Palm was wrong in their approach, and Apple was wrong in theirs first. Apple doesn't have the right to block Palm's vendor ID. 2 wrongs don't make a right, and so Palm should be punished under the USB consortium's wrath the same as Apple... That being said, Apple was still wrong, and that's the problem here.
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 Reports Apple to USB Compliance Organization Over iTunes Syncing Issues
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Palm was wrong in their approach, and Apple was wrong in theirs first. Apple doesn't have the right to block Palm's vendor ID. 2 wrongs don't make a right, and so Palm should be punished under the USB consortium's wrath the same as Apple... That being said, Apple was still wrong, and that's the problem here.
Treq
macrumors 65816
I'm not sure they did block them simply based on their USB VID. I think the way it was done was like this:
iTunes: Hello USB device. What are you?
Pre: Hello iTunes, I'm an iPod.
iTunes: Really? Who makes you?
Pre: Palm.
iTunes: Liar. Palm doesn't make iPods. You are an invalid, unrecognizable device. Good bye.
I could be wrong, but I don't think this is a violation of the USB rules.
Now, What Palm did... That is a HUGE violation.
And I stand corrected: http://amarok.kde.org/en/node/446
It would appear that Amarok DOES support the iTunes Music Store, and therefore, one argument less in the name of iTunes.
Now I'm just waiting for the stable windows and mac ports for users to clammer behind!
I'm really sorry for taking a side rant... But this needed to be said.
Really? And why not? If I was a software developer and I wanted to make a piece of software similar to iTunes. Why shouldnt I be allowed to do so? People need to realize that there are plenty of other people willing and wanting to make alternatives to commercial software, that are not only better, but are not run by the big huge corp. I would like it if Apple at least told us WHAT exactly iTunes DOES, so we can at least have people make other alternatives.
I will not go as far as to say that iTunes is a music/media organization software... Because frankly there is no power in the 'verse that will get me to click that "do you want iTunes to organize your music folder?".
😀 I really like that dialogue. And if that were the case, then Apple might be safe from the USB wrath, and your right, Palm is VERY MUCH in the cross-hairs... However, I would be very disappointed in Palm to find that to be true... If palm is going to lay themselves on the cutting board in that fashion, you would think they would have asked their lawyers first, and made sure Apple was going down with them... I mean, there is a huge risk in being wrong. In their minds, Apple screwed up, and Apple's going down. If Apple goes down, Palm will go down with them, taking one for the team. In your case, Palm goes down, and Apple reigns supreme.
I'm now VERY curious to see how this plays out...
GamecockMac
macrumors 6502a
Let me alter my statement just a bit. As long as you are not making money off of this third-party software, then have at it, develop a freeware alternative. Otherwise, you don't have the right to piggyback on Apple's investment in all of the things I originally mentioned to help you make a quick buck.
But then again, Apple might not really care, as they don't make any money directly off of iTunes and people would still be buying content from them using your software. So I guess this would probably go unchallenged.
GamecockMac
macrumors 6502a
Treq
macrumors 65816
In what way was the original poster wrong? He's right that this is similar to the browser wars, in that if you buy an ipod, you have no choice but to use iTunes, and Apple is seeing to it that that fact continues to be true by encrypting the newer iProduct's libraries. The OP was also correct that only time will tell how the outcome will be. It is also true that, while there are work arounds, there isn't an easy way of getting your iTMS music onto another device; Certainly not a way of doing it without installing half a dozen music applications.
r.j.s
Moderator emeritus
You can already use your iTMS purchases on any player that supports AAC.
I played my DRM-free iTMS purchases on my blackberry by merely dragging the files to the memory card.
Treq
macrumors 65816
I'm not sure they did ask their lawyers before going through with this. What lawyer would have let them say "it works with iTunes" when they have no control over the iTunes software. They are now forced to make their device work with a 3rd party software, without the 3rd party's approval, because they advertised it as a feature. That is a legal nightmare. You can't advertise a feature that you can't deliver. Not without some legal trouble.
errr.... no
um. no. ENCRYPTED AAC yes. & I would love to see a list of MP3 players out there that play encrypted AAC...besides the obvious Apple products. 😎
um. no. ENCRYPTED AAC yes. & I would love to see a list of MP3 players out there that play encrypted AAC...besides the obvious Apple products. 😎
r.j.s
Moderator emeritus
You're right, I should have been more clear.
DRM-free purchases can be used on any player that supports AAC. Which is the entire store, and your entire library should you choose to upgrade.
GamecockMac
macrumors 6502a
I'm sorry, I thought you said you had "been reading through this whole message thread". Did you mean the WHOLE thread, or just the posts that you were in agreement with? Because this poster was rebutted quite effectively earlier. Not to say his "opinions" were wrong per se, but that he was basing them on a completely fallacious premise. I could outline the counter-argument again, but I really shouldn't have to for someone who read the whole thread.
Treq
macrumors 65816
Well, you don't have to use an ipod to play the songs bought on itms. I thought that was clear.
And if you used Amarok, you wouldn't have had to take that "Drag and Drop" step. Now try using a non-Apple product to transfer to an iPhone....
r.j.s
Moderator emeritus
And if I used Amarok, I would be using Linux, and not have the complete user experience with my computer that I enjoy right now. I've used Linux, for years, and as a primary system on several machines. I'd rather use my computer than tweak it.
LagunaSol
macrumors 601
Thank you
Thank you for correcting me. I re-read back and saw the counter argument. I tend to skim when there are 22 freaking pages of comments lol.
So again thank you. I was wrong. it does happen occasionally. 😀
Thank you for correcting me. I re-read back and saw the counter argument. I tend to skim when there are 22 freaking pages of comments lol.
So again thank you. I was wrong. it does happen occasionally. 😀
GamecockMac
macrumors 6502a
Poisednoise
macrumors regular
Why are people going on about things that have nothing to do with the issue at hand? Whether I want to be able to use a Cuisinart Food Processor to transfer songs to my iPhone is not the issue here surely, the issue is that Palm have a device that is pretending to be something it isn't, by using vendor IDs that belong to another company. It doesn't matter whether Apple would be better served in your opinion by letting us sync our blackberry smoothie using iTunes, nor whether you think overall their business practices are sensible. You can transfer purchases made with iTunes to other devices, but even if you couldn't, that would be the risk you took by buying them from iTunes, much as those who bought from the "playsforsure" camp did. It has no relevance to the current thread.
Palm is stealing vendor IDs. Surely that's where the discussion ends.