iTunes 7.0.2 And Windows Vista

[TechnoPhobe]

Vista and iTunes one solution

I am running Vista and MACOSX due to my job.

Vista iTunes Solution:
I have my music on a external FAT32 formatted drive
In Vista select "My Documents" or "My Music" and redirect these to point to the external drive.

You do this via right click properties. Works like Unix "ln -s <source> <target>".

Then:
Download iTunes
Search for iTunes install package on desktop
Select iTunes install package
Run the iTunes install as an administrator. (Run as administrator)

this setup is working fine.

Preamble: I am not an OS bigot...

I tend to agree with people that the MAC OS X experince is generally more stable than Vista.

The principle issue I have with Vista are:

1. Security Prompts
Why does Microsoft grey my screen out and make me stop everything until I have filled out the security information?
2. Driver and Third Party Application Install Support
Fine I can buy a Vista PC - wait until you get it home and try and install your HP printer... Not to mention the fact that my Cannon FS 4000 US is not compatible. At least with MAC OSX I can use my Cannon FS 4000 US as the drivers run through Rosetta.

One final word:

**** Do not try and run Vista on an old Toshiba - pain and suffering ***

 

[3282872]

I am running Vista and MACOSX due to my job.

Vista iTunes Solution:
I have my music on a external FAT32 formatted drive
In Vista select "My Documents" or "My Music" and redirect these to point to the external drive.

You do this via right click properties. Works like Unix "ln -s <source> <target>".

Then:
Download iTunes
Search for iTunes install package on desktop
Select iTunes install package
Run the iTunes install as an administrator. (Run as administrator)

this setup is working fine.

Preamble: I am not an OS bigot...

I tend to agree with people that the MAC OS X experince is generally more stable than Vista.

The principle issue I have with Vista are:

1. Security Prompts
Why does Microsoft grey my screen out and make me stop everything until I have filled out the security information?
2. Driver and Third Party Application Install Support
Fine I can buy a Vista PC - wait until you get it home and try and install your HP printer... Not to mention the fact that my Cannon FS 4000 US is not compatible. At least with MAC OSX I can use my Cannon FS 4000 US as the drivers run through Rosetta.

One final word:

**** Do not try and run Vista on an old Toshiba - pain and suffering ***

I have a solution: use OS X

 

[superfunkomatic]

hmmm, five years in development, no working drivers for lots of peripherals, lots of software incompatibilities. huh? what were they doing during development. didn't anyone think to test popular software titles.

another example of anti-competitive behavior, the most popular music download site (with which they are in direct competition) doesn't work - even in the face of all the lawsuits they haven't changed their 'tune'.

i'm sure lots of windows users with upgraded OSes will be pissed off with their new purchase.

 

[indiekiduk]

i'm sure lots of windows users with upgraded OSes will be pissed off with their new purchase.

Definately! I can't even copy a folder in Vista without explorer crashing. I think the ordinary user will be tempted to return Vista to the shop instead of relying on SP1 to make their purchase acceptable.

 

[edenwaith]

I bet MS did it on purpose to get people to use Zunes.

And the funny thing is, from the reviews I've read, the Zune software didn't work on Vista! Maybe it does now, I haven't bothered to check (with good reason, not having a Zune or Vista and all).


Microsoft's support for its legacy systems has been both a bane and boon for it. I looked through some of my more recent games, and some of them still support as far back as Windows 98. But it is only now that even the game manufacturers are requiring Windows 2000 or Windows XP. But by trying to support so many legacy systems, APIs and such, it has likely made things even more complicated for Microsoft. I've seen some things work just fine in XP, but other cases (especially with games) have been so-so. Sometimes things work, and sometimes things will work after some work arounds and hacks have been applied. Nothing too particularly new for the Microsoft camp, since the "maybe it will work" ideals has been around for years and years. Plug and play? Maybe. Maybe if you coax it and install the latest drivers, etc, then maybe it will work. The Mac seems to have been more straightforward. Either it will work or it won't.

Especially in the past five years, Apple has been throwing away nearly all of its legacy, and continues moving forward. Even finding new software that will work with Mac OS 10.1 is becoming very difficult to find. Some of this is due to the maturing nature of Mac OS X, which is understandable. However, I've noticed a fair amount of programs with Tiger and Panther which quickly moved forward and abandoned the earlier versions of Mac OS X. The switch to Intel seems to have sealed the deal, giving Mac users even more reason to continue upgrading so they aren't left completely behind.

Even if it isn't someone like Microsoft or Apple coaxing people to upgrade, then the dropping support from 3rd parties will eventually be the final straw. Just look at anyone who might still be using Mac OS 9. What are their options for web browsers? Netscape 7.0 might be their best solution, but as we've seen already, browsers start to show their flaws over time, and plug-ins are no longer supported, and one way or another it is time to move to a more modern browser (I just wish everyone using IE6 would realize this!).

 

[edenwaith]

QUOTE

Let me give you some advice... DON'T pour water into the keyboard!

That is some excellent advice. I've had a person or two confuse their plant and keyboard, and decided to water the keyboard. Apple keyboards don't agree overly well with water. :/

Here's another tip: External hard drives are not dominos. Unless the drive is already dead, then go to town.

 

[BuzWeaver]

hmmm, five years in development, no working drivers for lots of peripherals, lots of software incompatibilities. huh? what were they doing during development. didn't anyone think to test popular software titles.

another example of anti-competitive behavior, the most popular music download site (with which they are in direct competition) doesn't work - even in the face of all the lawsuits they haven't changed their 'tune'.

i'm sure lots of windows users with upgraded OSes will be pissed off with their new purchase.

So in retrospect it does resemble the Mac OS.

 

[pionata]

Well, for all we know iPods are now guaranted to work on Vista, so Microsoft should just have made sure it had better compatibility with xp. But all that sucking will only help Apple.

Originally Posted by uNext
nothing is error free and certainly mac os x while they make it seem way superior is not. (clicking on the red circle dont even fully close the app but yet is "worlds most advanced operating system"?

I actually always tought that was the best feature (application not closing when you accidently hit the x). Really usefull for artistic work.

 

[clevin]

hmmm, five years in development, no working drivers for lots of peripherals, lots of software incompatibilities. huh? what were they doing during development. didn't anyone think to test popular software titles.

funny u suggest this, at same time, many ppl here at MR think Vista should totally be built from scratch.

another example of anti-competitive behavior, the most popular music download site (with which they are in direct competition) doesn't work - even in the face of all the lawsuits they haven't changed their 'tune'.

is this true? can u cite some evidences?

i'm sure lots of windows users with upgraded OSes will be pissed off with their new purchase.

I doubt it, and im not sure u can be sure about this.

 

[superfunkomatic]

funny u suggest this, at same time, many ppl here at MR think Vista should totally be built from scratch.

is this true? can u cite some evidences?

I doubt it, and im not sure u can be sure about this.

i think basic things like printers should work with an OS upgrade, the only time this happened was from OS 9 to 10.x, in the very beginning. otherwise every new printer seems to work fine through 4 major OS changes.

monopoly - yes, anti-trust suits in US and Europe - the one in Europe will start again full bore since they are tying things into the main operating system like WMP 11 and again with internet explorer 7.x. plus you don't need to read very hard between the lines - new OS, new media player, new music store, new music player - and iTunes music store selling the most of all music download sites. it's not a coincidence that itunes doesn't work, which really doesn't concern me as a mac user, but say the $1300 dollars worth of music i have was on a PC, i upgrade to stay 'current' with an OS and all of a sudden nothing works - i'd be pissed off, i'm sure about that.

 

[stainlessliquid]

i think basic things like printers should work with an OS upgrade, the only time this happened was from OS 9 to 10.x, in the very beginning. otherwise every new printer seems to work fine through 4 major OS changes.

Do you realize how old XP is? Vista is based on a completely different kernel and is nothing like the marginal updates OSX gets. Its very similair to upgrading OS9 to OSX.

monopoly - yes, anti-trust suits in US and Europe - the one in Europe will start again full bore since they are tying things into the main operating system like WMP 11 and again with internet explorer 7.x. plus you don't need to read very hard between the lines - new OS, new media player, new music store, new music player - and iTunes music store selling the most of all music download sites. it's not a coincidence that itunes doesn't work, which really doesn't concern me as a mac user, but say the $1300 dollars worth of music i have was on a PC, i upgrade to stay 'current' with an OS and all of a sudden nothing works - i'd be pissed off, i'm sure about that.

Wait, so Apple isnt guilty of any of those things too? I could have sworn Europe was suing Apple over similair stuff and that itunes and quicktime came with OSX.. This is typical of all companies and the EU loves to sue.

You seem to be blaiming Microsoft for stuff that Apple does too. You need to come to the reality that not everything is going to work with a new OS and since iTunes uses DRM and CD drivers it is a prime victim for not working with a new kernel and registry. The fact is that Vista RTM was out for months and Beta was out for even longer, its Apple's fault that they didnt get on the ball when they should have so they would be ready for Vista's launch. There is no conspiracy, if Microsoft intentionally "broke" itunes then it would affect countless other applications and screw Vista pretty badly (ie making CD burning impossible), if they singled out itunes so it wouldnt function then it would be EXTREMELY easy to prove and theyd be facing a tremendous lawsuit.

 

[matticus008]

Do you realize how old XP is? Vista is based on a completely different kernel and is nothing like the marginal updates OSX gets. Its very similair to upgrading OS9 to OSX.

No, it most definitely is not. It is most similar to the 10.3 - 10.4 update. Some of the underlying APIs have been changed and improved, but it is essentially the same OS. It was planned to be far more revolutionary, but it is instead based on the Windows 2003 kernel rather than a brand-new one, the file system is a marginal improvement at best, and although the UI has been removed from GDI+, it is more or less a recreation of the old UI. Aside from the Aero Glass effects, it's just a new theme.

I could have sworn Europe was suing Apple over similair stuff and that itunes and quicktime came with OSX.

Nope. The EU has a few iTunes complaints.

You seem to be blaiming Microsoft for stuff that Apple does too.

Microsoft is a convicted abusive monopolist. Apple is not.

You need to come to the reality that not everything is going to work with a new OS and since iTunes uses DRM and CD drivers

DRM has nothing to do with it. iTunes works perfectly fine for me in Vista and has for months.

Microsoft intentionally "broke" itunes then it would affect countless other applications and screw Vista pretty badly (ie making CD burning impossible)

It did. Most CD burning applications do not work in Vista without an update, and not all of them have been updated yet.

if they singled out itunes so it wouldnt function then it would be EXTREMELY easy to prove and theyd be facing a tremendous lawsuit.

No, it would not be. There are thousands of broken applications (some of them Microsoft's. Without the source, it is impossible to determine with certainty why most applications don't work. That said, one has to wonder what happened, because even as of the final beta, iTunes was working fine for almost everyone (aside from taking upwards of 9 seconds to start).

 

[ezekielrage_99]

ROFL seriously...

As for a previous comment, I'm not surprised that Microsoft's Zune competition [iTunes] is now having compatibility issues with Vista. Not suprised at all...

I'm kind of getting a flashback to the Netscape vs Explorer thing a few years ago....

Personally I'm not sure surprised nothing works in Vista I really do think a lot of I.T. professionals out there expected Vista to be just another Windows OS built on old technology, to Micro$oft's credit they have addressed quite a few know issues and have made a very pretty OS (functional, only time will tell). I'm just wondering when rootkit rumors will start to surface about Vista

Still it's also another good reason why I can't be bothered parting with my money for a Vista upgrade

 

[stainlessliquid]

but it is instead based on the Windows 2003 kernel rather than a brand-new one

Windows 2003 isnt Windows XP.

Nope. The EU has a few iTunes complaints.

Yep. Thats what I was referring to. Apple is no stranger to antitrust lawsuits.

DRM has nothing to do with it. iTunes works perfectly fine for me in Vista and has for months.

Then whats the problem? I dont own any DRM music and dont burn cd's so I havent tried that part in Vista with itunes yet, but my ipod works 100% fine. If the itunes conspiracy really did apply to the iPod and the Zune then why does my ipod work in my retail copy of Vista Business? You can add itunes to the long list of programs Ive used that still work in Vista for me, so far its a perfect score (drivers are a different story).

It did.

Proof? Clearly you know something that could open a whole can of worms for the Microsoft legal team. It seems awfully silly to do something so potentially damaging to your company just to prevent people from using a program until it gets updated with a free patch.

When programs dont work with a new version of OSX do you think Apple intentionally broke them too? It doesnt make any sense why people are so quick to point the finger at Microsoft when these things are natural for major OS upgrades that also happen to Apple.

 

[matticus008]

Windows 2003 isnt Windows XP.

Yeah, and a pigeon isn't a squab. It's no more an "entirely new" kernel than 10.4 was an "entirely new" kernel compared to 10.3.

Then whats the problem? I dont own any DRM music and dont burn cd's so I havent tried that part in Vista with itunes yet, but my ipod works 100% fine.

The USB subsystem. iTunes works fine on Vista, including using an iPod, usually. Vista in its final form, however, has been corrupting all sorts of mass storage devices, and the CD burning changes haven't been updated by related vendors. Right through RC2, iPod and iTunes worked without trouble on my two Vista systems. The final version, however, is suddenly problematic.

Proof?

You could try reading the following sentence, and you'd have it. Nero, Sonic DVD Studio, DirectCD, DeepBurner, WinISO, Slysoft products all broke in Vista. USB mass storage drivers have been full of problems with corrupted flash drives, even broken partition tables on hard drives. Google, and ye shall find.

When programs dont work with a new version of OSX do you think Apple intentionally broke them too? It doesnt make any sense why people are so quick to point the finger at Microsoft when these things are natural for major OS upgrades that also happen to Apple.

iTunes worked perfectly fine all the way through RC2. I never claimed some mass conspiracy, but last-minute changes at Microsoft broke tons of software, and it's not unprecedented for Microsoft to make changes and then fail to inform OEMs and developers in a timely fashion. That's why early adopters are left with several broken software titles. What major incompatibility problems has OS X introduced, apart from disk and system utilities which are a natural consequence?

 

[MacinDoc]

I can vouch for the first G5 imacs being pieces of junk. We ran them in the multimedia section of the college. Out of around 30 machines, 7 have been killed completely in just a year. Obviously these things are used far more than a regular home computer, but the failure rate of these machines was incredibly high compared to other machines at the school. Generally the problems included turning on the computer, the fan would go into a fit sounding like a hairdryer and thats as far as you would get, you had to unplug it to turn it off. The older macs, even the emac's lasted much longer than those crappy imacs (although a couple emacs ended up with broken screens). They had constant problems with the network, but thats probably because the IT guys were morons, the only problems I judge are the hardware failures which arent caused by not knowing how to work OSX. Theyve since replaced every G5 with an intel imac, I havent seen any broken macs yet.

On the flipside Im taking a visual basic class right now and they are using 900 something mhz retro Gateways that run perfect. They are so old that the plastic is turning brown but every last one of them still function (theres around 30 as well). I've only seen 1 broken Dell but to be fair there were hundreds of Dells at the school and Ive only been in 2 Dell classrooms. Macs in general were the only computers to ever bite the dust, there was always a smorgisboard of different types of macs in the "cheaper" classrooms since they were being replaced left and right.

When it comes down to it both macs and PC's use the same kind of parts and seem to be just as likely as one another to fail (apple doesnt make ANY hardware, its all made by the same companies that make PC hardware too). Ive never had a single problem with mac's OR pc's at home, not once. I have an old 1999 833mhz HP thats still running flawlessly even if it is incredibly slow, I havent upgraded anything in that machine except ram and its been running the same install of XP since like 2002. All of the PC's I got after that I built myself, I have never had a single problem with those even when I used a $30 PC Chips motherboard.

According to Consumer Reports and PC Magazine, Apple desktops are FAR more reliable than the competition. Have you considered the possibility that the iMacs are the only computers in the lab that are being used? Anyway, you can hardly say that so many of the 1st generation G5 iMacs have died after 1 year, because the 1st generation iMacs came out in August 2004, 2.5 years ago. (BTW, i owned every generation of iMac G5 except the iSight generation, and never had a problem.) Nonetheless, it is extremely unusual for so many of them to have failed (average failure rate of Apple desktops in 5 years is 11%, according to Consumer Reports, with other manufacturer's failure rates 50-100% higher), so a location-specific cause is likely.

Finally, in its preliminary analysis of Intel-based Macs, PC Magazine suggested that the reliability of Macs appeared to be increasing even further.

 

[ddubbo]

I do define quality based on defect rate. When talking about computers, the defect rate is a measure of quality. I rate the OS separately as it's reliability is reflective of it's design not the computers.



I guess you've just never met someone who has spent their life around as many computers as I have. And, had a pretty serious hobby with a house that held more computers than you've probably ever seen. I recently down-sized when I decided I had better things to devote my time to (like life).



Again, I rate an OS's reliability independently of the computer. Hardware reliability is not limited by the reliability of the OS. Put a better OS on there. It's not the computers fault that Windows is garbage.




I guess you'd have to have known me personally and seen the sheer mass of my previous computer collection to appreciate my experience with those machines.

They were not all PC's either. Notice I said from various manufacturers. That includes everything from old CP/M machines, to Apple II series, to Amigas, to PC's, Commodores, to Macs, to other more unique machines which few have heard of. My collection spanned more than the small PC and Mac areas. I used hardware and machines that spanned dozens of computing platforms.

My statement is simply that out of those thousands of computers of all ages (some of them had spent more than 20 years with me), the Apples (specifically the newer Macs), are the only ones I'd ever had to take in for service.

If you don't believe that I've had my hands on as many machines as I claimed, or that I've owned as many as I've claimed, then you just can't appreciate how diverse and massive a collection some people can have.

It was a bit of a mini museum.

I finally got my collection of machines down to about 60 or 70 about 3 years ago. And, about a year or so ago, I got out of it altogether and got down to just the basics and have about 5 or so now.



Thank you. I keep forgetting that

I owned about 7 macs and 20 PC in my life. Currently I use the both. First of all, I want to say that both Mac OS X and Win XP SP 2 are very stable. They both run monthes without restart and viruses(except security updates). The time when windows crushed every day gone with win 98, and when it caught viruses gone with SP 2.
Secondly - same performance on XP 2 for most of the tasks (excluding graphics, etc.) 30-50% cheaper than on OS X.
So what's left - is a style and design and less - easy of use. OS X indeed far easy, but on the other side it lacks of choice(lack of programs, peripheria etc.).
From this point of view Mac resembles for me an Alpha-Romeo. It has its own style, but not reliable, overpriced for performance and hard-to-fix. When you want to fix ignition in your alpha - you should to unmount an half engine, and it costs a lot of money. The same way with PC - you have an ugly gray box, but when something is out, you just open it and replace a broken part in no time. The Mac - you have a very stylish thing, but when it need a fix - you send it to the lab and pay a twice money and triple time.
So no wonder that world is ruled by Volkswagen and Toyota.

 

[superfunkomatic]

When programs dont work with a new version of OSX do you think Apple intentionally broke them too? It doesnt make any sense why people are so quick to point the finger at Microsoft when these things are natural for major OS upgrades that also happen to Apple.

do you have a point? or are you just being devil's advocate? i fail to see any logic in what you are saying - a new OS without CD burning support, most printers not working and no support (right now) for iTunes is a GOOD thing?
perhaps you should contribute to the discussion, rather than detract from it.

not a flame, i agree some people like MS OS, i've used it at work for years, but these types of issues should have been ironed out in the past 2 years of beta whether it was a completely new OS or not. why do you think OS 10 was released only as a paid beta, it wasn't ready for consumption by the average user, MS is so far behind they had to release something to justify the large R&D budget and time.

 

[flyinmac]

I owned about 7 macs and 20 PC in my life. Currently I use the both. First of all, I want to say that both Mac OS X and Win XP SP 2 are very stable. They both run monthes without restart and viruses(except security updates). The time when windows crushed every day gone with win 98, and when it caught viruses gone with SP 2.
Secondly - same performance on XP 2 for most of the tasks (excluding graphics, etc.) 30-50% cheaper than on OS X.
So what's left - is a style and design and less - easy of use. OS X indeed far easy, but on the other side it lacks of choice(lack of programs, peripheria etc.).
From this point of view Mac resembles for me an Alpha-Romeo. It has its own style, but not reliable, overpriced for performance and hard-to-fix. When you want to fix ignition in your alpha - you should to unmount an half engine, and it costs a lot of money. The same way with PC - you have an ugly gray box, but when something is out, you just open it and replace a broken part in no time. The Mac - you have a very stylish thing, but when it need a fix - you send it to the lab and pay a twice money and triple time.
So no wonder that world is ruled by Volkswagen and Toyota.

That is very well put.

 

[Stella]

stainlessliquid has a point.

Just because iTunes doesn't work it doesn't mean that MS intentionally crippled Vista to make it incompatible.

There are a lot of changes in Vista ( v XP ) to stop previous applications from fuctioning - such as CD Burning software. There are times when you simply cannot make a new OS backwards compatible with hardware-accessing applications.

Granted, lacking printer drivers is a bit lame - but those manufacturers should ship updated drivers ASAP. Apple do not write printer drivers for OSX- instead those drivers come with CUPS - which OSX uses for its printing system.

Likewise, Apple should make iTunes compatible with Vista ASAP.

The first full release OSX was a pile of ***** - that wasn't ready for consumers, but Apple still shipped.

do you have a point? or are you just being devil's advocate? i fail to see any logic in what you are saying - a new OS without CD burning support, most printers not working and no support (right now) for iTunes is a GOOD thing?
perhaps you should contribute to the discussion, rather than detract from it.

not a flame, i agree some people like MS OS, i've used it at work for years, but these types of issues should have been ironed out in the past 2 years of beta whether it was a completely new OS or not. why do you think OS 10 was released only as a paid beta, it wasn't ready for consumption by the average user, MS is so far behind they had to release something to justify the large R&D budget and time.

 

[mdelaney123]

stainlessliquid has a point.

Just because iTunes doesn't work it doesn't mean that MS intentionally crippled Vista to make it incompatible.

....

The first full release OSX was a pile of ***** - that wasn't ready for consumers, but Apple still shipped.

Agreed. I use OSX and just installed Vista on 3 PCs at my home. I like OSX, but I just can't see how so many people here can bash Vista like they are. On my 3 PCs, Vista runs GREAT. All of my printers and scanners were detected and installed AUTOMATICALLY. With the exception of Roxio CD Bruning Software, I have not had ANY issues with applications not working in Vista. Best yet, I have noticed no slowdown in any of the games I play -- WOW, AOE3, Oblivion, etc...

In the week I have been playing with Vista, I would give it a big thumbs up!

I hope the next version of OSX is good. For it to be, I really hope Apple comes through on these "secret features" because for what they have shown so far, they should be releasing it as a free service pack.

 

[glowingstar]

i wonder how many people will actually just wait for itunes to be updated before installing vista.

 

[kerpow]

I don't what all the fuss is about. I copied my entire iTunes folder off my XP machine onto an external disk. Copied it into my Music folder on Vista. Installed iTunes, ran it and it failed, (which now I know a little more about Vista I would expect it to) I then ran it as Administrator and it works perfectly and has done ever since.

Where's the problem?

 

[kerpow]

In the week I have been playing with Vista, I would give it a big thumbs up!

Me too. Only problems I've had is Azureus not working with Aero. Something to do with SWT.