Palm Pre Still Syncs With iTunes After 8.2 Update

[Vincent Ferrari]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://gizmodo.com/5276263/dont-worry-pre-media-sync-works-with-itunes-82' target='_blank'>http://gizmodo.com/5276263/dont-wor...-with-itunes-82</a><br /><br /></div><p><em>"An anonymous tipster just confirmed to us that the Pre iTunes sync continues to work with iTunes 8.2 (as it did with iTunes 8.2 beta for the iPhone 3.0 beta). The reader says that there's no worry (yet) that Apple's locking out the phone, and that iTunes continues to recognize the Pre as an iPod."</em></p><p><img src="http://images.thoughtsmedia.com/resizer/thumbs/size/600/at/auto/1244031158.usr18053.jpg" /></p><p>I gratuitously swiped the graphic from Gizmodo because it cracked me up!&nbsp; Anyway, I have to wonder how long Apple is going to allow this, if they're never going to stop it, or if it's just going to be the kind of cat and mouse game we saw with Sony and the PSP hackers.&nbsp; Personally, I think Apple should just leave it alone and make a huge deal out of how of all the things the Pre could sync with, they did some slick trickery to make it work with iTunes.&nbsp; Says a lot for who the standard bearer for people's music collection is, love it or hate it.</p>

[The Yaz]

I'm tempted to take a chance on the Pre...

I haven't gotten the iPhone because I was always holding out for a WM6.5 phone to finally satisfy my desire for something out of the ordinary.

The idea that I can roll my iTunes inventory into the Pre is tempting. I keep all of my purchases as mp3 so I could use them on my PocketPC, and used a 3rd party program that allowed any mp3 player to sync with iTunes until that was stopped two year's ago (that's when my wife suprised me with my 1st iPod).

It'll still depend on the monthly fee for the data and whether my wife balks at me signing up for a new 2yr agreement :eek:

Steve

[ptyork]

Why on earth would Apple disallow this? All this does is make the iTunes store a viable alternative to the Amazon store (included with the Pre), and is highly unlikely to take away from potential iPhone/iPod sales. It is a win-win for both companies, really. I know it might actually entice me to stick with iTunes (as opposed to running away screaming as I would if I weren't tied to it by my hardware choices).

Honestly, I've never understood why they haven't opened up iTunes more. Yeah, I get the whole integrated experience argument, but, especially now that they've dumped DRM, it seems to me that they are only losing money to the competing stores by not expanding their ecosystem. Does anyone buy an iPod or iPhone solely because it integrates with iTunes? I buy them despite of it. It would follow then that people likely wouldn't choose an alternative device simply because it integrates with iTunes. However, it IS likely that those folks might just use iTunes (and more importantly for Apple the iTunes Store) because they have in the past or know people who do.

[doogald]

Why on earth would Apple disallow this?

Because they make more profit when people buy iPods and iPhones than they do selling songs and albums? iTunes and the iTunes Store was giving away the blades so people will buy the razors. Why encourage people to buy a competitor's product and rob themselves of a ton of profit?

[ptyork]

Because they make more profit when people buy iPods and iPhones than they do selling songs and albums? iTunes and the iTunes Store was giving away the blades so people will buy the razors. Why encourage people to buy a competitor's product and rob themselves of a ton of profit?

Err, I guess you didn't read the rest of my post. People buy iPods and iPhones because they are iPods and iPhones, not because they integrate with iTunes. You're not encouraging people to buy a competitor's "razor;" I'd bet you'd lose far less than 5% of potential device buyers by opening up iTunes to the paltry selection of competitors. Rather, you're encouraging those who will buy a competing device anyway (most often due to price sensitivity) to buy your "blades." Apple averages about 20 cents per blade after royalties and transaction fees, which is hardly "giving away" when you consider that adds up to around $600 million in yearly gross margin against a VERY low cost structure (i.e., almost pure profit).

Without DRM, consumers now essentially have no "switching costs" associated with a change in device, anyway. All blades fit all razors. So the device lock-in strategy no longer applies. It costs nothing to allow others into your store, so why not open it up and get a little more revenue rather than allowing your competitors to get bigger and better? Already AmazonMP3 effectively killed the viability of their DRM. Do you think "encouraging" more and more people to buy from the competition and further bolster their store by maintaining a false sense of exclusivity will make things better?

By the way, the link in your signature is broken, just like the "Change" itself. ;)