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.
Not "ready" or "supported" on Vista != "doesn't work on Vista" or "never will be supported on Vista"
Also, what does "compatible with Vista" mean in this context to most users? If a product works just fine on Vista, what does something being not "compatible with Vista" mean to end users?
That is, all of these pieces of software work fine, except iTunes, for which Apple has released a temporary fix until the next iTunes release, which will officially support Vista. The next QuickTime release will also officially support Vista, though the current release works fine.
Yes, yes, they're not officially supported on Vista and that's a consideration, but this submission acts as if none of Apple's Windows apps even work on Vista, when actually they all do.
Also, that isn't a "new" Apple technical support article. It's been around since at least November 2006, and simply enumerates the versions of Windows officially supported by Apple's various software products for Windows. Considering Apple has already stated that at least two products (iTunes and QuickTime) will officially support Vista in their next versions, and Apple has released a temporary fix for their only Windows product that has identified problems with Vista (iTunes), I fail to see how this is news.
Should all of these applications have been qualified for Vista? Perhaps. But this is Apple we're talking about here, and meanwhile Microsoft has systematically killed off several major products on Mac OS X, even as Mac OS X's marketshare increases (Windows Media Player (Flip4Mac is neat, but is no substitute and also doesn't support Windows Media DRM), Virtual PC, VB in Office, Outlook, and so on).
Apple's new Apple Software Update for Windows (which does work on Vista) will bring down new versions of itself, and every other applicable Apple product, in a seamless and automated fashion when they become available.
Next? (Slow news day?)
With so few 3rd-party applications available, it would appear that Windows Vista is simply not ready for the desktop.
I'm not ready for Vista.
From my experience, Quicktime works fine under Vista, and I've used it extensively. The apple software update works as well. Perhaps they mean it works, but just isn't supported?
mmm...muffins
I remember the iPod updater didn't work back in June with RC1. I don't know why Apple's waited this long to even announce that their software doesn't work - although I have a sneaky suspicion it might solely be for PR purposes. "Look at this awful operating system. It breaks EVERYTHING! Buy a Mac instead."
Or perhaps there's a completely innocent explanation and I'm just being a touch paranoid.
PocketGamer.org - For the gamer on the go!
I don't think it's apple. Most of the antivirus products aren't working with vista yet. Drivers for hardware are being worked on. This isn't apple fumbling. Either the world fumbled Microsofts' throw, OR Microsoft threw badly. I'll let you decide which is more plausible. ;)
I'll believe in corporations having personhood when Texas executes one... - advocate_one
That doesn't make any sense. The quote was "DOS isn't done until Lotus won't run."
Since installing Vista ultimate, my experience has been that less than half of software I used on XP which hasn't been updated specifically for Vista doesn't work. Many won't even install. It's going to take some time for the support to be reasonable.
In my experience, the devs didn't port anything to a brand-new OS release that wasn't their _core_ business until it was, for all practical purposes, released for sale.
From a business perspective, there is little reason to rush to an OS that few people are using. Even if it's microsoft.
Many consumer hardware/software vendors will have some kind of support for Vista by Q4. Apple included.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
I don't for a moment believe this is an accident. Since Apple surely had access to the beta versions of Windows Vista all along to make sure their apps were compatible with Vista, there are two distinct possibilities:
a) Apple intentionally did not release Vista compatible versions of their software so that their iPod/iTunes masses would have a compelling reason to not buy Vista and consider buying a Mac instead.
b) Microsoft intentionally submarined Apple's software, specifically iPod/iTunes, because they want they Vista upgraders to consider dumping their iPod in favor of a Zune.
Either way, it's interesting that the music player industry would have such a compelling affect on choice of operating systems. I guess MP3 is this generation's killer app.
boxlight
They did. All of Microsoft's Macintosh applications still runs in the Rosetta processor emulation environment. Macs with Intel processors have been shipping for more than a year and no fix is expected until the second half of this year. There wasn't a version of Microsoft Office that worked in OS X until after Apple had released 10.1 - before that it ran in the classic environment.
It's often been suggested that Microsoft give up a lot of legacy and backwards support in the Windows line and start anew. The official line to that is that Microsoft wants to assure customers of their commitment to existing technology blah blah blah.
Seems like if your Windows 2000/XP applications aren't working on Vista then the backwards compatibility they treasure so much really isn't that important anyway.
As I recall, Microsoft publically made available an RC version of Vista, and Apple makes iTunes and Quicktime (non-Pro, at least) available to everyone to download. Both parties should have known, but it would probably be in the best interests of Microsoft to make sure it would work since they are the ones putting themselves on a limb with Vista.
More Twoson than Cupertino
Or, maybe, the apps are actually broken on Windows, and Microsoft didn't set out to break Apple's stuff.
Microsoft changed a lot of stuff, maybe it just broke in a predictable but not malicious way. I hate Microsoft as much as the next guy, but even I don't need to see a conspiracy here.
Cheers
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Can you name a few apps? I'm running Vista here and everything I've thrown at it works (short of iTunes which still won't work using any of the suggestions from Apple.) A few things I'm using just fine here are Dreamweaver/Fireworks/Flash, Photoshop, Acrobat Pro, OOo, and quite a few legacy in house apps.
LOAD "SIG",8,1
I'm using Vista Business and Vista Ultimate, and all of those products are working just fine for me. All of this hype over Vista breaking everything hasn't seemed to really pan out for me. The one program I haven't gotten to work is NetStumbler, and I have a feeling it's because MS changed the way drivers interact with the system, and NetStumbler doesn't like that. So, I don't see what all the fuss is about. I have three machines with three different sets of hardware and various apps, everything seems fine. Definitely not a large sample, but who knows. Everyone just calm down a bit.
The system requirements pages for Adobe Premiere and Intuit's Quicken Deluxe don't mention Vista. If either application doesn't work quite right under Vista, dag gummit, it must be a plot to RUIN MICROSOFT!... and not just the ordinary course of development for supporting new OS releases.
I don't need large brains to have a good time.
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 "
I'm pretty sympathetic to Apple on this score... after all, Microsoft has rushed Vista to the market so quickly, NO ONE could possibly have kept up with Microsoft's torrid pace!
Cut the poor Apple engineers some slack!
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
If you upgrade to vista before SP1, it's your own fault :)
Strange. I just dropped digg last week because, their write-ups were almost consistently asinine (and equally exaggerated), and their comments actually managed to be less informed and level-headed than the ones at Slashdot.
Seriously, suit yourself and good luck to you, but I don't miss digg cluttering up my RSS reader much at all.
Canthros
For what it's worth, I'd like to note that none of Microsoft's Vista applications are Mac OS X compatible, and it's API has been stable for far longer than Vista's has been.
Yaz.
So, in your mind, this is what will happen when people are deciding whether they want to upgrade to Vista:
That's interesting, because in my mind, it goes more like this:
You might want to double-check your sources on that one. I don't think Intel owns Apple.
"Can do less with"? Wow. I never thought of it that way, but you're absolutely right. There are so many things I can't do with my Mac. I can't have a meaningful conversation with it, toss the frisbee around, wear it as a jacket, or use it to trim my nosehair. Excuse me while I go throw it in the trash.Please. Macs can do the same things Windows & Linux PCs can. Sure, there are some applications that are better/actually existent on one platform or another, but for most users they all accomplish the same thing: mail, web, photos, word processing. Grow a real argument.
I'm sure when Jobs retires you'll be first on the shareholders' list.
Conversely, putting Apple software on a Windows box is like putting a rose in a crap garden. That doesn't work a lot better. There might be a rose there, but it's still a crap garden.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
His point is "whhahahhahahahah how dare you criticize Apple!!!! Whaaaaa"
/. for many years but I still don't understand the love for Apple as a company.
I've been on
I own an iPod. I own two, actually, because I recently bought a Nano for when I'm working out. I have an intense affection for my iPod. It's beautiful and usable and blah blah you've heard it before.
But my love does not extend to the billion dollar corporation that produced it. And it certainly doesn't make me think that the Corporation can do no wrong.
But around here, if you dare speak bad about the Cupertino kids you get seriously chastised by both being flamed and modded down.
Let's talk honestly: Apple dropped the ball with Vista. Maybe, just maybe, this is done on purpose. In fact, I don't see how it _WASN'T_ done on purpose. As others have said, they had ample time to make sure that their killer-device worked on what will be the worlds most widely installed OS. I'm left thinking that someone there thought that a user thinking 'vista broke my iPod' isn't a bad thing.
As a software developer, I (and others), realize that in this case, the blame falls on Apple, not Microsoft.
I butter my bread writing Windows software but I'm also sure that in many ways Apple beats Windows. Not in every way, not even close. In some way Microsoft beats apple, in most things, they're about the same. Accepting this is like accepting that in most ways, a Honda is the same as a Toyota. Each has certain areas of excellence, but neither is glaringly deficient.
I'm probably singing karma just saying these things outloud, but I believe that we should talk about things on the merits. Instead of an unorganized censorship system, which is what happens here when people speak good of Microsoft or ill of Apple/Linux, why not welcome the debate as a chance to match wits and prove that your chosen platform is actually superior.
The kind of censorship that's done using the Moderation system here just smacks of type of thing that some people hate Microsoft for.