Palm Pre Emulating an iPod to Accomplish iTunes Sync?

[frankly]

Desperate companies resort to desperate measures and there's no company more desperate than Palm right now.

This is very true. If the Pre is not a huge success Palm is going out of business and deservedly so. Look at how long it has been since they updated their OS. This is the first modern OS on their devices. All previous devices are using a really really old OS with fixes and new features cobbled together to try to make something compelling. Have you ever compared a Treo to an iPhone. Even a Treo model released in the past two or three years looks at least a decade old next to an iPhone.

 

[OllyW]

I don't get what all the Pre hatred is about. People in this thread are freaking out and acting as though it'll be the end of the world if the Pre is allowed to sync with iTunes. Big deal. At least look at it this way: The Pre actually appears as though some thought was put into the design and UI. Some say Palm copied the iPhone, but my point is, it looks as though they really, truly tried to make a decent phone. And it's even Mac compatible! Try getting anything like this from Redmond...their version of the Pre would be square and brown, have huge visible screws and run some horrific, clunky flavor of WinMo, and it would not be Mac compatible. I like the way the Pre looks. Granted, it doesn't have "teh sexiness", but again...there are other phones besides the iPhone. Deal with it.

I completely agree. How often have we heard companies being criticised on these forums because their products are not Mac compatible?

 

[pcorrado]

First - the character who wrote this article, no matter how reliable he is for tech information (there is a difference between reliable and credible), is also a business man (and wants to make money, like Apple) - he wants people to buy his software and the pre market can be huge - his theory may be relied upon for some details but I am not sure it is the complete truth and therefore not completely credible (he has a bias).

Second - we have no idea what the relationship has been between Apple and Palm in the past - it is possible that before there was an iPhone and Pre, that Palm licensed iTunes music syncing and depending on the terms of this agreement, which nobody here or on internet will ever really know. If this true, then Palm is doing absolutely nothing wrong. I am sure they have lawyers, I am sure they looked into this before announcing it.

Third - Everyone here seems to forget that iTunes works as well with other non-iPods as iPods work with non-iTunes software. Which means that it can be done, just not without some modifications. That being said, Apple designed the iPod to allow full integration with iTunes (which was first), it can be argued that its the iPod that is locked to iTunes and not the other way around.

Fourth - The capabilities you get with an iPhone and iTunes are extensive and from my understanding the capabilities of the Pre and iTunes are quite limited (non drm music and movies and Photos). The Pre really isn't infringing on much of the iPods/iPhone's territory.

Fifth - People will still buy iPods, Macs and iPhones - the Pre and the iPhone have two different targets, they are two different types of devices - the Pre is an internet device with communications and media abilities built in, while iPhone is a media player with communications and an internet device built in. Some users will switch, but overall Apple will remain king of the hill. In other words, everybody settle down both companies can and should succeed for having what appear to be great products.

 

[DougB541]

This is very true. If the Pre is not a huge success Palm is going out of business and deservedly so. Look at how long it has been since they updated their OS. This is the first modern OS on their devices. All previous devices are using a really really old OS with fixes and new features cobbled together to try to make something compelling. Have you ever compared a Treo to an iPhone. Even a Treo model released in the past two or three years looks at least a decade old next to an iPhone.

Palm is in the exact position Apple was in in the late 90's.

Its amazing how people want a company to fail cause they made missteps....yet they come out with a great looking product and people still want them to fail.


Btw, the Palm name and rights are too big to not be acquired by another company if they don't fix their financial problems.

 

[Test17]

The EU considers iTunes to have sufficiently close to a monopoly to take action, it just wants a serious complaint to do so...

It's doubtful anything would happen now, since the problem was you couldn't use the music you'd bought with other players. Now the DRM is "gone", so the Monopoly is "gone".

Arguing that having to drag-drop files rather than "sync" = monopoly is a bit of a stretch if you ask me

 

[frankly]

By purposefully crippling the ability of iTunes to sync with other devices. Going out of their way to purposefully code to do so. Syncing a playlist etc from within iTunes is much easier than dragging from folders. Arguing otherwise is asinine.


I'm still not sure what you're talking about. Yes the media is AAC. This thread is about Apple purposefully crippling iTunes to maintain leverage over a competitors product. Not other companies not supporting AAC .


Except not at all.

It is becoming more obvious with each post that you have no idea what you are talking about.

1) If you make a hardware device it is YOUR responsibility to develop the software that your customer needs to sync that device. It is NOT Apple's responsibility. Arguing otherwise is asinine.

2) The idea you were conveying is that people couldn't use their iTunes purchases with other players. You said, "Why buy from a company that makes it difficult for the media you buy to be used on devices made by other companies?" This is NOT the case. If a device manufacturer enables their device to play AAC files then they can play your purchases from the iTunes store.

3) It is close to corporate espionage in that the highest level Palm employee responsible for the development of the Pre used to work at one of the highest levels within Apple. It is VERY possible that he is using the Apple-specific knowledge he gained while working for Apple that is allowing Palm to sync with iTunes. He was responsible for developing the iPod. Hello? McFly?

 

[prestoleum]

Ok, just to set the record straight: Apple cannot sue Palm just because they emulated their device to appear as an iPod. There is precedent with numerous legal cases, and emulation isn't against the law or any I/P law.

As long as Palm isn't using any method that's patented by Apple to accomplish their device syncing with iTunes, they're in the clear.

That, of course, doesn't mean that Apple can't change their coding (if possible) to lock out the Pre (and for Palm to change the Pre in order to make it work again).


I knew that semester class of computer science law would come in handy sometime...

 

[frankly]

And why can't palm (or any other company) just sync with iTunes? Because Apple purposefully, by updates, cripples the ability for itunes to do so. Apple does so to maintain their control over the media in iTunes, making it difficult to transfer said media to other devices, and hence leveraging an advantage for their own media players. It makes perfect business sense. It's horrible for customers however.

The files accessible through iTunes are stored on your computer in folders that can be accessed by ANY program. They are not tied to iTunes. They do not require iTunes in order to be copied from your computer to a device. Until Apple creates an API that allows programmers to access iTunes it is the responsibility of the device manufacturer to write their own software that will take those files and move them to their device. It doesn't have to be cumbersome in any way, unless you are saying that no one else is capable of writing good software...

 

[DougB541]

3) It is close to corporate espionage in that the highest level Palm employee responsible for the development of the Pre used to work at one of the highest levels within Apple. It is VERY possible that he is using the Apple-specific knowledge he gained while working for Apple that is allowing Palm to sync with iTunes. He was responsible for developing the iPod. Hello? McFly?

Are you really that daft to think they would do something so obviously illegal?


Its a Usb connection...its VERY easy with the open API's that apple provided to have players sync to iTunes.


Apple on their website has a list of supported players other than the ipod.

There is no corporate espionage....geez. Hell look how many 3rd party companies that make a middleware program to get iTunes to sync with like blackberrys.

Its just this time, Palm cut out the middleware and built that support in the phone.

 

[rumz]

I'm so glad macrumors posted another article about this so there could be another ridiculous argument. The Apple fanboys are turning my stomach.

That said, even blogs following the Pre are suggesting something possibly underhanded in Palm's approach... we'll see what happens. I suppose iTunes would be a great help to the Pre succeeding as a media device, but otherwise not a deal breaker if iTunes syncing is broken.

I hope the Pre is a huge success. I want someone other than just Apple to be able to pull off a great user experience. I love having choices.

 

[Phil A.]

iTunes isn't open-source software.

It wasn't written by Apple and released with the intention of others freely doing whatever they want with it. The open-source software OS X uses was.

The iTunes license agreement does not prohibit the syncing of third party devices using it, so what are Palm doing wrong?

 

[bkap16]

there gonna stop it because its patent infringement most likely.. and because the pre is a huge competition to the iphone.. You dont let competition use your stuff to make there product better..
thats like buying a verizon phone and at&t letting verizon use there towers in the spots where verizon doesnt have towers and at&t does.. so why would you buy a at&t phone then?? yea think a little there

That's a moot point. AT&T can't use Verizon's tower because the towers are based on different technologies (GSM and CDMA respectively). They can and do use T-Mobile's towers. Likewise, Verizon can use Sprint's towers. That's called "roaming" and they charge you when you do it.

 

[rumz]

p.s. I LOVE all the Sprint ads that I see plastered around here (though probably likely due to its relevance to recent articles), haha.

 

[frankly]

I don't understand how this argument has been continuing. Is there anything easier than plugging in an mp3 player and syncing it with iTunes? No. Therefore, any other means of syncing it is more difficult. More is the operative word. It can still be manageable, doable, accessible, enjoyable, easy, and any other adjective you'd like to come up with, but it is more difficult.

That isn't Apple's fault. You are basically arguing that it is Apple's fault that no other device manufacturer is capable of writing software that makes it easy for their customers to sync. That is a ridiculous way of looking at the world.

 

[somethingelsefl]

Chaos

My iPod should be able to sync with the Zune software and then I should be able buy Amazon books through the Zune software using Wal-Mart gift cards all while using my Linux OS. *sarcasm*

OH WAIT...

There is a reason that...

1. Competition exists in the software arena and the rights to its property are the sole property of its creator
2. Device competition/exclusivity is the basis for consumer appeal
3. When you buy a product...you pay for it's research/development...in this case, you pay for Apple's YEARS of iTunes device integration and software fine-tuning.

Let's get real here...imagine if my Xbox 360 could "suddenly" play Wii games...it would be great for the consumer, but stupid for the developers.

Unless there is an AGREEMENT by both parties or an OPEN SOURCE code, it's flat-out theft.

Palm's tactics are stupid and illegal, especially when Apple has been VERY kind to Palm in the past, especially with integrated iSync, etc.

 

[bkap16]

The files accessible through iTunes are stored on your computer in folders that can be accessed by ANY program. They are not tied to iTunes. They do not require iTunes in order to be copied from your computer to a device. Until Apple creates an API that allows programmers to access iTunes it is the responsibility of the device manufacturer to write their own software that will take those files and move them to their device. It doesn't have to be cumbersome in any way, unless you are saying that no one else is capable of writing good software...

This is an argument for allowing Palm to use the iTunes library, not to sync with iTunes directly. If Apple has a patent relating to the protocol, it is illegal. It's also illegal if Palm finds a way around the DRM in the protected songs (stupid DCMA). More likely, this is just an intellectual property issue. Because of the intricacies of intellectual property laws, as long as Palm didn't look at Apple's source code, they should be okay. That's why projects like Wine (open source, cross platform win32 API) and Mono (open source, cross platform .NET framework) don't get sued by Microsoft.

 

[gnasher729]

What about one vendor using another vendor's ID?

Depends on the situation. Let's say hypothetically that Apple checks whether you plug in an iPod, then copies DRM'd music files onto the device with the DRM removed, but makes sure the owner of the iPod cannot copy these unprotected files somewhere else. If I faked the iPod ID, then iTunes would copy DRM'd music files onto my device where I can pick them up with DRM removed. That would be a clear infringement of the DMCA - faking the ID used to circumvent copy protection. (Now Apple doesn't do that exactly because faking the ID is easy, so the DRM'd files wouldn't be safe).

On the other hand, if you give your USB-controlled toaster Apple's iPod ID, that would be just stupid; your toaster would malfunction when plugged into a Mac running iTunes, and if you ran your toaster-control software with an iPod plugged in, the iPod could be damaged. I'd say the company reusing the ID would be responsible for any damage. If they do it very carefully and everything works, then no harm done.

On the third hand, if a large company reused the ID of some smaller company for an incompatible product, and this damages the reputation of the smaller company (lets say hypothetically if Apple reused the ID of the USB-controlled toaster for its iPods, and the toaster company gets complaints for destroying iPods, which would be unfair), the smaller company would probably have grounds for suing because it impacts their business.

But the plain fact that you are re-using the ID as long as the device is compatible, I don't think that would be illegal. In many cases, it would be stupid, but not illegal. Might be that you get into trouble with your USB license; you need a license to use USB because USB is patented in many ways, and the license might say that you can't use someone else's ID.

 

[frankly]

Which is still more difficult than just syncing with itunes. Explain to the general consumer that they have to install two media players.

No. And I have never said they had any such obligation. Did I?

Again an argument I've not made. Never once have I claimed that apple are stopping you from using your media in alternate ways. Just that by blocking syncing that they've made it more difficult.

Isn't it up to the device manufacturer to include clear, concise instructions regarding syncing their device with your computer? Why is that so difficult to understand?

By claiming that they are wrong for not providing this syncing ability you are making the claim that the right thing to do would be to set up syncing with these devices. So, you may not have said obliged but you clearly think it is wrong for them not to do this.

Once again, it is only more difficult because these other device manufacturers haven't made it easier. Are you going to claim that it is IMPOSSIBLE for a third-party device manufacturer to make it easier than syncing with iTunes? That Apple has made the end all be all of syncing software and that it is therefore completely impossible to make something that is easier to use???

 

[Darth.Titan]

Regardless of whether they have the right to or not (you guys can continue to debate that point) I think that if Apple kills Pre syncing, it will only make them out to be the bad guy. Therefore, I think Apple and Palm should come to a licensing agreement regarding iTunes syncing as well as the use of the name iTunes in Pre advertising. Let's face it, everyone knows iTunes so if Palm can put that reassuring software name out there for prospective customers it could only help them. That and the unopposed ability to sync music through iTunes should be worth some recompense to Apple. Otherwise what we'll see is Apple breaking things with an iTunes update, then Palm fixing things with a firmware update. Repeat ad nauseum, to the tune of too much wasted effort.

I fear that iTunes compatibility is not Palm's biggest hurdle. Frankly, while I think the Palm Pre looks like a great product, I fear they may have shot themselves in the foot by tying it to Sprint. A CDMA phone pretty much limits sales to the US, and Sprint these days is on its last leg itself. I wish Palm the best of luck, because there is more than enough room for them in the marketplace alongside the iPhone.

 

[Greydog]

iTunes and non-iPod players?

I could be wrong, but I seem to remember in the early days of iTunes being able to connect my MP3 player (non-iPod) to my mac and manually syncing music with it. Anyone try to sync up their vintage Rio lately?

 

[frankly]

iTunes 9.0: Fire zee missiles!

Well, okay, take a nap. Then Fire zee missiles!!!

 

[gnasher729]

I just finished reading a book called "Appetite for self-destruction" on the recent history of the music bussiness.
When Jobs negotiated with the companies, as they were desperate to get someone to sell music on the internet for them, he had a very good position and make an excellent deal: Apple gets between 60 and 70 cents per song sold on itunes (this is before DRM were removed). So, my ass they don't make money with the iTunes store. He gets twice what the record companies make and he does not pay the bands, the promotions, etc. He just puts the music online. It's true that he makes more money with hardware like iPhones, iPods, etc., but Apple definitely does not lose money with the store.
By the way, I highly recommend the book. The story of internet music linked to Steve Jobs and Apple is quite interesting.

Please check your facts and post a correction yourself.

 

[pcorrado]

We all know how this going to go down - Apple will break support and then 3 months later announce iTunes 9 with support for third party devices and everyone will praise Apple.

 

[nxent]

Third - Everyone here seems to forget that iTunes works as well with other non-iPods as iPods work with non-iTunes software. Which means that it can be done, just not without some modifications. That being said, Apple designed the iPod to allow full integration with iTunes (which was first), it can be argued that its the iPod that is locked to iTunes and not the other way around.

you sure about that? pretty sure you can't connect the zune to the itunes libray

 

[thetexan]

I don't get what all the Pre hatred is about. People in this thread are freaking out and acting as though it'll be the end of the world if the Pre is allowed to sync with iTunes. Big deal. At least look at it this way: The Pre actually appears as though some thought was put into the design and UI. Some say Palm copied the iPhone, but my point is, it looks as though they really, truly tried to make a decent phone. And it's even Mac compatible! Try getting anything like this from Redmond...their version of the Pre would be square and brown, have huge visible screws and run some horrific, clunky flavor of WinMo, and it would not be Mac compatible. I like the way the Pre looks. Granted, it doesn't have "teh sexiness", but again...there are other phones besides the iPhone. Deal with it.

Looking at the Pre UI it's obvious they didn't copy Apple, nothing remind me of Apple's setup unless you're taking into account they are both using the English language. As far as I know, Apple didn't patent icons either.

The Pre isn't in direct competition with the iPhone or any other smartphone on the market, that's straight from Palm's mouth. They feel that there is going to be enough growth in the smartphone market for everyone and I believe they're right. iPhone isn't going anywhere, and WebOS/Pre is going to be a huge success. RIM and WM will continue to be around, too. With as good as the iPhone is, they didn't hurt RIM or MS at all financially or with market share.

Regardless of if this phone works with iTunes or not it's going to sell. In fact, most people probably don't care if it does work with iTunes since there are lots of freeware media management programs available or simple drag and drop, options not allowed to those using the iPhone. I like the options the Pre is giving me, since I'm not that big of a fan of iTunes anyway.