That's what Knopper, the author, writes in the book. I can look for the exact amount later on. Actually, the record companies are quite pissed because they realized they made a mistake with this deal. Some of the big companies, like Universal, just renew the contract one year at a time, because they want to leave the iTunes prison they are in, but so far there's no real competitor out there. They are selling millions of songs a year and until someone releases a good online store to compete with Apple's (not easy), they have to be there or risk not selling anything.
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.
Palm Pre Emulating an iPod to Accomplish iTunes Sync?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That's what Knopper, the author, writes in the book. I can look for the exact amount later on. Actually, the record companies are quite pissed because they realized they made a mistake with this deal. Some of the big companies, like Universal, just renew the contract one year at a time, because they want to leave the iTunes prison they are in, but so far there's no real competitor out there. They are selling millions of songs a year and until someone releases a good online store to compete with Apple's (not easy), they have to be there or risk not selling anything.
Why is it impossible for you to comprehend that someone could write a piece of software that actually makes it easier for you to sync your third party device with your iTunes library? Why do you continue insisting that they options are either sync nicely with iTunes or drag and drop in some awkward way?
Just because someone doesn't currently make a piece of software that is as easy to use as iTunes does not mean that Apple should let other manufacturers use iTunes. The fact is that Apple is a hardware company that makes really good software to work on their hardware that has an incredible user experience.
Your arguments that is is more difficult to move files to a third party device are one of the biggest reasons that people buy iPods. They are easy to use both when connected to your computer and when disconnected. Apple put in a lot of hard work on BOTH the iPod OS and iTunes so that using them would be extremely easy. It is your contention that they should let their competitors have the easy way out and just say, "We know it is hard to develop the software that allows your users to manage their library and sync with the device so instead of working hard to make your own why don't you use iTunes? We've already done all of the hard work so just use our software, which we give away to consumers for free, to sync your device. Oh no, it doesn't matter that we will make no money in the transaction, you go ahead and enjoy the fruits of our labor."
You're statements are ridiculous.
1) Most people use iTunes because most people use iPods. 70% of all music players sold are iPods. They don't use iTunes just to manage their music and then they happen to buy whatever device and get mad when it doesn't sync. You are using a logical fallacy to make your point.
2) It doesn't screw over the consumer. Consumers have a choice and 70% of the time they choose Apple and iPod.
3) A fair fight would be the other device manufacturers writing their OWN software. They using iTunes to sync their devices already gives them an advantage because they did not have to spend the time and resources on what would be a huge project. Think about what you're saying before you say it.
Although your arguments seem logic, there's a couple of missing facts you should add:
1) There are other devices compatible with iTunes. We don't know whether Palm contacted Apple or not to enable syncing. Maybe they already paid for this ability.
2) Access to iTunes means access to the iTunes store, which sells contents. Apple gets a nice part of that money, at least in music (which is what we are talking about here).
So it might no t be as clear as: we make the software and you take advantage of it.
But, they are not emulating anything. They maybe assigning their device a USB vendor ID assigned to another vendor. It might not be against the law, but be against the USB organization's terms of use. http://www.usb.org/developers/vendor/
If they are really doing this, then it's not appropriate.
I must say I have been reading and posting on these forums for a while...
The term "Apple Fanboi" is the most annoying term in the world. It sounds like the person using it wishes they knew what it meant. Also, it makes you sound like Avril Lavigne when you spell it like that. Just because we prefer a different OS and Hardware doesn't mean that we are all BLINDLY following
.
Secondly. I hope Apple lets the Pre sync. I hope they leave it and let people be happy while they own their Pre.
Then I hope they break the ability for it to sync with iTunes. The Pre will just turn into one more device that tries to hard to be what it's not.
Then people can go back into dragging and dropping their music the oldschool way.
iTunes is Apples software and they have the right to choose what hardware works with it.
The term "Apple Fanboi" is the most annoying term in the world. It sounds like the person using it wishes they knew what it meant. Also, it makes you sound like Avril Lavigne when you spell it like that. Just because we prefer a different OS and Hardware doesn't mean that we are all BLINDLY following
.Secondly. I hope Apple lets the Pre sync. I hope they leave it and let people be happy while they own their Pre.
Then I hope they break the ability for it to sync with iTunes. The Pre will just turn into one more device that tries to hard to be what it's not.
Then people can go back into dragging and dropping their music the oldschool way.
iTunes is Apples software and they have the right to choose what hardware works with it.
You are half right and half wrong and you are comparing apples and oranges. You wrote software to sync with an Apple hardware device. I think that is perfectly acceptable. Pre should have written software to sync with their device. Using someone else's work for a purpose that is prohibited in the license is wrong.
Apple made their money from selling you the iPhone. They don't make money from you buying a Pre and using it with iTunes.
How long have you worked for Palm, or had a contractual relationship directly or indirectly with Palm (includes working for a spin shop such as Enderle)?
As long as Palm came by their knowledge via reverse engineering and not insider knowledge, it's legal. It's the same thing Compaq did in the early '80s with PC BIOSes.
Can you point me to the bit in the license that prohibits this from the Pre, because I couldn't find it...
You really think MS doesn't have patents on .NET and the ugly-as-sin WinAPI? They don't sue because they'd be bringing a literal *****torm on their own heads.
The fact of the matter is, take it from someone who has actually looked at the protocol (page 5 of this thread on default view settings): There are *no* protocols, barring AFC, that Apple could have patented, at least not as something brand new. The broad concept of device syncing is something Palm already did; the specific concepts of each protocol have already been done in the past (prior art) and there is nothing particularly more efficient or beneficial about Apple's way of doing them than the older ways of doing them.
But at least you're probably right that Palm can't use FairPlay. Too bad FairPlay doesn't come into play at any stage of device<->program communications; just the DRMed songs and the new hash algorithm, and Apple's getting sued over legal threats they made to the project that was seeking to crack that hash algorithm for... you guessed it... interoperability with third-party solutions, which is a completely protected practice under the DMCA.
This is BS and I'm sick of people claiming to know what an Apple fan would or wouldn't do. This reminds me of the old saying that when you're pointing one finger at me, three are pointing back at you.
As a former Palm device owner (multiple devices) I think that Palm customers would much rather have Palm get off of their lazy ass and make their own software that will sync the Pre with their computer. I know that is how I felt when I owned the Treo (two actually) and other Palm devices over the years. Palm's software was either incompatible or such utter and total crap that I had to purchase The Missing Sync in order to sync my device. I would much rather have had the device manufacturer (who knows the hardware and the hardware's OS best) to write my sync software.
Do you really think that syncing the Pre with iTunes (which could potentially break even if Apple doesn't do it intentionally) is the preferred solution? Think about it. Apple is constantly working on new versions of iTunes which Palm does not have access to. How long do you think you will have to wait after each of these updates for Palm to fix the Pre software in order for you to get your sync ability back? Do you really want to have to deal with that?
You guys need to think about what you're saying because it is a bunch of BS at this point.
1) You hate that they are consistently rated the highest or among the highest in customer satsifaction?
2) Please elaborate on the government powers they use to defeat competition. This should be an interesting response. I will get out my tinfoil hat.
3) This is obviously spoken by someone who has never developed software. It would be flat out impossible to deliver software without testing it. Aside from the internal testing that we don't know about if you are a regular at MacRumors then you will constantly see posts about Apple releasing a new build of their OS to developers on a regular basis. You lost all credibility with this post.
Number 1 is false. I know more people who started using iTune because it was a damn good music library software. The iPod part was a bonus if they ever got one. I started using iTunes because of how nice of a software it was to manage my library.
2. you clearly do not understand how apple current set up screws over the customer. It takes away your choices because apple locks your hardware to the software. now take away the hardware lock and see how many more choices one gets. For example one of the largest complaints i seen here on these boards is apple complete lack of a mid range tower desktop. Imagne if OSX could be installed on anything. That would give the consumer more choices on what they could use more choices on hardware set up and so on. It is no different with the music player.
3. Apple fights dirty. They are to afraid to have their hardware stand on its own. They have to use underhand tricks to keep it from happening with the software and limiting consumers choices
Actually, yes I do:
Firstly, syncing to older iPods has been pretty much the same for years and basically involves copying the files with mangled names to directories on the device: Nothing particularly complicated or complex involved and highly unlikely to break unintentionally.
Secondly, I have a considerable investment in my music and video in iTunes - I sync to my iPods (several), iPhone and Apple TVs. If I bought a Pre I would be much better for me as a consumer to be able to use the same playlists, etc to sync my new device alongside my existing ones.
IMO, the decision over whether to buy a Pre or an iPhone / iPod should be down to the capabilities of the particular device, not some lock in due to historical purchases.
Bollocks. They make money from the songs purchased and synced to the Pre.
That isn't an apples and oranges comparison; Palm has done the same thing I have and swapped sides by doing it from the device side as opposed to the client side. One of the things I eventually wanted to do with my stuff was write it so that it could be used for that very same purpose.
Using someone else's work? Once again, I'm pretty sure it's more "let's make it easier on our customers" than "hey, if we make our product sync with iTunes we don't have to write our own drivers and such." If Palm has written their own software -- and they probably have -- then there is absolutely nothing wrong with introducing compatibility with other products as well. And if not? Good on them for lowering the bloat and crap that must be installed on a user's machine.
If they want to be interoperable and Just Work(tm) with Apple software -- something Apple prides itself on -- more power to them. Once again, no theft has occurred. At worst, they're being cheap.
You know -- as to the argument that Apple makes no money off of Pre syncing with iTunes -- let me ask you this: if I downloaded iTunes and used it strictly as a music player (NO PURCHASES), has Apple made any money off of me? Because Apple does not charge for the player itself, and because there are no ads, the answer is most likely no. Why would using a Palm Pre hurt more? Would I literally be stealing money from Apple with a Pre? How? The Pre has incurred no cost on Apple's part. Apple has not lost money. They haven't gained it, but that's because I never bought a song. They have not lost money. Period.
Because I now own an iPhone. Palm stealing the use of iTunes potentially takes money out of Apple's pockets which means less money to improve the products I own.
I didn't say I wanted them to fail. I just said that if this isn't a hit they will fail. There is a HUGE difference. Palm has used ALL of their cash reserves to create the Pre.
wow.... That is a bad argument.
By the Pre doing this it forces apple to improve the iPhone more because now it is completing more directly with the Pre. It forces apple to impove the iPhone more to stay ahead. other whys apple has little motivation to try to out do the pre on the hardware level.
Do you know which argument I am referring to? I'm not talking about this thread but about a 'back and forth' within this thread from yesterday (or early this morning).
one more for the list...
Should Microsoft stop iTunes/iPhone from syncing with Outlook?
I bought the first generation iPhone because it advertised Outlook sync support. The sync crashed every time (stupid buggy Apple software
) so I returned the iPhone. Apple has now fixed the bugs and I plan to buy the new iPhone shortly. In other words, this sort of interop sometimes works in Apple's favor.
there have been third party helper/plugins before to do the same trick and apple wasn't way up in arms. as long as folks weren't hacking itunes and distributing that version a la the whole Psystar thing. in fact pre the ipod, there was a list of like 40 players that itunes recognized and they weren't cut out when the ipod was released -- at least not right away
personally I think they will NOT file suit. why? because unlike the whole OS thing where they are legally allowed to tie hardware and software due to a lack of market power, the ipod/iphone has a major part of the digital media player market. so as long as no other law has been broken, letting folks piggyback on itunes is a way to avoid antitrust claims.
in fact, I wouldn't be shocked if Apple stepped up and offered to let folks formally come into the fold on using itunes as a syncing platform. say for the Pre and the Mac using Zune folks. not to the point of the DRM music, video etc but for the rest why not. it might even increase sales of the DRM free music in the itunes store and said companies would have a harder time coming up with a suit to file against apple for illegal tying cause of the option to buy into the software.
A ploy to get new and unsuspecting customers?
Ok, I have been thinking...
Palms plan is to grabthe market share of both BB and Apple.
1. BB: compete with the fact you have a large screen (aka the Storm) but have a keyboard!
2. Apple: compete with customers who have a library already on iTunes, but want a (cheaper) phone or keyboard.
In the case of Apple, it is a risky strategy.
If the Pre can sync, they will get some more customers, but are hoping that if Apple disable this, "public outcry" will be on Palms side - and spin it as Apple hurting the public.. could drag out a bit in court etc..
So like Psytar this will only finish when Palm go bust as its a one trick pony.
I loved the Treos, but they lost me when they didn't update their line for several years. The Pre does look great, but I think its the end for Palm.
Ok, I have been thinking...
Palms plan is to grabthe market share of both BB and Apple.
1. BB: compete with the fact you have a large screen (aka the Storm) but have a keyboard!
2. Apple: compete with customers who have a library already on iTunes, but want a (cheaper) phone or keyboard.
In the case of Apple, it is a risky strategy.
If the Pre can sync, they will get some more customers, but are hoping that if Apple disable this, "public outcry" will be on Palms side - and spin it as Apple hurting the public.. could drag out a bit in court etc..
So like Psytar this will only finish when Palm go bust as its a one trick pony.
I loved the Treos, but they lost me when they didn't update their line for several years. The Pre does look great, but I think its the end for Palm.