Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

elppa

macrumors 68040
Nov 26, 2003
3,233
151
If they are redisigning iTunes 11, was it worth it to move iTunes 10.4 to 64 bit?

Because Apple has more cash than America, and they can.

I imagine it has something to do with Lion, given that the 64 bit version is Lion only. You are right, there would be no reason otherwise not to wait.

Because that was the only goal then, that's how all started, but things change and it's not only about that now.

Ok, what is the purpose of iTunes now then. Almost every other app Apple does you can sum up in a couple of words:

Safari - internet
iPhoto - photos
iMovie - video
Pages - Word processing
Numbers - spreadsheets
Keynote - presentations
Mail - email
Address Book
iCal - Calendar
Mac App Store - buy apps

Then we have iTunes which is music, video, podcasts, ringtones, social networking, syncing, music store etc. etc.

If other cross platform package creators can create similar experiences on similar performing platforms
Please can I have an example? Almost all cross platform software stinks.
 

AidenShaw

macrumors P6
Feb 8, 2003
18,667
4,676
The Peninsula
That is merely a 64-bit installer, the 32-bit installer is not compatible with 64-bit Windows. The client is still 32-bit.

I thought that Itunes on Windows includes a USB class driver for Idevice support - and that driver must be an x64 driver on x64 systems.

It isn't really necessary to have an x64 "installer" per se - in fact the majority of installer programs are x86. x86 installers run on both x64 and x86, and can choose whether to install x86 or x64 binaries as appropriate.

The majority of kits seem to be for both x86 and x64 Windows - both sets of binaries are in the kit, and the x86 installer selects the right files for the system on which it is running.
 

bushido

Suspended
Mar 26, 2008
8,070
2,755
Germany
i hope they dont split it up, its already annoying having iPhoto always pop up even if u just want to sync music
 

Dr McKay

macrumors 68040
Aug 11, 2010
3,431
57
Kirkland
I thought that Itunes on Windows includes a USB class driver for Idevice support - and that driver must be an x64 driver on x64 systems.

It isn't really necessary to have an x64 "installer" per se - in fact the majority of installer programs are x86. x86 installers run on both x64 and x86, and can choose whether to install x86 or x64 binaries as appropriate.

The majority of kits seem to be for both x86 and x64 Windows - both sets of binaries are in the kit, and the x86 installer selects the right files for the system on which it is running.

I dont really know the details of it, I just know if I download the 32-bit installer and attempt to run it, an error pops up saying the program is incompatible.
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.png
    Untitled.png
    36.3 KB · Views: 66

arbitter

macrumors regular
Nov 12, 2010
109
1
Belgium
I just don't understand, how long can it take to build a new software, especially of you're the second largest company in the world?

On Windows, iTunes is really bloated. It takes ages to load on my pc, and sometimes when synchronizing it freezes and takes almost all CPU. Syncing also takes way too long. I synced an iPad, detached it, then realized I wanted another app on it, connected it again and suddenly it begun transferring bought items again! Nothing changed in that mere minute.

Also; the photooptimizing takes way too long. I detest putting pictures on a device. The images need to be in one folder, and if you select another one, the others are gone. For me, not a problem to understand, but for my parents. And also support for more movie formats, also in iOS. It's ridiculous, you can't play **** on your device without converting your movies, paying gazillions to then download movies via iTunes and spending all your internet data (and this option isn't even available where I live) or having to pay a euro to buy a piece of crapware that plays half of the movies you want at 1 fps.
 

cms2

macrumors 6502
Aug 4, 2007
473
4
Texas
Remember this? Remember how much people whined when it was dropped!

Hah hah, very good point!

The current iTunes works for me, and suits my purposes, a redesign is always nice. I just hope they don't go along the route they displayed with iCal :(

Amen. I sincerely hope that Apple never does anything along the lines of iCal again. Should probably replace "sincerely" with "vainly."

iTunes has an identity crisis, and it's only getting worse. Its name and icon suggest music, but these days I go there for so much more. Movies. Podcasts. Apps. iPhone settings. Add to that books soon, and it becomes more painfully obvious that something must change.

Just thinking out loud, but I'd love to see either one app that combines all sort of media consumption in a way that doesn't trivialize everything other than music with its name, and maybe a separate app to deal with device and cloud syncing. Heck, merge the media consumption into Safari. I feel like I'm doing the same thing in Safari and iTunes most of the time anyway, when it comes to consuming digital content.

This just kinda hurts my head. I'm done venting now.

I like your suggestion to separate syncing into a separate app. I don't think it would be in keeping with Apple's (sometimes over) simplifying for the least sophisticated users.

Lets hope it gets some color back. It's looking quite pale ... euh gray.

Have you looked around in Lion? Not gonna happen. Gray is Apple's new favorite color.
 

cms2

macrumors 6502
Aug 4, 2007
473
4
Texas
On Windows, iTunes is really bloated. It takes ages to load on my pc, and sometimes when synchronizing it freezes and takes almost all CPU. Syncing also takes way too long. I synced an iPad, detached it, then realized I wanted another app on it, connected it again and suddenly it begun transferring bought items again! Nothing changed in that mere minute.

Man, I had forgotten how bad iTunes was on Windows. Only thing worse was Safari. #happyswitcher
 

kvnkvnkvn

macrumors member
Jul 29, 2011
55
10
There are three options of what should be done.

1 Rename iTunes to iMedia or some variation that includes all types of content

2 Allow users to add or remove features

3 Break up iTunes
* iMedia app that does audio and video content only
* new iSync/iCloud app that handles all synching of idevices
* iStore app that handles all purchases
* iRead/iBook app that handles ebooks, pdf etc.

* All new apps will watch folders and add new content automatically that are in there respective folders.

* iSync/iCloud will share data (library file) with the other apps and watch folders any data that is change in the other apps will be sync when the idevice is connected next time.

When iOS device or iPod is connected this app will launch asking what do you want to synch, charge device, update


* iStore will function as the store for everything in OSX and iOS; it will add media to the correct folders. Music for music, video for videos, apps for osx apps and ios for ios apps. The respective apps that work with these files will watch the folders and automatically add new files to there libraries.

* iRead/iBook an app to read all types of files/documents

* iMedia will be a audio and video app only it will handle your audio and video libraries and do a better job at video management.
 
Last edited:

HiRez

macrumors 603
Jan 6, 2004
6,250
2,576
Western US
i hope they dont split it up, its already annoying having iPhoto always pop up even if u just want to sync music

That's why I want an "iCloud" app (or call it whatever you want) that would handle syncing everything (but not try to manage the media itself). You go to one place for syncing everything, iCloud would know about the other apps (playlists, photo albums, book collections, etc.), but wouldn't need to pop up a separate app just to sync or import.
 

RJCP

macrumors 6502
Jun 8, 2011
434
40
To be honest, I hope that they'll go for an iPad like interface. The current iPod app on the iPad has a fantastic layout which would work perfectly on a regular computer. The current iTunes layout just feels so late early 2000's compared to the iPad one...
 

Rodimus Prime

macrumors G4
Oct 9, 2006
10,136
4
I dont really know the details of it, I just know if I download the 32-bit installer and attempt to run it, an error pops up saying the program is incompatible.

then that sounds like typical piss poor Apple support for windows. It should not be an issue.
The only problem that Apple would run into is a 64 bit OS requires 64bit drivers. Other wise non issue. Sounds like Apple is trying to put to much crap in the installers.

Either way all this does is add even more bloat to iTunes. It used to be such a great program and then Apple kept trying to shove more and more crap into it. It has way to much stuff bolted on to it trying to make iTunes does things it was never designed to do. That is the problem is all the extra crap added to it that its interface and design were never set up to handle.
 

BeSweeet

macrumors 68000
Apr 2, 2009
1,566
1,269
San Antonio, TX
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

It's pretty obvious iTunes will be redesigned (as seen on the iPad for iOS 5). Don't like the preview.
 

iFanaddic

macrumors 6502a
Sep 24, 2008
818
241
Montréal, Canada
Where's the bloat, again? Safari and WebProcess are FAR worse in terms of bloat, ram hogging, and resource hogging. So if you have iTunes problems in the future, check to see if Safari is taking over your computer first. Getting off my soapbox now.



Ooh, nice one! I didn't notice that until you pointed that out!



NO. NO NO NO NO NO NO NO. I don't WANT to have to go to this app for this function, and another app for another function. What I like about iTunes currently is its all-encompassing function, the "Walmart of apps", if you will. If I wish to sync my iPhone, I only need to go to ONE place, not 150 different places depending upon what I want to sync to my iPhone or iPad.

Yes, it's got its problems, but if iTunes 11 is the LONG-awaited rewrite of iTunes with a plugin architecture that makes everything work seamlessly WITHOUT having to split up iTunes into separate apps, then everyone will be happy and we'll all go in 6 months, "Why'd we want iTunes to be in separate apps, again?" Mark my words.

BJ

Think again, now that over the air syncing is here, he dont need iTunes to have everything we need.
 

winston1236

macrumors 68000
Dec 13, 2010
1,902
319
There are um, paid options. Spotify is brilliant in the whole two weeks I've been using it. The sparse advertisements don't bother me, and paying $5 a month for the great service would remove the ads altogether.

well the ads are for other music so even when they play it doenst destroy the mood like pandora would
 

transmaster

Contributor
Feb 1, 2010
1,368
624
Cheyenne, Wyoming
Can we please stop the separate app thingy? In general maybe it makes sense to have more than one app, if you are just starting now. Now it doesn't make sense to split one app into 100 apps and it will not remove bloat, because after iTunes went 64 bit cocoa there isn't any. If you have huge library it's whole other problem, because you know it takes time, CPU and RAM to load big library and there is nothing you can do about it.

Jerome you are right. I much as I dislike the clanky nature of iTunes I love how it is integrated. The clankyness can be fixed if Apple will ever take the time to fix it. If I could get an iTunes with is integration, combined Winamp's ability index really large files systems and I will be a very happy camper.
 

Lesser Evets

macrumors 68040
Jan 7, 2006
3,527
1,294
Would be nice if they just make it work properly, so it's... you know... convenient. As is, it's a nice music player-organizer-importer, and it integrates files to hardware. Aside from that it's a clunky pain in the ass. Apple has had 11 years to make it work right, and they just fudged along with it to keep it basically OK. That iTunes store is a mess, too. Aside from mediocre selections, it's hell to get through to find specific files unless they are super-current-super-famous.
 

BaldiMac

macrumors G3
Jan 24, 2008
8,795
10,933
Multiple apps open is the current situation, whether we need or want it or not.

No, it's not. :confused:

If you absolutely must have access to all of iTunes' current myriad features, then of course the status quo is perfect for you. For the rest of us who don't buy from iTunes, we do not need that bloat within slowing down the application and hogging focus while it tries to contact the mothership.

If they could make iTunes more modular so that we could permanently disable those parts we don't care for, then I wouldn't care that the application was so monolithic.

Most features can be disabled through parental controls. What can't you turn off?

Ok, what is the purpose of iTunes now then. Almost every other app Apple does you can sum up in a couple of words:

Safari - internet
iPhoto - photos
iMovie - video
Pages - Word processing
Numbers - spreadsheets
Keynote - presentations
Mail - email
Address Book
iCal - Calendar
Mac App Store - buy apps

Then we have iTunes which is music, video, podcasts, ringtones, social networking, syncing, music store etc. etc.

Media management.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.