

How Palm Re-Enabled iTunes Sync - jemmons
http://www.precentral.net/how-palm-re-enabled-itunes-sync

======
Skeuomorph
I'm still trying to figure out why iTunes only talking to iPod is (according
to Palm) any more of a USB agreement violation than Nikon Capture only talking
to Nikons, HP printer software only talking to HPs, or any other vendor
software/vendor hardware combination that only works with the vendor's
devices.

Palm's confused if they think a compatibility check is a violation as opposed
to, say, faking a hardware vendor ID. USB hardware IDs and network MAC
addresses clearly have to respect the vendors' address spaces or the hardware
standard falls apart.

Seems more likely this is a play to, yes, have the Palm device get press, but
also ensure their site gets Page Rank from all the unique news articles' and
blog entries' inbound links.

~~~
mcav
It's one thing to only be compatible with one device, but it's an entirely
different matter to _actively prevent_ other devices from working. I'm pretty
sure no other camera companies are trying to get their cameras to work with
Nikon Capture.

------
gamble
Palm should ask themselves whether flaky on-again/off-again integration with
iTunes is really better for their users than writing a standalone sync program
like Blackberry.

I don't really get Palm's reluctance to write good sync software. They've been
avoiding it since the 90s.

~~~
mrkurt
Well, there's no need. Windows comes with good media sync software. Most Palm
data syncs with web services.

What's missing is a quality experience with iTunes, particularly on OSX.
Emulating an iPod seems like a quick and easy way to provide an optimal user
experience. Plus, they get publicity when Apple pulls the dickhole move that
makes them seem like a big, abusive corporation.

~~~
gamble
It's quick, but what about the Pre owners who don't follow Gizmodo daily and
don't know what's going on when their phone suddenly stops syncing after an
iTunes upgrade?

This episode is reminiscent of what I went through working as the 'integration
guy' at an educational web startup in the early 2000s. We were in Palm's
position, trying to pull data out of systems created by companies that were
either indifferent or hostile to our product, so the integration tended to
break frequently and without warning. It's not a good way to satisfy your
customers. They don't care that you're striking a blow against the
establishment - all your customers care about is that _your_ product broke
without warning.

------
huhtenberg
Palm should've kept using their own USB ID and Manufacturer string, and allow
users to override them to impersonate an arbitrary vendor. Including, of
course, Apple. This way the Palm is in the clear, and it's the user that is
responsible for the actual act of vendor/device impersonation.

But all things considered, all this will simply lead to Apple ditching USB or
layering a custom encrypted protocol on top of it. So Palm's current hack is a
temporary solution.

~~~
lallysingh
I'd guess the USB Vendor ID switch was to trap Apple into matching vendor IDs,
so that they'd have a case with the forum. That's my assumption, as apple's
response was obvious from the moment the Pre came out.

------
psadauskas
Instead of this pissing match over the horrible iTunes, Pre, Google, and
Amazon need to get together and make better media software.

------
blasdel
Now that the Pre is actually masquerading itself, Apple could go after them
for trademark infringement!

~~~
mrkurt
The result of Sega vs Accolade suggests that trademark protection wouldn't be
extended to identification for interoperability reasons.

------
alaskamiller
Back in the day, AOL and Microsoft went through a similar war their messaging
service. It was great from the consumer's perspective, interesting from the
hacker's perspective, and petty from a business perspective--like the
insistence on trying to kiss the hot girl in the bar last Saturday, drunk.

Now, here's the other thought: Apple has a lot of reasons to block imitation
devices from accessing iTunes, the least of which includes perhaps security
issues for its users, but also for the fact that being able to access iTunes,
iTunes Store, and iTunes content might have very specific clauses drafted in
its agreements with Apple's content partners. By not protecting that, Apple in
itself might be in legal trouble.

So, this isn't just pettiness that Apple is taking in full delight of. Just a
bit.

~~~
sound2man
I don't think that we can really site security issues on this, as the pre
cannot access any DRM data at this point. So there cannot be any aggreements
with vendors.

Only if the Pre was accessing DRM protected media would that be a valid point.
I think there is more than a dash of pettiness involved here.

