Palm Releases webOS 1.3.1, iTunes Media Sync Missing

[wlh99]

So Palm gives Apple free advertising and directs users of their devices to iTunes where Apple stands to make more profits and have a more dominate Music Store and Apple purposely blocks them? This is just dumb and makes me wonder why I bought an iPhone.

This would be like a city building a sports stadium and then not allowing out of city people to purchase tickets to games because they don't pay taxes in their city, never mind the fact that the person will be spending money on the tickets as well as concessions. To prevent this they check your drivers license at the stadium blocking you from getting in if your from out of town.

Why should Palm have to make a new music store? That isn't their business. I'm glad companies like IBM are out there and actively work with their competitors to make their competitors products compatible with their own because they know in the long run it makes them look good as well as they are still bringing in revenue for whatever IBM product is required by a competitor's product.

Apple (supposedly)doesn't make money from iTunes. iTunes sells iPods. The ease of use of iTunes is a selling point for them. So if other devices can directly sync to iTunes that undermines the whole reason Apple continues to support it. That is why Apple is so protective.

Palm can't easily create their own iTunes like program. iTunes relys on deals with the record companies, so it isn't as simple as righting a software program. There are a few others out there, but they date back to before iTunes, or at least about the same time. I doubt if anyone could secure enough content to start another online music store in our current market.

A friend of mine recently bought a cheap <$50 mp3 player that synced to Rhapsody. If Rhapsody cleaned up the interface and made it braindead to use Apple could have some competition. As is, figureing out how to buy something and then get it on the mp3 player was a chore. Which brings up my first point. Apple uses iTunes to sell iPods. If any mp3 player could sync to it then couldn't charge the premium. They will not allow that to be taken away.

 

[czachorski]

Well I never said it was out of spite or pettiness. I said it was dumb. Apple has to realize that they have customers of their iTunes product but not their iPhone/iPod products. If they don't then they are dropping the bomb on their customer's experience with purchasing and syncing music through iTunes.

Apple has built a product in iTunes that its competitors shouldn't be viewed as non Apple hardware products but OTHER music stores. To do that sometimes you just need to play nice with your competitors of other divisions of your companies.

I'm not saying they should be forced to do it one way or the other however you can draw parallels to Microsoft Operating system and Microsoft Web Browser. Why should Microsoft Operating system have to play nice with non Microsoft web browsers? It shouldn't. However they are doing their customers of their OS a disservice if they don't play nice with these 3rd party web browsers like when they did a long time ago.

Now Apple just needs to realize that it is impossible to get a 100% market share in any one market, ie cell phone market. It's just not going to happen with the way the market is setup and the competition out there. Once they realize that they can start understanding that instead of fighting for customers they can't get they could grow their iTunes Music Store business through users that otherwise might not of used iTunes if they didn't have a device compatible with it.

I never bought a single song off of iTunes before getting the iPhone. The reason I used iTunes for the first time was because my phone synced up directly to iTunes. Had I not got pissed at Sprint and finally left I probably would of got a Palm Pre. And you know what? I would of been buying my first songs from iTunes with a Palm Pre if that device works with it well.

Yeah, you said they were dumb. So let me rephrase: anyone claiming Apple is being dumb, spiteful or petty needs to follow the dollars more closely.

You post just digs your hole deeper. Apple's business model is not based on iTunes making money through music sales, as you suppose. Check their quarterly statements - they make very little money there. Follow their profits and you see the profits are from sale of hardware. But not just any hardware. Very compelling hardware that integrates the device, the device's software, and software for your computer that all work together. You're call for comparison to Windows OS and browser is a flawed one, and shows a lack of understanding of what Apple is selling or why people are buying. I suspect this is the case with most people here who are puzzled over Apple's moved against Palm in this one.

 

[divad1978]

Apple (supposedly)doesn't make money from iTunes. iTunes sells iPods. The ease of use of iTunes is a selling point for them. So if other devices can directly sync to iTunes that undermines the whole reason Apple continues to support it. That is why Apple is so protective.

Palm can't easily create their own iTunes like program. iTunes relys on deals with the record companies, so it isn't as simple as righting a software program. There are a few others out there, but they date back to before iTunes, or at least about the same time. I doubt if anyone could secure enough content to start another online music store in our current market.

A friend of mine recently bought a cheap <$50 mp3 player that synced to Rhapsody. If Rhapsody cleaned up the interface and made it braindead to use Apple could have some competition. As is, figureing out how to buy something and then get it on the mp3 player was a chore. Which brings up my first point. Apple uses iTunes to sell iPods. If any mp3 player could sync to it then couldn't charge the premium. They will not allow that to be taken away.

So if Apple can't make money from iTunes Store itself then they have a bad business model relying on it to sell the hardware. Seems like putting all your eggs in one basket. Would be smarter to make both profitable on their own and try to maximize each division's profits anyway possible even if it means working with competitors of the other division especially when you can't get control of that entire market to begin with.

Obviously there are no true iPhone killers out there. But let's say one comes out that is not only an iPhone killer but iPod killer at the same time. Now not only does their hardware business start losing money from iPods/iPhones but they have a worthless iTunes Store that actually costs money to operate since the only reason it was in existence was supposedly to sell their hardware.

Let's say that iTunes Store is profitable though but only in terms of users that are buying music through their iPhones/iPods. And this iPhone/iPod killer comes along. Guess what happens? Not only do they start losing money in their hardware but the iTunes Store tanks at the same time.

However if they had a good business model for the iTunes Store that was profitable and didn't rely on only Apple hardware but they worked with competitors to make other phones sync just as good as iPhone/iPod does with iTunes and this iPhone/iPod killer comes along, guess what? Sure they will start losing money in their hardware division but the iTunes Store will keep on ticking because they didn't have all their eggs in one basket.

:SORRY FOR EDIT

I forgot to mention what happens if something comes along that just blows iTunes Music Store and the company that makes it could care less about the hardware. Now Apple will have a worthless iTunes Music Store and lose money in hardware (if they are really that dependent upon the iTunes Music store to sell hardware) since now everyone will supposedly feel free to use other phones/mp3 players that have access to this new and better Music Store.

 

[mytdave]

build yer own

Nice to see the sync missing. Keep it that way. Come on Palm, build your own dang sync app that interfaces with the files in the iTunes music 'library' just like everyone else does. It makes you interoperable, and legit.

iTunes is cool, but Apple doesn't own the media files managed by it. The customer does. Chances are, you could build a media player/sync app for your Pre that would be better than iTunes. I think it would be an opportunity to have features sorely lacking in iTunes.

 

[czachorski]

So if Apple can't make money from iTunes Store itself then they have a bad business model relying on it to sell the hardware. Seems like putting all your eggs in one basket.

Close. Yes, selling music on-line alone is a margin business model. So why exactly do you think Apple should try to focus on making money there? They have forged a good business model out of selling hardware that benefits from a good music store as one of many value-ads for customers. You seem to be just one step behind on what they are doing.

 

[Mackan]

Another flamebait news... MacRumors must be proud over the posts going on here.

 

[hugodrax]

hehe I have been short PALM and I see them going under 5.

 

[*LTD*]

Another flamebait news... MacRumors must be proud over the posts going on here.

It's Apple news. Besides, don't blame Apple, blame Palm. Had they not done the ridiculous and absurd, we wouldn't be discussing this now.

 

[mytdave]

value added

So if Apple can't make money from iTunes Store itself then they have a bad business model relying on it to sell the hardware. Seems like putting all your eggs in one basket. Would be smarter to make both profitable on their own and try to maximize each division's profits anyway possible even if it means working with competitors of the other division especially when you can't get control of that entire market to begin with.

Obviously there are no true iPhone killers out there. But let's say one comes out that is not only an iPhone killer but iPod killer at the same time. Now not only does their hardware business start losing money from iPods/iPhones but they have a worthless iTunes Store that actually costs money to operate since the only reason it was in existence was supposedly to sell their hardware.

Let's say that iTunes Store is profitable though but only in terms of users that are buying music through their iPhones/iPods. And this iPhone/iPod killer comes along. Guess what happens? Not only do they start losing money in their hardware but the iTunes Store tanks at the same time.

However if they had a good business model for the iTunes Store that was profitable and didn't rely on only Apple hardware but they worked with competitors to make other phones sync just as good as iPhone/iPod does with iTunes and this iPhone/iPod killer comes along, guess what? Sure they will start losing money in their hardware division but the iTunes Store will keep on ticking because they didn't have all their eggs in one basket.

:SORRY FOR EDIT

I forgot to mention what happens if something comes along that just blows iTunes Music Store and the company that makes it could care less about the hardware. Now Apple will have a worthless iTunes Music Store and lose money in hardware (if they are really that dependent upon the iTunes Music store to sell hardware) since now everyone will supposedly feel free to use other phones/mp3 players that have access to this new and better Music Store.

I understand the points you are trying to make. The thing is, online music stores are not wildly profitable, never will be, and Apple recognizes that.

The iPod/iPhone is Apple's product(s). iTunes/iTMS is a 'value added' component of the iPod. Companies do this all the time. It's like buying a car with, say, OnStar. The car is where the company makes it's money - they make next to nothing off of the fees you pay to use the OnStar system, but it's that system that 'adds value' to the vehicle.

EDIT: I think you'll find it unlikely to see GM give competitors access to their OnStar system. It is their value added component that they spent a lot of hard work on. It's a similar deal with the Apple/Palm thing.

 

[twoodcc]

maybe they learned their lesson

 

[ntrigue]

You know very well that a lawsuit will ensue.

 

[2992]

Does anyone else just feel sorry for your average phone buyer who's bought the phone after chatting with a sales assistant and is only now realising that the iTunes support they were told about isn't exactly official?

&

Yes, People use iTunes even if they don't own an iPod.

Actually, nope. Not everybody out there is using iTunes.

 

[Rot'nApple]

Of course, then they wouldn't be in the press every few weeks.

What with Verizon's Motorola Droid and Google's Android OS, the Palm PRE is acquiescing and should be the true smartphone found in the land of misfit toys.

It was not Palm PRE that would take on the iPhone, but rather, the Droid and other similar phone models that would take down the PRE and relegate it to its little niche market.

Sorry PRE you had your shot...

 

[FSLLS]

Kinda pathetic...

I always had lots of sympathy for Palm. After all, this company brought the Palm Pilot device and succeeded in creating a whole new consumer electronics market.

But... This attempt to impersonate Apple USB identity is nothing less than pathetic and very disappointing coming from a company like Palm.

I cannot begin to imagine how any accountable Engineering, Marketing or Legal VP at Palm could have given its blessing to such an inappropriate idea.

 

[*LTD*]

For those who *still* have a difficult time understanding the brutally simple:

iTunes is for Apple hardware. Any support for other hardware is, at this point, purely incidental and not guaranteed to be permanent.

(The remaining ability to synchronize with a limited number of legacy digital music players is likely a remnant of Apple's timeline the music industry: iTunes was released in January 2001, nine months prior to the iPod's unveiling and slightly more than two years before the introduction of the iTunes Music Store. When iTunes was released, compatibility with other music players was critical; because iPod has become the dominant digital music player, Apple no longer considers that compatibility to be a necessity.)

There is no support for "smartphones" other than the iPhone, save for approved syncing solutions, such as syncing utilities which do not offer the exact syncing functionality or user experience of Apple hardware.

http://www.engadget.com/2009/06/16/apple-says-itunes-syncing-only-for-apple-devices-looks-sternly/

Apple does not provide support for, or test for compatibility with, non-Apple digital media players and, because software changes over time, newer versions of Apple's iTunes software may no longer provide syncing functionality with non-Apple digital media players.

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3642

Apple designs the hardware and software to provide seamless integration of the iPhone and iPod with iTunes, the iTunes Store, and tens of thousands of apps on the App Store. Apple is aware that some third-parties claim that their digital media players are able to sync with Apple software. However, Apple does not provide support for, or test for compatibility with, non-Apple digital media players and, because software changes over time, newer versions of Apple's iTunes software may no longer provide syncing functionality with non-Apple digital media players.

 

[slapppy]

Palms sneaky, underhanded, hack of a job is 100 percent wrong. They know it.

 

[bretm]

Well I never said it was out of spite or pettiness. I said it was dumb. Apple has to realize that they have customers of their iTunes product but not their iPhone/iPod products. If they don't then they are dropping the bomb on their customer's experience with purchasing and syncing music through iTunes.

Apple has built a product in iTunes that its competitors shouldn't be viewed as non Apple hardware products but OTHER music stores. To do that sometimes you just need to play nice with your competitors of other divisions of your companies.

I'm not saying they should be forced to do it one way or the other however you can draw parallels to Microsoft Operating system and Microsoft Web Browser. Why should Microsoft Operating system have to play nice with non Microsoft web browsers? It shouldn't. However they are doing their customers of their OS a disservice if they don't play nice with these 3rd party web browsers like when they did a long time ago.

Now Apple just needs to realize that it is impossible to get a 100% market share in any one market, ie cell phone market. It's just not going to happen with the way the market is setup and the competition out there. Once they realize that they can start understanding that instead of fighting for customers they can't get they could grow their iTunes Music Store business through users that otherwise might not of used iTunes if they didn't have a device compatible with it.

I never bought a single song off of iTunes before getting the iPhone. The reason I used iTunes for the first time was because my phone synced up directly to iTunes. Had I not got pissed at Sprint and finally left I probably would of got a Palm Pre. And you know what? I would of been buying my first songs from iTunes with a Palm Pre if that device works with it well.

Apple doesn't make money off the store. It exists solely as a reason to buy their hardware. So they could really give a rats a that people might buy songs for a pre.

 

[RTee]

For those who *still* have a difficult time understanding the brutally simple:

iTunes is for Apple hardware. Any support for other hardware is, at this point, purely incidental and not guaranteed to be permanent.

(The remaining ability to synchronize with a limited number of legacy digital music players is likely a remnant of Apple's timeline the music industry: iTunes was released in January 2001, nine months prior to the iPod's unveiling and slightly more than two years before the introduction of the iTunes Music Store. When iTunes was released, compatibility with other music players was critical; because iPod has become the dominant digital music player, Apple no longer considers that compatibility to be a necessity.)

There is no support for "smartphones" other than the iPhone, save for approved syncing solutions, such as syncing utilities which do not offer the exact syncing functionality or user experience of Apple hardware.

http://www.engadget.com/2009/06/16/apple-says-itunes-syncing-only-for-apple-devices-looks-sternly/

Apple does not provide support for, or test for compatibility with, non-Apple digital media players and, because software changes over time, newer versions of Apple's iTunes software may no longer provide syncing functionality with non-Apple digital media players.

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3642

Apple designs the hardware and software to provide seamless integration of the iPhone and iPod with iTunes, the iTunes Store, and tens of thousands of apps on the App Store. Apple is aware that some third-parties claim that their digital media players are able to sync with Apple software. However, Apple does not provide support for, or test for compatibility with, non-Apple digital media players and, because software changes over time, newer versions of Apple's iTunes software may no longer provide syncing functionality with non-Apple digital media players.

No matter how clear you make it some still don't get it. I'm not sure whose sadder, palm or those that keep arguing for them.

 

[DMann]

Yes, People use iTunes even if they don't own an iPod.

Response:

Actually, nope. Not everybody out there is using iTunes.

Actually, yes.

People use iTunes, even if, and when, they don't use an iPod.

The term "people" does not imply "everybody."

 

[matticus008]

If a feature of the phone was iTunes support, would they have grounds to cancel a 2 year contract now that the software is not available?

If so, easy ground for termination of contract.

No. iTunes sync has nothing to do with the carrier or the service contract. Your contract isn't with Palm. Your carrier agreement continues even if your phone is a mess of half-functional software.

It's probably grounds to return the phone and replace it with something else. It's probably grounds for a consumer fraud and/or false advertising claim against Palm, who implied that the iTunes syncing was a legitimate feature.

It's not grounds for penalty-free termination of a cellular service contract.

So Palm gives Apple free advertising and directs users of their devices to iTunes where Apple stands to make more profits and have a more dominate Music Store and Apple purposely blocks them? This is just dumb and makes me wonder why I bought an iPhone.

Don't troll. Palm badly implemented a ripoff sync not because they're too inept to spend a week writing a proper and legitimate sync utility, but because they wanted free advertising and media attention on their flop of a phone.

Anybody who didn't know about iTunes before the Pre certainly doesn't know of it because of the Pre.

Why should Palm have to make a new music store? That isn't their business. I'm glad companies like IBM are out there and actively work with their competitors to make their competitors products compatible with their own

They don't. They can do exactly what Blackberry did. Blackberry is a competitor, and they sync beautifully with iTunes. I imagine the Droid will, as well, once it gets more established.

For those who *still* have a difficult time understanding the brutally simple:

iTunes is for Apple hardware. Any support for other hardware is, at this point, purely incidental and not guaranteed to be permanent.

No, it isn't. iTunes is for music management. The iTunes Store is for purchasing media, as well as applications for Apple products. The built-in sync functionality is exclusively for Apple products, because those are the only ones they're required to support.

Any other manufacturer can create a plugin or a sync utility for iTunes, using documented APIs made available by Apple. They just have to assume responsibility for developing, updating, and supporting that utility themselves instead of trying to pass the buck to another company. iTunes will work just fine with Blackberries, Windows Mobile devices, and dozens of other third-party devices if you go about writing a sync utility in an official, legitimate way.

 

[DMann]

For those who *still* have a difficult time understanding the brutally simple:

iTunes is for Apple hardware. Any support for other hardware is, at this point, purely incidental and not guaranteed to be permanent.

(The remaining ability to synchronize with a limited number of legacy digital music players is likely a remnant of Apple's timeline the music industry: iTunes was released in January 2001, nine months prior to the iPod's unveiling and slightly more than two years before the introduction of the iTunes Music Store. When iTunes was released, compatibility with other music players was critical; because iPod has become the dominant digital music player, Apple no longer considers that compatibility to be a necessity.)

There is no support for "smartphones" other than the iPhone, save for approved syncing solutions, such as syncing utilities which do not offer the exact syncing functionality or user experience of Apple hardware.

http://www.engadget.com/2009/06/16/apple-says-itunes-syncing-only-for-apple-devices-looks-sternly/

Apple does not provide support for, or test for compatibility with, non-Apple digital media players and, because software changes over time, newer versions of Apple's iTunes software may no longer provide syncing functionality with non-Apple digital media players.

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3642

Apple designs the hardware and software to provide seamless integration of the iPhone and iPod with iTunes, the iTunes Store, and tens of thousands of apps on the App Store. Apple is aware that some third-parties claim that their digital media players are able to sync with Apple software. However, Apple does not provide support for, or test for compatibility with, non-Apple digital media players and, because software changes over time, newer versions of Apple's iTunes software may no longer provide syncing functionality with non-Apple digital media players.

In closing:

"A free ride, a free lunch, and free PR - that's all we're asking for..."

 

[skeep5]

Who Cares

 

[slu]

Yeah, you said they were dumb. So let me rephrase: anyone claiming Apple is being dumb, spiteful or petty needs to follow the dollars more closely.

You keep saying this. Why don't you be so kind as to enlighten us as to how to "follow the dollars more closely"? Are you intentionaly trying to portray the attitude "I would tell you, but you are going to need to figure it out yourself, if you are smart enough."?

I think you are the one that needs to take a closer look at Apple's quarterly statements. You want to know why? Becuase Apple doesn't break out profits for the iTunes store in it's quarterly statements. It took me less than five minutes on google to figure that out.

What I also found out is that there a lot o different estimates as to how much Apple makes from the iTunes store, but it seems to be at least $500 million a year, but perhaps it could be closer to a billion with all the new content and with the apps store. Now this amount certainly pales in comparison with the profit from iPhones, but it is not as insignificant as you portray it to be.

What I fail to understand is why Apple bothers? To me, it does seem petty. Apple is losing very little revenue as very, very few people choose a pre over an iPhone, all things being equal. But there are many people that are unable to get an iPhone that Apple could be getting some profit from via the iTunes store and could perhaps get them to buy a Mac or iPhone/iPod in the future.

I understand Apple protecting their turf. I don't understand why Palm even went this route, especially since the music is now all DRM free on iTunes. They should have their own software that allows people to still use the iTunes store, but use their own software to sync the files. If I were Palm, I'd probably just move on and make my own solution, as it is clear to me Apple won't quit.

 

[skellener]

Just use DoubleTwist

Palm Pre - automatically convert your videos and sync them to your Palm Pre; sync your iTunes playlists and photo library.

 

[mds]

Just use DoubleTwist

Most Pre users are....MacRumors users are far more upset about all this than Precentral users...itunes isn't going to make or break Palm. There are plenty of other ways to get music on and off a Pre. If Palm fails it is because they did too little too late...WebOS has some promise, but Palm has to keep its doors open long enough to reestablish itself or its dead. iTunes isn't going to effect that either way...