Yeah I know how the roaming works I have sprint now. I have terrible service in my house and I'm always roaming in Detroit on the medical campus (probably because the place is built to withstand a riot) and my battery life is pitiful. When I go up North I'm always roaming and even then I can't make a call unless I go into the city. AT&T has better service at my house (slightly. Why it's not better I'm not sure), better in Detroit, and far better up north even away from the city.
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
I know a lot of people have already pointed out how Palm quite obviously wasn't the first kid on the block with copy/paste but I had to point out something I just read in the Gizmodo review of the Pre.
http://gizmodo.com/5277499/palm-pre-review said:
It seems to me that having the ability to copy isn't worth much if you can only copy from areas where you typed something. Looks like Palm needs to head back to the drawing board on this feature.
If you're in an area where the Sprint service is especially bad but Verizon service is not for some reason you might want to try switching your phone to roam only in those areas to see if it helps.
I'm not sure if anyone has posted this yet, but here's a screenshot of the iTunes sync courtesy of Engadget.
This is getting really shady by Palm. I like for things to be open, but a company has to have a right to protect their intellectual property. This will probably be stopped quietly by Apple.
If it stops with Palm there, they then will later say that we're not intentionally not trying to do it (to avoid negative press).
or
If Palm continues to do it, they will later on say they are protecting their IP.
Apple is not going to let Palm have full sync capability through iTunes. It should also be noted that Apple has sued for a lot less when it comes to iPod copyright infringement.
Maybe, but it never seems to find a signal roaming either up there. it also switches between a roaming signal that is weak and a Sprint signal that is also weak. Neither ones actually make a call. I think the Sprint store that was there last year went out of business and the tower was shut down or something.
The funny thing is looking at Verizon's coverage it seems it covers everything but the East side of the road by Lake Huron where all the cottages are.
Doesn't really matter though as I'm switching to the iPhone when it comes out.
Not only that but notice that by doing it this shady way you see the Contacts and Games tabs even though the Pre does not sync these. Many people that support this have been claiming to do so because it makes it easier and less confusing for the end user. I think that this screenshot shows just the opposite. The fact that it will let you check the boxes saying you want to sync your contacts but then it doesn't is going to cause a LOT of problems for Palm.
Maybe, but it never seems to find a signal roaming either up there. it also switches between a roaming signal that is weak and a Sprint signal that is also weak. Neither ones actually make a call. I think the Sprint store that was there last year went out of business and the tower was shut down or something.
The funny thing is looking at Verizon's coverage it seems it covers everything but the East side of the road by Lake Huron where all the cottages are.
Doesn't really matter though as I'm switching to the iPhone when it comes out.
You have to have it switched to Roam Only to really notice the difference. The reason for this is that if you have it set to auto and there is a Sprint tower, even a very weak one, it will ALWAYS try to connect to the Sprint tower, even if there is a very strong Verizon tower present.
I'm not sure if anyone has posted this yet, but here's a screenshot of the iTunes sync courtesy of Engadget.
Interesting. Assuming that the Pre pretends to be a certain iPod model, it must also pretend that it has a certain version of the iPod firmware installed, so that iTunes says "latest software installed".
I would be very curious to see what happens if Apple releases a new firmware version for that iPod version, so it would now believe that all the Pres have an old version of that firmware installed (in reality they have obviously no Apple firmware at all), and then iTunes tries to install an iPod firmware upgrade on a Pre.
Exactly what is Palm copying in your opinion? Palm is not committing copyright infringement as long as Palm isn't _copying_ anything.
Apple shouldn't care because it will encourage Pre owners to buy from the iTunes store. Now they have got rid of the stupid DRM it will be a good thing for apple.
Why not?
Blackberries can sync with iTunes, as can almost any device with a PC or Mac software wedge between it and iTunes.
Just as with Microsoft and Exchange, it's to Apple's huge advantage for others to adopt iTunes as their standard.
More to the point, if Apple didn't want to allow it, I think they'd have stopped Palm already.
I do no think apple will do anything about it. Their hands are tied in the matter.
If they block the palm which is doing things a lot like other phones (black berry) and other media players already apple risk pissing off everyone else they already allow.
Media wise apple block the pre is bad press when they allow a lot of other hardware to sync with iTunes. this could easily hurt future sells of the iPod. People are goign to get the Pre. Bad syncing with it the same people will move over to microsoft WMP which will have ZERO trouble allowing it. Those same people adjust and get used to using WMP library system and means they will not buy an iPod later one. (I would like to point out WMP library is very well done. Not as nice as iTunes but still among the better ones out there.)
Microsoft could just cut apple off from exchange support in the same manner.
There are quite a few inaccuracies in this post. First of all, the Blackberry syncs with iTunes using, wait for it, software they wrote to do the syncing
http://na.blackberry.com/eng/services/media/mediasync.jsp
So this isn't comparable. The only devices aside from an iPod that can sync are devices that were created before the iPod. In other words, ancient MP3 players. This has been covered multiple times in this thread.
And people don't buy the iPod because of iTunes. They use iTunes because they bought an iPod. Most people don't even sync that often. Once they load their favorite songs onto their iPod they tend to listen to those for a long time before they change them or add more. Remember that most iPods hold more than 1000 songs. A lot of people don't even have that many in their library. And those that do tend to be power users who wouldn't have a problem switching back and forth between different software.
The bottom line is that people buy the iPod because the iPod software and hardware are nicely designed. That is what they are interacting with on a daily basis. They aren't going to buy a non-iPod device because Apple caused the Pre to no longer be able to sync with iTunes. That is just about ridiculous.
No because Apple is paying a licensing or agreement fee to have Exchange support.
As far as we know Palm is just hacking their way into iTunes.
That would include an assumption that the Pre would have be a popular product that would replace the iPhone... Somehow I don't see that coming; maybe it's just me.
In a few days one of the first Pre's will be at apple HQ and they will be begin preparing their case.
Only a matter of time before teh fun begins.
Only a matter of time before teh fun begins.
I've never seen forum meembers so giddy to see a corporate lawsuit as if you'll no anything tha goes on in said courtroom.
Btw, Palm holds many patents that Apple infringed on themselves.
Now, cross lawsuits....thats where the "fun" begins.
Exactly. If Palm didn't sue to protect those patents, then they've already conceded them to Apple.
I hope Apple don't allow this.
Why is everybody so upset? More options is better for consumers. Interoperability is the goal.
Also, I'm pretty sure (obligatory IANAL) that reverse engineering is allowed to make products compatible. Palm isn't giving away any IP here... seems legit to me.
Of course, Apple can probably break compatibility pretty easily. I hope they don't do that, however. It would be childish. They should invite competition. Competition makes everybody better, even
.
Why is everybody so upset? More options is better for consumers. Interoperability is the goal.
Also, I'm pretty sure (obligatory IANAL) that reverse engineering is allowed to make products compatible. Palm isn't giving away any IP here... seems legit to me.
Of course, Apple can probably break compatibility pretty easily. I hope they don't do that, however. It would be childish. They should invite competition. Competition makes everybody better, even
One crux of the argument seems to be whether this steals revenue from Apple, because the iTunes is a loss leader for hardware sales.
1) I'm not sure that it matters, ethically speaking. If Apple chooses a business model where one line of business subsidizes another, I think they are opening themselves up to somebody impinging on their high-margin business.
2) The assumption that iTunes is a loss leader is mistaken, I believe. Take a look at Apple's latest 10Q.
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9MzA4OHxDaGlsZElEPS0xfFR5cGU9Mw==&t=1
Take a look at page 29. Net sales in the category "Other music related products and services (d)" is about $1.7bn. Now, that money is divided between iPod services and 3rd party licensing fees, but my intuition is that the iTunes store is probably slightly profitable or revenue neutral -- but definitely not losing money.
Non-programmers probably will blow this out of proportion. Repeating some other vendor's USB vendor ID may violate some USB standard or (even some FCC standard -- I have no idea), but it definitely isn't copyright infringement, or IP infringement.
To me (as a programmer) it isn't any different than spoofing an IP address (which means you modify the IP packet header -- very common, in fact, required for some legitimate applications, like NAT) or setting your browser's User Agent to "MSIE/6" so that you can use your bank's website (which is simply modifying an HTTP header). Neither of these is illegal.
The fact alone that it displays an image of an iPod when syncing to iTunes is using the likeness and image of a product. The image of the iPod is owned by Apple. They have threatened lawsuit before when others have used that image or any word that has slightly resembles the word "iPod" which Apple also owns and which the Pre also displays when syncing.
But that's Apple's software that's doing that; it's not Palm that's displaying that information.
Why is everybody so upset? More options is better for consumers. Interoperability is the goal.
Also, I'm pretty sure (obligatory IANAL) that reverse engineering is allowed to make products compatible. Palm isn't giving away any IP here... seems legit to me.
Of course, Apple can probably break compatibility pretty easily. I hope they don't do that, however. It would be childish. They should invite competition. Competition makes everybody better, even
I love how so many people in this thread have it in their heads that competition equals Palm using Apple's money and engineering to compete against them.
Competition is good, but it needs to be legitimate competition. I'm glad that Palm released the Pre because I think that good phones with good features will push Apple to improve the iPhone. The problem here is that Palm is riding on the back of Apple's hard work with iTunes in order to compete with them. That is patently unfair and the fact that you would think it is childish of Apple to protect their hard work is the most second most ridiculous statement I've read yet in this forum.
That is a bizarre way of looking at the situation. Seriously.