Poll: With iTunes already being ported, which other app should Apple Port to the PC?

[MacRumors]

Vote: Poll: With iTunes already being ported, which other app should Apple Port to the PC? (http://www.macpolls.com/?poll_id=236&ref=forums.macrumors.com)

[sacrilicious]

I hear "Mail" is pretty good. Outlook's filters don't always work for me.

[MrMacMan]

Final Cut//Shake

Alot of PC people have used simiar items in their respected fields... but I'm not sure if it is profitable...

Right now some Places GET macs jsut to have Final Cut so... not sure.

[jaykk]

Browser Wars Part II

Port it to Linux as well . ( Yes, conqueror/khtml is the base for safari, but apple branded browser will ignite browser war II )

[SilvorX]

I wouldnt like to see any of apple's products be ported to PC (Quicktime should stay for available for PC, as well as apple start up its AppleWorks for windows product if 7.0 hits), we should be thankfull right now that these products aren't available for PC, we dont see a client of MSN Messenger 6.0 available for mac, although there may be one someday, and we dont see Winblowz Media Player 9 working on a mac, and theres always those times when someone gives me a link to a wmv video and it doesnt work for wimp 7.1 :(

Lots of my fave games will never be ported to mac, but we all know that a mac isnt a gaming machine lol. I can remember a year or so when all my friends who had a mac didn't want ANY of apple's iApps to be ported to mac. The day apple's first iApp is ported to windows will be a sad day for some mac users...unless apple is able to make it bugier than Quicktime 6x for windows

[you]

the only thing that i want ported to a pc besides iTunes in iChat AV.

If apple started porting all of its software to Pcs there wouldn't as big of a reason to use a mac (unless they made weird trial versons that people could use for an hour or so just as incentive to use a mac)

iChat Av on the otherhand would be a benifit to existing Mac users. They could talk to all of their loser friends who don't have Macs

[Freg3000]

None. By strengthening the software side of Apple's business, they would be simultaneously hurting their hardware side. I think it is too idealistic to think that if Apple ports a few apps over to the PC, some PC user will see the light, want more, and switch to Mac. It seems like a slippery slope. Where do you stop? iMovie, iPhoto, FCP, iCal, keeping on going down the list. And then when you have all the software on the windows side, why doesn't Apple just make OS X on x86 while they're at it, since their hardware sales would probably evaporate. Not a good idea in my opinion.

And for everyone that is saying Safari in response to this question.....wow. Aren't we feeling much like David vs. Goliath? I think MacMinute or MacNN just reported that Safari has something like .7% of the market (although I might be wrong on that number). I think the only people who would use Safari on a PC would be Mac heads at work who are forced to use PCs. I don't really see any benefit for Apple in porting any of these apps.

[Bunzi2k4]

dude ichat av all the way! i love ichat av, but i know like... 3 or 4 people who have macs. I'd deffinatly get an isight if i knew other people could use it

[Nermal]

Definitely iChat AV. Sure we can talk to Mac users, but when all your friends are using PCs it's not much use. However it's possible that someone will make a third-party app that can access iCAV just like how they've got Trillian etc now.

[Pancake]

I agree with everyone saying they should port iChat AV. It would make the iSight a much more useful item.

[neutrino23]

Safari
If it doesn't cost Apple too much then Safari would be good. Porting doesn't dilute the Mac platform but it would dilute the effect of IE. Even if Safari only got up to about 10% or 15% share I think that would be enough that web designers could not ignore it and would have to design to standards and not just to the arcane behavior of IE.

I hadn't thought of iChat but I agree with the others on this. Good idea for similar reasons.

[tazo]

hmmm....

i really don't know if there is anything to port...

plenty of media players of windows, browsers are covered (mozilla and firebird are great, opera is pretty good too)

p2p, well lol apple doesnt make p2p...

i really dont know if there needs to be porting of anything, even itunes is comparable to winamp.

[punter]

i really don't see the point of porting safari. There's no money in it! But that's be discussed in many other threads.

I said Final Cut but now I want to change my vote to iChat AV. Actually I don't mind if it's not ported as long as some windoze compatable comes out soon.

I'm ready for a video conferencing revolution.:cool:

[noverflow]

ANYTHING but FCP!

Too many people would switch to pc if there was FCP on windows... i often thought that that was the one thing that i could never get on a pc and would always keep me on the mac.

[tazo]

Originally posted by punter
i really don't see the point of porting safari. There's no money in it! But that's be discussed in many other threads.

I said Final Cut but now I want to change my vote to iChat AV. Actually I don't mind if it's not ported as long as some windoze compatable comes out soon.

I'm ready for a video conferencing revolution.:cool:

most versions of instant messengers now include voice and video chat; notably yahoo instant messenger

[noverflow]

Originally posted by tazo
most versions of instant messengers now include voice and video chat; notably yahoo instant messenger

I do believe that you mean voice OR video chat

[Linkster82]

I love how so many people said port safari. that's a good one. how about we try to get windows users to surf with netscape first! How stupid. port safari. that's using your head.

[awulf]

Safari - There are tons of browsers for Windows, and Apple couldn't make any money of Safari on windows.

Final Cut - Definitely not, people buy macs due to this app.

Shake - Doesn' this already exist on Windows and Linux?

iDVD, iPhoto, iMovie, iCal - The iApps that make life easy on a MAC, if apple continues to port them, then that weakens the 'switch' factor.

Keynote - Yes, because this probably belongs to AppleWorks 7 in the future.

DVD Studio Pro - No

Soundtrack - No

iChat AV - iChat could probably be ported, but a lot of work still needs to be done due to the dodgyness of the UI. Really a Vioce/Cam enabled AIM will do on the PC side, iSight could come with Win drivers for interested people.

[isgoed]

I just want OSX ported to PC.

Ok, it's not a smart business move, but it's fun.

[iDONTsteal]

iChat AV and a Windoze compatible iSight would be so wise.

Just like iPod sales, iSight sales would continue the Apple 'trendiness' that many a Windozer is turning out at Best Buy and other stores to purchase.

Not to mention that I could then get my parents and other family members to support Apple by buying an iSight for their computer... the first step in my (Apple's too?) EVIL plan to have Mac's take over the computer world. <insert sinister laugh here>

Couldn't hurt to have iSights leaving a pleasant 'taste' in non Mac-users mouths ... especially when it comes time for them to buy a new P ersonal C omputer.

oh... and we could actually video conference / call on the stuff too!! Improved Communication options - what a kewl benefit!:) :D

[msassman]

Keynote should be ported. If not the entire program, simply a reader for the PC.

Exporting as a PPT file just doesn't look right...it doesn't have the same effect. If Apple could make a Windows Keynote Player, it would be a great tool and more copies of Keynote would fly off the shelves.

[fixyourthinking]

Originally posted by iDONTsteal
Just like iPod sales, iSight sales would continue the Apple 'trendiness' that many a Windozer is turning out at Best Buy and other stores to purchase.

Not to mention that I could then get my parents and other family members to support Apple by buying an iSight for their computer... :D

I agree. I also think it would give a little spike to firewire sales. Most people, once they see the benfits of firewire vs USB2 they tend to buy more firewire stuff.

I don't know if everyone else has noticed that firewire is fading fast, just like SCSI did. Sure there are still some high end stuff that is firewire (but so was highend stuff SCSI) and sure there are combo USB2/Firewire peripherals and sure there's iLink, but so was there combo parallel/USB/or Parallel SCSI peripherals for almost 5 years. Apple needs something other than the iPod to show people firewire is the way to go.

[-hh]

I can agree with the attitude of "NONE", under the basis of how it canabalizes hardware sales.

However, business is business. I'd say that Apple should port over whatever would "Steal the High End" ... in other words, go after whatever is going to be profitable.


Low-profit and free software giveaways need not apply, unless they contribute to a larger overall strategy (eg, Quicktime).

The best way to fight Microsoft is to offer a commercially viable contender to MS-Office (Keynote, etc). Ditto for the high-end AV applications, probably iTunes too. However, the underlying question is pure business pragmatics: "how much profit does it generate?"


FWIW, if iChat AV gets ported, it should contain a very tasteful Apple promotion element somehow/somewhere...




-hh

[ldjessee]

Hello,

As stated earlier, Shake is already a multiple OS software.

[edenwaith]

AppleWorks is available for the PC, but I've never seen it before (or even tried it.) AppleWorks 7 would be sweet to see on both PC and the Mac. Apple should promote AW7 (or whatever it would be called) to make PC users aware that it exists. A supervisor at an old job I had was surprised when AW installed on a computer.

I think it would make the most sense for Apple to perhaps bring a few applications over to the PC, but only if it is profitable for Apple.

[Sonofhaig]

Safari a close third? No way. I like Safari a lot, but it still has problems with many sites. Get it working first. It must be perfect or PC people will complain about it saying that's why Apple has a 2% market share. I can just hear it.
:rolleyes:

I like the idea of ichat AV porting. We need to communicate with the rest of the world. Even if they're not on a Mac. ;)

[eyelikeart]

if iTunes will be there...it would only make sense to eventually see more of the "iApps" which complete the package being ported as well...

[xjohn]

iTunes will be there to sell music.

None of the other apps sell anything, so I don't think they'll be ported.

[Le Big Mac]

Originally posted by Linkster82
I love how so many people said port safari. that's a good one. how about we try to get windows users to surf with netscape first! How stupid. port safari. that's using your head.

If you're voting as a matter of business strategy, you're probably right. But as a matter of "what piece of software would I like to be able to run on my PC at work" it would be safari.

Besides, I'm not so sure porting safari is a bad business strategy. Why was microsoft rung up on antitrust charges? Because they tried to monopolize the browser market. Sure, it doesn't make money directly, but browser technology is more and more the computer "gateway" that you need access to. If apple can get its browser adopted by a critical mass, then software cos. will have to acknowledge it. In the end, it's fairly important to have it count.

[PixelFactory]

Good point xjohn.

Itunes is only being ported to Windows as an access point ot the ITMS. It's a way of selling music and increasing iPod sales. To port over more of the i apps the mac will look less appealing to potential switchers. I would even expect iTunes for Windows to be a step behind the mac version in features.

[fixyourthinking]

Originally posted by xjohn
iTunes will be there to sell music.

None of the other apps sell anything, so I don't think they'll be ported.


IChat AV sells firewire webcams of which the iSight is the best (for the purpose of the software) on the market.

Just as iTunes sells some iPods

Just as some eMacs sell stands

...some PowerBooks sell special 3rd party peripherals and software, etc etc

[Lanbrown]

Originally posted by jaykk
Browser Wars Part II

Port it to Linux as well . ( Yes, conqueror/khtml is the base for safari, but apple branded browser will ignite browser war II )

Forget the browser war. Sites need to be coded to W3C standards, and then any good browser can properly display it. The problem with the browser war was that Netscape and MS were doing their own things and weren't quite compatible with each other. This is the last thing we need. Properly coded sites that accept all browsers and displays the way it was meant to is what is needed.

[Mr. Anderson]

I don't think FCP should get ported to the PC. Look at what Adobe's doing with Premiere, they're dropping it on the Mac.

I wouldn't ever want to see Adobe get frustrated with Apple and stop supporting them altogether.

D

[DougAdams]

iTunes is being ported?

[backspinner]

Mail.app

[theRebel]

Originally posted by ldjessee
Hello,

As stated earlier, Shake is already a multiple OS software.

Shake used to be available for Windows, but Apple has since cancelled the Windows version and it will not be coming back.

[Freg3000]

Originally posted by DougAdams
iTunes is being ported?

It is being ported in order to get the Music Store on the PC.

After reading through this thread, and being enlightened by MacRumors community, I wouldn't have a problem with a Windows version is iChat AV.

[arn]

Originally posted by DougAdams
iTunes is being ported?

Seems like it

http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/04/20030429203935.shtml

[johnnowak]

I hope they don't port iChat AV. That program is embarrasing with its text bubbles, lack of profiles, weird size icons, etc.

Not to mention crap logging support, etc etc etc.

I don't want it to be ported because then PC users will think us mac people are even more of a joke.

Port Adium to the PC why don't you. At least that's good software.

[shadowself]

Apple is porting iTunes to the Wintel platform so it can sell music and make money on the 90+% of users that don't have a Mac.

Porting iChatAV or Safari does not create a revenue stream for Apple. There are several Firewire cameras out there. The iSight camera is just one of them. Apple will not sell enough cameras to make up for the cost of porting iChatAV. Additionally, if Apple ported iChatAV to the Wintel platforms it would almost definitely have to put it capabilities to use USB 2.0 cameras and the iSight sales would then be nil on the Wintel side. It is definitely a losing proposition and will only cost Apple money in the long run.

Porting Safari is even worse financially. While many Mac users love Safari, it would only be one of many, many browsers in the Wintel world. Additionally, Apple would not get any revenue from it as most browsers are just given away free.

However...
I believe Final Cut Pro is a perfect candidate to port. Adobe has already thrown in the towel on the Mac platform because FCP is so much better than Premier. FCP should be ported to the Wintel world so that community cannot use the lack of Premier on the Mac side and the lack of FCP on the Wintel side as a reason to claim Macs do not have "cross platform" compatibility in the video editing arena. Maybe with any luck FCP will be overwhelmingly great on the Wintel platforms too and Adobe will give up video editing all together.

[bobindashadows]

Originally posted by ldjessee
Hello,

As stated earlier, Shake is already a multiple OS software.
And as you were earlier, again you are wrong. Shake originally was made for both Windows and Linux, but when Apple bought it, they lowered the price of the mac version, (or was it raise the PC version?), and left the Windows version to die. They've released new versions of Shake for Mac OS X - but not for Windows. This discussion is about porting something to Windows.

[quote]
Originally posted on http://www.apple.com/shake/

Buy Shake 3
For Mac OS X
$4,950.00

Shake 3 is also available for Linux and IRIX for a suggested retail price of $9,900 (US) with an annual maintenance of $1485 (US). Render-only versions of Shake 3 are free on Mac OS X and are available for Linux and IRIX for a suggested retail price of $3,900 (US) with an annual maintenance of $585 (US). Contact an Apple Authorized Professional Film Reseller to purchase.

[johnnowak]

No, porting FCP is a terrible idea. I have three friends who bought macs when they went to film school because of FCP. They all previously had windows machines.

Most windows users would just pirate FCP anyway. All the serious film people who'd buy it are using it already on macs.

[johnnowak]

Originally posted by bobindashadows
And as you were earlier, again you are wrong.

He's not freakin wrong. It's out for multiple platforms. Hence, its MULTIPLATFORM.

[MacSlut]

The litmus test for making the decision to port to Windows (or any other platform) should be:

1) Is there a profit to be found from sales of the software which is greater than the potential loss of hardware sales.

2) Does it benefit Mac users to have compatibility with Windows users because the software has been ported without giving incentive to switch to PC.

Thus:

Safari: No...there's no profit in it. It would be very expensive (in marketing, not engineering) and would be impossible to get any significant share compared to Explorer (see Netscape). If they did port Safari, it should be because it's the basis for iTunes, Sherlock, iChat and other Apple services.

Final Cut: No!

Shake: Pull from Windows.

iDVD: No!

iPhoto: Only if profit can be made from printing services.

Keynote: As a part of AppleWorks

iMovie: No!

DVD Studio Pro: No!

Soundtrack: No!

iChat: YES!

iCal: No, but compatibility with Outlook and Entourage would be nice.

AppleWorks: YES!

Sherlock: YES! Make it ad revenue supported on Windows and ad free on the Mac.

[Jerry Spoon]

iChat AV is the only one that makes sense. It benefits both the mac and pc user by opening more people to chat w/ and potentially has some help to apple by selling some iSights (OK, they probably don't make much on those) and showing pc users a nice form of compatability with macs.

[neutrino23]

Originally posted by shadowself
Apple is porting iTunes to the Wintel platform so it can sell music and make money on the 90+% of users that don't have a Mac.

Porting iChatAV or Safari does not create a revenue stream for Apple. There are several Firewire cameras out there. The iSight camera is just one of them. Apple will not sell enough cameras to make up for the cost of porting iChatAV. Additionally, if Apple ported iChatAV to the Wintel platforms it would almost definitely have to put it capabilities to use USB 2.0 cameras and the iSight sales would then be nil on the Wintel side. It is definitely a losing proposition and will only cost Apple money in the long run.

Porting Safari is even worse financially. While many Mac users love Safari, it would only be one of many, many browsers in the Wintel world. Additionally, Apple would not get any revenue from it as most browsers are just given away free.

However...
I believe Final Cut Pro is a perfect candidate to port. Adobe has already thrown in the towel on the Mac platform because FCP is so much better than Premier. FCP should be ported to the Wintel world so that community cannot use the lack of Premier on the Mac side and the lack of FCP on the Wintel side as a reason to claim Macs do not have "cross platform" compatibility in the video editing arena. Maybe with any luck FCP will be overwhelmingly great on the Wintel platforms too and Adobe will give up video editing all together.

I agree about iTunes. It sells music through iTMS which helps sells iPods.

iChat (or a similar client) could help sell iSight cameras. FW is not a problem. Just include a low cost FW card for PCs. When I bought a SCSI scanner they included a SCSI card for PCs. Actually, since iChat AV is standards based all Apple needs is for a standards compliant chat client to come out for the PC.

If it was relatively cheap to port Safari to the PC it might be good. Anything that dilutes the presence of IE is good. Yes, web sites should design to standards and not to the quirks of IE but they won't do that if the only browser they see is IE.

I strongly disagree with the notion of porting FCP. FCP sells power macs. Porting it to windows will cut into power mac sales.

To the idea suggested above that Keynote should be ported, I don't think it could. Keynote relies on some of the abilities of Quartz Extreme which is not available on windows. Better to just keep improving ppt compatibility.

[shadowfax]

this has got to be one of the best polls i have ever seen. kudos.

i voted for iPhoto, myself. there is certainly a market for a low-priced, highly funtional but simple photo-manager/editor in the windows world. safari doesn't deserve to be on the list, in my opinion. microsoft can, will, and really already has shut that market out, along with some help from mozilla. that's a product that would never even get a chance, if you ask me. iChat AV is another good idea, i guess, but it's still inferior to the windows AIM on basic functionality, like animated GIF support, profiles, things that i see most AIM users clinging to; not so many care about video conferencing.

i guess the only other thing i really have to say is that "none" shouldn't have been an option. that's not remotely interesting. shame on all ~500 of you who voted that way, even if it is true.

[MacFan25]

Besides iTunes, I don't think that anything else should be ported to Windows. I think many PC users would just think of Safari as something stupid made be Apple. :rolleyes: The iApps, excluding iTunes, shouldn't be ported either. I think that the iApps are one of the reasons that people buy macs. They are easy to use programs that people like. If they did port any more programs, then I think Apple would lose some of their hardware sales.

[Phil Of Mac]

Originally posted by tazo
most versions of instant messengers now include voice and video chat; notably yahoo instant messenger

Yes, but it's not nearly as good.

Either video AIM or iChat AV for Windows. We need one.

Originally posted by xjohn
iTunes will be there to sell music.

None of the other apps sell anything, so I don't think they'll be ported.

iPhoto sells photo prints :)

[scem0]

iChat AV because there isn't a comparible alternative in the PC universe and I think if people start seeing how superior apple software is to PC software they might switch.

Safari next, but I wish apple luck getting a browser faster than Phoenix - which is amazingly fast on a PC :).

scem0

[gopher]

iChat AV so I can video chat with PC users easier. Either that or make the PC videoconferencing free solutions compatible with iChat AV.

[Bunzi2k4]

yea i agree or at least a video confrencing network should become popular like aim or something like that

[vrapan]

Anything that can offer some income to Apple and anything that can help promote the Mac platform without a large monetary cost. So let me see:
iChatAV so there is a reason for people to use it - right now all my friends have PCs so no VidCon for me. It will also help iSight sales from Mac users - no self respecting Win user will pay 150$+tax to do videoconferencing - there are whole win boxes that cost just double that.

Safari not a good idea. Tons of W3C compliant browsers. Safari wont gain any significant share on Win no matter what.

FPC and other higher end software no cause they will cost a lot on lost hardware sales.

iPhoto maybe if they can make some profit either from making it a pay for app or from services - no sure how many use these services though.

iDVD maybe but only as a pay for app and iMovie no.

Appleworks 7 .... hm I dont think so is anyone using Appleworks on Win side??? I think MS Office, OpenOffice and the Wordperfect or Corel Suite don't leave much space for any profit to be made. But then again I might be wrong


In any case all of them need to advertise Macs. Clever small banner or by extra neat features that only Macs can have.

[Bunzi2k4]

too true and from the looks of it, Ichat AV wins! but will they ever make it?

[legion]

I, also, think iChatAV should be ported if only to give Mac users more "reachable" people.

As for other software, in an idealistic world, when Apple claims they are a hardware company, they would actually compete based on hardware. As it is, everyone (and probably rightly so) believes that Apple needs special software that is Mac only to get users to go to Macs. This disappoints me because I want better hardware always; the company who makes it isn't the selling point. Apple isn't a hardware company anymore; it sells "the Apple image"-- it in itself has become a marketing machine (especially under SJ).

My utopia would have all software on all platforms and then the consumer gets to choose the hardware he wants to use, that way the best hardware companies and software companies would always win out.

As for Shake, it seems to have fallen under the Apple's umbrella philosophy. Like all the software Apple buys (Macromedia's Final Cut, eMagic, etc...), after the product belongs to Apple, the software ceases for other platforms. I guess this is Apple's version of horizontal consolidation.

As for FCP, don't worry about Windows. Windows has available to it the granddaddy of editors from Avid and the complete Avid systems. In addition, you've got Discreet's Post and FX groups and Pinnacle's Liquid series. I don't mean to downplay FCP, but it is still not mature enough for serious editing and is really just a great entry-level NLE (price included). Even in audio, Apple has yet to enter into the more detailed (and more expensive) areas-- where much of the equipment runs more or less embedded windows systems. As long as Gigastudios and CreamWare exist, Windows is firmly entrenched.