| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
iTunes 4.1.1 released | |
|
||
| Time: 02:05 EST/07:05 GMT | News Source: ActiveWin.com | Posted By: Byron Hinson | ||
|
iTunes 4.1.1 is available for Windows XP and Windows 2000 on Apple's website. "'A few customers reported conflicts with specific PC configurations and we quickly updated the iTunes software in response,' Apple said in a statement. 'iTunes 4.1.1 addresses an isolated incompatibility with Windows 2000 and older third-party CD burning software, as well as problems caused by corrupt MP3 files on some users' PCs,'" | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 331 Last | Next |
The time now is
12:46:01 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 6253 (12.237.219.240) at 10/23/2003 3:00:53 AM |
| Oops, the "Greatest Windows App Ever Written" didn't actually get tested on Windows very much... |
| #2 By 2960 (156.80.64.137) at 10/23/2003 9:37:29 AM |
|
#1,
Oh, never mind. You couldn't possibly understand... TL |
| #3 By 3 (62.253.128.7) at 10/23/2003 11:37:12 AM |
| 6: Going by this being the 2nd clicked on story of the day, perhaps we should post about all the others...but instead of being petty, just assume people here want to know about it. |
| #4 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 10/23/2003 12:24:16 PM |
|
"That it was just wishful thinking?" No, that it was a joke, that it was tongue-in-cheek, that it was meant to inspire this sort of wrath and disgust from the Apple-haters and Softy-lovers and get them talking because they (Apple) understand that it is pure bravado, that some d!psh!ts will call Mac fans Steve Jobs worshippers no matter what anyway, that they knew it would provoke comments like: "The fact that they had to service it so quickly after its release just goes to show how much BS it was. 3, 4 if you are going to claim that you have the World's Best of anything, then expect criticism the first time you have a problem."
You all do realize that Apple does quite well selling FileMaker to the Microsoft audience (more so than to the Mac market) and that it is quite a good app; in fact, it usually wins awards every year? I don't know why the only company that needs to be truthful and gets so much scrutiny for their marketing verbiage is Apple. This post was edited by sodajerk on Thursday, October 23, 2003 at 12:26. |
| #5 By 2960 (156.80.64.137) at 10/23/2003 12:28:48 PM |
|
#5,
First, I didn't really say anything to warrant your comment. Secondly, I didn't really say anything at all. I decided to just let it go. Secondly, it's not about accepting criticism. It's about stupid, lame posts based on rhetoric. TL |
| #6 By 2960 (156.80.64.137) at 10/23/2003 12:30:57 PM |
|
Soda is correct. Filemaker (on the Mac OR PC) is a wonderful App.
There is nothing out there that you can use to get a database up quicker. TL |
| #7 By 61 (24.92.223.181) at 10/23/2003 12:42:48 PM |
|
Phaedrus: Depends on how you define a good Windows app.
Does it adhere to Windows UI guidlines? Not in the slightest, UI is exactly same as the Mac version, despite very different conecepts between the two OSes. Does it have real, context based, right click menus? Not really. Does the app provide good functionality? Yes. Does it work well? Yes. Is it well supported? Yes. Is it a great Mac app? Definately. |
| #8 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 10/23/2003 12:54:56 PM |
|
Hmm, I guess writing software perfectly ain't so easy after all, eh Apple?
|
| #9 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 10/23/2003 1:02:08 PM |
| Hmm, I guess delivering a patch/update quickly isn't so hard after all, eh Microsoft? |
| #10 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 10/23/2003 2:06:52 PM |
|
Sodajerk: I don't know why the only company that needs to be truthful and gets so much scrutiny for their marketing verbiage is Apple.
You've got to be kidding. When it comes to close scrutiny (of many kinds), Apple is hardly alone. But if they're going to continue to make claims on the order of "World's Fastest Desktop Computer" and the like, they (and you) would be foolish to expect otherwise. |
| #11 By 3 (62.253.128.7) at 10/23/2003 3:40:12 PM |
| #17 - unlike some of you, I'm not into loving just one companies make of software all my life, i'm open to just about every operating system there is - and yes, currently i prefer OS 10.3, no Steve loving there. |
| #12 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 10/23/2003 3:40:39 PM |
|
"they (and you) would be foolish to expect otherwise."
That's the point, the expectation is that it will be provocative and will get this sort of attention. The point is: besides the attention, do some see past it or disregard it entirely or simply do real research and evaluations? Yes. Those who do fixate on three or four words, are they wasting time by not paying attention to what real people think is important? Yes. People who aren't going to remain pure haters generally don't give a sh!t and after having their attention raised, actually check out the products. However, dumbasses should also expect that if they sit around whining: "But it isn't really the best Windows App Ever!" that they will look like fools and should expect to be treated as such. |
| #13 By 2960 (156.80.64.137) at 10/23/2003 3:57:39 PM |
|
#13,
No biggie :) TL |
| #14 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 10/23/2003 3:57:44 PM |
|
Byron - "unlike some of you, I'm not into loving just one companies make of software all my life, i'm open to just about every operating system there is - and yes, currently i prefer OS 10.3, no Steve loving there. "
I think you may misunderstand the point that many of us have been making. I honestly have no problem with Apple or other software alternatives. I just don't see why people feel a need to preach about it. I'm fairly critical of Microsoft software, but I don't feel any compelling need to go around and shout it from the rooftops. For instance I didn't like Windows Media Player at all until Version 9 came out. Versions prior to that were pretty buggy, slow and clumbsy. But I don't make a big fuss about it, I just go look for something different, like Musicmatch. If someone asks "Hey, I'm using this and having problems" then I'll mention alternatives. Again, I don't go preaching. I unfortunately have to spend an inordinate amount of time correcting misrepresentation of facts by these preachers and I find that irritating. I've looked at Apple before, and as a company they don't offer anything compelling for my needs. No amount of prostecyzing is going to change that for me. iTunes, I think that's great. I think it's nice that Apple finally has found a market that they can penetrate and sell product. I will probably download it and try it out, but that's about the extent of it. To claim that it is anything more than what it is is foolish. |
| #15 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 10/23/2003 3:59:41 PM |
|
sodajerk - "However, dumbasses should also expect that if they sit around whining: "But it isn't really the best Windows App Ever!" that they will look like fools and should expect to be treated as such. "
The only person looking like a fool is the one defending a buggy piece of software as "The greatest App ever written." And we can pretty much leave this discussion at that. If you were a reasonable sort and not an anti-Microsoft zealot you might understand the folly. |
| #16 By 2960 (156.80.64.137) at 10/23/2003 4:02:16 PM |
|
#14 (CPUGuy),
Buddy, I'm right there with you on the following of UI Guidelines. But, in the case of Windows, in reality there isn't such a thing beyond the basic File/Edit menu's. And some developers even take those for granted. There may be written HIG's for windows, but hardly anyone follows them. Even Microsoft (take a look at Media Player), doesn't follow consistent UI design. This has been one of the biggest complaints against windows since day 1. Has it gotten better? Hell yes. It is, however, no where near standardized amongst applications. With all that said, I also feel Apple made a few UI mistakes with iTools, and oddly enough, they are the same things that bug me about the Mac version. The biggest offense is no full-screen button that works properly. I HATE that in these new Apple Apps. TL |
| #17 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 10/23/2003 4:05:18 PM |
|
"The only person looking like a fool is the one defending a buggy piece of software as "The greatest App ever written.""
And if you weren't such an ignorant, deluded d!psh!t you wouldn't try to misconstrue the situation as you have. I haven't defended the app as "The Greates App Ever Written"; in fact, I have pointed out that those of us who do "LIKE" it don't think so and neither does Apple, dumbass. "If you were a reasonable sort and not an anti-Microsoft zealot you might understand the folly." If you were reasonable and not buried 18 inches up Gates's asshole, you wouldn't have to pretend I'm saying things I haven't in order to defend your lame ass position. |
| #18 By 2960 (156.80.64.137) at 10/23/2003 4:10:37 PM |
|
Oh, and if you want to see a UI gone wrong, take a look at Agent (the newsreader).
I've never seen so many options/preferences scattered amongst so many different menu's/sub-menu's in my life. It's like each little feature was tacked on, and not integrated. I registered the thing several years ago, and basically tossed it aside after 2 weeks. I just couldn't take it any more :) TL |
| #19 By 3 (62.253.128.7) at 10/23/2003 4:15:30 PM |
| #24 - sorry that wasn't aimed at you in terms to the "Steve loving" comments. |
| #20 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 10/23/2003 5:59:55 PM |
|
Sodajerk: I don't know why the only company that needs to be truthful and gets so much scrutiny for their marketing verbiage is Apple.
That's the point, the expectation is that it will be provocative and will get this sort of attention. The point is: Hold on--my point is that you were complaining (at first... and now you're expecting???) about Apple receiving an unfair portion of scrutiny in comparison with the entire rest of the industry, and I'm disagreeing. They are not alone, nor are they even the most scrutinized. Furthermore (and which you are now claiming as your real point... reminds me of Kevin Nealon long ago in his SNL Weekend Update bits--"Now that's what I'm really trying to say... forget about all that other stuff"), if they are going to make claims that are as "provocative" as they have been, they (and you) can expect the attention. You have little ground to complain about it. Incidentally, a little fuel for the "World's Fastest Desktop" fire: http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,112749,pg,8,00.asp |
| #21 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 10/23/2003 6:15:58 PM |
|
I expect Apple to get attention. I expect that you and most other people aren't complete idiots. Apparently, both of my expectations don't play out, but that doesn't mean I'm being inconsistent.
Who do you contend gets more attention about their marketing than Apple, bluvg? |
| #22 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 10/23/2003 6:38:27 PM |
|
Sodajerk, it's so simple:
- Apple markets the way they do to get lots of attention - You expect that Apple is going to get lots of attention So you do know "why [Apple]... gets so much scrutiny for their marketing verbiage." You said "I don't know why," so you're contradicting yourself. You were complaining about the amount of scrutiny Apple received, now you claim you expect it. I'm pointing out the inconsistency which is plainly there, regardless of your denials (which, being true to your form, I fully expected). |
| #23 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 10/23/2003 7:00:57 PM |
|
bluvg, thanks for avoiding a very simple question (that you yourself raised) and making it perfectly clear you cannot support your own claims.
Let's be clear on what I do not understand and what I find retarded and what I find myself needing to rebut: the notion that Apple truly thinks and is stating that their app is the Best Windows App Ever. Simply a retarded and pathetic contention to try to argue and one which completely avoids the real technical substance on which the marketing campaign is based on. I don't care if you don't like the campaign, if you get enflamed, etc... but if you say things like: Apple is lying... then yes, I will say you are wrong, that you are retarded, and that you have no clue, and that I don't understand how you can believe a marketing tag line is an objective statement of technical merit. Just because I and Apple should expect it doesn't mean the argument isn't idiotic. Expecting Apple to get attention, expecting most rational people to understand what marketing is, AND arguing with the people who don't have a clue and are complete idiots are not inconsistent. Yes, Apple is going to upset people and provoke retarded attacks... but just because I expect that, doesn't make it inconsistent of me to defend against those retarded attacks. Got it? Now do you have that company that is more attacked for their marketing campaigns than Apple yet? This post was edited by sodajerk on Thursday, October 23, 2003 at 20:16. |
| #24 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 10/23/2003 7:04:41 PM |
|
Now, bluvg, let's look at your pathetic attempt to misconstrue further what I said:
According to you, I said: "So you do know "why [Apple]... gets so much scrutiny for their marketing verbiage." You said "I don't know why," so you're contradicting yourself." But what I did say was: "I don't know why the only company that needs to be truthful and gets so much scrutiny for their marketing verbiage is Apple." I didn't say Apple shouldn't provoke a reaction. I said I didn't understand the hypocrisy of ONLY focusing on APPLE ALONE for their marketing when OTHER companies make comparable claims and people take it for what it is. See the difference? |
| #25 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 10/24/2003 11:04:50 AM |
|
sodajerk, if I really have to answer that question, you're seriously out of touch. Microsoft easily has more comments made regarding their marketing than Apple. I wish I had a nickel for every time someone made a comment along the lines of "Microsoft takes their mediocre products and markets them well."
As I said before, it is NOT "APPLE ALONE" that is being focused upon for their marketing. You made the claim that Apple IS alone in its degree of scrutiny, and you're just plain wrong. What's more, with the kinds of claims they make, they can expect it. "I don't understand how you can believe a marketing tag line is an objective statement of technical merit." So you're saying that Apple doesn't even buy into their own claims? And who said I believed it? I may offer criticism of the marketing claims, and I think that's entirely justified. So you think we should just sit here and keep our mouths shut, instead? No room for critical commentary? Who's talking about "hypocrisy"? |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 331 Last | Next |
The time now is
12:46:01 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
