Palm Pre iTunes Syncing Back With WebOS 1.1 Update

suraj.sun points out CNet coverage of Palm's newest OS release, which restores the ability to synch with iTunes that iTunes 8.2.1 had broken. "The news was posted on Palm's blog where it listed the new features and enhancements of the software update and nonchalantly added at the end: 'Oh, and one more thing: Palm WebOS 1.1 re-enables Palm media sync. That's right — you once again can have seamless access to your music, photos and videos from the current version of iTunes (8.2.1).' Bold move, Palm. Bold move. It'll be interesting to see how Apple responds, and do you suppose the use of the phrase 'one more thing,' a phrase that Apple CEO Steve Jobs often uses to introduce a new product at the end of his keynotes, was intentional or am I just reading too much into this?"

Comments

Intentional

[jDeepbeep]

and do you suppose the use of the phrase 'one more thing,' a phrase that Apple CEO Steve Jobs often uses to introduce a new product at the end of his keynotes, was intentional or am I just reading too much into this?"

Intentional.

Re:Intentional

[The_Duck271]

Intentional.

How the hell is this "insightful"?!

Re:Intentional

[LuvlyOvipositor]

Intentional.

How the hell is this "insightful"?!

How the hell is this "insightful"?

go go infinite recursion!

Re:Intentional

[Anonymous Coward]

Intentional.

How the hell is this "insightful"?!

How the hell is THIS insightful?

Re:Intentional

[iron-kurton]

I love mods with a good sense of humor. I would have modded you the same :)

Re:Intentional

[rantingkitten]

Or maybe it has nothing to do with anything. The world really does not revolve around Apple and Steve Jobs' quirks, and despite the (mostly self-generated) media circus surrounding Jobs' advertisements -- sorry, I mean "keynotes" -- his presentation style is not all that influental. I assure you, the phrase "one more thing..." has been used by millions of people before Jobs, and will be used by millions after.

This is akin to saying "I was at a meeting last week and the presenter was wearing a black turtleneck. Is it just me or was he totally ripping off Jobs' style?"

Sometimes, people, a cigar is just a cigar.

Seems Palm is coming thru with the Pre

[davidsyes]

and telling Apple, "You may BE the apple in many people's eye but WE will have your iTunes in the PALM of our hand... TALK to da HAND...be we will PALM slap you, byatch..."

Re:Seems Palm is coming thru with the Pre

[Anonymous Coward]

Its the "Instant Messaging" war all over again. This time Apple will lose, like AOL did. Because you can be that others will join the fray, on Palm's side, to ensure device interoperabiliity.

Re:Seems Palm is coming thru with the Pre

[orngjce223]

If you look at the tags on this story, someone's calling it the "isyncwar". Just FYI.

Personally I think it'd make a pretty good name but I digress...

Re:Seems Palm is coming thru with the Pre

[AndrewNeo]

How did AOL lose the Instant Messaging wars? Everyone I know (in the US) still uses AIM primarily.

Re:Seems Palm is coming thru with the Pre

[donny77]

But this isn't about "interoperability" no matter how Palm wants to sell it. iTunes has interoperability in it. Palm is choosing not to use it cause they want to be "just like an iPod." There is a difference between interoperability and hardware incompatibility. iTunes manages your music library and manages your hardware. Apple provides access to the libraries openly for any device. Palm is lying to iTunes/Windows/OS X claiming to be an iPod. This could potentially have severe ramifications should Apple push out a firmware to iPods and the command is mis-interpreted by the Pre. Apple is trying to protect themselves and Pre users. Palm is throwing everyone under the bus.

What we don't know:
- What could possibly brick a Pre.
- How many support calls Apple is getting from Pre users.

What we do know:
- Palm was reporting itself as a Palm iPod, now broken
- Palm is reporting itself as an Apple iPod

Palm is violating the USB spec, Trademark law and possibly copyright law. But, lets cheer on Palm.

Re:Seems Palm is coming thru with the Pre

[larry bagina]

this is slashdot, where everyone uses linux, IRC, and bash to manage your ogg collection.

Re:Seems Palm is coming thru with the Pre

[Lars T.]

Let me get this straight: you want to achieve universal device interoperability by having all mobiles use iTunes for syncing?

Re:Seems Palm is coming thru with the Pre

[h4rr4r]

As held in every case about this issue, copyright and trademark law are not violated when using a competitors name for the purposes of interoperability.

Lost battle

[Just Some Guy]

Queue iTunes 8.2.2 in about 3 days. Seriously, does Palm really think they can win this? On the other hand, I respect that they're not rolling over and dying, as they did when they replaced Graffiti with Jot and wrecked handwriting recognition for their long-time users.

Re:Lost battle

[Darkness404]

Theres only so much though that Apple can do short of killing compatibility with older iPods. Eventually Apple will just have to give up.

Re:Lost battle

[Rockoon]

I think they can.

Remember that updates to itunes annoys people.

Re:Lost battle

[Cyberllama]

Very true, though one expects software updates at a more frequent pace than firmware updates so one would expect that until one side or the other throws in the towel, it'll probably work less often rather than more often -- unless people who want this feature just don't update iTunes.

Re:Lost battle

[leonbev]

Sure, Apple could release iTunes 8.2.2 a week from now, but who's going to update to it? Most people don't bother to update their software when patches are released semi-monthly, let alone weekly.

Re:Lost battle

[Just Some Guy]

Theres only so much though that Apple can do short of killing compatibility with older iPods.

Do you know this for a fact? If the security is tight and Palm is only squeaking through by finding the equivalent of buffer overflows or undocumented functions, I think Apple could very well win this one.

Not that I'm necessarily taking Apple's side here. It's just that Palm seems to have stumbled upon a particularly stupid and capricious business plan that counts on Apple falling asleep on the job. This back-and-forth only has to happen a few times before potential buyers will get scared away.

Re:Lost battle

[Darkness404]

But there isn't anything "magic" that is on iPods that is just a string. Basically, what the Pre could do is just call itself an iPod classic and it would be the exact same as with the iPod classic. They rely simply on strings, both the iPod and the Pre.

Re:Lost battle

[RobKow]

Yeah, Palm just has to make the Pre look like an iPod to iTunes. Eventually Apple may run out of things to use to differentiate the Pre from a "real" iPod without breaking real iPods.

Re:Lost battle

[goombah99]

Theres only so much though that Apple can do short of killing compatibility with older iPods. Eventually Apple will just have to give up.

Well yes and no. first it means that the functionality palm can offer may not always be able to exceed that of the old iphones. Suppose for example while simple tunes transfer may be possibel by emulating the old ipod, suppose that new digital ipods or ones with camera would be more recognizable by itunes and so itunes would refuse to transfer over video or voice memos from an old ipod which is not supposed to have those capabilities. SO you can only get so far pretending to be an old ipod.

second, if this is to become a game then apple could turn the tables. Have itunes interrogate the other features the palm exposes. that is, when a palm plugs in it has to do more than just look like an old ipod. it has to also have some sort of palm specific conduit for address books and other phone features. apple could have itunes hunt for those to determine the phone is a pseudoPod.

That of course ratchets things up a notch, so apple may not want to drop that bomb for a long time. But it's hard to see how palm could escape that without being in the same boat-- breaking compatibility for older pre's

Re:Lost battle

[Facegarden]

Theres only so much though that Apple can do short of killing compatibility with older iPods.

Do you know this for a fact? If the security is tight and Palm is only squeaking through by finding the equivalent of buffer overflows or undocumented functions, I think Apple could very well win this one.

Not that I'm necessarily taking Apple's side here. It's just that Palm seems to have stumbled upon a particularly stupid and capricious business plan that counts on Apple falling asleep on the job. This back-and-forth only has to happen a few times before potential buyers will get scared away.

Apple hasn't been able to protect its own iPhone from jailbreakers, what makes you think they can secure iTunes any better?

And on a more direct note, if palm needs to they could probably go so far as to completely emulate an old iPod - they do have the guy who made them working for them now - though that may be illegal, or at least lawsuit bait. Not that Palm seems worried.

More than anything I just love that this whole scenario is happening - someone is finally challenging Apple on their own turf! I'm all for open hardware an apple has always been against it, so it's nice to see a big player finally get messy with this. :)
-Taylor

Re:Lost battle

[Just Some Guy]

Remember that updates to itunes annoys people.

BS. Apple could label it "PREVENTS HACKERS!" and people would flock to the upgrade. I find your lack of faith in the reality distortion field to be disturbing.

Re:Lost battle

[Facegarden]

Sure, Apple could release iTunes 8.2.2 a week from now, but who's going to update to it? Most people don't bother to update their software when patches are released semi-monthly, let alone weekly.

Yeah, especially if you own a Pre! There is really no harm in keeping a slightly older version of itunes, they never start locking you out of anything till you're a few releases back. And although most techy Pre owners probably waited to upgrade itunes the last time anyway, and are therefore unharmed, this release will have even the non-techy owners waiting to update, after having been bitten the first time. I would bet that most people apple screwed with the last update aren't going to do it again, so Palm has effectively saved many of their customers, by giving them one chance to learn.

Hell, palm may even have known exactly how apple was going to do this, just to see how it would play out, so they would have at least one guaranteed fix of the situation.

-Taylor

Re:Lost battle

[Aladrin]

Since it will be downloaded, it might indeed get queued by many people... However, I'm pretty sure you mean 'cue'.

Re:Lost battle

[clone53421]

if this is to become a game then apple could turn the tables. Have itunes interrogate the other features the palm exposes

I smell an "iTunes compatibility mode"... all Palm-specific features disabled so iTunes still can't tell the difference. ;)

Re:Lost battle

[MozeeToby]

I don't think you understand what it is that Palm is doing here, if they were doing what you described (cracking the security of iTunes) that would be at best questionable, I for one would be completely against that kind of behavior. All that Palm is doing is changing the Vendor ID on their phone to the Vendor ID used by iPods. Basically, iTunes says "Hey, who are you?" and the Pre says "I am definately, definately, an iPod".

Unless Apple adds a new requirement to sync, there's little they can do to detect if the iPod is actually a Pre, and if they add a new requirement they'll be breaking backward compatibility with all the iPods out there that don't have the requirement implemented.

Re:Lost battle

[dc29A]

Queue iTunes 8.2.2 in about 3 days. Seriously, does Palm really think they can win this? On the other hand, I respect that they're not rolling over and dying, as they did when they replaced Graffiti with Jot and wrecked handwriting recognition for their long-time users.

Why in the name of Cthulhu would anyone use iTunes to update a non iPod. Hell, with tools like SharePod you don't even need to use iTunes. Seriously, why? iTunes is the single most bloated piece of canine feces that exists ... and they dare to call it software. Can't Palm write a plugin for MediaMonkey or some other media player and just use that?

Using iTunes is a similar experience to that of eating one's own teeth.

Re:Lost battle

[greatica]

Yep! Reminds me a lot of the early days of universal instant messengers like Trillian that logged into ICQ, MSN, etc. Protocols kept-a-changin', upgrades kept-a-happenin', and now it's all moot.

You said it perfectly though. This will be a much shorter war. Basic users could upgrade ICQ at the the drop of a hat. Upgrading iPod firmware to keep up with the war? Heh.

Re:Lost battle

[goombah99]

if this is to become a game then apple could turn the tables. Have itunes interrogate the other features the palm exposes

I smell an "iTunes compatibility mode"... all Palm-specific features disabled so iTunes still can't tell the difference. ;)

Okay then let's say itunes just waits for the one time you plug it in before turning on compatibility mode. itunes then pushes over 1000 songs that are fingerprinted in a special way. Maybe they are all car alarms and babies crying. or just diminished audio quality. or maybe nothing youo can tell at all. But then the next time you try to update even in compatibility mode, itunes recognizes the fingerprint and intentionally malfunctions. it will be enought to drive you batty if the malfunction is cleverly chosen (e.g. transfers over songs with buzzing sounds in the background so you think your speaker is busted).

Re:Lost battle

[Rockoon]

That wont work for the people trying to interop their Pre with iTunes. They are a witness to the shenanigans.

Apple would actualy have to introduce honest-to-goodness new desirable features to get these people to consider moving forward, and what new desirable feature would be easier to implment than Pre support?

I don't think Apple can win this. I think what they are mostly afraid of is not the interop with iTunes.. its being forced to maintain that interop later on, when people come to expect it.

Re:Lost battle

[DurendalMac]

Simple: Apple makes iTunes scan not only for the iPod saying it's an iPod, but also for a valid serial number and other attributes. If Palm tries mucking around with serial numbers then Apple may well be able to buttfuck them with a lawsuit.

Palm is just being stupid. They have a lot more to lose from pissed off customers than Apple does. Palm, just make your own goddamned sync app like you should have in the first place. Yes, Apple is being a bunch of asses, but who didn't see that coming from a mile away, especially at Palm? If they want to use people's iTunes libraries, just make the sync app read the iTunes library XML file. Bloody simple.

Re:Lost battle

[Anonymous Coward]

Yea, sharepod works great the iphone and ipod touch......

Re:Lost battle

[amicusNYCL]

BS. Apple could label it "PREVENTS HACKERS!" and people would flock to the upgrade.

..even the "hackers"? I think that if you're using a Pre, you're not into the whole reality distortion thing in the first place.

Re:Lost battle

[aftk2]

Well, actually, they're telling them that the Pre is a device made by Apple:

http://www.precentral.net/how-palm-re-enabled-itunes-sync

That's a bit shady, and for a group so concerned with open standards like USB, I would imagine more Slashdotters would find that practice questionable.

Re:Lost battle

[thule]

This is slashdot.org! The people here love these kinds of hacks. They love giving a finger to the 800 pound gorilla in the market. Palm did one of the most simple things to do, they changed their USB ID. Can they help it if iTunes just goes ahead and copies all the files over to their device?

Re:Lost battle

[clone53421]

They could, but that would be really easy to defeat in round N+1 of the cat-and-mouse game.

Re:Lost battle

[bertoelcon]

I smell lawsuit. I don't know who would win but both reputations would be fairly tarnished.

Re:Lost battle

[Anonymous Coward]

I think it is because iTunes has a de-facto monopoly on music players. And probably a large monopoly on music managers. So why use something that no one has?

Re:Lost battle

[Jeremy Erwin]

Didn't HP make an Ipod? What vendor did they use?

Re:Lost battle

[Sancho]

I like open standards only because it means that all of my stuff can interconnect. Apple isn't using open standards. Palm is interfacing with a closed standard, thus making more stuff interconnect.

Re:Lost battle

[British]

If you have software updates every 5-6 days in the name of "security patches", you probably should hire better developers. I remember some stupid HP updater utility that got tacked on some printer drivers needed an update in the name of security. I decided to one-up the software by removing it entirely, thus preventing any future security issues with that product.

Re:Lost battle

[Anonymous Coward]

No more shady than reading vendorID and using it to lock out particular products. Can you see how a group so concerned with open standards like USB would find that practice questionable?

Re:Lost battle

[pyrelite]

iTunes is the single most bloated piece of canine feces that exists ... and they dare to call it software.

Clearly you've never used Adobe Reader.

Re:Lost battle

[PotatoFarmer]

I would imagine a lot of those same Slashdotters are currently using browsers that spoof the user-agent string to pretend to be other browsers. This sort of thing is not new.

Re:Lost battle

[AndrewNeo]

Here's a good question: If Palm were so worried about it.. why use iTunes at all? Just use Windows Media Player or whatever you already use, since if you're a Mac fan you probably have an iPhone/iPod already (assumption). The answer? Most people are drones to popular culture and own iPods, and guess what? That means they use iTunes. Suggesting other iPod-capable software to use for the Pre is redundant.

Re:Lost battle

[LuvlyOvipositor]

People already bitch about having so many applications that they have to use to sync multiple devices. I for one, think this is a great idea and Palm should keep it up. We don't need any more trash software installed.

Re:Lost battle

[donny77]

The only Open standard Apple isn't using is mounting the iPod/iPhone as a HD. iTunes is not just a file sync to iPods taht won't play nice. It handles firmware and software updates that Palm can't/won't be privy to. By breaking the USB vendor ID Palm is risking the bricking of Pres whenever Apple tries to do more than just a file sync. This is bad for Everyone. USB is a standard. Apples uses the standard, correctly, in order to connect to a closed system, iTunes. That is perfectly within the spec. What you are claiming is I should be able to use Blackberry sync software with my iPhone if I choose.

Re:Lost battle

[Anonymous Coward]

Theres only so much though that Apple can do short of killing compatibility with older iPods. Eventually Apple will just have to give up.

And you don't think they'd be quite happy to do that sooner or later? Eventually all the fools in the world that *would* buy a whyPod will have already bought 2 or 3, and Apple will be looking to push more product in a saturated market. What better way to force consumers to buy new models?

Re:Lost battle

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, they'll probably kill off support for older ipods. Apple has never been shy at discontinuing older hardware prematurely. What, do you think everyone with an older ipod will buy a sansa?

Re:Lost battle

[Anonymous Coward]

HP repackaged the iPod so they could sell it in stores that were not Apple Authorized Retailers. It's the same device.

Re:Lost battle

[drinkypoo]

Well, actually, they're telling them that the Pre is a device made by Apple:

http://www.precentral.net/how-palm-re-enabled-itunes-sync

That's a bit shady,

No, it really isn't.

Re:Lost battle

[jdgeorge]

By breaking the USB vendor ID Palm is risking the bricking of Pres whenever Apple tries to do more than just a file sync.

Just how, do you imagine, would iTunes engage the Pre's firmware update system?

The Pre does NOT manage its firmware through iTunes. There is ZERO risk to a Pre's firmware from interfacing with the iTunes application.

Re:Lost battle

[Sancho]

I said:

Apple isn't using open standards.

That's slightly inaccurate since Apple does use many open standards. Of course, I was talking specifically about syncing.

You said:

The only Open standard Apple isn't using is mounting the iPod/iPhone as a HD.

This is equally inaccurate, because anyone could come up with a dozen open standards that Apple doesn't implement. But again, we're talking about syncing.

Apple has a standard protocol for syncing. It's not open. It uses tricks like the device ID and now the vendor ID to avoid talking to non-Apple devices. You can argue the merits of it all you like (your examples of potential bricks are reasonable, but it's quite possible to protect against this with proper engineering.) However, I still hold that if Palm can correctly talk Apple's closed protocol (through the reverse engineering that they surely did), more power to them. They know what they're doing, and I'm pretty sure that we're not going to see any bricks coming from this.

If they screw up...well frankly, that will be one massive class action lawsuit. They've got a really good incentive to get it right.

Re:Lost battle

[omnichad]

Then they'll start using USB Vendor ID's. That would take more than just a software update, wouldn't it?

Re:Lost battle

[encoderer]

If it wasn't for all the profanity, I'd swear you were a bot. You've posted this "sync from the XML" comment no less than 5 times in the past month.

More on point.. I get the feeling you're neither a software engineer nor an attorney.

I mean, "mucking around with serial numbers" ...seriously? The DMCA explains clearly what is and is not legal, and inventing a number that happens to coincide with an Apple serial number is certainly not.

And Palm can free themselves from tortious issues simply by ensuring a "cleanroom" reverse-engineer.

I really am dying to know... why so petty about this?

Re:Lost battle

[_Swank]

How is Palm not trying to force Apple into making iTunes SO restrictive about syncing that Palm can sue Apple for anti-competitive behavior, eventually forcing iTunes to be actively open.

I say that Palm is doing the exact opposite of trying to avoid a lawsuit, but their intention is to be on the 'right' end of it. It's brilliant if it works.

Re:Lost battle

[0100010001010011]

I'd like to see Apple release a firmware update for the iPod the Pre says it is.

Pre: "Hey iTunes. I'm an iPod, what music have you got for me"
iTunes: "Shiny new Firmware!"
Pre: "Um, ok not really"
iTunes: "You said you were an iPod you're going to take this".

Re:Lost battle

[Zaiff Urgulbunger]

Internet Explorer still says it's Mozilla out of the box.

Re:Lost battle

[QuantumRiff]

I'm kinda looking forward to the firmware update the gets installed on all iPods.. and bricks devices that say they are ipods, and get their firmware overwritten.. Don't put it past apple.. "Sorry, we checked the ID and assumed it was one of our devices.. oops"

Re:Lost battle

[donny77]

Perhaps you have insight I do not. Does the iPod check with iTunes for a firmware upgrade or does iTunes check the iPod? See the difference. The Pre says it's an iPod, iTunes says, hey I have a firmware upgrade for you.

Re:Lost battle

[donny77]

I would argue that vendor ID and device ID aren't tricks. It's how you determine what proprietary devices and use what proprietary software. USB is a communication standard, not an interoperability standard. My USB printer driver doesn't work with my USB flash drive.

Re:Lost battle

[SBrach]

So, did you go Office Space on the printer or what. Throwing away a printer because the driver needs a security update one time seems a little crazy.

Re:Lost battle

[klui]

I agree. It is not annoying if updates were 5MB; but at 70+MB, it sure is annoying.

Re:Lost battle

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple seems to REQUIRE you to update iTunes otherwise it won't work at all, even if the old version worked fine.

Re:Lost battle

[Anonymous Coward]

Unless Apple decided to specifically target Pres some instruction down the wire that erases them and doesn't erase ipods. Oh I just j.i.m.p.

Re:Lost battle

[Lars T.]

So if Palm used GPLed software without providing the source to make more stuff interconnect, would you cheer?

Re:Lost battle

[Sancho]

That's not really a comparable issue.

Re:Lost battle

[gnasher719]

I mean, "mucking around with serial numbers" ...seriously? The DMCA explains clearly what is and is not legal, and inventing a number that happens to coincide with an Apple serial number is certainly not.

I don't think the DMCA comes anywhere into it. Music with iTunes DRM doesn't play on the Pre (Ok, that is just my assumption. If it does, then they _would_ be in trouble). I don't think incompatibility is "technical measure to prevent access" in the sense of the DMCA, just like software that allows you to record your old vinyl records onto your computer is not in violation of the DMCA.

On the other hand... If iTunes gives the registration number to Apple's servers, and Apple notices ten thousand iPods with the same serial number, then clearly 9,999 of them must be stolen. Imagine having the police on your doorstep looking for a stolen iPod!

Re:Lost battle

[DdJ]

Theres only so much though that Apple can do short of killing compatibility with older iPods.

False, I believe.

Every real iPod can receive a firmware update from iTunes. That's how AAC and DRM support were added to the iPods that were sold before the iTunes music store existed! If things got really crazy... I wouldn't put it past Apple to make the installation of a firmware upgrade a part of the sync process. And if Palm tried to spoof that, I think they'd end up in more legal trouble than they bargained for.

RIM is doing this the right way, as are any number of other vendors. Palm is just... they're either being very stupid or very smart, and at this time I do not have a reason to bet on "very smart".

Re:Lost battle

[LearnToSpell]

Yeah, Apple's good at that (see the "giving the aliens a virus" scene in Independence Day).

Re:Lost battle

[British]

I kept the printer. I just got rid of the annoying software around it. Kept the driver. It was just an updater program.

Re:Lost battle

[Anonymous Coward]

Mozilla COMPATABLE

Re:Lost battle

[nosferatu1001]

So it tries to push a firmware update, and webOS just ignores it - maybe even returning a "I'm finished!" to iTunes. What, you thought Palm would just let anything run the firmware update process?

Re:Lost battle

[X0563511]

How does iTunes decide if someone's got that firmware upgrade already then?

You can't go updating the firmware on a real iPod every time you sync. There's gotta be a way to say "i already have it"

Re:Lost battle

[X0563511]

No, it says it's Mozilla-compatible. Stated in another way, it says it's compatible with Mozilla.

Re:Lost battle

[Lars T.]

Just because you don't like the answer.

Re:Lost battle

[donny77]

Yes, and assuming Palm knows this and coded it in, what happens if it changes. What if there becomes a technical reason for Apple to change this process and it bricks a Pre?

No, It's not just Palm's problem. Apple has a reputation for seem less technology that just works. Right or wrong iTunes is an Apple product and it's operation with the Pre will effect Apple's image with the general public.

Re:Lost battle

[enrevanche]

no, it is not shady, the Pre is simply telling iTunes that it is compatible with it

Re:Lost battle

[Brian Feldman]

Then they'll start using USB Vendor ID's. That would take more than just a software update, wouldn't it?

No. The USB protocol is mostly not implemented in the hardware on the Linux-running Palm Pre. It is handled by kernel drivers.

Re:Lost battle

[Brian Feldman]

Firmware updates occur through manual intervention of the user....

Re:Lost battle

[Brian Feldman]

There is no "protocol" here. iPods are "USB mass storage devices" with FAT or HFS+ filesystems on them, and that is how iTunes operates them.

Re:Lost battle

[Anonymous Coward]

You're seeing things in black and white instead of shades of gray. Would you consider it ok for someone to violate the GPL to save someone's life?

Re:Lost battle

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple may well be able to buttfuck them with a lawsuit.

I guess "buttfuck them" could be good or bad, depending on your sexual preferences.

I had a couple of female ex's that preferred it.

Re:Lost battle

[demonlapin]

So does Chrome. But they mean Netscape, which was the original Mozilla. (I remember downloading an early Netscape beta - pre 1.0 - and the readme ended with the line "Yes, this is Mozilla.")

Re:Lost battle

[Achromatic1978]

It's not risking anything. If they're intelligent enough to write cell phone software, music software, what makes you think they're somehow not intelligent enough to ignore firmware updates, and even just report success when requested. Faking a USB VID does not somehow force the Pre to accept anything and everything the host throws at it. This is just FUD.

Re:Lost battle

[Achromatic1978]

I wouldn't put it past Apple to make the installation of a firmware upgrade a part of the sync process. And if Palm tried to spoof that, I think they'd end up in more legal trouble than they bargained for.

Pre: Okay to receive firmware update. Initiate.

iTunes:Sending

Pre: *captures firmware version number, spools update to /dev/nul

iTunes: Excellent, what version are you now?

Pre: Uhh, Version x.y.z

This is also completely an aside from the fact that the DMCA specifically permits such behavior for the purposes of interoperability, and a textbook definition of that word would be "to allow a Pre user to use their iTunes music library natively on a Pre.

Re:Lost battle

[WiseWeasel]

You haven't seen the new & improved iTunes firmware flasher... /evil laugh

Re:Lost battle

[ceoyoyo]

It's pretty much the same thing as the DRMed CDs claiming they are regular CD-Audio by putting the logo on the package.

Palm is in contravention of the USB specifications, yet I bet there's a USB logo on their packaging, and "USB" in the manual.

Re:Lost battle

[drinkypoo]

It's pretty much the same thing as the DRMed CDs claiming they are regular CD-Audio by putting the logo on the package.

False. DRMed CDs are deliberately designed not to work. Palm is doing their best to make the Pre work.

Palm is in contravention of the USB specifications, yet I bet there's a USB logo on their packaging, and "USB" in the manual.

If there were another way to do it, I'm sure they'd do it. But the alternative is janky.

Re:Lost battle

[ceoyoyo]

DRMed CDs are not in compliance with the CDAudio specification, therefore they should not be eligible to display that logo. If someone powerful enough were to push the issue with the licensor of the logo, those CDs would not be allowed to display it.

The Pre is using a USB manufacturer ID that doesn't belong to Palm, in clear and specific violation of the USB Forum's requirements. That makes the Pre ineligible to display the USB logo and to say it is USB compatible. If someone powerful enough were to push the issue with the licensor of the logo (the USB Forum) then the Pre would no longer be allowed to display it.

Despite your value judgements and assertion that the ends justify the means, the two situations are equivalent.

Re:Lost battle

[drinkypoo]

Despite your value judgements and assertion that the ends justify the means, the two situations are equivalent.

I'm not necessarily saying that the ends justify the means, but I am definitely saying that intent is highly relevant, and thus the situations might be similar, but they are certainly not equivalent.

Re:Lost battle

[DdJ]

Great. Yes, that covers the most simplistic, most trivial way Apple could do this. So if Apple does this in a brainless manner, and doesn't study anything anyone else has done, Palm has an easy ride ahead.

Now let me ask you, what do you know about XBox 360 hard drives?

You can't stick any old hard drive in there without hacking the device firmware. The "legit" hard drives all have a particular image file stored on them. The system won't recognize it as a drive without that file. And that file is copyrighted. So to put your own hard drive into an XB360, you have to either mod the firmware to recognize a drive without that image, or violate copyright and copy that image.

This has been sufficient to block widespread/mainstream installing of custom hard drives into XB360. Their technology detects the modded systems, and bans them from the network. Yeah, it's legal to go ahead and mod a system so it doesn't require that image, but the result is one that violates your XBLA agreements, and gets banned from the network. And as for installing the image on a non-approved hard drive, so you can use it with a non-modified XB360, the legal system seems to be sufficient to stop that.

Why is something along these lines not sufficient for this purpose? Just put a firmware update on every iPod that has it create a particular copyrighted data file in a particular location if that file is missing, and have iTunes look for that file. For Palm to overcome this, they have to either mod iTunes not to look for that file, or violate copyright by copying that file.

But I'm not sure it'll be necessary. Palm is violating their own agreements with the USB standards body by doing what their doing. I'm not sure how long this will last.

It's all stupid anyway. All they have to do is what everyone else is doing (RIM, doubleTwist, et cetera) and they would have syncing without getting into any pissing matches.

Re:Lost battle

[Anonymous Coward]

Palm aren't violating Apple's copyright. The two situations aren't even remotely comparable (you stupid fucking fanboy).

Re:Lost battle

[Lars T.]

Palm aren't violating Apple's copyright.

Nobody said they did, you stupid fucking hateboy. I hope your reading comprehension improves once you reach 5th grade.

But... for how long?

[popo]

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

Re:But... for how long?

[stevencbrown]

think you got that saying wrong - it's supposed to be - "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice - can't get fooled again".

Re:But... for how long?

[SanguineTechnology]

Yeah, but we're talking Apple. So it's more like, "Fool me once, get $200 dollars out of me. Fool me twice, convince me into buying a $500 computer for $2000."

Go palm!

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple's self-satisfied smug factor is too high and they need to be taken down a notch for their own good.

Couldn't get a Pre

[Gizzmonic]

I guess the Pre is selling pretty well, I couldn't get one at the Sprint store the other day. I prefer the "touchscreen & hard buttons" approach of the Pre and Treo as opposed to the 100% touchscreen approach of the iPhone or the 100% buttons approach of the Blackberry. I think the Pre is probably the best out of the lot, but that ain't sayin' much. Wish I didn't have to carry a cell phone at all.

cat and mouse

[goombah99]

Why as a consumer would I be so dumb as to buy a palm if my itunes only worked intermittently or had no assured path forward. Sure one could perhaps use the old version of itunes while I waited for palm to fix it. But really that's not a strategy. I'm in that boat right now with my jailbroken iphone and did I not sort of enjoy the novelty of this cat and mouse game it would be a detraction not an attraction. I can't imagine most people want a phone that might not work some of the time. who needs to waste time like that?

Re:cat and mouse

[Anonymous Coward]

Why as a consumer would I be so dumb as to buy a palm if my itunes only worked intermittently or had no assured path forward. Sure one could perhaps use the old version of itunes while I waited for palm to fix it. But really that's not a strategy. I'm in that boat right now with my jailbroken iphone and did I not sort of enjoy the novelty of this cat and mouse game it would be a detraction not an attraction. I can't imagine most people want a phone that might not work some of the time. who needs to waste time like that?

I know this sounds crazy, but most of the time I use my phone as a communication device.

Re:cat and mouse

[Anonymous Coward]

Why as a consumer would I be so dumb to buy music from itunes when I prefer palm over the iphone?

Re:cat and mouse

[Igorod]

Because people don't want the iPhone for some reason, but want to use Itunes with their smartphone. Honestly Palm should develop their own media application for ease of use. Itunes is not that great a program, and keeps getting slower. I'd rather not use Itunes but it's the easiest thing for managing my Ipod and I'm lazy. I don't use Itunes for any other equipment I own and am quite happy for it. And technically, if you agree to a ToS where you agree not to use non-Apple approved products with Itunes, you're kinda SOL on getting anything done about it. Same as jailbreaking your iPhone....it's a pain in the ass, but that's your fault and problem for going outside of normal operation as deemed by the maker.

Re:cat and mouse

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmmm. I could be wrong, but unlike Apple products, the Palm Pre will indeed still work even if it can't hook up with iTunes. A truly novel and ground-breaking idea if you ask me.

Re:cat and mouse

[G Money]

Why as a consumer would I be so dumb as to buy anything Apple if they're only goal is to extract as much money from me as possible by forcing me to use only their products? If a company like Apple wants to specifically break compatibility with their products for third parties then I would choose not to use their products. Why is it that people jump on Microsoft when they trap consumers but applaud Apple for the same behavior? I'm not saying Apple doesn't make good products (I think they do), but the price of it is vendor lock-in the likes of which Microsoft can only dream about.

Re:cat and mouse

[DurendalMac]

Um, maybe you already had? And if Palm would grow a few braincells then they would write their own damn software that would read the XML file in the iTunes library and sync data without needing to run iTunes and pretend it's an iPod. Current iTunes tracks are just AAC files that will play on the Pre no matter what you use to sync it.

Re:cat and mouse

[Anonymous Coward]

Last I checked, iTunes is free and nobody's forcing you to use it... There are a number of products you can use to sync your iPod/iPhone, and should you choose to use any other mp3 player or phone, I'm sure Apple would be happy to let its software run on OS X.

Why can't Palm write their own media manager? They're not a white knight trying to "free the masses" here, they're just being cheap.

Re:cat and mouse

[ground.zero.612]

Well, as a person who has worked retail, the easy answer is because you, as a consumer, are dumb. You as a person might even be dumb, but if I'm in the business of retail sales, I'd be more concerned with you being a dumb consumer.

The smartass answer would be: it's a phone first and foremost, and both it and the iPhone are a "trying-to-be-everything-that-a-web-enabled-PC-is" second and last.

Re:cat and mouse

[DurendalMac]

1. You can use your iPod with other software.
2. With the exception of older DRM'ed tracks, you can put your music from iTunes on any device with any other software that supports said device and the proper file formats.
3. Palm is taking the lazyass way out and piggybacking on iTunes when anyone with three braincells could see this leapfrog coming a mile away. Yes, Apple is being dickish about this, but Palm damn well knew this would happen and they have a lot more to lose from pissed off customers than Apple does. The iTunes library is just an XML file. It would be trivial for Palm to make an app that reads said file and syncs without the need for iTunes to be running.

Re:cat and mouse

[amicusNYCL]

Why as a consumer would I be so dumb as to buy a palm if my itunes only worked intermittently or had no assured path forward.

Well you're already dumb enough to use iTunes in the first place, so why not?

Re:cat and mouse

[Anonymous Coward]

Why as a customer would you be so dumb as to call yourself a "consumer"? When you're the boss do you call yourself a slave? I know this sounds really crazy when but it helps a lot if you actually know the meaning of the words you are using ...

Re:cat and mouse

[jonnythan]

My Pre has worked continuously.

I just didn't update to iTunes 8.2.1. And besides, there are other ways to sync the Pre besides iTunes. It syncs the way all other non-Apple phones sync. It just throws in iTunes syncing as an extra bonus, which is nice.

Re:cat and mouse

[ground.zero.612]

And if Palm would grow a few braincells then they would write their own damn software

Do you have any examples of a large and successful company wasting resources on development, by developing an exact clone of another company's product, rather than spending practically nothing to write a simple work-around?

I'd actually be curious to hear of some, because I would like to ridicule them for being so stupid.

Re:cat and mouse

[sbeckstead]

I think the Palm already doesn't work some of the time. I believe you have to have one form of connection or another to be able to use any apps on it. No bars, no wifi you have a hunk of plastic and metal with pretty lights and nothing more.
Maybe music playback works it did on my RAZR. But I doubt any apps will run. At least with the iPhone if I can't connect I can do more than play music. Anybody care to enlighten us further? I really am curious.

Re:cat and mouse

[Anonymous Coward]

I disagree, the iPhone is first and foremost an iPod and only an after thought of a phone.

Re:cat and mouse

[G Money]

As a disclaimer I don't use an iPod or iTunes so I might be making this up as I go along:

>1. You can use your iPod with other software.

Do people really do that? I was under the impression that if you have an iPod you really only ever use iTunes. Since iTunes is the only way to update an iPod you have to at least have it installed so using something else to manage an iPod doesn't sound like something most people would do. Not that there's anything wrong with that, iTunes is a superb app from what I've heard so there's no harm in bundling it as it gives the consumer what they want (good media app with good iPod integration).

>2. With the exception of older DRM'ed tracks, you can put your music from iTunes on any device with any other software that supports said device and the proper file formats.

I know a lot of people stuck with those old DRM'ed tracks who are too cheap/lazy/ignorant to update them. If you use iTunes, "Everything Just Works(tm)"

>3. Palm is taking the lazyass way out and piggybacking on iTunes when anyone with three braincells could see this leapfrog coming a mile away. Yes, Apple is being dickish about this, but Palm damn well knew this would happen and they have a lot more to lose from pissed off customers than Apple does. The iTunes library is just an XML file. It would be trivial for Palm to make an app that reads said file and syncs without the need for iTunes to be running.

This is certainly true, writing their own sync application would probably cost less than the lawyers they have on retainer preparing for the eventual Apple lawsuit. This is probably more of a press battle than anything else and Palm is playing it pretty smart by staying in the public eye with this. Apple looks bad for deliberately locking them out and Palm looks technically savvy for coming up with another workaround. For everyone I know with an iPod though, iTunes is The Music App. I used to see the same thing where IE was The Internet. If you have to use something else it looks like a kludge to end users so integrating with what they already know and use is a win for consumers.

Re:cat and mouse

[quadrox]

who ever said that those are the same people (the ones complaining about MS and applauding apple?). Theres lots of different people on slashdot, and only because certain attitudes get repeated often that doesn't mean that they are ALL come from the SAME people.

And for that matter, where does anyone applaud apple for their attempts at lock-in? I suspect only the most hardcore apple fans would have that attitude. Most pro-apple post highlight the qualities of apple products, not their flaws.

Re:cat and mouse

[clf8]

You buy the Apple products because you LIKE the Apple products, and you LIKE the way they work together.

Now PalmPre starts syncing with iTunes, but doesn't sync right. That will look bad on Apple. Let's say the PalmPre somehow effs up your library. That will look bad on Apple. Sure, Apple can say 'we don't support the Pre' but if you're music library is hosed you're going to be mad at Apple.

Look at the Motorola Rokr, they licensed the technology from Apple to allow it to Sync. And Apple guaranteed it would work right and not screw anything up. I'm actually surprised (for better or worse) that Apple hasn't invoked the DCMA.

What Apple does NOT want to do is become Windows and have to support 80 billion solutions under the sun. Their strength is and always has been tight integration. Having to lose focus on that and suddenly deal with problems with every Tom, Dick, and Harry syncing with iTunes will delay new features and products.

Re:cat and mouse

[QuantumRiff]

Its really easy to shop at wal-mart. the only trick is, that after you purchase your goods, you have to load your groceries into an approved Chevy automobile. Then, after you leave their parking lot, you can stop anywhere, and load your groceries into a vehicle of your choice. I don't know what all the hubub is, its easy enough to make sure you have a chevy, or borrow one, i mean they are pretty cheap used these days, and who doesn't have at least 2 cars!? If you don't like wal-marts policies, you should just choose not to shop there. If Ford was a decent company, they would either build their own stores, or partner with Target to be the exclusive vehicle allowed in their parking lots.

Re:cat and mouse

[Homburg]

1. You can use your iPod with other software.

Only because people are continually working on reverse-engineering Apple's attempts to lock-out other software from working with iPods. And you can't use a recent iPod Touch or iPhone with any software other than iTunes, because Apple have explicitly locked out the methods used by third-party clients to sync with earlier versions of the iPhone.

Re:cat and mouse

[AndrewNeo]

That's not entirely true, but you have to jailbreak it and then get filesystem access through either iTunes's communication protocol (not Mass Storage like before) or scp, which is usually just too much a pain as-is.

Re:cat and mouse

[Anonymous Coward]

lol...I wasn't aware my XML file was encrypted. I'd suggest you start here: http://www.sourceforge.net/

Re:cat and mouse

[omnichad]

Key word is current. There's plenty of DRM-encumbered music that wasn't upgraded to iTunes Plus. But I agree - just reading the XML is much smarter. Would have taken less time to implement in the first place.

Re:cat and mouse

[omnichad]

You don't have to clone iTunes. You just need an XML parser and file transfer tool. Let the user use iTunes to enjoy their music on their PC, and let the Palm software sync the library.

Re:cat and mouse

[encoderer]

Perhaps. But those of us with *FOUR* braincells, and a little experience actually writing software, can knock holes in your argument pretty easily.

The most obvious being, what if I chose to manually manage the music on my device? iTunes has no issue with this, but Palm would have to write their own GUI that would read the iTunes XML and then allow drag-n-drop sync.

Second, as a user, the last thing I need is another iTunes. I like the software. I know the software. It does its job well. If I want to buy a Pre, I as a consumer would just much rather use what I'm currently using.

Third, there are about a trillion edge cases with your suggestion. Like, multiple XML files. How will I know which XML file the user is using? I could have one in my All Users and one in my personal profile. iTunes has a simple option under the File menu to load a library. What would Palm do if they went gui-less and implemented your suggestion.

Finally, Palm isn't complaning that Apple updated their app. They just updated the Pre to match it. Why on Earth does it bother you so much? Apple are treating the iPod is hardly more than a hardware dongle for iTunes. Fine. But no reason to bunch-up your panties just because Palm circumvents their DRM. And don't kid yourself, that's exactly what a dongle is. DRM.

Re:cat and mouse

[omnichad]

Well...except in this case the Palm solution is a kludge, as it still requires iTunes - and furthermore doesn't survive an iTunes update without its own update. If that isn't the textbook definition of kludge, then I don't know what counts.

Re:cat and mouse

[oogoliegoogolie]

As a disclaimer I don't use an iPod or iTunes so I might be making this up as I go along:
You don't have an ipod?? I don't believe you! :P

Do people really do that? I was under the impression that if you have an iPod you really only ever use iTunes.
I don't know what the issue is that people have with iTunes, other than their own ignorance. You can export your purchased DRM-infested music to mp3's and 'voila', use your music anywhere. You can make ringtones for your iPhone from any mp3. You can backup your ipod and restore it to any other iPod or an iPhone. You can drag and drop mp3's to your iPod (but not the other way, which sucks, but others block this too) You can backup your library and copy to iTunes on another machine. I just don't see what the issue is. Maybe iTunes still sucks on windows, I dunno since I only use windows for gaming now. I think most people that are complaining about iTunes are the haters that complain about anything Apple, which is a sad lot.

I know a lot of people stuck with those old DRM'ed tracks who are too cheap/lazy/ignorant to update them. If you use iTunes, "Everything Just Works(tm)"

I don't see how something working seamlessly is an issue.

This is certainly true, writing their own sync application would probably cost less than the lawyers they have on retainer preparing for the eventual Apple lawsuit.

I see both companies sides here. I understand Apple's side cuz like any company they don't want to field support calls from unsupported 3-rd pary products-and you know they will get them, but OTOH iTunes is one of the biggest music/media managers out there so I can understand how Palm or others should be able to use it.

I have a question for anyone: Can the Palm Pre sync with windows media player or winamp? If it can, they why not use them? If winamp worked on a mac I'd probably use that.

Re:cat and mouse

[wbo]

The Pre functions just fine without a cell signal or WiFI. Apps continue to run just fine because most of them consist of HTML and JavaScript files combined with a SQLite database that is stored locally in Flash memory.

Some apps are more useful than others (The web browser and YouTube applications are not very useful without some form of Internet connection because they don't cache anything) but apps like Calendar, Tasks, Memos, Photos, Music, SplashID, and Classic work just fine.

Even the email app will function without a network connection (you can't send or receive new messages but you can read messages that have already been downloaded.)

Re:cat and mouse

[Anonymous Coward]

Walmart doesn't build cars to encourage shopping and GM doesn't run a supermart to encourage truck sales. Better luck next time, retard.

Re:cat and mouse

[richlv]

well, actually, palm might embrace other existing software that is way, way more friendly towards them.
as amarok developers mentioned in akademy (http://www.kdenews.org/2009/07/16/business-free), amarok, as a crossplatform music manager/player, would be better suited for palm and would allow them to out-feature itunes with little resources.

Re:cat and mouse

[gnasher719]

You don't have to clone iTunes. You just need an XML parser and file transfer tool. Let the user use iTunes to enjoy their music on their PC, and let the Palm software sync the library.

Using Cocoa:

NSDictionary* theLibrary = [NSDictionary dictionaryWithContentsOfFile: [@"~/Music/iTunes/iTunes Music Library.xml" stringByExpandingTildeInPath]];
NSArray* thePlayLists = [theLibrary objectForKey: @"Playlists"];
NSDictionary* theTracks = [theLibrary objectForKey: @"Tracks"];

and you can go from there. To check the exact file structure, run "Property List Editor" and have a look at the contents of the file.

Re:cat and mouse

[mcgrew]

Indeed; why don't you just sample the radio? Especially if you're going after pop music, they rotate the same damned songs over and over. With a compressed file, your quality will be as good. However, I have noticed that MP3s compression makes flaws worse; sample a tape or record and the hiss and pops stand out a lot more than in the original.

Re:cat and mouse

[Anonymous Coward]

Uh, dude, you could drag-and-drop music onto the Pre from the desktop since Day 1.

Re:cat and mouse

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, lets look at the situation right now. Pre Itunes sync used to work, and Apple stopped it for no good reason. It looks bad on Apple. Sure, Apple can say 'we don't support the Pre' but you're going to be mad at Apple.

Re:cat and mouse

[Zaiff Urgulbunger]

I'm actually surprised (for better or worse) that Apple hasn't invoked the DCMA.

Me too! I'm guessing that's the reason they encrypt data on iPods -- so they could take advantage of DCMA. Pretty scummy move if they do IMHO.

What Apple does NOT want to do is become Windows and have to support 80 billion solutions under the sun. Their strength is and always has been tight integration. Having to lose focus on that and suddenly deal with problems with every Tom, Dick, and Harry syncing with iTunes will delay new features and products.

They don't have to support anything other than their own products. I appreciate you're concerned that the Pre may impact the performance of iTunes in some way (e.g. break it), and that that could adversely affect Apple... but let's face it, it isn't that likely to be a problem really is it? It's the iTunes software itself that manages it's own data; the Pre cannot touch that data. If iTunes gets confused because of an unexpected response from the Pre, then that would be unfortunate, but it would be a defect in iTunes albeit one that Apple had not anticipated.

Re:cat and mouse

[node 3]

This is probably more of a press battle than anything else and Palm is playing it pretty smart by staying in the public eye with this. Apple looks bad for deliberately locking them out and Palm looks technically savvy for coming up with another workaround.

Palm is just looking like a bunch of amateurs constantly having to fix their product. They can blame Apple all they want, but as a customer, you're going to come away with "this Palm product is a load of shit, it keeps breaking its connection to iTunes".

Unless Palm can make their product work consistently, it's going to be the loser here. It's just like if your Internet connection keeps going down. Even if it's not your ISP's fault, but the fault of some upstream provider, you're not going to just say, "well, it's not their fault, so I guess it's OK".

And Palm might be able to accomplish just that. Their update now reports itself, in violation of the USB standard, as being an Apple product. Very, very amateur, but sufficiently invisible to the user that, unless Apple is willing to force firmware updates on every iPod/iPhone owner, they may not be able to break Palm syncing without potentially breaking syncing with legitimate iPods.

Which makes me think that if Apple is unsuccessful in getting Palm to stop using it's vender ID, they will do just that, and add some form of encryption between the iPod and iTunes for authentication.

It's sad to see the once mighty Palm fall to being so pathetically amateur.

Re:cat and mouse

[jimicus]

Yes I do, actually. Virtually every Microsoft product in the whole of history.

Re:cat and mouse

[Anonymous Coward]

You make a good argument about why Apple would have a problem with this, but I fail any reason that I should care if Apple has a problem. I don't care how inconvenient it is for them. I care how convenient it is for me.

Screw vendor lock-in.

Re:cat and mouse

[encoderer]

You may have missed, you know, this WHOLE THREAD, but the point the OP was making is that iTunes users could be catered to by merely scanning the iTunes XML file and syncing automatically.

We're talking about building a solid UX for an expensive, modern device.

The dichotomy of "Drag and Drop from Windows Explorer" or "Auto Sync Everything in iTunes" is hardly solid UX.

What about syncing certain playlists? Certain songs? Certain Podcasts?

........See? Good.

Re:cat and mouse

[node 3]

It's quite telling that Palm has such low confidence in its ability to provide a quality solution of their own (Palm Desktop) that they feel they have to resort to that kludge in the first place.

They have decided that a kludgy, constantly breaking, USB standards violating solution is superior to anything they could cook up in house.

Re:cat and mouse

[kencurry]

And if Palm would grow a few braincells then they would write their own damn software

Do you have any examples of a large and successful company wasting resources on development, by developing an exact clone of another company's product, rather than spending practically nothing to write a simple work-around?

I'd actually be curious to hear of some, because I would like to ridicule them for being so stupid.

the company is called Microsoft, and the rip-off product is called windows.

check and mate.

Re:cat and mouse

[dunkelfalke]

but if you're music library

Oh, that's okay with me - I am not a music library and I know for a fact that most people aren't either.

Re:cat and mouse

[Gizzmonic]

And...receiving the Slashie award for Tortured Car Metaphor for 2009, it's QuantumRiff! (Crowd goes wild).

Well Bob, that was a fantastic example of a classic Tortured Car Metaphor. It was simply chock-full of inappropriate comparisons of business models, implications of conspiracy, and smug ignorance. One wonders how he will be able to follow up this incredible stupidity next year!

Re:cat and mouse

[networkBoy]

I don't use iTunes with my iPod (2G nano) because it is a resource hog. I have a little app that's thin and lite that uploads content for me.
It's all I need, so it's all I use.
-nB

Re:cat and mouse

[Lord_Byron]

Actually:

1) You can't synch an iPod Touch to anything other than iTunes w/o jailbreaking it.

2) You can't *get* music from ITMS w/o iTunes, so the ability to use music gotten elsewhere with something other than iTunes isn't exactly munificence on Apple's part.

3) There are at least two apps to get music on the Pre w/o iTunes, and you can just copy files while using the phone in USB storage mode. I don't know why Palm is taking this amateurish, if amusing, tack but I don't see the harm in them doing it. Except that Apple is being a bully, and intentionally breaking the interoperability.

So me what harm is done by my phone pretending to be an iPod to my software, and you will change my mind.

Re:cat and mouse

[Attila Dimedici]

If you are going to use windows as your example from MS, then you could just as easily use the MacOS from Apple because they both stole the idea from Xerox PARC.

Re:cat and mouse

[Gizzmonic]

I understand what you're saying, but iTunes already has a plugin architecture for supporting 3rd party MP3 players. It's just that since Apple released the iPod, they aren't interested in supporting 3rd party players anymore...they only want you to use iTunes. They didn't care when iTunes was Mac only and the iPod had just come out, but now they don't want you using anything but the iPod with iTunes. Greed is the reason, not purity of experience. They could make it easy for 3rd parties again if they wanted to. Heck, they could at least refrain from breaking stuff on purpose.

But, I don't pay a penny for iTunes so it's tough for me to be that upset about it. I'd like a Pre myself, but I doubt I would use the music part of it anyway, there's just not enough space for it.

Re:cat and mouse

[clone53421]

What if someone wanted to copy music from a friend's iPod onto their Palm? Would you need iTunes to do it?

Re:cat and mouse

[node 3]

Perhaps. But those of us with *FOUR* braincells, and a little experience actually writing software, can knock holes in your argument pretty easily.

Clearly four is the upper limit...

The most obvious being, what if I chose to manually manage the music on my device? iTunes has no issue with this, but Palm would have to write their own GUI that would read the iTunes XML and then allow drag-n-drop sync.

Um, yeah. That's the point. Let Palm write their own GUI. That's what everyone else does. Is Apple the only company capable of writing GUI-based software or something?

Second, as a user, the last thing I need is another iTunes. I like the software. I know the software. It does its job well. If I want to buy a Pre, I as a consumer would just much rather use what I'm currently using.

Again, that's the point. If you want to stick with iTunes, buy an iPhone. If you want a Palm, you're going to have to use Palm's software (which currently consists of the Pre using Apple's USB vendor ID in violation of the USB standard).

Third, there are about a trillion edge cases with your suggestion. Like, multiple XML files. How will I know which XML file the user is using? I could have one in my All Users and one in my personal profile. iTunes has a simple option under the File menu to load a library. What would Palm do if they went gui-less and implemented your suggestion.

A preference in the Palm software? Time stamp? Four brain cells indeed!

Finally, Palm isn't complaning that Apple updated their app. They just updated the Pre to match it. Why on Earth does it bother you so much? Apple are treating the iPod is hardly more than a hardware dongle for iTunes. Fine.

They'll complain if Apple succeeds in locking them out entirely.

But no reason to bunch-up your panties just because Palm circumvents their DRM. And don't kid yourself, that's exactly what a dongle is. DRM.

It's amateur. Palm should write their own software, unless they aren't confident in their ability to do so. You raise DRM in order to elicit the standard reflexive response, but most people seem to draw the line at commercial interests. It's ok, and in fact often seen as "noble", to break DRM as a consumer. But to violate DRM for financial interests is generally looked down upon. It's also a bit pathetic when a once mighty corporation like Palm has to resort to such tactics.

Re:cat and mouse

[chill]

I'm actually surprised (for better or worse) that Apple hasn't invoked the DCMA.

The DMCA has an explicit exception for "interoperability". Check it out under paragraph (f), Reverse Engineering.

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/dvd/1201.html

Re:cat and mouse

[Anonymous Coward]

Your trolling is very, very amateur, and I believe it is also in violation of the USB standard.

Amateur, just amateur.

Re:cat and mouse

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you mean Apple, who stole the entire Lisa design from Xerox, then tweaked it slightly into the Mac.

Or did you mean NeXT, who ripped off better Unix UIs (eg Sun's NeWS) to create a shitty proprietary OS which failed miserably?

Re:cat and mouse

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the Palm Pre itself represents an example of the behavior your indicate.

Re:cat and mouse

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would I, as a customer, willingly deal with a company that habitually and continually goes out of it's way to LOCK both 3rd party vendors and paying customers alike out of doing what they wish with the hardware that they paid for?

Seriously you blame Palm, admit that you're in the same boat as Pre users, and then go back to standing in Apple's camp. The blinders people have on for Apple continue to astound me. Apple fan(atics) are the first to shriek at Microsoft and their ham-fisted attempts to Zune the world but refuse to see the elephant sitting on their own iPhone. If I have to "jailbreak" anything in order to use it, it is not worth my money or my time.

Guess what? I have a Squeezebox. It supports just about every format out there, no restrictions. I don't have to worry about what format my music is in, because it will play it, whether Ogg or Flac or MP3 or even AAC. I can play my music quite happily on my phone, my computer and any other device (Squeeze duet, boombox or even PS3) I've got handy with a network interface, all streamed from SqueezeCenter. No restrictions, no need to jailbreak a god damned thing. THIS is the kind of company I do business with.

Re:cat and mouse

[Planesdragon]

First off: I own a Pre. I own a TX. I own some Palm stock. I don't want my company wasting their time doing anything but making what I bought from them better -- that's time better spent on implementing standards.

Again, that's the point. If you want to stick with iTunes, buy an iPhone. If you want a Palm, you're going to have to use Palm's software (which currently consists of the Pre using Apple's USB vendor ID in violation of the USB standard).

Sheesh. My wife has a Sansa music player. Do you mean I have to suddenly go and download software from Sansa, and not just use whatever the f-- I want to move the stuff over?

Apple sells Macs. and iTunes. And iPods. This is all about Apple trying to make you an "Apple person", regardless of what you want to do. Oh, you can make a better MP3 organizer than iTunes? Apple doesn't want you syncing to iPhone. You can make a better media phone than the iPhone? Apple doesn't want you syncing with iTunes. If Apple could arbitrarily shut down any music player on Mac OS than iTunes, I bet they would.

This goes WAY beyond just "we don't support that". This is Apple going out of their way to break it.

Oh, and btw?

But to violate DRM for financial interests is generally looked down upon

Bull crap. This isn't DRM, this has nothing to do with DRM. This is simple interop; any iTunes file with DRM works perfectly, because the Pre just won't play it, this connection or no connection. Apple's not stupid enough to just let a transfer request automatically decrypt encrypted files... I mean, aside from their iPhone team.

It's also a bit pathetic when a once mighty corporation like Palm has to resort to such tactics.

Odd, I was about to say the same thing, but replacing "Palm" with "Apple" and "mighty" with "great."

Palm was never mighty -- they were popular. Big difference.

Re:cat and mouse

[iron-kurton]

If winamp worked on a mac I'd probably use that.

There used to be a version for Mac OS called MacAMP. Not sure if this is the right one, but give it a shot (looks like it died a few years back and is starting to get resurrected)

Re:cat and mouse

[HumanEmulator]

And if Palm would grow a few braincells then they would write their own damn software...

I'm willing to bet they have been writing their own software from the start and when they realized they weren't going to have it ready for launch, iTunes became a stop gap measure. Now they're using it as an opportunity to make Apple look bad (you decide if rightly so), gain press exposure and they have a great excuse if their media manager turns out not to be that great. ("We tried to offer iTunes support!")

That or iTunes really has become an OS for media.

Re:cat and mouse

[iron-kurton]

On the other hand, if you own a Pre device, and you are able to sync with iTunes today, and the only thing that changes is an iTunes update, there's a chance the consumers will blame Apple. Palm is banking on this, and most-assuredly they will have tech support tell them *not* to upgrade to the latest version of iTunes (or to downgrade).

It's not an amateurish play on Pre's part, but a very, very risky one -- but if it does work, and they are able to smear Apple's image enough to gain a few points with consumers, it might just work out for them. My guess is that Palm is working on its own version of iTunes + Music Store that is not ready yet, and they are trying to smear Apple enough to win over some customers in the end. Risky indeed.

Re:cat and mouse

[node 3]

First off: I own a Pre. I own a TX. I own some Palm stock. I don't want my company wasting their time doing anything but making what I bought from them better -- that's time better spent on implementing standards.

iTunes isn't an open standard. If Palm wants to add music syncing to their product, they can do it themselves, or use another product that they're allowed to use.

Sheesh. My wife has a Sansa music player. Do you mean I have to suddenly go and download software from Sansa, and not just use whatever the f-- I want to move the stuff over?

Yes. Or use a product that allows Sansa interoperability, like (I assume) WMP.

This goes WAY beyond just "we don't support that". This is Apple going out of their way to break it.

No shit, captain obvious.

Bull crap. This isn't DRM, this has nothing to do with DRM.

I wasn't the one who brought up DRM. Learn to parse quote tags.

Palm was never mighty -- they were popular. Big difference.

Palm was the PDA maker at one time. That sounds pretty mighty to me, but if you prefer, use whatever adjective you want for a company that Palm once was but is no longer. It doesn't change the facts, just the words.

Whatever words you choose, what I wrote still stands. Palm was once a great company, now they're playing amateur-hour with their iTunes hacks. They are a sad caricature of their former self.

Re:cat and mouse

[gstep]

I know this sounds crazy, but a lot of people, including myself, like iTunes. Even though I haven't bought any music from their store whatsoever, I still use it to play and organize my music. I hate it for it's bloat and sometimes crappy performance, but overall it does what I want it to. I like that when I get some new files, I can just import them into the library, and iTunes will automatically sort my folders and tag my music. I've started using Songbird more, which reads from my iTunes library, but for importing and organizing the library, it's iTunes all the way.

Re:cat and mouse

[DurendalMac]

The stupid thing is Palm relying on a third party product over which they have ZERO control and they KNOW they'll be fighting against. Writing their own software would negate the need for this arms race against Apple and result in far less pissed off customers.

Re:cat and mouse

[DurendalMac]

Apple had a deal with Xerox to work with their stuff. Xerox was paid with lots of Apple stock. I wouldn't exactly call that stealing.

Re:cat and mouse

[tenton]

You mean the Apple that paid Xerox for the rights AND then wrote from scratch the drawing routines (important parts that weren't even done on the Xerox PARC stuff, but the Apple people thought it was done)?

http://vectronicsappleworld.com/macintosh/creation.html

http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=On_Xerox,_Apple_and_Progress.txt

Re:cat and mouse

[DurendalMac]

1. The Pre supports drag and drop. A GUI app of their own would be easier than relying on a third party app over which Palm has ZERO control and they know is going to keep breaking compatibility with their device.

2. See above point on Palm having no control over iTunes. How many other phones/MP3 players can use iTunes? Oh, none outside of Apple's brand. Why would anyone expect the Pre to be different if Palm didn't specifically build it in?

3. iTunes has ONE XML file for the library, and naturally it would use the XML file that is being used by the currently logged-in user. A simple reading of iTunes preferences for said user would tell the app which XML file to use.

4. Palm is dicking up their customers fighting this battle. They know that Apple is going to break compatibility and they know that they could write their own software. It's not so much that it pisses me off. This kind of thing happens all the time. It's the people bitching about Apple when Palm knew damn well that this would happen and went ahead anyway.

Re:cat and mouse

[Attila Dimedici]

According to a link in another post, Xerox bought stock in Apple before the IPO. That is not exactly the same as "paying" Xerox.
It is also important to note that when Apple sued MS, Xerox sued Apple. Xerox's suit was thrown out because they waited too long. However, the idea originated with Xerox, not with the Apple Macintosh. So the implication that MS stole the idea from Apple is false. MS got the idea for the GUI from the same place that Apple did--Xerox PARC.

Re:cat and mouse

[DurendalMac]

The playlists are stored in the XML file. And exactly how hard would it be to put a basic GUI on their synching software? It's really not that difficult.

Re:cat and mouse

[sbeckstead]

Ok wasn't actually sure how that worked. How about the games?

Re:cat and mouse

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux.

Re:cat and mouse

[Anonymous Coward]

Because this is not a charity case? Palm is a direct competitor. Why in the world would you expect Apple to 'make it easy' for them? iTunes is an advantage for Apple. Palm is just plain lazy and it makes their device look like some hack.

Re:cat and mouse

[introspekt.i]

USB standards violating

I think "it just works" is more important to the end consumer than griping about standards violations with usb. I certainly don't ever check, I just want it to work. If it works by breaking some ivory tower industry standard, by all means, do it.

Re:cat and mouse

[ConfusedVorlon]

oh come on.

'Let's say the PalmPre somehow effs up your library.'

so Apple have written iTunes badly enough that a problem with the sync would destroy the library? You can say that - but I'm going to say that it isn't going to happen.

iTunes has defined the standard for managing your music. Palm is just letting you use the pre like an iPod. I think that is both smart and cool.

Re:cat and mouse

[introspekt.i]

using Apple's USB vendor ID in violation of the USB standard

Please tell me you're ranting to stand up for the holy of holies: the USB standard. The problem is this, the consumer wants a phone that's either not an iPhone or not on AT&T or something else YET still wants it to sync with iTunes. Palm is meeting demand by providing them a phone that takes the necessary steps. They could EASILY write their own GUI interface, but that's not what the consumer wants. iTunes is the top music market almost globally (if not already, I don't want to bother verifying), why would Palm bother competing in a market that they're not even a member of? What's the point? They don't plan on becoming a competitor in the music store business (which is really what iTunes is) or the media player arena. Apple is integrating their product line the exact same way Microsoft did back in the 90's with the Microsoft Network dialup service, and Palm is the guy trying to break into their action. Apple is leveraging their dominance in one market to gain sway in another, it's a monopolistic practice and its legally (and ethically [to some]) questionable. If you think it's so amateur don't buy it, it's as simple as that. Apple doesn't need people defending them and iTunes so violently, they have an army of lawyers to that end and they're not afraid to use them.

Re:cat and mouse

[Anonymous Coward]

Why do people expect this charity case from Apple? Palm is a COMPETITOR. Say it a few times, and then maybe look it up on websters. No good reason? Are you even listening to yourself? This is not an operating system. It is software specifically written by Apple to support Apple iPod's and iPhones. Apple has no need to 'make it work' with Palm's or any non Apple device. Folks keep saying they'll make money from the music purchases. Chances are they'll make a hell of a lot more from an iPod purchase. That's not to say Apple won't allow other devices to sync with iTunes, but Palm needs to pull it's head out of it's ass rather than being a parasite on Apple's software. They could easily approach Apple to become a supported device although at this point I doubt they would like the answer given the way they are doing business. Instead they've come off looking like some sad hack job.

Re:cat and mouse

[AmberBlackCat]

I definitely agree with not wanting to use two media players. I'm on my third iPod, my daughters have iPods, and other people in my family have them, all syncing on my computer. So iTunes is going to be there no matter what. If I get a new phone, it would be nice if it syncs the same way instead of me having to install more software. Furthermore, I've been looking to go upscale with my phone and get either an iPhone, a Blackberry, a G1, or a Palm Pre, and this makes the Palm the most convenient.

On the other hand, I wouldn't like this situation nearly as much as one that was fully supported by iTunes. But I think if I go with the Palm, I could actually deal with this problem since it's not so frustrating when I know what the problem is, and how to get around it. You know when you update iTunes it will stop working, and when you update the Pre it will work again.

On the third hand, I don't even like using my phone as a music/movie player. There are reasons I keep getting iPods.

By the way, I'm an alien and we all have three hands.

Re:cat and mouse

[Dahamma]

The whole point of jailbreaking IS reverse engineering apple's attempts to lock out other software from working with iPhones/iPods, and it has to be done every time Apple releases a new update and breaks the jailbreak.

He was pointing out that the OP's arguments that the iPod is usable with other software is more or less wrong, since you have to hack it to do so, which is not remotely an option for 95% of users. (Not to mention the ridiculous point claiming iTunes tracks are open "except for some old DRM'ed tracks"... yeah, some old DRMed tracks that still make up the majority of those currently out there, notwithstanding Apple's offer to replace them for an EXTRA per-track fee...)

Re:cat and mouse

[PJ1216]

If someone wants to stick with iTunes, they have to buy an iPhone and nothing else? So Apple is definitely not about choice in your opinion. You either have to go all Apple or no Apple at all. Whatever happened to buying products you like. Apple's intention for iTunes to sell iPods/iPhones notwithstanding, iTunes is a standalone application. There is no reason why you shouldn't be able to use one and not the other except for completely arbitrary business reasons, which in the end, are bad for the consumer. Pre is being the good guy here. They realize good software. They don't want to take that away from their consumers. They also don't want to burden them with more software. Apple is making their customers' lives difficult. If they use iTunes, they're still Apple customers. Maybe they aren't purchasing the other things Apple wants to sell them, but since when do you get to punish your customers because they only buy one product and not everything in the entire store.

Don't be mistaken. Apple isn't punishing Palm with this one. They're punishing consumers who've decided to buy a competing product. Apple is kind of a dick like that. I'm not saying other companies don't do it, but lets call a spade a spade.

Re:cat and mouse

[PJ1216]

Why do you insist that Palm is "resorting" to this? I applaud them for it. I like iTunes. Now, I'm not being forced to purchase an iPhone (though, I'm not gonna lie, I do own one, but at least in the future, my options may be open) just so that I don't have to deal with extra software. I think its absolutely ingenious what Palm did. They're enabling their customers to not have to relearn anything. They're not forcing their customers to drop their media player of choice. They're not forcing their customers to run multiple library management software suites. They're making the life of the customer easier for them. THEY GIVING THE CUSTOMER WHAT THEY WANT.

Why are you so anti-customer and so pro-corporate? You cannot justify your position and actually care about the consumer in anyway? Apple is absolutely anti-consumerist here. They're not giving a really large portion of the population what they want. Palm is filling that niche. iTunes isn't going to be a make or break for many people. Most folks will either like the Pre or the iPhone better than the other. Palm is at least making it easier for its customers. Kinda like how APPLE CAN BOOT WINDOWS TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR PEOPLE WHO USE WINDOWS. If Apple was so great, why'd they have to resort to boot camp to convince people to switch to a Mac? Isn't their OS good enough to stand on its own that they wouldn't need to reassure folks that they can still run windows? (Honestly, i don't believe that, but basically, your argument applies there. Either you don't have faith in Apple's OS and think they need to rely on Windows OR your argument is full of shit. You're not getting modded down because people disagree with you. You're getting modded down because your argument is horrendously weak, has nothing to do with anything, and really only consists of you trying to insult Palm because they were intelligent enough to sell a product that people want.

Re:cat and mouse

[Brian Feldman]

It's quite telling that Palm has such low confidence in its ability to provide a quality solution of their own (Palm Desktop) that they feel they have to resort to that kludge in the first place.

They have decided that a kludgy, constantly breaking, USB standards violating solution is superior to anything they could cook up in house.

Reading your trolling obviates how entirely out of touch with reality you are. Palm Desktop is not at all relevant to the Palm Pre. The iTunes synchronization ability is not a kluge because nothing breaks it other than intentional potshots by Apple. Also, how the hell did you convince yourself that there are any standards being violated?

Re:cat and mouse

[Brian Feldman]

You buy the Apple products because you LIKE the Apple products, and you LIKE the way they work together.

Now PalmPre starts syncing with iTunes, but doesn't sync right. That will look bad on Apple. Let's say the PalmPre somehow effs up your library. That will look bad on Apple. Sure, Apple can say 'we don't support the Pre' but if you're music library is hosed you're going to be mad at Apple.

You really should bother to do some trivial research to see what an iPod actually does when connected to iTunes. Here's your first clue: iPods appear as external hard drives when connected, and ONLY as a "mass storage device". Can you now guess exactly how much manipulation an "iPod-like device" does to iTunes? Make sure to also bear in mind the amount of headache that you would have by allowing both the iPod and the computer to be doing read/write access to it by direct filesystem manipulation -- there's a good reason that computers don't generally share storage without some kind of network protocol negotiating access.

Well?

Re:cat and mouse

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Blackberry.

Re:cat and mouse

[onenil]

1. iTunes does have an issue with the concept of manually managing the music on an iPod. I've never seen this functionality on an iPod. Apple haven't designed their software for this, so it is a scenario that CAN'T be supported by Palm, if they are expecting people to use iTunes.

2. If you as a user like what you're currently using, then you first need to accept the software was designed with a limited set of functions, and it is Good Software (tm) as a result of that design. What Palm needs here is not another iTunes, but another "synchronise Palm with iTunes library" app.

3. The "trillion edge cases" are again, by design of the iTunes software - and I think you're overstating the number somewhat. The example you use can be easily resolved: determine where iTunes stores the config of the currently opened iTunes library, and refer to that. The sync app therefore continues to piggy back off the iTunes UI, and everyone is happy.

4. I can't talk for the GP, but this bothers me because Palm seem to be doing it simply for the publicity. Good software developers don't write software to masquerade as some other software, unless they HAVE to (browsers identifying themselves as IE is a good example). The key message for Palm is: they can design their own software to seamlessly provide sync with the non-DRM portion of any iTunes library. It would seem they're just picking a fight with Apple purely because they can't be bothered writing Good Software themselves.

Re:cat and mouse

[Anonymous Coward]

"Why would I, as a customer, willingly deal with a company that habitually and continually goes out of it's way to LOCK both 3rd party vendors and paying customers alike out of doing what they wish with the hardware that they paid for?"

You are not a paying customer. iTunes is free and your using a competitors product. Apple has nothing to lose by pissing you off, and it certainly doesn't owe Palm any charity.

Re:cat and mouse

[adolf]

I've used MediaMonkey under Vista to transfer music to my iPod Touch (though I haven't tried with the newest firmware).

It's still somewhat in the realm of "ugly hack," though: MediaMonkey uses parts of iTunes (which must also be installed) in order to accomplish this, but it worked fine in the boneheaded, practical sense of things in that it was transparent, easy, and I didn't have to suffer with seeing iTunes.

Re:cat and mouse

[DurendalMac]

Old DRM'ed tracks would be unplayable on any other device in the first place, so bringing them up in the Palm Pre debate is pretty darned pointless.

Re:cat and mouse

[kelnos]

iTunes isn't an open standard. If Palm wants to add music syncing to their product, they can do it themselves, or use another product that they're allowed to use.

By extension, you're suggesting that a Pre owner is "not allowed" to use iTunes and their Pre together. Bullshit.

Writing a capable music player/syncing app is not the trivial task you make it out to be. And even if it was, obviously making a *good* app of that type is not trivial, considering that most of them suck pretty hard, and even iTunes is only just decent.

Now, that's not an excuse for Palm, but why *shouldn't* they support iTunes sync support if they can? If their motive for doing so is to tempt current iPhone users with an easier conversion path, more the better. Now, it's best if they have another sync method that's easy to use, since of course they can't *depend* on their iTunes interop. But frankly Apple is just being their usual dickish selves by doing their best to lock out the Pre with every update. My sympathy is firmly with Palm here. I do love Apple products (I'm typing on one now and have another in my pocket), but Apple as a company... their exclusionary policies make them look like a selfish 4-year-old most of the time.

Look at it this way: we all like open standards and common protocols, right? Well, I wouldn't bet that Apple will embrace one, ever. But if Palm can tire Apple out enough so they give up and "allow" (having to use that word grates on me) the Pre to interoperate with iTunes, that's better for the community as a whole.

My only issue with Palm is that is that using Apple's vendor/product IDs seems a bit sketchy, but, frankly... what harm does it actually do? If, for all intents and purposes, the Pre *behaves* like an iPod/iPhone when any piece of software tries to treat it as such, what does it matter? You can get all up in arms in the purist/idealist sense, but I'm too much of a pragmatist to care in this instance.

Re:cat and mouse

[jo_ham]

In this case, the totally free iTunes software provided free by Apple, free to use by you for free was just not designed for a Palm to spoof the USB ID of an iPhone to trick iTunes into believing it is an iPod, in violation of the USB standard.

What did you honestly expect them to do?

Re:cat and mouse

[jo_ham]

Well, iTunes is free, and supplied by Apple.

Perhaps if they sold iTunes and made it iPod/iPhone exclusive it would be worse, but it is a free program. You may like using it, but you can't call someone who only uses iTunes and nothing else from Apple a customer of theirs - iTunes is there to support Apple products that they sell. It's not there to be a sync platform for a competing product. Especially not a competing product that is violating the USB standard and using Apple's vendor ID.

Re:cat and mouse

[chartreuse]

Not as true as you think: http://folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=On_Xerox,_Apple_and_Progress.txt

Re:cat and mouse

[indiechild]

Palm is complaining that Apple updated their app:
http://www.macrumors.com/2009/07/24/palm-reports-apple-to-usb-compliance-organization-over-itunes-syncing-issues/

I guess you conveniently left that one out.

Re:cat and mouse

[node 3]

Reading your trolling obviates how entirely out of touch with reality you are.

Disagreeing with me does not mean I'm a troll. I'm putting forth my honest opinion.

Additionally, I suggest looking up the word "obviate" before using it again in the future.

Also, how the hell did you convince yourself that there are any standards being violated?

The Palm Pre uses Apple's USB vendor ID.

Re:cat and mouse

[node 3]

On the other hand, if you own a Pre device, and you are able to sync with iTunes today, and the only thing that changes is an iTunes update, there's a chance the consumers will blame Apple. Palm is banking on this, and most-assuredly they will have tech support tell them *not* to upgrade to the latest version of iTunes (or to downgrade).

No one is going to think there's a problem with iTunes. They're going to think there's a problem with Palm.

It's not an amateurish play on Pre's part, but a very, very risky one

It's both. But it's amateurish in the fact that they can't use their own software but instead are reporting their device, to Windows/OS X (not just iTunes), as being an Apple device.

This is a seriously amateur hour move.

Re:cat and mouse

[node 3]

By extension, you're suggesting that a Pre owner is "not allowed" to use iTunes and their Pre together. Bullshit.

Not "by extension". That's exactly what I'm saying. Palm devices aren't allowed to sync with iTunes. Not officially anyway, although they are clearly "allowed" to sync, in spite of Apple's efforts otherwise.

I'm not stating it's a legal or a technologically intrinsic restriction, it's a policy restriction on the part of Apple. I don't agree with it, either. But it exists, and to claim otherwise is a bit silly.

Writing a capable music player/syncing app is not the trivial task you make it out to be. And even if it was, obviously making a *good* app of that type is not trivial

I'm not making it out to be easy in any way whatsoever. That's exactly the point. Palm is trying to ride on Apple's iTunes coattails. If they want to make an iPhone competitor, they should bring with it all the parts needed. Blackberry does it. Windows Mobile does it. Android, SonyEricsson, etc, etc, etc, do it. If Palm wants to play, they should bring their own equipment to the field, and not scrap off of Apple's. It's pathetic.

Now, that's not an excuse for Palm, but why *shouldn't* they support iTunes sync support if they can?

Because iTunes belongs to Apple. If Apple wants to support the Pre, then good. If not, then all attempts by Palm to bypass Apple's wishes is pretty lame. It's similar to the whole Real/iTunes debacle. It makes Palm look needy and clingy.

Look at it this way: we all like open standards and common protocols, right? Well, I wouldn't bet that Apple will embrace one, ever.

Were I to list all of the open standards Apple supports (a large number of them, Apple invented), would push this post over into "Read the rest of this comment..." realm.

But if Palm can tire Apple out enough so they give up and "allow" (having to use that word grates on me) the Pre to interoperate with iTunes, that's better for the community as a whole.

What "community as a whole" would that be? Not the open source community. Not the generic "consumers" community. The only community is the Palm Pre owners community, which has, at best, a tenuous connection to any sort of "the community as a whole".

My only issue with Palm is that is that using Apple's vendor/product IDs seems a bit sketchy, but, frankly... what harm does it actually do?

I never said it caused any harm (others have, though, although I don't agree much with them--particularly stating that the Palm could mess up the iTunes library if their syncing is buggy, which is true, but if that happens, I suspect that would harm Palm's image far more than Apple's). What it is, though, is pathetic. It further shows how lame Palm is. Instead of boldly putting forth their own system, they have to resort to mimicking their competitor? Lame, lame, lame.

Re:cat and mouse

[Dahamma]

Yep, DurendalMAC, that's my point.

Apple does not always shoot rainbows out of their ass. They are a moneygrubbing corporation just like any other, and worse than some. (though my main argument would be: what's wrong with a moneygrubbing corporation - that's why they exist! Just don't pretend one is better than another...)

Re:cat and mouse

[Brian Feldman]

Sorry, but that is a convention, not a standard. There is also a long and storied convention that opposes that one: devices emulate other devices to facilitate interoperability. You may be familiar with, say, the IBM Compatihle BIOS. Implementing a device interface faithfully is only a standards violation in your twisted logic, mate.

Re:cat and mouse

[prockcore]

By that definition, then iPods themselves are a kludge.. since Apple pushes out iPod updates to enable them to work with iTunes updates.

Re:cat and mouse

[prockcore]

iTunes came out a year before the iPod did. So you can't say that iTunes only exists to sell iPods.

Re:cat and mouse

[enilnomi]

Simply to demonstrate that it's rarely as easy as "if they'd just do XYZ their world would be rosy"...

By specifying a hard path for the .xml file, your code assumes that users have left their iTunes Library file in the default location. If the library file has been moved -- say, to an external drive along with content files to make the entire library portable -- your code will produce, at best, access to an old .xml file (and at worst, a completely empty .xml file).

On a Mac, the most-recently used iTunes Music Library.xml file is best located by reading the ~/Library/Preferences/com.apple.iApps.plist file for the "iTunesRecentDatabasePaths" item, and extracting the .xml file's path. (For example, run defaults read com.apple.iApps iTunesRecentDatabasePaths in a shell script.) The equivalent item in a Windows "plist" file would be iTunes Library XML Location in the "iTunes Prefs.xml" file in the user's Application Data folder.

Re:cat and mouse

[jo_ham]

But it does now, as the business model changed. It was always free, though.

Re:cat and mouse

[jsebrech]

It's just like if your Internet connection keeps going down.

Yes, if it's your internet connection going down because your phone company (applecom) keeps messing with your connection because you didn't buy your dsl modem from them, but instead chose to get it somewhere else (palmdsl).

In some countries, what apple is doing here is illegal (product tying). Itunes is the default music management app on the mac. In fact, on a new mac, it's the _only_ music management app. Why wouldn't palm want to interface with that? And why should they have to settle for the second-rate user experience that apple says they deserve, when apple reserves a first-rate experience for iphone buyers?

The worst thing are the apple apologists though. I own two ipods, two macs, and zero windows machines, but I'll readily admit: apple are worse than microsoft. They act like stuck-up little bitches, in all their product lines, no doubt about it, and it's starting to seriously get on my nerves. But hey, that's normal, it's a public corporation, and it's corporate DNA to behave badly if it nets a profit. What's not normal is people who have no financial stake in apple supporting that bad behavior. If they really cared about apple's products, they would be more critical of everything apple does, to get them to behave better.

Anyway enough ranting, but I'm putting my money where my mouth is, I'm expressly not buying an iphone out of retribution for apple's bad behavior, even though I had decided I was going to.

Re:cat and mouse

[ceoyoyo]

I don't know... if I owned a Pre and every time I plugged it into my computer iTunes came up with an iPhone icon and every time I wanted to change which playlists got synced to my Pre I had to click on that icon and tell iTunes how I'd like to configure my "iPhone," and the whole thing broke periodically, my thought would be that I should have bought an iPhone instead of some knockoff.

On the other hand, if nice, well designed Palm Pre software came up and asked what I'd like on my Pre, I might think it was very convenient that Palm integrated their new phone with my existing iTunes library.

Re:cat and mouse

[ceoyoyo]

You're right. I'm surprised Apple hasn't sent the USB Compliance committee after them.

Re:cat and mouse

[Anonymous Coward]

I believe that the DMCA
A) Requires encryption.
B) Has a interoperability clause.

Re:cat and mouse

[babyrat]

So Apple is definitely not about choice in your opinion. You either have to go all Apple or no Apple at all.

Apple is all about choice. I chose to get a mac because I was sick of all the windows crap.

I chose to get an iPhone because of the user interface.

I chose to get an Apple TV (without ever having seen one) because of the trust I had in Apple that it would be very usable.

You are free to choose not to buy an Iphone, or an iPod, or an Apple TV or any of their other products. You are free to choose whether to shop at the iTunes store or not.

Part of my choice in buying their stuff is because all of it works very nicely together. It is part of their business strategy and apparently seems to be working out OK for them.

Why shouldn't they be free to choose what products synch with their software? Why should they let another company hijack this strategy from them?

Re:cat and mouse

[PJ1216]

Did you read what I typed? I said Apple doesn't let you pick and choose. You have to go all Apple or no Apple. Then you, apparently trying to somehow offer a contradiction, point out how you buy all Apple. How is that in any way refuting what I said? Its like you wanted to just jump out and prove my point for me.

Re:cat and mouse

[ground.zero.612]

Stupid? I would agree with you if and only if iTunes was the only application to manage your Pre's music library. I do not own a Pre yet, so I cannot confirm this, howerver, I highly doubt the Pre only syncs with iTunes.

Re:cat and mouse

[ground.zero.612]

Do you have any examples of a large and successful company wasting resources on development, by developing an exact clone of another company's product, rather than spending practically nothing to write a simple work-around?

I'd actually be curious to hear of some, because I would like to ridicule them for being so stupid.

the company is called Microsoft, and the rip-off product is called windows. check and mate.

Is saying Microsoft the new Godwin reference? Microsoft is Hitler so the longer the thread goes on the more probable a reference to Microsoft is made? What a pathetic attempt at a citation. In your words, exactly what did Microsoft rip-off to produce Windows? I know the answer to this as I've had to sit through many hours of computer history classes to earn my degree. HINT: your bias is clearly displayed here by your lack of including Apple and Mac OS.

Re:cat and mouse

[ground.zero.612]

Yes I do, actually. Virtually every Microsoft product in the whole of history.

That's a rather vague "example." Please detail.

Re:cat and mouse

[ground.zero.612]

Blackberry.

Ok, so that's a company name, but how about some details on this product they supposedly cloned from scratch rather than writing a simple work around?

Re:cat and mouse

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Don't have much info, just saw this post on engadget. There's also this one.

Re:cat and mouse

[ground.zero.612]

Don't have much info, just saw this post on engadget. There's also this one.

Your first link says that RIM will have a Mac version of their BlackBerry Desktop Manager software, and that it can sync with iTunes. IMHO I don't think this really counts as making iTunes from scratch, since the article didn't say RIM now has their own music store/application that syncs with BlackBerries. The second link "confirms" the September release date of the Mac native application.

Re:cat and mouse

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

I never meant to imply that 3rd parties should have to make their own iTunes alternative, but that they should use the APIs that iTunes makes available rather than going for a hack solution.

Re:cat and mouse

[kelnos]

Were I to list all of the open standards Apple supports (a large number of them, Apple invented), would push this post over into "Read the rest of this comment..." realm.

*Rolls eyes*. Obviously. I meant in the context of media syncing.

What it is, though, is pathetic. It further shows how lame Palm is. Instead of boldly putting forth their own system, they have to resort to mimicking their competitor? Lame, lame, lame.

I just don't see it that way. Maybe this just just my OSS developer side speaking, but I don't see iTunes as "Apple's." It's just simply a music library app that can sync with iPods. Another company wanting to support syncing their product with iTunes, which has a pretty large install base just sounds like good business to me. If they were incapable of writing sync software themselves, then, sure, that's pretty lame. But I don't think they are incapable; I think they've just chosen to do something else.

And I'm pretty sure loading up a Pre with music etc. doesn't *require* iTunes, so it's not like they're relying on iTunes for this to work.

Re:cat and mouse

[Anonymous Coward]

Well...except in this case the Palm solution is a kludge, as it still requires iTunes *snip!*

[emphasis mine]

WRONG. Transferring music to the Pre can be done by simply copying it over, hence the USB mass storage support. iTunes transfer is slower in comparison and I see no reason to use it if one keeps a diligent organizational structure of directories and files.

More interesting quote from Palm

[quantumplacet]

well, if anyone RTFA, there's an even more interesting quote from Palm:

Palm believes that openness and interoperability offer better experiences for users by allowing them the freedom to use the content they own without interference across devices and services, so on behalf of consumers, we have notified the USB Implementers Forum of what we believe is improper use of the Vendor ID number by another member.

Looks like Palm really is ready to turn this into a war.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[0100010001010011]

Then palm should have written their own Sync Program. I don't think Apple would have had a problem if they used the iTunes library XML files or just the iTunes media files themselves. What Palm is doing is lying to iTunes to get the Pre synced as an iPod.

Apple did all the engineering, R&D, and human interface work for iTunes. (Ok, other than what they bought in the beginning). Now Pre is trying to piggy back on this.

Palm, if you want to sync DRM free Media to the Pre, write your own application.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[blincoln]

Apple did all the engineering, R&D, and human interface work for iTunes. (Ok, other than what they bought in the beginning). Now Pre is trying to piggy back on this.

Interoperability with competitors' hardware is generally protected, at least in the US. See Coleco and other companies producing Atari 2600-compatible hardware, various companies producing unlicensed software for the NES, Sega Genesis, PS2, etc that had to use similar trickery to what Palm is doing.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[Roogna]

Indeed, in fact, from my understanding of things (IANAL) the DMCA specifically includes exemptions for interoperability purposes..

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple did all the engineering, R&D, and human interface work for iTunes. (Ok, other than what they bought in the beginning).

Other than what they bought in the beginning? You never used SoundJam MP, did you? It was a great program, but it in no way resembled iTunes. Apple only used the engine from it.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[SBrach]

So it is OK for Apple to lock-in customers to iPods because they downloaded their music collection from the iTunes store. Your take on corporations leveraging monopolies is interesting. Before I get flamed for calling the itunes music store a monopoly, they have over 70% worldwide market share and exclusive deals with many record labels and artists. If you want to download all your music from the internet legally you are forced to use iTunes.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[0100010001010011]

You're forced to DOWNLOAD it through iTunes. Nothing is forcing you to USE it through iTunes.
The files are sitting there on the hard drive plain as day. Now that they have no DRM on them you can do what ever you want.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[LanMan04]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:ITunes-exclusive_releases

What a huge and extensive list. /yawn

I used iTunes as my music organizer and I've never bought a single song from the iTMS.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[Duradin]

Open iTunes. Make sure you have your main library open. Create a new folder on your desktop. Open that new folder. Go back into iTunes and hit [cmd|ctrl]-A and then [cmd|ctrl]-C. Go to the new folder that you opened. Hit [cmd|ctrl]-V. When it is done copying you can have whatever program or device you want manage your music for you. (iTunes lock in is sooooooooooooo harsh!)

What the pre is doing is making use of iTunes' management capabilities so that that palm didn't have to much about with coming up with their own playlist and management app.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[commodoresloat]

goddamnit. replying to remove my mod of "offtopic," which was a mistake. I was trying to click "interesting." Now somebody mod me funny.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[SBrach]

There are many albums released with iTunes exclusive tracks that are not on that list.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[Mordok-DestroyerOfWo]

So by that logic should MS be allowed to deny 3rd parties from accessing their software? I mean they spent millions on R&D as well.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[n30na]

I dunno, i feel like they're more just trying to challenge apple than piggyback off them. Either way, it's fun to watch.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[SBrach]

You're right. I misunderstood and thought they were allowing DRM'd music to sync as well. I still think Apple is wrong however. If Microsoft only allowed you to sync a Zune to WMP people would be up in arms.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[orngjce223]

Sega v. Accolade, 1980s (IIRC).

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[PitaBred]

If you want a car that runs on non-Ford brand gas, make it yourself!

Standards are standards for a reason. Subverting the standard for anticompetitive reasons is wrong. Period.

Besides... who wants to install yet another damn program on their machine? I hate how each widget I get has some shitty driver it needs to have to get working with Windows, with some shitty software that never works. My Canon HF100? The video management software for it is abysmal. Palm is actually serving consumers by allowing them to keep their computers cleaner and use existing infrastructure, and you're getting upset at that? Fuck Apple.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[kbrannen]

Then palm should have written their own Sync Program. ... Palm, if you want to sync DRM free Media to the Pre, write your own application.

I don't understand that, and you're not the only one saying it -- so my apologies for using your comment instead of someone else's. But my question is why should Apple even care that Palm uses iTunes with the Pre? Apple gives it away for *free*! Anyone can download iTunes, you don't even have to have an iPod device. Shouldn't Apple be happy their program is getting used by more people? Maybe some of those extra people will even create an iTunes account and spend money on stuff. I just don't understand what all the hoopla is about.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[Homburg]

Palm, if you want to sync DRM free Media to the Pre, write your own application.

The Pre is a USB mass storage device, so it's already possible to copy media to it without iTunes. The advantage of integration with iTunes is that people already know how to use iTunes. This isn't a case of Palm using Apple's software to provide a facility they're too lazy to provide themselves, but rather of providing an additional feature to allow Pre users to use software they're already familiar with.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[klui]

Pretty ballsy since it is Palm that is doing the impersonation.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[Anonymous Coward]

Before I get flamed for calling the itunes music store a monopoly, they have over 70% worldwide market share and exclusive deals with many record labels and artists. If you want to download music specifically with iTMS-exclusive deals, are willing to plug your ears and shout loudly any time Amazon's quite sizable MP3 download store is mentioned in an effort to forcibly ignore it, and absolutely, ultimately refuse to listen to any music released for free on the internet, and want to do this all legally you are forced to use iTunes, except, you know, for taking the music purchased from iTunes (now DRM-free) and moving it to some other player.

There. Fixed that for you.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[donny77]

The thing is there is a diference between hardawre interoperability and software. Xbox 360 games do not have to play on a PS3. OS X programs don't have to work under Windows. Is this a software or Hardware interoperability issue? Is Apple required to make the iPod driver work with the Palm Pre? So HP has to provide me with drivers for my Xerox printer? iTunes does more than sync, it is the iPod driver that allows the Pre to sync with iTunes.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[omnichad]

Wait...whose improper use? Apple's or their own?

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[Chees0rz]

What do you use? Pirate, Amazon, CD Shop? Not trolling, just wondering.
Because I am just out of college, I have accrued quite a pirated music collection (it was kind of OK back then..). Now I have a full-time job, and some money to spend. For a while I hadn't gotten any new music (it's so freaking expensive and I felt kind of bad downloading it). Until I used ITMS...
iTunes Music Store is pure evil. It's too easy. It's like PS3 PSN, 1 click and you've spent 10 bucks! I love it, but I hate it. I always stay away from it. But when there is one album I really want (Two Tongues)... I end up clicking away on the 'recommended album lists' and getting 3 more.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[Gizzmonic]

If Microsoft only allowed you to sync a Zune to WMP people would be up in arms.

You know what would be worse? If dumped their "PlaysforSure" DRM and opened their own music store with DRM that doesn't work on anything but the Zune? Oh wait, they already did that.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a Pre and love it, but Palm isn't all about open everything - it is impossible to uninstall the 'Nascar' application and others that come stock with the Pre. The 'uninstall' option you have for all apps pulled from their app store just don't work for these. Now, if the app was an OS requirement or such, fine. While the ability to track Nascar winners may be mandatory for some in the Pre target demographic, I am not one of them.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[Anonymous Coward]

The Zune doesn't use WMP.

It uses its own player.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[MLS100]

The point isn't that the vendor has to support or implement interoperability (this would be lunacy), it is that they cannot sue when their software/hardware is reverse engineered by someone else for the purposes of interoperability.

Obviously nobody is suing in this case, likely for these reasons.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[LanMan04]

It was mostly ripped from among a group of 10 or so friends in 99/2000 timeframe, when everyone still had tons of CDs. My music collection is rather static, but I like it that way. :) I had a huge pile of Pink Floyd, CSNY, Zep, etc that were my contribution.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[yabos]

I think it's kind of funny that Palm is trying to "rat out" Apple to the USB board when it's Palm who has just violated the USB license terms by faking their vendor ID when identifying the Pre.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[HighFalutinCoder]

It looks like the paragraph Palm is referencing can be found towards the top of the second page of the USB-IF Membership Application, specifically this sentence:

Unauthorized use of assigned or unassigned USB Vendor ID Numbers and associated Product ID Numbers are strictly prohibited.

Although, at the same time, the way Palm restored iTunes syncing with the Pre was to have it use Apple's Vendor ID Number, which is also expressly prohibited by another couple of sentences in the very same paragraph:

Each Vendor ID Number is assigned to one company for its sole and exclusive use, along with associated Product ID Numbers. They may not be sold, transferred, or used by others, directly or indirectly, except in special circumstances and then only upon prior written approval by USB-IF.

So unless Palm has already acquired said written approval from the USB-IF, they are also in violation of their agreement.

It looks to me like Palm is very clearly in the wrong, and that Apple may or may not be, depending on who gets to be the official interpreter of the phrase "unauthorized use." I have to say, in a world where "ID" is normally short for "identification," using a "Vendor ID Number" to identify devices that came from that vendor sounds pretty standard.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[ceoyoyo]

Good luck with that. iTunes uses the vendor ID to make sure the device it's about to communicate with is one that it's compatible with. "Compatible" meaning one that the manufacturer has tested it with and warrants it will work with. That is precisely what the vendor ID is for.

Re:More interesting quote from Palm

[Anonymous Coward]

I just wish Palm would go about this differently, like trying to establish an actual standard for devices syncing with desktops, like a standard API that device makers and syncing software authors can then follow. But Palm's hijacking someone else's USB Vendor ID to piggy back off of the other entity's proprietary syncing software is shady and does nothing for establishing an open standard that all can follow.

Oppenheimer Would Be Proud

[hardwarejunkie9]

Is it just me, or does this have the sound of an escalating digital cold war? Palm updates, Apple Updates, Palm Updates, Apple updates. Palm Pre gets a reputation of compatibility with Itunes for the hardcore fans, just as long as they choose to sync on even weeks when Apple's busy writing patches for the new backdoors.

Re:Oppenheimer Would Be Proud

[ShadowRangerRIT]

It sounds like Apple is learning from the urban legend version of Microsoft. Except they're doing it for real.

Huh.

[WarlockD]

I just updated my Pre too. Scares me though. While Apple is selling DRM free music, dost it really stop them from their software only syncing up to properly signed iPods? I mean I like my iPod, but if its going to be a device that needs a secure encrypted channel to transfer file for me to just use normally, I am not sure I would want to use an iPod again.

Re:Huh.

[Facegarden]

I just updated my Pre too. Scares me though. While Apple is selling DRM free music, dost it really stop them from their software only syncing up to properly signed iPods? I mean I like my iPod, but if its going to be a device that needs a secure encrypted channel to transfer file for me to just use normally, I am not sure I would want to use an iPod again.

DVD Jon started some software that is like iTunes, but open, and made for any device. It looks pretty cool, though I haven't tried it yet.
it's called DoubleTwist, look it up.
-Taylor

Re:Huh.

[Anonymous Coward]

I think this only applies to the sync feature. Not the transfering of the files manually.

Re:Huh.

[mr100percent]

The problem is that Palm apparently is faking the Apple Vendor ID, which Apple is against. Apple has established sync APIs for any developer, including iSync and Sync Services, but Palm refuses to follow these and tries prying into proprietary APIs. Palm is looking at trouble from the USB standards board (whatever its called) for forging IDs

Typical Apple strategy

[tgibbs]

I doubt if Apple expects to be able to keep Palm out on a long-term basis. Apple's strategy of protection seems to be not so much to try to create an impregnable barrier, but rather to introduce inconveniences for those who use their products in an "unapproved" way. So if you get a Palm Pre, you'll have to check the web before you update your iTunes to make sure that Apple hasn't disabled Pre sync, and then wait for Palm to get around to fixing it.

Re:Typical Apple strategy

[MassacrE]

It just makes palm look like they are selling a low quality product (which in this regard, they are.) What sort of company wants to rely on private, undocumented interfaces in a direct competitor's product line in order to work?

Apple is probably taking pursuing three tacts right now - trying to figure out how to legally stop Palm from doing this, promoting the perception that palm's software is a poor quality due to their broken reliance on a competitor's mobile syncing software, and creating a list of ways to break this compatibility (including new firmwares, and possibly cryptographic challenges against the ipod firmware binary).

Re:Typical Apple strategy

[tgibbs]

It just makes palm look like they are selling a low quality product (which in this regard, they are.) What sort of company wants to rely on private, undocumented interfaces in a direct competitor's product line in order to work?

Except, of course that the Pre does not require iTunes to work. It's simply a convenience to the user to help the sync their different files. This is one of the strengths of the Pre--it has broad cross-platform compatibility, with Google, with Exchange, with Facebook, with iTunes, etc. etc.

Apple is probably taking pursuing three tacts right now - trying to figure out how to legally stop Palm from doing this, promoting the perception that palm's software is a poor quality due to their broken reliance on a competitor's mobile syncing software, and creating a list of ways to break this compatibility (including new firmwares, and possibly cryptographic challenges against the ipod firmware binary).

It would be hard to promote the idea that Palm's difficulty in working with iTunes is due to poor quality on Palm's end. After all, the Pre worked just fine with iTunes until Apple changed iTunes to break it, and Palm restored compatibility in fairly short order. Legally, it is doubtful if Apple has any grounds to prevent them from doing so, since the Pre doesn't change the iTunes files to interfere with iTunes, and users are entitled to do what they want with their data. There is no user agreement that prohibits individual users from utilizing their data with other software or hardware. Short of taking away the current ability of Apple computer owners to use iTunes with data files in standard open formats such as mp3, it is hard to see how Apple could keep the Pre from syncing with iTunes one way or another. But as I noted, Apple's strategy has never been to try to create impregnable barriers, but rather to introduce inconveniences for users who aren't doing things the way that Apple wants. So it will probably go on like this: Apple will occasionally modify iTunes to reduce compatibility, and Pre owners will have the inconvenience of postponing updating iTunes until Palm updates the Pre's software.

USB Vendor ID

[Anonymous Coward]

According to http://www.precentral.net/how-palm-re-enabled-itunes-sync , Palm now uses Apple's USB vendor ID. Which is kind of not allowed...

Unauthorized use of assigned or unassigned USB Vendor ID Numbers and associated Product ID Numbers are strictly prohibited.

And because the world doesn't always make sense, Palm filed a complaint with the USB Implementors Forum, stating Apple is abusing the vendor ID (according to http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20090723/you-can-almost-hear-the-shrieks-of-outrage-in-cupertino-cant-you/ ).

Re:USB Vendor ID

[clone53421]

Interesting. What sort of teeth does the USB IF have?

I mean, the complaint is obviously going to fail, as I see it. If Apple wants to use their vendor ID to identify their own USB products so that iTunes doesn't work with anything else, that's within their right. Even if Palm thinks it's a dick move by Apple, I can't see anything actually prohibiting them from doing it.

Re:USB Vendor ID

[Anonymous Coward]

The USB vendor ID was not intended to force users into lock-in at the software level. Apple is wrong to try to "close" and open standard.

Re:USB Vendor ID

[djcapelis]

I think Palm's complaint to the USB IF isn't intended to get Apple to stop. I think Palm knows that the USB IF has no teeth. However, at the same time, they also want to put on record why they're breaking the guidelines by using Apple's USB vendor ID.

That way they put Apple in a position where it's harder for them to take the high ground because Palm's complaint is their way of going on record that Apple is violating the purpose and spirit of the USB spec.

Re:USB Vendor ID

[Anonymous Coward]

If Microsoft wants to use their operating system to indentify their own browser so that Windows dosen't work with anythning else. Then that's within their right. Even if Mozilla thinks it's a dick move my Microsoft, I can't see anything actually prohibiting them from doing it. Please just because you like Apple (as they can do no wrong apparently) it doesn't mean they can do whatever they want.

Re:USB Vendor ID

[shacky003]

I wouldn't think it would be "not allowed" in this instance, if (as reported above) Palm is correct when telling on Apple for misuse of the USB vendor ID. This would then be a legal way of circumventing an illegal/not allowed block by Apple (in using the Vendor ID string as a vehicle to kill products from using its' software)
If this pisses off Apple enough, I could see them pushing an update for older iPods to change the way they are recognised by iTunes, maybe using a more complicated method that will only run on the OS that are on iPods.. If they start using a different method to verify an iPod is connected with something other than the Vendor ID (I think they will have to at some point, as if they don't, many more will follow Palms' example) then there could be an interesting war starting between Apple, and the masses.

This all of course assumes Apple doesn't go the lawyers route.. Something tells me there is an overly good chance of that happening, from their past tactics..

Disclaimer: I know nothing, about anything, ever.

Re:USB Vendor ID

[clone53421]

First off, I don't like Apple. They sell high-priced fancy style-over-substance gadgets, IMHO. Now that we've got that taken care of...

I didn't see anything on the form stating that you can't use your vendor ID to identify your products, while it did say that using unauthorized vendor IDs is forbidden.

Re:USB Vendor ID

[shacky003]

In the way of "teeth" - If Apple is violating the standard that they agreed to abide by, couldn't the group go so far as to say they will no longer let others use their Vendor ID to get iPods to connect to other devices? (ie: Windows itself, future accessories, etc..) ?

Re:USB Vendor ID

[Yvan256]

But they're violating the purpose and spirit of the USB ID in order to prove Apple shouldn't be violating the purpose and spirit of the USB ID?

This reminds me of the three stages in the history of warfare from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy:
- RETRIBUTION: I'm going to kill you because you killed my brother.
- ANTICIPATION: I'm going to kill you because I killed your brother.
- DIPLOMACY: I'm going to kill my brother and then kill you, on the pretext that your brother did it.

Re:USB Vendor ID

[clone53421]

I don't see that Apple is violating the standard, though... the vendor ID is supposed to identify your product; AFAIK, there's nothing saying you can't/shouldn't make compatibility decisions based on the reported vendor ID of a USB device that you're trying to connect to. Checking for the Apple vendor ID doesn't seem like it would be actually forbidden when it comes to seeing if removable device Y is able to sync with iTunes...

Palm, on the other hand, seems to be violating the agreement they made, assuming they have a USB vendor ID. In that case, I'm guessing the USB IF can do little more than revoke Palm's vendor ID, which would basically mean nothing unless they have some legal ability to keep Palm from producing USB devices with whatever vendor ID they want. Can the USB IF actually force people to play by their rules, or has it been more of a "we'll play fair all around" deal up until now?

Re:USB Vendor ID

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple deliberatly broke compatability with the Pre (I hope everyone here is on board).

Apple apparently using the USB Vendor ID to prevent this "we have notified the USB Implementers Forum of what we believe is improper use of the Vendor ID number by another member. " which is a violation. I assume that is what this is talking about.

So Palm is spoofing an Apple Vendor ID to allow access to the program.

And I didn't comment at all on any of that. I basically said that Apple doesn't have the right to prevent everything but Apple products to work with its software.

Re:USB Vendor ID

[clone53421]

Apple apparently using the USB Vendor ID to prevent this ... which is a violation.

They believe it's an improper use of the vendor ID, but do they have anything to back up that claim? That's basically all I'm asking. Did it actually violate anything?

Palm is crying "it violates the free spirit of the USB protocol!" Well, perhaps it does, but did the USB IF say you couldn't use your vendor ID to do that? If not, Apple has a more firm foundation than Palm, since Palm definitely violated the agreement by using Apple's vendor ID.

Apple doesn't have the right to prevent everything but Apple products to work with its software.

Well, sure they do. I have a right to sell cars that only run on pink elephant piss, and you have the right to buy something else if you don't like that. You can try to get it to run on gasoline, and I can't really complain if you manage to get it working. But I do have the right to sell it.

Re:USB Vendor ID

[Anonymous Coward]

No they are vollating the word of the USB ID in oreder to prove Apple shouldn't be volating the word and SPIRIT of the USB ID!

Re:USB Vendor ID

[Late Adopter]

Yeah. I could see this as Palm making the statement to USBIF of "Hey, what these guys are doing here is kinda shady and against the spirit of open interoperability. We've done something technically bad to try to fix it, but we're coming up front with it and letting you know, because we wanna act in good faith. We'd very much appreciate it if Apple didn't do this anymore so we didn't have to resort to such a misuse of the spec in the future."

Re:USB Vendor ID

[clone53421]

You're basically making the same argument as I was, albeit in a bit (okay, much) more dramatic fashion.

Re:USB Vendor ID

[iluvcapra]

The USB vendor ID was not intended to force users into lock-in at the software level.

It's a strange thing to attribute such an intention on the USB vendor ID, I wonder if there's any documentation of that...

I own an x-keys. Now, when I plug in the X-Keys, my Mac is completely unable to make any use of it, because it doesn't map the keystrokes of the xkeys to any actions. The OS is absolutely receiving the key events through the HID driver, I've seen them in the IO explorer. Is Apple intentionally crippling my x-keys, or rather putting Pi Engineering at a competitive disadvantage because they don't provide software to map the HID events from my X-Keys to software events, while at the same time they DO provide software that allows people to map events from Apple's own gear, like the Mighty Mouse? Is Pi Engineering being "locked-out" of the Mac keyboard market because they have to ship a helper application along with their key arrays?

On the other end of things, it's not so much the interoperability as much as it is the branding involved. When you plug a Pre into iTunes with this voodoo working, it looks like an iPod, and iTunes says "iPod" when it's talking about the Pre. That's a trademark, and it implies (wrongly) that Apple created or sanctioned the functioning of the Pre, when in fact it makes iTunes do a bunch of weird things -- like make two iPod tabs appear in the preferences window, and other oddities. iTunes isn't really built to talk to a Pre this way, and Apple isn't really under any obligation to make it work this way. They've gone and made the library data readable through XML, so vendors can read the library wtihout nettling with iTunes's execution state.

All I can say is, if I wrote a program that wrote data to an open file format, and someone insisted on writing a special bit of code that patched my program and made it do stuff I didn't write it to do, and I was the one who started getting the support calls about it, I'd be sorta pissed.

Re:USB Vendor ID

[donny77]

This isn't about lock in. It's about indentity. iTunes doesn't just sync music. It pushes FIRMWARE updates. Kind of important to know what the device is.

Apple is doing nothing to prevent copying files to the Pre. They are preventing it from using the iPod sync which is device specific.

Re:USB Vendor ID

[donny77]

Well, Palm is now violating trademark law by identifying itself as an Apple(TM) product.

Re:USB Vendor ID

[shacky003]

From a legal standpoint, I don't think so..
The Apple logo, name, etc are trademarked, yes...
The Vendor ID string is not. AFAIK, it's a separate technical entity that isn't covered under trademark law as it pertains to logos, sm's, tm's, etc..
If that were the case, there would be MANY legal issues going on out there with compatibility. If Apple breaks the iTunes code to only recognize
its' own Vendor ID, it's not looking for the word "Apple" - it's looking for a string..
Apple doesn't own the copyright to that string.

Re:USB Vendor ID

[ConfusedVorlon]

I think the complaint is that apple used Palm's vendor ID to spot that this was a palm device and to lock it out.

the issue is that the pre declared itself quite openly as a palm device (usb hub?) with an apple ipod connected.

Re:USB Vendor ID

[MassacrE]

Apple deliberatly broke compatability with the Pre (I hope everyone here is on board).

I'm thinking apple considered the mechanism the Pre was using to sync to iTunes to be a defect. So, more likely they fixed unauthorized syncing by third party ipod clones.

Apple apparently using the USB Vendor ID to prevent this "we have notified the USB Implementers Forum of what we believe is improper use of the Vendor ID number by another member. " which is a violation. I assume that is what this is talking about.

To clarify, there is no policy against enforcing vendor ID. There is policy that using another vendor's ID is prohibited. So Palm is in the wrong, but trying to convince the USB IF that at least Palm and Apple are both wrong.

I imagine the USB IF has the trademarks on USB, and can require that Palm remove any USB logos or the term USB from any of their documentation.

Re:USB Vendor ID

[MassacrE]

In that case, I'm guessing the USB IF can do little more than revoke Palm's vendor ID, which would basically mean nothing unless they have some legal ability to keep Palm from producing USB devices with whatever vendor ID they want. Can the USB IF actually force people to play by their rules, or has it been more of a "we'll play fair all around" deal up until now?

I imagine the USB IF can both revoke Palm's ability to use the vendor ID (retroactively and under legal penalty) and revoke their usage of USB logos and names via the trademark agreement.

But at least they can continue to use Apple's Vendor ID...

Re:USB Vendor ID

[cynyr]

what if I figure out a way to make your car think that the gas i have put in is your "pink elephant piss" (btw is the elephant pink, the piss, or both), by labeling the bottel "pink elephant piss", do you get to complain to the "fuel bottle vendors guild" that labling my bottles "pink elephant piss" is in violation of the naming scheme? or do you issue a critical update to your cars computer that looks a bit harder at the bottle, that works until i make a better bottle? or do you say "ohh well i still sold a damn car for a 300% (exergeration, it's probably only 250% :P) margin, guess i'll laugh on my way to cash this check"

Re:USB Vendor ID

[ceoyoyo]

The USB Forum licenses the use of the USB logo, name, etc. If Apple gets properly mad at Palm they've got an excellent case for having Palm denied the use of those resources.

Palm would not be able to say the Pre syncs over USB, put the USB logo on their packaging, etc. Maybe it doesn't sound like a big deal, but it would probably confuse enough people to result in some lost sales.

Watch out

[T Murphy]

Palm better watch out- Apple will be looking to get revenge by making the iPhone compatible with Palm's music store.

and so it begins

[v1]

Now announcing iTunes Update Month!

Software update will have a new update for iTunes every 4-6 days, with an ever more entertaining list of "bugfixes and improvements", none of which will mention anything about palm.

I remember them doing this awhile back for a plugin for itunes that would add a second ipod to your list on the left, that you could drag and drop FROM. That spawned three iTunes updates in two weeks. People that diff'd the updates found basically all they were doing was adjusting their plugin acceptance code. Finally on the third update, they gave up on trying to filter it by behavior, and just plain banned the name of the plugin. It was at this point the author basically said ok I'm done, they're targeting me personally and that's not a war I'm going to win.

Re:and so it begins

[fulldecent]

Or... he could have open-sourced and became immortal

Re:and so it begins

[Anonymous Coward]

Doesn't help; libgpod is fully open source (LGPL), but still can't read iPhone/iPod Touch out of the box (requires jailbreaking).

Apple just likes being an ass.

Apple's response:

[mu51c10rd]

This means iWar!

Re:Apple's response:

[Zorlon]

... to Palm's Pre emptive strike

Another low move by Microsoft

[jayme0227]

Don't you just hate how Microsoft always tries to manipulate the system to give an unfair advantage to one of their products based on the popularity of another? I can't believe they're at it again. I thought they'd stop after the whole IE/Windows debacle that they have gone through, and to a certain extent are still going through.

Oh wait.

Re:Another low move by Microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't you just hate how large companies always try to manipulate the system to give an unfair advantage to one of their products based on the popularity of another? I can't believe they're at it again.

ftfy

New Palm Fan

[neowolf]

I haven't been a big fan of Palm for many years now, but I'm starting to become a fan again.

I think it is a combination of the battle with Apple, which I hope they are able to win, and I think the woman in their commercials is amazingly hot. :)

Apple should let them do it

[hamburgler007]

But with the caveat of not having to deal with the possibility that an update to iTunes may break the compatibility with the Pre, no obligation to make previous version of their software available, and Palm telling their users such. I think it is pretty dumb on Palm's part that they would rely so heavily on a third party they have no control over.

This is some uber-clever marketing by Palm.

[WelshRarebit]

By forcing Apple to issue updates specifically disable their device, Palm is capitalizing on the media hype maelstrom that is lavished on Apple, keeping the name "Pre" on the lips of people who would normally only ever talk about the iPhone. So when the media covers this "war", they are in effect establishing the idea of comparability between the products that would have been hard to get through had they just gone with traditional advertising and promotions. Between this and the new Microsoft ads, it is interesting to see Apple's competitors finally starting to ratchet up their competition with a brilliant marketing company.

Re:This is some uber-clever marketing by Palm.

[aftk2]

All I know from this volley is that, were I to buy a Pre, I'm not sure from one day to the next whether it would work with the program that it SPECIFICALLY ADVERTISES IT SUPPORTS !@#

I don't think that's very wise press. If that's an acceptable level of "integration" I'm not sure what other corners have been cut.

Re:This is some uber-clever marketing by Palm.

[dafing]

People mention "vista" alot but NOBODY seems to think its a good thing :) Is that advertising? yes. Is it "I heard its good, lets pay $200" kind of advertising? NO!

I hope FSJ covers this more :) This was hillarious! http://fakesteve.blogspot.com/2009/07/ruby-on-rails.html

Its a vista-ster!

Re:This is some uber-clever marketing by Palm.

[indiechild]

You're spot on.

I think Palm's executives are douchebags, but they're brilliant douchebags.

Re:This is some uber-clever marketing by Palm.

[Anonymous Coward]

By forcing Apple to issue updates specifically disable their device, Palm is capitalizing on the media hype maelstrom that is lavished on Apple, keeping the name "Pre" on the lips of people who would normally only ever talk about the iPhone.

And the thing on people's lips is that Palm Pre's sync functionality is illegitimate and unrealiable, while other devices simply have their own sync apps that JUST WORK. Good job, Palm. What uber-clever move.

Re:This is some uber-clever marketing by Palm.

[Fear the Clam]

Palm is capitalizing on the media hype maelstrom that is lavished on Apple, keeping the name "Pre" on the lips of people who would normally only ever talk about the iPhone

Yeah, as in "Look at those Pre bitches. Their whole ad campaign is about not being the iPhone, but they need iTunes to work."

Palm hasn't been "brilliant" since 1997.

Palm

[sbeckstead]

I'm selling off my Palm stock. First Palm doesn't bother to do their own engineering and decides it's OK to be a parasite on other people's work. Then when those people fix it so that Palm isn't able to steal their work, Palm fixes it so that they masquerade and someone else's product. Then files a complaint that Apple is abusing the USB Vendor ID code to affect interoperability even though there are far better ways to do what they are doing even using iTunes to buy music. And then it turns out that they actually are violating the USB Vendor ID code themselves by not reporting themselves as the vendor of their own product. These guys are pathetic, they should just bite the bullet and license iTunes connectivity, like Apple did for Exchange.

Re:Palm

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep, that's the sound of Palm shaking in their boots.

Re:Palm

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm selling off my Palm stock

Im sorry, but everything you said after that, has zero importance.

Since you obviously didnt seem to have any problem with palms previous business practices, to such an extent that you bought the stock in the first place, why would anyone care about your laundry list of trivial complaints?

Re:Palm

[Shatrat]

Plus your macbook probably only allows you to check stock prices on APPL anyway.

Re:Palm

[sbeckstead]

Actually I did. But as they had already done it I thought that maybe when Apple finally slapped them they would let it go and bring out their own sync program. Sprint does have it's own music store. I really don't care how an anonymous coward feels about this anyway.

Re:Palm

[kkelly]

Palm is wrong here, Apple is primarily a hardware company and uses iTunes, the App Store and OSX in order to increase their hardware sales. Allowing Palm to hack together support for iTunes in a competing product jeopardizes Apple's business model, they are right to fight back. THEN Palm goes and advertises iTunes support as a key feature of their competing device when it's nothing more than a hack talk about biting that hand that unwillingly feeds you.

Palm could have licensed support for iTunes from Apple and avoided this all together, but this is probably an indicator of where they are as a viable company right now. They have 1 relevant product and are exclusive on a carrier that runs a very distant 3rd as far as subscriber base. WebOS is very nice, but that IP just solidifies them as a prime target for takeover, they will not beat Apple at this game........

Re:Palm

[Anonymous Coward]

You may be right. Then again, it makes a good story, which I think is more the point of the entire thing than the software itself. It's refreshing to see a big corporation like apple humbled for once. Sure, Palm may have gotten some free marketing out of the move, the time and effort may have been better spent on other things, and the resulting legal battle may do more harm than good, but what the hell. Why not? It gives me something fun to read over the course of the day. Who knows, Palm may end up coming out better for a bold move like this.

Re:Palm

[sbeckstead]

Plus your macbook probably only allows you to check stock prices on AAPL anyway.
There fixed that for ya

Re:Palm

[Ogive17]

I'm selling off my Palm stock.

Maybe you should keep your Palm stock... this Pre vs iTunes battle is the first news I've heard out of Palm in years.. sounds like they are trying to become a player again.

Re:Palm

[Shatrat]

Hah, you know I started to type it that way and thought "That looks stupid, there's no way that's the ticker."
Apparently APPL was taken.

Re:Palm

[sbeckstead]

Yeah but they way the stock is going I needed the stop loss.

Re:Palm

[sbeckstead]

And it turns out that it will cost me more to sell it than the amount I have is worth so I lose less if I hold it.

Re:Palm

[larry bagina]

Additionally, WebOS is basically WebKit plus some custom javascript objects. Most of Pre was built and designed by current and former Apple employees.

Re:Palm

[Anonymous Coward]

Since even the most incompetent stock trader can find a broker that doesnt charge more than 14.99, lets remember that number when we check todays price per share of PALM.

Last Trade: 14.47

Wow. So you have 1 share?

Dont spend it all in one place, moneybags!

Re:Palm

[ground.zero.612]

I'm selling off my Palm stock. First Palm doesn't bother to do their own engineering and decides it's OK to be a parasite on other people's work. Then when those people fix it so that Palm isn't able to steal their work, Palm fixes it so that they masquerade and someone else's product. Then files a complaint that Apple is abusing the USB Vendor ID code to affect interoperability even though there are far better ways to do what they are doing even using iTunes to buy music. And then it turns out that they actually are violating the USB Vendor ID code themselves by not reporting themselves as the vendor of their own product. These guys are pathetic, they should just bite the bullet and license iTunes connectivity, like Apple did for Exchange.

Call me naive, but where does it say for iTunes that it will only sell music/sync to iPod/iPhone owners? Also, if Palm is correct about the improper usage of the Vendor ID, why do you think it is acceptable for Apple to abuse the standard? I guess in your eyes (fanboi?) it's ok for Apple to discriminate against consumers, and the last I checked that is illegal. To me the next logical step is something along the lines of:

"Apple has developed a rigorous algorithm to determine the color of skin of it's userbase by their iTunes library. Using this new technology Apple has determined you are: Black. As such, we do apologize for the inconvenience but you are no longer allowed to purchase downloads or sync to your music device."

Re:Palm

[sbeckstead]

Wrong genius But I do have almost a whole share.

Re:Palm

[sbeckstead]

Actually if you read the application for a Vendor ID Palm is the one who is using the Apple Vendor ID without authorization and Apple is using it in a perfectly reasonable way. incidentally there is nothing stopping you from buying tunes with iTunes, but there is no reason that Apple should be forced to enhance a direct competitors product by allowing you to Manage the music on a device that was not manufactured by or for Apple.

Re:Palm

[sbeckstead]

Oh my gawd I have to read these things more carefully. You have got to be kidding me "discriminate against customers" of another product. Do you actually even live in this universe, what color is the sky where you are.

Re:Palm

[ground.zero.612]

Actually if you read the application for a Vendor ID Palm is the one who is using the Apple Vendor ID without authorization and Apple is using it in a perfectly reasonable way. incidentally there is nothing stopping you from buying tunes with iTunes, but there is no reason that Apple should be forced to enhance a direct competitors product by allowing you to Manage the music on a device that was not manufactured by or for Apple.

Admittedly I know very little of Apple products as I have no use for them. However, I find it suspicious that iTunes only offers support for iPods/iPhones. In fact, I actually won't believe that until someone links to the apple.com page that says specifically you can only use iTunes with Apple mp3 players.

Re:Palm

[ground.zero.612]

Oh my gawd I have to read these things more carefully. You have got to be kidding me "discriminate against customers" of another product. Do you actually even live in this universe, what color is the sky where you are.

Actually what I said was discriminate against consumers, but whatever. I guess your vote has been cast for the "White's Only" drinking fountain.

Re:Palm

[makomk]

Additionally, WebOS is basically WebKit plus some custom javascript objects. Most of Pre was built and designed by current and former Apple employees.

Well, since most of Webkit was built and designed by open source developers back when it was KHTML...

Relax

[anonymousNR]

They are just phones and music players. Is it really that big an issue ?

Does it matter where the XML file is read?

[thule]

"d if Palm would grow a few braincells then they would write their own damn software that would read the XML file in the iTunes library"

This what the Pre already does. It is just that Palm decided to let iTunes copy the files over to the device first, instead of reading directly out of iTunes. Why should Apple care were the XML file is read? From a technical perspective it is basically the same. It saves the user from installing additional software. The is one of the nice things about the Pre, no need for any additional desktop software.

Re:Does it matter where the XML file is read?

[ceoyoyo]

Lookitthat! You answered your own question!

"It saves the user from installing additional software. The is one of the nice things about the Pre, no need for any additional desktop software."

Apple spends a lot of effort developing iTunes. I can certainly understand why they'd be a little ticked that Palm is too lazy to even spend a dozen or so hours developing a little Pre sync program, using the APIs and software that Apple has so kindly provided, for free, for just that purpose.

Right idea, wrong mechanism

[ThrowAwaySociety]

Palm could easily inter-operate with iTunes without pretending to be an iPod and abusing Apple's vendor ID. All it has to do is create its own synchronization driver.

"But wait!" the Apple-haters say. "Apple is an evil, anti-competitive wannabe-monopoly! There's no way it would allow such a thing! No way would Apple allow its precious iTunes on other devices! It wants to extend its iTunes dominance to the iPhone by locking out all competitors!"

I give you:
http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/productivity_tools/themissingsyncforpalmpre.html

(Also for BlackBerry.)

All Palm has to do is build (or license) its own connector, and Apple would let it be. Maybe it would even promote the software on Apple's own website.

Re:Right idea, wrong mechanism

[Anonymous Coward]

That's Macintosh only. Most Palm Pre owners - hell, most iPhone owners - use Windows.

And you can't write iTunes plugins under Windows - Apple won't let you.

Re:Right idea, wrong mechanism

[ConfusedVorlon]

but why as customer should I have to install that extra stuff when it Palm can offer out-of-the-box interoperability with iTunes?

Palm didn't abuse any vendor id. The were really clear (in round one) that this was a palm device. Thy used the vendor id only where it was a 'magic number' that was required to get interoperability.

Re:Right idea, wrong mechanism

[cynyr]

hmm links to mac only software to use an app other than iTunes to sync files to the pre. I don't any of the above mentioned devices, and have no real plans to. Maybe i'll get the my touch G2 (dev/unlocked) seeing as i already have a tmobile sim card.

Really what i want in a little linux box about the size of the iphone with hardware decoding support(mpeg2/3/4, h264, maybe even Theroa), with enough battery life to spend 9 hours playing music, an hour or two playing at least 720P content and then 2-3 more than that on (in standby/sleep) between charges, come with a dock, accept files via simple mass storage (usb/esata). It would be nice if it had b/g/n wireless support for streaming and playing files from the network (bonus points for being a upnp player/controler), and a web browser (webkit/gecko/opera) with flash 9/10 (updateable). I'd pay $400 for one with everything, or $250 for one with out the wifi.
Storage can be just about what ever you like(SD/uSD/SSD as thoughts.) A battery that can be replaced without cracking the case, optional. A2DP 2.0 compliant bluetooth gets you double bonus points.

Re:Right idea, wrong mechanism

[prockcore]

Really? That's your response? Missing Sync? I used Missing Sync for my old WinMo 5 phone. It barely worked, it crashed a lot, and it was $40.

I prefer what Palm is doing. iTunes interoperability is just an extra bonus. You can still add music and photos and whatever just by dragging them to the device.

Screw that, it's MY computer

[spun]

I'll use it however I like. If I want to use iTunes with a home built Internet Rice Cooker/MP3 Player, I will. Boo fucking hoo for Apple, where do they get off trying to tell me what I will and will not do with my computer, software, and other hardware? You masochistic, submissive Apple fanboys may get off on being dominated by your Apple-daddy but the rest of us don't swing that way.

Re:Screw that, it's MY computer

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe because it's their software that they're allowing you to use for free, given that you respect their license and the way they want it to run. It is your computer, so you have the option not to run iTunes.

Apple may not have a choice

[goombah99]

When tunes are stored on an ipod they are stored in a way that creates a speedbump to just trasnfering them off. basically the names are munged. Maybe they mess with the id3 tags--don't know. But apple has long been a proponent of speedbump DRM, that is drm that gets in your way enough that most users won't hassle with defeating it.

The real trick that apple accomplished was convincing the music companies that this was sufficient protection.

IN return apple probably has to make a reasonable effort to prevent cases where pod-to-pod transfers all proliferation of music. this would include nominal efforts to never have a legitimate channel for this.

they won't care if it's not perfect. But they probably are obligated to try.

Re:Apple may not have a choice

[node 3]

When tunes are stored on an ipod they are stored in a way that creates a speedbump to just trasnfering them off. basically the names are munged.

Into index numbers, which provides a non-negligible increase in performance.

Maybe they mess with the id3 tags--don't know.

They don't, but good job on making things up.

Re:Apple may not have a choice

[Planesdragon]

Into index numbers, which provides a non-negligible increase in performance.

You've GOT to be kidding me.

the iPod either as a memory hash / database that stores a key to each track as an integer, in which case they don't need to re-name squat, or they wrote a custom filesystem for the iPod, that mysteriously stores a song's name as an integer and not a string... and they sure as hell didn't do the latter, since you can just copy a .AAC file into a (jailbroken) iPod and it plays just fine.

The performance difference between "string that just happens to begin with an integer" and "string that isn't an integer" is negligible. Especially when you never sort by filename, but the string value of an ID3 tag. Especially when your software has to have a set of both in memory at once ANYWAY.

Apple re-names files they copy onto iPods as a means of "speedbump" DRM, like the grandparent said. Since I'm not dumb enough to buy an iPod, I can't check to see if they mungle the ID3 tags -- but unless you've copied a mungled file from an iPod to a new PC, an examined the file yourself, you can't say if they mungle the ID3 or not.

Re:Apple may not have a choice

[kklein]

Since I'm not dumb enough to buy an iPod

Yes, only dumb people buy iPods.

(sigh) Slashdot.

Re:Apple may not have a choice

[PJ1216]

I can confirm they don't mess with the ID3 tags. There are a multitude of easy to use applications that will rename mp3s based on their ID3 tags. You can easily copy a file from the iPod (because, surprise, its not some magical custom filesystem. Maybe a custom folder structure, but that stops no one). Honestly, I have no clue why they rename the music files. It really could possibly help improve performance. I don't really know. It could be a way to ensure that files never have the same name. They could just be the unique ID to the file and instead of changing the ID3 tag, they just change the filename. It eliminates the need of a relationship of ID to filename. All it needs is the ID and the information about the song. It doesn't need another column about where to find the file because, bam, the ID and the filename are the same. Is this really the case? I have no clue. But I'm just saying, they do *not* mess with the ID3 tags and its not a custom filesystem as its easily read by Windows as a harddrive and you can copy stuff to it. Filesystem != folder structure/hierarchy. I wrote software for a digital x-ray machine. Think we named every file created after the animal and what body part? Hell no. We used a unique identifier. it was virtually impossible for another file to get created with the same name (virtually, not actually).

I've copied mp3s off an ipod. I've run software that uses the ID3 tags to rename them in a format of my choosing (normally "artist - album - track - title.mp3").

I have an iPhone 3G. I actually still feel remorse about buying it because of purchasing a product from Apple. I feel better when I buy from Microsoft than when I buy from Apple. I still feel remorse at buying from MS, but sometimes I need what they provide. Sometimes I need what Apple provides. I don't have time to wait around for someone to do it the right way. Honestly, I think the Pre may be pretty close, but I'm not switching mid-contract. When my contract is up, I may consider it though.

Apple Joins Sony...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's official - Apple has joined Sony on my list of companies to avoid. Sigh - they used to be sooo cool....

Terms and Conditions

[keyboarderror]

I'd think it would be in Apple's best interest to ignore this in the best way possible. Simply update the terms and conditions of iTunes to state: "Use of non-Apple devices with iTunes are not supported. Contact your hardware manufacturer." And let it go at that.

Apple can (and will) always claim the best experience is with Genuine Apple products. Licensing is key.

Things that are outside the scope of iTunes, such as exporting tracks from the device or other functionality, can be handled via the DMCA or other appropriate legal avenues, and are far easier to defend that a protracted unauthorized use vs. anticompetitive argument that would be expensive for all parties. Providing a licensing option would also make defending against other software applications that mimic iTunes compatibility much easier.

It's important to remember that with proper legal boilerplate, this acts as a secondary drive for iTunes sales, by making access to the library much easier for all parties. A process which is already possible with other media players albeit at more manual effort.

Apple has already scored a significant coup by getting it's proprietary hardware interface adopted by a wide variety of electronics manufacturers, from A/V equipment to auto makers. Licensing of this hardware standard to other devices might also be controlled and profited by Apple.

Essentially establishing iTunes as a de-facto standard for media devices. Embrace, extend, engulf.

Re:Terms and Conditions

[CompMD]

"Use of non-Apple devices with iTunes are not supported. Contact your hardware manufacturer." And let it go at that.

That won't happen. There are 3rd party MP3 players that work with iTunes out-of-the-box. I still have a Rio500 that iTunes detects and knows how to work with it perfectly on my old G3.

Re:PICK YOUR NOSE AND EAT IT

[Anonymous Coward]

No, let's just continue picking yours.....now where did I leave that pick-axe?

Palm's reply:

[commodoresloat]

Talk to the hand.

iTunes is "compatible" with my Nintendo DSi

[Yvan256]

Select unprotected AAC tracks from iTunes, drop onto an SD card, insert SD card into Nintendo DSi.

Nope it doesn't sync automagically but drag'n drop does work from within iTunes.

I've got that syncing feeling again

[jollyreaper]

Jobs: You synced my flagship product!

Re:PICK YOUR NOSE AND EAT IT

[Anonymous Coward]

I never knew I had a choice! I've always used the one my parents gave me...

facepalm

[commodoresloat]

Somebody mod this up. Palm is in the wrong here, but they're counting on capitalizing on anti-Apple sentiment since a lot of people are justifiably fed up with Apple. But Palm really needs to concentrate on making a better product -- if they want to compete with the iphone they've got to do more than piggy back on its success.

I really wanted to like the Palm Pre. I've still got my Treo, as beat to hell as it is, because I don't like the keyboard-less design of the iphone. (I text a lot and I like the Treo's keypad better than most). I have an ipod touch so I have most of the cool app features of the iphone without the AT+T contract. I went to the Sprint store to check out the Pre and I found it flimsy and slow, and its interface completely counterintuitive compared to the iphone. I was completely disappointed and now I might buy a Centro instead just because it's exactly what I now have except smaller and faster and it comes in green. So, yeah, I might opt for a feature set from like 1997 rather than the latest and greatest -- if that's happening in your product line, there's no way in hell you're gonna compete with the iphone.

Re:facepalm

[Anonymous Coward]

Palm is in the wrong here

How on Earth is promoting interoperability putting them "in the wrong?" The very idea is absurd -- even the pro-IP US Congress realized this when the lobbyists told them to approve the DMCA and added an exception for it.

I remember when Slashdot actually favored hackability and openness. Now all I hear is a how great iTunes and the iPhone are because they wall you into their little garden and control everything about how you use your hardware and access your music. Slashdot would have applauded Palm years ago, but now all I see is posts about how mean it is of Palm, and how Apple has to protect their business model. Their business model! Dear god. How much longer until this site goes pro-RIAA as well? Just a matter of time.

Re:facepalm

[commodoresloat]

Read the parent post I was responding to. Palm is not "promoting interoperability"; they're abusing Apple's vendor ID in order to pretend to be an ipod. While the effect of that may be "interoperability," as the other poster shows, that interoperability is already possible via third party tools, and if Palm wants to promote interoperability they should create their own solution rather than playing tricks on Apple's solution. I'm not trying to defend Apple on this - as I said a lot of the rage Palm is tapping into is justified - but I just don't think this is a valid reason to attack them.

Re:facepalm

[nathan.fulton]

Get a centro. I have one. Love it. Plus, why ever migrate away from palm's old OS? It isn't the latest flashy thing to come to the market, but it's definitely the best if you have real requirements (as opposed to features you're convinced you need)

I don't understand

[paleo2002]

I don't understand why its a good thing for one company to release a product that interacts with another company's products without their permission? If I'm a software developer, don't I have to license an SDK or get other permissions from Microsoft or Apple? If I were to create and market a console that runs PS3 games, Sony would have a problem with it. If I'm going to manufacture replacement parts for Honda vehicles, shouldn't I have to check in with Honda and make sure I'm doing it right? If I set up a website that copied Slashdot stories and reader comments and reposted them under a different banner, I'm pretty sure the Linux-powered cyborgs who operate this site would be angry.

Apple's success comes from maintaining the quality and compatibility of its software and hardware. If iTunes eats a Pre owner's media collection because of some incompatibility between iTunes and the PalmOS, who's responsibility is that?

Re:I don't understand

[Anonymous Coward]

Uh no! You do not have to get Microsofts permission to write applications!
Uh no! You do not have to get Sony's permission to write applications that run on the PS3!
Uh no! You do not have to get Honda's permission to make replacement parts!
To get a "Works with Win 7" badge you have to talk to Microsoft. To get a PS3 logo on your disc you have to fork out some $$$ to Sony. If you want Sony to tell you how to program for the PS3 you have to talk with them. If you want to make spare parts for Honda just do it. I don't use VW windshied wipers, or air intake or tires.

Re:I don't understand

[acid06]

No, you don't have to license an SDK or ask any sort of permissions to *write* software.
From where this silly idea came from?

You might need to agree to their terms if you want to use their distribution channels (e.g. sell your iPhone software in the Apple store).

Re:I don't understand

[prockcore]

I don't understand why its a good thing for one company to release a product that interacts with another company's products without their permission?

Software would be pretty much impossible to write otherwise. All software interacts with the OS, without the OS manufacturer's permission.

Hell, OSX comes with samba so that it can interact with windows servers without microsoft's permission.

Palm claiming Apple is abusing the Device ID?

[Junta]

Now, while Apple's use of the USB device id is unfortunate and possibly against the terms (would have to read an agreement I don't think I have access too), but Palm's spoofing of a USB device id is clearly already against the short snippet they quote:

Unauthorized use of assigned or unassigned USB Vendor ID Numbers and associated Product ID Numbers are strictly prohibited.

Whether or not Apple's use may be considered 'unauthorized' may be debatable, but I'm pretty damn sure Palm is not authorized to use Apple's device id. I am very disappointed that Palm would go so far in their ripping off of Apple that they would stoop to this. I'm also disappointed in Apple for their lockout and vote by not using iTunes, ever.

I have a Pre and overall like it, but see way too many places where they ripped off Apple in very specific ways where they could achieve equal functionality by being original. The multitouch zoom and accelerometer orientation that other phone vendors fear to do are rightfully used as pretty obvious things to do, but silly things like the pan to plain background and snap back, and the small slider looking toggle are just blatant copies without significant value. Pre made a very hackable phone with free SDK with a good featureset, and should be commended, but they clearly are coming at this with too much of a cloner attitude in some very specific respects.

Songbird

[Anonymous Coward]

Palm should use Songbird and its iTunes library importer add-on, it would be simplier to update and would be legal.

Salling MediaSync ...

[salimma]

Not sure why Palm does not bundle Salling's MediaSync, which allows syncing of multiple smartphones with iTunes (without pretending that the device synced is an iPod).

Maybe they could license a version that only sync the Pre, or pay Salling to create a version that performs fast sync on the Pre but not on other devices (if you download directly from Salling, the free version does basic sync; paying gives you a faster experience).

Re:Salling MediaSync ...

[ceoyoyo]

Because they're being idiots.

Apple has multiple, sanctioned methods for interacting with iTunes that Palm has ignored. If iTunes were actually closed then maybe Palm would have a case, but as it is they're just being dicks.

Palm are begging for a visit from the fuckup fairy

[argent]

1. There are defined APIs Apple provides to allow third party software to interact with iTunes, and do everything Palm needs.

2. Palm is better at sync software than Apple *anyway*.

Doing it this way is just begging for a visit from the fuckup fairy. Plus, I want Hotsync back. And a pony.

It's perfect!

[thule]

"All it has to do is create its own synchronization driver."

Why? All the driver would do is see the Pre and copy the files over.... kinda like it ALREADY DOES! This is because the "sync driver" is already inside the Pre. The Pre reads the iPod music library files directly. Palm already did the "hard work" of reading well documented files. They just chose to do it in a different place than the rest of the market. Why create a totally new way of storing music files, why you can just copy how someone already did it. The only reason the other devices need a driver is because they don't know how to read the library files directly.

This gives the best experience to the user. No additional software to install.

Re:It's perfect!

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Because if Palm use Apple's driver, that means Apple has to consider support for Palm whenever it does anything to it's own drivers. Why should Apple have to bother with that when all Palm has to do it write a bit of extra software and do things properly? Blackberry can manage, so why can't Palm? Given their past support of syncing software, I think Palm are just lazy.

Re:It's perfect!

[WiseWeasel]

"They just chose to do it in a different place than the rest of the market."

Yeah, the stupid place that Apple is going to break every month.

had a pre returned to the treo

[Anonymous Coward]

I like my Treo's keyboard too, but the Treo sucks ass 99 ways out of a 100 compared to the Pre. I returned my Pre not because it was not a much better interface most of the time, but because the Pre keyboard was worth than useless.

The finger swipey part of the interface is mostly right, I think the interface fail was:

a) not turning the little button in front into a trackball or d-pad
b) not having a stylus

As an example, I have splashshopper on my Treo and it very nicely displays 15-20 items or so and all sorts of details. On the Pre display which is twice as large only about 5 items can be displayed because everything needs to be ginormous so that it can be selected by a finger.

Anyway, I love and hate my Treo, and I sure hope a good Android phone comes out in the next 4 months.

Trivial?

[msauve]

It would be trivial for Palm to make an app that reads said file and syncs without the need for iTunes to be running.

You appear to be making the unwarranted assumption that all of the tracks stored in iTunes will fit on a Pre, and/or the user wants all the tracks transferred.

The advantage of having iTunes do the syncing is that the user can select exactly which subset of tracks (via playlists) are sync'd with the device, and those playlists are in common with other devices which are sync'd. There are also advantages (assuming the Pre supports these features) of having the device up the play count, last played date, and other dynamic data, so it gets sync'd back into iTunes.

Yes, Palm could conceivably read the full iTunes XML, allow the user to create playlists, and sync from there, but that would involve more work for the user, instead of allowing them to easily sync already created playlists.

Re:Trivial?

[node 3]

Yes, Palm could conceivably read the full iTunes XML, allow the user to create playlists, and sync from there, but that would involve more work for the user, instead of allowing them to easily sync already created playlists.

Playlists are included in the iTunes XML file.

Example

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you have any examples of a large and successful company wasting resources on development, by developing an exact clone of another company's product, rather than spending practically nothing to write a simple work-around?

Windows

Remember, Folks

[Chris Mattern]

"It's not done 'till Palm won't run!"

Apple & Palm should both grow up

[XxtraLarGe]

This whole thing is ridiculous. Palm should have just approached Apple and asked them if they could sync with iTunes in the first place, then Apple should have let them. If Apple was smart, they would realize that the iPhone is not the only game in town, and allow other players to work with iTunes like they used to. If some poor schlub can't afford an iPhone or iPod, but wants to spend money buying music through iTunes, Apple should be happy to have another revenue stream.

Re:Apple & Palm should both grow up

[ceoyoyo]

What you mean is, Palm should have just used one of the methods Apple designed for third parties to interact with iTunes. And Apple should... oh, right.

palm f'ed this completely

[kencurry]

Palm tried to take a nibble from apple, and apple politely shoo'ed them away. Next time, apple will not be so kind. There will be some seriously pissed Pre owners with f'ed up handsets looking for answers.

Palm's low-class moves will cost them dearly.

Re:PICK YOUR NOSE AND EAT IT

[Dishevel]

Not everyone has a detachable nose, you silly AC.

Some have something else that is detachable though.

Yes...

[msimm]

Because Slashdotters HATE circumvention and probably pray daily for the DRM utopia the Spaghetti-lord has promised them. Perhaps you could direct me to this Slashdot so I can also voice my own concern?

Re:Yes...

[quacking duck]

There's circumvention, and then there's misrepresenting yourself to trick someone into thinking you're someone else.

Analogy time: telephone caller ID and names. Many telemarketers make sure to use caller ID blocking, so the receiver doesn't know who's calling. At best, they'll pick up anyway; at worst they'll ignore it.

There are some shadier organizations that will actually send a false ID and name though. Anyone with a PBX can change the name being sent, spoofing the number is probably only slightly more difficult. The goal of course is to trick the other end into accepting what they think is a legitimate call, and making them believe you're someone they trust is half the battle.

The internet has its own term for this: phishing.

Palm may be circumventing restrictions, but they're abusing the USB standard for Vendor ID to do so.

Palm should be slapped down hard for trying to corrupt a system based around some limited honour and trust. Do you really want future USB specs updated so the vendor ID has to be digitally signed?

Part of this comment makes no sense.

[juuri]

"instead of reading directly out of iTunes"

The music files in question are all stored, unencrypted on the file system referenced in the XML file. If you are already parsing the file and already have a means for copying files back and forth to the device (which the Pre does) why would you use iTunes in the first place? In addition the XML file is again, just a flat file which is unencrypted on the FS. There's absolutely no need to go through iTunes for this unless you were feeling either Lazy, Too Smart for your own good, or looking to pick a fight with Apple.

Re:Part of this comment makes no sense.

[Brian Feldman]

You are being intentionally quite obtuse. Enabling the device to allow iTunes to maintain a database and media files on it is actually the easiest way to accomplish music synching. It's actually very elegant.

Re:Part of this comment makes no sense.

[ceoyoyo]

Yes. Apple came up with a very elegant system. Can you blame them for being irritated that a major competitor, with the stated intention of developing an "iPhone killer" is piggybacking for free on that system?

With a very little work Palm could easily write a little sync app that accomplishes the same thing as iTunes does. The thing could even be fully automatic and hide in the background until it sees a Pre attached. To the user it would be exactly the same except that the Pre wouldn't pop up an icon in iTunes, and it wouldn't break every time Apple released an update.

Wrong again.

[juuri]

This isn't about file storage.

This is the second time in this thread you have misrepresented what is happening. Why don't you learn about it some before spouting off again; damn late ass comers to slashdot.

Re:Wrong again.

[ceoyoyo]

Mod parent up (and grand parent down).

The GP is flat out wrong.

The Pre isn't "figuring out how to read the library files directly" it's depending on fooling iTunes into doing everything for it.

It's really simple...

[Flea of Pain]

Palm made me smile by waving their middle finger shaped update at Apple. Therefore I will buy a Palm. If only so I can laugh at the over zealous apple fanbois and say "Hey! I can use iTunes cause Apple can't lock me out!" And them watch them splutter in rage and spit out (admittedly likely true) excuses.

Re:It's really simple...

[MassacrE]

Palm made me smile by waving their middle finger shaped update at Apple. Therefore I will buy a Palm. If only so I can laugh at the over zealous apple fanbois and say "Hey! I can use iTunes cause Apple can't lock me out!" And them watch them splutter in rage and spit out (admittedly likely true) excuses.

You want to buy a device that doesn't work as advertised because you think people who buy Apple products are overzealous?

This "fanboi" is just going to laugh at you for spending money on a product that requires old software versions and tweaks to even work...

Also remember, the definition of an Apple Zealot is "everyone who bought an Apple product before I did"

Re:It's really simple...

[Flea of Pain]

Well, as of today the only apple product I own is an old ipod (gifted, not bought), and the best response I can give to this:

a product that requires old software versions and tweaks to even work...

Is that I run Linux, old software and tweaks is how I survive.

Stupid to Block Pre

[Nom du Keyboard]

It's really stupid of Apple to try and block the Pre from the iTMS eco-system. Apple sells non-DRM music through that store and makes a little bit (most goes to the record companies, but Apple still makes something and enhances their standing as the world's biggest digital music store) music through iTMS that can be played on the Pre - so why throw out this market and hope that you can force them into an iPod only to make more money now? Be nice and they might buy an iPod later because of a good experience with iTunes.

Re:Stupid to Block Pre

[DanJ_UK]

Preface: My post is regarding consumers .

It's really stupid of Apple to try and block the Pre from the iTMS eco-system. Apple sells non-DRM music through that store and makes a little bit (most goes to the record companies, but Apple still makes something and enhances their standing as the world's biggest digital music store) music through iTMS that can be played on the Pre - so why throw out this market and hope that you can force them into an iPod only to make more money now? Be nice and they might buy an iPod later because of a good experience with iTunes.

Because Apple will make more from selling applications on the iPhone in the long run. When you look at the costs involved in getting a developer account setup, getting an application submitted and approved you've already spent a pretty penny as a developer before you've even started selling anything yet. It's in Apples interests to put people off the possibility of buying a Pre and scrapping their iPhone. People can download music illegally, bypassing iTunes altogether - recent figures show that legal music download sales are following a declining trend while illegal download sales increase - but iPhone App Store sales are increasing at a very substantial rate - Apple are being smart in creating new sustainable revenue streams by adapting to and creating new markets, e.g. in the form of the App Store.

If you want to pirate that great application in the app store for your iPhone I very much doubt you'll find it lurking on some random torrent site because of the costs / time involved in getting things done the official route. If you do you'll need a jailbroken iPhone which will open the device upto security exploits and voiding your warranty etc. Don't quote me on it but I would imagine the proportion of non-jailbroken iPhones easily outweighs the number of jailbroken / unlocked iPhones.

Someone may release jailbreaking software to counter the patches Apple make with each new version of the iPhone OS but do you really think the average consumer really wants to go through the hassle of jailbreaking everytime and possibly risk fucking up a device they've paid a substantial amount of money for? - At the end of the day people are willing to pay a premium for the phone because it's a good device.

I've tried every 'iPhone killer / alternative' and none of them can match the ease of use with the iPhone as a mobile computing device, the only thing I've witnessed to come anywhere close so far are the Android based G1 / G2 devices, I see Google as being the real competitors to the iPhone in the time to come for consumers and if Apple continue to improve support for business needs with the iPhone I see them dominating a market that Blackberry have a hold on at the moment in the not too distant future.

Nokia may still dominate the smartphone market share but last time I checked they're losing market share progressively even though overall smartphone market share is on the increase and considering the iPhone is locked to a single carrier in a lot of the countries that really count towards those figures I only see that increasing when exclusivity contracts finally disappear. For every iPhone owner I know I must know 10 people that would get an iPhone immediately if they could get it on their own network.

Re:Stupid to Block Pre

[DanJ_UK]

Blackberry having a hold on **businesses** at the moment, by the way.

List of iTunes supported MP3 Players

[kklein]

Why as a consumer would I be so dumb as to buy anything Apple if they're only goal is to extract as much money from me as possible by forcing me to use only their products?

From here (for MacOS):

iPod Nomad II
Nomad II MG
Nomad II c
Nomad Jukebox
Nomad Jukebox 20GB
Nomad Jukebox C
Novad MuVo
Rio One
Rio 500
Rio 600
Rio 800
Rio 900
Rio S10
Rio S11
Rio S30S
Rio S35S
Rio S50
Rio Chiba
Rio Fuse
Rio Cali
psa]play 60
psa]play 120
SoundSpace 2

Clone Wars

[daybot]

I'm always fascinated by these mischievous tech battles - the higher profile and more legitimate the companies involved, the better. Examples:

• Swimming: these weird low-friction or air-filled swimsuits that just got banned. Really devious stuff.
• F1: so very many things. Freezing fuel, 'water-cooled' brakes that are just there to get past weight restrictions, 'engine cooling fans' that just happen to provide hundreds of kilos of downforce at the same time... and not to forget the recent creative interpretation of the 2009 rules that led to the double-diffusers.

OK, so the Pre pretending it's an iPod to iTunes is no double diffuser, but it's kind of a cheat, and so is Apple's fix by abusing the USB standard. Palm had it all planned out - they're trying to force Apple into some kind of consumer backlash which makes Apple look bad and Palm look like consumer-rights crusaders, and an antitrust lawsuit.

All that said, I do think Apple deserves a bit of this. They claimed that they were making iTunes DRM-free to give consumers the freedom to choose the device they want, but here they're deliberately, and unashamedly, blocking a device from syncing with iTunes.

thats why Ive lost 1gig of HD space APple

[Anonymous Coward]

Every bloody apple update keeps the previous version in the damn App data folder.

Yes, Microsoft

[hofmny]

Microsoft did exactly this when they created iPOD support for the XBOX 360. Apple never gave them the permission or ability to do it, but they reverse engineered the way music is stored on the iPOD and such. It was actually something they were advertising when the 360 came out -- iPOD support.

Of course, M$ is too easy to ridicule.

Re:Yes, Microsoft

[ground.zero.612]

Microsoft did exactly this when they created iPOD support for the XBOX 360. Apple never gave them the permission or ability to do it, but they reverse engineered the way music is stored on the iPOD and such. It was actually something they were advertising when the 360 came out -- iPOD support. Of course, M$ is too easy to ridicule.

Of course, reverse-engineering is completely legal, it's completely acceptable, and does not go against any business ethics. So, I would say this not count as a work-around.

Re:PICK YOUR NOSE AND EAT IT

[Anonymous Coward]

That's what the pick-axe is for.

How iTunes detects the liar

[tepples]

So it tries to push a firmware update, and webOS just ignores it - maybe even returning a "I'm finished!" to iTunes.

And then iTunes detects the liar using this rule: All communication after a firmware update is supposed to use the protocol of the new firmware, not the protocol of the old firmware.

Has anyone actually used a Pre?

[swb]

Aside from the music syncing issue, has anyone actually used a Pre? I deeply resisted an iPhone for mostly emotional reasons, the on-screen keyboard, and fear of the AT&T network, for a long time but finally broke down three months ago when my Motorola Q became too frustrating to use and my wife also needed a new, non-work related phone.

I had my iPhone 3G for about 2 months when the Pre came out and I must say I wasn't totally impressed. The screen seemed smaller and navigation less intuitive than the iPhone. The other thing that got me was not being able to connect the mail app to Exchange with a self-signed cert (or no cert).

I was a little hesitant when I first handled it, thinking I might have iPhone remorse, but I found the Pre to be far from an iPhone killer.