Palm Reports Apple to USB Compliance Organization Over iTunes Syncing Issues

[LagunaSol]

Unfortunately(for Apple), that isn't a legally protected arrangement. In fact, the iTunes Music Store can be seen as a monopoly that Apple is using to take over more profitable segments, such as MP3 players and smart phones.

Oh brother, here we go again. Class time:

monopoly (noun): the exclusive possession or control of the supply or trade in a commodity or service

Apple does not have exclusive possession or control of the supply or trade of digital music or videos. Period.

And the argument that "iTunes only works with iPods" or "OS X only works with Macs" somehow creates a monopoly based solely on exclusivity is absurd.

 

[Amdahl]

So... Apple is at fault for Palm's ripping off Apples Vendor ID and using it against the rules? A bit of the pot calling the kettle black.

Sounds like it is PALM that will be getting the smack down soon, not Apple.

Apparently, the USB standard says that you can not use Vendor IDs to prevent interoperability. Which seems like a pretty obvious rule for a standard like USB. They expect you to use the communications channel to do that, not the USB standard IDs.

Palm is saying that since Apple is using the Vendor ID to prevent interop, they are going to restore interop by matching the Vendor ID. USB Consortium isn't going to do anything about this on either side. They are a standards group, not an enforcer.

 

[Villageguy86]

lmfao

Originally Posted by derekjd
As for entitlement yes, if I buy something I want to use it on all of my devices (iPod, phone, Macs, AppleTV)


for all of these guys complaining that the music and whatnot that they buy through itunes should be allowed to be used freely, that is not the case, you can purchase drm free music i believe.


ALSO god blammit, you can BURN MUSIC TO CD using itunes, re-import using any freaking utility you want. as for the movies and tv, there are many other options.

apple is operating well within the right here, MY USB TV TUNER HAS its own software and other 3 party soft doesn't work with it, is that a violation too?

all you hater out there who get lit up by the idea of your *big bad apple* getting in trouble need to go blam yourselves.

why don't nissan car remotes work for my honda? im callin someone

palm should ask for their product to be given vendor id's not steal them.
and if the usb shiz holds up, then apple should make their own freaking plug.

god this stuff makes me hate this website

 

[DavidLeblond]

This is the key: iTunes is actually not free.

There is overhead associated with iTunes. Big time overhead (think server farms), and Palm wants a free ride to Apple overhead to steal a few Apple customers. Then Palm complains about it too, that Apple is not letting Palm have a free ride in their quest to 'kill' Apple products...

I do believe i.mac hit the nail on the head. Argument over, you can all go home now.

 

[Goona]

iTunes is the default audio player of OSX. WMP is the default audio player of Windows. Both organize your music. Both sync with devices. Both are used by the majority of their users.

You know damn well that Microsoft would never in a million years get away with blocking any MP3 player that wasnt a Zune in WMP. When you include something like WMP or iTunes with your operating system you have a responsibility to play fair with competitors.

Please remind me anywhere where Apple has stated that itunes is for syncing devices?

 

[LagunaSol]

I know that, I personally could care less either way since DoubleTwist is out there but the point is for someone that doesn't know this.

Is that what they're calling the Pre these days? DoubleTwist?

I've heard "Oreo" due to the poor build design resulting in twisting halves, but DoubleTwist works well too.

(P.S. joking - I do know what DoubleTwist is)

 

[trbutler]

There is no monopoly leveraging here. Apple is a hardware company and made an MP3 player that people wanted. That device is useless without an app to interface with it, so to actually use the iPod/iPhone, they wrote iTunes. iTunes was written to manage the iPod, not anything else, the iPod. iTunes exists to make the iPod/iPhone easy to use.

Actually that isn't true. iTunes came out before the iPod and originally supported a number of other MP3 players.

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT2172

In some ways, I think it would be beneficial to Apple to encourage 3rd party sync plugins that integrate fully into iTunes for Mac OS X. Unlike iTunes for Windows, iTunes for the Mac was intended to provide Mac with a full featured media player.

It is really to Apple's advantage to have support for devices other than the iPod and iPhone. Why? Well, let's say my company requires me to use a Blackberry. If I go to the Apple Store and they say, "hey, yeah, that'll work right out of the box with Mac OS X's synchronization tools" that is an instant bonus. One more reason a Mac "just works" (unlike Windows).

If you are Apple, you don't want someone to feel like they must dump all of their accessories just because they switched from Windows to Mac. For that matter, you don't want a phone (or media player) to ever push someone to switch to Windows.

Remember, Windows now has a centralized sync facility. Apple's iSync is growing rusty and outdated. I don't think unless Apple wants to expand and offer a wider selection of phones it is safe to act as if OS X only need focus on support for one phone.

(I say this as an iPhone and now iPhone 3GS user.)

Here's what Apple should do: they should insist Palm stop spoofing. But, they should release the API's necessary to allow developers to create synchronization drivers that integrate into iTunes. Maybe dump iSync since it is pretty much ignored and just add its remaining functionality into iTunes.

-Tim

 

[pdjudd]

You know damn well that Microsoft would never in a million years get away with blocking any MP3 player that wasnt a Zune in WMP. When you include something like WMP or iTunes with your operating system you have a responsibility to play fair with competitors.

Except... Microsoft has been legally defined as a monopoly and a trust by the courts. Apple has not. You can incluse anything you want with your operating system so long as you are not inhibiting competition. Please demonstrate how Apple is preventing Palm from making software for any platform. I can provide you with several programs that use fully Apple endorsed syncing methods that have been around on the market for years (the Pre ones haven't been around that long, but others have been).

People keep claiming that Apple is inhibiting competition, but I am not seeing it and every single time that I demand proof, none has ever come that has any merit.

 

[Moles]

Why does everyone here seem to have a problem with other devices being able to sync with iTunes to move content that WE the CONSUMER have purchased from Apple? I don't really consider what Palm has done here to be hacking. iTunes was created by Apple to be a content manager/sales portal of digital content. Maybe I'm missing something here but I would think Apple would greatly benefit from selling content for use on other devices. It's unreasonable to expect everyone in the world to use an Apple device so they might as well make money off them with content.

Truth be told, I doubt Apple has an issue with it as well, I think the underlying issue is that the Palm Pre has been developed by former Apple people. So this is probably just a case of grown-ups acting like children with the consumers getting screwed while they feud. For the record, I'm not a Palm user, I own the iPhone 3G plus 3 iPods and many Mac machines.

My blackberry won't sync with i-tunes, but my drm free music plays on my blackberry. That is legitimate use of content I owned. The fact that Palm is using iTunes without the permission of the owner of that Intellectual Property is a violation of copyright laws at the least. I imagine Apple was being nice on the first attempt and simply closed the hole. I image this time the gloves will come off and IP infringement will be claimed.

The violation of anti-trust comes in play when apple prevents a Palm created application to sync with Mac OS X happens, however since there is currently no such software available by palm, there is no anti-trust violation.

Palm really is hoping to win one with public opinion and publicity, but I get a feel that Palm's assets may be owned by Apple Inc if they keep this up. There is nothing wrong with creating software that controls a piece of proprietary hardware, there is definitely a problem using another company's software without permission.

Come on Palm, just get some of the smart engineers over there to do a little objective c (or JAVA so you only need one code line) application to handle the sync. Give them the ability to manage music at the same time and you should be good.

 

[MacFly123]

If I owned a pre I would love for it to sync with iTunes. However, Apple spent money acquiring iTunes parts and pieces and money and time developing it. Palm doesn't have a right to use it without paying something to apple.

I love palm and their products but they are wrong on this one.

One should think that if they were confident enough in their product line Apple wouldn´t care about this.
But they sure do

Indeed. This is starting to go into the same direction as Psystar.
Someone @ Palm must really hold a grunge against Apple for taking this road.

LOL. So Palm is saying it's okay to spoof other manufacture's vendor ID, while it is obviously pointed out that that is not okay? How ironic. It's like Palm becomes a desperate sore looser. Really, I expected highly of Palm with Rubinstein on the helm, not this kind of childish Palm.

In the meantime, a flurry of Andoid phones are coming. Instead of playing this game with Apple, Palm should be watching out for Android.

Palm is really taking a chance here, this could backfire on them. Palm is the one improperly using USB not Apple.

Seriously this is starting to piss me off. Look at this from a business point of view. Why in the crap should Apple let Palm step in and do this when they have spent millions, nay, billions developing product lines and integration with an ecosystem and proprietary software!?

And the fact that Palm is the one in the wrong here faking Apple's vendor ID and then reporting Apple??? Lol you freaking hypocrites. I thought Rubinstein was going to be pretty cool and I respected the Pre, but now this has seriously made me reconsider!

 

[str1f3]

This is not misuse of the Vendor ID.
iTunes/iPod is the exact same thing as Motorola software working on Motorola phones only.

Oh it's not?

From Gizmodo today:

Check this USB-IF compliance update from 2007:

The Vendor ID used by a product must match the VID of the company producing the product (the integrator). Please ensure that the VID used by the product matches the company making the product. The USB-IF does not permit the product to display the silicon VID instead of the company making the product...With written permission, the device may be listed on the Integrators List.

From PreCentral:

Jeffgus in our forums confirms the same: The Pre is now telling your computer that the vendor who made it is Apple. The change here is that with previous versions of webOS, the Vendor ID was "0x0830 (Palm Inc.)." So while previously the Pre identified itself as a "mass storage device" called an iPod, now it's identifying itself as a "mass storage device manufactured by Apple" called an iPod.

------------

Exactly how is this not misuse? This is heading towards a lawsuit and Apple will win it.

 

[0098386]

I know that, I personally could care less either way since DoubleTwist is out there but the point is for someone that doesn't know this.

I don't get why all the Mac/iPhone users are PO'd though, is the money coming out of your pocket, is it physically hurting you, if it is I would consider getting help. I use 3 platforms a day, everyday and all of them has their ups and downs but what I don't get is why go batsh*t crazy when it is not directly affecting you? I choose Apple for a majority of my computing needs personally, it's I don't chose the deathstar and Apple as my phone provider.

Because it might have some impact if Palm get their way. If this opens the floodgates then people who buy iPods because of how well they sync with iTunes (this is what pushed me to iPod) might just get some cheap MP3 player, which loses Apple money. The knock-on effect being we might see higher prices on the iTunes store or on iPods to compensate.

But as it stands now Palm want to piggyback off software that cost a lot of money to develop without paying any fees to Apple. This is a big no and I hope this whole report comes crashing down. Why dont Palm simply make an app to sync with the iTunes library? Hell even I could whip something up that could send files linked in the iTunes XML file to an external drive.

 

[BaldiMac]

I did not say they are currently, what I was saying many of these manufacturers will end up doing it and get slapped in the head. I personally think that any company that wants to build off an open community should be more open to sharing and not act like 5yr olds. Don't worry Apple will tell Palm your a bum head and take their tonka truck home in a few days. Then Pre users like me won't upgrade iTunes again until sync is back and the boys won't play nice again.

This really makes no sense for Apple saying here buy an Apple TV and hack the hell out to play other content we don't sell since it's a hobby toy but oh boy you bought a Pre so you can't haz cheeseburger.

Speaking of making no sense.

 

[Etnies419]

It is really to Apple's advantage to have support for devices other than the iPod and iPhone. Why? Well, let's say my company requires me to use a Blackberry. If I go to the Apple Store and they say, "hey, yeah, that'll work right out of the box with Mac OS X's synchronization tools" that is an instant bonus. One more reason a Mac "just works" (unlike Windows).

I must say, that is the first argument I've heard for Palm that makes sense. It could encourage people to buy Macs. However, I think that the potential loss in iPod purchases versus the potential gain in Mac purchases is not enough for Apple to justify allowing this.

If they allow the Pre to sync with iTunes, what's to stop any other company from having their mp3 player from doing the same? If every mp3 player could sync seamlessly with iTunes, I'm sure we would see a drop in iPod sales.

 

[SinfonianShrek]

Ok...

How hard is this to grasp, folks? Apple is a "total solution" kind of company.

Oh? You want a media player? Well, here's our offering. It comes with a well designed piece of software that not only allow you to manage your content for it but also acts as a portal to our digital store where you can buy more content specifically for it. Not only that, but it's all guaranteed to work together without you having to go through the trouble of setting up drivers, specific device settings, or spend time digging through your hard drive trying to find your files to bring across. It all just works.

That's the type of feeling Apple is trying to create and they do a damned good job of it. If you don't like some specific piece of the system then find another one that fits your desires. They're out there.

By limiting iTunes synching to just their specific devices they 1) help ensure their hardware sales (and true source of profit) and 2) prevent the system from getting so ridiculously complex due to extensions and drivers and conversion systems for the myriad of other media players/phones people want to be able to synch using iTunes.

Here's the way life is, folks: Just because you want it doesn't mean you will get it. Learn to handle disappointment for crying out loud. Just because Apple said "No," to you doesn't make them a monopoly.

 

[Phil A.]

When I first read the article, I misread it as Apple complaining about Palm's misuse of their USB Vendor ID, and thought fair enough if a bit petulant. However, I then realised it was Palm complaining about Apple, and thought Wow - you've got to admire their minerals

It does seem a particularly stupid move by Palm though because, as others have said, they are definitely in breach of the USB consortiums strictly defined rules whilst Apple may be in breach of some vaguely defined "spirit of co-operation". I can't really see Palm getting anywhere with this...

 

[BaldiMac]

Unfortunately(for Apple), that isn't a legally protected arrangement. In fact, the iTunes Music Store can be seen as a monopoly that Apple is using to take over more profitable segments, such as MP3 players and smart phones.

How can the iTunes Store be seen as a monopoly?

 

[MizzouCowboy]

From PreCentral:

Jeffgus in our forums confirms the same: The Pre is now telling your computer that the vendor who made it is Apple. The change here is that with previous versions of webOS, the Vendor ID was "0x0830 (Palm Inc.)." So while previously the Pre identified itself as a "mass storage device" called an iPod, now it's identifying itself as a "mass storage device manufactured by Apple" called an iPod.

------------

Exactly how is this not misuse? This is heading towards a lawsuit and Apple will win it.

If I were a shark of a lawyer at Apple, I'd sue Palm for my share of the Pre's sales since it says that it was a device manufactured by Apple. Isn't Apple entitled to a share of the sales money since they "manufactured" the item?

 

[Phil A.]

If they allow the Pre to sync with iTunes, what's to stop any other company from having their mp3 player from doing the same? If every mp3 player could sync seamlessly with iTunes, I'm sure we would see a drop in iPod sales.

I'm not sure it would make any difference at all - I can't imagine many people who would base their MP3 player choice purely on the basis of iTunes (it's really not that good, particularly on Windows IMO).
Personally, I wish they'd go the other way and stop insisting I have to use iTunes to manage my iPhone

 

[stellarceltic]

If I were a shark of a lawyer at Apple, I'd sue Palm for my share of the Pre's sales

Thankfully you aren't a "shark lawyer" at Apple because you would lose.

 

[Goona]

How can the iTunes Store be seen as a monopoly?

Maybe in terms of online music sales in America? I'm not sure.

 

[Amdahl]

I agree. And it's not like someone who buys a Pre can't use their iTunes purchased music. It's all DRM free, just import it into a different program and sync it. WTF is Palm acting like Apple "owes" them rights to sync?

I say **** Palm. I'm now boycotting their products for their obvious abusal of "I'm going to report you because you have something I want, but I don't want to pay royalties to use it."

You've got it backwards. Apple is trying to enforce a 'right' that no one except Apple can sync. They have no such right.

 

[BaldiMac]

iTunes is the default audio player of OSX. WMP is the default audio player of Windows. Both organize your music. Both sync with devices. Both are used by the majority of their users.

You know damn well that Microsoft would never in a million years get away with blocking any MP3 player that wasnt a Zune in WMP. When you include something like WMP or iTunes with your operating system you have a responsibility to play fair with competitors.

No, Microsoft has that responsibility as an abusive monopolist. Not OS vendors in general.

 

[stainlessliquid]

Bull. Itunes job is to sync with ipods and iphones, it's not the equivalent of WMP.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_media_player

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITunes

Please remind me anywhere where Apple has stated that itunes is for syncing devices?

Are you serious? Make up your mind.

Except... Microsoft has been legally defined as a monopoly and a trust by the courts. Apple has not. You can incluse anything you want with your operating system so long as you are not inhibiting competition. Please demonstrate how Apple is preventing Palm from making software for any platform. I can provide you with several programs that use fully Apple endorsed syncing methods that have been around on the market for years (the Pre ones haven't been around that long, but others have been).

People keep claiming that Apple is inhibiting competition, but I am not seeing it and every single time that I demand proof, none has ever come that has any merit.

How is any of that different than Netscape vs Microsoft?

No, Microsoft has that responsibility as an abusive monopolist. Not OS vendors in general.

that is 100% hypocrisy and you know it

 

[MizzouCowboy]

Thankfully you aren't a "shark lawyer" at Apple because you would lose.

Hey, worth a shot. If Palm is saying to iTunes that it is a device manufactured by Apple, it's in the software for all to see who "made" the device.

Why shouldn't Apple have a slice of that pie?