Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Yes iTunes is junk anyway on every platform.

Except the platform it's designed for.

Like I care how it works on Windows. That's Apple's problem, and it looks like it's working out just fine. Let someone come up with a better solution if it's unsatisfactory. All have failed thus far.
 
I love it, Palm can do whatever they want because, if Apple sues them for patent infringement they hold enough patents to prevent the manufacture of another iPhone.

Suuuure they do. And you are privy to this information how, exactly?

It's incredible how many Palm shills this subject has gotten to register and make their first troll...er, I mean post, on MacRumors. :rolleyes:
 
Ok, in my first post, i was a bit harsh when i called people retarted. I'll take that back.

For those wondering why the Pre is so in love with iTunes is simple.

The numbers, and it sounds like a good feature. If you own a Mac, you use iTuens. If you own an iPod, you use iTunes. Pre makes a phone they want to advertise as also being media friendly, and what better way than allow it to sync with the software that has a large marketshare thanks to the tie in with the parent product (iPod).

I was not aware of the encrpyed database, so i guess my comment on WMP syncing is useless now :p

My thoughts (not based on fact) - Apple is being a child with not sharing. Sure they made it and put the money into development, but in this world, we can only move on if people share. MS Shares enough and keeps more to itself, but may one day be better at it.

Also, Why doesnt the Pre sync with ActiveSync? - They didnt get the license from MS... Apple on the other hand played ball and did that so the iPhone looked good to the Biz folk.

Lastly, i dont know who was first, but my GUESS is that Pre made the driver that chatted with the iTunes sync api without having to cheat with USB VEN ID. Apple saw this, wasnt happy and then started blocking. My GUESS, i am allowed to be wrong.
 
I know everyone here is an Apple fan but Apple's iTunes is truly just an mp3 store/player. Apple's current situation with palm is reminding me more or less with Microsoft's browser wars and only time can tell what the outcome of this craziness shall be. If you bought music from one store, you should be able to play it on any MP3 player in my opinion. Being locked to one hardware vendor is lame. I like my iPod but I would like to opportunity to switch to an other brand if I wished to do so.
 
Of course, your entitled to think its a hack.

And you believe Apple never copy anything?

*All* companies copy / gain inspiration from each other.. yes, including Apple.

No one "thinks" the Pre spoofing an Apple USB ID is a hack, it plainly IS one. And you honestly believe your flimsy excuse-making justifies a company's unprofessional, underhanded business practices? We're not talking about a group of home-brewers coming up with a clever workaround, or some scriptkiddies tweaking code, this is a major corporation leeching off of a competitor's hard-earned success. Try again.

PROTIP: hacking ≠ "gaining inspiration"
 
I know everyone here is an Apple fan but Apple's iTunes is truly just an mp3 store/player. Apple's current situation with palm is reminding me more or less with Microsoft's browser wars and only time can tell what the outcome of this craziness shall be. If you bought music from one store, you should be able to play it on any MP3 player in my opinion. Being locked to one hardware vendor is lame. I like my iPod but I would like to opportunity to switch to an other brand if I wished to do so.

But you're not locked into iTunes. Does Apple encrypt the library so you can't find the files? No. In fact, you can make a playlist in iTunes for your Pre (or whatever other player you want), and drag and drop the files right into the device (assuming it supports drag and drop).
 
If you bought music from one store, you should be able to play it on any MP3 player in my opinion. Being locked to one hardware vendor is lame. I like my iPod but I would like to opportunity to switch to an other brand if I wished to do so.

Why does this ignorant myth persist?

APPLE ISN'T STOPPING YOU FROM PLAYING YOUR MUSIC ON ANY PLAYER YOU LIKE.

APPLE ISN'T "LOCKING" YOU INTO BUYING/USING THEIR HARDWARE.

Don't believe me? Go ask a Blackberry user if they can sync their phones with iTunes. Then ask them how this is accomplished. In fact, even Pre owners can use all of the music on their Macs with their phone regardless of iTunes synching. It's called drag and drop. Educate yourself.
 
I might be wrong on this one but I keeps me wondering...
Everybody is complaining at Palm that they should go on and write their own software yet they are paying apple for their OS that was build upon linux...

Anybody could explain?

OS X isn't built on Linux, it is built on a family of open-source standards and is now certified UNIX 03.

Apple uses this as a base to add their OWN customization and features.

Palm is taking a product Apple made to help sell hardware and is purposely misleading the computer to think the Pre is an iPod. They do this to avoid doing any real work themselves and that is weak sauce.

They are completely different.
 
i love it. Palm claims that Apple is wrong to restrict iTunes syncing to only Apple's Vendor IDs so they go against the rules and copy said IDs to make their devices work. and then have the gall to go run to the teacher.

this is like the mobile phone version of the second grade

Palm: Teacher, Apple pushed me in the mud
Teacher: Apple, did you push Palm in the mud
Apple: Well yeah, but Palm pushed me first
Teacher: Palm, did you push Apple first
Palm: No.
Apple: Liar, Palm told everyone he did it.
Teacher: Class, did Palm tell you that he pushed Apple in the mud before Apple pushed him back
Class: Yeah.
Nerdy Suck Up: Palm was telling everyone he was going to go push Apple in the mud before he did it
 
OS X isn't built on Linux, it is built on a family of open-source standards and is now certified UNIX 03.

Apple uses this as a base to add their OWN customization and features.

Palm is taking a product Apple made to help sell hardware and is purposely misleading the computer to think the Pre is an iPod. They do this to avoid doing any real work themselves and that is weak sauce.

They are completely different.

This.

This is exactly what is going on.
 
Considering Palm hasn't used any of Apples software, your comment is pointgless.

True.

The Vendor ID is not Apples IP. It's usage is granted to them by the USB CO.

Arguable. Apple has the right to use that Vendor ID, Palm does not. Whether that makes it "Apple's IP" or not is debatable, but it has the same end effect.

Apple is guilty of using the USB protocol as a method of restricting device access to iTunes. This is in violation of the USB CO terms of use.

Apple is using the USB IDs (Vendor, Device, etc.) to determine whether a given device is supported by iTunes. That is *exactly* the point of the USB IDs.

Palm is guilty of improper use of a Vendor ID. This is in violation of the USB CO terms of use.

Explicitly in the USB CO contract even.

Palm's original solution did not violate the Vendor ID usage as they simply used a generic device ID and called it ipod and while it may be a nice trick, it's not a violation of USB standards. It was Apple's update to iTunes that made the Vendor ID a requirement.
This forced Palm to go the Vendor ID route to re-enable iTunes access.

While Palm's original 'solution' idn't violate the Vendor ID usage, it *did* violate the *Device ID* usage by claiming to be an iPod (That's another USB ID Apple has exclusive rights to). Apple updated iTunes to pay attention to the Vendor ID as well, since Apple is under no obligation to provide and maintain Palm's sync solution for them. The next step will likely be Apple having iTunes pay attention to the Manufacturer ID as well.

Remember, Apple provides the Sync Services API and an XML interface which allows developers to read the iTunes Library (including songs, videos, podcasts, playlists, etc). Using that information, Palm can (and should) write their own syncing software. Instead, Palm is trying to force Apple to provide a sync solution for Palm's product. This would require that Apple can no longer make updates to the iPod sync protocol without essentially getting permission from Palm first. Palm isn't even *trying* to pay Apple for that privilege.

Palm seems to want Apple to provide and support syncing to/from Palm's device so *they* don't have to deal with it themselves. Apple wants Palm to provide and support syncing to/from Palm's device so they don't have to deal with it themselves. Apple is more than willing to *enable* it (through the provided interfaces), they just don't want to get stuck *supporting* it.

There's really no way to paint Palm in a good light with the facts at hand without trying to make the argument that Apple should be directly responsible for writing software to sync any arbitrary device that gets plugged into the computer, whether they have any information on that device or not. (Seriously, what do you think the odds are that Palm provided full specs on the Pre to Apple, or even just specs for the Pre's sync procedure?) That demand is akin to me seeing that you can afford to buy a car, and then demanding that you buy me one as well, then when you say no, pretending to be you so I can buy one on your dime.
 
I know everyone here is an Apple fan but Apple's iTunes is truly just an mp3 store/player. Apple's current situation with palm is reminding me more or less with Microsoft's browser wars and only time can tell what the outcome of this craziness shall be. If you bought music from one store, you should be able to play it on any MP3 player in my opinion. Being locked to one hardware vendor is lame. I like my iPod but I would like to opportunity to switch to an other brand if I wished to do so.

Sorry man. You want iTunes syncing, you get an iPod/iPhone. If you don't then get something else. How hard is it to understand this. Amazon, Napster and all those other lame online music stores would love your business.

I'm going to bitch to my local Cadillac Dealer for not having a number of mercedes-exclusive features on my ride, and if Mercedes refuses to "share" and Cadillac says they can't do it for cost reasons i'm going to yell "MONOPOLY" and "ANTI-TRUST" and "CONSUMER CHOICE" and..hrm..what else..."FREEDOM"..."LITIGATION"..."CHANGE" and probably another "MONOPOLY".

I've never met such a whiney bunch of self-entitled "I want it now!" people in my life.
 
This doesn't even make sense. If a company cannot use the USB IDs to discriminate between products, what can it use?

i think you missed a step in the game.

the USB forum assigns VID codes so that software can recognize the brand and type of device plugged in. this is useful, for example, so that itunes doesn't show the tab for photo syncing with my shuffle is plugged in. but does show apps when my iphone is plugged in.

Palm coded the pre so that it reports back an ipod VID to itunes and not a Palm VID. which is a move forbidden by the forum that assigns the codes. not a hack per se but a cheat.
 
No one "thinks" the Pre spoofing an Apple USB ID is a hack, it plainly IS one. And you honestly believe your flimsy excuse-making justifies a company's unprofessional, underhanded business practices? We're not talking about a group of home-brewers coming up with a clever workaround, or some scriptkiddies tweaking code, this is a major corporation leeching off of a competitor's hard-earned success. Try again.

PROTIP: hacking ≠ "gaining inspiration"

I am glad you think you can speak for "everyone".

Apple couldn't stop Real from PlayFair, and Apple will not be able to stop Palm.. Just like Apple cannot stop iPhone Jail break.

Live with it.

Replace the story from "Apple" to Microsoft , and "Palm" to "Apple" and everyone will be saying how Evil "Microsoft" and singing "Apple's" praises.
 
Yes iTunes is junk anyway on every platform. Why Palm is even trying to engage in a battle over the right to sync with this POS bloated application is beyond me. It's moronic in the extreme.

Palm has the resources to help fund development of an iTunes killer. There are plenty of potential partners out there who have technology that could be built on to deliver a great consumer experience.

If Palm had great software of their own, they would have another driver to help sell their hardware devices. Hell, they might even make some bucks selling music if they built their own store into the application.

Building another music store or just enable your device to play the music. This is called insanity.

So any hardware manufacturer should manufacture these ugly media player softwares..

There are more than 100 media playing software out there and u want more...
 
Building another music store or just enable your device to play the music. This is called insanity.

So any hardware manufacturer should manufacture these ugly media player softwares..

There are more than 100 media playing software out there and u want more...

They shouldn't make their own music store/media player. Instead, they should create an application to sync the phone with the existing iTunes Library XML file. That way you can manage your songs on iTunes, and then the app syncs it over. Or, they could find a way to make the phone do all of the syncing with the XML file, that way they don't need to make a separate app.
 
Except the platform it's designed for.

It's pretty slow and crappy on OS X too. I hate how long it takes to switch to Applications, and a media player really shouldn't take so long to load. iTunes should start up as fast as Safari.


Apple needs to completely rewrite iTunes, and break it up into more Applications. It needs to just be iTMS, and a media player. All the other stuff: iPod syncing, ringtone making, :apple:TV managing all should be in another application.
 
Sorry man. You want iTunes syncing, you get an iPod/iPhone. If you don't then get something else. How hard is it to understand this. Amazon, Napster and all those other lame online music stores would love your business.

I'm going to bitch to my local Cadillac Dealer for not having a number of mercedes-exclusive features on my ride, and if Mercedes refuses to "share" and Cadillac says they can't do it for cost reasons i'm going to yell "MONOPOLY" and "ANTI-TRUST" and "CONSUMER CHOICE" and..hrm..what else..."FREEDOM"..."LITIGATION"..."CHANGE" and probably another "MONOPOLY".

I've never met such a whiney bunch of self-entitled "I want it now!" people in my life.

Because apple sells (Mp3 player) and a Music software... everyone who sells an MP3 player should make one more software... I am sure Palm can do it but, why should they?
 
Because apple sells (Mp3 player) and a Music software... everyone who sells an MP3 player should make one more software... I am sure Palm can do it but, why should they?

Because Palm has nothing to do with Apple or iTunes, and Palm does not get to decide how Apple's own software is to be used.

Apple is not bound to support anyone else's devices, nor are they bound to ensure compatibility with each iTunes update. Apple is not beholden to Palm or anyone else.
 
@ smadpr
Because Palm has nothing to do with Apple or iTunes, and Palm does not get to decide how Apple's own software is to be used.

Apple is not bound to support anyone else's devices, nor are they bound to ensure compatibility with each iTunes update. Apple is not beholden to Palm or anyone else.

Read it.

Absorb it.

Live by it.

Again; Just because you want it doesn't make it yours.
 
Because Apple didn't make it. And this issue was already decided in the Accolade v. Sega case. They made their games say 'Copyright Sega' in order to pass validation on Sega game machines. Court said A-Okay.

uh no. Sega v Accolade was about reverse engineering by a software company (Accolade) of the operating system for a game console (made by Sega) in order to make games for such console.

not at all anything like this sitch.

That's funny.. I thought I recall a Steve Slide showing iTunes the number one seller of music in America, including retail CDs.

being number one just means you sold a little more than all the rest. an abusive monopoly means having the strongest cut of the pie -- so strong that you are way above the rest. should as Microsoft having something like 80% of the personal computer market while Apple has like 8% of a *nix the other 12%

for ease of math, lets say that $100 in music (all formats) have been sold. Apple did $30 of that. Amazon did $29. Best Buy did $25 dollars worth and so on. Apple was the highest but not a huge leap over anyone else. so they can claim number 1, but they aren't an abusive monopoly.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.