View Single Post
Old 27th April 2012, 18:32   #7
Batter Pudding
Major Dude
Batter Pudding's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,665
iTunes has gone "through the changes" because it is the store front to sell Apple products. It is very different to Winamp. iTunes is shop first, music player second. Winamp does so much more.

iTunes does not have to support a community of plugin developers. Winamp does. And some of the most useful plugins are ancient. Most of the code in Winamp is probably just as ancient, but works brilliantly. Why reinvent the wheel?

Apple make great kit. Don't think I am anti-apple. I have written software for both platforms. I support both platforms in my business. But as an example of a Microsoft strength I went back to some of my source code from 1998 and was able to not only recompile it without change, but I could also take the original executables I made in 1998 and run them on my modern 64-bit windows OS over a decade and a half later.

If I tried to do that with my old Apple Applications there would be no chance. Processor design has changed. And with many of the OS upgrades that Apple do they force you to replace your old software. Look at Lion - that almost without warning forced people to dump perfectly good software products purely because Apple decided to avoid the legacy support option of the older Motorola 68000 CPUs.

(Remember - inside older Apples used to be superior hardware. Now it is the same old Intel CPUs that you find in the PC market. Sitting on Foxconn motherboards just like you find in a Dell PC)

Apple is a marketing man's dream. Old Jobs was a Marketing Whizz. Who else could persuade they clients to buy expensive kit, the users then evangelize about that kit doing the sales job for them, yet the moment the new model is out they throw away the kit and buy new. Stunning business model.

In the PC world us poorer people can happily pick up ancient software and still do the job with it. I still run an old copy of Photoshop 7. Does everything I need it to do and has saved me hundreds if not thousands of pounds in upgrade costs. A different model. Microsoft just made the OS and then let dozens of other companies make the hardware and software and then the customer has the choice.

[Am about to reply to more of this thread, but can't do it tonight as I am out of time. I have beers to drink and places to be. But I do like to have a constructive discussion on this. But you can't just dismiss processor architecture in one sentence and replace it with "Well, Apple are doing it...." and then expect Developers to take the post seriously. ]
Batter Pudding is offline   Reply With Quote