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
No ... not scare ... more like arrogance. And it's interesting how Apple's "support" of third party devices depends on how much money the vendors are willing to fork over to Cupertino. It's not like there aren't any other non Apple devices able to sync to iTunes.
It seems to me, if Palm and Apple had come to some sort of midnight-at-the-gay-bar agreement on revenue and sharing of technology, all of this hype over the Pre and iTunes would have become moot.
It all comes down to backwards compatibility.
At this stage of the game, for example, Apple is extremely unlikely to ever issue a new firmware release targeting, say, the black & white 4th generation iPod.
Which means, if they want iTunes to maintain compatibility with such older iPod models, iTunes will have to continue to be capable of communicating with such models in pretty much the same way that it does today. Certainly, any changes they make on the iTunes side will still have to be limited to the confines of what's possible within the existing 4th generation iPod communication protocol.
So, if Palm (or any other 3rd party vendor) designs their device's iTunes compatibility layer to strictly simulate the communication protocol present in one such older iPod model, they stand a pretty good chance of maintaining compatibility with iTunes.
Obviously, though, it's not Apple's job to guarantee that compatibility exists, and rightfully so. Which means, if Apple does modify some aspect of the way in which iTunes communicates with such older iPods, and it exposes a bug in the 3rd party manufacturer's compatibility layer (ie an inaccuracy in some aspect of its simulation), then it would be entirely up to the 3rd party manufacturer, not Apple, to make things right.
By posting this disclaimer, Apple is just reminding users of 3rd party devices of the fact that compatibility with 3rd party devices is not Apple's responsibility. It is not necessarily an indication that any future intentional incompatibility is planned, or even that any future unintentional incompatibility is significantly probable.
At this stage of the game, for example, Apple is extremely unlikely to ever issue a new firmware release targeting, say, the black & white 4th generation iPod.
Which means, if they want iTunes to maintain compatibility with such older iPod models, iTunes will have to continue to be capable of communicating with such models in pretty much the same way that it does today. Certainly, any changes they make on the iTunes side will still have to be limited to the confines of what's possible within the existing 4th generation iPod communication protocol.
So, if Palm (or any other 3rd party vendor) designs their device's iTunes compatibility layer to strictly simulate the communication protocol present in one such older iPod model, they stand a pretty good chance of maintaining compatibility with iTunes.
Obviously, though, it's not Apple's job to guarantee that compatibility exists, and rightfully so. Which means, if Apple does modify some aspect of the way in which iTunes communicates with such older iPods, and it exposes a bug in the 3rd party manufacturer's compatibility layer (ie an inaccuracy in some aspect of its simulation), then it would be entirely up to the 3rd party manufacturer, not Apple, to make things right.
By posting this disclaimer, Apple is just reminding users of 3rd party devices of the fact that compatibility with 3rd party devices is not Apple's responsibility. It is not necessarily an indication that any future intentional incompatibility is planned, or even that any future unintentional incompatibility is significantly probable.
Glad for you that you have the iTunes love, but, I beg to differ. I've always liked the look of the high capacity storage of iPods, but, the fear of the need for proprietory iTunes is what has always held me off buying one.
MP3 players that show up as USB mass storage devices (and, ideally, able to be formatted in my filesystem of choice) are much more intuitive and trustworthy to me than music organiser software probably most known for its DRM. Is this iTunes thing going to be phoning home every week or what?
Very emotional. Apple doesn't shut anyone out. Apple just tells you very clearly that they are not testing any iTunes upgrades with any devices that are not officially supported (which is probably what their legal team advises them to do anyway, because they might be on slightly shakier grounds if they tested an upgrade and _know_ that it doesn't work with some device).
On the other hand, Palm has made the Palm Pre so that it _pretends_ to be an iPod when connected to iTunes. Excuse me, but Apple is absolutely in their rights to make the assumption that _any_ device connected to iTunes that shouts "hey, I'm an iPod" _is_ in fact an iPod, so if new iTunes versions are tested against any iPod that Apple has ever built then they have done their duty.
I don't like this.
This is too much on the same level of what MS did with Internet Explorer, and we all know how that ended up (in Europe, anyway).
It's one thing to include the music software on all Macs, but I hope they don't go out of their way to break compatibility with every non-iPod. If compatibility accidentally breaks, then it breaks, and there's an update by Palm. Fair enough. Otherwise, this is Apple locking down the music software bundled with Macs to be compatible only with Apple's own music player, and that's an abuse of their position, essentially eliminating competition using their position rather than by strictly by developing a superior product. It's anti-competitive, and anti-competitive behaviour is one of the reasons why Mac users jumped on the bandwagon of criticising Microsoft's unethical business practice.
In comparison, companies can make their mp3 players compatible with WMP on Windows if they want. That's called choice, folks. The other fair option would be to not bundle audio software on the Mac, and have people download the music player of their choice, which is what is done in Europe with regards to internet browsers.
Personally, I hope Apple gets called on this, perhaps penalised. It wouldn't happen in N. America, but perhaps in Europe.
You are deluded if you believe this is in the same manner as what Microsoft is doing, anyways I don't blame you.
By the way does Microsoft allow all mp3 players to sync with the Zune store, where is the choice, I wonder why Palm isn't targeting the Zunes store.
So Palm hacking itunes, is considered competition?
Your post is a perfect example of the kind of pathetic nastiness that has become prevalent on Apple forums in recent years whenever any kind of competition is mentioned.
I hope someone breaks into your home and drives a nail through all your Apple hardware. See how childish and irrational that sounds?
And the people claiming that Palm's actions are illegal should provide a link to back that up, because I doubt very much that it's true. I don't support their actions, but it's hardly encroaching on Apples IP or breaking the law to give a fake USB device ID.
And your post is a perfect example of some of the deluded bitterness that we've seen from people like you ever since Apple became a company.
I also hope the next time someone hacks into your computer, you find nothing wrong with it and have a big smile on your face.
Instead of developing their own store which actually brings competition or if they don't have the resources to do that, develop a proper software to sync with Itunes like RIM did, they've turned into two time hackers, and you have the audacity to support such nonsense.
Apple haters at their best.
Ok, here is an interesting move by Apple. If you think about it, iTunes is fully DRM free now, which once Apple made that announcement, I knew that either companies would try and partner with Apple or someone would try and find a way to sync thrid-party devices.
You can see it as an advantage to Apple to allow more third-party devices to use iTunes. More iTunes store revenue. But Apple as always portrayed iTunes as just a gateway drug to their products (ipod, macbooks, etc.) therefore would it be in their best interests to do such a thing?
Personally I am split on the issue. How much more store revenue would they gain vs iPod business they would lose? Do people use iTunes because of the store or because they have iPods? I see myself buying a new iPod / iPhone every two years which would be about $500. I spend well over a thousand a year on iTunes Store.
It all depends on the numbers and Apple's plan for the future. I see Apple fighting opening up iTunes to third-party but within the next few years, I could see them being forced to either by a lawsuit or pressure from the Market. That is my view on the issue.
You can see it as an advantage to Apple to allow more third-party devices to use iTunes. More iTunes store revenue. But Apple as always portrayed iTunes as just a gateway drug to their products (ipod, macbooks, etc.) therefore would it be in their best interests to do such a thing?
Personally I am split on the issue. How much more store revenue would they gain vs iPod business they would lose? Do people use iTunes because of the store or because they have iPods? I see myself buying a new iPod / iPhone every two years which would be about $500. I spend well over a thousand a year on iTunes Store.
It all depends on the numbers and Apple's plan for the future. I see Apple fighting opening up iTunes to third-party but within the next few years, I could see them being forced to either by a lawsuit or pressure from the Market. That is my view on the issue.
I love this, the Zune CAN'T sync with WMP, other players can't sync with the "Zune Store", and the Zune can't be used with PlaysForSure music services even though Microsoft could presumably license the system... to themselves... for free.
I still think Apple has more to gain from other devices syncing with iTunes, especially if were getting "licencing fees" (I know it doesn't sound right) from Palm, RIM, etc, for hardware support.
I also think people should wait for Apple to do something (or say they're going to) before they start complaining about it.
Complete Hogwash!
The Palm Pre is illegally using Apple proprietary info without permission to sync.
There are many ways to put music and content on third-party devices.
iTunes is neither a monopoly or an illegal monopoly.
There are plenty of other ways to purchase music.
Last I checked Toyota was not required to support or service Chevys!
Similarly, iTunes and Apple are not required to support Palm Pre's!
Apple has no anti-trust requirement to go out of their way to support 3rd-party devices.
There are no anti-trust issues here whatsoever.
The Apple document is best described as "CYA" (Cover Your Ass).
This means Apple is stating it's not legally responsible for supporting the Palm Pre, so they have given notice that they cannot be sued for problems related to it. Very simple.
What will happen if Apple blocks this illegal method of mimicking an iPod to iTunes?
Absolutely nothing. The 5 Palm Pre users will complain. End of story.
Careful with that point - Apple has gone out of its way so far to make sure it has not accused Palm of doing anything illegal. Such an accusation would require proof.
Admittedly, it is possible that they may have broken a law by using insider information in order to achieve interoperability with iTunes. However, we do not have proof of that, and the fact of the matter is, it is also entirely possible for them to have achieved the same position, even without Apple's permission, and yet still have done nothing illegal in the process.
If Palm can prove through its engineering records that it lived up to the definition of cleanroom reverse engineering in its iTunes synchronization, and that it did not duplicate any of Apple's own copyrighted code, or make use of algorithms covered by Apple's patents, or make use of secret information directly or indirectly disclosed to them by Apple or a current or former Apple employee in violation of an NDA, and they did not make unreasonable use of Apple's trademarks, then they will not, in fact, have done anything illegal.
The one thing that is fairly certain (perhaps not proven by the strict definition of the word, but I think has been shown clearly) is that Palm is using Apple's vendor ID's in the USB handshake process with iTunes. While perhaps not illegal (someone with more knowledge could possibly shed light on that point), it is against the rules of the USB Consortium, and could definitely get Palm in trouble there if they decide to take action.
jW
No, there are enough alternatives if Apple raises barriers to the iTunes store.
Just compare this to the fact that your printer comes with dedicated software to show ink status etc. This software doesn't work with printers from other manufacturers.
It's the same here. You have a Palm printer posing as an Apple printer trying to use the ink management software. As soon as Apple starts changing the management software, the Palm printer will have a problem.
There's an even simpler explanation for all of this, and after 6 pages, I cannot believe no one has thought of it yet. Has it occured to anyone yet that Apple is already receiving a large amount of calls from Pre owners asking for support and troubleshooting assistance with the Pre/iTunes sync, and Apple is simply notifying everyone to "stop calling us and call the handset manufacturer, as we didn't build, nor license the damn thing". Just my $.02.
And you are a judge in which court?
What is an "illegal monopoly" anyway?
And, there were many other operating systems, and many other browsers available when Microsoft was taken to court.
That defense didn't hold then, and it won't hold now.
There have already been legal rulings with respect to this (iTunes/iPod monopoly) issue in the US, prior to 2006, and in 2007 at which time the EU was involved, but the latter was about pricing.
With respect to the question of Apple and its locking of OS X to its own hardware, there were rulings about this in the past, and most recently, by Judge Alsup in the Psystar case in 2008.
What he meant by "illegal monopoloy" (not the best term) is a monopoly in which the entity abuses their position.
Actually, there is a very easy way for Apple to make it hell for Palm.
Simply, the iTunes and iPod can have a very complicated protocol for establish communication, but do not activate it at the beginning. For example, let's say there are 100 commands which iPod has to respond for iTunes to sync.
Right now, iTunes only uses 1 command, which Pre emulations.
Someday in the future, iTunes will use used either command 1 or 2, which Palm engineers have to reverse engineer and then update the firmware.
Then, another week later, iTunes randomly picks from command 1, 2 or 3, and Palm has to update again.
The beauty of that technique is, Apple doesn't have to even update iTunes and iPod firmware (assuming all the protocols are already working, just not activated). iTunes can gradually activate new commands based on date.
Because some Apple fans are too busy trying to think the same different as everyone else they've not allowed their emotional responses and general maturity to progress beyond that of an especially obnoxious 12 year old?
What Palm did seems to be a good solution. They COULD create a "hack" on the computer's side to extract info/sync from iTunes (like RIM did), but why not make it simpler? and develop the syncing software on the phone's side? It makes it that much more simple for the end user. Either way is doing something without Apple's blessing.
iTunes can sync with some old MP3 players from when it was SoundJam.
peterdevries said:
Printers are slightly different, the printer driver does all the work for the specific hardware, and the custom utility application has tools for that specific printer. There is absolutely no point for HP to reverse engineer their printers to pretend to be Canon printers, that requires a lot of effort and will limit the functionality of the HP printer.
Actually most printers with network connectivity have all their utilities displayed in a web interface, is it bad for them to use Safari to show the ink level?
The iTunes -> Pre thing is a totally different scenario, you have all your music all nicely set up on iTunes, rated and organised.
iTunes is great for organising music, it also came with support to sync with a few MP3 devices for people who want their music on the go. Now a user with an iTunes library just bought a Palm Pre, what's the easiest way for them to stick their music on their Pre? By having direct syncing capability! Its brilliant!
This isn't a feature that will decrease sales from iPhones and increase them on the Pre, because there are alternative ways to sync with 3rd party computer programs (or should I say hacking programs).
Now i don't care how the Pre will sync with iTunes (or if it doesn't) because I'm not going to buy one. I think its a great phone, but its not for me. I am considering buying an iPhone, but still on the fence whether or not as my SE P1i still adequately serves its purpose.
I'm on the palm defending side of this discussion because I see nothing done wrong here. The only thing that can go wrong, is that Apple releases a software update which breaks the syncing software, but that has happened to any program that has interacted with iTunes, weather it be a 3rd party syncing software or a sound enhancer like SRS iWOW.
Here's another similar situation, was/is it illegal for Sonnet and PowerMax to make CPU upgrade cards for Apple Macs? Like they "hack" the ZIF sockets for a G4, and prevent the user from buying a new Mac because they can prolong the life of their current Mac.
I think you just hit the nail on the head.
Sorta like I said, CYA (Cover Your Ass legally) + Please don't bother us with your problems Palm Pre owners. Thank You, Apple, Inc.
Apple has as competition to iTUNES... Amazon, Microsoft, Rhapsody (which btw claims to be the #1 Rated Music Download service, whatever the hell that means, hehe, it made me laugh reading it on the website though.)
Apple does NOT have the market share that Microsoft was taken to court for in either music sales or computer sales, so the whole monopoly thing at this point is a non-issue, illegal or otherwise. A monopoly, btw, is not by definition, illegal. Only Microsoft and the original US oil company, and the Bell System have ever been declared as illegal monopolies, so there's your answer to that question. It's a rare event.
And almost nothing but a slap on the wrist happened to even Microsoft with a 90%+ illegal monopoly conviction!
So what bad exactly do you think is going to happen to Apple from the Palm Pre non-story ???
Please, the answer is NOTHING!
Even if Apple blocks the device TOMORROW there will only be a whimper from 5 people! LOL
Move along, nothing to see here..
Everyone is blowing this out of proportion!
I would say with all the hype and the "selling point" that the Pre can sync with iTunes.. Apple had to make it clear that it would not be their problem if it stopped working in the future. With the fact that there are likely more iTunes updates a year than new Palm phone, there is always a chance it may not sync (initially) in the future.
It is NOT an intention - just a heads up, not to call them if it stops working - call Palm!
So, in the end, Palm will just issue patches... if it wants to keep its userbase.
Everyone jailbreaks iPhones, why not Pres/iTunes.
Wonder who this is directed towards.
Everyone is blowing this out of proportion!
I would say with all the hype and the "selling point" that the Pre can sync with iTunes.. Apple had to make it clear that it would not be their problem if it stopped working in the future. With the fact that there are likely more iTunes updates a year than new Palm phone, there is always a chance it may not sync (initially) in the future.
It is NOT an intention - just a heads up, not to call them if it stops working - call Palm!
So, in the end, Palm will just issue patches... if it wants to keep its userbase.
Everyone jailbreaks iPhones, why not Pres/iTunes.
If your buying the Pre because of it's Itunes capability, your gonna get screwed. If your buying the Pre because you like it, and the Itunes feature is just something nice, don't get to excited, unless you never want to upgrades Itunes. I love the little "Future updates might "Break" the ability to sync with the pre" in other words, it won't last for long.
Yet Apple uses threaded SMS - something first thought of by, oh yeah, Palm.
What would be nice is for Apple to let Palm use these reverse engineered techniques for syncing with iTunes in return for.... iPhone Synergy, the main featre on the Pre that I want on the iPhone, to have all types of conversation with contacts in one application on the iPhone.
Come on Apple, pleeease?
What would be nice is for Apple to let Palm use these reverse engineered techniques for syncing with iTunes in return for.... iPhone Synergy, the main featre on the Pre that I want on the iPhone, to have all types of conversation with contacts in one application on the iPhone.
Come on Apple, pleeease?
Pre Was Not Mentioned By Name
Please People, The Pre was Not Mentioned Buy Name, Please Re read the posting again, it seems folks what this to be something that is singling out only One (1) Manufacture, it is not, nor does it mention any (Electronic Device Manufacturer By proper Name)
"Apple is aware that some third-parties claim that their digital media players are able to sync with Apple software. However, Apple does not provide support for, or test for compatibility with, non-Apple digital media players and, because software changes over time, newer versions of Apple's iTunes software may no longer provide syncing functionality with non-Apple digital media players".
I do agree with this Statement, if you Like the Palm for it's features buy it, But counting on another feature that is not controlled or Coded and made by another company is just plain Gambling with disappointments sure to come.
Please People, The Pre was Not Mentioned Buy Name, Please Re read the posting again, it seems folks what this to be something that is singling out only One (1) Manufacture, it is not, nor does it mention any (Electronic Device Manufacturer By proper Name)
"Apple is aware that some third-parties claim that their digital media players are able to sync with Apple software. However, Apple does not provide support for, or test for compatibility with, non-Apple digital media players and, because software changes over time, newer versions of Apple's iTunes software may no longer provide syncing functionality with non-Apple digital media players".
I do agree with this Statement, if you Like the Palm for it's features buy it, But counting on another feature that is not controlled or Coded and made by another company is just plain Gambling with disappointments sure to come.