Slashdot Mirror
Apple's Windows Apps Not Ready For Vista
narramissic writes "A new Apple technical support document confirms that none of the company's Windows Applications are compatible with Vista. Affected applications include: 'QuickTime, the iPod shuffle reset utility, Bonjour for Windows, AirPort for Windows, the iDisk utility, AppleWorks for Windows, and Apple Software Update for Windows. The stand-alone iPod updater for iTunes 6 for Windows also isn't ready for Vista.'" The article refers to an Apple tech support document dated "today" (02/08) — without providing a link — but a search turns up only this one from 02/02.
Dont know if Apple is deliberately creating FUD by claiming that Vista breaks all these applications or if some deep skunkworks inside Microsoft nostalgic for the good old days of "DOS is not done, till DR-DOS wont run".
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
I'm always reading about poor Microsoft and how hard it is for them to have to make their OS backwards compatible with older software. I guess that's just a bunch of BS?
---Technology will liberate us if it doesn't enslave us first.
I'm sorry that I'm using iTunes on Vista with no problems.
I didn't know I had to wait until it was "ready" or "compatible", since "working" seems to imply former.
"The next version of Office for Mac - named Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac - is under development and scheduled to be available in the second half of 2007." http://www.microsoft.com/mac/default.aspx?pid=macI ntelQA
So, why the complaining about iTunes when Vista just came out? This seems a bit more important, as well as ::ahem:: late.
You seem to be operating on the assumption that Apple didn't get it's act together, when it's equally likely that the reason Apple's products aren't fully compatible with Vista is that Microsoft changed some API calls at the last minute in a way that was not fully compatible with the previous two years of that API's existence.
CISCO does not have a production VPN Client compatible with Vista. There is a beta floating out there, but it does not work on several Vista boxes (fresh installs, and modified ones) that I tried it on. Here are statements from CISCO: "Cisco is planning to release the Vista 32-bit IPsec VPN Client at the end of March." "Vista 64-bit is planned for approximately CY3Q/CY4Q07 as part of our next-generation client "
Not to mention the terrible driver support, and where's all the games? Macs have more games than Vista, and compared to consoles, no PC platform has any signficant number of games.
How we know is more important than what we know.
Along the same line of reasoning, why doesn't Microsoft's own Zune product work with Vista?
Not just applications, but hardware for that matter. I just found out that my HP5400 scanner won't work with Vista. HP says too bad, "consider buying a new product (from us)".
That's nothing new. Typically HP direct-attach printers and scanners only work with one version of Windows. They expect you to buy a new one every time a new version comes out. The only exception seems to be their network printers which are usually bought by corporate customers, have a more or less generic interface, are more expensive, and most importantly are real printers. One of the things that drove down the cost of consumer printers was the rise of "winprinters." Like winmodems, winprinters delegate important functions that were once implemented in hardware to the driver and other printer software. This virtually guarantees that such hardware will only work on one version of one OS.
That's where Linux zealots have their revenge. Whereas people may not give a rat's ass that their printer or modem will not work in Linux or on the Mac OS, they soon find that new versions of the OS, and sometimes even service packs, put them in a position where they have to buy a whole new piece of hardware because it just became a brick.
It reminds me of a funny story, too. A company was stupid enough to buy one of those 4-in-1 HP printer/scanner/fax/copier things. But they needed to upgrade their accountant's computer to Windows 2000 to get better security and support newer versions of quickbooks. Unfortunately this meant now their fax machine didn't work. And even though they were lucky enough in that HP was nice enough to make drivers for Windows 2000, they were mean enough not to offer them for download from their website and require $99.99 + shipping to get the CD with the drivers. And after exhausting all other options and confirming this was indeed the case, the company paid and waited 2 weeks to get them with "rush shipping."
As long as companies can get away with screwing customers they will. But when "everybody's doing it" as is the case in many industries, or when they have the upper hand for some other reason, or they just have a giant market share, the balance of power is so much out of whack that it's pretty much impossible for companies *not* to get away with it.
Isn't it funny that as people who love technology, we're faced with Vista that has really awful drivers support, obnoxious licensing, exists as a way to force a unified DRM model on all users, and yet we all sit around and say "Well, I guess I'll eventually repurchase everything, seeing as how Windows has to win out".
I'll paraphrase a joke.
A old Unix hacker was sitting around and he prayed to god... he said "Dear God, I don't like Windows Vista. It's everything I don't like, the vendor has a bad attitude, it's expensive, it's proprietary, and the DRM is taking away freedoms that I believe are my right. Won't you please send me an OS that can take over from Microsoft?"
And he prayed and prayed, but after a few months he said "well, I need a new computer, and god won't answer my prayers, so I'll buy that new Vista powered laptop"
And so the old hacker eventually died.
He came before God in heaven, and he said "God, I prayed for deliverance from Windows Vista, and you didn't listen, so I ended up buying Vista, and it became the dominant OS on earth"
And god laughed and said "You idiot, I sent you Red Hat, I sent you Ubuntu, I sent you Mac OS X and a whole host of other options but you wouldn't take them"
Something to think about.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you