Apple Blocks 3rd Party Devices from iTunes

[mykalberta]

No time to read through all the posts. Looks like Palm isnt going the AnitTrust route, but the USB working group route saying that Apple is going against the USB specifications.

I am with Apple on this. Itunes (not including the AppStore) will likely never recoup its cost of production. It was a loss leader meant to sell the high margin Apple items. Apple in no way should be forced to share that app with any other device.

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

No time to read through all the posts. Looks like Palm isnt going the AnitTrust route, but the USB working group route saying that Apple is going against the USB specifications.

I am with Apple on this. Itunes (not including the AppStore) will likely never recoup its cost of production. It was a loss leader meant to sell the high margin Apple items. Apple in no way should be forced to share that app with any other device.

I don't understand how Palm can go to the USB group when they are using Apple's vendor ID to get around the restriction and announcing that the Pre is an iPod made by Apple?

[Pastiche]

All problems iphone from lifehacker (a blog you should read every day it's that good):

http://lifehacker.com/5324724/bad-ap...yline=true&s=x

Refusing Competition

Over the course of the day, most people have speculated that Google Voice was rejected from the App Store at AT&T's behest. The reason? Apple's official line is that Google Voice duplicates features already on the iPhone—namely the Phone and Messages app. Of course, none of that holds water, considering the App Store is already full of alternate SMS apps and apps like Skype that sport a telephone dialer.

Forget About Innovation

It's unfortunate, of course, because Google Voice doesn't actually stop anyone from using AT&T. It's not a VoIP app (yet), so you still need AT&T for it to work at all. Again, it simply improves on what the iPhone already has. It would actually make AT&T—and the iPhone—better. From my perspective as a consumer, that in turn makes the iPhone a much more attractive device. Since it's been rejected on the iPhone but approved for Android phones and BlackBerrys, that in turn makes both of those devices that much more attractive.

The iPhone is a full-on computer in your pocket, and in many ways is more capable than your regular old PC. Imagine, if you can, that Microsoft tried dictating what browser you had to use on Windows. Oh right, that happened. Except they didn't refuse to allow you to use any other browser just because it duplicated the features of their default browser. And as Wired points out, Apple is inviting all kinds of regulation with this kind of mindset. And it hasn't just been about Google Voice:

[FanIn80]

That's just crap. You actually follow that stuff?

Have you even used a Windows Smartphone? Let me know if you find one out there running Firefox.

Seriously, man. I don't like a lot of the app rejections either, but you need to re-inventory some of the crap you're reading everyday.

[JohnnyFlame]

Not really going to matter methinks what apple does. I know there are guys already working on hacks to make the Pre undetectable by iTunes. Palm can do the same or just keep up the battle by releasing new versions to be countered by Apple. The Palm hacking community is huge and they are back in the game now with WebOS and their Pre's. There are for sure going to be some unofficial ways around anything Apple throws up. Heck you can already get anything you want from iTunes for free. There are more players in the battle that just the two companies though only one side works for us LOL.

[The Ditch]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

There are more players in the battle that just the two companies though only one side works for us LOL.

Could you elaborate on this? I don't understand. I don't see how employing people to code/maintain/sell iTunes is working against us while hacking a product to use a program so they don't have to create jobs to make their own is working for us.

Palm should be making their own software, why should they get to use another companies product, thus having to spend zero dollars of company money. How is that ok.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

Heck you can already get anything you want from iTunes for free.

Oh?

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by The Ditch

Could you elaborate on this? I don't understand. I don't see how employing people to code/maintain/sell iTunes is working against us while hacking a product to use a program so they don't have to create jobs to make their own is working for us.

Palm should be making their own software, why should they get to use another companies product, thus having to spend zero dollars of company money. How is that ok.

And why should other companies get to use the phone infrastructure setup long ago by other companies is just one example? Why should one company get to restrict third company/third person apps? Palm wasn't going to do anything about having their vast amount of old apps work on the Pre. But with Classic by Motion Apps you can do just that. Palm didn't step in and stop them. There are so many apps out there that work better than what the companies provide. If they don't want to let them in then hey I have no problem whatsoever with them hacking their way in.

This BS world where I can't get the cellphone plan I would want even though it's available in other countries is bogus so I don't own one. Or cable having the ability to force me to buy stations I don't even want because they have the market cornered. Just a couple of examples. Anyone working to give me what I want is good in my books. Quasi-legal -- whatever.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

And why should other companies get to use the phone infrastructure setup long ago by other companies is just one example? Why should one company get to restrict third company/third person apps? Palm wasn't going to do anything about having their vast amount of old apps work on the Pre. But with Classic by Motion Apps you can do just that. Palm didn't step in and stop them. There are so many apps out there that work better than what the companies provide. If they don't want to let them in then hey I have no problem whatsoever with them hacking their way in.

This BS world where I can't get the cellphone plan I would want even though it's available in other countries is bogus so I don't own one. Or cable having the ability to force me to buy stations I don't even want because they have the market cornered. Just a couple of examples. Anyone working to give me what I want is good in my books. Quasi-legal -- whatever.

I don't understand your point. Palm's phone is sending a false vendor ID to iTunes to spoof it into thinking it's an iPod - which is enabling it to sync with iTunes. The argument is why don't they just write their own sync software like everyone else does?

Why should Apple be forced to make its privately-built and funded sync application work with a competitor's product? Blackberry makes their own. Microsoft makes their own. Apple makes their own. Palm should make their own.

It doesn't really need to be more complicated than that.

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Oh?

LOL come on surely you ain't in the dark about that? cydia repositories, keygens, patches, cracked ipa's, deb files. Heck the instant an app comes out it becomes a request. Moves from being requested to solved. Then available. Just a matter of how it's solved.

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

I don't understand your point. Palm's phone is sending a false vendor ID to iTunes to spoof it into thinking it's an iPod - which is enabling it to sync with iTunes. The argument is why don't they just write their own sync software like everyone else does?

Why should Apple be forced to make its privately-built and funded sync application work with a competitor's product? Blackberry makes their own. Microsoft makes their own. Apple makes their own. Palm should make their own.

It doesn't really need to be more complicated than that.

Why reinvent the wheel? Why shouldn't other phone companies have been forced to put in their own lines as an example? Apple does not need to do the garden wall mentality thing. Palm ruled for years with allowing anybody who felt like it to add apps. Many of which were better than what they put out.

If I as a customer want to be able to hook up to iTunes from an alternate device why shouldn't I be able to? What's the difference to me how I do it. Competition is a good thing. I figured Apple was finally wising up when they took the DRM off but apparently not.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

Why reinvent the wheel? Why shouldn't other phone companies have been forced to put in their own lines as an example? Apple does not need to do the garden wall mentality thing. Palm ruled for years with allowing anybody who felt like it to add apps. Many of which were better than what they put out.

If I as a customer want to be able to hook up to iTunes from an alternate device why shouldn't I be able to? What's the difference to me how I do it. Competition is a good thing. I figured Apple was finally wising up when they took the DRM off but apparently not.

Uhhh... you do know that Telus owns those telephone lines, right? You know that anyone who wants to use any part of that infrastructure has to pay them royalties, right?

Your argument about allowing free access to iTunes doesn't make any sense. It's not open-source software.

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Uhhh... you do know that Telus owns those telephone lines, right? You know that anyone who wants to use any part of that infrastructure has to pay them royalties, right?

Your argument about allowing free access to iTunes doesn't make any sense. It's not open-source software.

It's an app store. Why not allow anybody who wants in to visit? All kinds of reasons to do so. More visitors = more purchases.

[FanIn80]

Because those apps wouldn't even run on any other OS? It's not a community service, it's a sync and media store that was built specifically for their devices.

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

Why reinvent the wheel? Why shouldn't other phone companies have been forced to put in their own lines as an example? Apple does not need to do the garden wall mentality thing. Palm ruled for years with allowing anybody who felt like it to add apps. Many of which were better than what they put out.

If I as a customer want to be able to hook up to iTunes from an alternate device why shouldn't I be able to? What's the difference to me how I do it. Competition is a good thing. I figured Apple was finally wising up when they took the DRM off but apparently not.

Apple is a hardware company. Company's make money for shareholders.

Apple sells software at next to no margin to drive high margin hardware sales. If they allow other hardware open access they sell less high margin hardware but more low margin software making shareholders angry. Apple closes store.

How is this good for competition? History is littered with examples of allowing such openness and companies dying. It already almost killed Apple.

Where's Atari? They opened up and died. Yes, Palm ruled for years and look where they are today. If the Pre fails, bye bye Palm.

Why aren't the same standards held to video games? Why should I have to get the permission from Sony, Nintendo or Microsoft to create video games? Why can't I play them on another device? It's because Atari tried to open it up and they got slaughtered. Sony Nintendo and Microsoft aren't stupid.

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by Barnes

Apple is a hardware company. Company's make money for shareholders.

Apple sells software at next to no margin to drive high margin hardware sales. If they allow other hardware open access they sell less high margin hardware but more low margin software making shareholders angry. Apple closes store.

How is this good for competition? History is littered with examples of allowing such openness and companies dying. It already almost killed Apple.

Where's Atari? They opened up and died. Yes, Palm ruled for years and look where they are today. If the Pre fails, bye bye Palm.

Why aren't the same standards held to video games? Why should I have to get the permission from Sony, Nintendo or Microsoft to create video games? Why can't I play them on another device? It's because Atari tried to open it up and they got slaughtered. Sony Nintendo and Microsoft aren't stupid.

You can. That's why emulators were invented. Why Homebrew is so popular. Why Nintendo did WiiWare. Palm got complacent which is what might have killed them. It was their innovation that kept them at the top for their run. They already realized DRM wasn't working for them. Why should Sony now be able to have some virtual/motion device when Nintendo did it first? I don't care. Why on earth do you? If somebody makes a better one just forces the other company to make an even better one. If somebody makes a better app then it forces the company to produce a better product.

Open up or get worked around--that's their options.

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Because those apps wouldn't even run on any other OS? It's not a community service, it's a sync and media store that was built specifically for their devices.

The music, photo's and video's work on the Pre as well as other devices. The number of people who have multiple devices has got to be a huge number. I can think of family after family where they each have a different phone, they also own an iTouch or another music/game device.

[mykalberta]

1 - App Store blockage - Apple has nothing to worry about until their phone reaches 50% market share and its along way from that. When they do or become a position of severe market dominance free market forces will be set aside and Anti Trust legeslation will kick in.

2 - Proprietary App Store - again, Apple started the App store as a severe loss leader and if it wasnt for iPhone Apps (of which they make a 30% margin on) its likely that iTunes would have never covered the cost of running or production for many decades. Apple made a decision to to that as a way to maximize the value for their high margin hardware devices.

The argument that Appstore/itunes should be opened up to any device is crazy. There are many places to buy music/movies etc and many software apps that manage those. iTunes simply makes it more convienient. Its convienient because Apple doesnt profit from its sales (I heard that not including iPhone apps, the store is not profitable). It makes no sense for Apple to make pennies on the dollar just so that Palm or any other phone can utilize a buisness that has taken many years to build.

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

You can. That's why emulators were invented. Why Homebrew is so popular. Why Nintendo did WiiWare. Palm got complacent which is what might have killed them. It was their innovation that kept them at the top for their run. They already realized DRM wasn't working for them. Why should Sony now be able to have some virtual/motion device when Nintendo did it first? I don't care. Why on earth do you? If somebody makes a better one just forces the other company to make an even better one. If somebody makes a better app then it forces the company to produce a better product.

Open up or get worked around--that's their options.

I am totally confused by this post. I don't disagree with any of it but it provides no arguments for. Palm has the opportunity to create a product to compete with the iPhone and using iTunes media by simply coming up with an innovative way of getting the library's content. Instead, they got lazy and pretend that they are an iPhone.

How is this innovative or good for competition?

I don't care that Sony made a motion controller but I would if they did it by allowing you to plug in a Wiimote into a PS3 or used copyrighted Nintendo technology.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

The music, photo's and video's work on the Pre as well as other devices. The number of people who have multiple devices has got to be a huge number. I can think of family after family where they each have a different phone, they also own an iTouch or another music/game device.

You're missing the point. Those other devices have their own sync software. This conversation is 100% about the ability to sync your device, not about buying music online. There is nothing preventing Palm users from buying their music in iTunes and syncing it on their own. DRM is a thing of the past.

Palm is just leeching the iTunes sync, instead of investing money to write their own sync application.

Actually, what they're doing is even worse than that... to put it in simpler terms... it would be like someone opening up a new grocery store aimed directly at competing against Safeway, complete with a full marketing campaign geared around them vs Safeway... yet you go inside to buy a pound of hamburger, and they're using Safeway carts and baskets, and they put your groceries in Safeway bags, etc etc.

"Come buy Palm's new phone! It's better than Apple's iPhone!! (Oh, but don't worry, we've hacked it for you so you can still keep using Apple's sync software since we just didn't feel like writing our own.)"