Page 1 of 11 123456 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 201
  1.    #1  
    Why do they keep on trying to make sure the Palm Pre works with iTunes? It's not an Apple product, are they that brainless that they can't build their own software program to work with THEIR phone? Instead they keep trying to hack the phones OS so it will work with iTunes? I don't get it...I dumped my iPhone to come to Sprint & the Palm, the last thing I want to do is continue using iTunes!

    Just like with the battery issue I had, I called Palm and they did everything in their power to not correct the issue, they did not want to replace my battery! I had to demand a supervisor and then even he was refusing to replace my battery, it was only until threats started to fly before he said "ok will replace it!" This company is a trip! This kind of service is not going to get them where they want to be in the smartphone world...sorry folks!

    Again, I just don't understand why they are so lazy, build your own program to work with the Palm and stop trying to use someone elses program that was built for another device. Seriously these people are f'n LAZY as hell!
    SPRINT...the carrier I never thought I'd switch to (and didn't lol)!
  2. #2  
    Sorry about your battery problem. If your within your 30 days....exchange the whole phone. Now onto the Itunes....

    Here's how I see it. If crapple were to bundle thier software with thier hardware (ipod/iphone) in the box and only offer UPDATES on the web, then to me that makes it proprietary and palm would have no business touching it.

    But....crapple FREELY distributes it's Itunes software on the net for anyone to download at anytime...FREE. So to me, that makes it UNproprietary and anyone with a phone/mp3 player from any manufacturer should be able to sync with it at any time they so choose. I know crapple is just upset that Palm spoofs the ID of the Ipod to sync, but hey if crapple doesn't want anyone to use it's software, then they need to bundle it with thier harware. That simple. So it's crapple that needs to get a grip. Allowing the sync, would be a win/win situation for both companies...but crapple doesn't want to own the world, they just want the world to own only thier stuff.

    Now, Palm offers amazon mp3. You can use mediamonkey or double twist to sync the pre, or you can just drag n drop. Your choice. So get off thier back. They are just trying to make it easy for people who OWN 1000's of songs from itunes to be able to be used on other devices (pre) without being tethered to crapples high priced, overrated, and somewhat smug looking ipod and Iphone.
  3. TyBec's Avatar
    Posts
    175 Posts
    Global Posts
    239 Global Posts
    #3  
    Really? All though I really hate iTunes (a lot), have you ever used a bundled music app with an mp3 player? They suck. Plain and simple. Most if not all other programs (MM, Foobar, J River Jukebox, et al) should sync with the pre all ready. To have on the posters that your product syncs with something a lot of (weird, imo) people all ready have on their computers is a big plus.

    Lazy? Maybe. But what ever they could come up with would never be better than the apps they could have made for webOS.

    On a side note, if Palm is lazy for not making a horrible music manager, why are you here and not making horrible apps for the phone?
    Bell Pre- running 2.1 @ 800MHz
    Samsung Galaxy Tab (stock)
  4. #4  
    Quote Originally Posted by TyBec View Post
    Really? All though I really hate iTunes (a lot), have you ever used a bundled music app with an mp3 player? They suck. Plain and simple. Most if not all other programs (MM, Foobar, J River Jukebox, et al) should sync with the pre all ready. To have on the posters that your product syncs with something a lot of (weird, imo) people all ready have on their computers is a big plus.

    Lazy? Maybe. But what ever they could come up with would never be better than the apps they could have made for webOS.

    On a side note, if Palm is lazy for not making a horrible music manager, why are you here and not making horrible apps for the phone?
    One bundled software comes to mind, although you can also DL it for free. Zune Software, especially version 4, completely owns iTunes.
  5. #5  
    Can you sync the Pre to the Zune software? I'm asking cause I really don't know.
  6. #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by Gator352 View Post
    Can you sync the Pre to the Zune software? I'm asking cause I really don't know.
    No, I wish.
  7. jaupro's Avatar
    Posts
    6 Posts
    Global Posts
    15 Global Posts
    #7  
    why would you make a brand new software that most people won't touch because "they never heard of it.and the general consumer would prolly call it "a poor man's Itunes" I mean really..windows tried to do something similar with zune. I literally know nooone who uses zune. This isn't about being lazy or not lazy its about market and demographics. Potentially stealing a couple Ipod/itouch/ipod loyalists who maybe don't have an iphone for one reason or another and the pre is potentially more appealing. Itunes already has a HUGE market in the US and attatching the word to ur product makes ur product more desirable. Just my 2 cents.
  8. #8  
    Originally posted by Dayvidpriddy. . .Again, I just don't understand why they are so lazy, build your own program to work with the Palm and stop trying to use someone elses program that was built for another device. Seriously these people are f'n LAZY as hell!
    What do you not understand about free publicity and that Phone is a hardware and not software developer. Did the people you purchased your PC from HP, Apple, etc actually write all of the software that you use for your PC?

    Palm is simply trying to make the same statement about Smartphones that exists for PCs. It's unrealistic for people to buy and use brand new software every time they upgrade or buy a new PC. The same should be true for smart phones that are using the same type of files i.e mp3, mp4, etc.

    Did you think it was okay for Microsoft to only allow your software to work with one PC? How would you feel if Google decided that only the Android can access google, google voice, google docs, google maps and the other numerous google web sites that are used on mobile devices? That would be okay because they wrote the websites and can decide what devices can access them, right?

    Apple wrote software for PCs, not Macs. Unlike Microsoft with Window Media Players and other software, Apple only wanted it to work for their devices. Then they should only sell their devices to people who own Macs. It is ridiculous that people have to load their PCs with a one trick pony software. I don't know how Apple has gotten away with it for so long.

    Quote Originally Posted by Elysian893 View Post
    One bundled software comes to mind, although you can also DL it for free. Zune Software, especially version 4, completely owns iTunes.
    Does it work with the Pre and does it allow you to sync and make playlists?
  9. #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by bdhu2001 View Post
    What do you not understand about free publicity and that Phone is a hardware and not software developer. Did the people you purchased your PC from HP, Apple, etc actually write all of the software that you use for your PC?

    Palm is simply trying to make the same statement about Smartphones that exists for PCs. It's unrealistic for people to buy and use brand new software every time they upgrade or buy a new PC. The same should be true for smart phones that are using the same type of files i.e mp3, mp4, etc.

    Did you think it was okay for Microsoft to only allow your software to work with one PC? How would you feel if Google decided that only the Android can access google, google voice, google docs, google maps and the other numerous google web sites that are used on mobile devices? That would be okay because they wrote the websites and can decide what devices can access them, right?

    Apple wrote software for PCs, not Macs. Unlike Microsoft with Window Media Players and other software, Apple only wanted it to work for their devices. Then they should only sell their devices to people who own Macs. It is ridiculous that people have to load their PCs with a one trick pony software. I don't know how Apple has gotten away with it for so long.



    Does it work with the Pre and does it allow you to sync and make playlists?
    Let's say you and me develop an MP3 player that is pretty solid. But what really makes it stand out is the sync program we developed for it that offers one of the best seamless experiences in the market.

    In fact the reason this mp3 is so popular and makes us money is mostly due to the sync program being so easy to use.

    Over time, you add in a store to buy songs, and continue to update it. You make it more available by writing a windows version so that you can sell more mp3 players.

    All of a sudden, a competitor comes along and hacks its way into using your sync program in the same manner. That advantage you have to sell your mp3 player is gone.

    Sure you could choose to let these competitors hack your software and simply let them buy songs. But your main revenue stream is selling mp3 players..not songs. Giving your main advantage away is the same as losing sales. Besides, that competitor already has an app on their device that directs its users to amazon to buy songs.
  10. #10  
    Originally posted by cardfan:
    All of a sudden, a competitor comes along and hacks its way into using your sync program in the same manner. That advantage you have to sell your mp3 player is gone.

    Sure you could choose to let these competitors hack your software and simply let them buy songs. But your main revenue stream is selling mp3 players..not songs. Giving your main advantage away is the same as losing sales. Besides, that competitor already has an app on their device that directs its users to amazon to buy songs.
    I understand your point, but copyrights only lasts for a certain amount of time and Google and everyone else that develops a phone should do the same thing with all of their software and sites. It would give their phone, the Android an advantage.

    I guess what will have to happen is for people to stop using their software for any of their devices. When all the traffic stops going to Apple and iTunes they'll play a different tune. Just as they did when they decided to make iTunes for the PC and the iPod compatible with a PC instead of just a Mac.

    Apple wanted money from the masses, not just people who own Macs. When Apple started changing their new devices so that I had to stop purchasing upgrades or constantly buy new accessories is when they lost all credibility and support from me.

    Apple has become a money grubbing grasper who even affects their own loyal customers to try to squeeze more money out of them. They've changed the video chip in their iPods so that people with new Nanos or iPods would have to purchase new accessories to watch video through the TV and now they've changed the charge chip so that my husbands new Nano can no longer charge in his specially installed iPod car dock or be charged with the numerous iPod accessories that we have around the house.

    iPod docks can only be used for iPod devices, but the new generation of Nanos, iPods, and iPhones will not work with them. You can no longer purchase or install an iPod accessory and know whether or not it will with your devices. Personally, I will keep what we currently own, but I refuse to upgrade or buy another iPod device.

    I am done with Apple.
  11. xtn
    xtn is offline
    xtn's Avatar
    Posts
    434 Posts
    Global Posts
    711 Global Posts
    #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by bdhu2001 View Post
    How would you feel if Google decided that only the Android can access google, google voice, google docs, google maps and the other numerous google web sites that are used on mobile devices? That would be okay because they wrote the websites and can decide what devices can access them, right?
    I'm all for Palm spoofing usb info to make their product work if they want to. There are no laws preventing it.

    I'm also in favor of Google making their stuff available to everyone on every platform if they want to, and I would be upset if they didn't.

    BUT it's their right to choose otherwise if they think that's what's in their best interest. I wouldn't FEEL happy about it, but my feelings do not superceed their business decisions.

    xtn
  12. #12  
    Originally posted by xtn:
    I'm all for Palm spoofing usb info to make their product work if they want to. There are no laws preventing it.

    I'm also in favor of Google making their stuff available to everyone on every platform if they want to, and I would be upset if they didn't.

    BUT it's their right to choose otherwise if they think that's what's in their best interest. I wouldn't FEEL happy about it, but my feelings do not superceed their business decisions.

    xtn
    I agree with everything you said. I don't have a problem with what either company is doing in terms of this back and forth software stuff. It really doesn't affect us customers because we have so many other options.

    My opinion of Apple changed when they changed the rules and game on their own customers. To be perfectly honest, it was not the first time Apple did this on a product I purchased from them.

    Previously Apple developed a hardware device to view the iPod on a larger screen. In their updates of iTunes subsequent to the device, they eliminated iTunes ability to let you view Videos on PC through your iPod. I simply stopped updated iTunes and made sure to never have iTunes on update ever since.

    This had nothing to do with them trying to keep a competitor from using their software. This was Apple trying to squeeze more money out of their current customers and force those customers to buy another product.

    Later Apple gave up on thinking they could force people to buy another device to view Video from their iPod and went back to allowing it on PCs. Now they are simply changing new iPods and nanos so that you have to buy new accessories to get them to charge and work.

    I hope it backfires on them and that people simply stop upgrading. That is what I'm doing.
  13. #13  
    Apple, Palm, etc..their priority is making a profit and increasing stock. Usually that involves selling a product or service. Making people happy or satisfying a need is usually the way you do that.

    It all shakes out in the end. If enough people are upset with apple, they'll have to change.
  14. #14  
    very interesting explanation and makes me look at it with a different angle...

    your right in that it's a vehicle for selling it's hardware... and offers that seamless experience with their products. they put out itunes for anyone to use the ability to buy music and manage the music through their itunes software and play it on any PC that you choose to put it on.

    But if you want to fully utilize the software and all its features then you have to buy the ipods and the iphones and for those owners is a value-add. Is that wrong from a business/product standpoint?

    Apple gives the API available so that other manufacturers can provide 3rd party solutions to rightfully access the music they have on the software and can copy them over... but why does Apple have to be forced to give features that they want specifically for their product and that they feel is important to maintaining their products?

    If you were a businessman, you would say it's not right for people to demand you to let them use your product and hack into it because 'you're too big.'

    Apple is still selling products... they are still coming out with products and probably introducing new products like the tablet that will take PCs to another level as they did phones and can still take itunes to another level with it. They probably dont know what new things they can use it for but don't need people telling them what to do with their software because they feel they have a right to their asset and possible new features that they want for their OWN products.

    That's like telling them you've sold enough ipods and phones (boy they really have ) and you make enough money so you can give up a little bit of this itunes feature and let others have it. Apple already has projected that ipod sales will start falling off in the future and wont be the cash cow it use to be but people will force them to take that hit now and be part of killing their own product?

    I don't have any other Apple products besides going through their 2G and now 3GS (ok, daughter has an old nano)... I'm a PC guy using MS7. I rarely use their iTunes to manage my music and I actually hate it cause they always stuck programs in the background to check for updates and if I didnt have a phone I'd never use it. And I really didnt see the big fuss why Palm has to force this when they can use the API to access users music and move them over.

    But this post makes me see it differently but from a businessmans perspective. If I were Apple I would be damned if I am going to let competitors ride on the back of my product that I built up and own and am still innovating with. Honestly, I hope Apple keeps fighting them and feel Palm is wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by cardfan View Post
    Let's say you and me develop an MP3 player that is pretty solid. But what really makes it stand out is the sync program we developed for it that offers one of the best seamless experiences in the market.

    In fact the reason this mp3 is so popular and makes us money is mostly due to the sync program being so easy to use.

    Over time, you add in a store to buy songs, and continue to update it. You make it more available by writing a windows version so that you can sell more mp3 players.

    All of a sudden, a competitor comes along and hacks its way into using your sync program in the same manner. That advantage you have to sell your mp3 player is gone.

    Sure you could choose to let these competitors hack your software and simply let them buy songs. But your main revenue stream is selling mp3 players..not songs. Giving your main advantage away is the same as losing sales. Besides, that competitor already has an app on their device that directs its users to amazon to buy songs.
  15. #15  
    I bought Mac and it came with iTunes, its my computer and I should be able to sync whatever the eff I want.
  16. jewel's Avatar
    Posts
    638 Posts
    Global Posts
    666 Global Posts
    #16  
    Rubenstein knows what he's doing. He is after all the father of the iPod. What I see is the marketing genius behind this move. The more controversy this makes the better the exposure to the market.
  17. #17  
    Apple is trying to have it both ways and that just doesn't work.

    If Apple really cared about this, they would bundle iTunes with the iPod/iPhone and not make it available by other means.

    But Apple wants to make the most money possible... so they offer iTunes as a free download to anyone. Therefore even if you don't have an iPod, they can still make money when you purchase songs.

    Apple will gladly take your money if you don't own an iPod. But they won't let you sync with your non-Apple MP3 player? Sorry, they can't have their cake and eat it too.
  18. #18  
    Originally posted by donm527:
    . . .Apple is still selling products... they are still coming out with products and probably introducing new products like the tablet that will take PCs to another level as they did phones and can still take itunes to another level with it. They probably dont know what new things they can use it for but don't need people telling them what to do with their software because they feel they have a right to their asset and possible new features that they want for their OWN products.

    That's like telling them you've sold enough ipods and phones (boy they really have ) and you make enough money so you can give up a little bit of this itunes feature and let others have it. Apple already has projected that ipod sales will start falling off in the future and wont be the cash cow it use to be but people will force them to take that hit now and be part of killing their own product?
    If I hadn't owned previous Apple products (iPod video, Nano, etc) products that Apple changed software on, that I purchased from Apple, I might be on their side too; unfortunately, I've been affected by their changes even when I'm only using their products and their software. Thus, a different opinion.

    When Apple changes software and pins on customers, customers have no choice or options. In some cases the customer doesn't even realize that a feature, accessory, or etc no longer works until you've had the product for a few months.

    I like Palm being a nuisance and I didn't notice everyone cry for AT&T when they broke up MaBell and allowed competitors to use MaBells phone lines so that they could take away MaBell's business.
  19. edlex's Avatar
    Posts
    657 Posts
    Global Posts
    660 Global Posts
    #19  
    I think since palm has put their music dl's in the hands of amazon they should be the ones that should build a media center with wireless downloads of all media including video.
  20. #20  
    My two cents:


    It's not laziness. It has to do with unfair competition, which happens when someone starts to get a monopoly...and then uses that position to crush competition and stifle innovation.

    Apple sells 57% of all of the world's online digital music purchases through iTunes...and 25% of all music sold in the US. That's the point - they are a *huge* entity in music sales, bordering on nearing a monopoly...and the way that they sell the music is through one piece of software - iTunes. Thus, iTunes is *primarily* the front end of the store that sells most of the music sold today. It is *not* primarily a device synch program....but they do use it as such for *their* devices only and then go out of their way to block others from doing what they can to allow their devices to synch with it as well to level the playing field and lower the bar for consumers to the same point that it is for iPods.

    Palm isn't asking Apple to do anything for them. They haven't asked for an open API or even API changes. Instead, Palm had to reverse-engineer the API and then chase it. Hardly lazy.

    Many similar examples exist in other parts of the business world...and sooner or later, the FTC steps in and forces the company in question to create a "firewall" between various parts of their companies so that the one part (the iPod division in this case) does not have an undue advantage over competitors who make similar devices...just because they also run the music store...and make no mistake, iTunes is a music store primarily. That is not is secondary function...not when it is selling 25% of all music in the US and 57% of online music globally.

    If this was Microsoft, the FTC would step in and force a firewall between the two divisions and force the iTunes API to be an open standard to which anyone can synch. In fact, it has happened with MS, when there were accusations that MS applications had an unfair programming advantage because MS also wrote the OS and included functions that benefited their apps and penalized other apps. Given the market share of Windows, the govt stepped in. Of course, we all have a love affair with Apple, so I have limited expectations to see a similar standard applied.


    (okay, perhaps that was four cents )
Page 1 of 11 123456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions