February 2, 2007 10:46 AM PST

Apple to Windows iTunes users: Don't install Vista yet

Related Stories

Install Vista, get free Wi-Fi

February 1, 2007

Vista steals the show

January 30, 2007

A frat party for Vista's debut

January 30, 2007

Why Apple can't send Jobs packing

January 26, 2007
Apple has warned Windows users running its iTunes software that they should wait for its next update before upgrading their PCs to Microsoft's new Windows Vista operating system.

The Cupertino, Calif.-based company cited a variety of compatibility issues that may cause friction between the media player software, its accompanying iPod player, and Vista. Among these problems is an inability to play music or video purchased from the iTunes Store, problems synchronizing address book contact and calendar functions, and slowed runtime. Additionally, there is a chance that plugging an iPod into a computer running Vista may corrupt the device.

Windows Vista, Microsoft's first new operating system in five years, was launched last week to consumers and is now standard on most new PCs from computer manufacturers. The enterprise version of Vista has been used by businesses since November.

The problems may not affect all Windows users, according to Apple, but they are serious enough that the company does not recommend that PC owners install Vista just yet. Within the next few weeks, Apple plans to release a new version of its iTunes software that was designed primarily to address the Vista compatibility issues; when the release is available, the synchronization issues should disappear. For the time being, a special support page is available.

According to a company statement provided by Apple spokesman Derick Mains, "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." Apple declined further comment.

See more CNET content tagged:
Apple Computer, Apple iTunes, Microsoft Windows Vista, Apple iPod, Microsoft Windows

127 comments

Join the conversation!
Add your comment
Sleazy...
.. Apple is asking us not to upgrade to Vista while playing one of those stupid "I am a Mac" commercial on the upper right hand corner. Typical Apple!!!
If this was MS talking about the next Mac release we would have seen Mac fanboys spitting venom.
Posted by FutureGuy (742 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Actually...
Apple can't be at fault on this one, Microsoft never released
(AGAIN) all of the code to make most main stream applications
work without issues...

With MS continuously tweaking Vista till the last minute, and
them also stating that they are already working on SP1 for Vista,
it isn't amazing that some major applications don't work...

This is typical MS incompatibility issues, if you want to blame
anyone for MS Vista and iTunes not working together all nice
and happy, you don't have to look much further than Redmond...
Posted by Matthew R. (37 comments )
Link Flag
relax
Apple does not get to pick what advertisement shows in the ad box so it's purely coinsidence that you got a mac ad on a mac article.

Apple isn't saying anything different than every other vendor who writes for the Windows platform; it's new, we haven't fully updated and tested our software on it so don't rush out to get it expecting our software to work.

It does suck that Apple is both a Windows software developer and Microsoft direct competitor since they couldn't really ask the Windows iTunes owners to wait without it looking bad.

Still, I don't think it's a sleazy tactic to slow sales of Vista (Vista is doing that all on it's own). It's simply a Windows software devloper saying "our current version doesn't work with the new windows, we're working on it but please give us bit to get it out too you."

It has nothing to do with the Microsurf vs Cult of Mac BS flamewars.
Posted by jabbotts (492 comments )
Link Flag
Figures
Why am i not surprised?

And now I'll leave you...the good people of CNet to determine who i am insulting here.
Posted by mf193 (12 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Midgets?
nt
Posted by Charleston Charge (362 comments )
Link Flag
Plenty of time with only beta drivers from Creative
Well, since creative only has semi-functional beta drivers for Vista, with no full release planned until March, it would appear that iTunes would be the least of Vista upgraders worries.
Posted by TheGraveDigger (2 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Poor iTunes users
Apple had no time to prepare for the Vista release. Shame on Microsoft for not letting Apple have access to any Vista betas or release candidates. I guess Apple is hedging its bet that Vista will only be deployed on 89% of PCs instead of 90%. That 1% difference must account for all the iTunes users out there.

Get with the program Apple and everyone else who is now claiming that their software will not run on Vista. You had over a year to get your software ready!!!
Posted by NewsReader_ (280 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Support will come...
While I'm not a Mac devotee and it's been a very long time since I used one your comment is flawed.

Vista will not be deployed 89% or 90% the day it is released. In fact it will take quite some time for it to reach that.

While Apple hasn't released an update they eventually will and at this point in time Vista is a very small percentage. Most old computers are not even Vista compatible since it requires a lot more resources then XP. I plan on not upgrading for a long time. I currently use XP and am happy with it. I ordered a laptop and it will come with XP. No need for Vista using all my computer resources. I buy an OS so I can run applications that I need.
Posted by dice871 (2 comments )
Link Flag
Behave.....
89%? 90%? What planet are you living on? Do you really think
that every pc user is going to rush out and upgrade to vista
immediately? The majority of ordinary pc users will carry on
using XP until they change their hardware and buy something
that has vista preinstalled on it.

It's not like this is the first time this has happened - I remember
upgrading to XP SP2 causing incompatibility issues. Just because
it's an Apple product doesn't mean that it must be deliberate.
You could equally look at it as a deliberate ploy by microsoft to
try and encourage people away from ipods and towards the
zune....
Posted by k103 (3 comments )
Link Flag
Didn't the Zune have a problem too?
Not really a big deal when you put it in the context that Microsoft's
own Zune had problems for a couple of weeks.

CNET Story
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://news.cbsi.com/Microsoft+makes+Zune+Vista-friendly/" target="_newWindow">http://news.cbsi.com/Microsoft+makes+Zune+Vista-friendly/</a>
2100-1041_3-6145116.html
Posted by ca5ter (176 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Yes, MS does have a habit of strategically breaking competing apps
I always found it funny that MS service packs routinely caused performance problems for Netscape Navigator.
Posted by jerrysproinger (12 comments )
Link Flag
For Business-Users, Yes. Home-Users, No.
Heads Up: Your link doesn't work when I try to visit it.

And, yes, Zune had this problem when Vista was released to businesses in November. But not when Vista went on sale for Home users.

Most businesses don't want portable media players connected to their hardware, so it was no big deal for them. No businesses complained.

But, not being able to connect your iPod to your HOME computer because Apple (or anyone else) hasn't upgraded their software yet just is NOT cool. Especially when you consider that they were so many chances to do so.
Posted by toosday (343 comments )
Link Flag
Apple Is Dragging Their eet
Apple has known about this for at least a couple months. I personally posted a topic in the Apple message boards back when the tech beta members got a copy of the release version of Vista. iTunes has problems with Vista. A work around is to launch itunes as the "administrator". Which Vista gives you the option to do.

Apple is sitting back having a chuckle at Microsoft, trying to ding early sales of Vista.

Not that Microsoft is above doing anything different.
Posted by jsdoyle (15 comments )
Reply Link Flag
True but...
They were fixed before the consumer release I believe.

If Apple really cared about its customers, it would not force them to wait to buy Vista or a PC with Vista in order to use thier product. This is either a pathetic ploy to delay Vista adoption or pure procrastination on thier part.
Posted by NewsReader_ (280 comments )
Reply Link Flag
True but...
They were fixed before the consumer release I believe.

If Apple really cared about its customers, it would not force them to wait to buy Vista or a PC with Vista in order to use thier product. This is either a pathetic ploy to delay Vista adoption or pure procrastination on thier part.
Posted by NewsReader_ (280 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Apple Is Dragging Their Feet
Apple has known about this for at least a couple months. I personally posted a topic in the Apple message boards back when the tech beta members got a copy of the release version of Vista. iTunes has problems with Vista. A work around is to launch itunes as the "administrator". Which Vista gives you the option to do.

Apple is sitting back having a chuckle at Microsoft, trying to ding early sales of Vista.

Not that Microsoft is above doing anything different.
Posted by jsdoyle (15 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Dragging their feet?
Sorry no, Apple is simply a 3rd party developer when it comes to
iTunes on windows.

ALL third party developers get peeved when OS updates break
their apps. They have a right to be. They had a piece of software
that used to work fine and now they have to do a bunch of extra
work.

Apple, on the other hand, at least provided Rosetta so that MS
Office would work on the new intel macs. Of course sometimes
they do break things with OS and hardware updates, and then its
their 3rd party devs that are complaining..
Posted by tedk7 (66 comments )
Link Flag
How many betas and CTP versions??
As much as Steve Jobs points out that Vista took 'years' to build, you would figure that Apple has had enough time to get iTunes working.
Posted by frankwick (413 comments )
Reply Link Flag
THANK YOU
This is exactly the point. Dont expect anyone to see your logic though. Personally, I try to call BS anywhere I see it. Ive noticed though, that if its Apple, anything they do is rationalized as being fantastic by the press and peanut gallery and FIERCELY defended. Its like a religion!
Posted by mlambert890 (44 comments )
Link Flag
Not unusual for MS updates
My experience has been that software updates from Microsoft --
and sometimes even security upgrades -- can break
applications.

My organization's web site content manager was developed
based on MS's .NET platform, and required IE to run. But IE 7
broke it. Had to undergo a very non-intuitive "backgrade" to do
my job.

I don't think Apple's foot-dragging on this one -- an update
within a week doesn't seem that bad to me.

I do agree that the "don't update to Vista" line is an unnecessary
thumb in the eye. But it also wouldn't surprise me to learn that
the incompatibility was, itself, an intentional thumb in the eye of
Apple.
Posted by calpundit (69 comments )
Reply Link Flag
THE INCOMPATIBILITY DOESN'T EXIST
iTunes works on Vista.
Posted by eddddd89 (49 comments )
Link Flag
Go to the source people...
APPLE, INC.

iTunes for Vista repair tool 1.0

<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.apple.com/support/downloads/itunesrepairtoolforvista10.html" target="_newWindow">http://www.apple.com/support/downloads/itunesrepairtoolforvista10.html</a>

Obviously Microsoft does not want anyone to use iTunes or iPods anymore, so let's design Vista to not allow for this "dissention among the ranks" by the WinPC people using iPods.

Banned from Redmond One, now banned from desktop PC at home...

No, were not a monopoly.
Posted by Llib Setag (951 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Funny, iTunes is working OK for me...
Just had some very high processor spikes every now and then, but oter than that its chugging along just fine...
Posted by Yukimi Konomi (48 comments )
Reply Link Flag
It breaks paid music
I think you use iTunes as media player/catalogue as many of us.
The bug is about the paid music and also you can understand the
frustration of users when their paid stuff doesn't play.
Posted by Ilgaz (573 comments )
Link Flag
Here we go again
In a utopian universe; all things designed by Steve would interface with all things designed by Bill, and they could each spend more time hugging each other and plucking flowers.
That Apple technology and Microsoft Technology seem to not mesh is hardly surprising nor is it a rare or remotely unique situation. 90 percent or more of Ford parts won?t work in my Chevy?. Hell, 90 percent of Chevy parts won?t work in my particular Chevy?.. Why do we, as consumers, assume that we can yank the foundation out from under our house, shove in a bigger one without breaking a few glasses or cracking some mortar?
First, let?s quit thinking of operating systems as software? an operating system is a utility basement, wires, plumbing, valves, much unsightly stuff that enables us to do things upstairs cleanly and smoothly , say tweak the knob on the pretty little thermostat, rather than shovel coal to warm up our house? That way, thinking of OS?s as infrastructure, utilities, rather than as an application, we would not be so quick to change them every time a shiny stainless steel model comes out? Only change the utilities/furnace/septic/AC when you NEED to, or when it financially makes more sense than upkeep on the old model?. What drives the consumer market for a new OS, since when has a new OS version actually added significant speed or versatility?
Posted by densbtly (15 comments )
Reply Link Flag
densbtly analogy...
I concour with densbtly analogy about ford and chevy.
If you have MS OS, why are you purchasing an ipod, and running
iTunes? Why not run what will work great on your machine and
OS?
Zune, creative &#38; Rapsody or what ever other music service?
According to some of the post I have read, some of these people
are making just silly statements for no other reason than to
make them. If you hate apple so much.., why do you own a ipod
or itunes? If you don't own a ipod or itunes..., why do you care?
As for me..., yeah I could be considered a Apple zealot, but that
is because I have a vested interest in Apple by owning stock.
However, every good investor always covers the table..., and I
own MS stock as well. But like any religious fanatics, I know they
will do what it takes to support their cause, which includes
paying $500 for a cell phone. Me..? No way..., I'd love one, but I
will stick with my cheap cell phone. However I'd be happy If a lot
of people bought the $500 cell phone to raise my stock.
But I digress..., If you are using a MS OS..., use a zune or
creative device with one of the multiple music services, and you
will more than likely have less issues with your system..., not
unless you just have to be hip and accepted to have an ipod and
itunes and hope that it works with the MS OS. Until then..., Just
wait a couple of weeks on the update on iTunes.
Posted by smithjones (103 comments )
Link Flag
Bravo!
Well Said.

Pick what you like and use it.

I do.
Posted by dansterpower (2511 comments )
Link Flag
Enough already!
If you have zero experience developing applications then please don't post comments like 'its all Microsoft's fault'.

If a 3rd party vendor is unable to get their applications working with vista in a timely manner, that is NOT microsoft's fault.

As MANY have said already, Microsoft releases beta's for all vendors to use to be able to get their software up and running.

And don't give me this 'oh microsoft changed Vista at the last minute to break 3rd party applications'. Thats not the way it works.

Microsoft will release an API with a defined and STATIC interface - what that means is your application see's the OS as a black box with instructions on how to use the features of that black box. You don't really care how the black box will execute its functions to provide those features to you. Those instructions may change in the early betas, but once you get to Release Candidates they will not.

As for hardware drivers? Um since when is Microsoft responsible for creating those? Microsoft takes it upon them seleves to include SOME hardware drivers, but that is not their responsibility.

So this is a case of Apple either screwing up or just taking their sweet time on releasing the appropriate upgrades for their software to work on Vista.

And by the way, did my mention how BAD apple is at porting their software to run on windows - ask me why I threw away my iPOD and bought a zune?

And yes I am a devloper who works on Microsoft products.
Posted by SilverStreak1 (4 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Then you know...
What you are saying is all summed up in your last sentence...
you are biased.

Microsoft will release an API prior or as the RTM version of the
OS is to come out, but there is no guarantee that the API in
question will still 100% work when all the security patches that
are released after the RTM version of the OS has been burned to
DVD and published for release...

The same thing has happened with Apple, and OS X and quite a
few games out there. When they changed from 10.3 to 10.4 and
even some upgrades from 10.4.2 to 10.4.3 or anywhere in
between an API that worked with 10.4.2 won't work with 10.4.3
because of the way a security update has disabled a function, or
whatnot.

So don't BS people here and say that MS holds no responsibility
for what has happened... MS holds a majority of all
responsibility, especially when it comes to software development
of 3rd party applications, for the lack of updated, or APIs in
general to the developers at all, can cause programs not to work
when a new revision of an application, or part of an operating
system comes out, and MS doesn't release the API till after the
fact.

And I may not be a programmer any more, but I do know about
programs, not to mention that I am a director of software
development, and a CEO of a game software company.... I hear
more complaints about MS and their lack of support for
developers for Vista APIs have come out since the RTM version
of Vista was authorized.
Posted by Matthew R. (37 comments )
Link Flag
Dumped your iPod for a Zune? Really?
You must be one of the two people that bought a Zune.

Market share, market share.

It's a little different when the roles are reversed, isn't it.
Posted by technewsjunkie (1265 comments )
Link Flag
Security update?
The API can stay the same, but the code under the API can change. My guess is that Microsoft changed some code that did work for any user, and now only runs if you are a super user (Access to crypto keys).

It would be cool if Vista would pop up a dialog box asking users for the user name and password to run an application as /su instead of just crashing.
Posted by ralfthedog (1589 comments )
Link Flag
A better suggestion...
...might be to unplug your iPod from your computer until Apple decides to provide you with updated iPod device drivers and application software. In fact, Apple should have been "warning" Vista buyers not to use the iPod with Vista until Apple can manage to update the iPod software. Apple's had--what, months?--to get its Vista software house in order. Why "warn" people not to install Vista when the problem is with the Apple software and not with Vista at all? Does Apple really think people need their iPods more than their computers? Uh, probably. This is just so predictable...Makes me thankful I don't have to worry about Apple's support for the iPod because I don't own one and probably never will...;)
Posted by Walt Connery (89 comments )
Reply Link Flag
If I was to bet on it, MS did this intentionally.
MS has been doing this for many, many years. Intentional incompatibilities with non-Microsoft products. Why should we expect any intentional incompatibility policies to change in Redmond now?
Posted by Microsoft_Facts (109 comments )
Reply Link Flag
MS Can't Have
They can't have made intentional interoperability issues because there aren't any. iTunes works fine on Vista.
Posted by eddddd89 (49 comments )
Link Flag
If I was to bet on it, Apple did this intentionally.
How if we look from other side, then there is LEOPARD.
Posted by Gunady (191 comments )
Link Flag
That proves it, Ap[ple programmers don't know how to code
What a bunch of retarded programmers at Apple. It proves onces again how inferior the Apple platform is.
Posted by iZune (58 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Proves Your Ignorance
To state that the "Apple Platform is Inferior," simply proves your
ignorance and nothing else.

Thanks iZune for revealing your true nature.

Now got back to your rock . . .
Posted by dansterpower (2511 comments )
Link Flag
How long has Apple known about Vista???
Did Steve Jobs and his developers just wake up today and realize that Vista had shippped? The world at large has known about Vista's ship date for at least 8 months now. So NOW Apple tells us to wait before upgrading??? People who blame Microsoft for this are simply uninformed.
Posted by PEdlund (8 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Wait...
Instead of blaming Apple, how about looking at the (literally) hundreds of companies who haven't updated things for Vista. Sony just released beta drivers for some of their "Vista ready" machines and there are numerous software packages out there that simply will not work. This happens every time a new OS comes out - whether their were public betas or not. And, to be fair, Apple's site point-blankly states "Windows 2000 Service Pack 4 or later or Windows XP" for the iTunes download.

Sounds like the sheeple out there who had to be on the bleeding-edge are the ones to blame, not Apple or MS.
Posted by Geoffrey Sperl (18 comments )
Link Flag
Slow Apple
Not only have they known about Vista and are slow upgrading Apple period is slow doing anything. I think they are just coasting along or their people are just sleeping while the world chugs along
Posted by darrenretro (2 comments )
Link Flag
Purposely planned by Apple...
to slow the amount of upgrades to Vista. Apple...Protecting their futile market share.... :( Pretty sad.
Posted by whizkid454 (157 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Funny...
Microsoft owns 90% of the market, Apple owns less than 10%, who
is strong-arming who here?

I'm sorry, I thought the definition of a monopoly was over 65% of
the market, not under 10%... odd... oh, and BTW, the way things are
going, Market pros are starting to say that Apple's market share
may go up by over 10 to 15% more market share after Vista and
10.5 are compared next to each other...
Posted by Matthew R. (37 comments )
Link Flag
Slowed the amount of upgrades?
Purposely planned by Apple? Thats absurd, you only need to
look in their own backyard as Zune isn't even compatible with
Vista either (or if it is now, it wasn't from the beginning.) Truth
is upgrades do take time and Apple has many iPod customers
expecting a quality upgrade.

And Apple doesn't want to sabotage Vista, thats just an insecure
assumption built on MS Fanboyism. But Microsoft will sabotage
Vista on its own, just wait and see.

Also Markeshare isn't an effective marker for success. BMW &#38;
Porsche have a small marketshare and yet they are considered
high performance automobiles as compared to just a regular
everyday Ford (which you can alternately view as the PC Market.)
Posted by ServedUp (413 comments )
Link Flag
OS/2 Warp
Apple has been slowing the "upgrades" to OS/2 for a long time to protect there futile market share.

What I'm getting as is.. they don't have to support a platform. Especially one with as few users as Vista.
Posted by Solaris_User (267 comments )
Link Flag
The more people running Vista, the better OS X looks.
Apple wants everyone to upgrade.
Posted by ralfthedog (1589 comments )
Link Flag
This would be true if it was incompatible
This is just a stunt by Apple. Itunes works fine on Vista. Therefore, MS cannot have made it incompatible.
Posted by eddddd89 (49 comments )
Reply Link Flag
It is not compatible if....
It is not compatible if you are running DRMed music while logged in as a normal user (bad idea running any operating system as a super user) on a fully patched system.
Posted by ralfthedog (1589 comments )
Link Flag
DR-DOS, remember?
It was documented in court that Windows 3.1 update has broken
DR-DOS compatibility.

It is a common thing MS does, it is not "zealot" or "fanboy" thing,
they do it even for Windows-only software/companies.
Posted by Ilgaz (573 comments )
Reply Link Flag
You are kidding, right?
Seriously, Apple writes a crap software app and then blames MS for it not working when the new version of windows comes out? Thats crazy and they would (and do) say the same thing about 3rd party applications for their OS.

Note to the Apple's, Intuit's, and Electronic Art's of the world, IF YOUR PROGRAM REQUIRES ADMIN RIGHTS TO RUN IN WINDOWS, IT IS CRAP! You should compensate every user's computer your software is installed on which have been infected with the various worms, trojans, viruses to run your crummy programs. Fire some developers, maybe the ones you keep will wise up and write some good code which complies with the MS API. If not, write your apps for the legacy OS's like OSX and Linux
Posted by mikezav (5 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Just because the software does not require SU rights today...
Just because the software does not require SU rights today, there is no guarantee that Microsoft won't change things so they require SU access tomorrow.

I would not even hold that against them. Any new OS has security problems. When you find that a function or class can give you root access, you need to isolate it from non privileged users.
Posted by ralfthedog (1589 comments )
Link Flag
You are kidding, right?
Seriously, Apple writes a crap software app and then blames MS for it not working when the new version of windows comes out? Thats crazy and they would (and do) say the same thing about 3rd party applications for their OS.

Note to the Apple's, Intuit's, and Electronic Art's of the world, IF YOUR PROGRAM REQUIRES ADMIN RIGHTS TO RUN IN WINDOWS, IT IS CRAP! You should compensate every user's computer your software is installed on which have been infected with the various worms, trojans, viruses to run your crummy programs. Fire some developers, maybe the ones you keep will wise up and write some good code which complies with the MS API. If not, write your apps for the legacy OS's like OSX and Linux
Posted by mikezav (5 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Wrong-
Apple can't be at fault on this one, Microsoft never released
(AGAIN) all of the code to make most main stream applications
work without issues...

They don't have to release any code, just the API kits which explain how to write applications which won't crash and which will work in future versions of Windows. Would it make sense to release an OS which purposely breaks 3rd party apps? Maybe that is how Apple does it, oh wait, do they even allow 3rd party anything?

it isn't amazing that some major applications don't work...

Itunes is garbage and requires unnecessary access to parts of Windows to run. Hire some better developers, Apple!

This is typical MS incompatibility issues, if you want to blame
anyone for MS Vista and iTunes not working together all nice
and happy, you don't have to look much further than Redmond...

Why, did Apple move there?
Posted by mikezav (5 comments )
Reply Link Flag
 

Join the conversation

Add your comment

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Click here to review our Terms of Use.

What's Hot

Discussions

Shared

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.