24 thoughts on “The Vista iTunes Fiasco”

  1. I’m going to say both of them… Apple wants their product on a foreign system, so they need to make sure their software complies with the foreign language. However, Microsoft’s number one objective should be software compatibility with (at the very least) previous version of their OS.

  2. The responsibility for this is completely Apple’s. I would agree that Microsoft owes it to application developers to make the new OS as backward compatible as possible, however, who knows how iTunes was programmed. Did they use old APIs, new APIs, their own library of Win32 code that may have problems, or some “advanced programming techniques” (AKA “hacks”)? Seen from the other direction, Microsoft would never be expected to verify all the software out there that runs on Windows.

    In the end, the onus falls on Apple to ensure their applications run well on the new OS, especially when Microsoft makes a beta program available well in advance of the release. As a software engineer myself, I know the proper procedure is for Apple to become part of the beta program, stay on top of updates, and test the heck out of their software with each new release.

    Or perhaps another strategy is to leave a huge, nasty bug in iTunes for Windows, so that frustrated users switch to Mac. But that would never happen…

  3. Boo Hoo. Early adopters will have to wait a few weeks for a Vista release of iTunes.

    Let see what Adobe is saying about Vista

    When Adobe began shipping Photoshop® Elements 5.0 and Adobe Premiere® Elements 3.0 software in September, final versions of Microsoft® Windows® Vista were not available to complete the testing required to ensure compatibility.

    Shortly after Windows Vista becomes available to consumers, Adobe plans to release updates for Photoshop Elements 5.0 and Adobe Premiere Elements 3.0 to provide compatibility with Windows Vista.

    Updates for existing Photoshop Elements 5.0 and Adobe Premiere Elements 3.0 owners will be available as a free download from adobe.com, and updated Vista-compatible versions of Photoshop Elements 5.0 and Premiere Elements 3.0 will become available in the same timeframe.

  4. Clearly it’s a nefarious plot by the evil geniuses at Microsoft, in an attempt to break everyone’s ipod, so that they can sell more Zune’s.

  5. I’d have to lay the blame at both their feet. Microsoft for making changes in their new OS, and Apple for not having a fix right now.

    Still, Apple probably bears more of the burden. I believe that earlier versions of iTunes ran fine on the Vista Betas – and given how long Vista Betas have been available, Apple really should be on top of it.

    However, Apple can’t really be expected to support Vista so soon, particularly at the expense of XP. If it doesn’t work six months from now Apple can be accused of carelessness; but as it, it’s an incredibly minor ‘issue.’

  6. A bit of a stuff up by both parties I suggest. Still I think Apple/iTunes are ok for a while as I can’t see there being a stampede of people upgrading to Vista.

  7. I don’t have enough technical insight to know for sure. However, I do know that Microsoft spends and extensive amount of time writing compatibility shims (1) to enable software from the big vendors to work.

    So, Adobe Photoshop will probably work out of the box, not so much because Adobe has released patches for it, but because Microsoft has ensured it would during its Vista QA.

    This is often why you’ll need to patch software from smaller vendors to get full Vista compatibility (I’m in the process of bugging several shareware authors at the moment) but not the big ones.

    If there are iTunes incompatibilities then it is something that Microsoft should have known about and either chose not to, or was unable to, write compatibility shims. Given their resources, but their antipathy to a competitor in a field they would like a larger presence in, I have my suspicions about which it is.

    (1) Compatibility shims are pieces of code which route API calls in programs that expect the functionality of an earlier OS.

  8. This is Apples problem plain and simple. Anyone who says otherwise should take their apple tinted glasses for just a sec.

    Microsoft did not release itunes, ipod, nore did they promise backwards compatibility for all software.

    As a poster said earlier there is no excuse for this as apple should have and could have tested this already.

  9. This has to be Apples problem, they have had the time and the resources to get an update out there. This has to be a marketing ploy and I am curious how this will turn out in the local news. I am sure the average news station will do something like feature a story about Ipod and M$ and how M$ doesn’t allow itunes to work.

    Apple has been great at marketing, if this is a marketing ploy then fine but do they really want people that have Vista computers to NOT be able to buy from itunes. That seems stupid.

  10. Oh hush, ye M$ otakii ! There’s a group called “AppCompat” within M$ ( and “AppCompat” doesn’t mean APPle COMPATability, it means Application Compatibility ) , who’s specific goal is to discern and identify how their already published API BREAK pre-existing applications. M$ established this groups SPECIFICALLY to MAINTAIN application compatibility, and not to discern and inform companies that their ( M$ ) software had caused issues with the other’s software. It’s goal and purpose was to try to maintain as high a level of application compatibility as possible.

    Not for placing blame but for making a point, is the question of whether anyone’s tried iTunes 7.0.2 on the RC1 of Vista released to the beta testers. IF iTunes worked on that build, and now “magically” doesn’t with the RTM build, well, you know who’s tuchus ( that’s yiddish for A__ ) is to blame. If it didn’t, then Apple had seemingly PLENTY ( it’s not like it wasn’t delayed long enough ) of time to have addressed the issue, should it have mattered enough to them.

    Just the same, voted with M$ carrying the burden, because I know of a few too many instances of “Gee, well it worked in the previous build !” rationale to skirt AppCompat.

    Move on people…it’s not the first time it’s happened, it’s not the last.

  11. Was ripping the ipod out of the dock before you hit eject a supported use case before Vista? It clearly flashes a warning on the ipod telling you not to do that.

    Compatibility issues are those of the vendor of the product, especially when you are dealing with something like hardware. Are you surprised when your Windows XP drivers for your video card don’t work in Vista?

  12. Apple had pre-release versions of the Microsoft code as did I. I knew full well that iTunes wasn’t going to work with Vista being that they don’t have a compatible download on their website. It’s not as if Microsoft released Vista early, catching the developers off guard.

    Apple, if it wants to maintain the lead they have in the music/video player space, have a responsibility to make damn sure that their product worked, otherwise the Zune is going to slowly creap up on them. If anything, I think they may have been taking the stance that they rule the player market, so they can control when people upgrade.

    Jsut so you all know where I stand, I’m firmly on the fence as far as platform is concerned. I’m an IT consultant that has both PC & Mac platforms on his desk, along with the appropriate development tools. The religious war was over for me along time ago, computers are just tools.

  13. The media bias towards Apple is sickening…
    How many firefox patches have there been? How are they reported.

    Is the new MacOS a revamped OS or a patch?

    End of story.

  14. Apple is to blame. I am surprised though Apple isn’t blaming Microsoft for iTunes not working.

    When Apple inadvertently contaminated iPods with viruses they took a jab at Microsoft, in essence, for not making a less popular operating system so people won’t write malicious programs. I don’t mean to go against the Apple religion, but OS X isn’t virus free because it is so secure but because it has less than 6% of the computer market. If I was writing a virus I would want to infect the most number of users…

    Vista has been in beta for years and out officially (for businesses) for months. There is no excuse why iTunes was not updated before the consumer launch of Vista. Apple is an extremely arrogant company. The iPod is crucial to Apple’s success, and Microsoft Windows iPod users out number OS X iPod users by a large number (my guess 10 to 1).

    I am sure the next version of OS X will NOT launch with iTunes problems…

    Also, MySchizoBuddy is under the impression Apple fixed the Vista iTunes problems. MySchizoBuddy check out Apple’s web site, as of Feb 6 they are not offering Vista compatible downloads.

  15. I am not a programmer, but I do support OSes. The burden is on the OS engineers who have dual responsibility to engineer the best and most secure OS while at the same time making the upgrade for the user base as seamless as possible. If a long standing stable application like iTunes is broken by an OS upgrade then the fault lies with the OS engineers.

    One of the readers responded with this comment…

    “I believe that earlier versions of iTunes ran fine on the Vista Betas – and given how long Vista Betas have been available, Apple really should be on top of it.”

    If iTunes ran find ont he beta version of Vista then it would have run fine on the release version–unless of course Microsoft made changes to the release version of Vista. Perhaps to make some bug fixes or patch security holes???

  16. My parents recently purchased a new Microsoft Vista laptop for school and then when I also brought an iPod I faced problems. I sent the laptop back to where we got it from and they deleted iTunes saying the two had ‘compatability issues’I even had problems getting broadband aswell!!!

  17. Apple should have been prepared for the Vista release for sure. However, there is soooo much just plain wrong with Vista as a UI that I can envision apple developers not getting all the information they need to assure compatibility from Redmond. Especially since they are competing (poorly I might add) with Zune. My next computer WILL be a Mac (unix forever!!)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.