I'm still trying to figure out why iTunes only talking to iPod is (according to Palm) any more of a USB agreement violation than Nikon Capture only talking to Nikons, HP printer software only talking to HPs, or any other vendor software/vendor hardware combination that only works with the vendor's devices.
Palm's confused if they think a compatibility check is a violation as opposed to, say, faking a hardware vendor ID.
USB hardware IDs and network MAC addresses clearly have to respect the vendors' address spaces or the hardware standard falls apart.
Seems more likely this is a play to, yes, have the Palm device get press, but also ensure their site gets Page Rank from all the unique news articles' and blog entries' inbound links.
It's one thing to only be compatible with one device, but it's an entirely different matter to actively prevent other devices from working. I'm pretty sure no other camera companies are trying to get their cameras to work with Nikon Capture.
The USB spec requires that USB devices be connected-device agnostistic. That is, they must be capable of communicating with any device, over USB, that knows the proper codes/bytes/etc.
Hiding the codes/keeping them secret, like most vendors do, is okay -- the USB spec does not require disclosure.
BUT changing the codes to prevent interoperability is prohibited by the USB spec b/c it defeats the whole point of the USB spec.
Palm's confused if they think a compatibility check is a violation as opposed to, say, faking a hardware vendor ID. USB hardware IDs and network MAC addresses clearly have to respect the vendors' address spaces or the hardware standard falls apart.
Seems more likely this is a play to, yes, have the Palm device get press, but also ensure their site gets Page Rank from all the unique news articles' and blog entries' inbound links.