I think they are working on it. But seriously, why? If they can keep playing with Apple for now...
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 Releases WebOS 1.1, Restores iTunes Media Syncing
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think they are working on it. But seriously, why? If they can keep playing with Apple for now...
So what would be more expensive/time consuming.....Writing soft for disabling the Palm or enabling it?
Snow Leopard might put paid to this for good,seeing as Apple have time to eradicate the Palm in the code that is.If its possible to do so without the cat and mouse carry on that is.
Snow Leopard might put paid to this for good,seeing as Apple have time to eradicate the Palm in the code that is.If its possible to do so without the cat and mouse carry on that is.
I was more thinking along the Star Trek lines of a reverse tachyon pulse back to the pre via the USB cable. But bricking works
While I love my Mac and I think the iphone is quite sweet, I am disappointed that Apple would be so petty here. Apple and AT&T decided to lay in bed together, but we as consumers shouldn't be subject to their 'love-making.'
The only reason I do not have an iphone is because of AT&T. There is little argument that the service is substandard and expensive versus other carriers.
MS would never get away with the exact same actions with the Zune. The issue is about consumer choice...how could anyone fight in favor of big business to corral us around like cattle?
How many of you would ditch AT&T if you could? honestly? What precedent does this set going forward?
I love my Pre AND my Mac...
The only reason I do not have an iphone is because of AT&T. There is little argument that the service is substandard and expensive versus other carriers.
MS would never get away with the exact same actions with the Zune. The issue is about consumer choice...how could anyone fight in favor of big business to corral us around like cattle?
How many of you would ditch AT&T if you could? honestly? What precedent does this set going forward?
I love my Pre AND my Mac...
I actually think this is quite entertaining. With Apple fights, it always seems to turn into a David vs Goliath story (Apple vs Psystar, Apple's lawyers trying to block that reporters access to public information about iPods catching fire, etc). I can't help but have respect for Palm sticking up to Apple's bullying tactics, which most cannot do.
And whose words were the "one more thing..." from the article? It would be funny if Palm actually used those words.
IP or not (it's actually debateable), let's all unbunch our Fanboy panties. This can only be good for the consumer.
And whose words were the "one more thing..." from the article? It would be funny if Palm actually used those words.
IP or not (it's actually debateable), let's all unbunch our Fanboy panties. This can only be good for the consumer.
And in a serious DOJ investigation, Apple must think it would lose. That's the only reason I can think of as to why they haven't pursued any direct legal actions against Palm.
Apple should just get over itself and bathe in the cash it's earned from iTunes and the iPhone - and just leave Palm alone. After all, the Palm Pre isn't really viable competition. Isn't that right, shills?
While I use and love my Macbook Pro, I am neutral person that sometimes leans more towards anti-apple.
I don't know what palm is trying to pull here. This in no way helps the users: One day they can sync their music, then all of a sudden they wont be able to sync for another week or two... Its ridiculous.
I think that palm should just buy/acquire/write a piece of software that syncs the Pre with iTunes they way all non-apple devices do, by using the XML data.
And for all those conspiracy theorists out there, apple wouldn't lose a lawsuit over something like this. Their iTunes store now sells DRM-free music, and they give everyone a PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE way of syncing their itunes stuff with their given devices. I don't know why anyone is under the impression that apple should allow an outside to device to exist peacefully in their ecosystem.
I don't know what palm is trying to pull here. This in no way helps the users: One day they can sync their music, then all of a sudden they wont be able to sync for another week or two... Its ridiculous.
I think that palm should just buy/acquire/write a piece of software that syncs the Pre with iTunes they way all non-apple devices do, by using the XML data.
And for all those conspiracy theorists out there, apple wouldn't lose a lawsuit over something like this. Their iTunes store now sells DRM-free music, and they give everyone a PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE way of syncing their itunes stuff with their given devices. I don't know why anyone is under the impression that apple should allow an outside to device to exist peacefully in their ecosystem.
Why do you enjoy and defend Apple's attitude? If same thing had been done by MS you would be screaming Big devil MS. You always talk about open platform , standards, cross platform etc but then applause Apple for this ridiculous behavior.
Yes, it almost seems Apple is punishing their own customers with flap. I don't want to catch in the middle of this cock fight.
I guess you have not invented/produced a product where somebody took advantage of years of your hard work without compensating you (or at least asking for your permission)...
So therefore he can't comment? And if that's the criteria you set down for having an opinion, I'd wager nor can you.
Here is what going to happen, as I see it. The only way I see apple being able to prevent this, is to update all their iPod's firmware. If they update all their iPod's firmware with some time of authication method via the serial number and then update iTunes to authicate with this, it will be impossible to beat. I am sure they already have a full database with all the manufactured iPod's serial numbers available (for warranty purposes). The cost to do this would be great so it depends on how far apple would be willing to go. Plus which would be cheaper? Hiring a team of lawyers to fight in court for the next few years and continue to go back and forth with Palm in the mean time? Or start developing this type of "authication" then do a mass update? Considering Apple has plenty of cash reserves and no debt, both of these could be very possible.
Personaly, palm needs to stop this madness and just partner with Microsoft or some other music service such as amazon. The other thing is all music on iTunes is DRM free now anyways, so why not just develope a program that can read itunes playlists, and you are done? Maybe it is a bit more complicated than that, but if I was palm, I wouldn't be wasting my time on this unless they just see it as advertisment.
Personaly, palm needs to stop this madness and just partner with Microsoft or some other music service such as amazon. The other thing is all music on iTunes is DRM free now anyways, so why not just develope a program that can read itunes playlists, and you are done? Maybe it is a bit more complicated than that, but if I was palm, I wouldn't be wasting my time on this unless they just see it as advertisment.
Quite entertaining. I think this is a smart move from Palm. They get a lot of free PR for this, basically getting their name in the news every time iTunes gets updated, and then again when they publish a new workaround. They also get to portray themselves as an underdog, a rebel, fighting against the all-might Apple (and Apple is quite allmighty in both smart phones and music software).
I love my iPhone and Mac, but I'm cheering for Palm.
I love my iPhone and Mac, but I'm cheering for Palm.
I won't drop my ATT for anything. I have had Verizon, I have had Nextel, I have had Sprint....they are all dogs. I've never had service issues with ATT.
Not saying that some people aren't having issues, but I think they are a minority, a loud one, but still a minority.
Why are a few of the cocks on here asking for Apple to brick phones?
Do you really think people buy the pre with the intention of illegally syncing iTunes with their pre?
Its not the Pre owners fault that Palm have taken this approach and none of them deserve to lose their handset over this pathetic issue.
Do you really think people buy the pre with the intention of illegally syncing iTunes with their pre?
Its not the Pre owners fault that Palm have taken this approach and none of them deserve to lose their handset over this pathetic issue.
Bullying tactics? Hardly. What is so hard to understand about the fact that Apple creates hardware, in this case iPods, iPhones, Apple TVs, Macs, etc ... and then create a software solution for said hardware? Apple works long and hard to improve the software so that those who buy their hardware have a good experience using their hardware. After all, Apple writes software to sell hardware. Palm couldn't be bothered to write their own software solution so they intentionally misrepresent their hardware to be that of an Apple product to weasel into Apple's software solution. That is weak sauce.
iTunes on Macs can be seen as part of the OS (or part of the software package you get when you buy a Mac). Thus Apple is getting money for it.
iTunes on Windows did appear some time after iPods came out. iTunes on Windows was solely created to serve as synching and companion device for iPods (and as a bait to potential iPod buyers).
If you distribute a program for free, shouldn't you be able to define what it can do and what it cannot do? You can stop distributing it whenever you want. And that is what Apple did with iTunes 8.2.0, they stopped distributing it and offered iTunes 8.2.1 instead.
What people choose to ignore (or choose to preferably not find out), is that iTunes only supported third-party players before the the iPod came out. They did not stop supporting those third-party players they had once supported officially after the iPod came out, but they stopped adding new third-party players to that list.
Well, the Pre owners could use some third-party software to do they syncing instead of using iTunes.Why are a few of the cocks on here asking for Apple to brick phones?
Do you really think people buy the pre with the intention of illegally syncing iTunes with their pre?
Its not the Pre owners fault that Palm have taken this approach and none of them deserve to lose their handset over this pathetic issue.
I was more thinking along the Star Trek lines of a reverse tachyon pulse back to the pre via the USB cable. But bricking works
LOVE IT!! Never thought about a Tachyon Pulse. If I'm not mistaken the user would need to be on USB 2.0. My understanding is however, if your on USB 1.1 you are limited to sending Thalaron radiation. This would be my 1st choice anyhow, as it would infect only the technology copied from their days at Apple. The few other lines of code would be left uninfected.
Seriously, let's give it 8-9 months. My prediction is that the Pre is SO cheaply built that any positives will be offset.
I used to respect Palm. Too bad they can no longer be something without taking something from someone else.
I very seriously doubt that Apple would want to release an update for my iPod from 2001... and the best part is, if Palm were to then start using serial numbers in the same format that Apple uses them, then once again Palm would win.
Well If I were Apple and were feeling a bit litigious I would go after palm for using the trademarks related to the iPod and iTunes without permission. I don;t know how successful I would be, but that is a possibility. My guess is that Apple is holding off until they can show that Palm is being flagrant in their approach. THe only other thing Palm could be dinged for is their implementation of identifiers that are related to the iPod, but that might not be something that can be litigated by Apple. The USB implementers might go after Palm for breach of license, but thats it.
Apple should just get over itself and bathe in the cash it's earned from iTunes and the iPhone - and just leave Palm alone. After all, the Palm Pre isn't really viable competition. Isn't that right, shills?
Well that may not be the point. Thats why I mention trademarks related to the iPod and iTunes - Apple doesn't want to risk those trademarks being diluted. It's a possibility at least.