Palm Releases WebOS 1.1, Restores iTunes Media Syncing

[cloudblood84]

Apparently what they are is no longer a shell of what they were. If pal is as an innovative of a copamy as I remember, then they wouldn't need to resort to these cheep shots to get sync working.

And people do buy the pre thinking that it will work with iTunes. Palm advertises it as a feature!

so because a company advertises one of their features, it CLEARLY means they are banking on it?

me wanting the pre (im sure many others) had more to do with sprint never coming out with new phones, and that lovely multitasking feature

(I have an ipod touch and hate to close out last.fm everytime i want to do something else)

but, OMG it cant sync my music that i already have on my ipod... this is clearly the end of the world

again. why would a company bank on this ONE feature. this ONE feature is not going to make them, it surely wont break them.

 

[pdjudd]

if thats your thought process no one should jailbreak their phones either because a new software update will come out and then you will have to find another solution all over again

1) Apple does not advertise jailbreaking and in fact they have condemned it.
2) Said jailbreaking has to be done by individuals who know what they are going into because they have to engage in that activity. THey know Apple doesn;t endorse this.
3) Palm is advertising iTunes syncing when they know that it isn't officially supported. This is different. The jailbreakers are pure individuals and not being sold a product by a company.

I for one think Apple should be endorsing the idea of the ability to sync with non apple devices.. sure they lose out on some hardware sales but the gains in music purchases etc should out weigh the losses

For the umpteenth time, the vast majority of all monies from iTunes sales go to the studios and to pay the expenses of running the store. They make far more money selling hardware than they probably ever make up from selling more tracks. For Apple, music sales don't mean much for them. Its just a way to sell their products. Thats because the record studios could care less where you buy the music.

 

[pdjudd]

so because a company advertises one of their features, it CLEARLY means they are banking on it?

No, it means they are advertising its feature. Banking on it? Maybe a bit.

me wanting the pre (im sure many others) had more to do with sprint never coming out with new phones, and that lovely multitasking feature

Good!

(I have an ipod touch and hate to close out last.fm everytime i want to do something else)

Good!

but, OMG it cant sync my music that i already have on my ipod... this is clearly the end of the world

Yes you can! There are products out there! Several of them in fact!

again. why would a company bank on this ONE feature. this ONE feature is not going to make them, it surely wont break them.

I never said they were banking on this one feature. They are banking on a successful product. This is another of the more public thing they are banking on. Its not a big loss if they loose this, but Palm is hoping they can manipulate the public without them thinking about what is really going on.

 

[rumz]

I just thought I'd throw my 2 cents in here.

A lot of people compare how Palm is syncing with iTunes to how other vendors such as RIM are doing it (via some third party interface).

I repeatedly hear people whining about how Palm is "lazy" and should "write their own media software instead of piggy-backing off iTunes".

These people quite simply are oblivious to / ignorant of the paradigm of the Pre. They're stuck in an old paradigm. (This is the same old paradigm that people live in who want palm desktop sync, etc.-- it's not bad or wrong to prefer that method of working, it's just not paradigm the Pre was designed for.)

Palm's goal is not to reinvent the wheel with regards to applications that people are already using and familiar with, but create a device that can integrate as seamlessly as possible into the systems they're already using. Gmail, Facebook, Exchange. ITUNES. It only makes sense that Palm would try to offer iTunes integration, because they know how many people already use iTunes to manage their music. It's not a function of laziness. It's a function of user experience being the priority. Apple users should understand this-- this is why I started using Macs and iPods in the first pace, the user experience was excellent.

Who wants to use Palm software to manage their music when they've already got an extensive library managed by another app? Do you know what a pain that is? Who wants to use TWO libraries if they still have an iPod they want to use? (This never worked for me-- there was a time when I owned both an iPod and a Sony mp3 player, and Sony's software was just crap, look where they are in the portable music market now.)

Seems like a given that iPod users will continue to use their iPods and therefore continue to keep iTunes around anyway, this saves a lot of headache to not duplicate the function of music management software and worry about maintaining separate libraries.

How elegant would a 3rd party interface to access iTunes be? Not nearly as transparent and elegant as the current solution, even if some people prefer something different like DoubleTwist. Palm's goal here is not to try to rip off Apple or anyone else, the goal is to create the a fore mentioned seamless integration with users' current systems.

Now, here's my other thought. As I mentioned earlier, people always point out that other vendors have interfaces for "syncing with iTunes". I submit that the only difference between Palm's solution and others' is how we think about them. In essence they all use some form of software to accomplish the task of leveraging a user's iTunes library. It's just that the software used to get the Pre to sync with iTunes is not installed on your desktop computer, but rather on the Pre itself. The Pre doesn't by default show up as an iPod device, you flip a switch or activate some software, so to speak, to get it to talk to iTunes. Much more elegant than having to install some software on your computer.

Self-righteous Apple fan-boys can complain all they want about how iTunes is designed to help sell iPods (that the ITMS is not really profitable but just helps sell iPods that are, blah blah blah) and that what Palm is doing is shady, but I submit that a) it's not fundamentally different than what anyone else is doing that Apple is *not* trying to break (a la third party interfaces installed on the PC) as far as enabling other devices to leverage iTunes, and b) there has never been any stipulation that only iPod owners / users could use iTunes. It's been available for anyone to use to organize their music regardless of what portable devices they may own (or they may own none at all) and regardless of whether or not they own a Mac. (Here's a wild idea-- what if how well the Pre plays nice with a Mac actually supports the ultimate goal of selling more Macs?). Yes, the iPhone and the Pre are competitors of a sort, but Apple needs to win this game by selling a better phone, not by being a bully about software that existed long before iPhones did.

Apple will continue to dominate the portable media player market, and iTunes will continue to support that endeavor. But we don't all want iPhones or AT&T (in the U.S., anyhow), so it's nice that we can still use our iPods and our phone of choice with the same music library.

I think it may be a bit late for Apple to backpedal on just how proprietary and exclusive they want their music system to be.

Also, Apple does *not* have a monopoly on the quality of user experience-- it's clearly the overall experience that Palm is selling, not a collection of features.

 

[iphones4evry1]

iTunes is multimedia jukebox software. iTunes Music Store is a store. They are not one in the same.
Lethal

"iTunes Music Store is a store"

So then by that definition, if they block certain members of the American population, then they are discriminating, right? Only, sort of. ANYONE can download iTunes onto their computer, and ANYONE can purchase music onto their iTunes. BUT, not everyone can transfer music from their iTunes onto their portable music device. This could be a problem. "We bought music but now they are telling us how we can and can't use it" could be a complaint in court. I think Apple is better keeping iTunes under one definition and not two.

 

[iphones4evry1]

thinking it's about time for apple to just buy palm and get it over with-

Rim (Blackberry) would show up at court and cry "antitrust violation." They might not win, but they sure will try to block it. Palm is a very good thing for Rim. It keeps iPhone one more degree away from dominating the world.

 

[pika2000]

Hmm, after thinking about it, let's turn this into a MacRumor.

I have to think Rubinstein is not this stupid. He probably knows things don't bode well for Palm (limited first launch with CDMA Sprint, not shipping GSM versions worldwide fast enough, add on to that the flurry of Android based phones on the horizon). I think Rubinstein wants Apple to buy Palm. He probably showed Apple "Hey, here's a cool way to do multi-tasking, and to expand on Apple's original idea of "web apps," so do you want to buy us?", and Apple said "hmm, maybe next time." Palm is getting desperate, and now they're playing this "Apple, we're going to annoy you every single day until you buy us."

I mean think about it. Apple is unlikely to come up with a CDMA based phones from scratch. However, there were rumors that Verizon is getting an "Apple phone" although it may not be an "iPhone." Guess what, next year the Pre won't be Sprint exclusive any longer. It would be easier for Apple to "release" a CDMA phone based on an existing product than re-engineering the iPhone. For all we know, it could be just Rubinstein bickering with Tim Cook/Jobs about the price of Palm behind closed doors, and all these publicity stunts are done to annoy Apple and for them to quickly buy Palm before its value erodes.

So yeah, how's that for a MacRumor huh?

 

[iphones4evry1]

Hmm, after thinking about it, let's turn this into a MacRumor.

I have to think Rubinstein is not this stupid. He probably knows things don't bode well for Palm (limited first launch with CDMA Sprint, not shipping GSM versions worldwide fast enough, add on to that the flurry of Android based phones on the horizon). I think Rubinstein wants Apple to buy Palm. He probably showed Apple "Hey, here's a cool way to do multi-tasking, and to expand on Apple's original idea of "web apps," so do you want to buy us?", and Apple said "hmm, maybe next time." Palm is getting desperate, and now they're playing this "Apple, we're going to annoy you every single day until you buy us."

I mean think about it. Apple is unlikely to come up with a CDMA based phones from scratch. However, there were rumors that Verizon is getting an "Apple phone" although it may not be an "iPhone." Guess what, next year the Pre won't be Sprint exclusive any longer. It would be easier for Apple to "release" a CDMA phone based on an existing product than re-engineering the iPhone. For all we know, it could be just Rubinstein bickering with Tim Cook/Jobs about the price of Palm behind closed doors, and all these publicity stunts are done to annoy Apple and for them to quickly buy Palm before its value erodes.

So yeah, how's that for a MacRumor huh?

I see your logic. Palm is the only one knocking at iTunes door. All Apple has to do is make Palm disapper, and then iTunes will be free to dominate the world again. But then again, maybe Apple is better that Palm will go away on it's own (bankrupt). But I wouldn't count on it. I think they are making enough sales to at least survive.

 

[killmoms]

Palm's goal is not to reinvent the wheel with regards to applications that people are already using and familiar with, but create a device that can integrate as seamlessly as possible into the systems they're already using. Gmail, Facebook, Exchange. ITUNES. It only makes sense that Palm would try to offer iTunes integration, because they know how many people already use iTunes to manage their music. It's not a function of laziness. It's a function of user experience being the priority.

Which is nice, except that Gmail, Facebook and Exchange all have public, existing methods by which they may be accessed by third parties. iTunes does not provide its two-way sync abilities publicly. They are for use by Apple's devices, and Apple is totally within their rights to create a vertically integrated system—there is nothing illegal about that.

Who wants to use Palm software to manage their music when they've already got an extensive library managed by another app? Do you know what a pain that is? Who wants to use TWO libraries if they still have an iPod they want to use?

You don't need two libraries—Palm could easily provide access to music and playlists in the iTunes Library via the iTunes XML file. This is how Apple's own iLife apps access the content of the library, and how Blackberry phones "sync" with iTunes. The XML file IS the "third-party" option. Palm doesn't need to write a "music management" program, they just need to write a small syncing program which provides sync access to the iTunes XML file and any other items they'd like.

Palm's goal here is not to try to rip off Apple or anyone else, the goal is to create the a fore mentioned seamless integration with users' current systems.

That's a fine goal, but they're not within their rights to infringe on the intellectual property of others to do so.

The Pre doesn't by default show up as an iPod device, you flip a switch or activate some software, so to speak, to get it to talk to iTunes. Much more elegant than having to install some software on your computer.

Also much more "breach of contract" (on Palm's part).

a) it's not fundamentally different than what anyone else is doing that Apple is *not* trying to break (a la third party interfaces installed on the PC) as far as enabling other devices to leverage iTunes

Sure it is. Palm is spoofing Apple's USB vendor and product IDs in order to piggyback on Apple's software, instead of using the pre-existing "interface" for easily "syncing" from a user's iTunes Library (the iTunes XML file).

b) there has never been any stipulation that only iPod owners / users could use iTunes. It's been available for anyone to use to organize their music regardless of what portable devices they may own (or they may own none at all) and regardless of whether or not they own a Mac.

You're free to use iTunes even if you don't have an iPod. But you're not free to masquerade as an Apple device to take advantage of non-public capabilities that the software provides.

But we don't all want iPhones or AT&T (in the U.S., anyhow), so it's nice that we can still use our iPods and our phone of choice with the same music library.

You could easily do that without Palm's ugly hack. Direct sync within iTunes is not provided for by Apple to anyone else, and they are under no obligation to do so. Just because you'd like something to be a certain way doesn't mean that it's illegal (or even unethical) for it to be otherwise.

 

[objc]

First you are dumb, Apple communicates with PC's using supported methods (Samba to which you link)

If you'd read the link, you'd know Samba was a completely UNSUPPORTED way of connecting to Windows before 2008. Do you even know what Samba is or how it's been developed for most of its life? Have you ever looked at the code for smbclient or libsmb? Microsoft didn't publish the protocol at all. The Samba team reverse engineered the protocol (and did a great job, BTW). I'd go through how this is exactly the same thing Apple's doing with Palm, respectively, but your mind would block it out, since in this case Apple is the one trying to keep others from inter-operating with their software instead of Microsoft.

Oh, and you called me dumb. Thanks.

 

[twoodcc]

come on apple, don't let them get away with this

 

[parapup]

If you'd read the link, you'd know Samba was a completely UNSUPPORTED way of connecting to Windows before 2008. Do you even know what Samba is or how it's been developed for most of its life? Have you ever looked at the code for smbclient or libsmb? Microsoft didn't publish the protocol at all. The Samba team reverse engineered the protocol (and did a great job, BTW)

Posts like the above give me the courage to come back and read MR.

That's exactly right - if Microsoft would have made it a point to break the protocol just to block Samba they would have looked as stupid and evil as Apple is with the Pre fiasco. The huge pressure on Microsoft to behave fairly and the lawsuits in US/EU resulted in Microsoft opening up most all of their protocols - today they even test Windows against Samba for interoperability! That is good corporate citizenship.

Some people do not learn from history - I am sure many more monopolies will be created, ill effects of it endured, and money/efforts spent to curb their bad-boy behavior - ad infinitum.

 

[GamecockMac]

Posts like the above give me the courage to come back and read MR.

That's exactly right - if Microsoft would have made it a point to break the protocol just to block Samba they would have looked as stupid and evil as Apple is with the Pre fiasco. The huge pressure on Microsoft to behave fairly and the lawsuits in US/EU resulted in Microsoft opening up most all of their protocols - today they even test Windows against Samba for interoperability! That is good corporate citizenship.

Some people do not learn from history - I am sure many more monopolies will be created, ill effects of it endured, and money/efforts spent to curb their bad-boy behavior - ad infinitum.

Posts like the above make me more certain that intelligent reasoning is truly a dying art.

I love how shills on this topic constantly toss around terms like "monopoly" and "evil" to describe the actions of a corporation well within its rights in protecting their business model, simply because these whiners "want" things to be a certain way that suits them. I hope Apple continues to fight back against unprofessional and lazy practices such as the ones Palm is utilizing in their desperate attempt to be relevant in the exploding smartphone market. Other companies like RIM and Nokia apparently have the ability to play nice with Apple, so why should Palm be different?

 

[windywoo]

Posts like the above make me more certain that intelligent reasoning is truly a dying art.

I love how shills on this topic constantly toss around terms like "monopoly" and "evil" to describe the actions of a corporation well within its rights in protecting their business model, simply because these whiners "want" things to be a certain way that suits them. I hope Apple continues to fight back against unprofessional and lazy practices such as the ones Palm is utilizing in their desperate attempt to be relevant in the exploding smartphone market. Other companies like RIM and Nokia apparently have the ability to play nice with Apple, so why should Palm be different?

Posts like yours show what double standards Apple fans have for Apple when compared to any other company.

 

[GamecockMac]

Posts like yours show what double standards Apple fans have for Apple when compared to any other company.

I guess financial analyst Shaw Wu is just an "Apple fan" with "double standards" as well then, because he had this to say about Palm's business practices today:

"While we acknowledge this is a short-term fix, frankly, we would have preferred Palm respond in a more professional and mature fashion," he wrote in a research note. "We do not believe hacking third-party software to work with one's hardware is a viable long-term business model, especially for a publicly traded company."

Those Apple fanboys...what excuses won't they make, huh?

 

[parapup]

Posts like the above make me more certain that intelligent reasoning is truly a dying art.

You had to write that sentence and follow it up with a reassuring proof below to prove to the world that intelligent reasoning is in fact a dying art - prior to that there was hope

 

[Goona]

I guess that analyst is an Apple fanboy.

 

[ddTaylor]

1) It doesn't matter what Apple charges for their music, most of it goes to the record companies. Apple is not going to suddenly make more money selling iTunes music. The reason? Other companies sell music. If Apple charges too much, they will flock to other venues like Amazon. Much of the activity that occurs in the music store portion is controlled by the music companies - the last thing they want is to have Apple control a market they want to own.

2) One of the most expensive and time consuming portions of support comes with third parties. If you suddenly think that the players are going to work at ensuring iTunes support, you are wrong - Not only would Apple have to test these things out every single time something changed, the public would demand that Apple essentially support other players by association with Apple. That is what competitors would love - reduced support costs. But Apple would hate it. Apple knows that they cannot rely on sales of music to support other players - eventually one would dominate the other.

Do you NOT understand that Apple ALLOWS for OTHER MP3 players to SYNC to iTunes and has since it was released many years ago! Apple was supposed to release many more $.69 songs but they disappeared - I wonder why?

Why then does Apple not go after people that sell third-party sync applications that use OTHER methods than the output file from iTunes?

I would have agreed with you but iTunes STILL allows for third-party players to sync with 'Tunes since it was released - so why complain now?

D

 

[Goona]

Do you NOT understand that Apple ALLOWS for OTHER MP3 players to SYNC to iTunes and has since it was released many years ago! Apple was supposed to release many more $.69 songs but they disappeared - I wonder why?

Why then does Apple not go after people that sell third-party sync applications that use OTHER methods than the output file from iTunes?

I would have agreed with you but iTunes STILL allows for third-party players to sync with 'Tunes since it was released - so why complain now?

D

How many of those MP3 players are still being manufactured or in use?

 

[charlituna]

* The market in question here is digital downloads.

i think you will find that if the issue is tested in court, downloads will not be part of it. digital media players will be the issue and the market

 

[ddTaylor]

How many of those MP3 players are still being manufactured or in use?

How is that relevant? The iRiver and Creative players are still made and STILL SUPPORTED! The point is that in EVERY iTunes update those players are still supported for syncing. If Apple really did not want any non-iPod devices to sync with iTunes why support any BUY Apple? They support a LIST of 3rd party devices and have for many, many years.

That is the real issues - not Palm and the PRE.

D

 

[GamecockMac]

You had to write that sentence and follow it up with a reassuring proof below to prove to the world that intelligent reasoning is in fact a dying art - prior to that there was hope

Took you 21 minutes (time between original post and edit) to hone that troll to perfection, huh?

Thanks for proving my point.

 

[GamecockMac]

How is that relevant? The iRiver and Creative players are still made and STILL SUPPORTED! The point is that in EVERY iTunes update those players are still supported for syncing. If Apple really did not want any non-iPod devices to sync with iTunes why support any BUY Apple? They support a LIST of 3rd party devices and have for many, many years.

That is the real issues - not Palm and the PRE.

D

Because those players have a license agreement with Apple and are grandfathered in.

Learn to read a licensing agreement and understand what one is.

 

[parapup]

Took you 21 minutes (time between original post and edit) to hone that troll to perfection, huh?

Talk about apt response - you took time to actually see the time between my post and edit to turn around the troll on me?

Any way I am willing to heartily follow -

 

[Etnies419]

Apple was supposed to release many more $.69 songs but they disappeared - I wonder why?

Don't blame Apple for that, blame the record companies. They're the ones who took advantage of the different price tiers.