Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Handhelds Hardware

Palm Pre iTunes Syncing Back With WebOS 1.1 Update 396

Posted by kdawson
from the cheeky-that dept.
suraj.sun points out CNet coverage of Palm's newest OS release, which restores the ability to synch with iTunes that iTunes 8.2.1 had broken. "The news was posted on Palm's blog where it listed the new features and enhancements of the software update and nonchalantly added at the end: 'Oh, and one more thing: Palm WebOS 1.1 re-enables Palm media sync. That's right — you once again can have seamless access to your music, photos and videos from the current version of iTunes (8.2.1).' Bold move, Palm. Bold move. It'll be interesting to see how Apple responds, and do you suppose the use of the phrase 'one more thing,' a phrase that Apple CEO Steve Jobs often uses to introduce a new product at the end of his keynotes, was intentional or am I just reading too much into this?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Palm Pre iTunes Syncing Back With WebOS 1.1 Update

Comments Filter:
  • Intentional (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jDeepbeep (913892) on Friday July 24, 2009 @02:33PM (#28810259)

    and do you suppose the use of the phrase 'one more thing,' a phrase that Apple CEO Steve Jobs often uses to introduce a new product at the end of his keynotes, was intentional or am I just reading too much into this?"

    Intentional.

  • by popo (107611) on Friday July 24, 2009 @02:35PM (#28810291) Homepage

    Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

  • Re:Lost battle (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Darkness404 (1287218) on Friday July 24, 2009 @02:36PM (#28810307)
    Theres only so much though that Apple can do short of killing compatibility with older iPods. Eventually Apple will just have to give up.
  • cat and mouse (Score:5, Insightful)

    by goombah99 (560566) on Friday July 24, 2009 @02:37PM (#28810329)

    Why as a consumer would I be so dumb as to buy a palm if my itunes only worked intermittently or had no assured path forward. Sure one could perhaps use the old version of itunes while I waited for palm to fix it. But really that's not a strategy. I'm in that boat right now with my jailbroken iphone and did I not sort of enjoy the novelty of this cat and mouse game it would be a detraction not an attraction. I can't imagine most people want a phone that might not work some of the time. who needs to waste time like that?

  • Huh. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by WarlockD (623872) on Friday July 24, 2009 @02:39PM (#28810369)
    I just updated my Pre too. Scares me though. While Apple is selling DRM free music, dost it really stop them from their software only syncing up to properly signed iPods? I mean I like my iPod, but if its going to be a device that needs a secure encrypted channel to transfer file for me to just use normally, I am not sure I would want to use an iPod again.
  • Re:cat and mouse (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 24, 2009 @02:43PM (#28810429)

    Why as a consumer would I be so dumb as to buy a palm if my itunes only worked intermittently or had no assured path forward. Sure one could perhaps use the old version of itunes while I waited for palm to fix it. But really that's not a strategy. I'm in that boat right now with my jailbroken iphone and did I not sort of enjoy the novelty of this cat and mouse game it would be a detraction not an attraction. I can't imagine most people want a phone that might not work some of the time. who needs to waste time like that?

    I know this sounds crazy, but most of the time I use my phone as a communication device.

  • Re:cat and mouse (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 24, 2009 @02:44PM (#28810433)

    Why as a consumer would I be so dumb to buy music from itunes when I prefer palm over the iphone?

  • Re:cat and mouse (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 24, 2009 @02:46PM (#28810463)

    Hmmm. I could be wrong, but unlike Apple products, the Palm Pre will indeed still work even if it can't hook up with iTunes. A truly novel and ground-breaking idea if you ask me.

  • Re:USB Vendor ID (Score:3, Insightful)

    by clone53421 (1310749) on Friday July 24, 2009 @02:49PM (#28810505) Journal

    Interesting. What sort of teeth does the USB IF have?

    I mean, the complaint is obviously going to fail, as I see it. If Apple wants to use their vendor ID to identify their own USB products so that iTunes doesn't work with anything else, that's within their right. Even if Palm thinks it's a dick move by Apple, I can't see anything actually prohibiting them from doing it.

  • Re:cat and mouse (Score:3, Insightful)

    by G Money (12364) on Friday July 24, 2009 @02:50PM (#28810521) Homepage

    Why as a consumer would I be so dumb as to buy anything Apple if they're only goal is to extract as much money from me as possible by forcing me to use only their products? If a company like Apple wants to specifically break compatibility with their products for third parties then I would choose not to use their products. Why is it that people jump on Microsoft when they trap consumers but applaud Apple for the same behavior? I'm not saying Apple doesn't make good products (I think they do), but the price of it is vendor lock-in the likes of which Microsoft can only dream about.

  • Re:USB Vendor ID (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 24, 2009 @02:52PM (#28810549)

    The USB vendor ID was not intended to force users into lock-in at the software level. Apple is wrong to try to "close" and open standard.

  • by WelshRarebit (1595637) on Friday July 24, 2009 @02:54PM (#28810581)
    By forcing Apple to issue updates specifically disable their device, Palm is capitalizing on the media hype maelstrom that is lavished on Apple, keeping the name "Pre" on the lips of people who would normally only ever talk about the iPhone. So when the media covers this "war", they are in effect establishing the idea of comparability between the products that would have been hard to get through had they just gone with traditional advertising and promotions. Between this and the new Microsoft ads, it is interesting to see Apple's competitors finally starting to ratchet up their competition with a brilliant marketing company.
  • Re:cat and mouse (Score:4, Insightful)

    by DurendalMac (736637) on Friday July 24, 2009 @02:57PM (#28810633)
    Um, maybe you already had? And if Palm would grow a few braincells then they would write their own damn software that would read the XML file in the iTunes library and sync data without needing to run iTunes and pretend it's an iPod. Current iTunes tracks are just AAC files that will play on the Pre no matter what you use to sync it.
  • Re:cat and mouse (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DurendalMac (736637) on Friday July 24, 2009 @03:02PM (#28810719)
    1. You can use your iPod with other software.
    2. With the exception of older DRM'ed tracks, you can put your music from iTunes on any device with any other software that supports said device and the proper file formats.
    3. Palm is taking the lazyass way out and piggybacking on iTunes when anyone with three braincells could see this leapfrog coming a mile away. Yes, Apple is being dickish about this, but Palm damn well knew this would happen and they have a lot more to lose from pissed off customers than Apple does. The iTunes library is just an XML file. It would be trivial for Palm to make an app that reads said file and syncs without the need for iTunes to be running.
  • Re:Intentional (Score:2, Insightful)

    by The_Duck271 (1494641) on Friday July 24, 2009 @03:03PM (#28810729)

    Intentional.

    How the hell is this "insightful"?!

  • Re:Lost battle (Score:3, Insightful)

    by DurendalMac (736637) on Friday July 24, 2009 @03:08PM (#28810781)
    Simple: Apple makes iTunes scan not only for the iPod saying it's an iPod, but also for a valid serial number and other attributes. If Palm tries mucking around with serial numbers then Apple may well be able to buttfuck them with a lawsuit.

    Palm is just being stupid. They have a lot more to lose from pissed off customers than Apple does. Palm, just make your own goddamned sync app like you should have in the first place. Yes, Apple is being a bunch of asses, but who didn't see that coming from a mile away, especially at Palm? If they want to use people's iTunes libraries, just make the sync app read the iTunes library XML file. Bloody simple.
  • Relax (Score:2, Insightful)

    by anonymousNR (1254032) on Friday July 24, 2009 @03:08PM (#28810789) Homepage
    They are just phones and music players. Is it really that big an issue ?
  • by spun (1352) <loverevolutionary@@@yahoo...com> on Friday July 24, 2009 @03:09PM (#28810811) Journal

    I'll use it however I like. If I want to use iTunes with a home built Internet Rice Cooker/MP3 Player, I will. Boo fucking hoo for Apple, where do they get off trying to tell me what I will and will not do with my computer, software, and other hardware? You masochistic, submissive Apple fanboys may get off on being dominated by your Apple-daddy but the rest of us don't swing that way.

  • by goombah99 (560566) on Friday July 24, 2009 @03:11PM (#28810827)

    When tunes are stored on an ipod they are stored in a way that creates a speedbump to just trasnfering them off. basically the names are munged. Maybe they mess with the id3 tags--don't know. But apple has long been a proponent of speedbump DRM, that is drm that gets in your way enough that most users won't hassle with defeating it.

    The real trick that apple accomplished was convincing the music companies that this was sufficient protection.

    IN return apple probably has to make a reasonable effort to prevent cases where pod-to-pod transfers all proliferation of music. this would include nominal efforts to never have a legitimate channel for this.

    they won't care if it's not perfect. But they probably are obligated to try.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 24, 2009 @03:11PM (#28810841)

    It's official - Apple has joined Sony on my list of companies to avoid. Sigh - they used to be sooo cool....

  • Re:USB Vendor ID (Score:2, Insightful)

    by shacky003 (1595307) on Friday July 24, 2009 @03:15PM (#28810895)
    I wouldn't think it would be "not allowed" in this instance, if (as reported above) Palm is correct when telling on Apple for misuse of the USB vendor ID. This would then be a legal way of circumventing an illegal/not allowed block by Apple (in using the Vendor ID string as a vehicle to kill products from using its' software)
    If this pisses off Apple enough, I could see them pushing an update for older iPods to change the way they are recognised by iTunes, maybe using a more complicated method that will only run on the OS that are on iPods.. If they start using a different method to verify an iPod is connected with something other than the Vendor ID (I think they will have to at some point, as if they don't, many more will follow Palms' example) then there could be an interesting war starting between Apple, and the masses.

    This all of course assumes Apple doesn't go the lawyers route.. Something tells me there is an overly good chance of that happening, from their past tactics..

    Disclaimer: I know nothing, about anything, ever.
  • Re:cat and mouse (Score:2, Insightful)

    by G Money (12364) on Friday July 24, 2009 @03:17PM (#28810929) Homepage

    As a disclaimer I don't use an iPod or iTunes so I might be making this up as I go along:

    >1. You can use your iPod with other software.

    Do people really do that? I was under the impression that if you have an iPod you really only ever use iTunes. Since iTunes is the only way to update an iPod you have to at least have it installed so using something else to manage an iPod doesn't sound like something most people would do. Not that there's anything wrong with that, iTunes is a superb app from what I've heard so there's no harm in bundling it as it gives the consumer what they want (good media app with good iPod integration).

    >2. With the exception of older DRM'ed tracks, you can put your music from iTunes on any device with any other software that supports said device and the proper file formats.

    I know a lot of people stuck with those old DRM'ed tracks who are too cheap/lazy/ignorant to update them. If you use iTunes, "Everything Just Works(tm)"

    >3. Palm is taking the lazyass way out and piggybacking on iTunes when anyone with three braincells could see this leapfrog coming a mile away. Yes, Apple is being dickish about this, but Palm damn well knew this would happen and they have a lot more to lose from pissed off customers than Apple does. The iTunes library is just an XML file. It would be trivial for Palm to make an app that reads said file and syncs without the need for iTunes to be running.

    This is certainly true, writing their own sync application would probably cost less than the lawyers they have on retainer preparing for the eventual Apple lawsuit. This is probably more of a press battle than anything else and Palm is playing it pretty smart by staying in the public eye with this. Apple looks bad for deliberately locking them out and Palm looks technically savvy for coming up with another workaround. For everyone I know with an iPod though, iTunes is The Music App. I used to see the same thing where IE was The Internet. If you have to use something else it looks like a kludge to end users so integrating with what they already know and use is a win for consumers.

  • Re:cat and mouse (Score:5, Insightful)

    by clf8 (93379) on Friday July 24, 2009 @03:22PM (#28811001)

    You buy the Apple products because you LIKE the Apple products, and you LIKE the way they work together.

    Now PalmPre starts syncing with iTunes, but doesn't sync right. That will look bad on Apple. Let's say the PalmPre somehow effs up your library. That will look bad on Apple. Sure, Apple can say 'we don't support the Pre' but if you're music library is hosed you're going to be mad at Apple.

    Look at the Motorola Rokr, they licensed the technology from Apple to allow it to Sync. And Apple guaranteed it would work right and not screw anything up. I'm actually surprised (for better or worse) that Apple hasn't invoked the DCMA.

    What Apple does NOT want to do is become Windows and have to support 80 billion solutions under the sun. Their strength is and always has been tight integration. Having to lose focus on that and suddenly deal with problems with every Tom, Dick, and Harry syncing with iTunes will delay new features and products.

  • Re:cat and mouse (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Homburg (213427) on Friday July 24, 2009 @03:32PM (#28811151) Homepage

    1. You can use your iPod with other software.

    Only because people are continually working on reverse-engineering Apple's attempts to lock-out other software from working with iPods. And you can't use a recent iPod Touch or iPhone with any software other than iTunes, because Apple have explicitly locked out the methods used by third-party clients to sync with earlier versions of the iPhone.

  • Re:Lost battle (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 24, 2009 @03:32PM (#28811157)

    No more shady than reading vendorID and using it to lock out particular products. Can you see how a group so concerned with open standards like USB would find that practice questionable?

  • 1. There are defined APIs Apple provides to allow third party software to interact with iTunes, and do everything Palm needs.

    2. Palm is better at sync software than Apple *anyway*.

    Doing it this way is just begging for a visit from the fuckup fairy. Plus, I want Hotsync back. And a pony.

  • If you want a car that runs on non-Ford brand gas, make it yourself!

    Standards are standards for a reason. Subverting the standard for anticompetitive reasons is wrong. Period.

    Besides... who wants to install yet another damn program on their machine? I hate how each widget I get has some shitty driver it needs to have to get working with Windows, with some shitty software that never works. My Canon HF100? The video management software for it is abysmal. Palm is actually serving consumers by allowing them to keep their computers cleaner and use existing infrastructure, and you're getting upset at that? Fuck Apple.
  • Re:Lost battle (Score:3, Insightful)

    by PotatoFarmer (1250696) on Friday July 24, 2009 @03:47PM (#28811371)
    I would imagine a lot of those same Slashdotters are currently using browsers that spoof the user-agent string to pretend to be other browsers. This sort of thing is not new.
  • Re:cat and mouse (Score:5, Insightful)

    by encoderer (1060616) on Friday July 24, 2009 @03:52PM (#28811469)
    Perhaps. But those of us with *FOUR* braincells, and a little experience actually writing software, can knock holes in your argument pretty easily.

    The most obvious being, what if I chose to manually manage the music on my device? iTunes has no issue with this, but Palm would have to write their own GUI that would read the iTunes XML and then allow drag-n-drop sync.

    Second, as a user, the last thing I need is another iTunes. I like the software. I know the software. It does its job well. If I want to buy a Pre, I as a consumer would just much rather use what I'm currently using.

    Third, there are about a trillion edge cases with your suggestion. Like, multiple XML files. How will I know which XML file the user is using? I could have one in my All Users and one in my personal profile. iTunes has a simple option under the File menu to load a library. What would Palm do if they went gui-less and implemented your suggestion.

    Finally, Palm isn't complaning that Apple updated their app. They just updated the Pre to match it. Why on Earth does it bother you so much? Apple are treating the iPod is hardly more than a hardware dongle for iTunes. Fine. But no reason to bunch-up your panties just because Palm circumvents their DRM. And don't kid yourself, that's exactly what a dongle is. DRM.
  • Re:cat and mouse (Score:3, Insightful)

    by omnichad (1198475) on Friday July 24, 2009 @03:56PM (#28811525) Homepage

    Well...except in this case the Palm solution is a kludge, as it still requires iTunes - and furthermore doesn't survive an iTunes update without its own update. If that isn't the textbook definition of kludge, then I don't know what counts.

  • Re:Lost battle (Score:5, Insightful)

    by drinkypoo (153816) <martin.espinoza@gmail.com> on Friday July 24, 2009 @03:56PM (#28811539) Homepage Journal

    Well, actually, they're telling them that the Pre is a device made by Apple:

    http://www.precentral.net/how-palm-re-enabled-itunes-sync [precentral.net]

    That's a bit shady,

    No, it really isn't. [wikipedia.org]

  • Re:Lost battle (Score:3, Insightful)

    by jdgeorge (18767) on Friday July 24, 2009 @04:02PM (#28811619)

    By breaking the USB vendor ID Palm is risking the bricking of Pres whenever Apple tries to do more than just a file sync.

    Just how, do you imagine, would iTunes engage the Pre's firmware update system?

    The Pre does NOT manage its firmware through iTunes. There is ZERO risk to a Pre's firmware from interfacing with the iTunes application.

  • Re:cat and mouse (Score:5, Insightful)

    by node 3 (115640) on Friday July 24, 2009 @04:17PM (#28811879)

    This is probably more of a press battle than anything else and Palm is playing it pretty smart by staying in the public eye with this. Apple looks bad for deliberately locking them out and Palm looks technically savvy for coming up with another workaround.

    Palm is just looking like a bunch of amateurs constantly having to fix their product. They can blame Apple all they want, but as a customer, you're going to come away with "this Palm product is a load of shit, it keeps breaking its connection to iTunes".

    Unless Palm can make their product work consistently, it's going to be the loser here. It's just like if your Internet connection keeps going down. Even if it's not your ISP's fault, but the fault of some upstream provider, you're not going to just say, "well, it's not their fault, so I guess it's OK".

    And Palm might be able to accomplish just that. Their update now reports itself, in violation of the USB standard, as being an Apple product. Very, very amateur, but sufficiently invisible to the user that, unless Apple is willing to force firmware updates on every iPod/iPhone owner, they may not be able to break Palm syncing without potentially breaking syncing with legitimate iPods.

    Which makes me think that if Apple is unsuccessful in getting Palm to stop using it's vender ID, they will do just that, and add some form of encryption between the iPod and iTunes for authentication.

    It's sad to see the once mighty Palm fall to being so pathetically amateur.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 24, 2009 @04:19PM (#28811931)
    Uh no! You do not have to get Microsofts permission to write applications!
    Uh no! You do not have to get Sony's permission to write applications that run on the PS3!
    Uh no! You do not have to get Honda's permission to make replacement parts!
    To get a "Works with Win 7" badge you have to talk to Microsoft. To get a PS3 logo on your disc you have to fork out some $$$ to Sony. If you want Sony to tell you how to program for the PS3 you have to talk with them. If you want to make spare parts for Honda just do it. I don't use VW windshied wipers, or air intake or tires.
  • Re:Lost battle (Score:3, Insightful)

    by _Swank (118097) on Friday July 24, 2009 @04:20PM (#28811943)

    How is Palm not trying to force Apple into making iTunes SO restrictive about syncing that Palm can sue Apple for anti-competitive behavior, eventually forcing iTunes to be actively open.

    I say that Palm is doing the exact opposite of trying to avoid a lawsuit, but their intention is to be on the 'right' end of it. It's brilliant if it works.

  • Re:cat and mouse (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 24, 2009 @04:21PM (#28811969)

    You make a good argument about why Apple would have a problem with this, but I fail any reason that I should care if Apple has a problem. I don't care how inconvenient it is for them. I care how convenient it is for me.

    Screw vendor lock-in.

  • by juuri (7678) on Friday July 24, 2009 @05:06PM (#28812817) Homepage

    "instead of reading directly out of iTunes"

    The music files in question are all stored, unencrypted on the file system referenced in the XML file. If you are already parsing the file and already have a means for copying files back and forth to the device (which the Pre does) why would you use iTunes in the first place? In addition the XML file is again, just a flat file which is unencrypted on the FS. There's absolutely no need to go through iTunes for this unless you were feeling either Lazy, Too Smart for your own good, or looking to pick a fight with Apple.

  • Re:cat and mouse (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Planesdragon (210349) <slashdot&castlesteelstone,us> on Friday July 24, 2009 @05:34PM (#28813229) Homepage Journal

    First off: I own a Pre. I own a TX. I own some Palm stock. I don't want my company wasting their time doing anything but making what I bought from them better -- that's time better spent on implementing standards.

    Again, that's the point. If you want to stick with iTunes, buy an iPhone. If you want a Palm, you're going to have to use Palm's software (which currently consists of the Pre using Apple's USB vendor ID in violation of the USB standard).

    Sheesh. My wife has a Sansa music player. Do you mean I have to suddenly go and download software from Sansa, and not just use whatever the f-- I want to move the stuff over?

    Apple sells Macs. and iTunes. And iPods. This is all about Apple trying to make you an "Apple person", regardless of what you want to do. Oh, you can make a better MP3 organizer than iTunes? Apple doesn't want you syncing to iPhone. You can make a better media phone than the iPhone? Apple doesn't want you syncing with iTunes. If Apple could arbitrarily shut down any music player on Mac OS than iTunes, I bet they would.

    This goes WAY beyond just "we don't support that". This is Apple going out of their way to break it.

    Oh, and btw?

    But to violate DRM for financial interests is generally looked down upon

    Bull crap. This isn't DRM, this has nothing to do with DRM. This is simple interop; any iTunes file with DRM works perfectly, because the Pre just won't play it, this connection or no connection. Apple's not stupid enough to just let a transfer request automatically decrypt encrypted files... I mean, aside from their iPhone team.

    It's also a bit pathetic when a once mighty corporation like Palm has to resort to such tactics.

    Odd, I was about to say the same thing, but replacing "Palm" with "Apple" and "mighty" with "great."

    Palm was never mighty -- they were popular. Big difference.

  • by ConfusedVorlon (657247) on Friday July 24, 2009 @06:47PM (#28814099) Homepage

    but why as customer should I have to install that extra stuff when it Palm can offer out-of-the-box interoperability with iTunes?

    Palm didn't abuse any vendor id. The were really clear (in round one) that this was a palm device. Thy used the vendor id only where it was a 'magic number' that was required to get interoperability.

  • by Nom du Keyboard (633989) on Friday July 24, 2009 @07:30PM (#28814479)
    It's really stupid of Apple to try and block the Pre from the iTMS eco-system. Apple sells non-DRM music through that store and makes a little bit (most goes to the record companies, but Apple still makes something and enhances their standing as the world's biggest digital music store) music through iTMS that can be played on the Pre - so why throw out this market and hope that you can force them into an iPod only to make more money now? Be nice and they might buy an iPod later because of a good experience with iTunes.
  • Re:cat and mouse (Score:3, Insightful)

    by PJ1216 (1063738) * on Friday July 24, 2009 @08:05PM (#28814773)
    If someone wants to stick with iTunes, they have to buy an iPhone and nothing else? So Apple is definitely not about choice in your opinion. You either have to go all Apple or no Apple at all. Whatever happened to buying products you like. Apple's intention for iTunes to sell iPods/iPhones notwithstanding, iTunes is a standalone application. There is no reason why you shouldn't be able to use one and not the other except for completely arbitrary business reasons, which in the end, are bad for the consumer. Pre is being the good guy here. They realize good software. They don't want to take that away from their consumers. They also don't want to burden them with more software. Apple is making their customers' lives difficult. If they use iTunes, they're still Apple customers. Maybe they aren't purchasing the other things Apple wants to sell them, but since when do you get to punish your customers because they only buy one product and not everything in the entire store.

    Don't be mistaken. Apple isn't punishing Palm with this one. They're punishing consumers who've decided to buy a competing product. Apple is kind of a dick like that. I'm not saying other companies don't do it, but lets call a spade a spade.
  • Re:cat and mouse (Score:3, Insightful)

    by PJ1216 (1063738) * on Friday July 24, 2009 @08:15PM (#28814851)
    Why do you insist that Palm is "resorting" to this? I applaud them for it. I like iTunes. Now, I'm not being forced to purchase an iPhone (though, I'm not gonna lie, I do own one, but at least in the future, my options may be open) just so that I don't have to deal with extra software. I think its absolutely ingenious what Palm did. They're enabling their customers to not have to relearn anything. They're not forcing their customers to drop their media player of choice. They're not forcing their customers to run multiple library management software suites. They're making the life of the customer easier for them. THEY GIVING THE CUSTOMER WHAT THEY WANT.

    Why are you so anti-customer and so pro-corporate? You cannot justify your position and actually care about the consumer in anyway? Apple is absolutely anti-consumerist here. They're not giving a really large portion of the population what they want. Palm is filling that niche. iTunes isn't going to be a make or break for many people. Most folks will either like the Pre or the iPhone better than the other. Palm is at least making it easier for its customers. Kinda like how APPLE CAN BOOT WINDOWS TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR PEOPLE WHO USE WINDOWS. If Apple was so great, why'd they have to resort to boot camp to convince people to switch to a Mac? Isn't their OS good enough to stand on its own that they wouldn't need to reassure folks that they can still run windows? (Honestly, i don't believe that, but basically, your argument applies there. Either you don't have faith in Apple's OS and think they need to rely on Windows OR your argument is full of shit. You're not getting modded down because people disagree with you. You're getting modded down because your argument is horrendously weak, has nothing to do with anything, and really only consists of you trying to insult Palm because they were intelligent enough to sell a product that people want.

The study of non-linear physics is like the study of non-elephant biology.

Working...