Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Dismisses Apple's iTunes for Windows
fewnorms writes "Microsoft's general manager for the Windows Digital Media division, Dave Fester, yesterday dismissed the new iTunes for Windows version, saying it was too limited for the average Windows users. Choice quote: "[Apple's music store] ... is a drawback for Windows users, who expect choice in music services, choice in devices, and choice in music from a wide-variety of music services to burn to a CD or put on a portable device." Of course Apple doesn't feel to worried about this, simply stating their products will (and have) lived up to the hype." The points made are all valid- but contradictory to standard Apple product design where simplicity always takes priority over flexibility. Besides, iPod is growing market share, and iTunes will be the best choice for windows users who own it.
Microsoft preaching about giving users a choice. That's the funniest thing I've heard all day.
>>if you use Apple's music store along with iTunes, you
>> don't have the ability of using the over 40 different
>>Windows Media-compatible portable music devices.
Oh, shoot. I mean, that's really a big problem for me. I like to use my Rio on Monday, and Samsung mp3 player on alternate Wednesdays, and the Nomad for Friday afternoon... What am I going to do if I can only use my iPod? Horrors!
Choice to Microsoft is letting you pick from any of THEIR products. They do not use that word as we do.
Um, yeah, this coming from the company that's offering exactly *how* many music downloads?
Condemnant quod non intellegunt.
..MS's path to more "choice" will include more baseline restrictions and DRM.
If Apple can keep things a little simpler, and a little more limited, and offer the flexibility that they do (burning audio copies to CD, etc), as much as we geeks might complain, it's probably easier for the average consumer to grasp.
Sure, I'd love to see a mainstream offering with a huge library selling DRM-less MP3s, but that doesn't seem likely to happen, and it's certainly not going to come from Microsoft.
that music blips and skips A LOT when running on iTunes whenever you do ANYTHING else, even if it's just like opening Explorer or moving windows? When I tried it on my machine, it was very noticable, especially compared to Winamp 3, which hardly blips at all for me. My machine's no slouch, either - it's a P3 1.1 GHz with 512 MB RAM running XP Pro. I had like 3-4 programs open along with iTunes: a FTP client, Visual Studio .NET, and Mozilla, I think.
I was just wondering if anybody else had similar problems. I mean, the interface is great, but if I can't code in VS while listening to music, then it's not very worth it to me.
Insightful: 76, Off-Topic: 379, Flamebait: 24, Funny: 152, Interesting: 201, Underrated: 55, Troll: 9, Total: 896
Windows users like choice? Then why do most of them use Internet Explorer, Outlook Express and, well, Windows? They generally take what they are fed, right? Microsoft doesn't yet have a solution of their own for legal music downloading as far as I know. So they need some aggressive rhetoric. I was under the impression that the iTunes music store had one of the largest catalogues out there. Does the general user want to use a plethora of services to locate the right song? I don't think so, but I don't work for Microsoft's media division.
Hank! White!
ROFL! Talk about naked FUD. Choice, choice, choice. Yeah, that's the Microsoft Way, isn't it? NOT. What hypocrisy!
It's not even accurate. You CAN burn iTunes Store music to a CD. Rip it again to MP3, put it on any device you want. Oh wait, iPods are just about the best device you can use, so I'm just guessing that if you have an iPod you don't have too many other devices you care to have. For that matter, no matter what device you have, you probably don't have too many others. Why would you? Use what works and done with it.
Choice in music? Well, the biggest choice is probably Kazaa, but that's beside the point. We're talking about the pay sites, and iTMS has 400,00 and growing. Not much of a problem, and becoming less so as time goes on.
Apple just signed with Pepsi and AOL to do cross-marketing. That's some big partners to get the word out. But the word is out already. I see so many iPods in use it's amazing. In short, Apple did something right and Microsoft is running scared about it. With only the Mac market so far, Apple captured, what, 30% of paid downloads. Now the other 90% can use their service, so watch out Microsoft.
Windows media == closed format supported completely over windows and partially on the Mac and *nix. AAC == open format (Mp4) supported completely over all major platforms. DRM rules -- unlimited CD burning over the iTunes music store, three separate computers able to play downloaded tracks, unlimited iPod transfers. I truly don't understand the criticism coming from MS over the iTMS and iTunes music software. Apple has never claimed it's the end-all software jukebox -- but, as others have pointed out, it's very simple and straighforward. Much like iMovie compared to FCP or CakeWalk to ProTools, iTunes is a simple way to manage a library of music and transfer it to a number of different formats. You can easily convert CD's burnt from Mp4 (AAC) tracks over to mp3 by merely ripping the burnt CD. That allows folks to still use Mp3-CD's with their entire collection and to share them with whomever they'd like. All that I feel coming out of Redmond right now is Hot Air....especially after hearing Longhorn ain't arrivin' until '06. Long time to wait, so I'm sure there will be lots of potshots directed at Apple in the meantime.
I'm not popular enough to be different.
Homer Simpson, The Simpsons
I downloaded iTunes yesterday. Within 5 minutes I had imported my music library, set up all the options I wanted, and I was listening to music. It has a very pleasant interface and includes all the features I want -- nothing more, nothing less.
Who wants crazy flexibility when you don't even use half of the extra options and they just clutter up the user experience? I'm ditching the other jukeboxes I've been suffering with all year and sticking with iTunes. It may even influence me to buy an iPod -- if it works as seamlessly and easily as iTunes, sign me up.
I'm tired of frittering away so much time trying to overcome the learning curves of PC software and trying to get programs to work and play together. I'm not into computers because I'm in love with jerking around in advanced options settings all day long, I'm into computers because of what they can do for me. My job already pays me to spend 10 hrs a day getting computers to work, I don't want to spend the rest of my free time doing the same thing.
Mac stuff works, first time, every time, it does what you expect it to do. I think that just might be worth paying for. I think I'm going to start saving my pennies for a nice little PowerBook.
There's no scripting required for smart playlists, just pick what you want from a couple lists. It's all pointy clicky.
Funny how they still sell so many CD-burners and blank media though, isn't it?
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
be sure to check out your QT settings in the control panel. If the audio out is set to DirectSound, you will probably experience muddy audio clarity. Change it to waveOut and the clarity should be just as good as it is in Winamp.
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
"Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one " -Albert Einstein
After watching the presentation Apple gave on the release of the new iTunes features I have to say that everything else doesn't even seem to be coming close to Apple's position of sheer domination.
iTunes is a nice start, but to have it for both platforms AND the best mp3 player on earth AND have every AOL user on the planet instantly be abel to use the ITMS (it uses the credit card from the AOl account) AND have Pepsi do a huge push during the Superbowl to give away 100 million songs (and at the same time having literally millions of people install iTunes in short order) AND having a means for parents scared of lawsuits to provide music for kids (allowance) AND to have thousands of audiobooks and other great content like NPR shows...
Apple has set a goal of 100 million songs downloaded in the first year of iTunes (starting in April). But frankly I think they have set their sights way too low. I think 200 million by next April is not out of the question, and probably really low.
One other benefit that Apple has, is that the musicians themselves are generally rooting for the store. I don't know how much of an effect that will have, if any... but a groundswell of artists demanding to be on ITMS cannot hurt.
I have to say, if I were trying to start up another music store right now I would be quivering - even if I were Microsoft, and none of them are! I have to wonder how long it will be before Microsoft sees the whole industry slipping from them and offers a music store directly screwing over all the partners based on WMP.
I don't understand why Dell is trying to do it's own server and doesn't just cut a deal to install iTunes on all Dell desktops. There's a plan for Gateway - are you listening?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The death of the MP3 is upon us.
Microsoft's main complaint is that AAC is a closed format, which is only useful with iTunes, the iPod, Apple's Music Store, and QuickTime, and throwing the stone that the Windows Media Player format is compatible with 40 devices and several download sites... but let's face it, WMA is a closed system to. The WMA system has a few more choices, but not an unlimited number.
What I really see is a future where you're about to lock yourself into the music network you pick today. If you buy your music by AAC, then you're stuck in the Apple products universe, if you buy your music by WMA you'll get stuck in the Windows Media products universe. If you want to stay with MP3s, you'll either have to buy CDs or risk the P2P cops finding you...
Yeah, there are you options. How would you like to pay today?
Our users expect flexibility, therefore we will make sure nothing we make talks to ipod or itunes.
Itunes is too limited for our users who are so complex they only want M$.WMA.
Poop on all the closed source DRM gimped up garbage. Zaurus cost $200, plays mp3 and ogg and takes non DRM'd compact flash. Get Open Zaurus and you can mount up a nice ext2 filesystem for all your long filenames, archiving and all that. Get a $100 wifi card and the thing can talk to any music server you would like to set up. Now that is total flexibility, why would anyone settle for less?
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
The way iTunes and the iTMS locks you in to Apple software and Apple hardware (I know, big shock there).
Nice sentence. Anyway... iTunes will let you burn your music to CD-ROM. You can then re-rip this (with iTunes no less) to unprotected AAC or MP3.
Besides, iTunes is a free application intended for iPod users. You don't see me bitching that Kodak's digital camera software won't work on my Canon Elph.
My Mac friends told me to download iTunes for the PC. I leap at the chance to badmouth Apple products any chance I can, so I went ahead and downloaded it. I wasn't interested in the store side of things, I just wanted to see how the player stood up against Winamp.
Let me say that over the years, I have tried dozens of MP3 players, only to keep coming back to Winamp. And yes, I'm one of the few that admits to liking version 3 more than 2.x.
Anyways, I've been searching for a long time for an app that will create a good, reliable, playable index of all my songs. I remember when Freeamp came out, its big claim to fame was the ability to build an index of songs according to their ID3 tags. Unfortunately, the app would ALWAYS crash while indexing. I went back to Winamp.
Eventually, the app I found that came the closest to doing what I wanted was MusicMatch jukebox. The problem came in its sorting - it would sort by album/artist/whatever, but I wanted an app that would sub-sort the songs in the order they appeared on the album.
For the record, I have about 300 albums' worth of songs. Each album has its own folder, and the songs are numbered in the order they appear on the album. I'm a big stickler for listening to songs in the order they were intended to be heard.
So I download iTunes. No, I don't want it to be my default audio player. You gotta earn that trust. No, I DO NOT want Quicktime to be the default video player! Why the hell are you asking me this? I tell it to index all my music, and not to copy the songs into the My Music folder (this is just plain dangerous for people that don't know how to organize their local files. I see lots of disks filling up due to copies of their songs living in multiple folders).
I fire it up, and nothing. Go into prefs, tell it where the songs live, and RE-TELL it not to associate Quicktime with my movie files (sigh).
This time it indexes all my songs. Pretty slick, if HUGE, interface. Still doesn't sub-organize songs by order on their album. But wait! Edit - Options - view track number! Huzzah!
Since my MP3 ripper of choice automatically puts the track number into my ID3 tags, suddenly I can see what order the songs are in! And it automatically sub-sorts by track number! This is huge!
The longest I used an MP3 player other than Winamp was probably the 2-day stint I did with Sonique back in 99 or so. But iTunes just might break that record. I'm very happy with it thus far. The only complaint I have is that it doesn't appear to have a 'compact' mode, where I can shrink the player to a reasonable size. Instead I have this huge monstrocity of an app on my desktop. But if it's the price I pay for a reliable, indexing MP3 player, so be it.
This article is ridiculous. Who cares what ANY company's PR group says about a competitor's product? It's always going to be the same: OUR COMPETITOR SUCKS. This article is just trolling for "M$ is stoopid" posts. The story is iTunes, not what any other company says about 'em.
Its rather interesting to see the issue of choice brought up in this context. While the point is a good one, it misses the mark for a couple of reasons.
First, Apple is the current "innovator" in this market.
All jukebox hardware devices are compared to Apple's iPod. The iPod is clearly the leader in the market and defines the scale by which all others are measured. Apple leads the market with an outstanding combination of features, user interface, and overall design - from the iPods compact size to its pleasing, slick look.
The same same is true of the iTunes Music Store. Apple was the first to deliver a service that offered a decent selection, at an acceptable price, with acceptable DRM restrictions. With this service, one is able to not only get a quality download, but retain some degree of ownership; more if you're willing to jump through the very clear loopholes created by the service. Which isn't to say Apple's service got all all right - more on that later.
Apple does have its competitors - and there are clearly products coming out that are designed to directly compete with the iPod and iTunes Music Store. But if Windows users want to take advantage of the leading products, iTunes is the gateway. In this context, choice is not the issue.
But what if choice is important? Users will need to avoid DRM restrictions. And they'll want to use standard formats like MP3 and (now growing in popularity) Ogg Vorbis that can be played on a wide variety of software and hardware.
The iPod is still an option in this case... if your choice of format is MP3. But you'll have to look elsewhere if you prefer Ogg Vorbis. Some of the iPod competitors offer that choice - a distinction that may cost Apple some sales.
When it comes to music service, neither Apple's offering nor any service featuring Microsoft's technology offers the end user real choice. There are some small label services that manage to deliver a fairly nice catalog of music from non-RIAA affiliated sources. But then, the selection is indeed limited if the end user expects to find their old favorites.
If consumers want true freedom and choice, they will have to continue using the current collection of illegal music swapping systems. And that has been the problem all along. When it comes to the business of music, choice has never been a consideration. It still isn't. The irony of the situation is that this mind set has created an increasing market for "pirated" data - a market industry trade groups become more and more vocal about and have taken more and more drastic actions to curb. What this does to consumer mindshare is fodder for other discussions.
Microsoft is correct to point out choice. But they're wrong in how it applies to the situation at hand.
Lets see, Airport [wireless + modem] iPod, apple cinema displays...all work with PCs too...but work even better with a mac. When apple REALLY figures this out [and they're starting to!] MS will finally have to pay the piper for abusing their market!
Exactly what limitations are you referring to, mr. vague? The only limitation I can possibly think of is the use of AAC for the music store files, but those can be easily transcoded into just about any format you want (wav, mp3, even wma by using an intermediary step). I'd hardly consider that a limitation. Yeah, you may lose *a bit* of quality by recompressing, but if you use a high enough recompression quality setting, you can really minimize that to the point it is a non-factor. Care to elaborate on the limitations now? I mean it rips into a multitude of formats (with very high levels of control over compression), it burns to DVD, CD in many different formats (MP3 CD, Audio CD, and Data CD), and has some of the best streaming support I've found in any music player, not to mention the ability to easily share your tunes over a network with no configuration outside of clicking a check box. I think it is a fantastic product, mac or windows, and I give kudos to Apple on a job well done.
today is spelling optional day.
...but of course it'll run even better on the Mac you buy next year... ;)
When will I finally have a good user interface to play music under linux?
When the linux developers start caring about interface design as much as they care about kernels.
Ergonomica Auctorita Illico!
Brief correction.
IIRC, AAC is actually an ISO standard and is used in MPEG4 and is significantly better than mp3s which are at much higher bitrates. WMA is wholly owned by Microsoft and doesn't seem to offer appreciable sound benefits over mp3s.
Integrate Keynote and LaTeX
iTunes for Windows requires Quicktime 6.4 to be installed for it to work (or 6.3 for the Mac version).
Why?
Because all the decoding of the AAC files - both DRM'd and non-DRM'd - is completed through the QuickTime libraries (NOTE: this is also a way to get iTunes to play ogg/vorbis encoded tracks). ANY application that makes the appropriate calls to the QuickTime API can decode and play tracks ripped by iTunes into AAC and tracks downloaded from the iTMS (assuming the computer is authorized to play them).
So, in theory, it's possible to get WinAMP to play files downloaded from the store if you don't want to use iTunes as your player software. Toast for Mac already can burn tracks ripped by iTunes and/or downloaded from the iTMS onto an audio CD.
The only problem is audio device support, but Apple likes it's iPod sales and Hell already froze over, so we probably won't be seeing WMA support on the iPod or iTMS compatibility on 3rd party devices ever - or at least not until iPod sales start slipping in a major way.
Surprise, surprise.
Oh, and where exactly are you finding all this Dolby 5.1 music? Or do you just spin movie soundtracks at parties?
From the article:
... this is a drawback for Windows users, who expect choice in music services, choice in devices, and choice in music from a wide-variety of music services to burn to a CD or put on a portable device.
"Unless Apple decides to make radical changes to their service model, a Windows-based version of iTunes will still remain a closed system, where iPod owners cannot access content from other services," said Fester. "Additionally, users of iTunes are limited to music from Apple's Music Store
The gist of this is that people want to be able to interface with other systems and that because Apple doesn't let you do this - which is something Windows users expect - the service is "dismissed".
Well, well, Microsoft double-speak at its best again. Pass me some of whatever you're smoking, will ya? Because last time I checked, users of instant messaging want the same thing - interoperability - and Microsoft isn't letting them have it with their IM service.
Conclusion: Microsoft is pointing at a "flaw" that they would actually like to have in their own system once they reach the critical mass that iTunes has.