5 ms·

How is this example any different than putting tons of effort into keeping other devices from making use of iTunes to transfer music? Or only allowing your OS t

by aik 17y ago

How is this example any different than putting tons of effort into keeping other devices from making use of iTunes to transfer music? Or only allowing your OS to run on the hardware you choose? etc. I don't agree with any of this of course. But anyway, Microsoft has changed since this time, haven't they? I hope so.

chrischen 17y ago
Because palm isn't supposed to identify itself as an iPod. And it would actually take effort to support other devices, not the other way around. As for the OS thing, Apple isn't dominating enough of the market for people to care. Microsoft has not changed. Read my comment on the xbox. As long as they benefit from proprietarity, they will try to undermine anything not theirs. It's because proprietarity opens up various strategies besides just improving a product, which is usually the hardest way to gain market. It allows you to take advantage of exclusivity and your existing powers (market share).
- shpxnvz 17y ago
  And it would actually take effort to support other devices Except that Apple is expending effort specifically to break efforts at compatibility. It appears to me that they are intentionally preventing competition, and as a long time Apple customer that upsets me. Apple isn't dominating enough of the market for people to care Claiming that bad behavior is okay so long as you only hurt a few people is a pretty weak argument. I own three Apple computers, have spent a boatload of money with them and as a customer I care about how they conduct themselves as a company.
  - chrischen 17y ago
    You're absolutely right. It is anti-competitive and anti-open in this case. No I don't mean it's okay. I'm simply stating why there isn't a fuss about Apple.
    - shpxnvz 17y ago
      Sorry if I misunderstood your argument. I don't disagree that Apple seems to get away with quite a bit. I imagine it's also because people like to think of them as the scrappy underdog who just does what's necessary to keep up with MS. The shame of it is that it's got to be easier to change ingrained anti-competitive corporate mentality before a company gets big enough that the mass protests start.
      - chrischen 17y ago
        Like I said, as long as companies are invested in proprietary end-user products, they will try to take advantage of it to some degree. The only way to fight it is to endorse open source free software but unfortunately on the consumer side it's not really gaining traction.
  - deleted 17y ago
    [deleted]
  - GHFigs 17y ago
    It appears to me that they are intentionally preventing competition, and as a long time Apple customer that upsets me. Apple does not prevent competing products from syncing with an iTunes library--in fact they provide a mechanism to do so. The issue there is Palm using iTunes to do so. Hijacking another company's product to support yours isn't really in the spirit of healthy competition. I mean, fixing bugs in your own software shouldn't be called "preventing competition" just because your competitors happen to be exploiting those bugs.
- rbanffy 17y ago
  "it would actually take effort to support other devices" It would be trivially easy to pop-up a message saying something like "You are using an unsupported device that looks similar to an iPod, but it's not. Some features may be missing or not work properly. iTunes is only exhaustively tested in combination with other Apple products. Be advised Apple will not support you in case of problems with this product or iTunes when connected to it" And that would be the right thing to do. I, personally, would add a "Please, don't complain to us if it blows up or eats your music collection. You are using this thing at your own risk", but that would be my own sense of humor.
  - GHFigs 17y ago
    And that would be the right thing to do. Why? Why is it "right" to add a feature that specifies you will not support what the user is about to do? Why not just not support things that you don't support?
    - rbanffy 17y ago
      Spit out a warning that something may not work as expected is much better than actively sabotaging what the user and another company are trying to accomplish.
      - GHFigs 17y ago
        iTunes working with the Pre is not "expected". It's a hack. Palm should not be setting expectations for things that it has no control over.
mattparcher 17y ago
Re: iTunes/iPod “lock-in”, Apple wants the best possible experience for users. Rightly or wrongly, they don’t believe that they can guarantee that with third-party devices. However, (except for old DRM’d tracks) your entire music library is freely available (including playlist data) to any third-party application that wants to read the library file and music files stored on your hard drive. RIM does this for Blackberry. Palm is either to lazy or stubborn to write their own music management app.
rbanffy 17y ago
Isn't the Apple iTunes/iPod lock-in much like the Nokia Media Manager (or whatever it's called this week)/Nokia Phone lock-in? It's not like iTunes is the only media player you can use to sync your non-iPod players. And, if you decided to buy DRM'ed music that was explicitly tied in to a specific player/platform/program/manufacturer, isn't it your fault? Look... I am not telling you Apple is a nice company. It is not. I am not telling either that the fact there is one Apple makes it right for Microsoft to break the law. What I am saying is that there is not only one bad Apple (pun intended) in the basket.

by aik 17y ago

chrischen 17y ago

Because palm isn't supposed to identify itself as an iPod. And it would actually take effort to support other devices, not the other way around. As for the OS thing, Apple isn't dominating enough of the market for people to care. Microsoft has not changed. Read my comment on the xbox. As long as they benefit from proprietarity, they will try to undermine anything not theirs. It's because proprietarity opens up various strategies besides just improving a product, which is usually the hardest way to gain market. It allows you to take advantage of exclusivity and your existing powers (market share).

shpxnvz 17y ago
And it would actually take effort to support other devices Except that Apple is expending effort specifically to break efforts at compatibility. It appears to me that they are intentionally preventing competition, and as a long time Apple customer that upsets me. Apple isn't dominating enough of the market for people to care Claiming that bad behavior is okay so long as you only hurt a few people is a pretty weak argument. I own three Apple computers, have spent a boatload of money with them and as a customer I care about how they conduct themselves as a company.
- chrischen 17y ago
  You're absolutely right. It is anti-competitive and anti-open in this case. No I don't mean it's okay. I'm simply stating why there isn't a fuss about Apple.
  - shpxnvz 17y ago
    Sorry if I misunderstood your argument. I don't disagree that Apple seems to get away with quite a bit. I imagine it's also because people like to think of them as the scrappy underdog who just does what's necessary to keep up with MS. The shame of it is that it's got to be easier to change ingrained anti-competitive corporate mentality before a company gets big enough that the mass protests start.
    - chrischen 17y ago
      Like I said, as long as companies are invested in proprietary end-user products, they will try to take advantage of it to some degree. The only way to fight it is to endorse open source free software but unfortunately on the consumer side it's not really gaining traction.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
- GHFigs 17y ago
  It appears to me that they are intentionally preventing competition, and as a long time Apple customer that upsets me. Apple does not prevent competing products from syncing with an iTunes library--in fact they provide a mechanism to do so. The issue there is Palm using iTunes to do so. Hijacking another company's product to support yours isn't really in the spirit of healthy competition. I mean, fixing bugs in your own software shouldn't be called "preventing competition" just because your competitors happen to be exploiting those bugs.
rbanffy 17y ago
"it would actually take effort to support other devices" It would be trivially easy to pop-up a message saying something like "You are using an unsupported device that looks similar to an iPod, but it's not. Some features may be missing or not work properly. iTunes is only exhaustively tested in combination with other Apple products. Be advised Apple will not support you in case of problems with this product or iTunes when connected to it" And that would be the right thing to do. I, personally, would add a "Please, don't complain to us if it blows up or eats your music collection. You are using this thing at your own risk", but that would be my own sense of humor.
- GHFigs 17y ago
  And that would be the right thing to do. Why? Why is it "right" to add a feature that specifies you will not support what the user is about to do? Why not just not support things that you don't support?
  - rbanffy 17y ago
    Spit out a warning that something may not work as expected is much better than actively sabotaging what the user and another company are trying to accomplish.
    - GHFigs 17y ago
      iTunes working with the Pre is not "expected". It's a hack. Palm should not be setting expectations for things that it has no control over.

mattparcher 17y ago

Re: iTunes/iPod “lock-in”, Apple wants the best possible experience for users. Rightly or wrongly, they don’t believe that they can guarantee that with third-party devices. However, (except for old DRM’d tracks) your entire music library is freely available (including playlist data) to any third-party application that wants to read the library file and music files stored on your hard drive. RIM does this for Blackberry. Palm is either to lazy or stubborn to write their own music management app.

rbanffy 17y ago

Isn't the Apple iTunes/iPod lock-in much like the Nokia Media Manager (or whatever it's called this week)/Nokia Phone lock-in? It's not like iTunes is the only media player you can use to sync your non-iPod players. And, if you decided to buy DRM'ed music that was explicitly tied in to a specific player/platform/program/manufacturer, isn't it your fault? Look... I am not telling you Apple is a nice company. It is not. I am not telling either that the fact there is one Apple makes it right for Microsoft to break the law. What I am saying is that there is not only one bad Apple (pun intended) in the basket.