Goona
macrumors 68020
Scare tactics eh, so Im guessing Apple adviced Palm to advertise iTunes sync, now they are changig their minds. Palm knew what they were doing, they deserve what comes to them.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Issues Advisory Regarding Third-Party Devices Syncing With iTunes
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Scare tactics eh, so Im guessing Apple adviced Palm to advertise iTunes sync, now they are changig their minds. Palm knew what they were doing, they deserve what comes to them.
As much as I did love my iPhone, I was tired of slow internet and paying outrageous service fees to AT&T. I switched to the Pre and have 3G in my town and all around me. My plan went down by $70 a month. There are some things I miss, but for me it is not worth $70 a month, and I have super-fast internet. It is user preference. I do not sync my Pre through iTunes, because there are many other ways to do it without going through iTunes. I never buy my songs on iTunes anyway. I either buy the CD and import or use Amazon.
Goona
macrumors 68020
Why don't you tell Palm to get of their lazt behinds and develop a proper iTunes syncing program like RIM did.
This is true, but Apple's entire approach to the iPod and iPhone (marketing-wise, at least) has been hardware/software synergy. The devices compliment each other in ways that would prevent the average user from wanting to sync via another method.
It doesn't surprise me at all that Apple would want to keep that dynamic exclusive to the "i" family of products.
quagmire
macrumors 604
Boo on competition that has to hack another companies IP in order to create the same experience as that company. Palm needs to create its own software to sync with the Pre.
Shake 'n' Bake
macrumors 68020
Because it seems that Palm is going for the Apple theme. Looks good, pretty good hardware, awesome OS, seamless experience, etc. I took a look at that program and it didn't look seamless.
HiRez
macrumors 603
First, this may just be legal CYA in case compatibility does break, they haven't actually shut anything down explicitly yet. This washes their hands of the matter should anything happen.
Second, Apple spent a lot of time, money, and effort developing iTunes. The iPod would not have been successful without it. Palm doesn't have any right to piggyback on that effort to sell their own competing hardware. If they want a music management and sync solution, the onus is certainly on them to write and maintain their own software for it. Nothing is stopping them from doing that. Now if Apple were building into their chips or OS something that blocked using other manufacturer's hardware with a Mac, I might feel differently.
Eidorian
macrumors Penryn
FFS.
Faced with a number of entirely mundane explanations, why does half the Internet always manage to go off the deep end.
Is it not even vaguely possible that this is just bog standard CYA copy from Apple?
Even if Apple don't give a flying toss about Palm, they're not going to go out of their way to rigorously test compatibility with the Pre, and as such they're making that clear *before* the inevitable bitching when something goes tits up.
[edit HiRez beat me too it]
...you don't think they might be monitoring the compatibility of their own devices a little more closely than those of palm?
Eidorian
macrumors Penryn
The Apple that releases software updates on "their" hardware only to pull them? Not to mention firmware updates on the computer hardware. It can happen.
HiRez
macrumors 603
Oh, I agree, I just think it was silly for Palm to openly encourage users to use iTunes for sync. Most users won't know about options and won't care when it breaks, because they were pointed to iTunes. Palm should have had their own software ready to roll and included with the Pre.
Creative One
macrumors 6502
I assume this is a Apple making sure they don't get screwed. Perhaps they let Palm piggy, but as soon as they surpass iPhone - Bye bye iTunes Pre users.
This is the right way to go about this sort of thing. It doesn't say "we're gonna break it, na-na-na", it's just a simple statement of fact that you takes your chances.
I run across this all the time. I develop integration solutions, including SOE images and other things. And when my solutions are mis-used, deliberately misconfigured or outright ripped off, when someone comes to me complaining, for example, that they lost all their data when they installed my image, enabled and logged in as root (true story), well.... sorry, but tough luck.
I don't develop with the intent to maliciously outright block or destroy or anything, but at the same time, I have no obligation to develop with the rogue element in mind - how can I when I can't really predict what they're going to do? The only thing I can do is develop with the genuine, true intention of what my product is supposed to do/achieve, and, as Apple has done here, state that any use outside its original intention is neither supported nor my problem.
I'm inclined to give Apple the benefit of the doubt here and take them at what they say (ie: the opposite of "if in doubt, assume the worst of someone" which seems to be the norm here), that they're probably not going to go out of their way to block Palm devices, but at the same time, if there's an issue, it's not their problem and they're not going to go out of their way to fix it.
I run across this all the time. I develop integration solutions, including SOE images and other things. And when my solutions are mis-used, deliberately misconfigured or outright ripped off, when someone comes to me complaining, for example, that they lost all their data when they installed my image, enabled and logged in as root (true story), well.... sorry, but tough luck.
I don't develop with the intent to maliciously outright block or destroy or anything, but at the same time, I have no obligation to develop with the rogue element in mind - how can I when I can't really predict what they're going to do? The only thing I can do is develop with the genuine, true intention of what my product is supposed to do/achieve, and, as Apple has done here, state that any use outside its original intention is neither supported nor my problem.
I'm inclined to give Apple the benefit of the doubt here and take them at what they say (ie: the opposite of "if in doubt, assume the worst of someone" which seems to be the norm here), that they're probably not going to go out of their way to block Palm devices, but at the same time, if there's an issue, it's not their problem and they're not going to go out of their way to fix it.
I also don't understand why people are against the Palm Pre syncing with iTunes, don't people want choice? How does it hurt them when the Pre can sync with iTunes? Apple isn't our friend, they are a business, and their main goal is to suck as much money as possible from us.
Also there are other ways to sync with iTunes, via third party programs, should Apple block all those programs from running under Mac OS X? Maybe Apple should make an Mac OS X app store and only programs approved by Apple can run on a Mac. After all most people here seem to hate choice.
inkswamp
macrumors 68030
I have no doubt that Apple sunk a lot of money and time into the R&D for iTunes and iPod and that's to say nothing of the seemingly thankless efforts they made to convince content providers that digital distribution was the way to go. After having taken the big risks and put in all the work, why should they be expected to share any piece of that?
Piggy-backing on Apple's products isn't "hardware competition." That's just lazy. Why shouldn't Palm develop and promote their own music store? That would be true competition. I wonder why you're not angry at Palm for their reluctance to embrace competition on that level.
This reminds me of the silly message that Netflix posted about how Apple wouldn't license their DRM so they couldn't offer streaming to Mac users yet. Just because Apple developed the content-protection scheme that Netflix needed didn't automatically mean Netflix had any rights to it. Netflix should have put in the time and energy to develop their own DRM if they needed it. Likewise, Palm has no business intruding on iTunes.
Apple's business model has always involved eschewing the tech industry's conventional wisdom that you need to license your software to all takers. That's Apple's business model. Differing types of business models also represent a type of competition. Would you deny Apple's right to compete in that way?
Maybe, but maybe not. It could be just as apple mentioned--that they don't guarantee that itunes will work the third party devices like the Palm Pre.
I could see someone getting a Pre then finding it doesn't sync after a particular update and blaming Apple and itunes for the malfunction. If Apple were expected to make sure all third party devices work with itunes it could get very, very expensive.
Because then you get a bunch of idiots trying to synch a third party knock off product hacked together in eastern europe or china (but by pirates I mean) with drivers that are scrapped together and hardly work and then their support teams are inundated with frustrated customers and calls bitching them out for not working.
Now, did I just describe Microsoft Windows or what????
Weird, mine doesn't. Hope Palm figures out online synching. Carrying a laptop around is so 1998.
dukebound85
macrumors Core
I don't think that's the main issue. If Apple releases an update to iTunes that happens to not work with the Pre, they don't want Palm and the Pre owners crying foul. It's better to lay the claim up front than for it to be a surprise.
The same can be said of web broswers. My college's online courses are designed/tested to work with IE, Firefox, and Safari. Does that mean you can't use something else? No, but it's not guaranteed to work. Same with Apple in this situation...