PDA

View Full Version : Itunes



shashanksingh
April 5th, 2012, 08:12 AM
I wonder why Apple being a company with so much resources and knowing there are so many users of their products, can't come up with iTunes for linux? Why? It feels like a big thing missing in ubuntu

zombifier25
April 5th, 2012, 08:13 AM
The same reason why Microsoft won't port Office to Linux?

hughr2005
April 5th, 2012, 08:18 AM
It's because they can't make enough money from it to justify porting it. Not that it would be that hard anyway, but I guess they just don't want to support an OS that is so opposite to the values their OS seems to subscribe to.

shashanksingh
April 5th, 2012, 08:19 AM
Is office available for OS X? If no, then why is iTunes available for windows but not Linux? What's the real problem for Apple if we use Linux?

Elfy
April 5th, 2012, 08:22 AM
Thread moved to Recurring Discussions.

cbennett926
April 5th, 2012, 08:22 AM
Is office available for OS X? If no, then why is iTunes available for windows but not Linux? What's the real problem for Apple if we use Linux?

They do have Microsoft Office for Apple, although not the entire suite (at least to my knowledge) they only have Word, Powerpoint, and Excel

zombifier25
April 5th, 2012, 08:27 AM
No one would buy a Mac anymore?
IMHO the reasons are:
1, Apple and Microsoft are for-profit companies, and porting their software to their competitor's OS is not really beneficial. This is (I think) why Windows won't recognize Linux partitions (ext).
2. Ok, but why Microsoft ported Office to Mac? Because there are loads of Mac users (about 25% of the market share) that are unlikely to switch to Windows anyway, so doing so would benefit them in the long term (and even so, only Word, Excel and Powerpoint are ported. Access is left out maybe because of the reason above :) ). Linux... not so much. Desktop Linux only takes up 1-3% of the market share.
3. They don't think they need to, since Wine can help runs iTunes (and recently, Microsoft Office) pretty well. Not perfect, but well enough for them.

dpny
April 5th, 2012, 04:06 PM
They do have Microsoft Office for Apple, although not the entire suite (at least to my knowledge) they only have Word, Powerpoint, and Excel

Nope: the whole thing is available for OS X. Has been for years.

Why won't Apple port iTunes to Linux? For the same reason a lot of other companies won't: the Linux user base is so small they'll never make a profit.

yetiman64
April 5th, 2012, 04:28 PM
Is office available for OS X? If no, then why is iTunes available for windows but not Linux? What's the real problem for Apple if we use Linux?

Yes and has been noted for years, IIRC, just before it was made available MS acquired a stake in Apple itself, not sure of the percentage but it was somewhere around 20 %.

I don't believe so much that it is the size of Linux's user base, but something more philosophical, Linux is not a company, is not primarily in business for company and shareholder's financial gain, and ultimately is an open product ie the product cannot be protected under law with regard to profits for the owning company. "Greed is good" doesn't work where Linux is concerned.

Concerning user numbers, with Ubuntu alone and its ~19 million users, it would be profitable imo. Even if Canonical's wish to gain a user base around 200 million is achieved, I believe the situation will remain largely the same for the reasons mentioned above.

dpny
April 5th, 2012, 04:37 PM
Concerning user numbers, with Ubuntu alone and its ~19 million users, it would be profitable imo. Even if Canonical's wish to gain a user base around 200 million is achieved, I believe the situation will remain largely the same for the reasons mentioned above.

Just to put this into perspective, Apple is selling around 19 million iPhones every three months. So, while 19 million might sound like a large installed user base, it is, in fact, a tiny market as far as any large computer company is concerned.

yetiman64
April 5th, 2012, 04:44 PM
Just to put this into perspective, Apple is selling around 19 million iPhones every three months. So, while 19 million might sound like a large installed user base, it is, in fact, a tiny market as far as any large computer company is concerned.
Yes I understand that and agree the Ubuntu market is tiny. But, how much would it cost Apple to develop a version for Ubuntu and keep it updated? Not as much as the potential return imo.

However, any profit (small as it would be) would pale in comparison to what you are talking about, but my belief still stands, the core reason it is not done it not to do with profits but what I previously mentioned. The only way to know for sure is if a test release was done by Apple and I really can't see it happening. Cheers.

edit:
Even if Canonical's wish to gain a user base around 200 million is achieved, I believe the situation will remain largely the same

dpny
April 5th, 2012, 05:22 PM
Yes I understand that and agree the Ubuntu market is tiny. But, how much would it cost Apple to develop a version for Ubuntu and keep it updated? Not as much as the potential return imo.

What numbers is your assumption based on? Considering that Apple makes almost no money on iTunes/the iTunes Music Store--profits from the store just about covering hosting and bandwidth costs. Spending the extra money to make a Linux/Ubuntu version would almost certainly mean spending money Apple will never recoup.

Apple leverages software to sell hardware. Anything which doesn't do that doesn't make sense for them.

yetiman64
April 5th, 2012, 06:06 PM
<snip> will pm dpny

dpny
April 5th, 2012, 06:42 PM
While a distribution remains open sourced I can't see any proprietary software of the scale of MSOffice, iTunes etc being made for it, a basic philosophical difference unrelated to user numbers.

License has nothing to do with it. If desktop Linux had decent market share, Apple and others would develop software for it. As desktop Linux is a niche OS, there's just no money in it. It has nothing to do with any sort of freedom.


The low user base argument is just as flawed in relation to viruses/worms etc when the fact up to ~70% of internet servers are linux/unix based and are a prime target for malware.

Except the kinds of attacks which target desktop OSes are very different from those which target servers. It's much easier to lock a server down than a desktop, because the main vector for attack--the thing between the keyboard and chair--doesn't exist in the server environment.

shashanksingh
April 6th, 2012, 05:14 AM
IMHO, I assume there are more than 12 million Ubuntu users. And iTunes is to supplement the Hardware that Apple sell. People using Ubuntu could access the store, buy applications, music, etc. How much different can it be for apple than someone using iTunes on Windows?

And who's telling Apple to keep it opensource? The application should be enough. Is it really that difficult for apple? Both philosophically and practically??

zombifier25
April 6th, 2012, 06:46 AM
Apple doesn't have the time to invest in an OS that has a really small amount of users. They have their cash cows MacOS and iDevices to worry about.
It's not difficult. However, Apple couldn't care less about an OS that only had 1% marketshare.
(this coming from a diehard Linux fans)
That's how things work. If Apple had to choose between 10 hours developing iTunes for Linux, and 5 minutes improving iOS, they would choose the latter.

shashanksingh
April 6th, 2012, 08:53 PM
Apple doesn't have the time to invest in an OS that has a really small amount of users. They have their cash cows MacOS and iDevices to worry about.
It's not difficult. However, Apple couldn't care less about an OS that only had 1% marketshare.
(this coming from a diehard Linux fans)
That's how things work. If Apple had to choose between 10 hours developing iTunes for Linux, and 5 minutes improving iOS, they would choose the latter.

Hmm. Convinced. Our only hope than is in increasing the tally. 1% is a little difficult to digest honestly.

LZRD
April 7th, 2012, 07:21 AM
So is it safe to assume there is no possible way to install itunes on linux...

philinux
April 7th, 2012, 03:11 PM
So is it safe to assume there is no possible way to install itunes on linux...

From what I read version 7 works via installing with playonlinux.

I don't need it or want it so I've not tried the above.

MisterGaribaldi
April 7th, 2012, 10:05 PM
Nope: the whole thing is available for OS X. Has been for years.

Nope, it's not all available for Mac OS X. Word, Excel, Powerpoint, and a mostly-Outlook are available. They've never bothered to release any of their other apps (unless you want to count Silverlight) for Mac OS X.

Technically, that's not true. They used to release versions of Internet Explorer for both Classic Mac OS and Mac OS X, but they stopped that a VERY long time ago.

dpny
April 7th, 2012, 11:13 PM
Nope, it's not all available for Mac OS X. Word, Excel, Powerpoint, and a mostly-Outlook are available. They've never bothered to release any of their other apps (unless you want to count Silverlight) for Mac OS X.

Technically, that's not true. They used to release versions of Internet Explorer for both Classic Mac OS and Mac OS X, but they stopped that a VERY long time ago.

I don't think of IE as part of Office. It's more like part of the OS.

Bandit
April 8th, 2012, 01:31 AM
It's because they can't make enough money from it to justify porting it. .....
Bingo..