Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 345678910 LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 193
  1. awrnsmn's Avatar
    Posts
    646 Posts
    Global Posts
    689 Global Posts
    #141  
    Great post!!! LMAO there are to many other options out there besides i-tunes. I personally will NEVER use i-tunes. I wish Palm would quit the dance with apple and find another app besides the one that happens to be a fierce competetor. I just don't understand it. It's like McDonald's using Burger King's fries to complete the value meal. Stupid. I bought the Pre for a Palm product, not a hybrid of Palm with apples music sync software! Is this a never ending loop?
  2. Huff's Avatar
    Posts
    114 Posts
    Global Posts
    136 Global Posts
    #142  
    From what I have read the USB-IF did NOT say that Apple can block Palm. It more or less said its not in their jurisdiction.

    USB-IF standards do not allow a manufacture to create a USB port that only works with certain vendors devices and deliberatly blocks others. What this means is that a company such as Dell cannot make their PC's with USB ports that only work with Dell manufactured USB devices. USB-IF dictates an open hardware platform standard.

    This was the issue behind Palms USB-IF letter. The USB-IF's stance is that they have no jurisdiction over a retail service run by Apple and not whether they feel Apple is right or wrong in blocking Palm. It is not a USB protocol issue. So Apple can legally block them so far (other court issues remain) but to me isn't a good choice for Apple to do.

    I feel Apple should open ITunes up to any phone since my computer can use it and it's not made by Apple. I have both an IPhone and now a Pre. I plan on dumping the IPhone and getting another Pre. That would allow me to dump AT&T, lower my plan costs by having both on Sprint shared plan and be done with Apples BS. So AT&T and Apple both loose my $'s.
  3. #143  
    I'm just saying that for me it is difficult to follow when you quote what you are referring to after you refer to it. Maybe it's only me.

    Quote Originally Posted by donm527 View Post
    uh... ok.
  4. DSPKweb's Avatar
    Posts
    447 Posts
    Global Posts
    468 Global Posts
    #144  
    Since Palm knows this will be an ongoing soap opera with Apple, "As the Itunes Turn," why don't they just work on a fix for the Itunes issue seperately that can be released whenever Apple decides to shut down the access. Then this would free up the rest of the release to be released and let us move on from this subject.
    Sanyo SCP 4500 > Samsung SCH 1900 > Sanyo SCP 5000 > Treo 755p > Palm Pre > HTC Evo
  5. #145  
    [QUOTE=Really mobile;1914274]
    Quote Originally Posted by jbg7474 View Post
    iTunes detractors:
    You guys just don't get it. The mass market uses iTunes. It's a fact of life. Palm would like webOS and the Pre to have mass market appeal. Therefore, the Pre needs to use iTunes. For most people, iTunes syncing is equivalent to the ability to use music on your phone. Palm could provide an application that mediates, but I think iTunes is a must one way or the other. Like it or not, drag and drop is not easy enough for most people, and most people will not look for other music solutions.

    Oh yeah, and the free publicity is good too.[/QUOTE]

    ...and doing things illegally or unethically is good too...

    ...my neighbor has the biggest house on the block. Everyone wants to live there but he does not want to sell or rent it....I think I'll squat there tonight...
    As the great Jack Nicholson once said "People who talk in metaphors oughta shampoo my crotch"
  6. fid
    fid is offline
    fid's Avatar
    Posts
    36 Posts
    Global Posts
    43 Global Posts
    #146  
    Quote Originally Posted by Huff View Post
    I feel Apple should open ITunes up to any phone since my computer can use it and it's not made by Apple.
    Why? For what purpose. Apple still has Fairplay agreements in place making 'them' liable if DRM is compromised while most of the income from iTune's content is not kept by them. This arrangement has been acceptable since it has helped sell Apple gear.

    Now you want them to be forced to officially support someone else's equipment and increase their liability. And they get what in return?

    If I were Apple, I'd respond with ... 'good luck with that'.
  7. #147  
    Nothing happens. The fight continues.

    if (apple breaks media sync <= 0)
    { printf("Apple hates Pre");
    printf("Apple Sucks\n")
    }
    else
    { printf("Pre rules\n");
    printf("Apple still sucks\n");
    }

    Lol. Add a loop statement for the continued breaking and fixing and your golden.
    Achill3s' Palm Pre: Modded and patched to death!!
  8. #148  
    Quote Originally Posted by Huff View Post
    From what I have read the USB-IF did NOT say that Apple can block Palm. It more or less said its not in their jurisdiction.
    What USB-IF did say is that Palm cannot use Apple's Vendor ID. The way the Pre fools iTunes is to use Apple's ID. Cain't do it no mo' Un Uh.

    But I think there is good news to this bad news. I suspect the reason that 1.2 has been delayed is that Palm wanted to restore Media Sync, and was waiting for the word from USB-IF. They did not want to release 1.2 without one-upping uppity Apple once more--how embarassing would it be!?!?

    Now that Media Sync is probably vulture victuals, I predict that 1.2 will be out in a few days, minus iTunes. If they ever resurrect Media Sync, it will have to come later.
    Kyocera 6035 > Samsung SPH-i300 > i330 > i500 > Treo 600 > 700p > 755p > PRĒ Minus > Touchpad & FrankenPre2
  9. #149  
    Guess people can interpret it in different ways...

    But for some I think the main point that USB-IF is saying that Apple is not doing anything wrong and the News Media is portraying it that way like this article...

    Palm's iTunes Protest Strategy Backfires - Tech Check with Jim Goldman - CNBC.com

    "This is America and no company should have the right to co-opt another's innovation. I've said before that "theft" is not another word for innovation."

    This is the free publicity that Palm wants?

    Quote Originally Posted by Huff View Post
    From what I have read the USB-IF did NOT say that Apple can block Palm. It more or less said its not in their jurisdiction.
    Last edited by donm527; 09/23/2009 at 04:24 PM.
  10. fwinst's Avatar
    Posts
    715 Posts
    Global Posts
    891 Global Posts
    #150  
    I've never used iTunes. I don't plan on using iTunes in the future (it's always ****ed me off that I would need to use an iPod to play music i PURCHASED). While I understand the reasoning for Palm to want to provide access to iTunes (both political and commercial), I believe it is time for Palm to pursue other avenues for the time being. Perhaps focusing on a way to sync with Windows Media, or Napster. Mr Rubenstein needs to let the personal issues go, and move forward. Palm's innovation does not need to be forever tied to Apple.
  11. #151  
    Quote Originally Posted by DSPKweb View Post
    Since Palm knows this will be an ongoing soap opera with Apple, "As the Itunes Turn," why don't they just work on a fix for the Itunes issue seperately that can be released whenever Apple decides to shut down the access. Then this would free up the rest of the release to be released and let us move on from this subject.
    Yeah I don't mind too much that they are working on it and ll, its stupid, thats for sure but they shouldn't hold back important updates for itunes. If they were releasing updates and were still d1cking around with itunes I don't think people would be so frustrated
  12. Huff's Avatar
    Posts
    114 Posts
    Global Posts
    136 Global Posts
    #152  
    Quote Originally Posted by fid View Post
    Now you want them to be forced to officially support someone else's equipment and increase their liability. And they get what in return?

    If I were Apple, I'd respond with ... 'good luck with that'.

    Huh? ITunes already works on ANYONES PC that runs Windows which at last look neither the hardware nor the OS is made by Apple. If ITunes is just for Apple products then why isn't Apple allowing ITunes to be used only for MAC's? The reason is MONEY. Theres a ton of Windows users that use ITunes. So why selectively block only one hardware platform (Palm) but allow almost all other non Apple PC's to function just fine? The selectiveness is what I have trouble with.
  13. Huff's Avatar
    Posts
    114 Posts
    Global Posts
    136 Global Posts
    #153  
    Quote Originally Posted by GoBears View Post
    What USB-IF did say is that Palm cannot use Apple's Vendor ID. The way the Pre fools iTunes is to use Apple's ID. Cain't do it no mo' Un Uh.
    I beleive Palm can still do just that. The only thing they can't do is apply a USB certified logo sticker to their products. Anyone can do anything they want with USB as long as they do not state they are USB certified and in compliance with USB-IF standards. Theres a ton of specialized hardware and software for USB that does not follow the standard. Perfectly legal.
  14. fid
    fid is offline
    fid's Avatar
    Posts
    36 Posts
    Global Posts
    43 Global Posts
    #154  
    Quote Originally Posted by Huff View Post
    Huh? ITunes already works on ANYONES PC that runs Windows which at last look neither the hardware nor the OS is made by Apple. If ITunes is just for Apple products then why isn't Apple allowing ITunes to be used only for MAC's? The reason is MONEY. Theres a ton of Windows users that use ITunes. So why selectively block only one hardware platform (Palm) but allow almost all other non Apple PC's to function just fine? The selectiveness is what I have trouble with.
    Apples licensing (for DRM) is to provide protection of Fairplay (i.e songs still covered, movies, apps) for up to 5 devices. One of those devices is your computer (PC, Mac or both). They didn't make that limitation up themselves. That was negotiated with the content providers... to provide software (and maintain integrity) on those platforms.

    The moment it moves out of Apple's environment (lets say to sync a Pre), why should Apple be liable for DRM violations because someone associated with Palm leaked Fairplay info. Apple get punished, not Palm.

    Jobs made this point in his 'open letter' to the labels awhile back.

    It could be be summarized as "Three can keep a secret, if two of them are dead."
  15. Huff's Avatar
    Posts
    114 Posts
    Global Posts
    136 Global Posts
    #155  
    Quote Originally Posted by fid View Post
    The moment it moves out of Apple's environment (lets say to sync a Pre), why should Apple be liable for DRM violations because someone associated with Palm leaked Fairplay info. Apple get punished, not Palm.
    I somewhat understand what you are saying. But what is the difference between say Palm vs. Dell vs. HP vs. IBM vs. Gateway vs. Sony or ASUS, MSI vs. Supermicro or Windows vs. Linux vs. SCO etc? All are 3rd party independent hardware or software manufactures. Why is Apple allowing ITunes to work with all of them but not Palm?
  16. s219's Avatar
    Posts
    498 Posts
    Global Posts
    1,008 Global Posts
    #156  
    Quote Originally Posted by Huff View Post
    Huh? ITunes already works on ANYONES PC that runs Windows which at last look neither the hardware nor the OS is made by Apple. If ITunes is just for Apple products then why isn't Apple allowing ITunes to be used only for MAC's? The reason is MONEY. Theres a ton of Windows users that use ITunes. So why selectively block only one hardware platform (Palm) but allow almost all other non Apple PC's to function just fine? The selectiveness is what I have trouble with.
    I am going to try and snatch a bite of reason out of this spaghetti plate of logic you just barfed up.

    iTunes *is* intended for Apple's devices -- iPods and iPhones. It's intended to make Apple's music devices easier to use. That's why they don't want Palm using it for their devices. Make sense? The whole point of iTunes is to make Apple's music products more appealing to consumers (and it does, which is why Palm is so fixated on it). They don't care what computer you run on at all; the computer platform is not the issue. It's all about the music devices. The iTunes app helps Apple sell more music devices. Why would they want to let Palm steal that competitive advantage?

    But the thing is, Apple doesn't prevent other companies from developing their own music software. The iTunes music library is open and has documented APIs anybody can use to write a front end. Palm is free to write their own version of a music app to sync with their devices. They keep claiming it's a "media rights" issue, but nobody is blocking them from the media in any way.
  17. s219's Avatar
    Posts
    498 Posts
    Global Posts
    1,008 Global Posts
    #157  
    Quote Originally Posted by Huff View Post
    I somewhat understand what you are saying. But what is the difference between say Palm vs. Dell vs. HP vs. IBM vs. Gateway vs. Sony or ASUS, MSI vs. Supermicro or Windows vs. Linux vs. SCO etc? All are 3rd party independent hardware or software manufactures. Why is Apple allowing ITunes to work with all of them but not Palm?
    Because when you buy any of those products, it doesn't take away an iPhone or iPod sale.
  18. Huff's Avatar
    Posts
    114 Posts
    Global Posts
    136 Global Posts
    #158  
    Quote Originally Posted by s219 View Post
    Because when you buy any of those products, it doesn't take away an iPhone or iPod sale.
    True but they do take away from Apple Mac sales.
  19. cgk
    cgk is offline
    cgk's Avatar
    Posts
    3,868 Posts
    Global Posts
    9,556 Global Posts
    #159  
    Quote Originally Posted by Huff View Post
    True but they do take away from Apple Mac sales.
    and? most ipod users don't have a apple mac, so what's the relevance?

    they don't care what platform you use itunes on, that's what the previous posts have been trying to tell you.
  20. Huff's Avatar
    Posts
    114 Posts
    Global Posts
    136 Global Posts
    #160  
    Quote Originally Posted by CGK View Post
    and? most ipod users don't have a apple mac, so what's the relevance?

    they don't care what platform you use itunes on, that's what the previous posts have been trying to tell you.
    Apple IMHO is cutting its own throat. If they allow ITunes to work with the Pre then they gain the sales from ITunes. I really do not think a large % of Pre buyers did so because of its ability to sync with ITunes. So the argument of lost IPhone sales because of Pre's sync abilities is moot.

    One can always just copy the songs over to the Pre. I suppose sync'ing appeals to some but no big deal. Certainly not enough to buy an IPhone over a Pre. Apples loses ITune sales is about all Apples blocking will do.
Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 345678910 LastLast

Posting Permissions