Apple is Porting iTunes to Windows

An anonymous reader writes "It seems that Apple is indeed porting its new iTunes software to Windows as evidenced by a posting on its job board (No. 1949938) This has interesting implications for Apple trying to sell more expensive hardware when the same apps are available on cheaper Wintel hardware. Is this inevitable? Will this have any effect on P2P networks?" Sure enough, I go there and it says, " Looking for a Senior Software Engineer to desing (sic) and build Apple's newest Consumer Application, iTunes for Windows." Heh.

Comments

Yeah! iTunes for Windows

[rgraham]

Yup, that is just the app I needed ported to Windows to cause me to switch. Oh, wait, there's still iDVD, iPhoto, Safari, Aqua, etc, etc. (rolls eyes)

Come on, its *one* freakin app, and the point is to drive sales of the iPod and their online music store.

Slow your roll, Cochise...

[Surlyboi]

This has interesting implications for Apple trying to sell more expensive hardware when the same apps are available on cheaper Wintel hardware. Is this inevitable?

It's one app, man. And the motive, as has been said
elsewhere here, is to push the music store. That's
it, that's all. The only implications are how much
money Apple's gonna make selling 99 cent songs to
'doze users. That and possibly an answer to why it
was so hard for other online music vendors to make
a Mac client.

Re:Music Store

[SunnyElLoco]

I believe that the sole reason for porting iTunes is so that they can get the iTunes Music Store for Windows users.

The whole point of the iTunes Music Store is that Apple has control of the whole process: You buy the music from Apple with iTunes, load it up to your iPod or burn it to a CD using iTunes. That's what makes it special from the numerous websites selling music downloads.

Apple already has iPod for Windows, but it ships with a 3rd party jukebox software. iTunes for Windows is the missing piece which will enable Apple to create a similar music purchasing experience for Windows users as it has for Mac users.

That's only my opinion, but I can't think of any other reason for Apple to create a free piece of software for Windows.

Apps aren't all of it

[derch]

This has interesting implications for Apple trying to sell more expensive hardware when the same apps are available on cheaper Wintel hardware.

I don't know anyone who bought their Mac just for iTunes or Mail. They all bought a Mac for the overall user experience of the apps and OS X. It's great that WinXP will get iTunes. It still won't have Safari, iDVD, iPhoto, Mail, Terminal, Fire, etc.... And it definitely won't have the BSD layer of OS X.

There are still fundamental differences between OS X and WinXP that will attract people to OS X. One or two ports of favorite apps won't change that.

QuickTime in iTunes clothing

[thatguywhoiam]

A while ago (like, 2000) some of my friends were discussing the significance of QuickTime on Windows. I think it came out of Apple's testimony in the MS antitrust case about Windows appearing to "break" QuickTime. (A lot of Windows people tend to bash QuickTime on x86. I've played with it, and while I agree that it's somewhat clunkier - somewhat - than the Mac version, it works fine for everything I've thrown at it. I've often suspected that these people who hate Qt/Win are used to v3 or something.)

QuickTime is a truly remarkable system that has never been fully appreciated I feel. The scope and breadth - and elegance - of the QuickTime architecture is absolutely stunning. It can literally do anything (I used to joke that the cure for cancer was in QT if you knew the right keyboard shortcut.) I've seen people juggle dozens of disparate codecs, publish automated PDF spreadsheets, and control remote cameras and robots w/QT. (Okay, I like QT.)

Now, QT on Windows I've always regarded as a sort of Apple Secret Weapon. The original QT-Win port actually contained a really significant chunk of the Mac Toolbox API out of necessity. Don't know if that's still true. What my friends were discussing all that time ago was whether or not Apple could use this installed base of what amounts to a mini-OS against Microsoft, if the media wars every truly got nasty.

Think about it - you hook everyone on something like, say, movie trailers, get everyone to install it.

Now you roll out iTunes, which everyone loves, which relies on QT for many functions, not the least of which your new DRM (FairPlay - good name) for the Music Store you just launched. Hmm.

Nothing really insightful here but QuickTime could pose some major problems for Windows hegemony in media dominance. It's already captured the format for the MPEG4 spec (MS just howled bloody murder over that). It's been around since the dawn of time. iTunes for Windows is just the head of the spear. Apple has been playing defence for a long time but this is really significant, especially of consumers really glom onto Apple's method of DRM. Palladium, anyone? (I know its not the same, but do you think any typical users know that?)

Once upon a time, MS asked Apple to cede the authoring market for digital media in return for keeping playback. That's so fucking funny to me now, it hurts. Helloooo, iMovie. Slightly OT: Two things Apple should do that would be incredibly simple and restore massive goodwill towards QuickTime; ditch the nag-dialogs for non-pro users entirely, and port to Linux. The port alone, while earning them no money, would be very strategic.