MobileInfocenter

iTunes 8.2.1 Blocks Palm Pre Media Sync

iTunes IconApple has released a new version of iTunes today (v8.2.1) which has been confirmed to break the Palm Pre's media sync functionality. Apple's release note states:

iTunes 8.2.1 provides a number of important bug fixes and addresses an issue with verification of Apple devices.

Apple had warned that it "would not guarantee future compatibility" with "unsupported third-party digital media players" in a previously support document. This action seems to make it clear that Apple disapproves of the backdoor method Palm used to add support for iTunes into webOS.

Palm Pre Itunes Update

Pre users wishing to keep iTunes media synchronization should simply hold off on upgrading for the time being. Alternative options for managing media also exist such as doubleTwist, the Missing Sync for Mac OS or manually via USB drive mode.

Article Comments

 (60 comments)

The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. PalmInfocenter is not responsible for them in any way.
Please Login or register here to add your comments.

Start a new Comment Down View Full Comment Thread

I wonder what they're using NOW to verify Appleness

SeldomVisitor @ 7/15/2009 11:19:40 AM # Q
And can IT be (legally) copied...

Whatta game!

RE: I wonder what they're using NOW to verify Appleness
bhartman34 @ 7/15/2009 11:53:16 AM # Q
I would assume that they're simply querying the root hub, as many have suggested they would do. The root hub identifies as a Palm Pre.

I think the only way that Palm could overcome that change would be a firmware update. And I find it hard to see the point in that, anyway. I think that's too much effort just to sync with iTunes, when there are other, easier ways to get unencrypted AAC files on to a Pre (which is all we're really talking about doing here). Simple conversion software can let your iTunes files sync with any software you want in MP3 format. Once your music's converted, you can buy the rest of what you want through the Amazon store, which provides a fairly seamless experience (other than the need to use Wifi, of course).

Reply to this comment

It was a risky idea to begin with.

DevPOV @ 7/15/2009 11:24:57 AM # Q
It was a risky idea to begin with: Let's fake being our major competitor's hardware so we can sync with our major competitor's software!

It really would have been fine to use support it via USB transfers or whatever. They could have spun that just fine.

Now it just looks silly.

RE: It was a risky idea to begin with.
DevPOV @ 7/15/2009 11:25:57 AM # Q
All these years and still no Edit Comment.
RE: It was a risky idea to begin with.
SeldomVisitor @ 7/15/2009 11:36:15 AM # Q
> ...No Edit Comment.

For a very brief moment a montn or three ago, there was a little icon up there with all the other little icons by the Subject that APPEARED to be an Edit function. It went away fairly quickly, though.

Reply to this comment

I-Tunes.. bla bla bla

bussie1966 @ 7/15/2009 11:38:11 AM # Q
Just don't install the new version of I-Tunes. Why do you need always the newest version. There is no need for it many times.

BTW, there are other and better ways to put your music on the Pre.

Apple.. bah!

RE: I-Tunes.. bla bla bla
SeldomVisitor @ 7/15/2009 12:34:14 PM # Q
Right! We all know newer versions don't fix old bugs! Just keep the old buggy version!

RE: I-Tunes.. bla bla bla
bhartman34 @ 7/15/2009 3:23:17 PM # Q
SeldomVisitor wrote:
Right! We all know newer versions don't fix old bugs! Just keep the old buggy version!

The operative word in bussie1966's post is "always". There's no reason to upgrade just because there's a newer version. In this case, in particular, the only "enhancement" is to break Pre syncing. If the next version of iTunes brings actual enhancements, there might be an argument for upgrading, but to upgrade for the sole purpose of breaking a feature doesn't make any sense.

It's no different than when a Microsoft Office "update" breaks file compatibility with another product.

RE: I-Tunes.. bla bla bla
SeldomVisitor @ 7/15/2009 4:04:52 PM # Q
Uh...Apple's words on the new version, quoted right up there in the PIC article:

== "...iTunes 8.2.1 provides a number of important bug fixes..."

Sheesh.

RE: I-Tunes.. bla bla bla
freakout @ 7/15/2009 4:33:19 PM # Q
^^ Piffle. Every software update everywhere claims to deliver "important bug fixes". (In my not-so-humble-opinion, the only essential bug fix for iTunes right now is the one that deletes it from your PC entirely.)

Nope, bussie is right on all counts. Not only do you not need to update if Pre/iTunes syncing is essential for you, but there are better ways to do it too.

Reply to this comment

Smooth move, Apple

hgoldner @ 7/15/2009 1:44:55 PM # Q
Nice move, Apple. You're starting to look like 'Big Brother' in your own 1984 style commercial.
RE: Smooth move, Apple
LiveFaith @ 7/15/2009 8:30:16 PM # M Q
I wonder if they are giving much thot tohow this makes them look to consumers?
RE: Smooth move, Apple
rmhurdman @ 7/15/2009 10:07:41 PM # Q
Purchasers of the Pre are not customers of Apple, so Apple probably doesn't care what they think. If they wanted to use iTunes, they'd buy and iPhone. If they buy a Pre, they're probably not that concerned about the ability to use iTunes. It was stupid of Palm to advertise it in the first place.
RE: Smooth move, Apple
Winterbay @ 7/16/2009 1:01:24 AM # Q
I'm not so sure about that. I know several people who use iTunes as a music store and nothing else (i.e. they connect it with their iPods and have no iPhone and do not plan to buy one, or they buy non-protected music). They are thus still customers of Apple but do not plan on buying an iPhone.
By limiting access to iTunes from Apple-products only Apple is limiting their costumer base to people who own one of their products which I find somewhat interesting.

Now, I have an iPod, but would never in my life install iTunes and was very happy when I found an extension to Winamp that works really well with synching. (I also wouldn't have bought the iPod, so it's just as good that I won it...)

RE: Smooth move, Apple
DarthRepublican @ 7/16/2009 3:20:34 PM # Q
So how much of the media player market does Apple have to own before they start to get the same anti-trust static that Microsoft constantly gets?
Screw convergence
Palm III->Visor Deluxe->Visor Platinum->Visor Prism->Tungsten E->Palm LifeDrive->Palm TX->Palm Pre
Visor Pro+VisorPhone->Treo 180g->Treo 270->Treo 600->Treo 680->T-Mobile G1->Palm Pre
http://mind-grapes.blogspot.com/
Reply to this comment

Oh *no*! We can no longer use iTunes! (swoon)

freakout @ 7/15/2009 4:26:15 PM # Q
Truly, this is a dark day for Palm fans and Pre owners everywhere. No longer can we use the world's worst desktop media software to sync our music! Oh, the anguish...!
RE: Oh *no*! We can no longer use iTunes! (swoon)
jca666us @ 7/15/2009 4:31:58 PM # Q
Freak,

Palm was stupid enough to offer "compatibility" with itunes in the first place.

Their engineering dollars could have been much better spent developing their own syncing software.

Still, it's only Wednesday, and one advertised Palm feature has been eliminated.

RE: Oh *no*! We can no longer use iTunes! (swoon)
freakout @ 7/15/2009 4:36:09 PM # Q
What's your point? iTunes still sucks.
RE: Oh *no*! We can no longer use iTunes! (swoon)
gmayhak @ 7/15/2009 5:44:07 PM # Q
freakout @ 7/15/2009 4:36:09 PM
What's your point? iTunes still sucks.
--
maybe, but there are still a few people using those iPod things...
As of January 2009, the store has sold 6 billion songs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITunes_Store
Tech Center Labs
RE: Oh *no*! We can no longer use iTunes! (swoon)
jca666us @ 7/15/2009 5:58:04 PM # Q
My point is that this is a pointless thread.

itunes may suck to you - and for you this news is insignificant. For those who saw itunes compatibility as a killer feature for the Pre are bound to be disappointed, but it's entirely a result of Palm's laziness and stupidity.

Instead of developing their media sync in a compatible manner, they exploited a hole in itunes and got burned. Seems alot like the Palm of old.

itunes automatically generates an XML file of all your songs and playlists - so that NON-itunes software can access that information in a standard way.

In other words, itunes already supports 3rd-party access to your library - and the files themselves can be copied anywhere.

Palm just needs to play by the rules; develop a separate app that accesses iTunes XML data to transfer the media files, rather than using a cheap ass hack into itunes.

BTW, both Apple and Palm pay the USB Consortium a fee that assigns unique vendor IDs. Palm faked out Apple's ID to use during sync mode with iTunes. That is against the USB Consortium rules that Palm signed when they received their own vendor IDs.

Palm can write their own app to interfaces with iTunes like everyone else does.

RE: Oh *no*! We can no longer use iTunes! (swoon)
freakout @ 7/15/2009 6:05:00 PM # Q
You seem awfully defensive, jca666us. How're you ever going to get to home base with Jobs with such an insecure personality?
RE: Oh *no*! We can no longer use iTunes! (swoon)
ssid12 @ 7/15/2009 7:04:38 PM # Q
If you really want to use iTunes then just buy missing sync by Mark/Space, that was deemed good enough for all the old Palms don't see why its deemed unworthy now?

RE: Oh *no*! We can no longer use iTunes! (swoon)
hgoldner @ 7/15/2009 9:00:14 PM # Q
iTunes is not the worst desktop software for music; Zune is (and only because Sony's old Sonic software is no longer required).
RE: Oh *no*! We can no longer use iTunes! (swoon)
usakarateri @ 7/16/2009 5:50:18 AM # M Q
true. zune is worst. but izunes (opps, i mean itunes) is right next to it!
RE: Oh *no*! We can no longer use iTunes! (swoon)
abosco @ 7/16/2009 7:34:47 AM # M Q
I hate to break it to you, but if you don't use iTunes, you're in the minority. This is a bigger deal than you're making it out to be.
RE: Oh *no*! We can no longer use iTunes! (swoon)
freakout @ 7/16/2009 8:13:16 AM # Q
^^ Maybe. I know I've been banging the "Palm-should-have-their-own-media-sync-software" drum myself for ages. But I just don't see people having based their decision to buy a Pre on the basis that "it can sync with iTunes". I think it's a big deal for nobody except the crazies like jca666us.


Reply to this comment

Apple Smacks Palm, and Palm's Hollow Plea

Gekko @ 7/16/2009 4:53:26 AM # Q

Apple Smacks Palm, and Palm's Hollow Plea
Published: Wednesday, 15 Jul 2009 | 4:20 PM ET
By: Jim Goldman

Look, I'm all in favor of consumer freedom and choice, but not at the expense of the innovators who bring new technology to the market, and when that freedom affects their ability to control their innovations. A wink wink and a nod nod when it comes to scoring iTunes on a non-Apple device might be one thing, but geez, Palm's been loudly banging a drum that Pre users can backdoor their way into iTunes.

Which leads me back to my original question: How can Palm honestly believe it could co-opt another company's technology and use it as a selling point for its own product? Exploiting another's security loophole and tricking the software into believing your product is really one of theirs is a poor substitute for "innovation." The underlying message seems to be, we don't have our own way of getting music onto our multimedia device, so we'll just take someone else's. And yet when the first company takes action against the second, Palm's response is to attack the move as "anti-consumer." Huh?

http://www.cnbc.com/id/31927379/site/14081545


RE: Apple Smacks Palm, and Palm's Hollow Plea
DarthRepublican @ 7/16/2009 3:44:15 PM # Q

Apple Smacks Palm, and Palm's Hollow Plea
Published: Wednesday, 15 Jul 2009 | 4:20 PM ET
By: Jim Goldman

This article seems a tad confusing. Let me see if I can parse it.

Look,

I'm smart, you're dumb. So listen up as I talk to you like a six-year old.

I'm all in favor of consumer freedom and choice, but not at the expense of the innovators who bring new technology to the market, and when that freedom affects their ability to control their innovations.

I'm all in favor of freedom and choice for companies of which I am personally a fanboy of or whose stock I own, and when that freedom gives them the ability to ruthlessly stamp their competitors out of existence.

A wink wink and a nod nod when it comes to scoring iTunes on a non-Apple device might be one thing, but geez, Palm's been loudly banging a drum that Pre users can backdoor their way into iTunes.

For Palm to make the lives easier for the users of both Apple's products and its own by making them compatible is one thing, but geez, Palm's been actually advertising that compatibility as a selling point of the Pre in a way that might make iTunes users actually want to buy it. Only Apple has the right to do that.

Which leads me back to my original question: How can Palm honestly believe it could co-opt another company's technology and use it as a selling point for its own product?

Which leads me back to my original question: How dare Palm believe that it can make its products more desirable by making them compatible with those of a another company?

Exploiting another's security loophole and tricking the software into believing your product is really one of theirs is a poor substitute for "innovation."

Technology should be a closed, walled garden. If users want compatibility, they have to buy all of their products from the same company and replace all of them at the same time.

The underlying message seems to be, we don't have our own way of getting music onto our multimedia device, so we'll just take someone else's.

The underlying message seems to be, we don't want our users to have to install five different proprietary music players, so we'll just make their lives easier by letting them use their own.

And yet when the first company takes action against the second, Palm's response is to attack the move as "anti-consumer." Huh?

http://www.cnbc.com/id/31927379/site/14081545


And yet when the first company takes action against the second, Palm's response is to attack the move as "anti-consumer." Huh? Of course it's anti-consumer! That's what tech companies are supposed to do. They are supposed to line their pockets by creating incompatible products which force consumers into an endless upgrade cycle where they have to buy all new hardware every six months. Now if you'll excuse me, Apple just refreshed my month-old MacBook Pro and I have throw away the old one and get in line to buy a new one.
Screw convergence
Palm III->Visor Deluxe->Visor Platinum->Visor Prism->Tungsten E->Palm LifeDrive->Palm TX->Palm Pre
Visor Pro+VisorPhone->Treo 180g->Treo 270->Treo 600->Treo 680->T-Mobile G1->Palm Pre
http://mind-grapes.blogspot.com/
RE: Apple Smacks Palm, and Palm's Hollow Plea
freakout @ 7/16/2009 5:26:52 PM # Q
+1, Darth!

The ridiculously OTT self-righteous mewlings of those applauding this move really do need a good splash of cold reality. They can try and spin it however they like, but the bottom line is:

*Palm made a new player that was compatible with iTunes, benefitting all users of the software.

*Apple deliberately and openly broke said compatibility, with no motivation except protecting its own walled garden.

Seems rather cut-and-dried.

RE: Apple Smacks Palm, and Palm's Hollow Plea
jca666us @ 7/16/2009 6:01:40 PM # Q
Cut and dried? Stop with the nonsense freak.

>*Palm made a new player that was compatible with iTunes, benefitting all users
>of the software.

Said compatibility was done in an incompatible way - by having the Pre access a hole in itunes (kinda like the hole in your head). So, in effect, it's not really compatible.

Considering Ruby was an Apple guy, you would think he'd know how to access itunes in a compatible fashion. Guess not!

How does a Pre having access to itunes benefit all users of itunes? That's an idiotic statement - but coming from you, that's to be expected.

>*Apple deliberately and openly broke said compatibility, with no motivation
>except protecting its own walled garden.

More misinformation freak? Apple broke the HACK Palm used; however, access to itunes via the xml file is still open and allowed.

itunes is Apple software; as such, Apple is obligated to protect their IP.

Palm had every opportunity to make their media sync compatible with itunes; they didn't. They chose a hack and got their asses burned!

RE: Apple Smacks Palm, and Palm's Hollow Plea
hkklife @ 7/16/2009 6:28:38 PM # Q
Not my exact words in many of the quotes, but it's close enough. Pretty reasonable commentary here:

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9135599/Analysis_Palm_Pre_sync_flap_hardware_issues_hurt_Palm

Pilot 1000->Pilot 5000->PalmPilot Pro->IIIe->Vx->m505->T|T->T|T2->T|C->T|T3->T|T5->Zodiac 2->TX->Verizon Treo 700P->Verizon Treo 755p->?

RE: Apple Smacks Palm, and Palm's Hollow Plea
freakout @ 7/16/2009 7:00:57 PM # Q
Your unbelievable stupidity continues to astound, jca666us.

Said compatibility was done in an incompatible way

Leaving aside the complete self-contradiction within that sentence...

No, it was done exactly the way it works for Apple's own products. You plug in your Pre. It appears in iTunes. You sync it. In short, it offered better compatibility than any other third-party iTunes sync solution by allowing you to directly use the iTunes interface to manage your sync.

You cannot get anymore user-friendly and compatible than that.

How does a Pre having access to itunes benefit all users of itunes?

Because all users of iTunes are not necessarily happy owners of iPods. Maybe they don't want an iPhone, but they love the Music Store. Maybe (for some bizarre reason I'll never fathom) they prefer iTunes' interface above all others. Whatever the case, just because you use/like the software does not necessarily mean you use/like the hardware.

Thus, more devices fully compatible with iTunes = more choice for iTunes users. Choice = good.

Let's play a word replacement game:

How does a Logitech mouse having access to Microsoft Windows benefit all users of Windows?

Apple broke the HACK Palm used;

...even though said hack did nothing to harm their software and was, in fact, all on the Pre's end.

however, access to itunes via the xml file is still open and allowed.

So in other words, you're free to access iTunes content with a third-party device, you're just not allowed to use iTunes' own interface to do so. Clearly, that is not an ideal solution for the iTunes user, who should be welcome to plug in any device they want and sync it without being obligated to install and use yet another piece of software that simply serves as an unnecessary middleman between them and the media they legitimately own.

itunes is Apple software; as such, Apple is obligated to protect their IP.

And if Palm was redistributing iTunes and modifying it to their own commercial advantage, that might actually be a relevant point!

RE: Apple Smacks Palm, and Palm's Hollow Plea
jca666us @ 7/16/2009 7:37:50 PM # Q
>>Said compatibility was done in an incompatible way
>Leaving aside the complete self-contradiction within that sentence...

It's not a self-contradiction - just a lack of comprehension on your part freak.

If something is implemented in a nonstandard and unsupported way, then it may work (for a time), but it's not compatible.

>No, it was done exactly the way it works for Apple's own products. You plug
>in your Pre. It appears in iTunes. You sync it. In short, it offered better
>compatibility than any other third-party iTunes sync solution by allowing
>you to directly use the iTunes interface to manage your sync.

It was done exactly the way Apple *did* it, by faking itunes into believing the Pre was an ipod. It offered better *apparent* compatibility - by cheating.

Apple has a supported way for itunes sync with third party devices - Palm should have played by the rules and this would be a non-issue.

>You cannot get anymore user-friendly and compatible than that.

Yes you can, by using an ipod or an iphone - didn't you hear the news? Pre isn't compatible with itunes :)

>>How does a Pre having access to itunes benefit all users of itunes?
>Because all users of iTunes are not necessarily happy owners of iPods.
>Maybe they don't want an iPhone, but they love the Music Store. Maybe (for
>some bizarre reason I'll never fathom) they prefer iTunes' interface above
>all others. Whatever the case, just because you use/like the software does
>not necessarily mean you use/like the hardware.

>Thus, more devices fully compatible with iTunes = more choice for iTunes
>users. Choice = good.

Choice=good

Freak=buffoon

Idiot wonder - any device can be compatible with itunes - if said vendor of the devices adheres to Apple's rules - because - believe it or not Apple has provided a standard interface for itunes and apple makes the software.

>Let's play a word replacement game:

>How does a Logitech mouse having access to Microsoft Windows benefit
>all users of Windows?

The difference here is that logitech adheres to a standard - usb or bluetooth

itunes has a standard - xml. If palm adhered to that standard, there would be no issue.

>>Apple broke the HACK Palm used;
>...even though said hack did nothing to harm their software and was, in fact,
>all on the Pre's end.

However, the hack exploited a hole in itunes that Apple has every right to eliminate. Their software, their rules.

>>however, access to itunes via the xml file is still open and allowed.
>So in other words, you're free to access iTunes content with a third-party
>device, you're just not allowed to use iTunes' own interface to do so.
>Clearly, that is not an ideal solution for the iTunes user, who should be
>welcome to plug in any device they want and sync it without being obligated
>to install and use yet another piece of software that simply serves as an
>unnecessary middleman between them and the media they legitimately
>own.

itunes was never advertised as the be all and end all synchronization software for every mp3 player and media device in the world. Some people should realize what they are - and aren't - getting with itunes before they install it.

As for the media they legitimately own - nothing is stopping them from syncing it with any device out there.

>>itunes is Apple software; as such, Apple is obligated to protect their IP.
>And if Palm was redistributing iTunes and modifying it to their own
>commercial advantage, that might actually be a relevant point!

What? Palm was accessing itunes in an unauthorized way - Apple did what they had to do...it is their software.

RE: Apple Smacks Palm, and Palm's Hollow Plea
Gekko @ 7/16/2009 7:45:43 PM # Q

jim goldman of cnbc has long been in the tank for apple. go back and look at all of his prior apple "reporting". in fact, the current head of PR for apple had goldman's job at CNBC.


RE: Apple Smacks Palm, and Palm's Hollow Plea
freakout @ 7/16/2009 8:17:05 PM # Q
Firstly, jca666us, you need to look up the word "compatible" in a dictionary. Here, I'll do it for you:

http://cougar.eb.com/dictionary/compatible

designed to work with another device or system without modification; especially : being a computer designed to operate in the same manner and use the same software as another computer

Something cannot be "compatible in an incompatible way" as you put it. It either is or it isn't.

Apple has a supported way for itunes sync with third party devices

Yes, they do. They have a way that makes any non-Apple hardware a second-class citizen. If you're an iTunes customer who wants to use non-Apple hardware, then that makes you a second-class citizen as well.

This approach sucks for iTunes users, who are effectively locked into Apple hardware forever if they want the "proper" experience.

What? Palm was accessing itunes in an unauthorized way - Apple did what they had to do...it is their software.

Tell me again why Apple "had" to do this?

RE: Apple Smacks Palm, and Palm's Hollow Plea
jca666us @ 7/17/2009 12:13:39 AM # Q
>Firstly, jca666us, you need to look up the word "compatible" in a dictionary.
>Here, I'll do it for you:
>http://cougar.eb.com/dictionary/compatible

>designed to work with another device or system without modification;
>especially : being a computer designed to operate in the same manner and
>use the same software as another computer
>Something cannot be "compatible in an incompatible way" as you put it. It
>either is or it isn't.

Let's take your statement apart einstein:

"designed to work with another device or system without modification"

Hmmm - since the Pre is modifying their own usb vendor ID to talk to itunes then Pre's media sync ISN'T compatible with itunes - get over it and deal with it, instead of playing word games. I should have put "compatible" in quotes - that was sarcasm in my original statement doofus.

You should send your definition to Palm - so they can take down their statement regarding Pre's compatibility with itunes.

>Apple has a supported way for itunes sync with third party devices
>Yes, they do. They have a way that makes any non-Apple hardware a
>second-class citizen. If you're an iTunes customer who wants to use non-
>Apple hardware, then that makes you a second-class citizen as well.

Hey, second-class is a bit different then Apple locking you in.

Apple may make it cumbersome for users to use non-Apple devices with itunes, but they are not locked in to itunes (with the exception of drm-laden files).

>This approach sucks for iTunes users, who are effectively locked into
>Apple hardware forever if they want the "proper" experience.

Nothing is stopping them from using winamp or something else - you're talking out of both sides of your mouth here freak. Either itunes sucks and nobody should use it, or itunes users are screwed and tied to itunes for all eternity.

Again, when did apple say itunes was opened up for anyone to use and sync with whatever 3rd rate media device they have?

I have yet to see downloads of itunes source code on sourceforge - that's because apple owns the software and are under no obligation to re-design it to help palm sell a few more pre's.

"Prehaps" if Palm wants to create a "proper experience" for the Pre they should develop or license their own syncing software - instead of trying to do it on the cheap by using an unauthorized hack into itunes.

>>What? Palm was accessing itunes in an unauthorized way - Apple did
>>what they had to do...it is their software.

>Tell me again why Apple "had" to do this?

Let's see:

#1. To eliminate support calls from irate Pre owners (like yourself) as to why certain itunes features don't work with the Pre.

#2. Not a stretch to call this usb hack a security hole - and an unauthorized back door into itunes. Apple owns the software - if they feel the need to secure it - it's their option.

Palm needs a sync option for the Pre - they should look to develop one.

RE: Apple Smacks Palm, and Palm's Hollow Plea
freakout @ 7/17/2009 12:54:33 AM # Q
Let's take your statement apart einstein

Actually, I'd strongly recommend that you didn't, 'cause you clearly have no idea how to put it back together again after you're done.

Again, when did apple say itunes was opened up for anyone to use and sync with whatever 3rd rate media device they have?

They didn't. This is what makes them jerks. Do you get it yet?

#1. To eliminate support calls from irate Pre owners (like yourself) as to why certain itunes features don't work with the Pre.

Oh please. All they'd need to do is say "we don't support the Pre".

Not a stretch to call this usb hack a security hole - and an unauthorized back door into itunes.

ROFL. That's a good one. Almost as good as "there's no copy-and-paste on the iPhone because it's a security hole". Not quite. But close.

RE: Apple Smacks Palm, and Palm's Hollow Plea
jca666us @ 7/17/2009 1:38:27 AM # Q
>>Again, when did apple say itunes was opened up for anyone to use and
>>sync with whatever 3rd rate media device they have?

>They didn't. This is what makes them jerks. Do you get it yet?

I get that Apple hasn't misrepresented itunes here - I also get that you're mentally deficient and lacking in basic comprehension and reasoning. You're probably also wearing an adult diaper due to the strain of having to write long complex sentences :)

Actually, Palm are the jerks here. Trying to cobble together itunes support with a product they down own and didn't license. To quote Christian Bale, "what don't you f*cking understand"

On top of that, Palm has misrepresented this hack as "compatibility" with itunes.

Palm misrepresenting something?!?! Palm lying to consumers?!?!

It's not like THAT hasn't happened before.

Hey freak, when is Cobalt coming out for the Tungsten?

>Oh please. All they'd need to do is say "we don't support the Pre".

They did say that - read their release notes for itunes :)

>Almost as good as "there's no copy-and-paste on the iPhone because it's a
>security hole". Not quite. But close.

Freak - I think you have a hole in your head - when you have a clue, feel free to comment further.

RE: Apple Smacks Palm, and Palm's Hollow Plea
jca666us @ 7/17/2009 5:03:45 AM # Q
Learning Day for Freak:

Freak, here's a definition for you: Proprietary

pro·pri·e·tary
Pronunciation:
\prə-ˈprī-ə-ˌter-ēFunction: noun
Inflected Form(s):
plural pro·pri·e·tar·ies
Etymology: Middle English propietarie, from Anglo-French, from Medieval Latin propietarius, from Late Latin, adjective
Date: 15th century

1: one that possesses, owns, or holds exclusive right to something ; specifically : proprietor 1

2: something that is used, produced, or marketed under exclusive legal right of the inventor or maker ; specifically : a drug (as a patent medicine) that is protected by secrecy, patent, or copyright against free competition as to name, product, composition, or process of manufacture

3: a business secretly owned by and run as a cover for an intelligence organization

Now an example of that definition in the use of a sentence:

The concept by which Palm hacked the Pre to access itunes uses proprietary information owned by Apple. Apple has no obligation to allow non-Apple hardware work with their software.

Freak, education is a good thing. For the sake of humanity, GO BACK TO SCHOOL (or as you spell it SKOOL)!!!

RE: Apple Smacks Palm, and Palm's Hollow Plea
freakout @ 7/17/2009 5:26:22 AM # Q
(1) Palm gave iTunes users another choice.
(2) Apple took it away to protect their own walled garden.

Truth hurts. Please, write another five-hundred page essay in response. I'm having trouble sleeping.

Reply to this comment
Start a New Comment Thread Top View Full Comment Thread
Achtung! Only the first 50 comments are displayed within the article.
    Click here for the full story discussion page...

Account

Register Register | Login Log in
user:
pass:

Latest Comments