Palm Pre Emulating an iPod to Accomplish iTunes Sync?

[Wikinerd]

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.

Somehow I don't seem to see any turnaround artist at work here... When you're so desperate that you start to [illegitimately] emulate your competitor's product I'd say you're no more than a copycat as well as a thief...

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

... If they did it legitimately, that is...

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.

Geez... RTFA. The screen clearly states "iPod" not some mp3 player. (And no, iTunes does not show "iPod" for any random 3rd party mp3 player.)

And I doubt that iPod device firmware is "open" either; and neither is the USB identifier...
(As for the API's, the fact that they are "open" does not mean they are not copyrighted... And the fact remains that it's Apple's IP. If they're open sourced it probably also means that Palm needs to release the modified source code, and they didn't.)

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.

Last time I checked it's 64% of high-capacity PMPs... So 70% is a reasonable guess for the current number...

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.

First, if you choose to use OS X, you must buy a Macintosh. It's a choice you are allowed to make... If you don't like it, there's always Windows and Unix/like systems to choose from...

And this hardware lock is a choice made by the consumer. They probably know that if they bought an iPod, they will have to use iTunes unless they do extensive modification. And so far not a lot of people are complaining.

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

Proof please?

 

[frankly]

I'm curious to see how many of you think Palm is doing this without Apple's consent. Of you who are against that, how many of you have jailbroken iPhones, or support the devcommunity and the unlocking/jailbreaking of the iPhone?

Only those deluding themselves think that Palm got Apple's permission for doing this. It is quite obvious to most people that if they did then it wouldn't be listed as an iPod.

I am against it and I do not have a jailbroken iPhone. I do not support the community that does this, especially NOT the people that allow apps that are supposed to be paid for to be installed for free on a jailbroken iPhone.

 

[Wikinerd]

Bollocks. They make money from the songs purchased and synced to the Pre.

<snip.>

First let me start of by remarking that music sales represent a really small amount of revenue that Apple Inc gets... Most of that comes from hardware sales—esp. from the iPod/iPhone family.

And so, you're saying that Apple now has an obligation to hand over 8 years of development for free to their competitor so that you can spare the five seconds of clicking to get it to sync using an external App or smth?

Besides, why doesn't Palm just use plugins so that it stays legit? Why illegally emulate the iPod USB identifier just so that it syncs like one?

And, let's say, Apple includes new functionality in a new generation of iPods and updates the firmwares of older generation iPods, and drops support for this USB ID, is it Apple's fault then?

This is a capitalist world. Don't expect Apple to do things that will directly benefit their competitor but has no value to themselves. You can all stop using iTunes if you want to. But I doubt that'll happen in such a massive scale to be noticed by Apple to not do this...

We have here an entire thread about Apple "allowing" or "not allowing" something and you think it has to do with tinfoil heads to assume that Apple might actually sue.

No. It's just their basic right to hold rights to whatever they make. So if I hypothetically take your hypothetical product and reproduce it at, say, 90% less, and people start buying my cheap knockoffs, would you sue?

These aren't government powers... And Apple isn't the extreme in this area either... Just look up "patent trolling" or "patent abuse", and you'll be aghast...

I always love that argument. If that is so true then why is Itunes the number 1 music retailer and the one that everyone is trying to copy? So, I call BS on that statement! If Itunes didn't make money Apple would have dropped it long ago and allowed Amazon and others to take over.

... Because they risk loosing a market—a market adjacent to their hardware business.

So given the choice of (a) syncing all your digital devices through the itunes interface, or (b) installing a separate syncing app for each device you own, you think the latter is no less convenient than the former for the consumer? And by consumer think about the average computer user.

As I said in an earlier in this post, this is a market (capitalist) economy. Unlike centrally-planned economies, decisions are made on a whether-this-will-turn-a-profit basis, not "for the public good". If you don't like it you can look up Communist Party USA and see if they're running for any government seats anytime soon...

Just face it; it's the truth.

I'm curious to see how many of you think Palm is doing this without Apple's consent. Of you who are against that, how many of you have jailbroken iPhones, or support the devcommunity and the unlocking/jailbreaking of the iPhone?

1st. Jailbreaking has no bearing whatsoever on this subject except when it's used as a way to install cracked apps. Apple still gets revenue from the phone purchase.
2nd. Cracked Apps are, in no way, politically or legally or morally correct, imho.


_____________________________________________________

The thing here, with the thread, is the morality of having a device identify itself as a competitor's product so that it can use that product's software, is wrong, imho.

 

[diamond.g]

Please don't take this the wrong way but based on that response I guess you're unaware of how the Internet works so I'll give you some more information.

When you open iTunes and go to the iTunes store the store and all of the pages you see are not stored on your computer. Your computer connects to a server farm where the iTunes store software is actually running. Then when you actually want to purchase a song that server farm connects to any number of server farms in order to facilitate the transfer of your purchase to your computer. The more items that Apple sells on the store and the larger those files are (think HD TV Shows and Movies) the more hardware (servers and associated networking hardware) they need.

Apple currently sells over 10 million songs, over 40,000 TV episodes, and over 5,000 movies including over 1,200 in HD.

And as has been pointed out numerous times iTunes is the #1 music retailer in the U.S. They sell millions of songs per day. This is no small feat.

Let me know if you need additional information as to how this works or the type of investment this requires on Apple's part.

I would guess the poster is referring to the servers and all of that hardware, but I could be wrong.

And that server farm could be partially paid for by other things. Like say iPod/iPhone sales.

Most likely Apple is relying on servers from Akamai so they would only be paying for availability, uptime, and bandwidth. They wouldn't have to worry about server hardware. Although I would be interested to know if Apple uses hardware that isn't 1U (since they only seem to sell 1U). You would think that to run a super popular website/storefront (assuming they actually use OS X Server) they would need some ultra beefy (and high bandwidth) hardware, which they don't have for public sale (which is a shame cause I would have happily recommended it to my customer).

 

[pavvento]

First let me start of by remarking that music sales represent a really small amount of revenue that Apple Inc gets... Most of that comes from hardware sales—esp. from the iPod/iPhone family.

And so, you're saying that Apple now has an obligation to hand over 8 years of development for free to their competitor so that you can spare the five seconds of clicking to get it to sync using an external App or smth?

Besides, why doesn't Palm just use plugins so that it stays legit? Why illegally emulate the iPod USB identifier just so that it syncs like one?

And, let's say, Apple includes new functionality in a new generation of iPods and updates the firmwares of older generation iPods, and drops support for this USB ID, is it Apple's fault then?

This is a capitalist world. Don't expect Apple to do things that will directly benefit their competitor but has no value to themselves. You can all stop using iTunes if you want to. But I doubt that'll happen in such a massive scale to be noticed by Apple to not do this...



No. It's just their basic right to hold rights to whatever they make. So if I hypothetically take your hypothetical product and reproduce it at, say, 90% less, and people start buying my cheap knockoffs, would you sue?

These aren't government powers... And Apple isn't the extreme in this area either... Just look up "patent trolling" or "patent abuse", and you'll be aghast...



... Because they risk loosing a market—a market adjacent to their hardware business.


As I said in an earlier in this post, this is a market (capitalist) economy. Unlike centrally-planned economies, decisions are made on a whether-this-will-turn-a-profit basis, not "for the public good". If you don't like it you can look up Communist Party USA and see if they're running for any government seats anytime soon...

Just face it; it's the truth.




1st. Jailbreaking has no bearing whatsoever on this subject except when it's used as a way to install cracked apps. Apple still gets revenue from the phone purchase.
2nd. Cracked Apps are, in no way, politically or legally or morally correct, imho.


_____________________________________________________

The thing here, with the thread, is the morality of having a device identify itself as a competitor's product so that it can use that product's software, is wrong, imho.

I think they are closely related. Both are using an Apple product in ways that Apple did not intend, without their permission.

 

[frankly]

And that server farm could be partially paid for by other things. Like say iPod/iPhone sales.

Most likely Apple is relying on servers from Akamai so they would only be paying for availability, uptime, and bandwidth. They wouldn't have to worry about server hardware. Although I would be interested to know if Apple uses hardware that isn't 1U (since they only seem to sell 1U). You would think that to run a super popular website/storefront (assuming they actually use OS X Server) they would need some ultra beefy (and high bandwidth) hardware, which they don't have for public sale (which is a shame cause I would have happily recommended it to my customer).

Isn't that part of the point that we've been making, that the iTunes store is partially funded by iPod/iPhone sales???

And it doesn't matter if they own the hardware or rent it, there is a cost involved.

 

[charlituna]

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.

Pre Ipod there were some 30 or so devices that were native to itunes.

fact is that Apple may have no choice in this issue because locking out the Pre could be seen as illegal tying due to the ipod's strength in the market.

unlike

2. 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.

actually it is very different in one key way. Apple doesn't have the market strength in personal computers (which is the market, not Mac specific computers) and thus it is totally legal -- so says the courts thanks to Psystar -- for their to be a tie.

with digital media players, Apple could be seen as having the market strength and thus a lock out would be abuse of power and illegal.

3. 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

that's the most twisted interpretation of the facts I've ever seen. but hey if it helps you sleep at night, go for it. just remember that you can't go and try to make a profit off those hackintoshs in your living room or you will be shut down. cause at this point, that hack is illegal.

 

[Griffter]

I've just had an interesting thought...

Maybe Palm is seriously looking for a fight, Apple will take the bait and it will go to court, it will be a massive fight, Apple will likely win, but the press may look more favorably on Palm as the underdog.

Palm wins...

 

[frankly]

Pre Ipod there were some 30 or so devices that were native to itunes.

fact is that Apple may have no choice in this issue because locking out the Pre could be seen as illegal tying due to the ipod's strength in the market.

unlike



actually it is very different in one key way. Apple doesn't have the market strength in personal computers (which is the market, not Mac specific computers) and thus it is totally legal -- so says the courts thanks to Psystar -- for their to be a tie.

with digital media players, Apple could be seen as having the market strength and thus a lock out would be abuse of power and illegal.

Having strength in a specific market does not make protecting your work illegal. What people seem to forget is that when Microsoft was brought up on anti-trust charges they were doing some crazy things like making vendors pay them for Windows licenses even on machines that didn't have Windows installed. That was an example of abusing your strength in a market.

If Apple were to tell retailers that in order to carry the iPod they are not allowed to carry other music players, that would be an abuse of their strength. If they were to tell AT&T that in order to continue carrying the iPhone they are not allowed to sell other smart phones that would be an abuse. Altering their program so that Palm can't use it without their permission is NOT an abuse. They aren't even the market leader in the cell phone or smart phone market which is where Palm and the Pre reside so what strength are they supposedly abusing? The strength of making software that works well?

 

[str1f3]

David Pogue's Pre review slips out!

David Pogue's Review of the Pre slipped out online: Here.

As stated before it literally get recognized as an iPod. This will be broken in an iTunes update or part of a bigger lawsuit with Palm.

David Pogue's comments about the Pre:
-(OS)The Pre’s all-new operating system, called Web OS, is gorgeous, fluid and exciting.

-(Battery Life)That’s fortunate, because battery life is the Pre’s heartbreaker. On days when I used the Pre a lot, the battery was dead by late afternoon. On days when I used it only occasionally, it was dead by dinnertime. Yikes.

(Music)When you connect it to your Mac or PC, the Pre shows up right there in Apple’s iTunes software, labeled ‘‘iPod.’’ A couple of clicks later, you’ve synced your music, photo and video collections (minus the copy-protected items) and iTunes never knows the difference.

-Opening certain programs can be very slow—sometimes 8 or 9 seconds—and there’s no progress bar or hourglass to let you know that it’s still working. There’s no memory-card slot to expand the 8 gigabytes of storage, and no Visual Voicemail (where messages are listed like e-mail). The onboard search function won’t look through your e-mail or calendars. There are a few bugs left to exterminate, too.

 

[brop52]

David Pogue's Review of the Pre slipped out online: Here.

As stated before it literally get recognized as an iPod. This will be broken in an iTunes update or part of a bigger lawsuit with Palm.

David Pogue's comments about the Pre:
-(OS)The Pre’s all-new operating system, called Web OS, is gorgeous, fluid and exciting.

-(Battery Life)That’s fortunate, because battery life is the Pre’s heartbreaker. On days when I used the Pre a lot, the battery was dead by late afternoon. On days when I used it only occasionally, it was dead by dinnertime. Yikes.

(Music)When you connect it to your Mac or PC, the Pre shows up right there in Apple’s iTunes software, labeled ‘‘iPod.’’ A couple of clicks later, you’ve synced your music, photo and video collections (minus the copy-protected items) and iTunes never knows the difference.

-Opening certain programs can be very slow—sometimes 8 or 9 seconds—and there’s no progress bar or hourglass to let you know that it’s still working. There’s no memory-card slot to expand the 8 gigabytes of storage, and no Visual Voicemail (where messages are listed like e-mail). The onboard search function won’t look through your e-mail or calendars. There are a few bugs left to exterminate, too.

He said that he has poor service for sprint in his area. It's no surprise the battery didn't last long. Roaming or searching for a signal is a battery destroyer. The Pre on Verizon sometime in the next 6 months will be a solid improvement.

 

[slapppy]

Plastic or glass

Is the screen still plastic? Or is it glass now?

 

[slapppy]

Full review.

Engadget now has a full review.

 

[kdarling]

Is the screen still plastic? Or is it glass now?

Probably plastic, but that's okay:

To those of us who use a plastic screen protector over glass, it's all the same.

 

[str1f3]

He said that he has poor service for sprint in his area. It's no surprise the battery didn't last long. Roaming or searching for a signal is a battery destroyer. The Pre on Verizon sometime in the next 6 months will be a solid improvement.

The problem is Sprint has not very good coverage. That and poor customer service is why they lose subscribers to Verizon. Chances are greater than 50% that you'll be in an area where you will have lousy coverage. It will be better on Verizon. Ultimately, Pogue isn't 100% sure that was the reason, only assumption.

Edit: Wired is also stating battery life is less than the iPhone while offering half the life for music playback (24 to 12) and two hours less for video (7 to 5). The battery is easily replaceable and costs $50.

 

[str1f3]

Probably plastic, but that's okay:

To those of us who use a plastic screen protector over glass, it's all the same.

I think it's glass but all reviews coming in on the hardware says it feels cheap and plasticky.

 

[str1f3]

Engadget now has a full review.

Also Gizmodo and Mossberg.

 

[nws0291]

I'm about 95% leaning towards the Pre. I am with Sprint right now and I am on SERO so I will have to lose my $30 plan for everything It' still only going to cost me $60 a month on the new plan. The main reason I will be getting the Pre is that Sprint data network is very fast and reliable unlike at&t. I txt and use data and about no peak mins at all so data speeds are my #1 priority in my choice.

I am still waiting until next week to see what apple brings to the table. I am an Apple fanboy so it's hard to not go with the iPhone. I wish at&t would upgrade their network bandwidth already. It will only get more saturated with the new iPhone. Sprint's network doesn't have many users and they are bleeding cash so I don't see them lasting much longer if they can't get more subscribers.

 

[frankly]

David Pogue's Review of the Pre slipped out online: Here.

Have some courtesy and link to his actual review:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/04/technology/personaltech/04pogue.html?_r=1

 

[MrSEC]

Have some courtesy and link to his actual review:

Might wanna put a band-aid on that cut between your legs.

 

[frankly]

He said that he has poor service for sprint in his area. It's no surprise the battery didn't last long. Roaming or searching for a signal is a battery destroyer. The Pre on Verizon sometime in the next 6 months will be a solid improvement.

That should not have been a problem since Verizon coverage is great in David's area (he's raved about it before). Any Sprint device should roams without problems on the Verizon network. I know that my Sprint phone always did when I had it which is why I always had great coverage. I guess it is possible that in more populated areas, like the Northeast where David lives, they don't allow roaming on all towers since Sprint should have enough coverage themselves but it does seem strange.

Also, roaming shouldn't use more battery power than non-roaming unless the OS is set to specifically try to find a Sprint tower every so often. Really poor signal on a phone that won't roam for some reason will kill the battery though. I wonder if the phone was set to roam. Most Sprint phones have a setting to connect to Sprint only, Allow Roaming, or Roam only. I wonder if the Pre has this and what he had his set to.

However, battery life sounds ridiculous thus far. I'm willing to bet this is related to the OS not being optimized as good as it can be. Remember that the iPhone has had better battery life after each software update.

 

[frankly]

Might wanna put a band-aid on that cut between your legs.

Seriously? You actually made a conscious decision to make yourself look that stupid by typing this response in and pressing the Submit Reply button?

Really? That's surprising considering you were smart enough to get past the parental controls your parents set up on your computer and post something after dark.

 

[kdarling]

I think it's glass but all reviews coming in on the hardware says it feels cheap and plasticky.

I'm a little behind. The only real review I've looked at so far is Pogue's:

The Pre is a shiny, flattened black plastic capsule, coated with a hard, glossy, scratch-resistant finish. When it’s turned off, the screen disappears completely into the smoky finish, leaving a stunning, featureless talisman. It’s exactly the right size.

 

[Wikinerd]

I think they are closely related. Both are using an Apple product in ways that Apple did not intend, without their permission.

Although both aren't legal, I'd say that it's different. One's directly copying Apple's IP and code, and may have underlying corporate sabotage which can be a clear violation of law.

Jailbreaking, however, is "reverse engineering". No one in the jailbreaking team was on the Apple iPhone dev team, and none of them knew the code before reverse-engineering.

In fact, jailbreaking helped Apple. It provided a basis for the size of the market wanting 3rd party apps; Apple followed suit. In this situation, Pre is ripping off Apple's iTunes to create a phone in the category that Apple created...


The fact remains, however, that Apple catching all jailbreakers would be a wasted effort, like software piracy, while large companies will never get away with pirated software—or anything infringing, etc.

Might wanna put a band-aid on that cut between your legs.

I can't imagine why would he do that... He's right, you know...

Or maybe him being right has appealed to your childish sense of jealousy and gave him a cut there; which I seriously doubt you can...

 

[str1f3]

I'm a little behind. The only real review I've looked at so far is Pogue's:

I guess it varies from review to review. Both Gizmodo and Boy Genius Report have said that the casing felt very cheap.