Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
For all of you nay-sayers that it'll be horribly hard to program this for Windows, look at quicktime. It runs on everything from 95 to XP, doesn't crash, and I consider it a more complex program (having to decipher video and audio) than what iTunes will be.

Plus, I could see this version of iTunes not support ripping or burning- just make it a player and not much else.
 
what about Mac 9.2

Personally I could care less about Windows. I know Apple has stated that Mac 9.x is dead but not every mac user has or even can upgrade to OS X on all their machines (older mac, etc.). What about us?
 
Originally posted by MacAficionado
Maybe they are testing the waters or making Apple more mainstream and making it so attractive that people may just make the switch, thus getting the developers onboard to make software for x86OS x.

I don't think so. Most in the record industry have referred to the Apple Music Store as an "experiment." And the market as "small." Without the PC marketshare AAC nor Apple's distribution model can become a "standard" for the industry. There's simply not enough users.

Not to mention that the "piracy" the RIAA is looking to stem, is primarily on the PC platform.

Apple has to get iTunes on Windows before similar efforts are made using WM9 or MP3 in the much larger, and to the RIAA, more significant PC market.

If Apple can get it done (PC software is not Apple's strong-suit) the RIAA would probably prefer anything that does not tie them to a single vendor, i.e. WM9.
 
Re: Re: iTunes for Windows is Coming

Originally posted by Mudbug


Job listing re-written: Must be possessin' mad skillz in killer app speech, great taggin', the shizzle dizzle for the enginizzle, and hear the good shout-outs from the peeps.


Hahah.. Stop, I can't laugh at work ... at least not while staring at a studio display.
 
Re: what about Mac 9.2

Originally posted by danielruiz
Personally I could care less about Windows. I know Apple has stated that Mac 9.x is dead but not every mac user has or even can upgrade to OS X on all their machines (older mac, etc.). What about us?

Well, in a perfect world, they'd like you to upgrade. That'd help them (and trust me, it would help you too). 😀

I can feel your pain, though. Moving up to X takes $$, let alone time. Unfortunately to continue moving ahead in software development, sometimes you have to raise the bar of the lowest common denominator to make it make sense for the masses. The average shelf-life of a computer is about 3 years, any more than that and you're lucky, or don't upgrade often.
 
I hope it does well. Any increase in revenue that leads to more R&D or lowering the margin on other products is great, and this could do that.
 
Re: Re: Better be soon

Originally posted by caveman_uk
Alternatively they could realise who pays their bills and make it work for international mac users first rather than US windows users who don't give a damn.

I know that this may be hard for most people to understand, but its NOT APPLE that doesn't want to sell you music, its the legalities involved.

Why wouldn't they want to sell to as many people as possible? Give them the credit that they deserve.

Laws vary from country to country, territory to territory. It is likely more cumbersome to work out copyright issues (who owns the music) and royalties (payments to record companies, artists, publishers, etc.) in foreign territories. I deal with this all the time with my own record label.

Trust me, it was a MASSIVE UNDERTAKING to get the "big 5" in the U.S. to sign on. It's very political and there's lots of red tape, bickering and childish behavior.

It will be completely overwhelming for them to get the same type of cooperation from record labels in other countries.

As its been said before, try to secure a bank account with a billable address in the U.S. and you can immediately begin taking advantage of Music Store.

Take care.
 
the international issue

I think one of the problems I'm having with the "legality" of this service across the pond is that you can buy recordings of artists on CD's in record stores in Europe (and everywhere else).

If this music service is as legal as buying a CD at Best Buy, why can't they make it work internationally the way CD sales work?

I'd love to see this go worldwide. Soon.
 
Re: what about Mac 9.2

Originally posted by danielruiz
Personally I could care less about Windows. I know Apple has stated that Mac 9.x is dead but not every mac user has or even can upgrade to OS X on all their machines (older mac, etc.). What about us?

As I sit here writing this on my beloved G4 400 desktop (OS 9.1), you're just gonna have to climb aboard the OS X train or miss out. It's a hard reality.

Thank gawd for my Ti550 and G4 400 at home with OS X.

Apple is a for-profit business and they have to recouperate what they've invested in a wonderful *new* OS called Mac OS X.

It will temp people to buy it or buy new hardware that runs it. That's the carrot, my friend... and as a stockholder, I love it.😀 😀
 
Re: What will the skin be like ?

Originally posted by Maxx Power
Anyone thought of what the skin maybe like for iTunes for windows ? Just a thought.
Well, this is a screenshot from my Compaq running Windows 2000 Professional. I sppose Apple will port iTunes to Windows by using the same "brushed metal" they use for quicktime for windows.

By the way, when I open quicktime for windows, this is what I get. They are already giving Windows users a taste of this music service.
 

Attachments

  • quicktime2.jpg
    quicktime2.jpg
    44.5 KB · Views: 345
Re: the international issue

Originally posted by Mudbug
I think one of the problems I'm having with the "legality" of this service across the pond is that you can buy recordings of artists on CD's in record stores in Europe (and everywhere else).

Unfortunately, it's not that simple.

Artists very rarely own the rights to their music. Their labels do. And they all operate separate entities in separate markets to deal with the fact that each market has their own copyright and contract laws to deal with. Because of this, signing, say, WB US does not give you access to WB UK catalog. You have to turn around and sell WB UK on the idea and negotiate another contract under UK law to sell their catalog.

Then you get into fun things like local content laws and differing tastes and suddenly WB US's catalog differs from WB UK's catalog. Either because release dates are different, or WB UK/US doesn't think the artist will sell in their territory, so they don't obtain the rights and that artist is simply not available. Then, you have to sort out whether or not they've signed locally with someone else, or do you need to "import" that artist from another zone and who the primary rights holder that has to be paid for the privilage is. Which is why, for example, when I went to hunt down a Warren Zevon album for my dad last christmas, his early records could bought for the local going rate, but most of the newer stuff put out since his fame died down had to be bought at as an "Import" at twice the typical local price. No local distributer wanted it.

That's just one of the ways the entire process could best be described as "legally messy", even before the Labels start tossing their own extra conditions into the mix...
 
"Apple Features for International Users"

Dear Friends,

I have just read and signed the online petition:

"Apple Features for International Users"

hosted on the web by PetitionOnline.com, the free online petition
service, at:

http://www.PetitionOnline.com/AppleInt/

I personally agree with what this petition says, and I think you might
agree, too. If you can spare a moment, please take a look, and consider
signing yourself.

Best wishes,

Steffan Kent
 
petition

I also looked at the online petition. Unfortunately, it's worded in a way that makes it sound like Apple's the one controlling international distribution. Look back a few posts in this thread and you'll see this is the exact topic we're talking about. I'm all in favor of Apple broadening their market. I'm pretty sure they are too. More users = more $$ = better development = better computers = no more microsoft. just threw that last one in there to see if you were paying attention.
 
Re: "Apple Features for International Users"

Originally posted by applebobbing
Dear Friends,

I have just read and signed the online petition:

"Apple Features for International Users"

hosted on the web by PetitionOnline.com, the free online petition
service, at:

http://www.PetitionOnline.com/AppleInt/

I personally agree with what this petition says, and I think you might
agree, too. If you can spare a moment, please take a look, and consider
signing yourself.

Best wishes,

Steffan Kent

Just a warning: People get really weird about petitions around here. If you don't like being flamed, you probably don't want to mention petitions.
 
Re: Re: I could get this job.

Originally posted by BaghdadBob
4) Save it for the political forums. And remember which way Bill Gates and Ted Turner vote.

PS: Some of us don't like making blanket statements about huge segments of the population, i.e. "those black people sure do like to sleep around."

Thank you BdB
 
First off I want to say Please shut up about marklar! although x86 has faster processors it is in no way the best architecture and is certainly not a fitting Apple architecture. The more you bring this DEAD topic up, the more it shows your lack of knowledge in computing. Besides the fact that it's never going to happen so don't bring it up. If apple went x86, I'm finding a different computer platform.

I will say that Itunes should not be ported to Windows. They should be able to have a portal to the Applemusic store that ties into quicktime but that's it. A featurless web portal and that is all.
 
Originally posted by NavyIntel007
I will say that Itunes should not be ported to Windows. They should be able to have a portal to the Applemusic store that ties into quicktime but that's it. A featurless web portal and that is all.

featureless won't entice new users... maybe limited features, but still mainly a fully-functioning jukebox program with the interface to the iAMS.

hehe - isn't Iams a dog food company?
 
Well, my opinion is this. I don't think that porting iTunes to Windows is a good idea. I agree with NavyIntel...sure, allow windows users to purchase from the online music store, but leave it at that.

I say this as a recent switcher (Feb of 2003). THE primary motivation to switch to Apple started when I bought an iPod. Sure, I had it working with windows (it is a mac pod working via X-Play) but I was so curious about iTunes (something I couldn't have) I started poking around on apple.com.

After reading about iPhoto, iCal, Safari, etc, I decided to ditch my homemade AMD vacum cleaner (man that thing was loud) and come to Apple. I got an iMac from someone on this board and haven't looked back for a second.

My fear is Apple will essentially shoot themselves in the foot by allowing their iApps to be ported to Windows. Yes, I know, they are just talking iTunes now and nothing else, but who would have ever thought a single iApp would have made it to Windows? iPhoto, etc is next.

If Apple concentrates on software, ports most of it to Windows, why on earth would anyone shell out $3200 for a mac when they can run the same software on a $800 PC? (yes these numbers are extreme ends of the spectrum but you get the point).

Give Windows a very watered down version, so it sparks curiosity. Hell, it worked with me over a silly iTunes curiosity...if I had it on Windows I might have changed my mind about going mac, and Apple wouldn't have a new switcher.

My 2 cents.
 
Re: Re: the international issue

Originally posted by Dave K
Unfortunately, it's not that simple.

Artists very rarely own the rights to their music. Their labels do. And they all operate separate entities in separate markets to deal with the fact that each market has their own copyright and contract laws to deal with. Because of this, signing, say, WB US does not give you access to WB UK catalog. You have to turn around and sell WB UK on the idea and negotiate another contract under UK law to sell their catalog.

Then you get into fun things like local content laws and differing tastes and suddenly WB US's catalog differs from WB UK's catalog. Either because release dates are different, or WB UK/US doesn't think the artist will sell in their territory, so they don't obtain the rights and that artist is simply not available. Then, you have to sort out whether or not they've signed locally with someone else, or do you need to "import" that artist from another zone and who the primary rights holder that has to be paid for the privilage is. Which is why, for example, when I went to hunt down a Warren Zevon album for my dad last christmas, his early records could bought for the local going rate, but most of the newer stuff put out since his fame died down had to be bought at as an "Import" at twice the typical local price. No local distributer wanted it.

That's just one of the ways the entire process could best be described as "legally messy", even before the Labels start tossing their own extra conditions into the mix...
Whilst this is all true I just don't want Apple to go 'That's too difficult' and not bother. As mentioned elsewhere it's not just with this the non-US folks get a worse deal. We don't get the iPhoto album buying stuff or anything worth bothering with with Sherlock either. Are those the record companies fault? The more we make Apple realise how pissed off we are about this the more they might try to do something about it. Sure the US is Apples biggest single market by far but it still sells half it's macs outside of the US.
 
Re: The international issue

I'm glad to here the right noises from Apple about the music service coming to international markets.

But I want to know what timescales are being aimed at since i don't trust Apple on this after Sherlock and iPhoto. I will also be extremely angry if the effort goes into bringing the service to Windows before International Apple customers as already seems to be the case.

I suspect Apple can't be bothered and will hide behind no announcements on future products and legal issues.

As this seems to be the longest thread on this subject some of you might want to complete this petition (5500 and counting) and help the international cousins!

International petition

My tuppence ha'penny
 
I think there's a bigger petition going on:

Dear Apple:

We would like to offer ourselves in exchange for settling the legal issues with the control-freak record companies and offering your music sevice internationally. Thanks in advance for expiditing our ability to throw ourselves at you.

Signed:

Yen
Lira
Franc
Pound
Dinar
Peso
Mark
Kroner
Gulden
Piastres
Drachmai

etc, etc, etc. I really wouldn't sweat it. Releasing iTMS for the international market equals big bucks to Apple, and requires much less effort than developing for Windows. They're not stupid, they will do everything they can. Unlike Sherlock, this equals profits, period (not that I agree with their lack of effort on that front).
 
Originally posted by coolbreeze

I say this as a recent switcher (Feb of 2003). THE primary motivation to switch to Apple started when I bought an iPod. Sure, I had it working with windows (it is a mac pod working via X-Play) but I was so curious about iTunes (something I couldn't have) I started poking around on apple.com.

I'm a switcher too. but not many people are switching to mac for iLife. The number is negligible. Trust me, if any significant number of people were switching they would.

The PC has far more consumer DVD apps. Pirated software abounds. Cheap fast hardware. And many find XP's interface superior. There are still things I like better about it, but I do prefer my iMac.

There's a lot of cheaper, as or more capable video/audio players soon to be available and marketed directly at PC users. Apple cannot wait for the PC world to catch up and surpass them. And that's exactly what will happen if Apple doesn't establish iTunes, iPod, the Music Store, and AAC on the PC platform. No matter how nice or easy to use it is, it can easily be dwarfed by a modest percentage of the PC market. The RIAA cares about one thing and one thing only, money.
 
Re: what about Mac 9.2

Originally posted by danielruiz
Personally I could care less about Windows. I know Apple has stated that Mac 9.x is dead but not every mac user has or even can upgrade to OS X on all their machines (older mac, etc.). What about us?

you must remember that this is a good thing for apple. People
who haven't upgraded now have to buy mac os 10.2 for mucho
denero. Plus, there aren't many people still running 9.x. 🙁
 
Originally posted by kcmac
The music files will still be AAC format. Does this mean that only Quicktime will open them even on the windows side?

Well, one would assume that the iTunes for Windows woud support the AAC format.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.