Apple, Palm hear privately from USB-IF on iTunes spat, involvement unlikely (update: the Forum's not pleased)
By Chris Ziegler 
posted September 22nd 2009 9:46PM
posted September 22nd 2009 9:46PM
Update: Digital Daily has come away with a very, very different story from the actual leaked communication, and it turns out that the USB-IF has actually sided against Palm on two different fronts. First, the Forum has told Palm that it doesn't see how blocking Palm's Vendor ID from accessing iTunes violates its policies; and second -- this might be the big one -- Palm's actually riled up the Forum by saying that it'll be using Apple's Vendor ID on the Pre going forward. It wants a clarification of Palm's "intent" within a week, saying such a move would be contrary to the rules and regs set out for the proper use of USB. At this point the question becomes, how many companies and industry bodies is Palm willing to piss off to keep iTunes working exactly the way it wants?
Rules or not, Apple needs to quit being dicks. If Pre becomes popular and it wants to tie into Apple's software, isn't that good for Apple anyways? If this was Microsoft, people would be crying out and scrawling M$ all over the place. Maybe we need a new one for Apple: A**hole.
guys, i'll let you finish... but Beyonce had one of the best videos of all time! One of the best videos of all time!
Sounds like a reasonable position from the USB-IF. Palm was always coming from a pretty indefensible position. This nonsense needs to stop and Palm either needs to do a deal for official iTunes support or implement a more traditional method of syncing. The current situation only harms their customers.
It’s not really about the iTunes app it’s about access to the iTunes store.
If there was another app that could work with the iTunes store I don't think this problem would exist.
The majority of online music is bought through iTunes and Apple has a controlling position in the online music space. The debate on this is whether their control is too high and so is not pro-consumer.
Palm first used the iPod Product ID and Vendor ID to allow it to work with iTunes.
Then Apple ‘patched’ iTunes and specifically stated this was to stop 3rd party devices like the Pre from working with iTunes.
Apple spokeswoman Natalie Kerris said “It also disables devices falsely pretending to be iPods, including the Palm Pre."
Reference: http://www.businessweek.com/technology/ByteOfTheApple/blog/archives/2009/07/apple_to_palm_i.html
To me this means Apple went on the offensive to stop the Pre specifically working with iTunes. Back to their dominant position in online music sales – this effectively gives them an unfair advantage in the marketplace and in the long run is not in the best interest of the consumer.
On the specifics of the Palm/Apple situation – it’s handbags at dawn, but the bigger issue of the level of control Apple has over online music sales I expect this is going to run and run….
...and those people are the same people who don't know they could use simple drag n' drop to transfer music to and from (most) USB devices which are recognised as standard Mass Storage from just about any OS.
who cares ? why did iTunes work out ? some people don't know how to transfer music from and to their devices. they don't know what is a file, and they don't know where are the diles on their computer. they don't know how to differenciate an MP3 file from another. they don't know anything about formats... I'm pretty sure iTunes was developped at first mostly for those people.
Its estimated that there are 100 million itunes users.
If this free software is boxing people in to buying apple products, they will end up getting the same anti-trust heat as microsoft got back in the day. It's just in a different direction (software to hardware).
Its way better for the consumer that itunes isn't permitted to be exclusive.
I hate the concept of another media player being launched anyways.
I love this hack. A little mischief is nice sometimes.
and actually the RIAA should care about this more than anyone else.
It sort of deters non i-whatever people from using the store.
This is exactly the ground work palm is setting up, apple's to dumb/money hungry to see it.
Apple should allow all mobile players to sync with itunes the same way Windows Media Player does. Anything else reminds me of the lawsuit MS lost some years back when they integrated IE into Win95. And I consider this a worse case than that one, as, as far as I am aware (lost of as :p) Mac-users don't have that much of a choice in the Media-sync'ing software they can use as Windows users do. This is just an example of Apple taking advantage of their leading market position in this sector.
Call MS and tell them they should let EVERY music player with all their ineffeciencies sync with the Zune software. It wont happen. But of course its apple so every gets all riled up about it. Again for the people in the back, Plug your random shitty music player into your windows computer and launch that Zune software and see how far that gets you.
Palm is in the wrong, there is no other explanation.
Pre or consumers should be able to pay the royalty of a reasonable amount in order to facilitate the syncing. No doubt there's intellectual property at stake that Apple feels like is being stolen in some way. Remember iPod/iTunes is a platform not just a PMP. Hopefully they could compromise.
We've been reading with much interest the stupid, almost ludicrous public battle that been going on between Palm and Apple, and given that shareholders money is being frivolously wasted, we thought it only fair to put our two cents worth.
Is Apple In The Wrong?
From an Apple Shareholders Perspective: Why should other companies profit from my investment? Apple has increased my shareholder value by developing innovative and useful products and services that consumers want to buy.
From a Palm Shareholders Perspective: Why didn't Palm use my investment to develop its own iTunes store? Why is Palm dependent on Apple for the success of its products? Why has Palm failed to establish itself as the leading smart phone manufacturer?
Apple has invested hundreds of millions of dollars into developing iTunes and the App Store. You can't honestly expect them to give that investment away to competitors without some sort of compensation? If Palm, or any company for that matter, is so hell bent on offering Apple's products to its customers, then they should pay some sort of royalty.
Maybe we're a little too capitalistic in our views, but money is what makes the world go round. Without people investing in companies we wouldn't have wonderful innovations like the iPhone, the automobile, or the television.
Didn't iTunes used to support plugins for other devices? ...I have a 64mb mp3 device that did that with iTunes 2 and 3. ...Why doesn't Palm do the same?
Or maybe AT&T cant get service in my town and I spend a lot of money on iTunes. Yeah I have my iPod but I dont want to always carry both, it would be nice for integration to work without hoops. Apple would have more money generated through iTunes by allowing the Pre and other MP3 devices for that matter to sync with it.
Apple computer was partly founded on funds earned by selling blue boxes. These were devices to cheat the phone company out of getting tolls for usage of their equipment.
Apple is now crying because someone wants to make their device able to play music bought from their store, using a technique not much different than spoofing a network card's MAC.
Power to the palm!
If Apple had any sense, they would make their software, and store, support all music players.
This is by far the funniest approach I have seen in a while. While I do not believe Palm should be making the Pre identify as an iPod they should have the rights to use the iTunes software as they wish. I mean so long as they conform to the coding standards to make sure that it is 100% compatible with the software. I do not feel they should be allowed to do this for free of-course Apple should license them this service. The more devices using iTunes = the more money generated from the music/movie purchases. Apple is only going to hurt themselves with this battle and I feel both parties need to come to a resolution.
Yes iTunes is intellectual property and Apple has the right to not allow anything other than their music players from connecting to the software and syncing but think about this... What makes it so MSFT HAS TO ALLOW iPods? Sure there is iTunes on WIndows but if MSFT wanted to they could start blocking any Apple iProduct from connecting and communicating with the operating system. They would have the right as they are not responsible for writing software that ALL devices would be supported by... Windows is intellectual property as well so while you can plug your nice USB device into your system what says that the OS has to see it? Is that in violation of USB-IF and if so why? If the machine sees the device but not the OS who's to say the OS has to?
I use Apple computers at home and linux at work so the OS debate is not one I am going to get into but just think.. If on a software level Apple has the ability to block any device from using it's software why can't Microsoft and if they did what do you think would happen to the iPod market. I doubt many would go out and buy a 2,000 apple computer so that their $300 iPod would work with their computer. There would be an increase of iPod postings going up on Ebay and Craigslist.
End resolution I think that the two companies should come to a resolution soon because they are making themselves look like idiots.. Palm either work out a deal with Apple or write your own software. Apple realize that you are not the giant you think you are. A simple switch in the Windows operating system and you will be in Palms shoes.