Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: iTunes coming to PC sooner (Read 20507 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

iTunes coming to PC sooner

And Apple, NEWSWEEK learned, quietly informed some music insiders that it’s moved up the date for expanding its current Mac-only iTunes for the vast universe of Windows-based PCs to mid-October.

Article.


Should increase AAC adoption as the Mac version has.

iTunes coming to PC sooner

Reply #1 –
Why does anybody care about iTunes for Windows?
Just look at the quality of QuickTime Player for Windows (I mean only the player, not the codecs or file formats).
The QT Player just sucks. It's slow and it looks like some alien application. Dows anybody think that iTunes will be different?

iTunes coming to PC sooner

Reply #2 –
Quote
Why does anybody care about iTunes for Windows?
Just look at the quality of QuickTime Player for Windows (I mean only the player, not the codecs or file formats).
The QT Player just sucks. It's slow and it looks like some alien application. Dows anybody think that iTunes will be different?

I see. So you criticize before even waiting to see how will it be?

Besides, for your information (since you are obviously uninformed about iTunes), the feature everyone is looking forward is the possibility of easy ripping, batch encoding and tagging MP4 with it.

iTunes coming to PC sooner

Reply #3 –
AAC encoding isn't free.  Will they be including it in WiniTunes anyway?

iTunes coming to PC sooner

Reply #4 –
Quote
AAC encoding isn't free.  Will they be including it in WiniTunes anyway?

Maybe in a paid-for version of iTunes. One of the major purposes of WiniTunes is offering official windows support for the iPod (the other is offering an interface to the Apple music store). So, AAC encoding is a must.

One might also suppose that you get AAC encoding for free if you own a registered version of QT Pro.

iTunes coming to PC sooner

Reply #5 –
Quote
AAC encoding isn't free.  Will they be including it in WiniTunes anyway?

It was free via an upgrade on my Mac. I do not have QT Pro, as I refuse to pay the extra 20 bucks to upgrade (although I would love to make that annoying little prompt to do so go away!). When I bought my PowerBook last month, I upgraded the QT player to version 6.3 and installed iTunes 4.1. After this, I was able to encode to AAC without paying anything. I'm not sure if the PC version will work in the same manner, but I'd be willing to bet that it would not.

iTunes coming to PC sooner

Reply #6 –
i dunno guys i mean when i heard iPod coming out for Windows about a year or so ago, I thought it would've been chaotic (and i was right had there not have been a 3rd party prog called EphPod  ). MMJB simply sucks and that was WiPod's only flaw, but i think that Apple might know what they're doing and might come out ahead from their problems... ...thats if, and only if they keep their name  (beatles screw you)

chances of succeding IMO is 1:4 chance! i dont take a fancy to AAC at all

iTunes coming to PC sooner

Reply #7 –
I agree about Window's QT. It's as bad as Mac's WMP. I'm not sure why either can't come up with a decent product there.

Except for some TV commercials in some markets, the iPod and iTunes (and by extention Apple Music Store), is going to remain the introduction to Apple for many of those on "the dark side".  It seems Apple has a lot riding on getting this right. They are under time pressure with other services starting, but I can't believe this wouldn't be the most important thing under development in Cupertino right now. For short term (Apple Music Store and iPod sales) and long term (possible Apple Mac sales) reasons. Anyway you look at this it's important to them. Then again Apple has missed opportunities before.

I also suspect this may dramatically increase the use of music management software. WMP didn't get it right and many avoid it for that reason, preferring to do things manually (not counting the other advantages of WinAmp and Foobar). Will be interesting to see how that changes things.

iTunes coming to PC sooner

Reply #8 –
Quicktme has nothing to do with this. I don't even know why the first poster launched into a rant.

What I'm hoping for as a Mac user and PC users is parity.

iTunes PC would cause me to ditch MMJB entirely.  Quicktime is a seperate application. What we're looking for is the same usage rights which as of this day are MUCH better than buymusic.com.  With iTunes you can burn your playlist 10 times.  You can transfer music to 3 computers, authorize or deauthorize on the fly.  The site is easy to use and you know what you're getting as far as DRM.

I'd give them far more than a %25 percent chance at succeeding.  The point really is people want an easy source of downloadable Digital Music files which doesn't put the burden on the end user to decipher what you can do with each song. 

ITunes Music Service is basically HTML that is accessed through iTunes the application. PC users will eventually view it as just another site in a way. I look forward to it as the current offerings leave me wary.

AAC is going to be fine. Of course I wish Apple had chosen 160kbps. Perhaps someday they will upgrade.

iTunes coming to PC sooner

Reply #9 –
Quote
AAC is going to be fine. Of course I wish Apple had chosen 160kbps. Perhaps someday they will upgrade.

There have been rumours (spread by me mostly) that VBR AAC will be implemented in QuickTime. So, one can hope for VBR encodings at the Apple Music Store. Even VBR 128 is better than CBR 128.

iTunes coming to PC sooner

Reply #10 –
I hope that article is correct, I've been anxiously awaiting the arrival of iTunes for the PC. I hear all these great things about iTunes and I envy Mac users for it.

iTunes coming to PC sooner

Reply #11 –
Quote
Quicktme has nothing to do with this. I don't even know why the first poster launched into a rant.

Well, they do have a lot in common. For instance the fact that iTunes uses QuickTime for decoding and encoding AAC, and it uses QuickTime for playing unsupported file formats. Anyway, QuickTime isn't all that good; it's just the best there is for macs.

I would consider a freeware version with AAC quite likely. After all, it's free for mac (as long as you pay for the OS and the computer ), but still, they would probably hope to make the money on the iTMS and the iPod. They'd max out the AAC licensing fees anyway.

Apple have already "ported" iTunes to another platform; Max OS 9. Their Mac OS 9 version looks very much like the Mac OS X version: It uses the same scroll bars, font smoothing and buttons. If they could make that work, they can make it work for Windows as well. Just don't expect it to be without quirks from day one; it took quite some time for the last quirks to disappear from the mac version.

iTunes coming to PC sooner

Reply #12 –
I'm also waiting for iTunes for Windows. Even though it can only read a limited number of formats, what it supports it does it very well. The best way to handle a large base of MP3s so far and a consistent way of organising the files. Also it would allow me to have my MP3s in sync between the Mac and the PC.

I'm quite sure it will be free because it will be the way for Apple to open the door to their music store to all PC users.

iTunes coming to PC sooner

Reply #13 –
Quote
Also it would allow me to have my MP3s in sync between the Mac and the PC.

One of the neat features is that it allows you to share you music on a LAN - maybe that feature will make it to Windows too. In that case, you wouldn't have to keep them syncronised.

For us mac users, it might inspire more developers to develop for QuickTime, so we would see support for more formats

iTunes coming to PC sooner

Reply #14 –
Apple has to make win iTunes free, or a lot less people will be using AAC .

About the quicktime rants... Mac QT Player doesn't look that much different from the PC version (a little better in some respects, but not that different), a lot of us mac users still complain about the brushed-metal appearance, etc. Tho iTunes does use QT for its encoding, its slightly different from exporting w/ QT Player... no resource forks are generated and the track duration is less accurate (an export from QT Player will show in iTunes as greater by maybe 0.001 seconds [sim. Vorbis], while an iTunes export will be greater by maybe 0.052 [sim. to LAME MP3].

iTunes coming to PC sooner

Reply #15 –
Quote
Quicktme has nothing to do with this. I don't even know why the first poster launched into a rant.

Of course it has. QT - just like iTunes - is an Apple app.
Compare the GUIs of QT and iTunes on Mac. They are simmilar.

Adobe Photoshop and Illustrator also have simmilar GUIs.
One app is usually an example for the philosophy of a company how it designs applications.

QT for Windows shows how Apple designs Windows apps. Instead of a GUI that looks and performs somewhat native, it's just a pile of crap.
Does anybody really think that Apple will use a GUI for Win-iTunes that fits into Windows?

iTunes coming to PC sooner

Reply #16 –
It's not just the GUI though, is it? I mean, it's more than looks. It's speed, design, speed, functionality, speed, ease-of-use, speed... did I mention how slow and clunky it is?

Seriously - it will have to make people think "Wow - this is good!". QT has the opposite effect. Let's hope they've learnt.


If they have, get ready to witness a mini revolution.

Cheers,
David.

iTunes coming to PC sooner

Reply #17 –
Quote
Of course it has. QT - just like iTunes - is an Apple app.
Compare the GUIs of QT and iTunes on Mac. They are simmilar.

Erm... so?

Quote
Adobe Photoshop and Illustrator also have simmilar GUIs.


Meanwhile, Adobe Photo Deluxe, Adobe Premiere and Adobe Encore DVD have quite different GUIs.

Quote
One app is usually an example for the philosophy of a company how it designs applications.


Bullshit. I can't believe you are even saying this on this forum. Saying that because QT sucks all Apple apps suck is like saying that because MPC fails on one sample, it fails on all of them. You should know better than that by now.

Quote
QT for Windows shows how Apple designs Windows apps. Instead of a GUI that looks and performs somewhat native, it's just a pile of crap.
Does anybody really think that Apple will use a GUI for Win-iTunes that fits into Windows?


Well, I can think, off the top of my head, of several applications that don't even resemble the Windows API and still work very well. Most media players, for starters. And ICQ Lite. And Babylon Translator.  And so on.

Anyway, I find it really interesting, you say that it will be crappy before it's even launched. Or maybe you have some secret contact inside Apple? If you do, you should better provide some hard data, because that's what this forum is all about: discussion over hard data, not speculation.

iTunes coming to PC sooner

Reply #18 –
So the GUI is your problems with QuickTime on the PC? Mine is the buggy nature of it (and as mentioned WMP on the Mac).

Mac's have always had a more consistent GUI (though currently split between Aqua and Metal in OSX) terming it at various times as The Humane Interface or The Humane Environment. Until maybe XP, I didn't think PC's had the same and still probably doesn't to the same extent. In fact there's a history of standing out with unusual Windows, different toolbars, transparent edges, hiding a control box in the corner, etc.

We'll see how iTunes for the PC looks, but I wouldn't be surprised if it ends up like QT or iTunes on the PC. It may not, but brace yourself if that is what you most fear.

iTunes coming to PC sooner

Reply #19 –
It will almost certainly be as iTunes is on the MAC, I wouldn't be surprised if 80% or more of the Code is the MAC version.

iTunes coming to PC sooner

Reply #20 –
Quote
Quote
AAC encoding isn't free.  Will they be including it in WiniTunes anyway?

Maybe in a paid-for version of iTunes. One of the major purposes of WiniTunes is offering official windows support for the iPod (the other is offering an interface to the Apple music store). So, AAC encoding is a must.

One might also suppose that you get AAC encoding for free if you own a registered version of QT Pro.

They'd better make it free to Ipod owner.  I just paid 300 for the Ipod, the hell I'll pay them more for the ability to encode music for it.

iTunes coming to PC sooner

Reply #21 –
I can't imagine they'd charge for AAC. As mentioned it's free on the Mac and can only increase sales of the iPod. Windows doesn't charge for WMA, though it's also not free.

That said, didn't the Rio Nitrus portable just start shipping at $299 with tranfer and encoding (Ogg) software, but requires a $9.99 upgrade to encode MP3's?

iTunes coming to PC sooner

Reply #22 –
Quote
It will almost certainly be as iTunes is on the MAC, I wouldn't be surprised if 80% or more of the Code is the MAC version.

<nitpicking mode>
It's mac, not MAC. MAC is Machine Address Code.
</nitpicking mode>

As I said earlier, Apple already has iTunes functional on two platforms. On both, it looks very much like a Mac OS X application, using large portions of the Aqua look & feel. Apple has the entire source code for Mac OS X and all it's proprietary technology to dig into in the porting process. BTW, from a technical point of view, I'd say that Mac OS 9 sucks far more than Windows XP ever did.

Whether it will be horribly buggy or not is difficult to say. But there's a lot of prestige in the project...

iTunes coming to PC sooner

Reply #23 –
I believe it's Mac not mac or MAC. 

iTunes coming to PC sooner

Reply #24 –
Quote
Quote
Quicktme has nothing to do with this. I don't even know why the first poster launched into a rant.


Of course it has. QT - just like iTunes - is an Apple app.
Compare the GUIs of QT and iTunes on Mac. They are simmilar.

Adobe Photoshop and Illustrator also have simmilar GUIs.
One app is usually an example for the philosophy of a company how it designs applications.

QT for Windows shows how Apple designs Windows apps. Instead of a GUI that looks and performs somewhat native, it's just a pile of crap.
Does anybody really think that Apple will use a GUI for Win-iTunes that fits into Windows?

Your post was valid but  your complaints centered around the UI of Quicktime.  When using iTunes you never see that  UI. You use the iTunes apple for playing and organizing music.  Yes it uses QT APIs but I have yet to see the perfect Video Player UI. It certainly isn't  Windows Media.  I hope Apple has some suprises for QT 7.

I'm hoping the iTunes PC UI is exactly like the Mac. It's efficient ..can be shrunk down to just a small Widget and is elegant enough.

I'm hoping for the best.  It's time for a few legit Music Services.  I welcome all good ones...not just Apples.