Microsoft can do with their software whatever they want. Go and use another OS if you don't like what they do. No one's forcing you to use Windows.
I wish that were true. Several courts have ruled differently.
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.
iTunes 8.2.1 Reportedly Breaks Palm Pre Syncing
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I wish that were true. Several courts have ruled differently.
i can care less, its way easier to move music around (back and forth) with USB mode anyway, media monkey or songbird are readily available as well.
And I agree, its apple's software, they can do whatever they want with it.
Its not that difficult for palm to produce a software, or throw its weight behind songbird. Whichever is fine with me.
And I agree, its apple's software, they can do whatever they want with it.
Its not that difficult for palm to produce a software, or throw its weight behind songbird. Whichever is fine with me.
As others have said, Apple is in no way preventing users putting the DRM free music on any device they like - the files are stored on the hard disk of the user (probably in folders organized by artist) - users can do what they want with those files.
Also, the Pre works just fine without iTunes - it supports drag and drop of music files on to it: The iTunes 'Integration' was really a comfort blanket for existing users IMO.
Personally, I don't have a problem with Palm pretending the Pre is an iPod, nor do I have a problem with Apple blocking it with an iTunes update. I would have had a problem with Apple if they'd taken Palm to court because that would be too heavy handed IMO and they've done this the right way - through technology
Having said that, I wish Apple would spend a bit more time improving iTunes - the organisation options (or lack of them) for shared libraries is appalling (why can't we view by coverflow, etc for shared libraries?) and the support for networked drives is a bit of a pain too (for example, if I start iTunes up away from my server to browse the store or whatever else, and it can't connect to the shared drive that my music is stored on, it silently resets the storage location back to the default!
No they were guilty. The Bush administration's DOJ basically gave them a slap on the wrist by offering a deal to end the case. Cite.
Regrettably, the remedy was overturned on appeal (which led to the horrible settlement) but not the findings of fact.
Uhh, you do realize that Obama (and his team during the election) uses a Mac and an iPod right???
So? What does that have to do with anything if Apple isn't breaking the law. Something one can only dream about because there is no investigation of anti-trust over device integration with iTunes.
Breaking compatibility with Palm Pre is the best thing Apple could do, both for iPod/iPhone AND Pre users...
Apple has 2 ways of exchanging data between iTunes and a device:
1 - the officially supported one, on which Apple has to maintain backward compatibility in order for non-Apple devices to continue working as expected.
2 - their private (and not officially referenced) one.
With (1), you get the assurance that iTunes will not break your device. If, after some iTunes update, you experience problems, it's because Apple did change something they shouldn't have. It is Apple fault, and they have to fix it, or at least explain to third-party devices what changed, why, and how to avoid the problem(s).
With (2), Apple may do whatever they want at any time, including, for example, change the protocol format for speed/efficiency reasons, or add support for new features planned for their own devices. In this case, it's Apple's responsibility to handle the new/modified features in iTunes AND in the device(s).
Since Apple doesn't have any control on Palm's software and roadmap, they have absolutely no way of improving their private protocols without potentially breaking Palm's sync. They don't even have Palm's sources, in order to check that Palm's sync is implemented correctly, according to current Apple sync protocol!!! The fact that Palm's code *seems* to work correctly *today* is by no mean a proof that Palm followed Apple's private protocols!!!
Let's say Apple does nothing to prevent Palm sync with iTunes using their *private* framework, and this becomes a widely used way of syncing a Palm with your computer. 2 things may happen in the future :
1 - after some months/years, they decide to change something (anything!), which indeed break Palm sync. They would have to face a zillion of angry users! I can already see the headlines saying "Apple's nasty bug crashes millions of Palm devices".
2 - in order to "play nice" with Pre users (and tomorrow, Samsung, LG, Nokia,...), they have to call Palm whenever they *plan* to change something on their code, give them the change, wait for all of them to implement it in their device, and finally release the new version of iTunes.
One (hypothetical) possible change: let's say that, during contacts sync, there is one transmitted field which gives the number of contacts sent. This information is transmitted as a 16-bits value, assumed to be signed, which means that you can only synchronize 32767 contacts in "one shot". Tomorrow, Apple decide to fix this (for whatever reason), and send this value as 32-bits. Since Apple's programmers are not dumb, they did implement a security check in their current code: if the number is -1, the packet is invalid, and sync cannot be done (unless of course you flash the new firmware on your device). What would happen to Palm's users? Maybe all their contacts would be erased! Or their will try to synchronize 65535 contacts, or maybe [...]
I could give you thousands of such examples...
The fact that Apple has no access to Palm's code make things even worse, since they have absolutely no way of verifying Palm's *current* implementation of their own private protocols!!!
To make a long story short: don't blame Apple because they don't want to support hacks made by others. Specially if they also made the effort of implementing and supporting a public API!!!
rle
Apple has 2 ways of exchanging data between iTunes and a device:
1 - the officially supported one, on which Apple has to maintain backward compatibility in order for non-Apple devices to continue working as expected.
2 - their private (and not officially referenced) one.
With (1), you get the assurance that iTunes will not break your device. If, after some iTunes update, you experience problems, it's because Apple did change something they shouldn't have. It is Apple fault, and they have to fix it, or at least explain to third-party devices what changed, why, and how to avoid the problem(s).
With (2), Apple may do whatever they want at any time, including, for example, change the protocol format for speed/efficiency reasons, or add support for new features planned for their own devices. In this case, it's Apple's responsibility to handle the new/modified features in iTunes AND in the device(s).
Since Apple doesn't have any control on Palm's software and roadmap, they have absolutely no way of improving their private protocols without potentially breaking Palm's sync. They don't even have Palm's sources, in order to check that Palm's sync is implemented correctly, according to current Apple sync protocol!!! The fact that Palm's code *seems* to work correctly *today* is by no mean a proof that Palm followed Apple's private protocols!!!
Let's say Apple does nothing to prevent Palm sync with iTunes using their *private* framework, and this becomes a widely used way of syncing a Palm with your computer. 2 things may happen in the future :
1 - after some months/years, they decide to change something (anything!), which indeed break Palm sync. They would have to face a zillion of angry users! I can already see the headlines saying "Apple's nasty bug crashes millions of Palm devices".
2 - in order to "play nice" with Pre users (and tomorrow, Samsung, LG, Nokia,...), they have to call Palm whenever they *plan* to change something on their code, give them the change, wait for all of them to implement it in their device, and finally release the new version of iTunes.
One (hypothetical) possible change: let's say that, during contacts sync, there is one transmitted field which gives the number of contacts sent. This information is transmitted as a 16-bits value, assumed to be signed, which means that you can only synchronize 32767 contacts in "one shot". Tomorrow, Apple decide to fix this (for whatever reason), and send this value as 32-bits. Since Apple's programmers are not dumb, they did implement a security check in their current code: if the number is -1, the packet is invalid, and sync cannot be done (unless of course you flash the new firmware on your device). What would happen to Palm's users? Maybe all their contacts would be erased! Or their will try to synchronize 65535 contacts, or maybe [...]
I could give you thousands of such examples...
The fact that Apple has no access to Palm's code make things even worse, since they have absolutely no way of verifying Palm's *current* implementation of their own private protocols!!!
To make a long story short: don't blame Apple because they don't want to support hacks made by others. Specially if they also made the effort of implementing and supporting a public API!!!
rle
Well he is true... With one giant "but". Microsoft can do what it want's with it's OS provided that it doesn't violate anti-trust with their proven market power.
But for the most part, what you said is correct. As a convicted monopolist, MS's business model is defined around the risk of future federal litigation.
This is exactly what will get the DOJ investigating. It's called illegal tying or bundling. If Apple has a dominant position in a market (take your pick of
Apple doesn't have a dominant position in any market. If you don't like iPhones, Macs und iPods, fine. There are plenty of other options out there. You don't like the iTunes store. Fine. Nobody cares because you could always shop at Wal-Mart, Amazon, or wherever. Apart from some of Apple's own software there is not a single major app out there that locks you into Mac OS.
You can even get iTunes to sync with other players if you do it the right way. You can also sync the iPod with other software.
Good point...except none of the Apple-bashing trolls has had a solid point thus far in 15 pages and counting. It's all been nothing but their unfounded, ill-supported OPINIONS of what Apple should and shouldn't be allowed to do with their intellectual property. Pretty much the same as the clueless dolts who have defended Psystar for the past year or so.
Also, to be fair, 15 pages of comments is more than I would ever be likely to read! It's a shame when they assume facts that aren't true, but digging up the truth isn't always quick and easy. (But you're right, I'm sure, that many posters DO know the facts and stubbornly keep posting in contradiction of those facts all the same. Then honestly ignorant people may read that and think their assumptions were true. And the cycle goes on!)
Am I seeing double standards here? So you dont have any problem with Apple using Windows as a selling point, but you do have a problem with Palm using iTunes as a selling point. This is really "thinking different"
I don't get the analogy. At all. So, Apple uses PC hardware and makes it wasy to install Windows. In which way does this make unfair use of someone else's efforts? Oh, you mean, by allowing Windows on their computers (which is by the way Microsoft's business model, to be run on 3rd party hardware) they gain an unfair advantage over ... uhm whom exactly?
Recent behaviour... and then you quote like 2 things, one of which isn't even worth mentioning because - again - Palm could have done what RIMM did (make use of the XML file). But no, they had to take the path of the rogue. It was crystal clear that Apple would block that.
And, by the way,what do you mean by "banning competing apps"? Apple doesn't sell any software on the AppStore. After 1 year, there are 65.000+ apps around. Banning doesn't seem to have a major impact.
Here is the misconception.....any device CAN sync with your iTunes music library via SDK and published working methods (xml file)...Apple is not stopping anyone from accessing the music you organize with iTunes...PERIOD.
What Apple is doing is protecting their brand name and technology. If they allow Palm to imitate iPod then what's to keep other vendors from doing the same.
Comparing iTunes to Windows Media is not a good comparison, comparing it to Zune Marketplace on the other hand is. MS does not allow other players to sync to Marketplace...and not only that, THEY CHANGED the format on all the other vendors that were using MS technologies and locked them out.
If Palm did indeed use the USB identity code to fool iTunes into thinking it was a iPod, then that is indeed wrong and Apple has every right to protect it's investment. the iTunes/iPod combo is just THAT GOOD...it just works....if the bulk of people would find it hard to use...it wouldn't do as good as it has.
iTunes did come out before the iPod...but do you REALLY think Apple didn't have the iPod in the pipeline when they brought iTunes to market? And in order to start making iTunes work, they had to start by allowing it to sync with third party devices...
All Palm needs to do is write a little app that reads the XML file, or uses the SDK to sync any non-DRM music/video to the Pre....done deal....
If Apple would have made the iPhone or iPod pretend it was a Zune to use the Zune Marketplace.....everyone would have been all over Apple. And, MS would have EVERY right to prevent it from working.
Everyone needs to get their heads out of the clouds and get your feet back on earth and look at this level headed. Apple has stated many times that iTunes was developed to help sell more iPod/iPhones which is where they make their money. They are not responsible in any way, shape or form to support any third party device if they don't want to...they should be commended for at least making it POSSIBLE for third parties to allow you to use your music collection on other devices (non DRM that is).
And don't fool yourself...the iPod and iTunes combo is so massively popular, because it does what it does, well. If it didn't, then the competition wouldn't be so hot to replicate that success.
Now you're getting mysteriously mysterious.
You mean MS has a mole-in-power in the DoJ?
Not quite true.
Not having an obligation and purposefully making a change to cut people out is two entirely different things.
You missed the point....Apple is not hurting palm, they are hurting their own consumers who've paid for their songs and should be able to play them anyway they wish.
Not having an obligation and purposefully making a change to cut people out is two entirely different things.
You missed the point....Apple is not hurting palm, they are hurting their own consumers who've paid for their songs and should be able to play them anyway they wish.
Well said, I can't believe we should reward Palm for being lazy with a pat on the back and Apple should get fines or lawsuits.
In which way does this stop you from buying a non-Apple MP3 player if you don't like iPods?
oh Booooo! If this is true then Apple is going about things all wrong. They should encourage the Pre and any other phone or mp3 player to sync through iTunes. More sales for iTunes songs & movies plus more positive exposure for Apple.
I'm not saying give them full access to everything, but let them sync the basics like songs & podcasts.
Now instead of being looked at in a positive light Apple has alienated the Palm Pre crowd.
Hey! someone that gets it. Now I wish Steve Jobs was reading your post.
Yeah, but you could mention the reason why this defense didn't work: bundling with the 95% market share OS called Windows.
iTunes is DEAD
I've had more trouble with iTunes. I'm looking for an alternative that let's me play my iPods on any of my Macs. As is I plugged my wife's iPod into my Mac, (the iPod was mine before I got a 160GB model) & it would not & could not be seen or used by my Mac. But the iPod said not to disconnect it. But there was no indication of doing anything. I turned off my Mac & still the message would not go away. Since the iPod was non-responsive & is hard to open without some special pry tools, only time & a discharged battery turned off the message. I want something non-itunes to take care of my 200 GB of Apple Lossless encoded music. iTunes has failed so far. iTunes has failed my iPod. So the search goes on.
This cutting out of the Pre means that many will not be able to use the music as easily that they purchased from Apple. I don't have a Pre now, but after this next January looks more like a Pre day with my Verizon cell service. Apple has shown that when it gets big that it acts just like MS does. Many on these Mac sites still think that Apple can do no wrong & all MS does is wrong. They vote for iTunes by purchasing their music there & then is unwilling to want to let others use their iTunes music on non Apple hardware is wrong. I thought that music I purchased for my personal use can be used on any pard ware product I want to use it on. This means that iTunes must be taken out of the mix. Music an still be purchased at many places other than through iTunes. Other programs are around to control our music, movies & other things that we used to use iTunes for. I will not do any upgrading of my iTunes software unless it can be used on the Palm Pre & other hardware that wants to use the iTunes to control their music/movie player.
There has to be something better. Maybe we can find that & have the Palm Pre use that to do its syncing. But iTunes control must go away. Apple can not & must not allow to go on & complete its transition into another MS type of monopoly. This can be a first step.
oh Booooo! If this is true then Apple is going about things all wrong. They should encourage the Pre and any other phone or mp3 player to sync through iTunes. More sales for iTunes songs & movies plus more positive exposure for Apple.
I'm not saying give them full access to everything, but let them sync the basics like songs & podcasts.
Now instead of being looked at in a positive light Apple has alienated the Palm Pre crowd.
I've had more trouble with iTunes. I'm looking for an alternative that let's me play my iPods on any of my Macs. As is I plugged my wife's iPod into my Mac, (the iPod was mine before I got a 160GB model) & it would not & could not be seen or used by my Mac. But the iPod said not to disconnect it. But there was no indication of doing anything. I turned off my Mac & still the message would not go away. Since the iPod was non-responsive & is hard to open without some special pry tools, only time & a discharged battery turned off the message. I want something non-itunes to take care of my 200 GB of Apple Lossless encoded music. iTunes has failed so far. iTunes has failed my iPod. So the search goes on.
This cutting out of the Pre means that many will not be able to use the music as easily that they purchased from Apple. I don't have a Pre now, but after this next January looks more like a Pre day with my Verizon cell service. Apple has shown that when it gets big that it acts just like MS does. Many on these Mac sites still think that Apple can do no wrong & all MS does is wrong. They vote for iTunes by purchasing their music there & then is unwilling to want to let others use their iTunes music on non Apple hardware is wrong. I thought that music I purchased for my personal use can be used on any pard ware product I want to use it on. This means that iTunes must be taken out of the mix. Music an still be purchased at many places other than through iTunes. Other programs are around to control our music, movies & other things that we used to use iTunes for. I will not do any upgrading of my iTunes software unless it can be used on the Palm Pre & other hardware that wants to use the iTunes to control their music/movie player.
There has to be something better. Maybe we can find that & have the Palm Pre use that to do its syncing. But iTunes control must go away. Apple can not & must not allow to go on & complete its transition into another MS type of monopoly. This can be a first step.
There is no way to do anything in any way you would like to. I want to drive on the highway in reverse in the car that I pay for, but that happens to illegal. The law also says you have to respect other people's property.
And nobody is stopping people from using unprotected content. They just can't use iTunes to do that. Last time I checked, iTunes is proprietary and there is nothing illegal about that. I can't hack the PS3 or fool it to play Xbox games either.
on the contrary, there is tons of law supporting the exclusivity of intellectual property.
It's irrelevant, since unprotected content is not locked to iTunes.
yeah, apple has no responsibility of supporting the Pre, which I agree, I also sincerely hope Palm would not play catch and release game with apple. Just go put some $$$ behind songbird or mediamonkey, would be great!
anyway, there are probably 400,000 Pre users out there. I do hope there are 19 of them using iTunes tho.
whats the point of vaguely making a statement which has no practical impact in this case? IP laws? find one fit this case, if you want to state so.
So basically you're saying that Apple is Microsoft circa 1997.
The revolution always seems like a good idea at the time....