Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Wild speculation. iLife for Windows.
- Thread starter Coca-Cola
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Never. iLife is meant to draw users to the Macintosh hardware platform, where Apple makes its money. iLife for Windows would be totally foolish on Apple's part.
Never, ever, ever. Part of the selling point of the Mac is it's simplicty. If you made photo, video, and audio editing as easy as it is on the Mac for the PC, that'd be the end of it.
Well, that would be a fruitless endeavor even if you DID try. C'mon, Apple's great, but it can't work miracles. After all, any software written for Windows still has to operate within the confines of that horrific environment. Clearly, the Windows versions would be subpar.
Well yes, but have you used iTunes for Windows? Steve's not lying when he says "it's exactly the same as the Mac version."
Hmmmmmm......
Apple wouldn't do this. In fact I'm suprised they even ported iTunes, iTunes is a strong selling point for macs.
OS X and high quality like the iLife suite are what makes macs what they are. Porting to windows would do nothing but hurt apple's sales.
scem0
Apple wouldn't do this. In fact I'm suprised they even ported iTunes, iTunes is a strong selling point for macs.
OS X and high quality like the iLife suite are what makes macs what they are. Porting to windows would do nothing but hurt apple's sales.
scem0
Re: Wild speculation. iLife for Windows.
ha
same as office
how much is that 200$$
to 50$$
that looks bad to windows
and good for mac as i c
any one hear of smart sync by m$
let me guss where that got that form
ha
same as office
how much is that 200$$
to 50$$
that looks bad to windows
and good for mac as i c
any one hear of smart sync by m$
let me guss where that got that form
Well, I wasn't surprised with the port of iTunes, because iTunes is really critical to the whole iPod package and to the endeavor to ensure Apple's lead in the digital music a la carte market. That set of products is quickly becoming extremely mainstream and Apple was smart to port iTunes. In a sense, porting iTunes to Windows is marketing the iPod.
However, porting iLife to Windows doesn't really market any particular Apple hardware. Instead, iLife on Macs markets Apple computers, which is really what it's all about.
That's true. When I show my PC friends my iBook, the first thing I show them is my iLife apps. Some of there responses are "why can't that be PC-compatable?" My suggestion: get a mac
Originally posted by Shifty
That's true. When I show my PC friends my iBook, the first thing I show them is my iLife apps. Some of there responses are "why can't that be PC-compatable?" My suggestion: get a mac
Does it work for you? 'Cause is never does for me. One example: A friend of mine bought a digital still and a DV camera for the express purpose of using them to send pics/video of his newborn to family around the country. He NEVER got the video editing to work (he could only make full screen/full motion and couldn't export except back to the camera) and doesn't have a good image editing app.
I showed him the iApps and got a similar response. Suggested he buy a Mac, he just got annoyed, "maybe next time". Next time, new Dell. When I asked him why not a Mac his response was that his flight simulator game wouldn't work on it. Weak. I've never even seen him play it and it has yet to be installed on his new computer.
He has given up on doing any photo or video editing, although he does use the digital camera. It's a shame...
He would love it if Apple came out with iLife for Windows. Truly. I hope they never do.
I agree. To me, it'd be kind of like Apple giving in. "Ok they're not going to buy our computers, so let's make software for them." The whole reason to go with Apple is because you get the whole package--the best hardware, and the best software. It'd be doing PC users a disservice. You want the best software? Switch teams
In all honesty, people like that are probably better off with Windows. There is a good reason why you don't see any ignorant Mac users: they're all using Windows.
I think you should offer to buy the DV camera. Then go out and make some great movies using iMovie. Then you can show your friend what great fun you had with his camera and a Mac!
I think that iLife for Windows is the right thing. How else are PC people going to be exposed to the software on a Mac? By a chance demo from a dwindling number of Mac users? That's hardly enough.
iTunes for Windows is out there on a large number of PCs, exposing Windows users to Apple goodness, and showing them firsthand that it is truly better, rather than old Apple myths getting in the way. The program is also not crippled in some dumb attempt to get people to shell out for a whole new Mac just to get the features that were left out. There are actually a few things missing: the connectivity to the other Apple apps.
iTunes for Windows also blows a big hole in the theory that they can't port the iApps to Windows. Granted, it largely depends on Quicktime, but that just shows that Quicktime is not unique either. Hell, it even has the rendezvous music sharing that is interoperable with Macs. So, I don't think there's a lot of technical problems standing in the way of porting iApps to Windows.
If nothing else, it can establish Apple as a provider of excellent Windows software. This can only increase revenue (the remainder of the iLife apps are no longer free remember) and brand awareness. Over time, this then makes the Mac more compatible if people are using a lot of Apple software. The Mac then becomes more easily substitutable for a PC, but in the important way that a BMW is substitutable for a Ford. There are no real compatibility issues, you're just trading up to something nicer.
I know it seems counter intuitive, but Apple porting an app over to Windows is not really one less reason to buy a Mac, but actually can become one more reason to by making more software between them common and raising brand awareness.
iTunes for Windows is out there on a large number of PCs, exposing Windows users to Apple goodness, and showing them firsthand that it is truly better, rather than old Apple myths getting in the way. The program is also not crippled in some dumb attempt to get people to shell out for a whole new Mac just to get the features that were left out. There are actually a few things missing: the connectivity to the other Apple apps.
iTunes for Windows also blows a big hole in the theory that they can't port the iApps to Windows. Granted, it largely depends on Quicktime, but that just shows that Quicktime is not unique either. Hell, it even has the rendezvous music sharing that is interoperable with Macs. So, I don't think there's a lot of technical problems standing in the way of porting iApps to Windows.
If nothing else, it can establish Apple as a provider of excellent Windows software. This can only increase revenue (the remainder of the iLife apps are no longer free remember) and brand awareness. Over time, this then makes the Mac more compatible if people are using a lot of Apple software. The Mac then becomes more easily substitutable for a PC, but in the important way that a BMW is substitutable for a Ford. There are no real compatibility issues, you're just trading up to something nicer.
I know it seems counter intuitive, but Apple porting an app over to Windows is not really one less reason to buy a Mac, but actually can become one more reason to by making more software between them common and raising brand awareness.
conventional wisdom is that apple makes software to sell hardware. there's more profit to be made on the hardware... apple would do better to sell a few extra iMacs than selling a bunch of iApps for windows, i imagine...
raising brand awareness won't cut it for apple for the simple reason most people will regard computers as merely a tool and therefore, cheapest stuff will almost always win. if iApps got ported to Windows, there will be no reason for most people to buy a Mac. why buy a $1200 iMac when a $700 dell will run iPhoto/iMovie equally well?
as for the poster mentioning a friend who wanted to do stuff with pics and DVs... i think he's probably hesitent because it's hard to believe just how easy and useful iPhoto/iMovie are. if i started photo and DV manipulations with windows software (and find out how difficult and clumsy the process is), i'd be very skeptical how well "free" apps would work on a Mac. i wouldn't believe that it's actually not that difficult...
it's fine by me. i'd be able to impress more people with such simple things as stringing together some clips and putting fades in for transitions or putting up pictures taken a day or two ago on the web in a nice format - you have no idea how many people think it took me days or a ton of effort to accomplish...
Well, I would expect it to work straight away. Things like that don't happen overnight, but the more I show off my iLife apps, the more they want to spend time working with iLife, just playing around, and what with GarageBand now here, they may want to spend a lot of time playing around with the features. Eventually, they may consider macs for a change.
I'd like to believe this too, but just this morning a co-worker of mine who just bought a new Dell (even though he claims to have wanted a G5) said that last night he was going to re-download iTunes but then realized that his new computer comes with "Dell MusicMatch" which is "just as good and does the same thing". I pointed out that he already had an account set up in iTunes and that supposedly iTMS has more songs available. He didn't care. He didn't want to waste his time. Apparently his broadband connection isn't as fast as mine...
Maybe after he actually uses MusicMatch he'll see the superiority of iTunes. (I'm just assuming here as I have never used MusicMatch myself)
That's an interesting observation, and I have to agree that most people are quite surprised at how simple it is to do the things I do with the iApps. But I find that even though they see how simple it is they don't get it at the same time. I guess people are just less intelligent than I give them credit for
.Sorry for the thread drift...
My co-worker mentioned above told me this morning that he was able to find songs by Linkin Park and Metallica on MusicMatch. AFAIK, neither of those bands has authorized any of their music for download anywhere.
Can anyone verify this? If he can't really get LP and Metallica I'd love to catch him in his little white lie.
My co-worker mentioned above told me this morning that he was able to find songs by Linkin Park and Metallica on MusicMatch. AFAIK, neither of those bands has authorized any of their music for download anywhere.
Can anyone verify this? If he can't really get LP and Metallica I'd love to catch him in his little white lie.
themadchemist/MacRumors quoted in newspaper
If you were not already, you are now nationally famous, having been quoted on the above comment on iLife. Allan Hoffman of the Newark Star-Ledger mentioned it in an article about the iLife series and the article appeared in this morning 's Houston Chronicle.
MacRumors will probably get a lot more hits in the next few days. Brace yourselves!
Congratulations, themadchemist!
If you were not already, you are now nationally famous, having been quoted on the above comment on iLife. Allan Hoffman of the Newark Star-Ledger mentioned it in an article about the iLife series and the article appeared in this morning 's Houston Chronicle.
MacRumors will probably get a lot more hits in the next few days. Brace yourselves!
Congratulations, themadchemist!