RE: Dumb iTunes Question

["Melanie Shannon" <lilblueriver@hotmail.com>]

i'm going to jump in over my head here-

----Original Message Follows----
From: Brad Caviness <bigwigenterprises@yahoo.com>

> > Which leads me to my eternal gripe with apple as a persistent PC user: Why 
> > is everything they produce so adamantly proprietary? iTunes is the most 
> > cross-platform application they've yet released, but even then you have to 
> > use their machine (an iPod, in this instance) or you're out of luck.

what's so proprietary about it?  do you want Mac programs to run on PCs?  
(what Mac programs would you want for a PC, besides iTunes, which is 
available for PC?)   I don't really understand, because  it seems to me that 
Microsoft is the company trying to block out Mac, by cutting off the supply 
of Microsoft programs for Mac platforms.  but Mac doesn't really mind so 
much, because the Mac programs seem to consistently run better.  (i'm 
thinking in particular of Internet Explorer being no-longer available for 
Mac- but Mac's Safari program is pretty snazzy.)

i just KNOW this is going to spark computer-geek debate that's way over my 
head, so i'm actually asking questions, here; not just arguing back.  i was 
a die-hard PC girl for years, though (and an art student PC girl, at that!), 
who converted to Mac about two years ago.  and i loooove Mac, now.  their 
stuff /works/, and i makes /sense/, and never drives me crazy, and it's so 
pretty!


> >
I know, Mac users will argue that Apple is not proprietary, per se, it's 
just that they're closer to the edge of the technology curve, while PC's are 
lagging behind. But I have a hard time accepting any platform that makes you 
upgrade all of your software when the operating system goes up a notch. 
Windows may be backwards in a lot of ways, but at least it's backwards 
compatible.
> >


well, i'm sure someone can answer this better than me, but i think when Mac 
moved from OS9 to OS10, they made such a change in programming that they're 
hardly related operating systems.  am i right?  wrong?  bueller?  what other 
listee likes Macs?  and do the upgrades actually cost $$?  i didn't think 
they did...

> >
And people wonder why Apple has only been able to capture 3% of the computer 
market. iPod and iTunes gave them a huge surge (3 million files transacted 
and counting), and their marketing for the product is brilliant. But 
competition from other manufacturers as well as iTunes limited application 
to these units seems to me to be potentially restricting to Apple's 
earnings. Which could leave them back at 3% in the not to distant future. 
You know, after they're done making money hand over fist.
> >

my only answer to that is every friend i've had who's owned a non-ipod mp3 
player has wound up tossing it aside to gather dust, or in one case, just 
leaving it on a bus in australia on purpose.  if "cutting edge of the 
technology curve" means things actually work, i don't blame apple for being 
a little possessive of it.


-melanie

_________________________________________________________________
Stay informed on Election 2004 and the race to Super Tuesday. 
http://special.msn.com/msn/election2004.armx

---------------
Unsubscribe by going to http://www.actwin.com/OtR/