Wired is reporting that Palm's new handheld device, the Pre, will be able to sync automagically with Apple's iTunes. Thanks to a team of ex-Apple engineers the Pre will sync everything but iPhone applications and some of the older Fairplay DRM music. "It does it by faking out iTunes, making the jukebox software think that it is connected to a real iPod. Hook it up and you'll be given three options: USB mass storage device, charging only or iTunes sync. This is a ballsy move from Palm, and we totally love it: a big fat middle finger at Apple. Apple will, we are sure, be readying its legal attack dogs as I write, and don't be at all surprised if an iTunes update pops up around June 6th. This fight just got a lot more interesting."
by Anonymous Coward
on Friday May 29, @11:49AM (#28140271)
While I enjoy the big fat middle finger to Apple as much as the next guy, I firmly expect Apple to give the big fat legal cock in the ass back to Palm.
And when it comes to a winner, the middle finger loses to the fat cock every time.
What exactly is the threat to Apple? It works with iTunes? So? I used to own a TDK MP3 player that also worked with iTunes. People forget that iTunes predates the iPod.
Some people never use iTunes to buy anything, but once you have iTunes it is hard to resist visiting the iTunes Music Store. Remember, Apple is getting rid of DRM in the ITMS, and music purchased there now "plays for sure" on any device. This is much more of a middle finger to the RIAA. Keep in mind that the recording industry is looking to reduce Apple's control and influence, not increase it.
If Apple allows Palm, iRiver and other device manufacturers to use iTunes, it gains access to potential music sales that previously would not have been Apple's. When it comes to personal listening devices, either you iPod or you don't. But - if you own an MP3 player and you buy music instead of downloading it on P2P networks, I am sure Apple would love to have your business.
Next, consider the potential market for sales to owners of smartphones, and Apple can broaden their potential market tenfold without lifting a finger. If Palm allows the Pre to utilize iTunes without prompting or overt permission from Apple, the FTC cannot really take action against Apple for restraint of trade, monopoly practices, etc etc etc.
Finally, iTunes exposes the user to the Mac user interface, even when running on Windows. Users may also see Apple product features "dimmed" in buttons and menus when their non-Apple product is connected. Apple could even detect that a non-Apple product is connected to their iTunes software and display marketing that targets sales to users of their competitors' products. Can you say "halo effect"?
"I've got you this time, Brer Rabbit," said Brer Fox, jumping up and shaking off the dust. "You've sassed me for the very last time. Now I wonder what I should do with you?"
Brer Rabbit's eyes got very large. "Oh please Brer Fox, whatever you do, please don't throw me into the briar patch."
Plug the Pre into a PC and you're offered the option of using the device as a USB drive, charging it or beginning a "media sync." Interesting, using media sync the Pre does indeed sync with iTunes, though it's hamstrung by Apple's DRM protected songs. Can't imagine Apple's too happy about that. Presumably, Apple legal is already drafting a letter. Pre appears to make iTunes think it's an iPod.
How is Apple going to feel about that, asks Walt. Rubinstein dodges a bit noting that there are a variety of ways of getting music out of iTunes. Walt pushes back pointing out that this is the first non-Apple device that is recognized as an Apple device by a Mac. Rubinstein dodges again. Seems he's pretty obviously using his Apple knowledge here. McNamee jumps in. Apple is "practically a monopolist," he says, adding that people should be able to use music that they purchase in what ever way they see fit.
Such a letter would be the stupidest move Apple has made in a long time. I already view them as monopolistic bastards with their iTunes website & iTunes application & iTunes DRM & iPod/iPhone lock-in scheme. I am sick and tired of explaining to my friends and family how to burn a DRM'd song from their computer to a CD and then rip that CD to an MP3 and then put that MP3 on their player of choice.
I am begging Palm to sue the hell out of Apple if Apple comes after them. Palm should sue App
The DMCA is the regulation that makes breaking DRM-based vendor lock-in illegal, regardless of other legal issues. Perhaps you don't understand what you linked to.
Perhaps you don't understand what he linked to. Let me reproduce the very first sentence again.
"A free market is a theoretical term that economists use to describe a market which is free from government intervention (i.e. no regulation, no subsidization, no single monetary system and no governmental monopolies)."
So a market is "free" so long as the monopolies aren't "governmental".
A monopoly is "governmental" if the monopolist uses the power of the state to maintain it, even if the monopolist is a business in the private sector. The DMCA anti-circumvention powers, like the other powers granted to copyright owners, are a government-granted monopoly. What monopolistic business methods were you thinking of that don't involve the power of the state?
I was with you up until the DRM part. The iTunes store is almost entirely DRM-free by now.
If you don't like AAC either, Amazon.com sells MP3 downloads that are cheaper than iTunes downloads, and has about the same selection. iTunes was once a monopoly, although Apple's DRM practices ironically ended that rather quickly.
I've put off upgrading because I don't want to spend 0.30 on the free tracks I got from the Pepsi promotion. I didn't spend all that time looking through the bottoms of Sierra Mist bottles just so I could turn around and buy all those songs.
I already view them as monopolistic bastards with their iTunes website & iTunes application & iTunes DRM & iPod/iPhone lock-in scheme.
I guess you're entitled to view them as monopolists, but that doesn't mean that view accords with real world legal definitions. There are other sources for digital content online, and there are other players - Apple has a big chunk of the market, but by no means do they have total control - facts you note at the end of your post. Also, let's not forget that a big chunk of the pricing of content is driven by the deals the content providers are willing to cut with Apple - remember the recent change to a tiered pricing scheme from the $.99 for all music.
How is Apple a monopoly, if we understand the term monopoly to mean something other than "a company you don't like/does things that displease you?"
I wish I had mod points because this is a smart response. I hate it when people use the word "monopoly" as a synonym for "I don't like them." If there's a real reason not to like Apple--even a bad one, like, "I always prefer the underdog," is better than none--then use it. Don't just call it a monopoly.
The whole reason that music went DRM free is because the actual producers/distributors of the music realized just how much power they had handed Apple.
. ..when they required Apple to apply DRM in the first place (which was the only reason it had ever had it).
Apple's negotiating power with the members of the RIAA cartel is very close to that, only we don't mind so much because Apple is actually the lesser evil.
You mean the same negotiating power that introduced "variable pricing", which meant that "pretty much any vaguely popular or contemporary song" immediately jumped 30% in price, from 99c to $1.29, whilst Apple fanboys tried to spin it as "well, most tracks are going to go DOWN to 69c!", where "most tracks" was a synonym for "obscure low selling acts that you're lucky to have heard of, let alone desire to purchase" (seriously, did anyone but the most deranged Apple fan honestly believe that Apple and the record labels were going to voluntarily offer up a 30% reduction in revenue?)?
Who won out of that? Apple got a nice kick, and so did the labels. You and I didn't.
I'm not exactly sure why you're trumpeting that as a testament to "Apple's negotiating power", but okay...
Meh. Lock-in across product lines is older than dirt. Its practice doesn't make a company "monopolistic" (though its practice by a monopoly can sometimes be illegal, which may be why you associate the two things).
Anyway, you appear to be wishing for legal action based on how much you like each company's actions rather than on any legal facts; which means you're also not looking at an accurate picture of the costs and outcomes if legal action does occur.
I won't speculate on the issues that would matter in a court case (such as whether any trade secrets were utilized by the ex-Apple engineers that allegedly made this work), but I will say that without knowing the details of those issues, I wouldn't be begging anyone to start casting legal stones.
Lock-in across product lines is older than dirt. Its practice doesn't make a company "monopolistic"
No, it makes them unpalatable to customers who like to have a lot of choices for how to use the products they buy.
The original reason I didn't buy an iPod was because I didn't want to have to use iTunes. When other options became available, I had already become a customer of other manufacturers of mp3 players.
The original reason I didn't buy an iPhone was because I didn't like the idea of having to use AT
Reverse engineering is perfectly legal for interoperability, if you don't copy the implementation code. My friend's company legally clean-room reverse engineered all of CIFS, so their proprietary boxes can act as a stand-in for Windows.
I'm sure that Apple won't find a way to break this in an iTunes update down the road. They certainly have no history of breaking unlicensed addons... Nope...
iTunes currently supports about 20 non-iPod devices:
Nomad II Creative Labs USB
Nomad II MG Creative Labs USB
Nomad II c Creative Labs USB
Nomad Jukebox Creative Labs USB
Nomad Jukebox 20GB Creative Labs USB
Nomad Jukebox C Creative Labs USB
Novad MuVo Creative Labs USB
Rio One SONICBlue/S3 USB
Rio 500 SONICBlue/S3 USB
Rio 600 SONICBlue/S3 USB
Rio 800 SONICBlue/S3 USB
Rio 900 SONICBlue/S3 USB
Rio S10 SONICBlue/S3 USB
Rio S11 SONICBlue/S3 USB
Rio S30S SONICBlue/S3 USB
Rio S35S SONICBlue/S3 USB
Rio S50 SONICBlue/S3 USB
Rio Chiba SONICBlue/S3 USB
Rio Fuse SONICBlue/S3 USB
Rio Cali SONICBlue/S3 USB
psa]play 60 Nike USB
psa]play 120 Nike USB
SoundSpace 2 Nakamichi USB
The big deal is that Apple's not supporting iTunes interfacing with the Pre. The support is coming from Pre's side. Your post says:
iTunes currently supports about 20 non-iPod devices
The big deal is that it seems as if Apple decides what gets supported and what doesn't. It should be built so that any device maker can choose whether or not to build an adapter so that their hardware can interface with iTunes? Where does this leave iRiver, Archos, Sandisk, Microsoft, Centon, Nextar, etc?
Apple decides who lives and who dies. That's the big deal.
Nokia has been syncing with iTunes as log as I can remember. They have their own software and is very simple to do. it's not supported by Apple and in hasn't stopped working in the last 3 or so years.
That list, which is old, represents the 3rd party plugins which are bundled with iTunes by default. The SDK allows anyone to develop their own plugin. As someone else mentioned, Nokia has done this a long time ago.
This could not be any more of a non-story. It's really bad reporting. It would've been more interesting to me if they had said that Palm made the Pre so that it could *not* sync music with iTunes.
And the headline is incredibly misleading...it won't sync DRM music people may have in their libraries, and it won't sync movies, tv shows and most importantly apps purchased from iTunes.
"This fight just got a lot more interesting." (sigh)
The big deal is that Apple's not supporting iTunes interfacing with the Pre. The support is coming from Pre's side.
If that's true, then the Pre could emulate one of the non-ipod devices and sync to iTunes. Can Apple sue Palm for emulating a Rio? Possibly, I guess, if Rio's paying royalties for the privilege of syncing to iTunes...
Those are legacy devices, pre-dating the iPod, from the time when iTunes was just a music management application (originally called SoundJam MP) and not the lynchpin of Apple's vertical monopoly entertainment strategy.
None of those devices are supported on iTunes for Windows.
In fact, these - non-iPod - devices seem to have been out of production for nearly a decade now.
I seem to recall that some of the mentioned players were current (and indeed, supported by iTunes 1.2 or so) in the days of Mac OS 9, circa 1999 or 2000, like the Nomad series by Creative and the Rio series by sonicBlue.
It's not so simple as that. What you call an "unlock" gets you double the bit rate too. A workaround that Apple execs have talked about publicly is that you burn it to CD and rip it back. If you're not at all interested in doubling the bit rate, the small amount of loss in re-encoding probably isn't going to be a big deal.
We can talk about coulda woulda shoulda, but I doubt Apple is the main problem here. If the RIAA is involved in the mix, I think the RIAA should get the lion's share of the blame if it doesn't go the way you think it should.
Why is this fraud? It should be fraudulent to block other players from accessing my software.
Its really incredible how people instinctively side with bad corporate policies. How about my rights as a consumer? How about the right to tinker? How about educating people about Apple's horrible policies?
I see nothing wrong with this. I hope its a wake up call to the industry and I hope it shows all the apple fanboys whats wrong with their favorite company.
Honestly, who bases a whole product line on a "faking out" feature. I'm no fan of DRM, and wish iTunes was more open to other devices, but to publish a whole iPhone "killer" on a kludge is just asking for trouble.
WTF are consumers going to do when Apple pushes an update that breaks this (intentionally, or not) and all of a sudden this marvelous sync stops working?
Is this really such a "big fat middle finger"? It's cementing iTunes as the default player and iTMS as the default music store, and putting Palm in the position of trying to pick up some of Apple's leftovers. Plus, if Apple doesn't like it, they can issue firmware updates and update iTunes, making everything connect some slightly different way, and suddenly Palm's stuff stops working.
If Palm really wanted to make trouble for Apple, they'd make their own alternative to iTunes, which wouldn't take much work. If they really didn't want to do it from scratch, I'm sure there are even some open source projects [getsongbird.com] that could be used as a jumping-off point. And if they didn't want to make their own music store, they could probably strike a deal with Amazon. Now that would be a problem for Apple.
Pure speculation here but what if during that whole patent debate that Palm and Apple had regarding touch technology Apple conceded to let the Pre sync? Just a thought.
I mean I'm sure Apple told Palm, "Hey, you can't use multi-touch or anything like it." So Palm said, "Oh yeah? Browse our portfolio. We've highlighted a number of patents the iPod, Touch, and iPhone clearly violate." Apple: "Cross License?" Palm: "Sure! Oh, and we want to sync to iTunes."
Very possibly. Apple's people internally have been crying foul about this stuff, and they've been whining about their talent drain following Jon Rubenstein over to Palm for awhile now. It seems a lot of the guys who were inside at Apple during their big turnaround put their loyalties with Rubenstein rather than Jobs or the other corporate types that are really running Apple these days. Apple did the same thing a few years ago when they stripped Palmsource of all the developers they could find to make the iPhone, and had been pulling away top guys from Palm even before that when they were creating the iPod.
Is anyone really surprised that Apple's gone evil? Listen to the rhetoric. Apple, with every passing day, has been acting more and more hardline and closed to competition than even Microsoft. Apple fanboys are sounding off the same soundbites that the Microsoft guys did years ago about Linux.
The truth is that Apple doesn't want just anyone buying music from their near monopoly on pay music downloads(which, coincedentally, was helped to become a monopoly by Bono of U2, who also just so happens to be a member of Elevation Partners, one of the major shareholders in Palm). They only want the "approved" companies that swear not to actually compete with them to work with their stuff. This is the type of thinking that sent Apple down the tubes back in the late 80's/early 90's.
Palm exec: I thank you for all your effort in giving us the inside scoop on how Apple work. No I will have to fire you because you have shown yourself to not be a trust full person and we have no confidence that you will honor our NDA, as you have shown not to honor your previous employer.
I find it more than a little ironic that before this item became news all the Pre supporters were saying iTunes was craptastic and claiming the lack of syncing on the Pre as a feature. Everything's in "the cloud", so who needs desktop tethering?
Ahhh, but now that it syncs with iTunes, suddenly Palm is super-genius for supporting and iTunes support is [i]obviously[/i] a major selling point.
Whatever. When Apple blocks it and it doesn't sync, I'm sure syncing will suddenly not be important again.
To hell with iTunes, I just want to sync my Palm (my existing Palm) with Palm Desktop on my Macbook, without going through a third party product that wants to OWN my PDA.
Back when I had Palm Desktop and Hotsync, I could sync my PDA with my office desktop and my home desktop and my laptop and everything Just Worked. Then I had to start syncing with Lorus Notes at the office, and tried two third paty syncing products, and the best I could manage was syncing with TWO computers. Then Palm gave up on Hotsync, and now I'm using Missing Sync and my PDA is tethered to my Macbook. Not only that, but I can't get it to sync notes at all.
I don't know what I'll do when my current PDA finally dies. I never liked PDAs at all until I got a Palm, I tried a Pocket PC for a while and it screwed up my data... but even Palm doesn't support Palms any more.
As much as I'd like to mark you as flamebait, you actually have a point. Until the Palm Pre was announced, I was under the impression that Palm (as a company) had gone under. When looking to replace my faithful HP iPAQ h5550 PDA (god that was an awesome PDA) I asked around in the electronics shops about a palm device, the majority thought they didn't exist any more. So it's nice to see they've been working on something over the past few years (unlike the Duke Nukem Forever guys).
They were on the verge because PalmOS is crap and Palm Desktop is steaming crap, and they both look rosey compared to palm's technical support.
I just threw away my T2 and got a touch, and love it. From repeated bad experiences of my own and almost everyone I know with palm, I hope apple reams them good, give them a twist for me while you're at it.
No, it won't. Think about it for a moment and you'll realize why.
iTunes knows which version or revision of iPod is connected because Apple has prepared iTunes to recognize each one -- first-party software recognizes first-party hardware. The icons are all stored inside the iTunes binary, and it's only relying on an identifier from a list of possible iPods it knows of (thus the software update after each iPod release).
Most likely, the Pre is presenting itself to iTunes as a 4th gen iPod, something that iTunes has to support and for which there is a lot of reverse-engineering work already out in in the hackersphere.
This should be interesting (Score:5, Funny)
While I enjoy the big fat middle finger to Apple as much as the next guy, I firmly expect Apple to give the big fat legal cock in the ass back to Palm.
And when it comes to a winner, the middle finger loses to the fat cock every time.
throw me in the briar patch (Score:5, Informative)
Some people never use iTunes to buy anything, but once you have iTunes it is hard to resist visiting the iTunes Music Store. Remember, Apple is getting rid of DRM in the ITMS, and music purchased there now "plays for sure" on any device. This is much more of a middle finger to the RIAA. Keep in mind that the recording industry is looking to reduce Apple's control and influence, not increase it.
If Apple allows Palm, iRiver and other device manufacturers to use iTunes, it gains access to potential music sales that previously would not have been Apple's. When it comes to personal listening devices, either you iPod or you don't. But - if you own an MP3 player and you buy music instead of downloading it on P2P networks, I am sure Apple would love to have your business.
Next, consider the potential market for sales to owners of smartphones, and Apple can broaden their potential market tenfold without lifting a finger. If Palm allows the Pre to utilize iTunes without prompting or overt permission from Apple, the FTC cannot really take action against Apple for restraint of trade, monopoly practices, etc etc etc.
Finally, iTunes exposes the user to the Mac user interface, even when running on Windows. Users may also see Apple product features "dimmed" in buttons and menus when their non-Apple product is connected. Apple could even detect that a non-Apple product is connected to their iTunes software and display marketing that targets sales to users of their competitors' products. Can you say "halo effect"?
"I've got you this time, Brer Rabbit," said Brer Fox, jumping up and shaking off the dust. "You've sassed me for the very last time. Now I wonder what I should do with you?"
Brer Rabbit's eyes got very large. "Oh please Brer Fox, whatever you do, please don't throw me into the briar patch."
Parent
Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! (Score:2, Interesting)
Plug the Pre into a PC and you're offered the option of using the device as a USB drive, charging it or beginning a "media sync." Interesting, using media sync the Pre does indeed sync with iTunes, though it's hamstrung by Apple's DRM protected songs. Can't imagine Apple's too happy about that. Presumably, Apple legal is already drafting a letter. Pre appears to make iTunes think it's an iPod.
How is Apple going to feel about that, asks Walt. Rubinstein dodges a bit noting that there are a variety of ways of getting music out of iTunes. Walt pushes back pointing out that this is the first non-Apple device that is recognized as an Apple device by a Mac. Rubinstein dodges again. Seems he's pretty obviously using his Apple knowledge here. McNamee jumps in. Apple is "practically a monopolist," he says, adding that people should be able to use music that they purchase in what ever way they see fit.
Such a letter would be the stupidest move Apple has made in a long time. I already view them as monopolistic bastards with their iTunes website & iTunes application & iTunes DRM & iPod/iPhone lock-in scheme. I am sick and tired of explaining to my friends and family how to burn a DRM'd song from their computer to a CD and then rip that CD to an MP3 and then put that MP3 on their player of choice.
I am begging Palm to sue the hell out of Apple if Apple comes after them. Palm should sue App
Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! (Score:5, Insightful)
Am I the only person on earth that sees this as a direct affront to a free market system?!
I do not think that term means what you think it means: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market [wikipedia.org]
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The DMCA is the regulation that makes breaking DRM-based vendor lock-in illegal, regardless of other legal issues. Perhaps you don't understand what you linked to.
Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! (Score:4, Insightful)
Perhaps you don't understand what he linked to. Let me reproduce the very first sentence again.
"A free market is a theoretical term that economists use to describe a market which is free from government intervention (i.e. no regulation, no subsidization, no single monetary system and no governmental monopolies)."
Parent
Copyright is a government-granted monopoly (Score:3, Insightful)
So a market is "free" so long as the monopolies aren't "governmental".
A monopoly is "governmental" if the monopolist uses the power of the state to maintain it, even if the monopolist is a business in the private sector. The DMCA anti-circumvention powers, like the other powers granted to copyright owners, are a government-granted monopoly. What monopolistic business methods were you thinking of that don't involve the power of the state?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Inconceivable!
Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! (Score:5, Insightful)
I was with you up until the DRM part. The iTunes store is almost entirely DRM-free by now.
If you don't like AAC either, Amazon.com sells MP3 downloads that are cheaper than iTunes downloads, and has about the same selection. iTunes was once a monopoly, although Apple's DRM practices ironically ended that rather quickly.
Parent
Except for... (Score:5, Informative)
Except for movies. And TV shows. And audiobooks. Oh, and applications.
But yeah, besides those things, *totally* DRM free.
Parent
Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! (Score:4, Funny)
I've put off upgrading because I don't want to spend 0.30 on the free tracks I got from the Pepsi promotion. I didn't spend all that time looking through the bottoms of Sierra Mist bottles just so I could turn around and buy all those songs.
Parent
Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! (Score:5, Insightful)
I guess you're entitled to view them as monopolists, but that doesn't mean that view accords with real world legal definitions. There are other sources for digital content online, and there are other players - Apple has a big chunk of the market, but by no means do they have total control - facts you note at the end of your post. Also, let's not forget that a big chunk of the pricing of content is driven by the deals the content providers are willing to cut with Apple - remember the recent change to a tiered pricing scheme from the $.99 for all music.
How is Apple a monopoly, if we understand the term monopoly to mean something other than "a company you don't like/does things that displease you?"
Parent
Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The whole reason that music went DRM free is because the
actual producers/distributors of the music realized just
how much power they had handed Apple.
. . .when they required Apple to apply DRM in the first place (which was the only reason it had ever had it).
Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course it does. Having a monopoly is legal. Abusing a monopoly to create lock-in is the illegal part.
Parent
Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! (Score:4, Insightful)
You mean the same negotiating power that introduced "variable pricing", which meant that "pretty much any vaguely popular or contemporary song" immediately jumped 30% in price, from 99c to $1.29, whilst Apple fanboys tried to spin it as "well, most tracks are going to go DOWN to 69c!", where "most tracks" was a synonym for "obscure low selling acts that you're lucky to have heard of, let alone desire to purchase" (seriously, did anyone but the most deranged Apple fan honestly believe that Apple and the record labels were going to voluntarily offer up a 30% reduction in revenue?)?
Who won out of that? Apple got a nice kick, and so did the labels. You and I didn't.
I'm not exactly sure why you're trumpeting that as a testament to "Apple's negotiating power", but okay...
Parent
Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! (Score:5, Insightful)
Meh. Lock-in across product lines is older than dirt. Its practice doesn't make a company "monopolistic" (though its practice by a monopoly can sometimes be illegal, which may be why you associate the two things).
Anyway, you appear to be wishing for legal action based on how much you like each company's actions rather than on any legal facts; which means you're also not looking at an accurate picture of the costs and outcomes if legal action does occur.
I won't speculate on the issues that would matter in a court case (such as whether any trade secrets were utilized by the ex-Apple engineers that allegedly made this work), but I will say that without knowing the details of those issues, I wouldn't be begging anyone to start casting legal stones.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
No, it makes them unpalatable to customers who like to have a lot of choices for how to use the products they buy.
The original reason I didn't buy an iPod was because I didn't want to have to use iTunes. When other options became available, I had already become a customer of other manufacturers of mp3 players.
The original reason I didn't buy an iPhone was because I didn't like the idea of having to use AT
Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, but RTA - the guys working on the project are ex-Apple employees. Dodgy much?
Parent
Right. (Score:2, Troll)
I'm sure that Apple won't find a way to break this in an iTunes update down the road. They certainly have no history of breaking unlicensed addons... Nope...
Why is this a big deal? (Score:5, Informative)
Nomad II Creative Labs USB
Nomad II MG Creative Labs USB
Nomad II c Creative Labs USB
Nomad Jukebox Creative Labs USB
Nomad Jukebox 20GB Creative Labs USB
Nomad Jukebox C Creative Labs USB
Novad MuVo Creative Labs USB
Rio One SONICBlue/S3 USB
Rio 500 SONICBlue/S3 USB
Rio 600 SONICBlue/S3 USB
Rio 800 SONICBlue/S3 USB
Rio 900 SONICBlue/S3 USB
Rio S10 SONICBlue/S3 USB
Rio S11 SONICBlue/S3 USB
Rio S30S SONICBlue/S3 USB
Rio S35S SONICBlue/S3 USB
Rio S50 SONICBlue/S3 USB
Rio Chiba SONICBlue/S3 USB
Rio Fuse SONICBlue/S3 USB
Rio Cali SONICBlue/S3 USB
psa]play 60 Nike USB
psa]play 120 Nike USB
SoundSpace 2 Nakamichi USB
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT2172 [apple.com]
Re:Why is this a big deal? (Score:5, Insightful)
iTunes currently supports about 20 non-iPod devices
The big deal is that it seems as if Apple decides what gets supported and what doesn't. It should be built so that any device maker can choose whether or not to build an adapter so that their hardware can interface with iTunes? Where does this leave iRiver, Archos, Sandisk, Microsoft, Centon, Nextar, etc?
Apple decides who lives and who dies. That's the big deal.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Nokia has been syncing with iTunes as log as I can remember. They have their own software and is very simple to do. it's not supported by Apple and in hasn't stopped working in the last 3 or so years.
Anyone can do this and many have (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The big deal is that Apple's not supporting iTunes interfacing with the Pre. The support is coming from Pre's side.
If that's true, then the Pre could emulate one of the non-ipod devices and sync to iTunes. Can Apple sue Palm for emulating a Rio? Possibly, I guess, if Rio's paying royalties for the privilege of syncing to iTunes...
Re:Why is this a big deal? (Score:5, Informative)
Those are legacy devices, pre-dating the iPod, from the time when iTunes was just a music management application (originally called SoundJam MP) and not the lynchpin of Apple's vertical monopoly entertainment strategy.
None of those devices are supported on iTunes for Windows.
Parent
Re:Why is this a big deal? (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
These players are current,... (Score:3, Insightful)
... aren't they? Not really.
In fact, these - non-iPod - devices seem to have been out of production for nearly a decade now.
I seem to recall that some of the mentioned players were current (and indeed, supported by iTunes 1.2 or so) in the days of Mac OS 9, circa 1999 or 2000, like the Nomad series by Creative and the Rio series by sonicBlue.
Re:Why is this a big deal? (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Why is this a big deal? (Score:4, Interesting)
It's not so simple as that. What you call an "unlock" gets you double the bit rate too. A workaround that Apple execs have talked about publicly is that you burn it to CD and rip it back. If you're not at all interested in doubling the bit rate, the small amount of loss in re-encoding probably isn't going to be a big deal.
We can talk about coulda woulda shoulda, but I doubt Apple is the main problem here. If the RIAA is involved in the mix, I think the RIAA should get the lion's share of the blame if it doesn't go the way you think it should.
Parent
iTunes Has Always Supported Other Players (Score:5, Informative)
They are even documented [apple.com] on Apple's website. I'm not sure why it's a surprise that the Pre is also going to be able to sync with iTunes.
Re:iTunes Has Always Supported Other Players (Score:4, Insightful)
Why is this fraud? It should be fraudulent to block other players from accessing my software.
Its really incredible how people instinctively side with bad corporate policies. How about my rights as a consumer? How about the right to tinker? How about educating people about Apple's horrible policies?
I see nothing wrong with this. I hope its a wake up call to the industry and I hope it shows all the apple fanboys whats wrong with their favorite company.
Parent
I can see an iTunes update in your future. (Score:5, Insightful)
Honestly, who bases a whole product line on a "faking out" feature.
I'm no fan of DRM, and wish iTunes was more open to other devices, but to publish a whole iPhone "killer" on a kludge is just asking for trouble.
WTF are consumers going to do when Apple pushes an update that breaks this (intentionally, or not) and all of a sudden this marvelous sync stops working?
So...? (Score:4, Interesting)
Is this really such a "big fat middle finger"? It's cementing iTunes as the default player and iTMS as the default music store, and putting Palm in the position of trying to pick up some of Apple's leftovers. Plus, if Apple doesn't like it, they can issue firmware updates and update iTunes, making everything connect some slightly different way, and suddenly Palm's stuff stops working.
If Palm really wanted to make trouble for Apple, they'd make their own alternative to iTunes, which wouldn't take much work. If they really didn't want to do it from scratch, I'm sure there are even some open source projects [getsongbird.com] that could be used as a jumping-off point. And if they didn't want to make their own music store, they could probably strike a deal with Amazon. Now that would be a problem for Apple.
But... (Score:4, Interesting)
Will Amarok 1.4 work with the Pre?
I would love to have a Smart Phone that works well with Linux.
Re:But... (Score:4, Insightful)
Amarok 1.4 works with every other MP3 player I've tried it with ... so I don't see why not.
I'd much rather use Amarok than iTunes.
Parent
Speculation (Score:5, Interesting)
I mean I'm sure Apple told Palm, "Hey, you can't use multi-touch or anything like it."
So Palm said, "Oh yeah? Browse our portfolio. We've highlighted a number of patents the iPod, Touch, and iPhone clearly violate."
Apple: "Cross License?"
Palm: "Sure! Oh, and we want to sync to iTunes."
Re:Speculation (Score:4, Insightful)
Is anyone really surprised that Apple's gone evil? Listen to the rhetoric. Apple, with every passing day, has been acting more and more hardline and closed to competition than even Microsoft. Apple fanboys are sounding off the same soundbites that the Microsoft guys did years ago about Linux.
The truth is that Apple doesn't want just anyone buying music from their near monopoly on pay music downloads(which, coincedentally, was helped to become a monopoly by Bono of U2, who also just so happens to be a member of Elevation Partners, one of the major shareholders in Palm). They only want the "approved" companies that swear not to actually compete with them to work with their stuff. This is the type of thinking that sent Apple down the tubes back in the late 80's/early 90's.
Parent
Coming soon.... (Score:5, Funny)
iTunes 8.1.2, "fixes syncing issues"
Thanks to a team of ex-Apple engineers (Score:4, Funny)
and soon to be ex-Palm engineers.
Palm exec: I thank you for all your effort in giving us the inside scoop on how Apple work. No I will have to fire you because you have shown yourself to not be a trust full person and we have no confidence that you will honor our NDA, as you have shown not to honor your previous employer.
Amusing... (Score:3, Interesting)
I find it more than a little ironic that before this item became news all the Pre supporters were saying iTunes was craptastic and claiming the lack of syncing on the Pre as a feature. Everything's in "the cloud", so who needs desktop tethering?
Ahhh, but now that it syncs with iTunes, suddenly Palm is super-genius for supporting and iTunes support is [i]obviously[/i] a major selling point.
Whatever. When Apple blocks it and it doesn't sync, I'm sure syncing will suddenly not be important again.
How about... let's sync with Palm Desktop (Score:4, Informative)
To hell with iTunes, I just want to sync my Palm (my existing Palm) with Palm Desktop on my Macbook, without going through a third party product that wants to OWN my PDA.
Back when I had Palm Desktop and Hotsync, I could sync my PDA with my office desktop and my home desktop and my laptop and everything Just Worked. Then I had to start syncing with Lorus Notes at the office, and tried two third paty syncing products, and the best I could manage was syncing with TWO computers. Then Palm gave up on Hotsync, and now I'm using Missing Sync and my PDA is tethered to my Macbook. Not only that, but I can't get it to sync notes at all.
I don't know what I'll do when my current PDA finally dies. I never liked PDAs at all until I got a Palm, I tried a Pocket PC for a while and it screwed up my data... but even Palm doesn't support Palms any more.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They were on the verge because PalmOS is crap and Palm Desktop is steaming crap, and they both look rosey compared to palm's technical support.
I just threw away my T2 and got a touch, and love it. From repeated bad experiences of my own and almost everyone I know with palm, I hope apple reams them good, give them a twist for me while you're at it.
Too little, too late, palm.
Re:PALM PRE OMG (Score:5, Funny)
Unlike the iPhone, which is hardly ever mentioned in the media...
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
DVD Jon agrees with your appraisal of the situation. [nanocr.eu]
Re:Why go the legal route? (Score:4, Informative)
No, it won't. Think about it for a moment and you'll realize why.
iTunes knows which version or revision of iPod is connected because Apple has prepared iTunes to recognize each one -- first-party software recognizes first-party hardware. The icons are all stored inside the iTunes binary, and it's only relying on an identifier from a list of possible iPods it knows of (thus the software update after each iPod release).
Most likely, the Pre is presenting itself to iTunes as a 4th gen iPod, something that iTunes has to support and for which there is a lot of reverse-engineering work already out in in the hackersphere.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Does a red story mean that there are no comments?
Not sure, but a read story means it's winter in hell.