After “upgrading” to Windows XP Service Pack 2, USA Today’s Edward C. Baig reports, “The Windows firewall flagged Apple’s iTunes the first time I tried to use the program. I was informed some iTunes features would be blocked. Because I trust Apple’s program, I was able to click on an unblock button, and I haven’t received the warning again.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: It’s good news that XP SP 2 doesn’t seem to block iTunes, if users click the unblock button, that is.
Apple is teaming up with Amazon to make its premium streaming service more accessible than ever. Prime members can now subscribe…
With iOS 27, Apple is rolling out Apple Intelligence-powered features like AI video summaries, natural-language search, richer notifications…
Italy’s competition authority has opened an investigation into Apple for allegedly failing to open up its iOS and iPadOS ecosystems…
Apple’s Indian supplier Tata Electronics announced on Tuesday that the state pollution control board has dropped its scrutiny…
Apple plans a major wave of releases in late 2027, headlined by long-rumored camera-equipped AI AirPods, a second-generation foldable…
with all the viruses, trojan horses, spyware and generally bad things out there for Windows, M$ decides their first priority is to take down iTunes?! Unbelieveable…
Maybe they could ad a “switch” button linked to Apple’s OSX webpage, that would be very helpful!
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
I am not suprised at all
this has nothing to do with ‘targeting iTunes’. The M$ firewall simply monitors all ports for in/out traffic. iTunes runs on a port not open by default. SP2 asks the user if they would like to open the port to allow the application to communicate with the outside world (very much like ZoneAlarm).
I’m all for M$ bashing, but lets do it when it’s legitimate.
“with all the viruses, trojan horses, spyware and generally bad things out there for Windows, M$ decides their first priority is to take down iTunes?! Unbelieveable..”
Yet another hilarious comment by a clueless Mac zealot.
Good firewalls deny by default and allow only what is needed.
The new MS firewall doesn’t recognize the iTunes traffic, so it asks the user what to do, JUST LIKE ALMOST EVERY OTHER CONSUMER FIREWALL DOES.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/08/12/winxp_sp2_stop_moaning/
“For instance, in our shop we use Remote Desktop all the time as a secure means of remotely administering clients and troubleshooting issues. By default, Windows Firewall blocks remote desktop (TCP 3389) connections, even if the system was configured to allow remote desktop connections when SP2 was applied.”
So the firewall also by default blocks Microsoft software, just as one would expect from a good firewall.
Let’s see, M$ is starting an online music service. M$ releases an update to Windows. Their largest competitor’s software no longer works. Raise your hand if this is a shock to you. Anybody? Anybody? I thought not.
is it just me or is mdn trying to stir up mac zealots agian? and agian?
i don’t see other mac sites reporting on this, because no one gives a shit. its a firewall. thats what its suppose to do. get over it
sp2 was a great update, for my pc.
Who cares? I use OS X so I’m not.
SP2 is already a joke:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3557952.stm
iTunes connects to the internet at launch to 2 different connections. The iTunes Music Store and the CDDB server. If you have the highly unstable Windows XP SP1 the first thing I would do is lock down every connection for every application and bind it to explorer.exe. Personally I am not suprised and find the fact this is even news rather dull.
The same thing happened when I re-installed OSX and ran iTunes for the first time.
I received a message that said iTunes was being blocked by my firewall, so I just went into the sharing pref pane and created a rule to open that particular port.
I hate MS as much as the next person but this is not a deliberate attack on Apple. Credit were credit’s due.
Nice link, twelveightyone.
Although 43% said the SP2 installation had gone without a hitch, 49% of those contributing had problems ranging from minor to severe.
A few contributors said they had to completely rebuild a system before they could get the update to work.
Some of those responding mentioned that it took a couple of hours to install the update which, for business firms, weighs in at 266MB.
Before installing SP2, users are recommended to ensure their machine is free of viruses and Trojans that could put it under the control of malicious hackers.
I know a few who wouldn’t dare install it.
In defense of Microsoft (who rarely deserves any defending) it is not at all targeting iTunes as has been said earlier here. It’s simply the firewall working the way it should be. It’s detecting the outgoing port attempt and simply alerting the user to it. You can easily set it to not flag it again in the future and allow the traffic, so I’m not sure why this is even a story here. M$ sucks, but this is one instance where they actually are doing the right thing. It’s also flags AIM, Yahoo Messenger and any other app attempting a similar action as well.
As for you PC zealots here bashing the so called “Mac zealots”, at least most of us give M$ credit where credit is due as you can see based on most of the responses here on this particular topic so far. Too bad you can’t do the same when the shoe is on the other foot…talk about being blind…
What I wanna know is: why are so many PeeCee users commenting on a Mac-centric site like this one (and this isn’t the only one)? If all you guys can do is insult, make stupid comments, etc. then IMO you shouldn’t be in here. This is a Mac centric site. HELLO! I think “Mac-zealots” have ever right to live out their zealotry on a Mac-centric site. The fact that you guys often put down “Mac- zealots” on a Mac-centric site says nothing about your intelligence.
Re: XP SP2 and it’s treatment of iTunes – “It’s simply the firewall working the way it should be.”
I disagree. It is the way XP users must micromanage their computer if they are using MS Windows. I have Mac OS X (10.3.5) with my firewall constantly on, and I have never seen such a message from my firewall or OS, regardless of the applications that access the internet. And, my computer STILL appears to be nonexistent to the outside world.
How should an average home user know if ACCS405.EXE should have access to Port 315 or not? Then next week, I’ll wonder why my Adobe Reader doesn’t update.
Apparently Mac OS X is smart enough to know what has access and what does not, IT DOES NOT GET IN MY WAY!!! To say that the myriad of (often cryptic and confusing) error messages that XP bombards the user with is merely “the way the computer should be” is only proof that MS has brainwashed their users into believing there is no better (intelligent) system or user interface available.
I honestly cannot remember the last time OS X gave me an error message or asked me what setting I wanted. The last request was when it asked me if I wanted to update my software to 10.3.5. I clicked “Update” then “Restart” and that was the end of it.
Computers are merely tools; saving time and making your life easier, not more complex.
~ Correction! ~
My last OS X error message was last week when I tried to print and my printer wasn’t turned on.
Sorry, I didn’t want to exaggerate the facts.
Does this SP2 update scan for, then inform the users that a particular port, or ports are open and ask them what they would like to do? Or does Microsoft just close everything THEY don’t feel is appropriate? If it does not do a port scan and ask for input from the user; shame on MSFT.
— “I disagree. It is the way XP users must micromanage their computer if they are using MS Windows. I have Mac OS X (10.3.5) with my firewall constantly on, and I have never seen such a message from my firewall or OS, regardless of the applications that access the internet. And, my computer STILL appears to be nonexistent to the outside world.” —
Just to counter this, I’ve received some similar warnings in OS X when first setting up some of the sharing features in the iLife suite itself (iTunes and iPhoto in particular, if memory serves me).
All in all, this is a non-issue.
Edward C. Baig wrote, “During installation, Microsoft strongly recommends having SP2 turn on automatic updates by default. If you agree, critical patches will be installed without prompting; you’ll be notified if a reboot is required.”
Doesn’t this open a way for other things to be installed without prompting? Maybe someone with more knowlege could answer.
I’m no expert and new to keeping track of these forums, but isn’t this the problem everyone gripes about? My OS X can look for updates automatically, but nothing is installed unless I want it. I have to enter a password as administrator (this seems more secure to me) if I want anything installed on my Mac.
Also, Aryugaetu, good point. I’m no power user, but I’ve used computers for work and play for most of my life (I’m 32). I recently switched to Mac and for the longest time I did think that was “the way the computer should be”. Now I know better. I have never been asked to allow iTunes or any other app access through the firewall, and I use the OS X firewall and an Airport Extreme yet they always seem to know what I want and get out of my way.
~M
MDN “editors” should pull their heads out of Jobs’ ass.
i believe one can set automatic install, or just automatic downloads (and user install) of windows updates… and requires admin rights. that’s the way it is at work at least.
Interestingly, I don’t think computers have EVER made life easier or simpler. They have grown more and more complex, with more and more integration and complexity. They’ve made us supposedly more efficient, but that does not mean we have more time… it means we are expected to do more work.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
It’s the interface with the computer that has had to continually try to simplify the operation of these imcreasingly more complex machines.
A minor difference, but a valid one.
Whatever happened to robots doing all the work and humans pursuing higher-thinking activities or doing something worthwhile with their time?
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
In addition… the AE portion of the article is barely less than a sidepoint… mdn, however, has taken a magnifying glass to the dirt on the linoleum.
Seriously, AE was mentioned in the article merely as an example, a sidepoint of what SP2 is doing when it comes to port blocking. There was nothing more than a sentence there… and it was merely giving an example of SP2 at work.
What, does MDN have a constant google troll for anything apple related? Give us real news. I wouldn’t be surprised if tomorrow, there’s an article on how “an apple a day keeps the doctor away” is somehow disproved because steve jobs had to have surgery or something silly.
Aryugaetu, this is silly.
Outbound connection monitoring on a firewall is useful functionality. The OS X firewall doesn’t support it — is that a ding on Windows, because their firewall now has superior functionality?
It’s very good for dealing with spyware (which is more common on Windows — a LOT more common).
And, in fact, there’s an OS X application called “Little Snitch” which does this exact SAME thing in OS X. So does the fact that Little Snitch even EXISTS mean OS X sucks?
By your reasoning, it would have to
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
atomic flower sputtered:”What, does MDN have a constant google troll for anything apple related?”
well.. yea.. that’s where they find these articles.
Ahh, it’s nice to see that the PC weenie trolls still come running to a Mac site in defense of their favorite OS. Maybe you should try pulling your own heads out of Gates’ ass while you’re at it eh?