USB Forum Rules Against Palm in Apple Dispute

Unfortunately I have to agree with the USB-IF and the implementation of the standard. Ethernet MAC addresses are vendor specific for the same reason - to prevent device ID collisions and consumer confusion. The correct solution is for Palm to team up with other content providers and compete against Apple.

Itunes is part of Apple

/end of story

OK Palm, just do your own sync utility and be done with it - read the iTunes library file so users don't have to manage two libraries and make sure you flag up any files that are protected when you do the sync.

I may not agree with a lot of Apple's practices, but they are entirely within their rights to restrict iTunes to Apple-only devices - controlling their platform is how they maintain their image and "stability" and that is perfectly acceptable for their brand.

iTunes has proven time and again to be crapware, full of bugs that makes Windows stop working, and full of bloat that amounts to a 90 meg download. Seems to me that Palm could just as easily sync with other software. Songbird is a 13 meg download. Or, better yet, why not write their own? preTunes sounds good to me.

On the other hand, a shame that Apple is shutting out a fair-sized potential for business. How many Pre owners out there might purchase songs from the iTunes store were they able to sync them. Apple is refusing to play nicely with others in the same way they did in the 80s by refusing to license their technology like IBM. To that I say, look at how many PCs there are in the world compared with the number of Macs.

Duh. Everyone (with the possible exception of Palm) saw that answer coming. If Palm didn't expect that answer from the USB-IF, then they aren't in touch with reality (in which case their shareholders should immediately demand that their Board of Directors take action).

I agree with you, and so does Apple. Write your own sync software and make it happen. You can probably even find a way to connect it to iTunes to make the process seamless for your users, but first you have to actually write some software and stop trying to impersonate an iPod.

BTW, am I the only one who is tired of hearing Palm whine about this? Quit trying to run your company by relying on software from your competitors, that's just plain foolish.

yes... no one would be stupid enough to do that... *cough* firefox *cough* make EU rape MS *cough*

i say screw apple they deserve what ever they get coming to them. if that means palm using itunes then so be it im all for it.

It's like spoofing the first three octets in an ethernet MAC - the one that identifies the manufacturer, so Apple is in the right on this one. No effect in my household, where all Apple products are banned anyway.

Doesn't really matter. Now that the workaround exists, 3rd party people and hackers will get it to work under their own steam.

Apple does something bad, Palm implements a quick fix and gets scolded for standing up against a monopoly. Our work here is done

So this USB-IF is run by...ah, here we go, board of directors.

Oh my. This list is...Oh god...Mussolini? Mao? Stalin? H...Hitler?

Apple's taken over the USB-IF! =O

Another governing body? Just how many are there?

Palm really needs to incorporate iTunes syncing within their OWN software. Consumers can do their purchases in iTunes and then Palm's software could pull the files and copy to their device. Apple cannot banned them from doing that since you can already do this with their music in the form of USB drives and non-iPod devices. As long as the music is DRM free.

So create a special in-between dongle that does the vendor ID faking, sell it for $5 and everyone's fine.

If Microsoft would do that, then everybody would be bitching about it... but as is Apple, the "views" get skewed a little...

Why would anyone use this, just stick with DRM free Mp3's. iTunes is for dummies.

Man I have an extreme dislike of iTunes...but as some of the previous posters mentioned, there are other solutions. I use Winamp still and manage my libraries with it, including iTunes music that I purchased years ago. Palm could offer a similar solution but I also think that people who prefer iTunes should be able to have a bit more choice.

Both sides have valid arguements. iTunes can be considered a monopoly, especially since there's a number of songs/artists/albums that are 'exclusive' to iTunes, and thus mandate an Apple product (if you go by the Apple handbook).

Palm on the other hand is not going by this approach the right way. Instead of making their own software, they try to use somebody else's software (iTunes). As other posters have said, there are other avenues that Palm could have taken. Their current route is not atypical of Palm either - their own software offerings have generally been mediocre and they've relied heavily on 3rd parties for software support in the past.

Exclusive to the iTunes Store doesn't mean you can only play the music on an iPod or other Apple device. You have to use iTunes to buy it, but once it's purchased, it's simply an AAC file and you can load it on any device that can play AAC+ (AAC-HE) files. No DRM on current music selections, and you and upgrade any old DRM encumbered music files from the iTunes store to DRM free versions for $0.30/song.

iTunes software serves 3 purposes:
1. An interface to browse and purchase music and video from the iTunes Store.
2. A playback system for music and videos.
3. Management of Apple iPod/iPhone devices (including firmware updates, music and video synchronization between computer and Apple devices).

Apple gives away the iTunes software and is not blocking Palm users from doing either of the first 2, only the 3rd. The built-in iTunes/iPod synchronization is designed for and supported exclusively on Apple devices. Palm simply needs to create or buy their own synchronization piece. Whether that piece is a separate application or if it's one that integrates into iTunes is a design choice for Palm.

iTunes is not a monopoly, either the software or the store. Nor is iPod a monopoly. In each case, Apple is the largest competitor in each market, but there are serious, viable competitors in each.

iTunes is DRM free, dummy

Would it be OK for Palm to offer an iTunes patch that would make iTunes sync with any USB device?

Board of Directors

The USB-IF, Inc. Board of Directors is composed of the following companies and their designated representative Directors:

Hewlett-Packard Company - Alan Berkema
Intel Corporation - Jeff Ravencraft
LSI Corporation - Dave Thompson
Microsoft Corporation - Fred Bhesania
NEC Corporation - Steve Roux
ST-Ericsson - Geert Knapen
Corporate Officers

The USB-IF, Inc. Corporate Officers are:

Chairman/President - Jeff Ravencraft, Intel Corporation
Vice-President - Geert Knapen, ST-Ericsson
Secretary - Geert Knapen, ST-Ericsson
Treasurer - Alan Berkema, Hewlett-Packard Company

yeah apple need to amke thier own software i mean heck if they need help let me know and Ill do it for them!

Wow, Apple is one to talk about using others peoples software but thats another story.
Isn't this exactly what microsoft was sued for in the EU, not letting other people play nice with its software? As well as norton and the other anti-virus software companies when microsoft plugged the holes in Vista and wouldn't release kernal information to make thier products work? Why is Apple allowed to do this when if it was another company most people would be screaming for a lawsuit.

No, it's very different.

1. iTunes is not integrated into the OS, you can remove it completely. In fact, you can use it on Windows. IE can't be removed from Windows.
2. iTunes is only necessary to buy items from the iTunes store or to sync an iPod/iPhone. Once you've purchased music or videos, you can play them on any media player you choose. They're not restricting access to the content regardless of what media player or platform you use.
3. Apple isn't preventing or limiting Palm (or anyone else) from selling, giving away, or installing software on a machine. MS was preventing Symantec, et al from installing their security software on Vista.
4. Apple isn't harming an existing market (as MS was with Symantec, et al)
5. Apple doesn't have the market power to assert "monopoly-like" influence over the market or their competitors.

If Apple were preventing Palm and others from installing their own sync software, or if they were removing the ability to use non Apple software or devices, then it would be similar. It's not.

Apple has done nothing to harm Palm or Palm customers. Palm tried to take a shortcut by emulating an iPod rather than do the work of developing their own sync software and it has backfired on them and their customers. Taking shortcuts in a competitive market place will often hurt you in the long run. Now it's time for Palm to put on their big boy pants, write (or buy) their own sync software, and start acting like a company that can actually compete. Until they do that, they're just whining and throwing a tantrum like a 5 year old.

For everyone who still says that MS would get sued for doing this, let me point out several examples where MS does exactly the same thing:

1. Zune software works only with Microsoft Zunes.
2. The ZunePass subscription music system will only work with a Zune.
3. You can't have live synchronization with MS Exchange Server, unless you license ActiveSync from Microsoft, and you still might have to write (or port) the sync software yourself if you're not using a Windows based device.

Frankly, the whole Zune situation is far worse than anything Apple has even been accused of doing. First, they created and promoted the "Plays for Sure" system and they got other vendors to develop and sell devices. Then, they effectively killed that system, screwing the vendors, and the buyers. Then, they started selling their own competing products and won't allow any competitors access to their services. But, I digress.