http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/ Engadget Comments for Palm's Colligan rebuffs Steve Jobs' 'likely illegal' plea to stop hiring from Apple http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/Aug 25th 2009 10:11AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/
I thought you were joking with abit of /s but then I realized you're a friggen moron with delusional idea's about a tool(Jobs) that resembles a classical rapist.

Yeah man best of luck to you.]]>Aug 20th 2009 7:12AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/
Wow... dude... loosen the belt. I own an iPhone and while it's a great phone, it's not something I'd pray to. Maybe you should stop too, it might anger the Cell Phone Gods (read: Join the Circus).

]]>Aug 20th 2009 7:37AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/Aug 20th 2009 7:53AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/
WinMo while a nice OS has many problems...WebOS is a very solid OS for a first release. Substantially better than the Iphone OS v1.0. And yea...multi-tasking...something the iPhone still can't do well. Also...how many revisions did it take for cut and paste again?

While Steve J. is a visionary and very good at creating products...most people leave Apple because of one thing. Steve J. is apparently a perfectionist and somewhat of an ***hole. His way or the highway so to speak...and they chose the highway.

]]>Aug 20th 2009 8:09AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/Aug 20th 2009 8:22AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/Aug 20th 2009 11:25AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/Aug 22nd 2009 8:41AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/

"everything else is a toy"
Riiiight. And the iPhone isn't a toy? I mean don't get me wrong, it's a cool device, but it's definitely less functional and more playful than everything else. That probably has a lot to do with why it sells very well.

And anyways I take offense to your whole argument since life is all about experiencing new things, change, and choices. Plus Android kicks everything's ass ;)]]>Aug 20th 2009 1:23PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/
woof!

meow would be appropriate if it were 2 females...

(here comes the hurt!)]]>Aug 20th 2009 3:47PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/Aug 20th 2009 6:55AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/Aug 20th 2009 4:27PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/>> "...Oh, and Apple had just lost Jon Rubinstein..."

That's an interesting spin on his departure.

Lol!
]]>Aug 20th 2009 6:55AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/

They make great pizza's but that ain't all!]]>Aug 20th 2009 6:58AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/Aug 20th 2009 7:00AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/
Is name in reference to what you catch in mouth from Jobs when you're both alone?]]>Aug 20th 2009 7:43AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/2. Then the iPhone consequently took over the world. It seems like Apple did, in fact, "face the competition". And crush them along the way.

Not sure how you can look at Apple's success with the iPhone and say with a straight face that they're not facing the competition.]]>Aug 20th 2009 12:40PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/
The former is a gentlemen's agreement and possibly very legal. It's not the first deal we have seen. Another example being Google agree not to take advantage of the access being on the Apple Board provides. The latter very likely quite illegal. But it would require proof that right now we don't have. All we have is the word of a man with all good reason to make his company look like the good guys and Apple the bad guys. Same as the stunt with the USB-IF in hoping they would ignore Palm's 'illegal' spoofing of Apple's vendor code when deciding if Apple did anything wrong in rewriting itunes in such a way that the Palm Pre (and presumably all other non Apple devices) were shut out.
]]>Aug 20th 2009 3:35PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/Aug 20th 2009 10:24PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/
Can't Palm and Apple just get along?]]>Aug 20th 2009 7:01AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/"Can't Microsoft and Apple just get along?"
Never gonna happen.]]>Aug 20th 2009 7:46AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/And if apple is so big and great and has all that money they would not have to worry at all about people leaving right?
Mind you there is an old contractual rule in these regions where people sign on getting a job that if they quit they won't work in a similar position for a similar company for 6 months or so, and that seems all legal. of course smart employees would not sign such stuff so it would not work on those even if that is allowed.
]]>Aug 20th 2009 7:04AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/
I don't think that is what is being proposed at all. I don't see anything here that says that an employee that is working for Company A cannot apply for a position at Company B. All I see is a proposal that Company B should not headhunt (i.e. unsolicited approach) employees from Company A.]]>Aug 20th 2009 8:01AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/
Judging from that little snippet, it kinda sounds like Jobs was trying to get an agreement that neither company would HIRE someone who worked for the other, not just that they wouldn't headhunt from each other. Employees are free to apply for whatever job they want, but it seems to me that this kind of agreement would mean that HR people would look at a resume and see "oh, they work for Apple" and toss it in the trash. That kind of collusion probably is illegal.

If this is true, what arrogance on the part of Steve Jobs. "Hey Palm, we just cornered the smartphone market because we hired people who worked for you. Now that we're bigger and stronger because of it, how's about we make a deal where we don't poach talent from each other? Sound good?"]]>Aug 20th 2009 8:49AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/
IT_CompanyA has ClientX as its customer, Employee1 cannot apply for a position in IT_CompanyB if it's meant to work with ClientX as well, at least for six months.

Though I was given one of those forms for me to sign, I just spat on it. They were trying to take away my freedom.

They can take my life, but never take my freeeeeeeeedooooooooooooooooommmmmmmm!!!!!]]>Aug 20th 2009 9:02AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/
Hmm, on closer inspection of the Bloomberg story, it may well be that what was proposed was a prevention of recruitment of employees from the other company, even if those employees were applying for positions without having been approached first. Mind you, we only have Colligan's word to go on at this time so we don't know exactly what Jobs said, although it seems unlikely that he would make up such statements only to release them 2-years later.

@fLim

Going to work for the competition is an interesting topic. Here in my company, accepting a position with a competitor means that you do not serve a notice period, which seems fairly appropriate. Additionally, we certainly have IT contractors who have it written into their contracts from their contracting company that they are not permitted to work directly for our company, which is supposedly there to stop us from poaching the contractors (which we do, sometimes).]]>Aug 20th 2009 9:59AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/
To be honest, whether the proposed agreement was "not to hire" or "not to recruit" from each other, they both sound like illegal collusion agreements to me.]]>Aug 20th 2009 10:45AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/Aug 20th 2009 10:56AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/Aug 20th 2009 11:41AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/
Somebody please tell me they didn't.]]>Aug 20th 2009 7:04AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/
But it doesn't matter much anyway because there are alternatives to iTunes that work just fine with both the store and the pre.]]>Aug 20th 2009 7:25AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/
Remember, this article relates to events 2-years prior and iTunes has never supported the Palm Pre. However, it is clear that there was a degree of animosity between the two companies and that is no doubt still in affect.]]>Aug 20th 2009 8:11AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/
Palm, however, decided to go the idiot route and programmed the Pre to identify itself specifically as an Apple iPod to iTunes. Not only is that a trademark violation, it's just flat out stupid. Palm could easily have the Pre sync to iTunes like everybody else does. They are CHOOSING not to. The only thing Apple did is prevent the Pre from pretending to be an iPod, which is entirely within their rights to do considering the trademark violation issues here.

All Palm has to do is stop being stupid about it and simply write an app to sync to the XML file like everybody else. Problem solved. But Palm is insisting on being childish and annoying Apple for the sole reason of annoying Apple. There is no need for them to do it this way.]]>Aug 20th 2009 2:14PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/Aug 20th 2009 7:05AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/
wow, you're dumb. i don't think it's possible for you to blow apple any harder than you have already.

even the hookers are impressed.]]>Aug 20th 2009 7:50AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/
Sounds like fun.]]>Aug 20th 2009 8:09AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/Aug 20th 2009 7:10AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/
Look hotshot (Steve-o J.), dont call your competetions main dude (Jon R.), and say "please don't hire anyone from our company since they are leaving us"

Its time you leave your office/garage laboratory, head down the hallway, walk into apple's HR Department, and say, "Look guys we've got to see what we can do to keep our people here."

Work on your employee retention suckas.


But oh wait, there are actually people that dont have jobs right now, maybe you can look to them to fill the gaps!]]>Aug 20th 2009 7:23AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/Aug 20th 2009 7:45AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/Aug 20th 2009 8:05AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/]]>Aug 20th 2009 8:56AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/Aug 20th 2009 10:14AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/Aug 20th 2009 7:47AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/Aug 20th 2009 8:18AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/
In all fairness, using the term "fanboi" doesn't do you any favours either. I'm sorry but that is not a word and should never be used. Frankly, the term "fanboy" seems to be thrown around far too freely these days to refer to "someone who holds a different opinion" as an excuse to avoid debate.]]>Aug 20th 2009 8:48AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/
dude, every comment i read from you makes me feel dumber. why the f*ck would you want to limit a market to three things? do you not like competition? afraid a company will one-up your 'precious' (apple)?

and i suppose there's no room for android phones in your perfect market.





]]>Aug 20th 2009 7:55AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/
If, however, there was an agreement, or proposed agreement, that neither company will recruit staff that were or are currently employed by the other, then that would be wrong. Employees should be free to choose where they want to work and move as they see fit.]]>Aug 20th 2009 8:07AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/Aug 20th 2009 8:32AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/Aug 20th 2009 8:34AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/palms-colligan-rebuffs-steve-jobs-likely-illegal-plea-to-sto/I once worked in an Apple retail store and I use a Mac.

However, I'm falling more in love with Palm (and less in love with Apple) by the moment. Gosh, I'm blushing :)

*Just kidding about the blushing part.]]>Aug 20th 2009 8:45AM