Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

kwyn

macrumors regular
Jan 9, 2009
145
1
Not sure why everyone is defending Apple here :rolleyes:

Seriously though, if you bought music and own the rights to it, you should be allowed to put it on whatever f'in device you want...an iphone, ipod, mp3 player, cd, dvd, or a Palm Pre...

I prefer to put mine on an iphone, but I have no problem with people putting it on a Pre.

Seriously, let's not be complete fan boys here...
 

Maclver

macrumors 68030
Nov 23, 2008
2,645
1,962
New Mexico
If Apple was smart, they would start licensing iTunes compatibility now. Otherwise, eventually, they will get hit with an anti-trust suit, if not by the DOJ, by the EU/EC. At least this way they could make money, instead of losing a ton in court.

how can you say apple is violating antitrust laws....... by not letting Palm users sync with iTunes? its APPLES PROPERTY they can do as they please....
 

parapup

macrumors 65816
Oct 31, 2006
1,291
49
I am wondering how long it is going to take for a iTunes 8.2.2 update with a warning that all non-iPods pretending as iPods will be bricked? Wonder if they do that how many will think twice about buying Apple products again?

I've already stopped buying music over iTunes, I own a Pre and as much as I don't care using iTunes ( let alone to sync with the Pre ) - I think this is making Apple look extremely silly or evil - pick one.

Microsoft is starting to look a lot better - I just came to understand they opened up Exchange fully with standard Web Services (SOAP) protocol and any one can write a client in any language on any platform - no licensing required.
 

libertyforall

macrumors regular
Mar 28, 2006
186
0
Where is Pre DIRECT CONNECT?!?!

*IF* Palm & Sprint were smart, they would have put Nextel Direct Connect in the Pre from day 1! After all, the biggest blunder Sprint did in buying Nextel is NOT integrating Direct Connect across ALL their phones! What a MONUMENTAL missed opportunity!!! :eek:

Speaking of which, where is Apple's iPhone Direct Connect equivalent?! I am waiting Apple!
 

Stella

macrumors G3
Apr 21, 2003
8,835
6,331
Canada
Let the games begin!



I wonder if the iTunes EULA states that it must be used with apple-branded devices...if so, then all Pre users syncing to iTunes is in violation of the EULA....

EULA isn't legally enforceable in some countries... so what does it matter?
 

pdjudd

macrumors 601
Jun 19, 2007
4,037
65
Plymouth, MN
In a way, allowing devices from other manufacturers to sync to iTunes could be a smart market move for the iTunes store... no? Apple can't really stop other companies from offering competing products in the hardware market, so having them act as a gateway for luring more users towards iTunes could make Apple some extra dough...

Except iTunes is a break even or small profit center designed to sell Apple hardware. Opening up iTunes to other players (which won't be able to offer anything close to what the Apple players can offer) won't gain Apple any significant amount of sales. iTunes exists as a convenient front end to selling Apple made devices - not to be a central program that requires Apple to play good with multiple vendors each with different capabilities and requirements that can be obtained by using sync services and windows native services. Inevitably, maintaing computability ends up being a drain to Apple and for what? The ability to sell a few more songs? Thats all other players can get due to DRM requirements on video content. Invariably, enabling massive support is just going to be a resource drain on Apple that requires them to compromise their business to accommodate others.
 

str1f3

macrumors 68000
Aug 24, 2008
1,859
0
As a Pre owner I just don't care. The only time I used iTunes is when I owned an iPhone. Frankly, there are way better apps out there meant for syncing media. I know 5 people who use the Pre at work alone and none of them sync with iTunes. This really isn't that big of a deal.

On another note, Apple really needs to be careful how they handle this situation. It won't take much for the DOJ to look at Apple's iTunes/iPod as being a monopoly. They are by far the most dominate force in the multi-billion dollar industry that is online music. Considering the anti-business Democratic control in DC it will not take much. Obama's new appointee to the DOJ's antitrust division is already targeting Google as a possible monopoly, and they haven't really pulled anything "evil".

People are really overdoing this nonsense. This is not the same kind of situation as Microsoft. The ONLY reason Apple was ever considered approaching monopoly status with iTunes was Fairplay. DRM locked you into the iTunes. Since iTunes no longer offers DRM they are no longer considered a potential monopoly which is why you have seen a ton of lawsuits dropped against Apple regarding this.

iTunes is not an open source tool. This is a product made by a privately held company. They actually do have a choice of what they can do with their product. You can even find cheaper music on Amazon.

As for Palm, it is a childish move by a childish company. I've said it before and I'll say it again. The soon Palm goes bankrupt, the better off the industry will be.
 

shakenmartini

macrumors 6502
Apr 29, 2008
432
0
If Apple was smart, they would start licensing iTunes compatibility now. Otherwise, eventually, they will get hit with an anti-trust suit, if not by the DOJ, by the EU/EC.

I doubt it. iTunes is not a monopoly and now that DRM is gone you can drag and drop you music outside of iTunes and it plays just fine. Also iTunes allows direct competitors such as Amazon to directly import purchased MP3's into iTunes.

Unless you can educate me otherwise with specific violations, I see no possibility of an anti-trust case against Apple.

Being the market leader does NOT automatically make you a monopoly or trust. Also Apple is under no obligation to allow 3rd party sync to the iPhone or iPods. If you don't like it, there are other phones or MP3 players you can purchase that are far more compatible.
 

ptsube

macrumors 6502
Oct 12, 2008
277
24
I wonder if the iTunes EULA states that it must be used with apple-branded devices...if so, then all Pre users syncing to iTunes is in violation of the EULA....
EULA's are worthless. They are nothing more than a scare tactic. They have not been tested in court. And no company(except Apple V. Psystar) will take it to court because they are afraid they will be proven worthless.
 

thetexan

macrumors 6502a
May 11, 2009
720
0
how can you say apple is violating antitrust laws....... by not letting Palm users sync with iTunes? its APPLES PROPERTY they can do as they please....

How was Microsoft violating antitrust laws by putting a web browser, something that is free anyway, into Windows? It's Microsoft's property, they can do as they please.
 

shakenmartini

macrumors 6502
Apr 29, 2008
432
0
how can you say apple is violating antitrust laws....... by not letting Palm users sync with iTunes? its APPLES PROPERTY they can do as they please....

And the Pre could sync with iTunes using supported methods EXACTLY as do Blackberries and Symbian devices
 

bytethese

macrumors 68030
Jun 20, 2007
2,706
120
If Apple was smart, they would start licensing iTunes compatibility now. Otherwise, eventually, they will get hit with an anti-trust suit, if not by the DOJ, by the EU/EC. At least this way they could make money, instead of losing a ton in court.

On another note, Apple really needs to be careful how they handle this situation. It won't take much for the DOJ to look at Apple's iTunes/iPod as being a monopoly. They are by far the most dominate force in the multi-billion dollar industry that is online music. Considering the anti-business Democratic control in DC it will not take much. Obama's new appointee to the DOJ's antitrust division is already targeting Google as a possible monopoly, and they haven't really pulled anything "evil".
Um, no but thanks for playing. :)

People have a choice. They could buy a Zune, a Samsung player, Blackberry, etc. All have software with which they work and 2 of the 3 work on Mac or PC. There's nothing wrong at all with Apple restricting software it created to working with devices it created, so long as if the consumer doesn't like Apple's implementation or offerings, they can purchase others, which is the case. If Apple actively pursued actions or software that prevented competitors products from functioning, then the DOJ, etc would have a case but this is just not the case here.
 

Compile 'em all

macrumors 601
Apr 6, 2005
4,130
322
iTunes doesn't make enough money to justify its existence alone.

Last I knew, Apple was barely breaking even on the iTunes store.

iTunes is a vehicle to sell iPods and iPhones since Apple is above all else a hardware company.

I agree. Apple doesn't make money out of selling apps :rolleyes:
 

DudeDad

macrumors 6502a
Jul 16, 2009
716
309
...and there is nothing Apple can do to said user.

They could, but it's not feasible...besides, none of these companies want the EULA evaluated by a court...especially Apple, given the Pystar situation.
 

davidwarren

macrumors 6502a
Aug 28, 2007
782
2
If Apple was smart, they would start licensing iTunes compatibility now. Otherwise, eventually, they will get hit with an anti-trust suit, if not by the DOJ, by the EU/EC. At least this way they could make money, instead of losing a ton in court.

I agree, no harm in letting licensed products sync, the Apple products sell on their merits, not (exclusively) because only they can sync with iTunes. I love all the armchair lawyering about EULA and DMCA and anti-trust and monopolies though.... very entertaining.
 

Maclver

macrumors 68030
Nov 23, 2008
2,645
1,962
New Mexico
How was Microsoft violating antitrust laws by putting a web browser, something that is free anyway, into Windows? It's Microsoft's property, they can do as they please.

So your saying apple should just pull iTunes? Microsoft violated antitrust laws because microsoft required windows users to get software updates via internet explorer only (Windows XP ) you could not get updates via firefox or safari in windows.. Apple is only saying we do not wish to have competition use our IP to compete with us! in no way is apple violating antitrust laws
 

kryptonianjorel

macrumors 6502
Jul 3, 2009
373
0
In a way, allowing devices from other manufacturers to sync to iTunes could be a smart market move for the iTunes store... no? Apple can't really stop other companies from offering competing products in the hardware market, so having them act as a gateway for luring more users towards iTunes could make Apple some extra dough...

Actually I see it as a negative. Why buy an iPod or iPhone when any device can sync with the largest online digital media distribution system out there? Remember, Apple makes very little money off the iTMS, but makes a lot off of the iPods.

Also, Apple may have in its contracts with the media giants that it will only allow syncing to apple branded devices, to "cut down on piracy"

Its a totally different camp over here; the people at engadget is ripping Apple a new one for this...
 

cameronjpu

macrumors 65816
Aug 24, 2007
1,364
78
EULA's are worthless. They are nothing more than a scare tactic. They have not been tested in court. And no company(except Apple V. Psystar) will take it to court because they are afraid they will be proven worthless.

Haha so wait eula's are worthless and no company is willing to go to court to defend one.

Except apple.

Not a great argument my friend ;)
 

Colrath

macrumors member
Sep 24, 2008
70
0
Nevada
If I had bought a Palm I would feel like I'm walking on ice.

Competing with Apple for no reason, wasting man hours, and shortly after the failed launch of their crummy SDK.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.