Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 23:13 UTC
Apple Well, this is an interesting double standard. Remember Apple's reaction to Palm trying to tap into iTunes? They were pretty pissed, right? Well, it seems that in Apple's world, it's not okay to access their services unauthorised, but when Apple needs to do the same to someone else's services, it's suddenly not a problem. As it turns out, Apple violated Facebook's terms of service, knowingly, and willingly.
Thread beginning with comment 439553
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: I suppose...
by BallmerKnowsBest on Mon 6th Sep 2010 16:37 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: I suppose..."
Member since:

But the situation isn't comparable

You're right. Palm did nothing even remotely illegal, and merely undermined iTunes+iProducts as a lock-in mechanism. Apple, on the other hand, used Facebook's resources not only without permission, but knowingly violated a legal agreement in the process.

At the very least, Apple should be forced to reimburse Facebook for any bandwidth costs that Apple caused.

iTunes was never designed by Apple as something to be used with non-Apple products.

Of course not. For that to happen, Apple would need to put usability, functionality and user experience ahead of their desire to lock users into iTunes. It's extremely lucky for Apple that Microsoft is above those kinds of tactics. "Sorry, Steve-O, but Exchange was never designed to be use with non-Microsoft clients. Say buh-bye to Exchange support on the iProducts."

The cold hard reality is that a dying company in the dying days were desperately looking for something or someone to latch onto as to improve their profile and financial fortunes.

Riiiiight, I'm sure it had nothing to do with Apple's "if we can't have them, nobody can" bitterness over Palm hiring former Apple employees. Or the pathetic, thinly-veiled patent litigation threats that Schiller made towards WebOS.

Reply Parent Score: 2