Apple's Windows iTunes SDK

[Highland]

iTunes has a fatal flaw . . . it cannot "watch" folders as MusicMatch can.

I have another solution for that problem...

My g/f and I both have Macs. We also have Airport.

So, all you need to do is turn 'Share my music' on. That way I can play her songs via rendezvous over our LAN. Easy.

Does the PC version have the rendezvous features of iTunes?

 

[SiliconAddict]

Crack its the other white meat.

this is only half of the truth; it is very true that current macs have plenty of memory, but that's not because mac software eats it for breakfast, it's because one can benefit from it. because mac is a unix, there can be as much memory as your wallet permits, and it can be all in use if you like.

windows, however, lives still in the stone-age where people was amazed to see a computer with a whopping 16MB of ram. windows handles the memory in such a way that it tries to keep maximum amount of memory available to apps the user may like to run in the future, in other words, it keeps the memory free and the contents that should reside in memory, it flushes down to the virtual memory (hard drive). that's the reason fewer windows users buy a lot of memory, simply, because it cannot be used efficiently.

Umm it’s obvious you know NOTHING about Windows. Zip. Zero. Zilch. That is how Windows 9x worked that is why there was no point in going over 256MB of RAM for 98 or ME the OS couldn’t use it. The NT kernel that is used for NT\2K\XP\2003 uses all RAM to store programs and part of the OS.

mac can have as many apps in memory simultaneously, and switching between them is very fast. windows can in real world have one app in physical memory and the others will be stored in the virtual memory, making it very slow to switch between the app you currently use and the app you haven't used in few hours. windows has to load the not-so-recently-used app from the hard drive, which is very stupid if there would be available memory.

Bull. Where the heck did you get that idea. Application are loaded and STORED in RAM. I don’t know what crack you are on or if that is how Win9x worked but that sure as HELL isn’t how NT/2K/XP works. Look at the attached picture. Isn’t it amazing how I have multiple apps open with NO pagefile. Hell there is a tweak in XP that allows you to load the majority of the OS into RAM so it operates faster. If you are going to make excuses please do a better job then the drivel you posted. I have no problems with you hacking on Windows for ease of use issues or security from hell but not this. OS X has enough virtues that it doesn't need propaganda put up against it to win.

 

[Highland]

that's the reason fewer windows users buy a lot of memory, simply, because it cannot be used efficiently.

That was a bit of a silly thing to say.

I agree with the previous post. I don't know where you could have heard all that BS.

Let's not talk about using over 4gb of ram though

 

[JGowan]

no, it doesn't. it falls into "bloated software" category, or at very least, "unoptimized software" category,...

And you know this,... HOW? How on God's green earth do you know that iTunes isn't as lean as possible. If you want to compare iTunes with WinAmp, then at least be the FIRST in line to admit that WinAmp doesn't do NEEEAAARRR the ***** that iTunes does. And with more WORK to be done, more RAM is needed.

 

[Mav451]

QT is the engine that powers iTunes on both the Mac and the PC. Saying that iTunes forces it down PC users throats is like saying that automobile manufacturers force the ICE down buyers throats...

Oh sorry, my bad. I didn't know this before. I stand corrected.

 

[JFreak]

And you know this,... HOW? How on God's green earth do you know that iTunes isn't as lean as possible. If you want to compare iTunes with WinAmp, then at least be the FIRST in line to admit that WinAmp doesn't do NEEEAAARRR the ***** that iTunes does. And with more WORK to be done, more RAM is needed.

you're right about itunes being superior in features, no matter what's the comparison, it's in its own league. totally.

but it's not as lean as possible. it's a hog. it's however understandable, because itunes four is the first windows-release. first versions are never fully optimized.

itunes starts three processes: itunes.exe (28MB), ipodservice.exe (2MB) and ituneshelper.exe (2MB) and while there's nothing wrong in starting processes, the function of such processes shouldn't require that much memory. and itunes itself, i think its memory footprint could easily be halved, if some effort was put into optimizing it at all.

(apple itunes uses 22MB in single process. that's about 30% less than windows version.)

actually, i'm wrong in stating that it hasn't been optimized "at all". some optimizations have been made as itunes memory footprint is only 9MB when it's not playing anyting and is minimized. so something has been done right, but much could still be done. i'd like apple to show windows people how to make efficient applications, not memory hogs.

 

[JFreak]

Umm it’s obvious you know NOTHING about Windows. Zip. Zero. Zilch. That is how Windows 9x worked that is why there was no point in going over 256MB of RAM for 98 or ME the OS couldn’t use it. The NT kernel that is used for NT\2K\XP\2003 uses all RAM to store programs and part of the OS.

Bull. Where the heck did you get that idea. Application are loaded and STORED in RAM. I don’t know what crack you are on or if that is how Win9x worked but that sure as HELL isn’t how NT/2K/XP works.

umm, yeah, i've only used them since windows 2.0 and missed 1.0 totally. never saw any 0.x releases whatsoever, so i'm a newbie.

seriously, the NT memory handling is not so much better in real life. in my office the windows workstations can be rebooted once a month, so on average the windows os has been up two weeks instead of two hours you might be more familiar. i can surely tell when the os loads apps from the hard drive and when the apps are loaded from memory, and believe me, windows xp DOES load awfully lot from the disk. every morning i find that everything has been put into hard drive as opening any already open app takes forever and longer.

yeah, right, i know nothing. and sure as hell i don't daily face any frustration with these windows workstations. everything is fine and secure. yeah, right.

 

[xy14]

Complainers Suck

Bull. You sure as heck do NOT need that kind of RAM for Windows unless you are talking with world's most poorly programed game that is.

First of all, what does this have to do with the iTunes for Windows 4.5 SDK?

Second of all, quit complaining! If you have a problem with sonething, fix it! Maybe you've heard of a thing called xCode? You can design your OWN games and then you can try being a better programmer than someone from a 100 million dollar company and maybe you will make a dollar or two. Unless you require like 768 MB of RAM because you made the world's most poorly programmed game. Sorry but it just gets annoying that people always complain and never do anything about anything. If you people weren't so slothful, maybe you would though. The world would be a much better place if people didn't just complain about the bad things. I don't complain about drugs, and I own a treatment center.

 

[Highland]

I'm not saying that iTunes is the most efficient app ever written, however the extra 10mb could be accounted for by the extra HTML rendering code that would be required for the Windows version (the OS X version would use the system level Safari HTML renderer, whereas the Windows version would have to have the HTML renderer embedded into iTunes).

If you guys think that iTunes is bloated, then please provide Apple with feedback--optimisations benefit us all.

 

[phasornc]

In regards to my request to "Watch Folders" this giant wrote:

I have another solution for that problem...

My g/f and I both have Macs. We also have Airport.

So, all you need to do is turn 'Share my music' on. That way I can play her songs via rendezvous over our LAN. Easy.

Does the PC version have the rendezvous features of iTunes?

That's brilliant dude now try to sync your wifes songs to your ipod, try to play your wifes songs when her computer is not on, try to burn a CD from her music . . . the point is YOU CAN'T, cuz iTunes is stupid. I have a low power beige G3 233 running Panther Server and I burn all my songs to it. Did I mention in addition to our Desktops my wife and I both have laptops with 802.11g cards that we use to connect to the networks as well. Now try to make sense of that "shared music" curappy system when you have 4 computer not all of which are around. Only storing songs on a server makes sence. And ONLY watching folders makes this efficient.

 

[Highland]

That's brilliant dude now try to sync your wifes songs to your ipod, try to play your wifes songs when her computer is not on, try to burn a CD from her music . . . the point is YOU CAN'T, cuz iTunes is stupid. I have a low power beige G3 233 running Panther Server and I burn all my songs to it. Did I mention in addition to our Desktops my wife and I both have laptops with 802.11g cards that we use to connect to the networks as well. Now try to make sense of that "shared music" curappy system when you have 4 computer not all of which are around. Only storing songs on a server makes sence. And ONLY watching folders makes this efficient.

Firstly, she's not my wife

I understand your point, and that would be a cool feature. However, I'm sure the record labels would not want something like that in iTunes.

...now try to sync your wifes songs to your ipod

That's actually illegal (yes, yes, yes... I do realise how stupid that is, but it doesn't fit within the 'time shifting' or 'space shifting' laws that most western countries have). It is a bit of a grey area, but for a company like Apple, who's trying to win over the music industry, a mistake like this could cost them the entire game.

Given that iTunes can be remote controlled via 3rd party apps, why not write an iTunes sync utility? (or pass on the idea for someone else to write.)

 

[runeasgar]

Did this SDK sprout iTunes Catalog? I went looking like.. a few days after the SDK came out for a program that would find album art / publish my music to the web and I came across iTunes Catalog. I bought it immediately. If this is what SDKs can do.. I look forward to more SDKs released for other apple programs.