The Pre in iPod's clothing
Palm has quite a checkered history when it comes to syncing your Pre with iTunes, going as far as to make the device report itself as an iPod, and leaving lingering speculation that Apple would block the device with future iTunes updates -- which is exactly what has happened. But many Pre owners were surprised (and relieved) to hear that Palm had already fixed the issue, only a week after the problem surfaced.So, how did Palm manage to get sync working again? Well, the good folks over at PreCentral have discovered that they pulled it off by making the Pre report that its USB chipset is developed by Apple. This change effectively makes the device appear even more like an iPod, as well as further ensnares Palm into what could potentially be a nasty web of legal issues.
While it may not seem like such a bad thing to let iTunes recognize the Pre as an iPod, the problem lies in how Palm is going about doing it. All USB devices report a plethora of information back to the operating system when they are plugged in, including a device ID, a vendor ID that usually identifies the chipset manufacturer, a manufacturer string to identify the name of the company that built the device, as well as other information that identifies various capabilities that the device might have.
USB device information as shown in System Profiler
Typically, a combination of the vendor ID and device ID can be easily used to identify a specific device, which is how most applications and drivers communicate with USB devices. When you plug in your iPhone, for example, the system sees a device with a vendor ID of 0x05ac (which identifies it as an Apple device), and a product ID like 0x1294. The system then checks to see if any drivers have registered to be notified when this device combination is plugged in, and it continues from there. In the case of the Pre, however, Palm is identifying the vendor ID as 0x05ac, tricking the operating system into thinking it sees an Apple USB device.
As you can see, this process relies on the IDs provided to be correct in order for things to work properly. Because of this, the USB Implementers Forum (commonly called USB-IF) oversees the assignment and handling of these IDs to ensure that things go smoothly. Companies who wish to manufacture USB chipsets have to apply for a vendor ID number, as well as pay annual membership or licensing fees to the USB-IF to be an authorized vendor. So not only is Palm causing technical problems by misrepresenting the device to the computer, but it is doing so by using an ID that Apple has paid for and has the sole legal right to use. Palm, on the other hand, is likely in violation of their own agreement with the USB-IF, which clearly states that "Unauthorized use of assigned or unassigned USB Vendor ID Numbers and associated Product ID Numbers are strictly prohibited." And yes, they do have their own ID for use on their other hardware.
So what does Palm have to say about all of this? They have turned the tables back on Apple, saying that they believe Apple is improperly using the vendor ID to limit the devices that consumers are able to use with iTunes. Wait, what? Isn't that *exactly* what the ID is there for? Most programs that communicate with any USB device check the vendor and device IDs to ensure that they are talking to the right device. If you've ever used the tools that came with your scanner, you've seen this before. HP's Scan Pro checks the USB devices to see if any of them are supported scanners. This is the sole reason these IDs exist, so that the software can identify a connected piece of hardware, and determine whether or not it is compatible. You wouldn't expect HP's Scan Pro to be able to download pictures from your Fujitsu ScanSnap, so why expect iTunes to show the Pre some love?
Don't take this the wrong way, I do think that iTunes and the Pre should get along, but Palm needs to go about it the proper way. Disguising the Pre as an iPod is just like a wolf dressing in sheep's clothing, but things won't go well for the wolf when the shepherd catches up with it.
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4)
jds said 10:17PM on 7-24-2009
Actually, I would expect HP's Scan Pro to be able to download pictures from my Fujitsu ScanSnap. Why wouldn't I?
Reply
Joshua Ochs said 10:48PM on 7-24-2009
Because different hardware tends to "talk" differently. Or do you also want a KeySpan serial adapter to start trying to interpret your pictures or filesystem as a serial connection?
Andre said 10:59PM on 7-24-2009
It may be nice for some people, but HP has the right for their software to work only with their hardware. Fujitsu has the right to develop their own software.
If Fujitsu started breaking USB standards because they can't be bothered writing their own software, then they would be in the wrong. If HP changed their software to ensure only their hardware worked with their software, they would be right.
The whole issue - if it were between HP and Fujitsu - would make Fujitsu look foolish, and might even put me off buying their products.
Bryan said 10:18PM on 7-24-2009
Ugh.
Just another example of Apple's petty nature. Let it be. Take it as a complement that Palm feels the need to make their devices compatible with iTunes and leave it at that. First the ridiculousness with the App Store and now this. Is the company run by 5th graders?
Reply
Joshua Ochs said 10:54PM on 7-24-2009
Palm is in the wrong, and it comes down to laziness.
Apple is correct, as they can't guarantee compatibility with third-party reverse-engineered products, and people will just blame Apple if it breaks - not Palm.
iTunes is designed to be compatible with one thing - an iPod. If Apple wants to make changes to iTunes or the iPod, they can accomodate for it in the other - for instance, when they added the iTunes Music Store. You throw an unexpected device like the Pre in, and now either:
a) Apple ignores it, and everyone blames big bad Apple when it breaks - because it's doing something wrong while pretending to be an iPod, *or*
b) Apple is forced to grudgingly support it - which wastes their time on something they clearly have no interest in.
Palm is clearly in the wrong. Apple is NOT being anti-competitive. If Palm wants to integrate with iTunes, they can write their own program to recognize the Pre, and then read the iTunes XML library and sync as needed. The format is open and documented, and that's what it's there for. If Palm wants to sync with your iTunes library, they're free to with Apple's blessing. But NOT by lying to iTunes.
gsd said 11:42PM on 7-24-2009
I find it interesting that here on TUAW people are criticizing Palm, and on Engadget Ross Miller took a more neutral tone to this new development.
Look TUAW, I know you guys report on all stuff Apple, but try and be a little less biased.
My personal opinion on all this? Go Palm. This comes from a happy iPhone user.
Greg said 12:00AM on 7-25-2009
No, Palm shouldn't be using other people's software.
Not to mention, if there is a problem with the Pre's syncing, who do customers go to? Apple doesn't support it, and Palm can't support it. If you wreck your Pre using iTunes, you're screwed, and you're going to blameApple.
That's why they're trying to block it NOW, before something happens.
Michael Jones said 1:32AM on 7-25-2009
@gsd: Believe me, I wasn't intending to be biased. The Pre is a nice phone, and a great option for people who want to avoid the AT&T headaches.
My viewpoint stems more from that of a developer than an Apple fanboy... if Palm wants their Pre to sync with iTunes, they need to do the legwork to make it work, not fake it by making the device impersonate something else to trick the application and OS into thinking it's a different device.
Larry D said 6:31AM on 7-25-2009
@Michael Jones
But in this case Palm have clearly done the legwork to allow sync, because faking this code allows the sync to happen. Just faking the code wouldn't magically cause the Pre to somehow sync.
This is fairly open and shut in my opinion - Apple are not only deliberately failing to support a third party, which would be sad but which I could understand on cost grounds if nothing else. In fact Apple are actively blocking their interoperability. When Microsoft did similar things, they was wrong. Surely it's just as wrong now Apple are the ones doing it?
joshua said 9:45AM on 7-25-2009
OK, so Apple can knowingly block a specific USB device to break it working with their software and thats fine with you guys because you think Palm is lazy. But if Microsoft went and changed something that broke iTunes from working on Windows the whole world would freak out and there would be lawsuits.
The device acts like an iPod and the software wouldn't know the difference, so they locked it out based on who made it.
I'm not upset that it was done. I don't use my Pre for music because I have an iPod nano for that. It just seems that when Apple is the underdog everyone cheers them on, but now that they have a hold on digital music they are turning around and doing the same type of tactics. I love Apple's OS and their music players, but I wish they would be more open about things.
This doesn't feel like a community, it seems like a bunch of brainwashed people who drank the kool-aid and have to go around justifying everything Apple does.
Bryan said 12:52PM on 7-25-2009
@joshua:
You're exactly right. In addition, however, this seems to be a stupid business decision for Apple. I know there aren't as many Pre users as iPod/iPhone users, but if Pre users are allowed to sync their phones to iTunes, where do you think they'll buy their music? That's right, the iTunes Store. If I were Apple, I'd certainly let it happen.
How about this -- have iTunes show some sort of pop-up warning the first time you sync a non-Apple device. Something like "This device is not authorized for use with iTunes and may or may not work properly. Please contact the device manufacturer for support with sync issues."
That way, Apple gets to grab more music purchases, and the user gets hooked into iTunes. In fact, if they enjoy iTunes but don't like the sketchy sync process used by the Pre, maybe they choose an iPhone the next time they upgrade their phone, huh?
Eric said 3:52PM on 7-25-2009
@ joshua
itunes is a free app designed to bridge the gap between ipods/iphones and the itunes store. If I paid for the app I would expect 3rd party interoperability be extremely and justifiably upset if Apple started dictating what I could or could not do with it. Just like the zune tool doesn't work with ipods, the blackberry tool only works with blackberries and my HP printer driver only works with HP printers, itunes only works with apple devices. What palm is doing is trying to piggyback on an existing ecosystem that was not designed around their products but has become the de facto standard for managing personal digital media. There is nothing wrong with this strategy if the owner of the ecosystems allows you to do it or at the very least turns a blind eye.
Now what I see is an opportunity for a 3rd party to make a great media manager that supports a lot of mobile devices including apple's. Kind of like how isync used to do for phone contact data. (it may still but I haven't used it in a while) Now that most music from the itunes store is DRM free. Other than purchasing it and managing ipod/iphone apps you would not really need itunes. If they were really smart they would make it open and plugin extensible on the front end and work with as many manufactures as possible giving them something to bundle with their devices for a small royalty.
Michael Jones said 2:30PM on 7-25-2009
If Microsoft were to do something that stopped iTunes from functioning, that would be completely different. You're talking about (hypothetically) a change to an operating system breaking functionality for a device or an application.
Like Eric said, the problem here is that Apple offers iTunes for free, so that consumers can sync their iPod or iPhone to their computer. They make no claim or warranty that iTunes is intended to work with any other device, or that their devices will work with any other application.
I do think that something along the lines of Bryan's suggestion (a popup message warning the user that the device is not designed to be used with iTunes) would be a great idea. But Apple is known for not being terribly flexible when it comes to things like that.
Yes, it would be awesome if Apple came back and said "Look, you want to talk to iTunes? Here's how..." -- but just because they aren't doesn't mean that they should have to support a hack being done by a 3rd party to impersonate their devices.
There isn't any law saying that they have to allow competitor's products to work with their software, just like there is nothing that requires Microsoft to allow Mac software and devices to work with Windows. Again, I think it would be nice if Apple provided some sort of interface into iTunes, or allowed the user to use a device but warned them that it was unsupported would be really nice, but they do not *have* to do so. Saying that Apple should ignore this whole thing, however, is ridiculous. Palm is clearly taking the wrong path to get the functionality, and potentially breaking the law in doing so.
Apple has every right to complain and to block Palm's hacks until they decide to go through the proper channels to get the support they need.
Analyzer said 10:19PM on 7-24-2009
You did a great job explaining this. I'd never understood how usb is recognized. Do you think that palm is just trying to sync as long as they can because it adds value to the Pre? It's worth a protracted legal battle to be able to sync.
http://www.actualanalyzer.com
Reply
Le Big Mac said 9:00AM on 7-27-2009
Yes, thank you for the really good explanation of what is going on here. And thanks for not cluttering it up with judgments about whether or not the Pre should be able to sync with iTunes.
CraigButrick said 10:26PM on 7-24-2009
This was covered in my podcast/blog today, http://technestreport.com .
I believe Palm is trying to draw attention to themselves and to this situation. I believe that they will try to get Apple pegged into some kind of monopolistic battle over how itunes music syncs with non-Apple devices. I think this is going to turn around and bite Palm in the rear end when they get into legal troubles over effectively stealing Apple's vendor ID.
Reply
Binja said 11:06PM on 7-24-2009
The real question here is, Who would go to such a hassle to use iTunes? Don't get me wrong. I love my Apple software. But iTunes is just not all that great a media player. And the bottom line is that Pre users are, for the most part, actively seeking out a phone that is un-Apple.
It just seems like a waste of Palms time that will lead to a waste of their money.
Reply
Michael Jones said 4:16PM on 7-25-2009
Agreed. Apple has made some nice stuff, and I use iTunes because of the syncing feature to my iPhone, but I don't like it as a media player so much.
Jeremy said 4:46PM on 10-03-2009
Can you guys recommend a better media player for Mac? I've been a Mac user for three years now and have basically settled for iTunes, but I'd love to try something better.
Sky said 11:02PM on 7-24-2009
Absolutely agree with everything you wrote.
Apple is completely justified in protecting their investments which includes their software. No one should be able to come and use it for free, selling a product on the back of Apple's hard work.
Not to say that this is what Apple SHOULD do. But it is their right to do it.
Reply