Palm complains about Apple to USB governing body, while Pre / iTunes sync "fix" is explained
By Ross Miller 
posted Jul 24th 2009 5:41PM
posted Jul 24th 2009 5:41PM
"Unauthorized use of assigned or unassigned USB Vendor ID Numbers and associated Product ID Numbers are strictly prohibited."The implication here is that Palm believes Apple is violating this stature by disallowing certain Vendor IDs -- namely, Palm's -- from using iTunes. So how'd Palm manage to "fix" that syncing hole Apple managed to fill? From the looks of it, by misrepresenting its own Vendor ID, so that the Pre now shows up as a iPod / mass storage device made by Apple (ID 0x05ac) as opposed to one by Palm (ID 0x083) -- hence the complaint. Of course, lying about your own ID would seem to break with the aforementioned rule, too, so what we're left here is some muddled grey area and Palm apparently being okay with fudging some data to correct what it sees is an injustice. If anyone's curious, DVD Jon points out that the root USB Node is still identified as "Pre," so we very likely could see another round of these shenanigans in the not-too-distant future.
Finally, now's as good of a time as any to take a look at some of the peripheral casualties from this war of attrition. In an essay on his personal site that's been circulating the interwebs, Marc Deslauriers outlines the pangs he and the Linux community have felt over the years trying to use iPods on the open source platform, surmising that Apple is intentionally and repeatedly seeking ways to block non-iTunes programs from syncing in any way with its devices. This story is far from over, and as ugly as it looks now, it's probably only gonna get worse.
[Via Digg and Pre Central]
Read - Marc Deslauriers, "Goodbye Apple"
Read - Palm's lodges complaint with USB IF
Read - USB Vendor ID application
Read - Palm Pre USB hack confirmed
Why are Palm complaining? I don't know much about how it works but if Palm don't own iTunes, then surely Apple has the rights to control that software and I sure as hell wouldn't let someone use something that cost millions to make and fine tune. It's like letting someone take a seat in my new car or on a bike.
I don't think that analogy fits here ...
Would you like if Microsoft restricts data to be moved betwwen two differents OS'es ?
I DATA and I CONTROL ...
More like, I have this general purpose app and it has some general use like buying, playing and organizing music. I also enable it to enhance my own hardware offerings to manage things like images and apps and music. To do this I've put quite a lot of engineering money and advertising into the product. Along comes a direct competitor and forces me to support his hardware as well as my own. He gives me no money to defray my costs but he has nearly the full use of my efforts. On top of that he is using my own software to cannibalize my sales. So in order to keep myself differentiated from him I fix it so that only those products that have MY Vendor ID can be connected to the software. Since there is no more DRM people can still buy music and manage it but not with his devices. So here he comes back and forces me to allow his products to use my software again and this time he has faked my Vendor ID to do it. Then complained to the organization that issues the ID about how I used it to exclude his products. even though from the rules stated by the issuing body I am using the Vendor ID correctly and his use is not authorized by me at all.
You are right, Itunes is apple invention, but what did APPLE have to do support pre or anyother device ..nothing ..
They did more work not to support other devices ..
And secondly it's not about APPLE dollars and inventions, it's about I DATA, how do I take my data out of the Itunes shield, that's the bigger question ..
@Prethinking
What you are saying is true. Also true is your own comment above this comment. However Apple is not merely trying to control your data. Actually Apple cares less about your data. What Apples cares more about is your ca$h. If the Pre can sync with iTunes, then you are less likely to buy an iPod/iPhone. Apple is trying to guard their hardware sales.
@Scott Beckstead
This has nothing to do with support. Apple doesn't have to care about supporting anything other than the iPod/iPhone but it has been continuously trying to sabotage any device syncing to/from either iTunes or iPod/iPhone.
Good Job. This is a perfect description. I can guarantee that most Apple haters will COMPLETELY ignore it though.
Ok, I do think its wrong that the Pre device is lying and saying its an iPod to get on, but I think its stupid for Apple to do this to their iTunes customers who want to use iTunes but might want a Palm Pre. Apple is basically saying, hey you wanna buy music from me instead of somewhere better like Amazon, then you have to shell out for an iPhone, and deal with ATT.
This is really just a stupid battle. Microsoft got crap for making everyone buy windows to work tons of programs and things, why isn't apple held to the same anti-monopoly standards?
Whatever, this seems more to me about being anti-competitive. Apple is the biggest dealer in MP3s, which takes away their free will to control things with an iron fist(due to antitrust lawsuits). The fact that they are making it so devices that have worked with iTunes(even if unauthorized) are blocked now is showing that they are being anti-competitive while being the largest market share holder. If they were a minority player in the market no one would care what they supported.
People cried when Microsoft the largest share holder in the OS business packaged along Internet Explorer, but didnt actually BLOCK the use of third party internet browsers. You still had the OPTION, but it was less likely someone would seek out an alternative browser being they already had the option to use the packaged along one. But in the itunes & pre problem, apple is intentionally blocking another manufacturers hardware and giving no option to the consumer to use the alternate hardware. There have been mp3 players that have worked with itunes for years, but now that the Pre is out there and is a direct threat to their market share in smart phones they are locking down itunes. So the only option is that a hardware vendor has to pay additional money to work with itunes, sounds a lot like the hardware manufacturers of headsets having to pay to get the chip to work with the new ipod shuffle. They are using their market share clout to force other companies to pay them money to earn the right to make money off apples market share.
When are you apple fanatics going to understand that you're supporting a company that is way more evil than Microsoft? You're supporting a company that is taking away your option to use other hardware, be it a phone or a HEADSET. What happened to the objective consumer that weighed their options(now and in the longevity of the product) instead of just jumping on the "I heard this is better" bandwagon and assuming that the company you bought from has your interests in mind? If you think I'm just one of the many "apple haters" you're damned right, I cant stand a company that is being a dictator about how *I* use their product that i paid good money to own the rights to use. Even when Apple becomes the market share leader in the OS game I'm not going to use their product, because the principle of it is just wrong. I'm pretty confident that one day the apple computer will become the market share leader, I just wont give my money to a company who tells me what I want to do. My future lies with Ubuntu or another linux distro. And for your info I do not and will never use itunes.
Okay, look. I agree with a lot of what you say. I used to be an Apple fanboy who blindly defended Apple. Well, Apple came out with another product. It's going to be awesome, no matter what! Then, I came to learn about open source. I was instantly hooked on to Android. It has amazing potential and great UI. I still hate Microsoft, however, because of their clunky products. Anyway, now I believe that Apple [cough]Steve Jobs[cough] thinks he can do whatever he wants and get away with it. In fact, he does think that. However, on this issue, Palm has no right to be suing Apple about proprietary software. They're using a false vendor ID and are reporting Apple to the USB group? That's pretty stupid, if you ask me.
You know topgearfan427, you make a very valid logical point but I still hate Apple for being such a control freak. There is only one thing I hate about software/hardware and that is when it wants me to do a task the way the designer wants to allow me and not any other way.
That is a very valid point in regards to support!
When it comes to support from Apple, and money lost the argument is bunk given that if a user is using there pre with iTunes they are more likely to spend money with Apple buying songs there. If the value and benefit of buying music and then syncing it to the device of your choice is lost then Apple will lose out in the end.
Apple will not get my money in regards to hardware due to the difference of $45 a month it would cost to carry the iPhone in comparison to carrying the Pre on Sprint. So at the vary least they should be grateful I am willing to spend my money buying music with iTunes.
Palm complained, but I don't think that they are actually suing Apple, I could be wrong though
Ahh.. Its a war they want. I didnt realise.
What fun it will be to watch.
All I know is I purchased my very first song from itunes since I've had my Pre. I owned an ipod for several years and never did.
My take on this ... i may be smoking crack so let me know.
we purchase non drm music from itunes ... apple is still trying to force the public to buy an ipod by blocking itunes from syncing with any other device.
The question is: Is Apple being anti-competetive because only the tech savvy consumers can find ways of using their music on other devices?
John Q Public doesn't know you can have Windows Media Player or Zune software monitor and sync your itunes library. If you don't know this you are forced to buy an iPod.
That is the real question here to protect the consumer.
You make me wonder, why doesn't Palm just create a syncing app for the Pre that reads the iTunes music library. iTunes already stores all media information (such as the files that you want to sync and their location) in a separate bunch of XML and iTunes Database files that can be read even if iTunes is running (I tested that myself). Album Artwork folder is useful as well.
You are free to use your non DRM music purchased from the iTunes store on any device you want. You just can't use iTunes to do it. All of the files are in your iTunes folder. There are lots of third party apps that will manage sync for you.
The big question is why didn't Palm create or license their own syncing app?
They could probably have come up with something more user friendly than iTunes.
But apple don't block you from using your music with other players (you can find it on HDD and import to your player and then sync with your mp3 player (especially now since it's DRM- free:) ) You probably could do it automatic in WMP/Amarok since they building theirs music DB from tags in mp3/aac.
On apple.com exist tab iPod+iTunes and it's there from begining. I don's remember iTunes+(insert any brand/model/Palm Pre).Palm try to tap into this eco-system, but they lack resources to copy it (and by copy I mean create their own multimedia app).
Apple don't changed rules of game they played it for years now. This is reason why their are so successful in music business - simply because transfer songs to an ipod is so easy, this is one of big factors in apple dominating online music.
PS. Sorry for my English:)
Unfortunately for the rest of us that find the iphone is a big pile of fail it means its just one more step to sync our music from itunes.
If you're thinking of forking out for an iphone think twice and read http;//iphonessuck.com
lets say we're talking cars.
The device is the engine. Every apple device or 'engine' comes with a free 'car' to put it in... you know, to make the owning experience as smooth as possible. The car costs money to make and maintain, but you are given it for free, because you buy apple machinery.
Lets say you buy a new palm engine... You can't just stroll up and ask for a free apple car to put it in - you need to go and ask your palm manufacturer for one of theirs.
Suppose it were Microsoft Word, and MS said you HAD to use a Microsoft printer to print your docs? Defending MS in that case starts to sound pretty ridiculous, doesn't it?
...Well, yes it does sound pretty ridiculous, but they'd be within their rights - and if the product had always worked that way, and be marketted that way, particularly so. Other text editors are available after all.
And making the MS analogy relevant, you would still be able to print the files to your tamagotchi printer - by right clicking/ dragging & dropping etc. Alternately, the tamagotchi printer corporation could author their own software that allows you to launch and use MS word documents...
The difference is that iTunes is a free app meant to accompany iPod/iPhone hardware. MS Word costs a fortune to buy. ONe is provided free as a utility. One is purchased with the expectation it will work with any printer you own.
I don't like Apple or their business practices, but I don't see anything wrong with making software to support your (and only your) hardware.
I guess it's like saying Amazon should have to allow over-the-air syncing to its kindle store to every other e-reader in existence, because how dare they only support the Kindle. I don't see that happening any time soon.
or everyone could use
doubletwist http://www.doubletwist.com/dt/Home/Help.dt#supporteddevices
People jumped all over Dell and others for using proprietary hardware in the machines. Yet Apple uses proprietary Hradware, where is the outcry now ??
and lets face facts, the I pod is really a crappy MP3 player, cant edit playlists on the fly, sound quality is horrible, and you have to use their cable. The new I phone is not backwards compatible with the old Charger cable.
Sony and creative have much better MP3 players, HTC and Nokia have much better phones.
A big point most of you are missing is that apple is not saying you have to use itunes to sync your music. Since its DRM free WMP, songbird, etc. can all manage the music you buy. I've done it with WMP for my non-ipod mp3 player.
Um isn't this the same as Sony suing/complaing against Nintendo for not allowing Wii and Nintendo games/controls/franchises to work/appear on the PS3?
iTunes was made by Apple to work with the iPod and iPhones. Period. Get over it Pre owners. If would stop being lazy and simply make their own music conduit.
Why the heck does everybody want to give Apple a hard time. Apple doesn't stop you from playing your music on a non Apple device, they just don't allow a direct sync to iTunes. Apple sells DRM free music thanks to the confused music industry that don't seem to know what the he'll they want since a few years ago they demanded for DRM. Anyway, since Apple does sell DRM free music you can use iTunesto buy your music but getting the content on to your non Apple device is the responsibility of the devices maker or third party applications.
Palms behavior is no better than music pirates. Palm should create their own conduit. Rimm seems to be doing it legally with their upcoming 'Blackberry Desktop for Mac' by being able to read iTunes playlists.
Palm is just being petty and personal and it will blow up in their face if they don't stop acting like children.
Spot on.
Girls, fly the pirate flag all you like, the world of business is a much tougher place where nuance and reality are kings. Palm is pinning its hopes on winning a PR battle by trying to paint itself as the Cinderella of the piece. Who can forget the immortal quote from then Palm chief back in 2006 (http://www.engadget.com/2006/11/21/palms-ed-colligan-laughs-off-iphone/)?
Who was the big guy and who was the little guy in the phone business back then?
Car analogies don't really work in the OS world for a number of reasons. Say Apple is a typical car manufacturer, it designs the car, uses mostly (carefully chosen) off the shelf components for the car itself and for the key differentiators in the car (elements of the gearbox, engine, suspension, shell etc.) uses proprietary technology. Now Microsoft's model as applied to cars is as follows, it manufactures and then licenses specific proprietary technologies, such as, for example, the whole engine, maybe the gearbox and driveshaft to a number of other companies (the OEMs) who design and build the rest and then sell it onto the punters (you and me). Those companies are AUTHORISED to resell MS technologies and MS will stand behind those technologies.
When people use car analogies (or printer analogies, like Riz) stupidly, they assume that there's some kind of evil conspiracy to stop you from doing what for example, car or MS word users would normally expect. What is actually happening in the OS world is closer to the BMW/Alpina situation, not the usual "MS cars can't drive on Apple roads", which is hilariously stupid and off the mark. Apple, like BMW, sells the car as single, fully executed package. It will not care if you (joe mechanic) lift open the bonnet and lift out the 2 litre engine and stick in a turbocharged 6 litre unit - fill your boots! But it will care if Audi buys BMWs (or proprietary components thereof), fits BMW technology/components into Audis and then sells them on as Audis without a licence. (a) that is a breach of BMW's IPRs and (b) it creates reputational and potentially tortious liability issues for BMW and it suppliers.
So in Palm's case, it is using technology to create a false link between it and Apple (one that Apple has not granted Palm a licence for as Apple is ENTIRELY free to do or not to do). Why does Apple do this? It's free to do so because it does not force users actively to adopt its iPod/iTunes platform nor is Apple obliged under a law to open up iTunes access to non-Apple devices. Apple is not some sort of inherently evil corporate, it is a corporate whose job it is to make money for the benefit of its shareholders not for the benefit of pissed off Pre owners out of some act of charity.
Just remember that in MS's case, MS actually and actively stopped OEMs (Dell, Compaq etc.) from installing Netscape on Windows PCs. Had it not done so, there would have been no issue but it wouldn't have "won" that way.
I'm sorry... what people are forgetting here is that are a bunch of former Apple-insiders running around at Palm now. I guess they got the idea that they would take advantage of a great music platform and Apple was just going to roll over on it. Um, no. Palm is a direct competitor with them not just on the iPod front but now also the phone front... AND Palm have been extremely antagonistic with Apple in terms of calling their own device an iPhone killer.
Now you tell me... if you have a direct competitor who seriously antagonizes and screws with you in the press who then turns around and usurps a private API without even bothering to license access to the same... what are YOU going to do? Of course Apple has to protect it's intellectual property.
Whatever you think of Apple's stance on a monolithic platform -- I don't necessarily agree with everything they do -- they certainly do have a responsibility to protect themselves from competitors.
And one other point I feel strongly about is that Apple *is* eventually on the hook for all these Pre users. Why? Well, you don't think that Palm is going to start supporting iTunes, now do you? Of course, they're going to starting complaining to (and about) Apple when their stuff doesn't work correctly. Well, guess what? Apple makes no claims regarding compatibility with other devices. If they decide to take the extra step of attempting to prevent access by unauthorized/tested devices, all the more power to them.
The answer is clear, the Apple heads at Palm need to figure out they no longer work at Apple and need to start approaching a competitor in proper fashion to license technology from them if they plan to make use of it. And as for this USB complaint, I think it's going to blow up in Palm's face. As far as unethical behavior, I think spoofing a competitor's ID to gain access to their API is by far a worse violation of ID misuse rules than Apple using their ID to limit access to their own devices.
Palm is desperate with slow sales and probably going under soon, IMO.
slow sales? we won't know that until official numbers are released .... here in Kansa City I see Palm Pre's everywhere. A customer of mine let me play with his while he was shopping one day during the release week. It's interface blows the iphone out of the water.
I think when we start seeing some other devices Palm is going grab its foothold in the electronics market again.