I'm putting this at the top of the message since it bears argument with a LOT of the posts on here that keep saying that Palm should simply make its own synchronization software to work with existing iTunes libraries. Sorry, but Apple would fight that too. See this:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090427/1917274671.shtml
Apple does NOT want users to be able to use their music libraries with other programs PERIOD. They want users to buy their hardware and ONLY use it with iTunes (that link talks about Linux users wanting to use the iTunes alternative "Songbird" to sync to an iPod, which is the reverse of the Palm situation and Apple attempted to have them shut down under first DMCA and then copyright claims, neither of which actually apply to that situation but it shows you the extent they will go to and the fact that they do not want other companies reading the iTunes XML database files for ANY reason). And yet I'm constantly told that Apple isn't trying to stop competition and that Palm is just lazy.
Can I use BMW car parts in my Mercedes? - No
Do Sony PS3 games play on my X-Box? - No
Do Canon printer cartridges fir my HP printer? - No
Your comparisons are completely misguided. Apple provides an OPERATING SYSTEM. 3rd party companies are SUPPOSED to be able to utilize that operating system. A better comparison would be whether Ford tries to block Alipine from making stereos that are installed into Ford vehicles! Apple blocks anyone from using something whenever they think it will financially benefit them. That even applies to the Apple Store itself. If Apple comes out with a competing software package suddenly the software they carried before goes missing.
Apple are NOT blocking competition.
Palm can make a phone and software both of which can be installed on a Mac or Windows and work, no competition is being harmed.
You just don't get it. Some of us use iTunes to organize our entire media library. What does iTunes have to do with phones? That's something Apple chose to ADD to a media player program designed originally for their operating system. What you are suggesting is that it would be OK if Apple blocked 3rd party hardware makers from being able to access Safari or the Finder or Spotlight, etc. Or that it would be OK if Apple decided to block Safari from being able to view Palm's web site. The question here is whether Apple is an operating system vendor with responsibilities to serve the entire Mac community or whether it's just a phone or walkman vendor like Sony with propriety software that can and should only function with their own products. Clearly, the answer is that Apple dabbles in MULTIPLE MARKETS and that's what gets them into trouble for it is when and ONLY when a company purposely makes licenses and such to impede competition using that one market to leverage the other market that they have broken the tying provision of the Clayton Anti-Trust Law.
The WHOLE POINT of that law is to ensure that the consumer has free choices and are not blackmailed somehow into buying another product. Apple has provided me with iTunes media software WITH my Macintosh computer. But then it turns around and actively attempts to deny me to use that software with any external media hardware but Apple's hardware. This should come as little surprise since they do the same thing in the OS X license so that you are "encouraged" to buy ONLY Apple brand name hardware to use with the OS X operating system. That is without a doubt a violation of the tying provision of the Clayton Act. Hardware and Software are two different markets and Apple made a license that forces a consumer to buy ONLY their hardware to use with their retail operating system. This iPod syncing issue is simply a sub-set of that operating system that is set up to deny users from buying auxiliary hardware that is not from Apple. They have even gone so far as to put a special control chip in their newer iPod Shuffle to FORCE people to buy ONLY THEIR HEADPHONES to use with it (or someone that has paid them to license the use of such a chip) when all they had to do was put a female headphone jack at the end of a control wire to avoid the situation. They didn't do it that way because then anyone's headphones could be used with it. And you're telling me that Apple is not trying to actively BLOCK competition???? Bologna!
Palm just can't be bothered spending the time and money that Apple has done.
WTF should Palm have to recreate part of the Operating System just to synchronize music files in an existing user library? I had iTunes organize all my media long before I ever bought an iPod or an Apple TV. It is the premier media control software for Macintosh computers and it comes with the Operating System. Apple should therefore be providing a generic interface to all developers to do just that from the start. More to the point, why should I have to use another program to manage my music and video libraries just because Apple wants me to buy their hardware and therefore tries to deny me full use of the software they provided in the Operating System that came with my computer? The CHOICE should be MINE, not Apple's and not Palm's. That's the whole darn point of the Clayton Anti-Trust Act. The CHOICE should be up to the consumer and the BEST PRODUCT in that particular market (iTunes is not part of the phone hardware market) should win. If Apple wants me to buy an iPhone, then the iPhone should be the more attractive product. THAT is what should decide my choice, not Apple denying everyone else the right to synchronize (or even play) music or movies.
Keep in mind that you CANNOT play iTunes Store purchased movies (and older encrypted music) on 3rd party hardware PERIOD, even IF that hardware provides its own interface and media player and synchronization software. And that stems from Apple's REFUSAL to COOPERATE or LICENSE its encryption for use by other companies, once again SOLELY TO PREVENT COMPETITION. If Apple wants people like myself to stop pointing these things out, maybe they should try actually competing on their own merits instead of trying to sabotage all other companies from competing on a level playing field. They can start by removing that BS license from their OS X operating system that denies ANY AND ALL COMPETITION for OS X compatible hardware to all other vendors who might wish to install it on their hardware.
Some of you have it in your heads that people in the United States are allowed to do anything they want with their inventions/creations/software and seem to utterly clueless about the laws of this country that are designed to protect the market place and ensure that our economic system of Capitalism actually works. If you want to do commerce in this country, you have to follow the rules. Capitalism does not work when competition is sabotaged by companies that would rather try and cheat the consumer of his choice than compete with a better made product. What does Apple have to fear from Palm if its product is BETTER than Palm's product? NOTHING. The fact they are going out of their way to try and keep Palm from simply accessing the the user's music libraries for easy loading shows that they have NO FAITH in their own product to compete on an even playing field.
Apple have NOT broken the law, and you are a bigger idiot than I thought if you think they have.
The fact you have had to stoop to personal flames tells me your arguments have no merit, what-so-ever. The fact you don't comprehend the Clayton Ant-Trust Act when it spells out verbatim that a company cannot leverage one market against another in a way that purposely tries to defeat competition tells me you should do some more studying.
The theft here that you seem so willing to ignore, is the theft of all the work and money that Apple have spent developing iTunes to support its players, which Palm just steal to sell their own products.
Again, what was stolen? You cannot even tell spoofing an I.D. (something that Apple does themselves in their web browser) from theft. Apparently, you think when Apple spoofs that it's perfectly OK but when Palm does it, they've stolen Apple's property somehow. They have not TOUCHED iTunes ONE BIT so this idea that they've stolen something is completely and totally and utterly LUDICROUS.
Are you saying that there will never be a competitor to iTunes? Should one never be developed? Is that really what you want?
There are plenty of competitors to iTunes including Microsoft's Media Player, VLC and a large number based on the Linux platform. What do any of those have to do with my right to synchronize my existing library on a phone that I purchase? I'm using iTunes because I'm FORCED to in order to use my two Apple TV units. But then I'm expected to create all new libraries with some 3rd party product just to synchronize music to a non-Apple product? WTF should I have to do that when it's already organized in iTunes? So Apple can try and cheat me out of a choice to buy a potentially better music player or phone? That's a load of BS because iTunes was not created to service the iPhone. It was created to be the media player for OS X. Apple has no obligation to support Palm under the Clayton Act, but they are not allowed to purposely sabotage Palm in their Operating System either.
