Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 143
  1. #101  
    Quote Originally Posted by Adjei View Post
    Last time I checked, you could put songs from itunes onto your Pre without syncing. Why doesn't Palm take a clue from RIM and develop their own solution. I forgot they are leeches, why else would they do it, when they can leech of someone else.
    Or they're allowing Pre customers to use their syncing software of choice rather than forcing one on them. Seems to me the Pre customers who use it really appreciate it.

    Yes maybe in the fairy tale world you live in you can use any application you want to sync with whatever you want. I wonder why a Pre doesn't sync with RIM's Desktop Manager or why an ipod doesn't sync with Zune Desktop. I wonder why.
    Because the platforms are not compatible. None of these companies block another from using it. But in the case of iTunes, you're merely transferring MP3s with the benefit of having them organized in a familiar application, iTunes.

    The party is almost over for Apple. Don't make me laugh. None of this is affecting any of Apple's ipod and iphone customers. They are all able to sync their devices wonderfully with itunes. It's the Pre customers who are left finding solutions when their Pres can't sync with itunes. Apple has 30 billion in the bank to fight this. Palm already got smacked by the USB group when they ran crying to them. Now the ******* are waiting for the European Union to come help them. I can't wait for the Union to give them the dirty slap they deserve for being leeches.
    I meant the party is over for Apple locking down iTunes. Palm has likely opened the floodgates, and the fact that the only thing Apple is doing about it is releasing updates that break compatibility tells me that Palm isn't doing anything illegal or worthy of a suit. Apple just needs to open up the iTunes app to any MP3 player, collect licensing fees, and everyone is happy. Except you, I'm sure.

    Yes they are playing dirty, you even admitted. They are leeches. The only reason anybody gives a damn about them these days is they've found a way to attach their name to Apple. Find me one article about Palm in the last 10 months without something about Apple in that same article. Palm are like that annoying fly around you who doesn't want to go away.
    And that's exactly what they're trying to be. Apple will cave eventually. Palm is the first annoying fly -- there will be others, and I welcome that. iTunes is a great application for buying and organizing music -- it can only benefit Apple to have EVERY MP3 player owner buying music from their store.
  2. #102  
    Quote Originally Posted by Adjei View Post
    Yes and Palm is lucky to have ******* like you ready to suck whatever garbage they shove in your throat.
    this guy is obviously jobs proctologist. Noone would get this upset about a sync solution without having skin in the game. How lame. Obviously he is scared by the effect on his 401k or something. Either way moron, I can drag and drop or sync with the latest itunes with my pre. Ha!
    Last edited by mrloserpunk; 10/03/2009 at 10:04 PM.
  3. #103  
    I'm not using iTunes to get music on my Pre, I just drag and drop, but since it makes this guy so crazy, I may just start haha.
  4. Faculak99's Avatar
    Posts
    31 Posts
    Global Posts
    32 Global Posts
    #104  
    Adjel,

    You are an angry little man.

    Don't throw hate in the equation as an us versus them. I own a 3g iPhone, Apple Powermac, and a shuffle. Apple has plenty of my money over the years.

    The argument is not that Palm should make Apple allow them to sync with their software. It is about equal and fair trade. As I have said many times before in many of these forums, Apple is and always will be a software company first. They are making every gain that they have made with iTunes, Quicktime, and Safari take a step back when they sit on an ideal that serves no one. iTunes, according to the Market Firm Research, since the addition of video sales has recorded over 200 million users. The idea was to gain market share with iTunes, not reject opportunities for more pieces of the pie. Every keynote in the last four years has began with how many purchased downloads iTunes has acquired for the year.

    Palm is such a small piece of the pie, it is foolish to not take advantage of Palm's market. It would not surprise me to see Apple acquire or absolve Palm altogether. Watch how you use the word leeches - lol - or have we forgotten the technology that Apple amazingly acquired for under 100k from a starving kid in college, and the input device of the mouse from Xerox product development.

    LOL

    Just quit arguing and enjoy the technology that is available. Competition is a good thing. I have no affiliation with either group, but rather enjoy the banter, and more importantly ENJOY the technology. I still have my original bag phone if you really want to be independent of any of these marketing ploys with any company

    My last plea is to Apple. It is ridiculous to think that you can be the only smartphone out there. Please let more in to the iTunes store, so more people can buy more songs, video, podcasts, tv shows, and apps. Sincerely, an Apple stockholder. Make me money biiiaaaattttch -

    LOL
    Last edited by faculak99; 10/03/2009 at 10:14 PM.
  5. #105  
    Quote Originally Posted by jrstinkfish View Post
    I'm not using iTunes to get music on my Pre, I just drag and drop, but since it makes this guy so crazy, I may just start haha.
    I like the playlist function for music. I use Pandora, but every now and again, I listen to a playlist when I don't want to use Pandora at the gym. It's a rarity. I've had my phone since 6/6/09. I work out 5 days a week, but I've only used my playlist three times.

    Thanks to Music Remix, I'd be able to create a list w/o iTunes, but I already have them loaded and don't need to compile them in iTunes.
  6. #106  
    Itunes= control piracy ... This is why Actors, Artists, ETC. have been loving and promoting the IPOD and IPHONE from day one... The Media has promoted this alot and it is a great product except (MAC owns you)
    Itunes battle with the pre is just a ****ing match between Steve Jobs and Jon Rubinstein ... Dont forget about the email jobs sent Jon Rubinstein ... asking him not to hire former Mac peeps
  7. #107  
    The most comprehensive argument against Apple's behavior:

    Apple's hypocritical move to block competitors from accessing iTunes. - By Farhad Manjoo - Slate Magazine

    Free iTunes!Apple's hypocritical move to block competitors from accessing its software.
    By Farhad ManjooPosted Monday, Sept. 28, 2009, at 3:44 PM ET

    Palm.In May, Palm announced that its new phone, the Pre, would do something that only a single other smartphone in the world could do—"synchronize seamlessly with iTunes." For years, manufacturers of digital music players had been trying to compete with Apple's dominant music app. They'd all failed. iTunes is one of the most popular downloads in the world and one of the main reasons people love the iPod and the iPhone. Palm—whose CEO, Jon Rubinstein, is a former Apple executive who'd been instrumental in creating the iPod—understood that it couldn't beat iTunes. So why not join it?
    Print This ArticlePRINTDiscuss in the FrayDISCUSSEmail to a FriendE-MAILGet Slate RSS FeedsRSSShare This ArticleRECOMMEND...Single PageSINGLE PAGE
    Yahoo! BuzzFacebook FacebookPost to MySpace!MySpaceMixx MixxDigg DiggReddit RedditDel.icio.us del.icio.usFurl FurlMa.gnolia.com Ma.gnoliaSphere SphereStumble UponStumbleUponCLOSE

    There's a simple reason why not—Apple doesn't allow third-party devices to sync with its software. But Palm found the restriction easy to circumvent: Every device that connects to a computer's USB port identifies itself with a specific vendor and product code. Palm simply copied Apple's USB codes. It's the digital equivalent of telling a bouncer that you're McLovin: When you hook up the Pre to your PC, it identifies itself as an iPod. iTunes thinks you've just connected something made by Steve Jobs—and it syncs your music and movies just as it would if you'd purchased the gadget from the Apple store.

    Apple, of course, doesn't approve of this. And so began a tedious cat-and-mouse game. Every time Apple releases a new version of iTunes, it disables the Palm Pre's syncing capability; the syncing comes back every time Palm updates its software. (As of Apple's release of iTunes 9, the Pre cannot sync with Apple's software; Palm says it's working on restoring access.) In July, Palm complained about Apple's iTunes block to the USB Implementers Forum, the trade group that manages the USB specification. But the move backfired. In a letter sent last week, the USB-IF exonerated Apple and told Palm that it was in the wrong for copying Apple's USB codes.

    The USB-IF didn't say whether it would try to enforce its ruling; Palm says that it's reviewing the decision. I hope the company continues to search for ways to sync with iTunes, because the fight—silly as it seems—is important, and Palm is clearly in the right. Apple may have the USB-IF on its side, and it may also be protected by copyright law. But by blocking non-Apple devices from its music app, Apple is violating a more fundamental principle of computing—that unalike devices should be able to connect to one another freely. The principle underlies everything we take for granted in tech today: It's why the Internet, your home network, and the PC function at all. And it's why Palm should keep storming the iTunes fortress.

    I am not claiming that Palm has the legal right to hack into Apple's software, nor am I calling on any authorities to compel Apple to let Palm in; if the cat-and-mouse game turns into a courtroom brawl, it's very likely that Apple would win the fight. Instead, I'm calling on Apple to stand down. Even better: It should create a legal pathway for Palm and every other company to sync with iTunes. Why? The most obvious reason is that it's good for iTunes users. Nobody other than Apple benefits from locked-down software. Apple frequently extols the wonders of digital music—the convenience, the flexibility, the environmental friendliness. But how flexible can it be if you're allowed to sync your tunes only with devices made by a single company?

    What's more, the iTunes block is hypocritical. Like every other tech company, Apple has benefited enormously from the spirit of interconnectedness that pervades the tech industry. The iPod would have fizzled if Microsoft had blocked it from hooking up to Windows PCs. Or look at the iPhone—Apple is proud that it can sync with Outlook, Microsoft Exchange, Gmail, Yahoo, and just about everything else. Indeed, you could argue that Apple, once left for dead on the periphery of the tech industry, managed to come back only because it skillfully marketed Macs as the most promiscuous computers you could buy. Around the turn of the century, Jobs began touting the Mac as a "digital hub" for your home. You know what he meant? That the Mac would hook up with anything. Clearly, the pitch worked: Apple still sells Macs by pointing to the ability to connect to Windows networks and their easy compatibility with third-party printers, cameras, and other devices. The latest version of the Mac OS can even automatically sync with Microsoft Exchange—something not even Windows does.
    Related in Slate
    Farhad Manjoo criticized Apple for rejecting Google's apps, argued that the days of the iPod are over, considered whether Google's smartphone can compete with the iPhone and BlackBerry, and explored the debate between "open" and "closed" cell phones. Tom Vanderbilt looked at how iPhone apps are changing the way we drive, use public transit, bike, and even walk.

    Apple defenders might argue that the company connects with systems only when it has the legal right to do so; Apple isn't hacking its way into compatibility, and we should resent Palm for doing so. But that's a circular argument. Palm had to resort to hacking only because Apple closed down any legal paths for entry—making illegal the very same sort of compatibility that Apple itself has long depended on. Hacking was Palm's only option.

    What's more, Apple itself hasn't been shy about achieving compatibility through means that other companies consider "hacking." Look at Samba, the fantastic open-source project that lets non-Windows computers connect to Windows networks. The project began as a hack: In 1991, Andrew Tridgell, then a Ph.D. student at the Australian National University, reverse-engineered the traffic on his local network to figure out how to communicate with Microsoft machines. Over several years, his effort grew into what is now the main way for Unix-based machines to share files with Windows. Microsoft long took a dim view of Samba; in 2007, after years of legal wrangling, European regulators forced it to allow Samba to interoperate freely with Windows. But Apple didn't wait for that ruling—it built Samba into the Mac OS in 2002. In other words, so what if Microsoft didn't like Samba? Apple needed to build an OS that connected to Windows, and Samba was the best way to accomplish that.

    Apple often gets away with behavior we'd never sanction from other companies. If Microsoft began preventing rivals' devices from connecting with Windows, the tech industry would go ape. If Google gave preferential treatment to its sites on its search engine, European regulators would threaten a lawsuit. Apple's exclusionary ways weren't very consequential when it was merely a tech-industry also-ran. But now that it's a behemoth, we—its customers—should demand that it play by the same rules as everyone else.
    Palm Vx > Treo 650 > Centro > G1 > Pre > BlackBerry 9700
  8. #108  
    personally after reading all the threads on this... palm is correct in doing all this. palm is simply pointing out that apple is wrong in whats its doing. i think palm should work with microsoft on this one and see if microsoft would put an update on its computers to block access to ipods.
    apple: but no... the ipod should be free to work with windows or mac using itunes...
    microsoft: well were blocking access from using our product just as much as your blocking palm to use yours
    palm:yeah!!
    applek fine, we'll be good
  9. #109  
    Adjei -

    I don't understand the argument. Palm is doing nothing illegal by cloning an Apple Vendor ID. Unethical possibly, but not illegal. Worst case scenario the Implementer's Forum will kick Palm out of their "group" for cloning a vendor ID and Palm could no longer display the USB logo on their packaging. But that's it.

    Personally I find this ironic. It used to be Apple being the little guy swatting at Microsoft, and now Palm is doing the same to Apple - kind of funny.

    P.S., I typed this on my Mac Book while listening to my iPod Touch with music on it I downloaded on my Pre and synched over to iTunes thanks to Palm and Apples Vendor I.D. Oh Yeah, and I paid half the price I would have if I bought the music on iTunes
  10. #110  
    Quote Originally Posted by Adjei View Post
    Yes I get heated when companies decide to become leeches, sue me.
    I hope you buy every single mp3 that you own, don't stream illegally, don't take friend's burned copies of movies/music, don't share your music in anyway, and don't download any pirated software.

    I highly doubt it though, so where is your caring about intellectual property then? Oh right, you only use that argument when its to your advantage. Go back to not paying musicians/record companies/actors/film companies for their work

    (and this goes to everyone on their intellectual property/copyright high horse)
  11. #111  
    The USB-IF decission is a joke: "What Apple does blocking devices via software is not USB-IF is not our problem, but Palm preventing this via software is our problem." WOW!
  12. KJ78's Avatar
    Posts
    838 Posts
    Global Posts
    1,113 Global Posts
    #112  
    all the more reason to not sync w/ crytunes in the first place.
  13. #113  
    It doesn't matter. It isn't necessary for Palm to use iTunes to sync the Pre. There are plenty of free programs like sharepod and others that will do that and keep Pre users happy; but free publicity doesn't just happen on a regular basis w/o thought and planning.

    Every time Apple changes their software just to kick off the Pre, Pre or Palm gets news. Whenever Palm mimics the iPod ID to get it to work again, more free publicity.

    If Apple would leave it alone, the new would be a flash and over. Their failure to do so, keeps Palm in the news and all they have to do is wait for Apple to bring them back to everyone's attention. It makes people wonder: "What has that Pre got that makes Apple use this much trouble and resources."
  14. gbp
    gbp is offline
    gbp's Avatar
    Posts
    2,506 Posts
    Global Posts
    2,543 Global Posts
    #114  
    Quote Originally Posted by kbritt31 View Post
    I hope you buy every single mp3 that you own, don't stream illegally, don't take friend's burned copies of movies/music, don't share your music in anyway, and don't download any pirated software.

    I highly doubt it though, so where is your caring about intellectual property then? Oh right, you only use that argument when its to your advantage. Go back to not paying musicians/record companies/actors/film companies for their work

    (and this goes to everyone on their intellectual property/copyright high horse)
    well said

    and don't post to the site if you are working in the office.
  15. #115  
    Quote Originally Posted by bdhu2001 View Post
    Every time Apple changes their software just to kick off the Pre, Pre or Palm gets news. Whenever Palm mimics the iPod ID to get it to work again, more free publicity.

    If Apple would leave it alone, the new would be a flash and over. Their failure to do so, keeps Palm in the news and all they have to do is wait for Apple to bring them back to everyone's attention. It makes people wonder: "What has that Pre got that makes Apple use this much trouble and resources."
    Exactly! And is Apple who is creating troubles to their iTunes' users.
  16. gbp
    gbp is offline
    gbp's Avatar
    Posts
    2,506 Posts
    Global Posts
    2,543 Global Posts
    #116  
    For the benefit of all the folks

    "PALM is not hacking iTunes"

    iTunes is APPLE's intellectual product and it remains that way.

    However this intellectual product is not intelligent.

    It recognizes non APPLE products to be iPods and lets them use iTunes.

    I say APPLE should fix their "Intellectual Product" so that it is intelligent as to which devices it allows to be synced.


    Why blame PALM, if there is any fun in this thing , its on APPLE's part , they are sweating to release a new version of iTunes.
    I say more power to PALM (thought I prefer PALM's own application similar to the RIMM one)


    OBTW, some folks argued to death in Jan 2009 about the multi touch thing being APPLE's invention and a possibility of a lawsuit.

    I haven't seen one yet on multitouch, but I welcome a lawsuit on iTunes ( if its possible).

    I say game on.
  17. #117  
    Quote Originally Posted by deCorvett View Post
    The USB-IF decission is a joke: "What Apple does blocking devices via software is not USB-IF is not our problem, but Palm preventing this via software is our problem." WOW!
    If the USB-IF decision had been against Apple would you have considered it a joke. If this goes to court and is ruled against Apple, should Apple abide by the court's decision? If it's against Palm, what should Palm do? If the FCC get's involved and rules against Apple or Palm, does it matter? Or would that also be a joke?
  18. #118  
    If saying a software patch isn't their concern, but a software patch is their concern isn't at least laughable, I don't know what it is...

    Said that, there are a bunch of sentences that clearly states that you can't prevent interoperativity between devices, so don't expect this case to go to court.
  19. #119  
    quoted.
    Seriously, Apple sells 57% of all online music...and has 25% market share for all music sold in the U.S. These numbers are insane...especially when one considers that delivered product then drops into an iTunes ecosystem targeted for just their devices.

    If Walmart sold 25% of all music in the US, but the music would only then play on Walmart-branded CD players, the FTC would get involved.

    Sure, you can move iTunes-purchased non-DRMed music to other MP3 players using a range of other tools or processes, but the fact that Apple goes out of their way to block the client-side of their store from device manufacturers shows the monopolistic spirit in play here.

    iTunes is *not* part of an iPod. It is the front end for the Apple store that sells 25% of all music sold in the US. The iTunes ecosystem is a store...yet Apple also uses it to an unfair advantage by making it both the store *and* the iPod synch software...thereby equating the store with a device family...and raising barriers for all other device manufacturers...while doing everything that they can to leave consumers with the impression that the store is only compatible with iPod devices.

    No one expects Apple to go out of their way to add compatibility for other music players and Palm hasnt asked them to do so, but they are doing the opposite here - they are going out of their way to block it...which is *why* Palm has gone rogue.

    It's not the USB Implementers Forum's job to broker monopolistic issues. Their opinion may be quite sound and valid within their narrow scope...but there are larger issues at play here...and it is time for the FTC to get involved.

    Until then, go Palm...you plucky little rogues!

    Numbers are high enough that the iTunes ecosystem represents a barrier to fair competition for music devices.
  20. gbp
    gbp is offline
    gbp's Avatar
    Posts
    2,506 Posts
    Global Posts
    2,543 Global Posts
    #120  
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnnyPre View Post
    quoted.
    Seriously, Apple sells 57% of all online music...and has 25% market share for all music sold in the U.S. These numbers are insane...especially when one considers that delivered product then drops into an iTunes ecosystem targeted for just their devices.

    iTunes is *not* part of an iPod. It is the front end for the Apple store that sells 25% of all music sold in the US. The iTunes ecosystem is a store...yet Apple also uses it to an unfair advantage by making it both the store *and* the iPod synch software...thereby equating the store with a device family...and raising barriers for all other device manufacturers...while doing everything that they can to leave consumers with the impression that the store is only compatible with iPod devices.
    I might agree with your post except the 25% iTunes market share thing in US.

    I believe iTunes has more than 50% market share in the US.
    Where did you get your numbers from ?
Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast

Posting Permissions