Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Archive > Archives of Old Posts > MacBytes.com News Discussion

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Dec 23, 2005, 10:19 AM   #1
MacBytes
macrumors bot
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Should Apple Port the iLife Suite?




Category: Opinion/Interviews
Link: Should Apple Port the iLife Suite?

Posted on MacBytes.com
Approved by Mudbug
MacBytes is offline   0
Old Dec 23, 2005, 10:23 AM   #2
yellow
Moderator
 
yellow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Portland, OR
Hell no.

That's just one of the many reasons that you should be running a Mac. Why give this away? That's just stupid.
yellow is offline   0
Old Dec 23, 2005, 10:31 AM   #3
JDOG_
macrumors 6502a
 
JDOG_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Oakland
What a rather boring article...no offense to the author. I'm sure they took their time on it.

No mention of windows movie maker app to compare to iMovie. And why sell this to PC users? I'd think they's start selling Final Cut Pro and Aperture to people before porting iLife.

Yes iTunes was better than WMP when they first introduced it, but lets not forget Apple didn't just port iTunes to the PC to sell more iPods, they did it to get more iTMS customers as well.
__________________
XBOX Live Gamertag: Tarengo
Machine: 2.4GHZ Aluminum Macbook
JDOG_ is offline   0
Old Dec 23, 2005, 10:36 AM   #4
mkrishnan
Moderator emeritus
 
mkrishnan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Grand Rapids, MI, USA
I personally don't think it's worth the benefit... when Apple ported iTunes, it got a lot of flack because early versions of iTunes/Win ran poorly or unreliably on a lot of existing Windows installs... That's okay, because iTunes was necessary to grow the iPod and iTMS phenomena, and although it had to run on lots of different Windows computers, it only used one kind of iPod. With the rest of iLife, I think there are too many hardware profiles in the Windows world, and its less likely that Apple would be able to offer the kind of seamlessness that exists on Macs.

Well, that's my opinion, at any rate. Although Picasa seems to be a relevant counterexample in terms of iPhoto being doable. I have only seen Picasa once, and I was impressed, although I'm not sure how easy it is to configure cameras on it (and if it meets the zero-config level of iPhoto).
__________________
Mohan
mkrishnan is offline   0
Old Dec 23, 2005, 10:38 AM   #5
devman
macrumors 65816
 
devman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: AU
Quote:
Originally Posted by yellow
Hell no.

That's just one of the many reasons that you should be running a Mac. Why give this away? That's just stupid.
agreed. well said.
devman is offline   0
Old Dec 23, 2005, 10:42 AM   #6
xtbfx
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Well, I must be one of the 'stuck up' Mac users because Windows users shouldn't get iLife. It's part of the Apple Culture and you can't just ship it over to Windows.

Let them get a Mac if they want it so bad.
xtbfx is offline   0
Old Dec 23, 2005, 10:43 AM   #7
nuckinfutz
macrumors 603
 
nuckinfutz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Middle Earth
No Porting iLife is not worth the increase in sales

The assumption made in the article is that since iTunes saw success from being ported iLife would also find that same success. This is a fallacy. iTunes is a delivery conduit for pre-recorded media. iLife is a management and creation suite. You cannot expect the same results when comparing the two.

The problem with cross platform applications is that they can never fully exploit the hardware. If Apple makes iLife for windows then they must program to a lowest common denominator codebase and then toss on platform specific features later. This is not good for you and I if we wish to have an application that is Mac through and through.

I disagree that there are no equivalents in the PC world. Picase is probably better than iPhoto as of today with RAW support and excellent performance.

Fruity Loops has been PC only for years and isn't as slick as Garage Band but is mature and tested.

Premiere Elements from Adobe handles video editing just fine and burn DVDs to boot.

I think iLife needs to be focus on highlighting Macintosh technologies. I think dreams of iLife dominating the PC landscape are coming from Mac users with no experience or knowledge of the many applications available to a PC user.

I will acknowledge the excellent price of iLife. It's definitely a steal of an application that we should be happy to enjoy on our own as Mac users.
nuckinfutz is offline   0
Old Dec 23, 2005, 11:08 AM   #8
iHateWindows
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: May 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by yellow
Hell no.

That's just one of the many reasons that you should be running a Mac. Why give this away? That's just stupid.
I second that.
iHateWindows is offline   0
Old Dec 23, 2005, 11:19 AM   #9
mjstew33
macrumors 601
 
mjstew33's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Illinois
It's not worth it, if they want the iLife suite so bad - get a effing Mac mini. This is one of the damn advantages of the Mac! They can't just give it to everyone, this is part of the reason I'm still on the Mac!

Apple's been pissing me off lately. nah, I take that back. These rumors have been pissing me off lately.
__________________
macbookpro 15" 2.4 GHz intel i7 quad | iPhone 5 64GB
Who except God can give you peace? Has the world ever been able to satisfy the heart? St. Gerard Majella
mjstew33 is offline   0
Old Dec 23, 2005, 11:36 AM   #10
Norse Son
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Under Uncle Sam's Thumb
Bread to the Masses?

Porting iTunes to Windows did help broaden the appeal of the iPod & iTMS. However, didn't Apple reach 100 million iTMS downloads just on the Mac USA version (were there UK, French & German iTMSs)? However, with the iLife suite there were few, if any, legit options for the other apps. No, in the inclusive/integrated world of the MacOS, Apple was the only company that could (would, for that matter) release such a comprehensive & elegant suite of media tools.

But port it to Windows?!?!?

Not to sound like a Mac Snob, but with more Windows users switching to Mac I have seen a... hmmm... (delicate wording necessary)... Oh, screw it, I'll just say it... Windows users have been used to paying dirt cheap prices for second rate, garage-built hardware, cobbled together with software patches up the ying-yang, and having dozens of mediocre choices in each software category - "Viruses, schmiruses; my PC eats them for breakfast!" So, here's the elitist rub - Have others noticed a slight "dumbing down" of the intellect in forum threads around the Mac web?

"Have not!", "Hav two!", "Yur pc'z a peace of ,crap then!" "Yeh? Wel, you Mac snobs are all th same. Think your better then the rest of us Windows people... At least i can built my pc from skratche. How xpan-dabbl is y'ur Mac!"...

And, no, I wasn't too far off the mark judging by some forum posts I've read... I'm not perfect, and the "U" key on my laptop occasionally sticks, but I do try to lend intelligence to my posts, with thought-through research to back up my opinions.

I don't want to see iLife on Windows, because people who made the choice to use Windows do not appreciate the benefits associated with a (short term) premium on the Mac. I expect elegant hardware & software "solutions" from Apple, as well as 3rd-party developers. "Solutions" is the key word, because it empowers you to complete a task. The interaction between myself and the applications, interpreted by MacOS X, is intuitive, because Apple requires developers to "respect" the look & feel.

I will pay a premium for that, but a majority of Windows users, let alone those switching to the Mac, did not learn to use a pc that way. So I think they should be perceptive to what makes a Mac different from a Dell, HP, Gateway, eMachines, ACER, "Bob's LawnMower Repair's Green Dragon PC-Extreme", etc. - an overall quality of computing they can only get on an Apple Mac running MacOS X...

If Apple really wants to convert Windows users they should stock Best Buy, Circuit City, Frys, Comp USA, etc. with the mini, iBook and iMac; and pay the salaries for knowledgeable sales people who only deal with Macs, know what they're talking about, and can ably demonstrate the "non-inflated" benefits of the total MacOS X experience over Windows... Imagine Apple working to actually promote the Mac, not just the iPod. That would do more than "iLife for Windows" to encourage intelligent crossover decisions.

Call me intelligent for my computing choice, but never a snob.

Last edited by Norse Son; Dec 23, 2005 at 11:42 AM.
Norse Son is offline   0
Old Dec 23, 2005, 11:57 AM   #11
Sun Baked
macrumors G5
 
Sun Baked's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
I'd say port it to Windows, but make it run only on a Mac.

Something nifty for Windows users buying the MacIntels and a bit easier for the dual boot crowd.
__________________
If you are the type of person who solves all their problems with a hammer, because it is the only tool in your toolbox. It would be wise of you to never get in an argument with a gunsmith.
Sun Baked is offline   0
Old Dec 23, 2005, 02:36 PM   #12
Jimjiminey
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Seattle
Then what would be the point of buying a mac?

Sure OSX is more secure, Blah, Blah, Blah, but the general public could care less. You buy a mac for the programs, like iLife, and FCP or FCE or Logic Pro.
You sure don't buy it based on security, ease of use, game play, or processor speed. While those things are great and amazing reasons to purchase a mac, when I mention them, people's eyes glaze over. I show them what I can create, and they are amazed. (I always end it with "You can't do that on a Dell!)

You use the sizzle (iLife-pro apps, Frontrow) to sell the steak (G5 or iMac/Mini)

J
__________________
If it Looks Like Windows
And It Acts Like Windows
Then Its A Cheap Rip Off Of Apple
Jimjiminey is offline   0
Old Dec 23, 2005, 02:39 PM   #13
Lacero
macrumors 601
 
Lacero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Apple should on port apps if it helps to sell their closed, proprietary hardware, such as the Itunes/Ipod combo, otherwise, I say screw PeeCee users running Micro$haft's Winblows. I love my MAC!



Here's to the Crazy Ones
Lacero is offline   0
Old Dec 23, 2005, 02:41 PM   #14
~Shard~
macrumors P6
 
~Shard~'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: 1123.6536.5321
Send a message via Skype™ to ~Shard~
Nope - it wouldn't run properly/as well on Windows, and then Windows users would complain about it and wrongly give it a bad name. Keep it Mac!
__________________
My riches consist not in the extent of my possessions, but in the fewness of my wants.
- J. Brotherton
~Shard~ is offline   0
Old Dec 23, 2005, 02:47 PM   #15
dubbz
macrumors 68020
 
dubbz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Alta, Norway
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lacero
Apple should on port apps if it helps to sell their closed, proprietary hardware, such as the Itunes/Ipod combo, otherwise, I say screw PeeCee users running Micro$haft's Winblows. I love my MAC!
My head just imploded.

Edit: More:

I kinda figured they ported they ported iTunes to Windows because they wanted something better for for iPod owners who's running Windows, as well as giving access to the Music Store. Makes sense, ya know?

QuickTime ported because they wanted to spread their favored format(s) (and the same, to some point, could probably be said for iTunes too).

The other apps doesn't make as much sense, I think...
__________________
"If a tree falls in the forest... I'll kill the bastard what done it!" - Jaheira

Last edited by dubbz; Dec 23, 2005 at 02:56 PM.
dubbz is offline   0
Old Dec 23, 2005, 03:03 PM   #16
Peace
macrumors P6
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Space--The ONLY Frontier
There are also a lot of other bundled apps designed for Windows.This port would be useless for Windows users imho.
__________________
Throw us one Russell---John Fox Super Bowl 48
Peace is offline   0
Old Dec 23, 2005, 03:39 PM   #17
sjk
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Eugene
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~Shard~
Nope - it wouldn't run properly/as well on Windows, and then Windows users would complain about it and wrongly give it a bad name.
Yeah, like they already do (sometimes justifiably) with iTunes on Windows. Even though it's Apple's app I seriously doubt it'll ever be as good for me as running it on OS X. Same would be true with any other iApps on Windows.
sjk is offline   0
Old Dec 23, 2005, 04:32 PM   #18
Fender2112
macrumors 6502a
 
Fender2112's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Charlotte, NC
Send a message via AIM to Fender2112
I think porting just iPhoto could be a very strategic move. Dangle a nice juicy carrot in front of them and lead them to the promised land. Ooo Yeah!
__________________
Really? Really, really!
Fender2112 is offline   0
Old Dec 23, 2005, 04:59 PM   #19
amin
macrumors 6502a
 
amin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Boston, MA
[QUOTE=Fender2112]I think porting just iPhoto could be a very strategic move. Dangle a nice juicy carrot in front of them and lead them to the promised land. Ooo Yeah![/QUOI don't think iPhoto would create very many converts. For the average person, Picasa may even be a better choice!
amin is offline   0
Old Dec 23, 2005, 06:03 PM   #20
Loge
macrumors 68000
 
Loge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: England
No they shouldn't. Such resources would be better spent developing and improving software for OS X. iTunes was an exception justified on the basis of iPod sales, and that the alternative iPod compatible jukebox software for Windows was generally considered inferior.
Loge is offline   0
Old Dec 23, 2005, 06:05 PM   #21
Fender2112
macrumors 6502a
 
Fender2112's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Charlotte, NC
Send a message via AIM to Fender2112
Quote:
Originally Posted by amin
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fender2112
I think porting just iPhoto could be a very strategic move. Dangle a nice juicy carrot in front of them and lead them to the promised land. Ooo Yeah!
I don't think iPhoto would create very many converts. For the average person, Picasa may even be a better choice!
I'm not familiar with Picasa, so I'll accept your statement. Perhaps iMove might serve the purpose. The purpose being ... Apple should port one other program, not the whole suite. Something that Apple can afford to use as a teaser to lure Windows users into the Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Field.

If all else fails, Apple could just port OS X to Windows.
__________________
Really? Really, really!
Fender2112 is offline   0
Old Dec 23, 2005, 06:12 PM   #22
~Shard~
macrumors P6
 
~Shard~'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: 1123.6536.5321
Send a message via Skype™ to ~Shard~
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fender2112
I think porting just iPhoto could be a very strategic move. Dangle a nice juicy carrot in front of them and lead them to the promised land. Ooo Yeah!
I don't think iPhoto would make that much of an impact. And remember that iTunes was already made available to the PC crowd, and due to its implementation it simply does not run as well on Windows, which has given it some negative press as a result. We don't want Widows users to be getting these types of bad impressions and misconceptions when it comes to iLife, or else then they'll never convert!
__________________
My riches consist not in the extent of my possessions, but in the fewness of my wants.
- J. Brotherton
~Shard~ is offline   0
Old Dec 23, 2005, 06:16 PM   #23
iMeowbot
macrumors 601
 
iMeowbot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
The iTunes port made sense, Apple had products and services to sell that needed it. What cash stream might iLife have attached, .Mac? That can't be worth the probable dent in Mac hardware sales, unless they were itching to get out of the PC business.
iMeowbot is offline   0
Old Dec 24, 2005, 01:47 AM   #24
s10
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Los Angeles
exactly iMeowbot

Itunes on PC made sense as Apple needed to give the same user experience to PC users (iPod+iTunes) in order for the iPod to become as successful as it is now.
s10 is offline   0
Old Dec 24, 2005, 04:21 AM   #25
Seasought
macrumors 65816
 
Seasought's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Those against
Porting the iLife suite dilutes the Mac platform


*waves hand*
__________________
"If you can hear it, then itís speaking to you. And if you can see it, then itís yours to have."
Serial Experiments Lain
Seasought is offline   0


 
MacRumors Forums > Archive > Archives of Old Posts > MacBytes.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
iLife Suite has been deleted after I erased HardDisk nayakgrv Mac Applications and Mac App Store 3 Dec 18, 2013 03:54 PM
iPad: iWork/iLife suite after restore from backup? Epiphron iPad 8 Nov 6, 2013 03:34 PM
Will Apple ever update iLife and iWork for OS X? dandeco Mac Applications and Mac App Store 29 Sep 6, 2013 04:40 PM
Airport Express LAN port takes duty of fried WAN port? InfoTime Mac Peripherals 3 Jul 30, 2013 12:50 PM
Multi-port usb hub that can charge devices from *each port* patrickkidd Community Discussion 3 Jul 22, 2013 11:40 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:03 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC