Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 3rd Oct 2009 19:07 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless So, you thought this whole tug of war over iTunes synchronisation was over, right? The USB Implementers Forum slapped Palm in the face, and exonerated Apple from any wrongdoing. The thing is though, the USB-IF is pretty much a powerless organisation, so Palm tossed them aside, and fixed webOS iTunes sync in webOS 1.2.1.
Order by: Score:
Here we go again...
by darknexus on Sat 3rd Oct 2009 19:17 UTC
darknexus
Member since:
2008-07-15

Come on, Palm. If syncing with an iTunes library means that much to you, interface with the xml database iTunes provides. That's, y'know, kind of why it exists. What Palm is doing, pretending to be an iPod, is just a hack and surely there are better ways to spend developer time and money than this. Your users gain nothing with this tug of war situation, although I suppose it gives Palm the media attention they really want.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Here we go again...
by Thom_Holwerda on Sat 3rd Oct 2009 19:24 UTC in reply to "Here we go again..."
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

If syncing with an iTunes library means that much to you, interface with the xml database iTunes provides.


The xml database is crippled. It only contains a subset of the data contained within the actual iTunes library, so it does not provide the same experience as actually integrating with iTunes itself.

Reply Score: 9

RE[2]: Here we go again...
by darknexus on Sat 3rd Oct 2009 20:03 UTC in reply to "RE: Here we go again..."
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

How much of the data does WebOS actually use from the iTunes library? Does it have all of iPod's features and thus need all of the iPod's data? I'm asking, I don't know as I don't have a WebOS phone.
Still, Palm might be better off forgetting iTunes sync if the XML data isn't enough for them. While it makes Apple look bad, it doesn't exactly make Palm look like angels either for using such a hack and further catching their users in the middle of it all. All a non-technical user would know is that first their iTunes sync worked, then they updated and it didn't, now they updated and it works again... it's not a good thing for their customers when they could be spending time making their own media manager or concentrating on the ones that do allow plug-ins or extended functionality.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Here we go again...
by mrhasbean on Sat 3rd Oct 2009 23:25 UTC in reply to "RE: Here we go again..."
mrhasbean Member since:
2006-04-03

" If syncing with an iTunes library means that much to you, interface with the xml database iTunes provides.


The xml database is crippled. It only contains a subset of the data contained within the actual iTunes library, so it does not provide the same experience as actually integrating with iTunes itself.
"

Does this additional data impact the ability of the device to sync with the database? I think not. This is nothing more than Palm wanting a free ride. If they want the whole feature set of iTunes they should write their own app - like Apple did. As you point out, there are other methods of sync'ing content with WebOS devices, just not as feature complete or novice friendly (in most cases) as iTunes. The XML database provides all information necessary for transferring content to and from the iTunes Library, if that's not enough write another app...

Reply Score: 6

RE[3]: Here we go again...
by jabbotts on Mon 5th Oct 2009 14:29 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Here we go again..."
jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

"they should write their own app - like Apple did"

Didn't Apple buy iTunes rather than write it from the ground up?

The general issue remains the same; Palm should not be spoofing authentication codes and Apple should not be devoting time to actively breaking compatibility with non iThingy devices. In this issue, Palm has less basis for justifying it's behavior. It's not like Apple is squeaky clean with it's own home grown source and "woe is me" victim act though.

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: Here we go again...
by LobalSurgery on Mon 5th Oct 2009 20:53 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Here we go again..."
LobalSurgery Member since:
2006-09-07

Didn't Apple buy iTunes rather than write it from the ground up?

More or less. They bought SoundJam, a popular shareware audio player. What they eventually released as iTunes was a not insignificantly modified version of this program (I continued to use SoundJam for a number of years as I preferred the modular, skinnable interface).

Apple's first choice was Audion (by Panic), but the developers punted and SoundJam was chosen instead. Excellent story at http://www.panic.com/extras/audionstory/

Reply Score: 1

What's missing?
by Stratoukos on Sat 3rd Oct 2009 23:51 UTC in reply to "RE: Here we go again..."
Stratoukos Member since:
2009-02-11

What is missing from the XML file that is in the actual iTunes Library? I am not arguing agains it, this is a genuine question. Apple says so here: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1660 . I opened the file and saw all of my music, podcasts and videos in it. I don't use iPhoto but in the same link they say that iPhoto uses the same file to store information. Is there any content that is missing or just iTunes specific data?

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Here we go again...
by Blomma on Sun 4th Oct 2009 15:44 UTC in reply to "RE: Here we go again..."
Blomma Member since:
2005-07-06

" If syncing with an iTunes library means that much to you, interface with the xml database iTunes provides.


The xml database is crippled. It only contains a subset of the data contained within the actual iTunes library, so it does not provide the same experience as actually integrating with iTunes itself.
"

Could you please elaborate on crippled, since as far as i know you can restore you're itunes library from the xml file. Also, it seems apple agree with me here, http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1451

So again, can you please tell us what exactly is crippled?

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Here we go again...
by FurryOne on Sun 4th Oct 2009 19:23 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Here we go again..."
FurryOne Member since:
2006-01-23

"[q] If syncing with an iTunes library means that much to you, interface with the xml database iTunes provides.


The xml database is crippled. It only contains a subset of the data contained within the actual iTunes library, so it does not provide the same experience as actually integrating with iTunes itself.
"

Could you please elaborate on crippled, since as far as i know you can restore you're itunes library from the xml file. Also, it seems apple agree with me here, http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1451

So again, can you please tell us what exactly is crippled? [/q]

Forget it! "Crippled" to Tom means that Apple isn't going to give away the iTunes application to Palm. Look at all the "Apple bashers" in this thread - have they even read what's been posted?...

EARTH TO APPLE BASHERS... THERE'S A PUBLISHED WAY TO ACCESS THE INFORMATION... RIM DID IT CORRECTLY & LEGALLY...PALM DIDN'T!

Apple is within it's right to block Palm's "non-approved" method. What Palm did may be illegal (It is according to the USB-IF.), but it is definitely unethical. So here's a question for the Moderators of OSNews...

Does OSNews support the continued unethical behavior of Palm?

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Here we go again...
by WereCatf on Sun 4th Oct 2009 20:59 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Here we go again..."
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Apple is within it's right to block Palm's "non-approved" method. What Palm did may be illegal (It is according to the USB-IF.), but it is definitely unethical. So here's a question for the Moderators of OSNews...

Does OSNews support the continued unethical behavior of Palm?


I am not saying it is acceptable behaviour from Palm, but let's look at this thing from a different angle: is it ethical for a company to try to lock a very popular music management and playing application only to their hardware when it could easily support dozens of different devices and which would make life a lot easier for the end-user? I have to say no to that too; artificially limiting the hardware your popular application supports just so you can increase your profits isn't ethical either. The correct and ethical way would be to make it easy for others to support your application and try to make the life for the end-user easy.

You may disagree with me, but try to atleast maintain your calm and argument properly.

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Here we go again...
by FurryOne on Sun 4th Oct 2009 22:08 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Here we go again..."
FurryOne Member since:
2006-01-23

... is it ethical for a company to try to lock a very popular music management and playing application only to their hardware when it could easily support dozens of different devices and which would make life a lot easier for the end-user?

Are you actually serious?

The correct and ethical way would be to make it easy for others to support your application and try to make the life for the end-user easy.

You mean so that other devices can sync with your iTunes library, like:

"BlackBerry Desktop Manager Software also integrates BlackBerry Media Sync, enabling Mac users to sync their iTunes music collections with their BlackBerry smartphone." (Quote from MacDailyNews.com)

You may disagree with me, but try to at least maintain your calm and argument properly.

I would if you actually presented a credible argument, but all you've been doing is whining, and you get no points from me for that. Before you whine again about Apple being the bad guy, do some reading. I'd suggest:

http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2009/07/27/why-apple-is-killing-the-p...

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: Here we go again...
by WereCatf on Mon 5th Oct 2009 07:44 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Here we go again..."
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Are you actually serious?

Yes, I am serious, and you decided to not to answer the question posed; is it ethical for any company whatsoever to try to lock end-users to their software and hardware? Notice that I didn't even mention Apple in my post, it could be just as well about any other company doing it.

I would if you actually presented a credible argument, but all you've been doing is whining

I posed a question. How is that whining? Try to answer the argument posted instead of trying personal attacks.

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: Here we go again...
by FurryOne on Mon 5th Oct 2009 20:44 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Here we go again..."
FurryOne Member since:
2006-01-23

...is it ethical for any company whatsoever to try to lock end-users to their software and hardware?

There is nothing "unethical" about locking hardware to software when one Company creates both as a compliment to each other. It happens all the time in the electronics business - not just in computers. Companies make major investments in R&D, and in many cases if you change software or hardware you will void the warranty.

Apple would be well within their rights to not publish a way for other
hardware to access iTunes information, but instead they allow other Companies that FOLLOW THEIR GUIDELINES to access what's needed to make use of iTunes libraries. Apple invested the R&D, Apple wrote the iTunes software, so Apple makes the rules as to how their software should be accessed. There's nothing unethical about that.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Here we go again...
by polaris20 on Mon 5th Oct 2009 03:41 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Here we go again..."
polaris20 Member since:
2005-07-06

So how do you feel about other hardware/software lock-ins that no one ever complains about? Because Apple isn't the only one that does this, though they're the only one anyone ever complains about.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Here we go again...
by WereCatf on Mon 5th Oct 2009 07:32 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Here we go again..."
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

So how do you feel about other hardware/software lock-ins that no one ever complains about? Because Apple isn't the only one that does this, though they're the only one anyone ever complains about.

If you had bothered to read my post I already asked this question myself and answered it just as well; I personally feel such lock-ins are bad no matter who does it.

Reply Score: 3

cjcoats Member since:
2006-04-16

...in several contexts. The court results: it is not proper to use embedded trademark recognition to prevent interoperability -- at least two cases I know of (printers, garage door openers). So the wrong-doer is Apple, here.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Here we go again...
by zlynx on Mon 5th Oct 2009 13:50 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Here we go again..."
zlynx Member since:
2005-07-20

Illegal? Unethical?

How is this any different from setting up Linux and Samba at IP 192.168.1.1 to interface with a Microsoft application that expects a Windows File Server at 192.168.1.1?

It doesn't look any different to me.

Reply Score: 3

The return of the Pre.
by Budd on Sat 3rd Oct 2009 19:26 UTC
Budd
Member since:
2005-07-08

Fixed? Nothing to be fixed here.They just restored back the sync.Pre is masquerading iPod/iPhone by using the same ID. Does that means that every software conceived to communicate with the iPhone/IPod will via USB will treat a Pre the same way?I'm curious what will follow next.I'm not familiar in the ways a contract with USB-IF works but I suppose that if there's such a contract then it should be respected by both parties.By the looks of it this is more like a "gentlemen agreement" and Palm didn't broke any law here.So,somebody please enlighten me: can USB-IF do something? Or Apple,of course.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by JayDee
by JayDee on Sat 3rd Oct 2009 19:42 UTC
JayDee
Member since:
2009-06-02

Wasted resources on 'fixing' something that should not have been an issue in the first place.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by vohaul
by vohaul on Sat 3rd Oct 2009 20:13 UTC
vohaul
Member since:
2009-05-04

"I'm already shaking my fist at Dell for refusing to sell Ubuntu netbooks here, and since my other fist is used to hold my own My Little Pony, I don't have a fist left to shake at you."

Haha! ;)

Also, yes, the Pre needs to come to the Netherlands. When the real-world reviews started rolling in, I decided to relegate my Omnia to secondary phone status (which is currently my SE W850) and just purchase a Pre, regardless of the price. I'm all suited up to become a Palm fanboi all over again, but if I don't get the goods, what's a man to do?

(whine, that's what)

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by vohaul
by Aaron1 on Sun 4th Oct 2009 01:04 UTC in reply to "Comment by vohaul"
Aaron1 Member since:
2006-01-19

While I don't think iTunes is great software I do have an iPod and I wouldn't want to maintain two libraries so I could also sync to my phone. I think both sides went too far. Palm shouldn't be faking their USB ID but Apple shouldn't be actively try to block other hardware.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by vohaul
by WorknMan on Sun 4th Oct 2009 02:54 UTC in reply to "Comment by vohaul"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

Also, yes, the Pre needs to come to the Netherlands. When the real-world reviews started rolling in, I decided to relegate my Omnia to secondary phone status (which is currently my SE W850) and just purchase a Pre, regardless of the price. I'm all suited up to become a Palm fanboi all over again, but if I don't get the goods, what's a man to do?


Get another phone. I have one issued from work, so I HAVE to use it. You have to jailbreak it just to change the notification sound on emails. The battery life is atrocious. What a horrible, horrible piece of sh*t.

Note: this is my first 'smart phone', so the others may be just as crippled. Guess I'm just too spoiled by the desktop experience and actually running decent apps. I realize that a phone is not a desktop, but a lot of people seem to think it is.

Reply Score: 2

loophole
by geleto on Sat 3rd Oct 2009 21:21 UTC
geleto
Member since:
2005-07-06

The "Media Sync mode" is a loophole to avoid breaking the USB-IF requrements. When in media sync mode - show a message: "Activating Media Sync, USB is now off", disable all USB-related functionality in the OS and the apps, give access only to the files and features required for the sync. If that's how it works - probably Apple and USB-IF can do nothing. Even if Palm is forced to remove the USB logo from the box, specs and documentation, I doubt anyone would care.

Reply Score: 2

Palm is being slimy
by sigzero on Sat 3rd Oct 2009 22:43 UTC
sigzero
Member since:
2006-01-03

There should be repercussions for forging another vendors USB id. Palm could have taken the high road and did it right. They didn't choose that though.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Palm is being slimy
by thewolf on Sun 4th Oct 2009 00:59 UTC in reply to "Palm is being slimy"
thewolf Member since:
2007-12-27

There should be repercussions for being a douche and forcing vendor lock-in.

Apple isn't the "good guy" here, just the slightly better guy.

Reply Score: 3

I hate iTunes & iPods...
by cmost on Sun 4th Oct 2009 00:05 UTC
cmost
Member since:
2006-07-16

Personally, I'm not a fan of Apple's gadgetry. I simply think most of their stuff is subpar, but gets by because it's "popular" or "cool" (if it costs more or Paris Hilton uses it, it must be the best, right?) Whatever! I think Palm should forget about iTunes altogether and bundle an open source (superior) media manager like the new Amarok 2.2 (http://amarok.kde.org/), which is available on all three platforms (e.g., Windows, Mac, Linux.) Why continue to promote Apple's software if Apple won't play nice. The open source community will be all too eager to oblige in making the Palm WebOS music syncing experience something to relish, especially if Palm tosses it a bone (monetary support) for its efforts.

Edited 2009-10-04 00:06 UTC

Reply Score: 6

RE: I hate iTunes & iPods...
by Zifre on Sun 4th Oct 2009 00:57 UTC in reply to "I hate iTunes & iPods..."
Zifre Member since:
2009-10-04

While there are many great music players that I think are better than iTunes, Apple has a huge monopoly in the online music store category. The iTunes music store is by far the biggest. Amazon MP3 comes close and is really the only other option. If Palm and Amazon could work on integrating Amazon MP3 into some good, open source music player, a lot more people might be willing to use it.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: I hate iTunes & iPods...
by Piot on Sun 4th Oct 2009 21:37 UTC in reply to "RE: I hate iTunes & iPods..."
Piot Member since:
2009-09-17

You do realise that the Palm Pre incorporates an Amazon MP3 store client on the device?

Reply Score: 2

RE: I hate iTunes & iPods...
by polaris20 on Sun 4th Oct 2009 01:26 UTC in reply to "I hate iTunes & iPods..."
polaris20 Member since:
2005-07-06

While I disagree with you on the Apple products (I happen to like my two MacBook Pro's and Mac Pro, along with my iPod Touch) I completely agree with you on the open source idea.

Why not embrace that, and not put the users in the middle of this childish crap? Amarok is a great media manager, and wouldn't cause all this hoopla over Apple and its bitter ex-employees.

Reply Score: 3

The real fix
by jspaloss on Sun 4th Oct 2009 02:00 UTC
jspaloss
Member since:
2007-05-10

was to correct EAS synchronization with Exchange 2007. And I for one am quite annoyed that I and hundreds of other users had to wait for this iTunes nonsense to be worked out before we got our email, contacts and calendar working...

Reply Score: 3

Powerless?
by tobyv on Sun 4th Oct 2009 02:57 UTC
tobyv
Member since:
2008-08-25

Palm has just ceded any influence they may have had in drafting future USB standards.

Not to mention Apple will have grounds for pushing more draconian access control measures in future versions of the standard.

Reply Score: 0

Palm media sync app.
by krreagan on Sun 4th Oct 2009 15:02 UTC
krreagan
Member since:
2008-04-08

If palm spent the money to create a media sync app they would have to allow other phones to sync with it or they would be hypocrites (as they are trying to get Apple to do) .

Well as a Pre owner... I see Palm as a pretty low level vendor anyway and don't have much respect for them as it is. I also own a 1G iPod Touch and the Touch blows away the Pre (except for phone functions of course). The WebOS is okay (needs some real work but has a lot of potential). The HW is poorly designed from a usability standpoint.

Ex: keyboard is not easy to slide open. The keys are too small for my fingers (med size hands). Not enough apps work in landscape mode. keyboard would have been more useful if it slid out the side (landscape mode) and the screen rotated. IF door for charger is very difficult to operate and seems flimsy (I expect this to break off in the next week or so). Although the biggest drawbacks are SW related. Needs VPN support badly! NEEDS MORE APPS! <<--- This is the biggest drawback!

KRR

Reply Score: 1

The Why
by mckill on Mon 5th Oct 2009 01:23 UTC
mckill
Member since:
2007-06-12

It's pretty simple why Apple is doing this and why they can, ignoring the fact that people might complain to Apple that their 'Ipod' isn't sync'ing right when it's actually a Palm... Apple did _buy_ Soundjam for a bunch of money and their developers to make iTunes what it is today.

How many years has iTunes been on the market? almost 10 years now, so put together the cost of Soundjam and at the entire iTunes dev team's salaries for last 10 years and you'll understand why Apple doesn't want people getting a free ride.

Oh ya, lets all ignore the fact that everyone else was able to write an app that interfaced with iTunes API.

Reply Score: 1

only fan boys care
by viator on Mon 5th Oct 2009 02:27 UTC
viator
Member since:
2005-10-11

My wife just bought a pre she tried to get her songs out of itunes i didnt work. Then she got the over the air update of 1.2.1 and it worked! She was happy she didnt give a crap how palm did it she only cared that they made it work. The ONLY people that are going to cry about this implementation are apple fan boys and a smattering of other geeks. Everyone else will just say wow palm is great they made my itunes sync work.

Reply Score: 2

RE: only fan boys care
by darknexus on Mon 5th Oct 2009 02:59 UTC in reply to "only fan boys care"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Everyone else will just say wow palm is great they made my itunes sync work.


Oh, sure... until it stops working again with either the next iTunes update or the next WebOS update and people begin to wonder just why the Pre's iTunes sync is unreliable. This isn't good for Palm's customers omatter how you slice it, it's as bad an image for Palm as it is for Apple.

Reply Score: 2

RE: only fan boys care
by Blomma on Mon 5th Oct 2009 04:16 UTC in reply to "only fan boys care"
Blomma Member since:
2005-07-06

My wife just bought a pre she tried to get her songs out of itunes i didnt work. Then she got the over the air update of 1.2.1 and it worked! She was happy she didnt give a crap how palm did it she only cared that they made it work. The ONLY people that are going to cry about this implementation are apple fan boys and a smattering of other geeks. Everyone else will just say wow palm is great they made my itunes sync work.


Ahhh it's nice to see that the reality distortion field not only applies to steve. The fact is that your wife's itunes sync will break at almost every itunes update and you will have palm to thank for that. Fair enuf if you find this acceptable as a customer, but me, i would be pretty pissed seeing how apple has provided third party vendors with a perfectly good way to sync without breaking at every update to itunes. And as a bonus, palm can do it without giving a big f--k you to the USB-IF. But hey, what would i know, im just a apple fan boy.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: only fan boys care
by phoudoin on Mon 5th Oct 2009 08:36 UTC in reply to "RE: only fan boys care"
phoudoin Member since:
2006-06-09

Because there is a limit to counter device-masquerading too, a future iTunes update will *even* break sync support of Apple *own* devices eventually.

In the end, everybody lose.
Wait, it's a déjà-vu, no?
Hum, can't remember where.
Nevermind.

Reply Score: 2

RE: only fan boys care
by polaris20 on Mon 5th Oct 2009 04:57 UTC in reply to "only fan boys care"
polaris20 Member since:
2005-07-06

No, customers that have a clue care. How's your wife going to feel when her phone won't sync again? Blame it on Apple? Or does she just not care and want it to work?

Blackberry can do it. Why can't Palm?

Reply Score: 2

RE: only fan boys care - nice shirt
by jabbotts on Mon 5th Oct 2009 15:34 UTC in reply to "only fan boys care"
jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

That's a really nice shirt and I want one of my own to wear. I don't care that it was produced by underpaid pre-pubescent philipino boys toiling in unhuman work conditions. I want my really nice shirt.

Or, in other words, how a product is produced and made to do what it does can be very important, even if it's only the technology geeks (or human rights geeks in the example) that take any notice.

Your wife is, of course, not wrong for not caring how the magic was done by Palm. However, the majority of consumers not caring how the magic is done has lead to the restrictive vendor driven technology market we have now. We now accept synthetic limitations imposed on technology purely for business benefiting reasons not consumer benefiting reasons.

Edited 2009-10-05 15:37 UTC

Reply Score: 2

hmmm
by viator on Mon 5th Oct 2009 15:15 UTC
viator
Member since:
2005-10-11

How does blackberrys implimentation work/not work compared to palms. Is palms more robust than blackberry? Also if apple changes somethings wont blackberry need to update as well?

Reply Score: 1

RE: hmmm
by viator on Mon 5th Oct 2009 15:24 UTC in reply to "hmmm"
viator Member since:
2005-10-11

I do however see on the blackberry support forums and the crackberry forums as well people having problems with the "media sync" app and itunes

Reply Score: 1

Exchange support for snow leopard
by mbooth9517 on Tue 6th Oct 2009 04:48 UTC
mbooth9517
Member since:
2006-07-15

I heard a feature of snow leopard was exchange support.. is that masquerading as an outlook client.. should Microsoft take steps to block this?

Reply Score: 1