Quote:
Originally Posted by Barnes
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.
|
I would say it was very innovative and goes along with what Palm said in the past which was open season. I've read that they may have done it just because it's win /win for them. It gives them a ton of publicity. It shows up Apple as a closed against competition, force the customer to take what they offer kind of company against their tradition of allowing one and all to get involved. Heck it's not like they would have any problem doing some syncing software especially considering how many ex-Apple employees they brought in.
They could very easily just match every Apple update with one of their own and when Apple counters they anger their own customers while gaining nothing. They could go to court but that's likely nothing more than a crapload of money given to lawyers.
Again I look at it from the point of view as a customer. I don't care if it's tech that they invented or just fool it into thinking it's something else. What's it to me? Apple can always just cut some deal with Palm and push it under the radar if they are smart. Did not iTunes exist before ipod? Did it not allow other devices in? Did they not then decide to close it up? Should have just remained open in the first place.
