Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Apple Quietly Releases iTunes 4.8

timothy posted more than 9 years ago | from the they're-humming-john-cage dept.

Media (Apple) 169

trmptblwr writes "Apple has quietly released an iTunes update to version 4.8 for Mac OS X and Windows. Release notes say 'iTunes 4.8 includes new Music Store features and support for transferring contacts and calendars from your computer to your iPod (requires Mac OS X version 10.4 on your computer).' There also appears to be a some sort of new video functionality as you can now import QuickTime movies. I speculate that this has something to do with the 'new Music Store features.'"

cancel ×

169 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I wonder (2, Interesting)

InfallibleLies (654694) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480226)

if this means the next iPod will have video?

And maybe they're planning on releasing it soon?

Re:I wonder (2, Informative)

CptChipJew (301983) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480317)

Jobs said that video on portable devices was a bad move (or something). I remember it sounded like he was implying such a thing would never happen.

Re:I wonder (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12480445)

It's true... I simply CAN'T watch a movie in a 2" screen... it's ridiculous...

And... I don't want a swiss army knife that isn't good at anything... I want something that I can use to listen to songs (and that does that well)

Re:I wonder (4, Interesting)

Golias (176380) | more than 9 years ago | (#12481155)

I don't want a swiss army knife

I dunno.

The iPod Photo didn't really rock my world, because I'm not much of a shutterbug... ... but the ability to watch downloaded Doctor Who episodes in the ice-fishing house or while waiting in line at the DMV sounds pretty sweet to me.

It's not often that I disagree with the Almighty Jobs, but I think that the only thing really preventing video on hand-held MP3 players was that the technology was not quite ready to do it right just yet.

IMHO, we are rapidly approaching the point where introducing an "iPod Movie" will be nearly as trivial as the extra $50 or so to create the iPod Photo was.

Re:I wonder (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12480569)

Keep in mind Jobs bad mouths everything up until Apple releases a product that does it 'better'. Flash based music players, and the iPod Shuffle are a great example of this.

Movies? (1)

DamienMcKenna (181101) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480448)

Maybe they want to start selling music videos and movie trailers? Or maybe even entire movies? Maybe this is part of the alleged reason behind the Mini Mac, to create a cheap platform for playing online movies? Their new Quicktime & codec are supposed to be able to produce higher quality movies at a lower bandwidth requirements than competitors.

Damien

Re:Movies? (3, Funny)

geoffspear (692508) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480941)

Nah... if they were going to start selling movies, we'd be hearing rumors that Apple is buying up some big movie studio, followed by speculation that it's a plot by Jobs to get Pixar a good distribution deal, hundreds of Slashdotters screaming about how Apple will die if it branches out and becomes a media company, followed by disappointment when people find out they're actually just going to be selling movies online.

Re:Movies? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12481185)

Kind of like how they bought a record studio prior to the introduction of the iTMS.

Oh wait... that didn't happen.

Never mind.

Re:Movies? (1)

HTH NE1 (675604) | more than 9 years ago | (#12481375)

Kind of like how they bought a record studio prior to the introduction of the iTMS.

Oh wait... that didn't happen.


If they had, they should have bought out Apple Records.

That reminds me: what is the state of the latest Apple Records v. Apple Computer suit?

Re:I wonder (1)

Reaperducer (871695) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480921)

if this means the next iPod will have video? And maybe they're planning on releasing it soon?

You've been able to import Quicktime files into iTunes for the last few versions. I've been ripping Quicktime files out of the Music Videos section of the iTunes store, then importing them back into iTunes to get free songs for almost a year.

Oh, yeah... Don't steal music.

Will it run on linux? (1)

DrJonesAC2 (652108) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480229)

I mean seriously. When are they going to get around to porting it?

After you buy a Mac Mini (1)

mogabog (55770) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480333)

Then they will care about you. Why should they port to a competing *NIX variant?

A

Re:After you buy a Mac Mini (1)

discstickers (547062) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480399)

Linux being a "competing *NIX" has nothing to do with it. Apple has decided that it isn't worth the effort to port iTunes (and thus QuickTime and most of Carbon) to Linux. Deal.

Re:Will it run on linux? (1)

Zemplar (764598) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480388)

Two options:
1) Wine
2) Codeweavers

Re:Will it run on linux? (1)

DrJonesAC2 (652108) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480478)

Yep already use it under Crossover Office but the CD burining doesn't work. Not that it's really that big a deal but it would be nice if Apple started taking Linux platforms more seriously. I mean both Apple and the various linux (linuxii?) out there have a common goal. The way they go about it now they are treating Windows as a superior OS to Linux.

Re:Will it run on linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12480659)

Apple's goal is to sell more Macs, whatever your supposed goal of the Linux master plan, it's not that.

Re:Will it run on linux? (3, Insightful)

geoffspear (692508) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480665)

Since when is the goal of any Linux to make money for Apple?

Apple is a corporation. Their only goal is to make profits. They don't see porting iTMS to Linux to be a good business move, the same way most game manufacturers don't see making games for either OS X or Linux to be a good business move.

Re:Will it run on linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12480494)

Never. There is no market for it, or at least one that will earn them any money.

Sure - It may be really quite simple for them to port it since it's running on OS X, but c'mon - Just how many Linux users are going to buy something from the the iTunes store?

Why would they want to attract linux users anyway - I'm sure they are quite happy trying to convince you to run it on one of their macs with OS X instead :)

Re:Will it run on linux? (3, Insightful)

nosferatu-man (13652) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480705)

Approximately 10 seconds after some bright spark ports the Quicktime framework to Linux. Which is to say, never.

Exansion... (3, Interesting)

kenthorvath (225950) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480240)

Maybe it will go something like music -> music videos -> movies? One can only hope...

Re:Exansion... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12481210)

Despite what you may have been told, amn't is a word and it's high time that it made a comeback.

And what, pray tell, does "amn't" mean?

Jeez, if you can't even be bothered to spellcheck your sig file, how lazy are you?

Not in software update, it seems. (2, Interesting)

BigZaphod (12942) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480251)

Does Apple usually delay putting updates into software update or was slashdot just amazingly fast getting this news story published?

Re:Not in software update, it seems. (4, Informative)

moosesocks (264553) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480575)

Yes. this is normal procedure.

they roll out updates to a small section of the net at a time, usually over the span of a day so that their servers don't die the instant they release a patch.

it's not a bad idea... Microsoft used a similar scheme for SP2, but did it over the course of several weeks leaving many customers high and dry for a few weeks until they got enabled to receive the update.

Re:Not in software update, it seems. (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 9 years ago | (#12481286)

I think that makes sense. A minor addition: If you had to have iTunes 4.8, you can download it directly now, from apple.com.

I thought Microsoft's XP SP2 was available through downloads.microsoft.com that way too. I really don't know for sure as I didn't have Windows XP at that time.

Re:Not in software update, it seems. (1)

ioErr (691174) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480596)

Yes, this is normal. It always takes a few hours for releases to apear in software update. Don't ask me why.

Yeah, but will it play oggs? (1, Interesting)

Cecil (37810) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480366)

No, seriously.

qtcomponents [sourceforge.net] has not been updated in almost a year and has to my knowledge never really worked. It is open source, but according to a bug posted by an Apple developer, it uses the now obsolete SoundManager and will have to be rewritten to use CoreAudio before it'll work again.

The other component [illadvised.com] , while being even longer since it was last updated, worked great. Although it had a few annoying bugs, it was quite usable right up until QT7 landed, and now it doesn't work at all. It is not open source, so you're pretty much out of luck.

Has anyone found any alternative way of getting oggs to play in iTunes?

Re:Yeah, but will it play oggs? (1, Flamebait)

minus_273 (174041) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480447)

WHY? no, seriously, why another format? AAC and MP3 work fine.

Re:Yeah, but will it play oggs? (4, Interesting)

PaxTech (103481) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480528)

In this week's I, Cringely column [pbs.org] there's some talk about an unused Ogg iTunes icon embedded in Tiger. Official Ogg support could be on the horizon..

Looking at the unused iTunes icons that shipped with your new version of 10.4, you'll notice icons for currently-not-supported ogg vorbis and Windows Media Audio (wma), as well as several others including a variety of video formats, too.

Re:Yeah, but will it play oggs? (0, Flamebait)

minus_273 (174041) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480642)

seriously, who uses Ogg why would they bother? Is there any financial benefit from it?

Also, if it supports ogg in itunes, then they would need to support it on the ipod which is not possible because of that wonderful floating point issue.

Re:Yeah, but will it play oggs? (1)

Scaba (183684) | more than 9 years ago | (#12481269)

It's very possible to support Ogg on portables; I know this because I own one that does (Rio Karma). That wonderful floating-point issue has been solved now for at over two years, when Xiph released [xiph.org] Tremor, the integer-based Ogg decoder.

Re:Yeah, but will it play oggs? (0, Flamebait)

minus_273 (174041) | more than 9 years ago | (#12481293)

Rio Karma and Ipod arent the same device. Look at the linux ipod that pays OGG and you see how god awful the playback is.

Re:Yeah, but will it play oggs? (1)

Scaba (183684) | more than 9 years ago | (#12481594)

Well, I was really speaking to your claim about iPod not being able to support Ogg Vorbis due to the floating-point issue, not how well some hacker shoved Linux onto an iPod to play Ogg Vorbis files. (Which contradicts your own assertion that the iPod cannot support Ogg.) And, really though - using a hobbiest's hacked-up iPod as an example of why Apple's hypothetical support of Ogg Vorbis hypothetically sucks, what with Apple's paid engineers and extensive testing, is kinda specious, dontcha think? The Linux iPod is just a bad implementation. I'm sure if these players [xiph.org] can support Ogg Vorbis, Apple's engineering wizards can make iPod support it, too.

Re:Yeah, but will it play oggs? (4, Informative)

geoffspear (692508) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480739)

The icons were there about a year and a half ago. I wouldn't count on actual ogg support being "on the horizon", as it hasn't materialized in that time.

Re:Yeah, but will it play oggs? (1)

PaxTech (103481) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480904)

Heh, I didn't know that, Cringely made it sound new. Maybe it's a really BIG horizon.. :)

Re:Yeah, but will it play oggs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12481372)

Anything Cringely just noticed is new, especially if it's something that most other people have also not noticed before now. That's his bread and butter.

Re:Yeah, but will it play oggs? (3, Informative)

DLWormwood (154934) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480855)

there's some talk about an unused Ogg iTunes icon embedded in Tiger.

That icon's been present in the last few releases of iTunes. It seems to have devolved into a running gag at this point. During the OS 9 era, iTunes included icons for MODs, S3Ms, and other "sound module/track" formats.

The rationale once seemed to be that since iTunes is playing files via QuickTime, iTunes could potentially play OGG or WMA files via a new codec component provided by a third party. Apple used to encourage developers to create codecs and make them available for distribution via QuickTime Update. There has been some effort at making an OGG codec, and the the first verison of WMA (then called NetPlay, IIRC) used QuickTime hooks for the Mac version of the player.

However, Apple hasn't done much with QuickTime Update and it appears to be going the way of QuickTime TV. (Does anybody out there use stuff like Axel, On2, or ZyGoVideo?) It seems there is no market or widespread enough interest in third-party enhancements to QuickTime...

Re:Yeah, but will it play oggs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12481408)

It seems there is no market or widespread enough interest in third-party enhancements to QuickTime...

Are you kidding? Without the DivX codec for my quicktime player, I wouldn't be able to play bootleg .avi files for fansubbed anime and Doctor Who which I download from torrents and newsgroups!

Well... not without using VLC, anyway... which I usually do...

Come to think of it, there's not really much demand for thrid-party enhancements to QuickTime after all. Never mind.

Re:Yeah, but will it play oggs? (1)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480617)

Looks like Apple's going to unleash some geek love soon:
$ ls -l /Applications/iTunes.app/Contents/Resources/iTunes -ogg.icns
-rw-rw-r-- 1 root admin 43825 Oct 4 2004 /Applications/iTunes.app/Contents/Resources/iTunes -ogg.icns
(the spaces aren't really there - Slashcode likes to reformat code, defying all logic)

Re:Yeah, but will it play oggs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12480712)

That doesn't mean anything. Those icons have been there for almost a year now.

Re:Yeah, but will it play oggs? (1)

Reaperducer (871695) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480954)

Don't get all foamy just yet. The OGG icons have been there for a long long time. At least a year. There are also Windows Media icons, but that doesn't mean crap either. Yet.

Re:Yeah, but will it play oggs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12481597)

The OGG icons have been there for a long long time. At least a year. There are also Windows Media icons, but that doesn't mean crap either.
Precisely. I suspect that they tossed in icons for just about every format they thought they might ever consider supporting at any time in the future to eliminate the possibility that someone might forget to remove it in the case where they experimented internally with a given format, then decided against it.

Not like the icons take up a lot of room or hurt anything

Re:Yeah, but will it play oggs? (1)

Paradise Pete (33184) | more than 9 years ago | (#12481216)

the spaces aren't really there - Slashcode likes to reformat code, defying all logic

It's to keep the morons [slashdot.org] from using it for page widening [slashdot.org] .

Re:Yeah, but will it play oggs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12482093)

Looks like Apple's going to unleash some geek love soon:


Those icons have been there for years. There's also one for WMA, and other types that iTunes doesn't support. You could even make your system use that icon by modifying iTunes' Info.plist. It's not a sign of things to come, necessarily -- just a sign that the icon designer was thorough.

Re:Yeah, but will it play oggs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12482062)

No, seriously.

Yes, seriously - I realize you and your 5 friends care, but y'know what - nobody else does.

It simply doesn't make any sense to spend thousands of dollars to implement a feature that may be used by less than 1% of their installed base, realistically won't sway many users their way (average Ogg user: "corporations bad! Fire Bad! Rarr!"), and of course there's a chance some RIAA member will get pissy over .ogg for no reason whatsoever, which won't stop the RIAA from raising a flag and marching their army of lawyers down to 1 Infinite Loop.

iTunes 4.7.1 and video (1)

Mikito (833242) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480380)

iTunes 4.7.1 (and maybe prior versions as well) can show QuickTime music videos from the iTunes store, but I don't know offhand if it's making a call to the QuickTime program or processing the QT file itself. I know that there are AppleScripts that will let you save iTunes music videos to your hard drive.

You can play a local QuickTime file with iTunes 4.7.1 but you'll only hear the audio content. Doing so also makes a copy of the QT file in your Music folder.

Re:iTunes 4.7.1 and video (2, Insightful)

cryptochrome (303529) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480552)

QT is a framework, accessible from any program. I think the idea here is you can now store and play video from iTunes. It makes perfect sense. Audio jukebox -> video jukebox. Why not? The catch is video consists of large files you probably can't and don't keep around on the hard drive very long. This could be just for early adopters with gigabytes to spare.

But it could also foreshadow the rumored iTunes subscription service which must of necessity handle temporary audio files. Such a system could handle temporary VIDEO downloads just as easily - AKA, online rentals. Something the iTunes store could easily accomodate. This new feature may be to prepare for that release.

New Apple Lossless format (1, Informative)

georgewad (154339) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480386)

from the link:
Use the new lossless encoder to import music from CDs and achieve sound quality indistinguishable from the original, at about half the original file size. Plays in iTunes and on iPod.
Yum.

Re:New Apple Lossless format (2, Informative)

CptChipJew (301983) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480444)

That encoder was in the last release of iTunes. It isn't new.

Re:New Apple Lossless format (1)

georgewad (154339) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480586)

Thanks for bursting my bubble. I guess I should pay more attention to an app that I use every day...

Re:New Apple Lossless format (2, Interesting)

kitzilla (266382) | more than 9 years ago | (#12481158)

At least you've noticed now. Give Apple Lossless a try. I was using variable-rate MP3s before, but have completely switched over. Unless you have really crappy speakers or headphones, you'll hear the difference.

Be read to buy more hard drive space, though. ;-)

Re:New Apple Lossless format (1)

Chucker23N (661210) | more than 9 years ago | (#12481923)

That was introduced with iTunes 4.5, on iTMS's first anniversary, April 28, 2004. :-)

Any downgrades? (4, Interesting)

fname (199759) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480413)

It seems that with every iTunes release, Apple quietly removes some useful feature to placate the RIAA. They eliminated internet streaming, disabled some plug-ins, restricted you to sharing songs with 5 computers a day, and so on. Any word yet about whether has removed any features this time?

Re:Any downgrades? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12480645)

They removed the ability to play music.

Re:Any downgrades? (1)

outZider (165286) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480829)

*streams some audio*

Well, that works. What on earth are you talking about?

Re:Any downgrades? (1)

mcknut (759166) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480944)

I'm guessing the original poster meant that you used to be able to specify the IP addresses of other machines running iTunes, but now you have to use the likes of RendezVous Proxy.

Re:Any downgrades? (1)

Reaperducer (871695) | more than 9 years ago | (#12481009)

He's just another troll out looking for something to sink his teeth into and hoping someone will take his anti-RIAA bait. Go away, troll!

Re:Any downgrades? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12481289)

I sure wish they'd go back to allowing multiple computers per day to access iTunes. I haven't changed from 4.6 because I enjoy sharing my collection with the 2000 people here at work. Of course most don't have iTunes, but there is a small community of online people here.

Re:Any downgrades? (1)

NotoriousQ (457789) | more than 9 years ago | (#12482018)

They probably "removed" PyMusique compatability again. Does anyone know?

MOV import (1)

dynayellow (106690) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480423)

Just tried it out: it imports MOV files, all right, and creates a full copy of the file in the iTunes library.

However, it doesn't (or I haven't yet figured out) play the video portion of the file in iTunes: only the audio.

Re:MOV import (3, Informative)

CptChipJew (301983) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480484)

It plays the video in the album artwork display. Do you have it hidden?

Re:MOV import (1)

dynayellow (106690) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480535)

D'oh! Sure did! Thanks.

Re:MOV import (3, Informative)

confidential (23321) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480626)

in the iTunes preferences (under advanced), you can also set it to play the movies in the album viewer spot, in a new window, or fullscreen... Regardless of your choice, you can always click on the new "open in full screen" button on the bottom left corner.

The Real Question (3, Interesting)

hawkbug (94280) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480427)

The real question is, when will there be a Windows 64 compatible version? Since XP 64 is currently shipping from OEMs, and a lot of other companies currently have 64 bit drivers and apps either out or in development, I wonder when Apple will release iTunes for it. Everything in iTunes currently works under 32 emu mode, but to burn CDs, you would need 64 bit drivers. Burning CDs from iTunes is a huge, important feature, so it's not a minor thing.

64-bit Windows (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12482087)

To borrow a phrase being used elsewhere in this discussion, there'll be a Win64-compatible version when significantly more than the current 0.001% of the Windows user base is running Win64...

you know (2, Interesting)

sethadam1 (530629) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480472)

You know, for a company that has gained A LOT of support and respect from the /. type, they really ought to spend the 59 seconds necessary to have iTunes support FLAC and OGG. Seriously, you know how many people they'd make happy?

And if the iPod itself supported those codecs, I wonder how many more they'd sell to this crowd? (This crowd, by the way, being the ones who provide recommendations to the people who sign the checks to buy IT equipment for corporations worldwide.)

Get over yourself (4, Insightful)

amichalo (132545) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480568)

And if the iPod itself supported [FLAC and OGG], I wonder how many more they'd sell to this crowd? (This crowd, by the way, being the ones who provide recommendations to the people who sign the checks to buy IT equipment for corporations worldwide.)

The parent post doesn't even make sense in the Real World (tm). What corporate IT infrastructure is the target market for the iPod? And in that small subset of the global market, what group requires FLAC and OGG and can't "make due" with Apple Lossless, MP3 and AAC?

As to your question about "how many more would they sell?" All I can say is that Apple sells 90% of HD based players and 68% of Flash based players according the March numbers from IDC. If the 10% and 32% non-Apple players being purchased are being purchased because of their FLAC and OGG support, then we are living in some wierd ass /. fantasy land!

Re:Get over yourself (0, Flamebait)

sethadam1 (530629) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480718)

Uh, let me make this clearer for you, since you obviously are a little slow. missed the point completely.

Apple also makes a computer system, and it's called the Macintosh! It's really fancy, and they just released a new version of their OS, and they are trying to get into the corporate market!! Wow! Isn't that the roxx0rs?!?!?!1!

If Apple were to gain even more popular with the crowd that implements hardware in corporations, maybe they'd sell more hardware to them. They can start that goodwill with some simple mods in iTunes.

Re:Get over yourself (4, Insightful)

amichalo (132545) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480816)

If Apple were to gain even more popular with the crowd that implements hardware in corporations, maybe they'd sell more hardware to them. They can start that goodwill with some simple mods in iTunes.

What a load of crap. There are no IT managers who would support a platform change to Mac OS X if only Apple would support FLAC and OGG on the iPod. No, not one. Apple has created tons of goodwill to the OSS community - embracing OSS with contributions like Bonjour and using FreeBSD in OS X. Want proof of the good will? just checkout a website known as /. [slashdot.org] where OSS geeks fall all over themselves praising Apple daily.

The iPod is for consumers. Be rational, not emotional, about these facts.

Re:Get over yourself (1)

sethadam1 (530629) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480976)

There are no IT managers who would support a platform change to Mac OS X if only Apple would support FLAC and OGG on the iPod.

Inroads, my friend. Cause ya gotta start somewhere, and being the flavor of the week ain't so bad. How many fanboys here have begun buying IBM hardware since they became Linux's bestest big brother?

Don't underestimate the OS X/Apple hardware marketing that can be done with "consumer products" like the iPod.

If you doubt me, go to ANY tech trade show - Citrix, Linux, VoIP, etc. Nearly every vendor is auctioning off an iPod. Gee, I wonder why?

The blind devotion to your position is astounding! (4, Insightful)

amichalo (132545) | more than 9 years ago | (#12481396)

Don't underestimate the OS X/Apple hardware marketing that can be done with "consumer products" like the iPod. If you doubt me, go to ANY tech trade show - Citrix, Linux, VoIP, etc. Nearly every vendor is auctioning off an iPod. Gee, I wonder why?

Let me repeate, no IT manager in their right mind would base a Mac OS X vs. "Platform B" decision on wethere or not FLAC and OGG were supported on the iPod.

The logic that iPods are given away at trade shows as support of the assertion that FLAC/OGG support would sway these decision makers is illogical. iPods are given away because they are sought after consumer electronic devices, targeting a personal market. Do you think that the bouncy balls and T-shirts given away are to appeal to the corporate IT needs of the organization? Heck no! They are to appeal to the attendees! Show me the iPod givaway that includes some sort of business related use. They don't. iPods are music players given away because they bring crowd of people who want to win one for themselves or someone in their household!

As I said before, be logical, not emotional about this. FLAC and OGG support on the iPod does nothing to aid Apple's bottome line. It's like Panasonic supporting Betamax on their VCRs. It may be a format with some merits, but the masses have spoken, 90% of HD and 68% of flash players sold in March in the US wore the Apple logo. None of those played FLAC and OGG files and they continue to fly off the shelves!

The limited market for FLAC and OGG players does not concern Apple. Neither Apple nor any other manufacturer can build a player that appeals to 100% of the market, and Apple has no doubt considered and rejected FLAC/OGG support.

It isn't going to loose them any market share on consumer digital music player or with business hardware. Face it!

Re:The blind devotion to your position is astoundi (1)

sethadam1 (530629) | more than 9 years ago | (#12481584)

Oh my. You are relentless.

Does a billboard on the highway influence you?
Does a TV commercial?
How about nifty applications like F-spot?
Are you jazzed by new themes on your distro of choice?
How do you feel about magazine ads?

Same thing. It's called advertising. And virtually all commercial companies do it. Companies do it to create goodwill and "push" customers to examine their product. They do it to create a warm, fuzzy feeling about their brand name. They do it to inspire trust, and to establish their name.

So the more you like Apple, in theory, the more likely you are to entertain Apple as a solution. This is not rocket science. *I* think that by adding support for these kinds of formats, there's no downside - those who don't use it won't notice and those that do will love it, and conceivably be more positive and open minded about Apple in general.

It's not a direct "I like FLAC in iTunes so I'll simply use OS X" relationship, despite your fanatic need to make it so.

I'm done.

Re:The blind devotion to your position is astoundi (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12481668)

I'm done.

Thank goodness. Now back to the big boy discussion.

(Hint: Apple doesn't care that you want ogg/flac support in iPods. Neither do we. Got it? I'm done.)

Re:The blind devotion to your position is astoundi (1)

amichalo (132545) | more than 9 years ago | (#12481744)

*my* fanatic need?

sethadam1, you are the one confusing "advertising" with "corporate decision making", and it's okay, but just recognize the differences.

I'll give you that the more a product appeals to use as individuals, the more friendly we may be to considering other solutions from the same company in our business lives. But many professionals (note: 1 those _may_ decide against an Apple soltuion in their corporate infrastructure because our consumer electronics device doesn't support these obscure formats."

With the release of iTunes 4.8 supporting video formats on the other hand, Apple can easily defend it's position that it opens the iPod and iTunes platforms up for further multimedia support in the future.

Re:you know (4, Funny)

dtfarmer (548183) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480641)

they really ought to spend the 59 seconds necessary to have iTunes support FLAC and OGG. Seriously, you know how many people they'd make happy?

Uh, both of you?

*ducks*

Re:you know (1)

hammeredpeon (572012) | more than 9 years ago | (#12481121)

That's better than any bash.org thing I've read. Except the wizard hat one.

Re:you know (1)

babbage (61057) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480674)

I guess they're just not that worried in investing the 59 seconds it would take to placate both of the world's Ogg users.

I can't blame them, really. They seem to be doing pretty well so far by ignoring these Ogg fanatics (both of which, aside from incessant Slashdot whining, don't ever actually seem to show up in real life).

But YMObviouslyVaries... :-)

Re:you know (1)

Satai (111172) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480746)

I was under the impression that having an OGG decoder required heavy FPU usage... (Which is why the Neuros was the only one doing it for the longest time, if not still!) I seem to recall there being an int-only decoder publicized a while back, but I don't know if that ever took off or not. Does the iPod have an FPU that's up to the challenge?

Re:you know (1)

sethadam1 (530629) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480831)

If not, at least iTunes does. Any machine that can decode vorbis files without iTunes I have to assume can decode them from within iTunes.

Re:you know (1)

Satai (111172) | more than 9 years ago | (#12481395)

This is true. I have been using OGG files in iTunes for a while now, with the qtcomponents project. I believe iTunes can play anything that has a QuickTime codec... QTComponents was broken with QT7, however.

Re:you know (1)

Onan (25162) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480821)

Seriously, you know how many people they'd make happy?
Six.

Re:you know (1)

halepark (578694) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480824)

(This crowd, by the way, being the ones who provide recommendations to the people who sign the checks to buy IT equipment for corporations worldwide.)

Your company's IT dept. buys you all iPods?!? Who do I have to give my resume to?

Re:you know (4, Insightful)

revscat (35618) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480874)

Why do you care, and why should I? I try to be sympathetic to all the format wars -- Real v. WMV v. QuickTime, OpenOffice v. MS Office, etc. -- and pick the side that is best for the community, but honestly on this one I just do NOT see a reason to give a crap. MP3 and M4A do everything I want. I have yet to see reasons compelling enough to justify caring about this battle.

Re:you know (2, Insightful)

javaxman (705658) | more than 9 years ago | (#12481344)

You know, for a company that has gained A LOT of support and respect from the /. type, they really ought to spend the 59 seconds necessary to have iTunes support FLAC and OGG. Seriously, you know how many people they'd make happy?

While I agree with you in principle, in reality I find that it's pretty easy to re-encode any shorten, flac, or other format audio file into something iTunes will manage ( like, oh, I don't know, MP3 ). FLAC and SHN files are for archive use. MP3s sound fine at a high enough bitrate, and have the bonus that they work on all players.

I'm still wondering where you can get OGG files that you don't make yourself. Sorry, Seth, but something tells me that Apple has done the market research and decided that support for FLAC and OGG would confuse more people than it would make happy. Those of us who end up with FLAC or SHN files know how to convert them. If lossless is a big deal, we can use Apple's lossless...

Ultimately, the answer is that iTunes exists for the iPod, and you'll see these formats supported by iTunes just as soon as they're supported by the iPod. I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you.

Re:you know (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12482155)

Why bother? The OSS crowd that's falling over themselves to complain about .ogg support (all 5 of you vocal little bastards :) will never buy:

1) An Apple computer (too expensive, not x86, no support for grilled toast hardware you bought at a flea market last weekend, etc.)
2) An Apple peripheral (too expensive, not open source, no recording, etc.)

So in other words, there's no incentive for them to spend any money whatsoever doing this. All that'll happen is you'll just start to complaining about something else instead of ogg - you won't actually buy anything.

Not that your combined 5 iPod sales would come close to paying for the iPod team spending 15 minutes working on this in any case, much less a full development/QA/production pass.

Security fixes included as well (3, Informative)

confidential (23321) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480542)

from 2 seconds ago, posted to the OSX Security Bulletins Mailing list:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

APPLE-SA-2005-05-09 iTunes 4.8

iTunes 4.8 is now available and, among other enhancements, delivers
the following security improvement:

CVE-ID: CAN-2005-1248

Impact: A buffer overflow in iTunes could cause a denial of service
and lead to execution of arbitrary code

Description: The MPEG4 file parsing code in iTunes versions prior to
4.8 contains a buffer overflow vulnerability. Parsing a
maliciously-crafted MPEG4 file could cause iTunes to terminate or
potentially execute arbitrary code. iTunes 4.8 addresses this issue
by improving the validation checks used when loading MPEG4 files.
Credit to Mark Litchfield of NGS Software for reporting this issue.

iTunes 4.8 is freely available at
http://www.apple.com/itunes/download/ [apple.com] for Mac OS X v10.2.8 or later,
Microsoft Windows XP, and Microsoft Windows 2000

For Mac OS X:
The download file is named: "iTunes4.8.dmg"
Its SHA-1 digest is: 5a86f278f9f83192a7789ad123d5d62f67a6a316

For Windows 2000 or XP:
The download file is named: "iTunesSetup.exe"
Its SHA-1 digest is: 12582d193b27991c8f069331ab12d107c569bde2

Information will also be posted to the Apple Product Security
web site:
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=617 98 [apple.com]

This message is signed with Apple's Product Security PGP key,
and details are available at:
http://www.apple.com/support/security/pgp/ [apple.com]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.1

iQEVAwUBQn+6yYHaV5ucd/HdAQLYzQf/SDN1AnjwypPbB7Uu NO eR3PnBSNyV+Z1k
L+EwCmtafm1tx2G8m8wAX0WYJ+k79cFSxf A7A8LzVGcZwN7uYj f7JT7YDmOHiMGB
rJFKakNmP5iSfRObSKXylfUkjBMhriiQyY zBrsbtIPjHo/HhD3 UCcKcOX0/ghFJn
WPow+OatAPQWMV2ieyEDL1Yxr42SknmZrC EndrGDisPiT204R5 SV38vAF4PDafbm
0/fB24UW2TPfAa/Ga50hO3IGEusAeeCRl/ VJFI9bOmDcHLAAaj Nh9zWODZ/3j49S
nbiuGlzyf23lI2mdmSZ743DxeuojIahM9w potpWdqKMTyej4/D kbkA==
=T7Wp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re:Security fixes included as well (1)

gellenburg (61212) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480970)

Well, I guess we know Apple Security hasn't upgraded to Tiger yet because they're still running PGP 8.1.

They're playing catchup. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12480651)

There also appears to be a some sort of new video functionality as you can now import Quicktime movies. I speculate that this has something to do with the new Music Store features

I speculate it's because Windows Media Player has always been able to play videos - as can Winamp these days. They're probably frustrated that iTunes is popular but everybody hates the Quicktime player because of it's nagware behaviour. Even if they run iTunes, Windows users still turn to Windows Media Player or Media Player Classic (and various others) to view movies. Hell, even as a Mac user I prefer the OSX port of Mplayer over the horrible Quicktime player.

So rather than admit they were wrong with the nagware effort, I bet they're trying to turn iTunes into their consumer "all media" player. This allows them to push Quicktime player slightly upmarket, to continue to charge for the Quicktime Pro toolset - and continue to nag users about upgrading.

This would also explain why the new Quicktime 7 is even more desperate to get you to buy the Pro version (when they should have backed off). It now has all the menus of the Pro version in the free version - but they're greyed out.

Not to toot my own horn... (1)

Mr. Cancelled (572486) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480693)

But this is largely what I was trying to achieve when I initially started storing videos in iTunes.

This [macosxhints.com] was my solution (different nickname... Same dull, boring guy). I'm glad to see that Apple's taken my lead and is running with it! 8)=

Have they fixed basics yet? (3, Insightful)

cornjones (33009) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480701)

I use itunes to keep my ipod synced but it lacks some basic functionality that I keep expecting to see in these updates.

How about an option to rescan a directory? If I drop new music in my Music folder, I have to either import that directory manually into itunes or delete everything and reimport. Ideally, I could drop the whole folder on itunes and it would find the new items. Instead, it reimports all of them so I end up w/ duplicates in my library. WTF? Similarl issues show up if I update my tags.

Everything else I have used has a "rescan" function, why doesn't iTunes?

Re:Have they fixed basics yet? (3, Insightful)

geoffspear (692508) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480887)

If you were using iTunes as it's designed to be used (letting it organize your music instead of importing your whole library that you're organizing yourself every time you update it, so you can sync to your iPod), you wouldn't have that problem.

Have you requested the feature/reported it as a bug to Apple? If not, it's unlikely anyone else has, as it works for the way they expect users to be using it.

Re:Have they fixed basics yet? (2, Insightful)

soupdevil (587476) | more than 9 years ago | (#12481176)

I'm one more person who doesn't use iTunes, primarily for this reason.

Re:Have they fixed basics yet? (2, Informative)

CaptainStormfield (444795) | more than 9 years ago | (#12480975)

I don't get duplicates when I tell iTunes to "add folder to library" and point it at my itunes music folder. Widows XP for me; perhaps the mac version works differently?

Re:Have they fixed basics yet? (1)

georgewad (154339) | more than 9 years ago | (#12481416)

hmmmm, perhaps I'm misunderstanding, but I update my folders often, drag a parent (with lots of already catalogged tunes) to iTunes and it adds the new ones only. Check to see if you have 'move to iTunes folder' checked (I'm at work with my linux box, so can't look at the app to see what it really says)

Re:Have they fixed basics yet? (2, Informative)

Sometimes_Rational (866083) | more than 9 years ago | (#12481883)

How about an option to rescan a directory? ... Ideally, I could drop the whole folder on itunes and it would find the new items. Instead, it reimports all of them so I end up w/ duplicates in my library.


As others have pointed out, the File > Add to Library ... menu item is the rescan function that you seek. In the preferences, under the "Advanced" tab, uncheck "Keep iTunes Music Folder Organized", and when you use the Add to Library ..." menu item, the files will get added to the library list without new copies being made in the iTunes Music folder. You can keep whatever personal organizational scheme you want for your music this way. Of course, if you store your music all over your hard disk, you are likely to accidentally delete something one day and then you'll be sorry.

This basic functionality has been with iTunes for some time.

"Quiet"? No, announced by mass mail (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12480979)

APPLE-SA-2005-05-09 iTunes 4.8:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

APPLE-SA-2005-05-09 iTunes 4.8

iTunes 4.8 is now available and, among other enhancements, delivers
the following security improvement:

CVE-ID: CAN-2005-1248

Impact: A buffer overflow in iTunes could cause a denial of service
and lead to execution of arbitrary code

Description: The MPEG4 file parsing code in iTunes versions prior to
4.8 contains a buffer overflow vulnerability. Parsing a
maliciously-crafted MPEG4 file could cause iTunes to terminate or
potentially execute arbitrary code. iTunes 4.8 addresses this issue
by improving the validation checks used when loading MPEG4 files.
Credit to Mark Litchfield of NGS Software for reporting this issue.

iTunes 4.8 is freely available at
http://www.apple.com/itunes/download/ [apple.com] for Mac OS X v10.2.8 or later,
Microsoft Windows XP, and Microsoft Windows 2000

For Mac OS X:
The download file is named: "iTunes4.8.dmg"
Its SHA-1 digest is: 5a86f278f9f83192a7789ad123d5d62f67a6a316

For Windows 2000 or XP:
The download file is named: "iTunesSetup.exe"
Its SHA-1 digest is: 12582d193b27991c8f069331ab12d107c569bde2

Information will also be posted to the Apple Product Security
web site:
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=617 98 [apple.com]

This message is signed with Apple's Product Security PGP key,
and details are available at:
http://www.apple.com/support/security/pgp/ [apple.com]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.1

iQEVAwUBQn+6yYHaV5ucd/HdAQLYzQf/SDN1AnjwypPbB7Uu NO eR3PnBSNyV+Z1k
L+EwCmtafm1tx2G8m8wAX0WYJ+k79cFSxf A7A8LzVGcZwN7uYj f7JT7YDmOHiMGB
rJFKakNmP5iSfRObSKXylfUkjBMhriiQyY zBrsbtIPjHo/HhD3 UCcKcOX0/ghFJn
WPow+OatAPQWMV2ieyEDL1Yxr42SknmZrC EndrGDisPiT204R5 SV38vAF4PDafbm
0/fB24UW2TPfAa/Ga50hO3IGEusAeeCRl/ VJFI9bOmDcHLAAaj Nh9zWODZ/3j49S
nbiuGlzyf23lI2mdmSZ743DxeuojIahM9w potpWdqKMTyej4/D kbkA==
=T7Wp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Closer, closer ... (3, Insightful)

kitzilla (266382) | more than 9 years ago | (#12481320)

Closer, closer Apple edges to distributing video entertainment (DVD-quality movies, music videos, streaming video pay-per-view) via iTunes.

Won't be long now. This follows the introduction of the new H.264 video codec in Quicktime 7. Apple has pretty much all the pieces in place to begin content sales to early adopters.

You didn't think those 30" cinema monitors were just for pr0n, did you? ;-)

Re:Closer, closer ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12481535)

You didn't think those 30" cinema monitors were just for pr0n, did you? ;-)

To a true geek, those monitors are pr0n. I'm gettin' a woody just thinking about them.

iTunes vs QT Pro (4, Interesting)

Bulln-Bulln (659072) | more than 9 years ago | (#12481356)

Funny, you need to buy QT Pro in order to play videos full screen, but OTOH Apple releases iTunes 4.8 with *fullscreen* video support for free.
The same is true (since a long time) for audio encoding: Need QT Pro for the "Export" feature in QT, but the "Import" feature in iTunes is free.

I like Apple, but IMHO the guy, who's responsible for the QT Player frontend (not the QT backend, which is cool), is quite stupid.

What's next? iTunes 5.0 with video encoding support?

AppleScript (2, Informative)

pudge (3605) | more than 9 years ago | (#12481685)

I want to be able to select a file (or files) in iTunes and open it in QuickTime Player or VLC. So, I wrote this, and save it in ~/Library/iTunes/Scripts/. Select one or more files and select the script in your iTunes scripts menu.
tell application "iTunes"
set myfiles to location of selection
tell application "QuickTime Player"
activate
open myfiles
end tell
end tell
Also save a separate version with "VLC" instead of "QuickTime Player". Also works with any media file in iTunes. including MP3s etc.

Psychologically interesting (4, Funny)

biglig2 (89374) | more than 9 years ago | (#12481754)

Let me tell you a story.

Once upon a time I was upgrading iTunes from 4.5 to 4.6. While the upgrade was running, there was a knock at the door. I went to open the door, and who was there, but Steve Jobs! Steve said "Mr. BigLig? Mr Rufus T. BigLig?" "That's me Steve", I replied. And then he kicked me in the nuts.

Well, not exactly. But I did have an "iTunes Music Library file unknown error (-50)" every time I used iTunes from then on. Tried everything - see here [ipodlounge.com] for details. It hit about 0.01% of users, and the fix was basically "suffer in agony until 4.7".

And now 4.8 is out, and like a fool, I'm downloading it as I type.

And that, Best Beloved, is how Steve got his Reality Distortion Field.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?