AfterDawn: Tech news

iTunes has problems with Vista

Written by James Delahunty (Google+) @ 03 Feb 2007 18:18 User comments (32)

iTunes has problems with Vista If you are an iPod owner and plan to upgrade to Microsoft's latest operating system, Windows Vista, Apple Computer Inc. suggests you think otherwise due to some issues the iTunes software has with the new OS. Several report shave been coming in from users that mainly deal with problems playing purchased music, purchased TV shows, synchronizing address book contacts and slow response times.
Occasionally also, there has been reported corruption of connected iPods. Of course, not everybody has these problems, but Apple did warn users to wait until the company published a patch before upgrading to the new OS. "Although iTunes 7.0.2 may work with Windows Vista on many typical PCs, Apple is aware of some known compatibility issues and recommends that iTunes customers wait to upgrade to Windows Vista until after the next release of iTunes, which will be available in the next few weeks." said Apple spokesman Derick Mains at the time.

If you are planning to upgrade to Vista, then download the iTunes Repair Tool for Vista 1.0 from Apple.

Source:
Engadget

Previous Next  

32 user comments

13.2.2007 18:57

y would anyone even want to upgrade to vista in the first place...its just going to be filled with bugs for the next year or two

23.2.2007 18:57

Now it begins; the long sequences of patches to fix the next best operating system that doesn't live up to its expectations. And they want $400 for this POS in its glorious edition. Microsh*t keeps you hopping.

33.2.2007 19:04

Vista is CRAP! my sisters comp took a shit so i helped ehr get a laptop but the only choice was vista! it died 3 days b4 vista came out & there was nothign to choose from cause noone was restocking b4 vista! well we got it & it has frozed 2x & rebooted 1x & 2 of the MAIN photo edditing programs that she uses says that she dosent have enough memory or harddrive space for running & installing! BS she is 2 gm memory & 200gb HDD space! vista is a joke & yet another of microsofts beta releases!

43.2.2007 21:58

lol, vista

53.2.2007 22:00

I really don't see how this is a big deal at all. I plan on upgrading to Vista. While it may be a "piece of crap" because there are no new original or important features, almost all software developed in the next few years along with all hardware sold will be compatible mainly for Windows Vista. As with the iTunes issue, which apple seems to be manifesting on, it's really not a big deal at all. I know that there are going to be many bugs and glitches. I've solved it. Three partitions. Vista on one, Windows XP Media Center Edition on the second. Possibly a third for everything else. Why is one piece of software that goes bad such a big deal?

64.2.2007 0:32

Quote:
Why is one piece of software that goes bad such a big deal?
With iPods up to 80GB available, i can imagine ppl would scream if they got corrupt iPod from Vista?

74.2.2007 4:15

Why are you all so quick to blame microsoft. This is apples fault. They have known Vista was coming out and have had plenty of time to make its updates before the official release. You expect microsoft to ensure that its operating system is compatible with every piece of PC software out there? Thats why their is such thing as betas and release code to software developers well in advance.

84.2.2007 5:20

I hope you don't back up movies!!Gonna be a nightmare.

94.2.2007 8:23

Quote:
With iPods up to 80GB available, i can imagine ppl would scream if they got corrupt iPod from Vista?
Exactly, I haven iPod myself and planned something either hardware or software going bad. I made backups, which is what everyone should do, and found a program called Powerquest Partition Magic 8.0 to make partitions without having to format my drive. I'll run iTunes and other things that don't want to work on Vista yet on XP on the second partition. It's a really simple solution for anyone.

104.2.2007 9:39

My solution is not to upgrade until at least SP1 comes out and the majority of vendor's sw is Vista compatable. I do blame Microsoft for this farce. XP was backwards compatable with most software and hardware. A lot of software is crashing under Vista. Acronis, McAfee, iTunes, eBay's Turbo Lister to name a few. A lot of hardware doesn't work either, especially some video cards.

114.2.2007 9:45

they should publish a list of the software that WORKS with vista, would be a shorter one than the list of those that dont...

124.2.2007 11:40
natony
Inactive

Partitioning your drive is a simple solution for some people, but not the average joe out there who is 'upgrading' to vista because they believe all the marketing hype. Backups are a sensible idea too, but i think the point is that you shouldn't have to do them.

134.2.2007 12:32

Whats wrong with backing up movies? I have been since OCtober with no problems. My computer has a 3.2ghz processor, 1GB RAM, GF-7600GT, but is about 2.5 years old, and its still rated at a 4.4 because of the RAM. If I were to upgrade that, it would be a 5.6, and the top score you can currently have is a 5.9. If you have problems with iTunes, or any software for that matter, couple of things, check on the vendors website for more info (apple has more then just that one tip), and also check to see when the last time was they updated the program. Vista has been out, in one form or another, for around a year, there is no reason Apple hasnt updated iTunes already. But before you start bashing M$ for everything, remember how much stuff was compatable with XP when it came out? And how much was UNcompatable after SP1/2 came out for it? Big software programs are rarely bug free on launch. Give it time, the price will go down, as well as any problems.

144.2.2007 16:40

Boy I'm glad I switched to Mac last year..I avoided this whole mess. All I have to say is, one year of trouble free, worryless computing. Everything just works. =) sorry, folks, I used to defend MS....I just can't do it anymore.

154.2.2007 18:55
jim_61
Inactive

amazingly vista has a compatibility wizard that, whenn itunes is run thru it. then it works fine. Use compatibility wizard.

165.2.2007 2:37

Mofomac, I'm seriously considering switching to a Mac. Working in IT, it would be a nice change to get away from Windows. Do you run across any limitations with the Mac, a learning curve, any problems? Or is it like night and day compared to MS?

175.2.2007 7:45

Its not all that bad, it should be working fine in a year or so. Patience is a virtue.

185.2.2007 10:31

Hey Cheif, give it a try. You could always go back to windows and pick up right you left off if it doesn't work out. It was fun switching, yeah there was a small learning curve because it's a different system all together, but it was a fun learning curve, you discover alo of neat things along the way. Never had a problem, that what makes me so glad, I dunno it just seems simpler for me to use. When I switched I bought the book, Mac for dummies...made it really easy!! So I recommend picking one up. I also got a book called Mac, the switcher guide. My brother gave me that one,... it was a little bit outdated but everything worked the same. So that was a good tool.

195.2.2007 15:30

[quote=garmoon]Now it begins; the long sequences of patches to fix the next best operating system that doesn't live up to its expectations. And they want $400 for this POS in its glorious edition. Microsh*t keeps you hopping.


You think that's a BAD thing? Try building something as massively complex as Vista is and see if you can make it 1005 perfect first try... I think a company that DOESN'T issue patches for it's s'ware is far worse than one who does try to keep up with new vulnerabilities. Todays OS's are far too complex to expect them to be flaw free. Most flaws are completely UNKNOWN until someone gets tinkering with things, so just how do you expect them to fix flaws they don't even know exist?? People who make this type of comment are completely unaware of how difficult it is to write complex code in todays computer world. Frankly, if it weren't for MS, we'd still be working with antiquated GUI's and machines where you have to load drivers, mount drives, and use command line to get things to work. MS has pioneered the modern computer that your grandma & kids can use, which is only what everyone wanted in the first place. Everyone screamed that "This needs to be easier, and That needs to be automatic, and it needs to work with Everything I can think of" so when a company tries to do exactly that, they get jumped on for building this complex, interactive s'ware with a few errors in it. Give it a try and see if you can do better...

205.2.2007 15:32

Hmm...it was a "Percentage sign" when I typed it... That's supposed to read "100% perfect" (trying again) Guess I had to release a PATCH for my post eh...!!!

215.2.2007 16:33

ChappyTTV you must work for microsoft.

226.2.2007 2:58

@ChappyTTV

Apple seems to do it every time they release an operating system!



236.2.2007 3:16

I'm no code writer, TG. But I am networking/systems etc. From my understanding of code, there is a general foundation to build on. From there it's building step by step using logic. Many companies don't follow this but many do. I'll have to go back and get the stats but there are a lot of incompatabilities w/Vista with software that does follow this model.

Another way to look at it. iTunes worked w/XP. iTunes hasn't changed. MS took that which worked and broke it. 25 million lines of code or not. This is poor planning.


"Is that 3 thousand dollar bounty on the shark in cash or check?"

"We can do it the easy way...Or we can do it the REAL easy way."

246.2.2007 3:37

Originally posted by garmoon:
@ChappyTTV: Apple seems to do it every time they release an operating system!
maybe you dont remember the massive amount of software that no longer ran on macs when apple released OSX?
and how they just said hard luck?
and how their only option was to bundle a mac emulator that required you to own a copy of OS9 to install on it and expect you to try and run your software thru that?

having said that, i love my mac :)

oh, and to the topic in general: if it werent for the early adoptors who pay thru the nose for the first release there never would be a SP1!

256.2.2007 12:20

>>Apple seems to do it every time they release an operating system!<<

Hardly!!

The only reason Mac systems aren't hit as hard as MS ones are, is that hackers know there isn't enough machines out there to make it worthwhile for the effort. It's simply an issue of NUMBERS and nothing more.
As Mac's become more popular and their numbers increase, you'll see a direct increase in the number of vulnerabilities found in their OS as well. Someone who says "Macs are Immune" just doesn't have a clue!
They are NOT immune and never will be, they just aren't picked over by the experienced hacker community as much as MS OS's are. There have been Mac vulnerabilities found in the past and there will be more & more as time goes by. NOBODY can write a perfect OS....period.
Just go to this page http://www.apple.com/support/downloads/
and tell me again that Mac doesn't need "Security Updates".

There were too many poor designs for the numerous protocols needed in the past, just to get the Wired World rolling, and instead of rethinking and completely rebuilding things, developers simply added on top of faulty protocol design and now it's far to late to rethink everything and start over. So this basically "builds in" vulnerabilities because of being built on top of an unstable base to begin with. It's become far too complex & costly to do over again so we're stuck with what we have.

No, I don't work for MS and neither do I think MS is "Da Best" either. I just know how difficult it is to write something SO DAMN COMPLEX and make it perfect...it'll never happen. I also don't agree with MS's release policy on Hotfixes, but at least they start working on it when a new vulnerability is found. My entire point was that it's better to have patches for s'ware that can never be perfect, than to never get patches at all.

266.2.2007 12:59

The only programs that worked on my new XP machine was MusicMatch jukebox. My scanner, camera,mp3player and the rest of my programs nothing worked. It was the worst 30days transferring everything and replacing programs and finding new compatible drivers etc. I never hear Mac users complaining. I have not had a Mac, so assumed they were compatible. Obviously I was wrong.



276.2.2007 13:11

Quote:
I'm no code writer, TG. But I am networking/systems etc. From my understanding of code, there is a general foundation to build on. From there it's building step by step using logic. Many companies don't follow this but many do. I'll have to go back and get the stats but there are a lot of incompatabilities w/Vista with software that does follow this model.
Hi Chief

For smaller programs...yes, and I suppose there's even a base for large ones like an OS..the kernel, but there's a big difference.
There are so many 1000's of interactions in a complex OS that it's basically impossible to run a "Step Logic" system. It would create far too much bloat (which we have anyway ;) ) and simply couldn't be feasible.
People want their computers to be able to do "Everything" basically, and it's because of that we have such a humongously complex (and ultimately confusing for most), whopping chunk of code called XP or Vista....even Mac OS X too for that matter. You simply can't apply the same technique to build an OS as you do for even a large program, there's way too many other things happening. I wrote my first program in 1975 on "Punch Cards" for an IBM computer that was almost twice as big as my GMC 4x4 is, so I know a bit about code. It took 10,000 steps (cards) to make a simple program to tell the computer to make a poster using ASCII characters...imagine how many "steps" it would take to make a functional browser, then interact with your email client and top it off with popup and ad blockers, activeX, Flash...etc.
Over the years different folks made different protocols for emerging technologies and everyone wanted theirs to be the standard one. Some protocols were given to a governing authority and somewhat standardized, such as IP protocol and such, but others continued doing things their own way. Take CD and DVD for instance and the +/- format wars..
Eventually tho, everybody wants an OS that can do it all and for that they have to allow for many different things to have many differing standards...that alone builds in the vulnerability risks.
I could go on & on (I already have I guess..heheh) about why it's impossible to build perfect systems nowadays, but it's fairly common knowledge for s'ware engineers and I don't need to rehash it here.

Anyway, I'm not expousing MS as the OS to use, nor trying to discredit Mac OS, I'm simply trying to get across the fact that to build a perfectly safe & secure, fully functioning, totally compatible, easy to use, point & click OS today, is a pipe dream. I think the "Holy Grail" will be found before that ever happens.

My fingers hurt....I need a Beer

286.2.2007 16:55

Hi garmoon

Yah, Vista is a rather large leap for many programs and existing hardware. I Beta tested Longhorn/Vista and while the original plan had many new & innovative ideas, many of my favorites had to be dropped due to the time constraint of getting it stable in time for Public Release Candidate. I certainly hope MS continues to iron out the new file system they had planned back in Longhorn days, that will prove to be a major security improvement.
Personally, I'm sticking with a stable and well tested XP Pro platform for now, partly because of the heavy system requirements for Vista but mostly because XP is nicely matured, well supported by programs and very stable. As "ripxrush" above has pointed out, Vista is still having stability issues whereas XP has proven itself as the MOST stable platform MS has ever built.

No doubt that Mac's are fantastic OS's and Apple makes one frikkin GORGEOUS Machine!!! Man they're sleek and good lookin, sexy as all hell, and I thoroughly enjoy helping my neices on their Mac's as they're exceptionally user friendly for audio/visual and just plain foolin around fun. But I have to laugh when I listen to Mac users who think they have no worries about Virus or hackers and stuff like that...they'll be in for a big shocker soon. Macs are getting very popular and I know for a fact that mainstream hackers are taking a hard look at them now, so it won't be long.
A cruise thru any established hacker IRC channel will tell you that Mac users and their "worry free" glory days are soon to part company.

K...I've written enough here already. I feel like I've written another tutorial or sumthin...
You guys please Take Care, it's been a slice and I hope I've helped to dispell a myth or two here, there's too many of them around that should've died years ago.

296.2.2007 18:51

Well, as time has told before, like it or not Vista is here to stay. I was happy as can be with my TRS-80 back in the day and was very weary of any of the new technologies. I loved DOS 6.22, and didn't even want to look at Windows 3.11, but as time wore on, I got used to that as well as Win 95 and 98. XP has some nifty things in it compared to DOS 6.22 that really simplifies all of the things I use my PC for. I guess that I'll just have to poke around under the hood and play with Vista until I get used to it.

307.2.2007 3:02

Quote:
[quote]I'm no code writer, TG. But I am networking/systems etc. From my understanding of code, there is a general foundation to build on. From there it's building step by step using logic. Many companies don't follow this but many do. I'll have to go back and get the stats but there are a lot of incompatabilities w/Vista with software that does follow this model.
Hi Chief

For smaller programs...yes, and I suppose there's even a base for large ones like an OS..the kernel, but there's a big difference.
There are so many 1000's of interactions in a complex OS that it's basically impossible to run a "Step Logic" system. It would create far too much bloat (which we have anyway ;) ) and simply couldn't be feasible.
People want their computers to be able to do "Everything" basically, and it's because of that we have such a humongously complex (and ultimately confusing for most), whopping chunk of code called XP or Vista....even Mac OS X too for that matter. You simply can't apply the same technique to build an OS as you do for even a large program, there's way too many other things happening. I wrote my first program in 1975 on "Punch Cards" for an IBM computer that was almost twice as big as my GMC 4x4 is, so I know a bit about code. It took 10,000 steps (cards) to make a simple program to tell the computer to make a poster using ASCII characters...imagine how many "steps" it would take to make a functional browser, then interact with your email client and top it off with popup and ad blockers, activeX, Flash...etc.
Over the years different folks made different protocols for emerging technologies and everyone wanted theirs to be the standard one. Some protocols were given to a governing authority and somewhat standardized, such as IP protocol and such, but others continued doing things their own way. Take CD and DVD for instance and the +/- format wars..
Eventually tho, everybody wants an OS that can do it all and for that they have to allow for many different things to have many differing standards...that alone builds in the vulnerability risks.
I could go on & on (I already have I guess..heheh) about why it's impossible to build perfect systems nowadays, but it's fairly common knowledge for s'ware engineers and I don't need to rehash it here.

Anyway, I'm not expousing MS as the OS to use, nor trying to discredit Mac OS, I'm simply trying to get across the fact that to build a perfectly safe & secure, fully functioning, totally compatible, easy to use, point & click OS today, is a pipe dream. I think the "Holy Grail" will be found before that ever happens.

My fingers hurt....I need a Beer[/quote]I guess when you really think about it, it's amazing a computer even boots up. Zillions of code lines, multiple hardware pieces and peripherals, all w/different firmware and drivers. Hundreds of DLL's flying around. Hundreds of ports opening and closing, numerous protocols, GPO's, firewall rules, spyware protectors, virus scanners, resource intensive games and apps, wireless considerations, and a million other 3rd party apps w/G-D knows whats in em. IF that isn't enough, this poor box is getting bombarded daily by hackers, phishers, scanners, scammers, viruses, email bombs, and old Glen Campbell records. And yet, despite all of this, it all works (relatively speaking.) It really is a remarkable thing.

But here's what I don't understand. iTunes for example worked w/XP. It doesn't work w/Vista. Why did MS take away that 'core?' Did they have to, to make Vista? Is Vista built on a completely new foundation?

317.2.2007 3:05

Originally posted by Unfocused:
Well, as time has told before, like it or not Vista is here to stay. I was happy as can be with my TRS-80 back in the day and was very weary of any of the new technologies. I loved DOS 6.22, and didn't even want to look at Windows 3.11, but as time wore on, I got used to that as well as Win 95 and 98. XP has some nifty things in it compared to DOS 6.22 that really simplifies all of the things I use my PC for. I guess that I'll just have to poke around under the hood and play with Vista until I get used to it.
Ya know, you really hit the nail on the head. Bottom line, in a year or so, Vista will be the new XP in popularity. Might as well get used to it now. I'm still going to wait for SP1 though. Just too many incompatabilites right now, at least for me. I use a lot of small company proprietary SW for certain things I do.

3210.2.2007 5:14

Quote:
Originally posted by garmoon:
Now it begins; the long sequences of patches to fix the next best operating system that doesn't live up to its expectations. And they want $400 for this POS in its glorious edition. Microsh*t keeps you hopping.
You think that's a BAD thing?
Try building something as massively complex as Vista is and see if you can make it 1005 perfect first try...
I think a company that DOESN'T issue patches for it's s'ware is far worse than one who does try to keep up with new vulnerabilities. Todays OS's are far too complex to expect them to be flaw free. Most flaws are completely UNKNOWN until someone gets tinkering with things, so just how do you expect them to fix flaws they don't even know exist??

People who make this type of comment are completely unaware of how difficult it is to write complex code in todays computer world. Frankly, if it weren't for MS, we'd still be working with antiquated GUI's and machines where you have to load drivers, mount drives, and use command line to get things to work. MS has pioneered the modern computer that your grandma & kids can use, which is only what everyone wanted in the first place.
Everyone screamed that "This needs to be easier, and That needs to be automatic, and it needs to work with Everything I can think of" so when a company tries to do exactly that, they get jumped on for building this complex, interactive s'ware with a few errors in it.
Give it a try and see if you can do better...

Perhaps... but I think MS puts its foot in its mouth with their release model. Releasing all new OSs every few years puts unnecessary pressure on their programmers and other hardworking employees, and all for a little increased revenue? MS should consider a more Apple solution, where in they just release little updates at strategic intervals...

Comments have been disabled for this article.

News archive