|
 Originally Posted by Kupe
Yet I wonder why Palm thinks they have the right to link into someone else's proprietary software just to provide a capability they were too cheap to make themselves. Would it be so wrong for Apple to cut them off?
Whether it's wrong or right for Apple to cut the Pre off is a moot point. It's Apple's software, they can allow or choose not to allow whatever hardware to work with it that they want, assuming they are able to do so. If they are able to disable Palm's Sync feature through the iTunes software, they're perfectly within their rights to do so. What they CAN'T do is force Palm to remove that feature from their own device. I'm fairly sure there is no law that says modifying hardware to work with an already existing piece of software, even if it's from a different company, is somehow against the law.
What about when Apple switched over to Intel processors and created drivers and instructions built into OS X that allowed people to dual-boot Windows on a Mac? Should Microsoft have the right to force Apple to disable that functionality? Of course not, that's ridiculous. But this is no different really, just substitute Apple with "Palm", Windows with "iTunes, and "Mac" with "Pre". So basically, they can't make Palm cut out this functionality, but they can disable that feature in iTunes if they can figure out how to do so.
Of course, the question is, should they? It certainly wouldn't seem to be in their best interest. Allowing that functionality only provides the service to a larger user base and helps to bring in new customers and keep existing ones who switch to the Pre. If they disable it though, they'll only push customers to another service (probably Amazon since that functionality is already built into the Pre as well), and they run the risk of appearing monopolistic. It seems like a no-brainer to me, but Apple doesn't always seem to operate on common sense. We'll just have to wait and see what happens.
|
|
|