This is the only issue I stand on the side of Apple.

Palm, grow up, get over it and write your own sync software instead of wasting time and money with this childish tit-for-tat.

All you're doing is validating Apple's piece of shit software and thus empowering the competition "oh if Palm as so serious about syncing then iTunes must be good".

Just stop.

this is how it should be. props for palm for sticking to the man.

Why should Palm stop? Apple wants everyone to buy their music from iTunes then they tell them you can only sync that music if you own an iPod. That is some BS right there. I say go Palm, Apple has no right to lock customers out of syncing just because they don't own an iPod. You buy music on iTunes you should be able to sync it with whatever you want.

I can purchase any music I want as an .mp3 through any browser in the world, and play it on whatever hardware I want with no requirements or lock-downs whatsoever. It boggles my mind that anyone would put up with iTunes. It actually makes my head hurt trying to understand it.

Actually tayb, Apple has complete right to do so.

tayb:

iTunes is proprietary software designed to sync music with Apple's hardware platform. If it's not Apple it's not authorised to sync with iTunes.

No argument, no discussion, end of.

And why the hell would you be buying music from iTunes if you DIDN'T have Apple hardware? There's 101 different places to buy your music from so you'd have to be some kind of moron to buy from Apple then complain you can't sync it with a non-Apple device.

iTunes sucks. I'm with Zelog on this one. Now, if Apple wants to create a closed ecosystem where their hardware only works with their software and is the only way to play music bought from their store, it should hurt Apple like it did in the 90's. I see why Palm wants to ride along with Apple, but really Apple should be left to itself and be allowed to fall behind as the rest of us move on to open platforms and stores.

This all just feels like a Giant Dick measuring contest, seeing who's willing to be the biggest douchebag and have their aforementioned douchebaggery somehow justified. Apple is restrictive and supports DRM. Palm wants to market their hardware to people already lazy enough to use iTunes for their music. ( Go to Amazon or somewhere else for goodness sake, or better yet go support the bands you love live so they get all the profit from the album sale ). Both companies need to grow up.

It's not widely known, but Palm actually owns a chain of Australian grocery stores. . . .

Just kidding.

I agree it's stupid to give any money to Apple, but just because you were stupid enough to buy a song on iTunes, it DOES NOT mean you should have to pay a few hundred more on an iPod or iPhone.

What if you did own an iPod, but 18 months later the battery died? Refusing to give apple more money you just left your iTunes songs sitting idle on your computer. Now, Palm releases a fancy new phone, and low and behold, it also has the ability to sync with your songs. That sounds like a win win to the consumer.

BUT WAIT!!! Apple, not content to stick with the 99cents per song and $300+ they already got from you for a defective iPod, they disable synching to your brand new phone with a software fix, simply because they think they can! What right does Apple have to do that? Why should you be forced to buy another piece of hardware with a defective battery when you already own hardware that can synch with your music?

For one, I'm hoping this action results in Apple losing their USB license (they violated the terms of the USB licensing contract when they restricted iTunes via the USB identifier, something expressly prohibited). Of course, no legal body will investigate Apple for anti-trust (Google, Microsoft, etc.. are just bigger fish), but they should.

I'm more interested in what the other stuff this update added. Better copy/paste, file saving from web sites, etc...

Hehehe

What you guys are missing is the fact that there are a lot of people who bought their music from itunes and are now stuck with using it on their older ipod or itouch. A lot of those same users don't want or cannot afford the iPhone | AT&T duo so they go with Sprint. So should they be forced to carry their phone and ipod?

@hellwig

I think the USB-IF said Palm is in violation of the membership by doing this. Not Apple.

It's about time. I own neither an iturd nor do I run any crApple software... But to hinder the use of usb devices from other companies is a violation of your rights as a consumer. Basically it's like saying you can't use Emril spice in any pot or pan that's not made by Emril... think about it. How ticked would you be if you bought a CD produced by Sony and it wouldn't play in any cd player except those made by $ony? Any opposing opinion is nullified by simple logic.

I really don't understand why so many people that are obviously smart enough to surf the web, register on this site and check their email to verify it so they can post reply's to this thread, can't comprehend that their music is not locked down to using an iPod.

I have never owned an iPod, apple computer or any other PMP but I have purchased some music from iTunes recently and play it on my Samsung Omnia phone. I have to say the whole experience from purchase to listening to music on my phone was about as complicated as being able to post on most tech sites.

I think you're right. Palm accused Apple, but was themselves found guilty of violating the policy for spoofing Apple's USB vendor ID to begin with. Still, USB is about what the attached device can support, not who made it. I don't like Apple using an open standard to create a closed system (not that they did any different with BSD, AAC, etc.. etc..).

Actually, doesn't Apple allow other third-party device to sync with iTunes? Yeah, shut the fuck up.

@hellwig

Actually the believe that the USB-IF said that what Apple is doing is specifically allowed by the specification and their regulations. In reality companies make USB hardware all the time that requires their specific software to get full use out of.

Plug in any Logitech mouse, keyboard, controller, video cam etc.. and you will not get full use of the device without their proprietary software. You can get basic mouse and keyboard functions with Windows HID drivers but not have access to extra buttons, scroll features etc.

Same goes for Wacom tablets, Soundblaster X-Fi USB boxes, most cellular phones, hell the list goes on and on of people that use proprietary software with their USB enabled devices.

You can do that just fine, regardless of whose PMP you're using, as long as the songs you bought are DRM free (as all songs from iTunes are now). If you have older DRM encumbered songs from iTunes, you must first upgrade them to non-DRM encumbered songs before you can play them on any non Apple hardware/software. iTunes songs are now all DRM free and they're stored on disk as just another file. Any device that can sync by copying the files can play the songs.

No, Apple does NOT support DRM, they originally had to use DRM to protect the songs on iTunes, however, Apple fought against DRM and eventually got the record companies to agree to allow non DRM encumbered music downloads. Every song on iTunes is now available DRM free. Apple even gives detailed specs on how iTunes manages it's files other manufacturers can write their own sync software to allow their device to sync the music that managed by iTunes.

There are no lock-downs with iTunes, downloaded music is DRM free. One reason people would choose iTunes over Amazon or others is that the songs are available as 256k-bit AAC files, which is better than any MP3 format.

Seriously folks, you can buy software for about 20 bucks (there's probably free alternatives if you're willing to look) that will remove DRM from iTunes music. I've used it myself. Spend some pocket change and get non-DRM music files from iTunes music. No more worries.

if anybody cares to take a look in the folder where the itunes library file is stored, you will see an XML file (XML is a standardised data transport definition). If anybody cares to open this file in a text editor, you will see its a datafile describing the entire contents of your itunes library. 3rd party developers can use this file to get a current list of the users itunes library and then interrogate the itunes library to request whatever media file they want. the trick is, the 3rd party (in this case, palm) has to write their OWN program to do this, and they can't be bothered, so they simply resort to spoofing an apple vendor id instead.

I could be wrong on this second bit: i'm also sure apple does operate a licensing deal whereby a device can "officially" be allowed access to syncing with itunes via a licensing agreement with apple which would presumably involve money changing hands, so perhaps palm is trying to get the functionality for free by spoofing the vendor id (does anybody remember the motorola v3i razr that had itunes sync capability - officially!!!)

Ok, 1, it is not like the songs can't be synced to a pre, it's just apple refses to allow 3rd party devices that compete with theirs to sync natively, at apples expense alone. Hundreds of other devices use simple apps that read the iTunes metafile. Your songs, playlist data, ratings, etc can all be synced, and you can use Junes to manage it all. The only proprietary restrictions are on the control of the device itself, not the content.

2, the USB-if sided with apple already confirming this arguement.

3, you can buy music from almost anywhere (drm free) and use it with iTunes and iTunes music can be used with any other program thy plays aac or mp3. There is no vendor lock in. Palm can write their own sync app, they're just too lazy and cheap.

I don't understand what all the ruckus is about. Just pirate all your music and skip things like itunes.

I think Apples marketing and management group have some serious issues. They have alot to learn about people in general and what brings future customers in. Their Tv ccommercails are sad, they are trying to pick a fight with a 1,200 pound Garilla. If they want to grow as a buisness they need to learn more about people in general and more about what it takes to plant seeds for future customers. The games and attitude their useing won't get them anywhere except where their at now.

Except that your example is nothing like what is actually going on here.

Facts:
1. iTunes includes a feature allowing it to manage iPod and iPhone devices.
2. Since the iPod/iPhone sync module is not designed to be generic, but is in fact designed specifically to manage iPod/iPhone devices, Apple has made the component check to see if the connected device is in fact an iPod/iPhone and only attempt to sync/manage those devices.
3. Apple provides full documentation on the files iTunes uses to manage it's music and video files.
4. Vendors other than Palm have written their own synchronization software, using the info Apple provided, so that their devices can sync with iTunes. Apple has made no attempt to disable sync with these devices as they are properly using the officially sanctioned synchronization method.
5. Palm filed a complaint against Apple using the USB Vendor ID to restrict their sync component to only Apple devices with the USB-IF. The USB-IF said Apple is correct, and that in fact it appeared that Palm was misusing the USB Vendor ID.
6. Palm continues to refuse to write (or buy) their own sync software to allow iTunes to properly sync with the Pre.

In fact, given that iTunes now checks the USB Vendor ID and Palm claims they're able to sync anyway, Palm appears to be deliberately and knowingly violating USB-IF rules. I hope the USB-IF sanctions them.

This whole situation has convinced me to never consider buying a Palm product, and to actively recommend that people buy anything but Palm because Palm has demonstrated that they willingly disregard licensing restrictions (both Apples iTunes license and the USB-IF rules) and are unwilling to give their users the software necessary to make their products easy to use and interoperable.

If you want to stick you head in the sand and ignore Palm's blatant disregard of licensing terms, and their failure to support their own customers with proper software, preferring to escalate a "hacking" war instead of using published, supported, and sanctioned methods, you're free to do so. Just don't try to put the blame on Apple or the USB-IF when Palm's stuff fails to work correctly next week.

the new IPOD i bought earlier today will probably be my last one.i am sick of APPLE and their dumb BS.
go sue some more grocery stores while you are at it.i sell APPLES !!! Fresh ones too.

Not sure why they want to use the bloated iTunes store. I use Amazon MP3 so that they are in non-restrictive mp3s

Didn't the usb consortium rule that Apple was within their right to block the pre? And didn't they warn Palm about trying to bypass it anyway?

That was exactly my first thought after reading this article, even though I think Palm should continue to to do this.