Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple iTunes for Windows... Soon?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Re: Re: Re: Re: Side effect of iTunes for Windows?
But none of them have the credibility of Apple. As many recent articles have articulated, Apple is well respected and well known, especially by today's youth culture. As of right now, the big 2 browsers in the PC world don't have built-in popup blocking or the simplistic and intuitive interface of Safari. If Apple is looking for stronger PC exposure, Safari may be a fine idea for port. I'd actually consider eventually having a free suite of software: iTunes for Windows, Safari for Windows, and Apple Mail for Windows (for its easy junk blocking). Exposure for Apple is important so that they can give people a compelling reason to switch - and keep their image solid for PC users. They currently don't put out anything for the PC except Quicktime, and it'd be best if they can do better than that. Apple is a hardware company, but they also make amazing software.
But none of them have the credibility of Apple. As many recent articles have articulated, Apple is well respected and well known, especially by today's youth culture. As of right now, the big 2 browsers in the PC world don't have built-in popup blocking or the simplistic and intuitive interface of Safari. If Apple is looking for stronger PC exposure, Safari may be a fine idea for port. I'd actually consider eventually having a free suite of software: iTunes for Windows, Safari for Windows, and Apple Mail for Windows (for its easy junk blocking). Exposure for Apple is important so that they can give people a compelling reason to switch - and keep their image solid for PC users. They currently don't put out anything for the PC except Quicktime, and it'd be best if they can do better than that. Apple is a hardware company, but they also make amazing software.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Side effect of iTunes for Windows?
Mozilla, Opera, Firebird all have built-in pop up blocking. They have had it even before Safari existed. IE is pretty much the only one that doesn't offer popup and ad-blocking.
An intuitive interface is mainly because of the consistency with other applications. Safari may be pretty consistent with other OSX applications, but it would stick out in a windows environment.
Seeing what kind of crap people install on their computers, I seriously doubt that people care about the image of the company. Heck, they are using Microsoft Windows
I also doubt that Safari would be as fast on windows, than it is on mac os x. You would have to emulate a big part of cocoa. Any G3/G4/G5 specific optimisations are lost, design decissions based on the intimate knowledge of the operating system is rendered worthless.
I also doubt that people would be more inclined to switch to an Apple, if they have all Apples software for free. Apples software is one of the main reason people switch to a mac. The reason people would switch, is because they can do more things, more easily than on their current PC.
Finally, what would the existing Apple customer base prefer? A new, innovating Apple application/OS for Mac OS X, or an application they can't use because it runs on Windows. Development costs money, so Apple can't do everything all at the same time. Would you like to wait another year for Panther, so Windows users have another choice in browsers?
Mozilla, Opera, Firebird all have built-in pop up blocking. They have had it even before Safari existed. IE is pretty much the only one that doesn't offer popup and ad-blocking.
An intuitive interface is mainly because of the consistency with other applications. Safari may be pretty consistent with other OSX applications, but it would stick out in a windows environment.
Seeing what kind of crap people install on their computers, I seriously doubt that people care about the image of the company. Heck, they are using Microsoft Windows
I also doubt that Safari would be as fast on windows, than it is on mac os x. You would have to emulate a big part of cocoa. Any G3/G4/G5 specific optimisations are lost, design decissions based on the intimate knowledge of the operating system is rendered worthless.
I also doubt that people would be more inclined to switch to an Apple, if they have all Apples software for free. Apples software is one of the main reason people switch to a mac. The reason people would switch, is because they can do more things, more easily than on their current PC.
Finally, what would the existing Apple customer base prefer? A new, innovating Apple application/OS for Mac OS X, or an application they can't use because it runs on Windows. Development costs money, so Apple can't do everything all at the same time. Would you like to wait another year for Panther, so Windows users have another choice in browsers?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Side effect of iTunes for Windows?
I totaly agree that Apple shouldn't port all their software to Windows. I like working with Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash and Dreamweaver much more on Windows.(Mostly because how Window max out the workspace and the UI doesn't look that glossy on Windows.) If I had Safari and iTunes for windows there wouldn't be anything I would need my Mac for.
Mozilla FireBird and Opera is way faster than Explorer on Windows so I really don't see why Safari would be slow.
I totaly agree that Apple shouldn't port all their software to Windows. I like working with Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash and Dreamweaver much more on Windows.(Mostly because how Window max out the workspace and the UI doesn't look that glossy on Windows.) If I had Safari and iTunes for windows there wouldn't be anything I would need my Mac for.
Neither can Apple. My Apple Apps on my iBook crashes (unexpctly quits) more often than any apps crash on my Windows-machine.
Judging by how QuickTime works on Windows, any app Apple develops for Windows will suck!
Let's hope the new guy Apple hired knows he's stuff!
Really?
How much RAM do you have?
I feel OSX needs 512 MB min.
Seems like a lot for an iBook, but I don't see a way around it.
as for stability...
I find our dual Xeon BOXX PC running XP crashes 2 times daily.
Windows Media Player seems more unstable than Quicktime on it.
And try to use Macromedia Director on this thing without it hanging up and needing a reboot every 3 hours.
How much RAM do you have?
I feel OSX needs 512 MB min.
Seems like a lot for an iBook, but I don't see a way around it.
as for stability...
I find our dual Xeon BOXX PC running XP crashes 2 times daily.
Windows Media Player seems more unstable than Quicktime on it.
And try to use Macromedia Director on this thing without it hanging up and needing a reboot every 3 hours.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Side effect of iTunes for Windows?
That is plainly and absolutely false. They might RENDER pages faster, but the application themselves are way slower than IE. On a PC powerful enough so that neither IE, FB or Moz are resource-restrained, that problem might disappear, making all applications behave equally fast (and thus making FB and Moz seem like an even better option because they still render pages faster). But use a Pentium 233 w 160 MB of RAM like the one I am using right now to write this, and you will definitely want to do it in IE. IE flies in this machine and FB, while being usable, chokes (and Apple's QuickTime turns a big load of unusable ****).
This is the way it is.
That is plainly and absolutely false. They might RENDER pages faster, but the application themselves are way slower than IE. On a PC powerful enough so that neither IE, FB or Moz are resource-restrained, that problem might disappear, making all applications behave equally fast (and thus making FB and Moz seem like an even better option because they still render pages faster). But use a Pentium 233 w 160 MB of RAM like the one I am using right now to write this, and you will definitely want to do it in IE. IE flies in this machine and FB, while being usable, chokes (and Apple's QuickTime turns a big load of unusable ****).
This is the way it is.
What? Direct competitor must be singular, and so it has to be Windows Media. MMs direct music is a joke in the PC world, they are a competitors but its disingenuous to claim they are direct competitors. Would you claim HandEra was a direct competitor to Sony?
I know that if they release it [iTunes] for windows I will be buying 10 or so songs that day! Gotta support Apple!
Sorry if this has been posted before, but there is more confirmation that iTunes for Windows is coming out this week. An article in the New York Times has the following quote:
Looks like the announcement is almost 100% guaranteed to be this week.
Looks like the announcement is almost 100% guaranteed to be this week.
