Earlier this year, Apple killed off iTunes on macOS, breaking it up into three different apps: Podcasts, Music, and Apple TV. At the time, the company also said that iTunes for Windows is here to stay, but that might be changing. A job listing on LinkedIn looking for a senior software engineer says, “Join us and build the next generation of media apps for Windows.”
Later in the description, it also says, “If you love music and you are passionate about writing code, and want to work with world-class engineering teams that ship to millions of users, the Media Apps team is the place for you.” Naturally, this implies that an Apple Music app could be on the way, but it seems likely that if that’s the case, then an Apple TV app shouldn’t be too far behind.
MacDailyNews Take: Sounds like Apple is going to (someday) pull their one glass of ice water in order to give the Windows sufferers multiple glasses of ice water in hell.
Apple’s job listing is here.
Not to defend Windows, but it’s Windows users that saved Apple.
Do you think only the Mac user base was large enough so their purchase of the iPod would have saved Apple?
Now imagine if MS pulled an Apple and didn’t allow iTunes and forced, yes forced, Apple to use Windows Media Player to manage the iPod.
To their credit, they never interfered with programming PCs. Even their mobile, such as it was.
I dread the outcome of that hypothetical scenario.
No… The first iPod arrived in 2001. And the first three generations of iPod were intentionally aimed at Mac users (due to reliance on FireWire connection). iTunes existed for years even before first iPod as Classic Mac OS app. It was the first translucent iMac in 1998 that really “saved” Apple, not iPod.
It wasn’t until 2004, with 4th iPod (plus deal with HP) AND arrival of first Windows version of iTunes, that Apple seriously marketed iPod at Windows users. By then, Apple was clearly “out of danger” and expanding its business beyond computers.
iPod was important back then, but more important was the beginning of Apple as a media and service company, with the iTunes Music Store. Apple transformed the music industry and became the top music retailer because of iTunes. THAT was the main strategic reason for iTunes on Windows. Supporting Windows iPod customers was secondary, and became less important over time.
And when did sales take off…?
And if MS disallowed iTunes like I said? Sure they may be what nVidia is today. Maybe.
Your premise (in first post),”Windows users saved Apple,” is incorrect. That’s my point, NOT that Windows users added to Apple’s revenue.
Of course iPod sales increased dramatically when Apple allowed Windows users to use iPod easily, with iTunes for Windows plus an iPod that fully supported USB. But THAT happened in 2004. The bad times for Apple was mid-to-late 1990s, resulting in the NeXT acquisition (the actual game changer). The only Windows users who helped in “saving” Apple were the ones who “switched” to Mac. By 2004, Apple was doing fine financially.
For iPod and iTunes, what DID happen was Apple exploiting Windows users for revenue. From iPod and iTunes Music Store sales. And also exploiting the massive Windows user base as a pool of easily converted “switchers” to Mac, through their positive experience with iPod and iTunes.
Your other premise that Microsoft could have disallowed iTunes on Windows is nonsense. Microsoft provided (licensed) Windows to OTHER companies who produced the PCs. For example, to kick things off for the Windows iPod, Apple made a deal with HP to have iTunes pre-installed on HP’s PC and resell an HP-logo’ed iPod. Microsoft had zero power over what HP (or any other PC maker) pre-installed on HP products. And Microsoft can’t anger its own Windows user-base by intentionally crippling iTunes; they had enough self-inflicted problems during the Ballmer years.
Well said. Man it must hurt posters like “applecynic” who brazenly spew falsehoods and continue to recycle completely erroneous tech history to support their faulty views showing they clearly don’t know what the heck they’re talking about. I think we all are completely embarrassed for him (and have a cruel chuckle at the same time).
Guys like AppleCynic still believe “Microsoft owns Apple” because of the misleading caption at the end of “Pirates of Silicon Valley.”
@dd
That’s a very indoctrinated outlook. I don’t care who owns who. I don’t do the fan game.
Yes, it’s Mac users of 2001 that made Apple what it is today…
Okay, we can agree then that without Windows users (hypothetically) Apple would still exist and be a much smaller and ignorable company.
The point is, if MS behaved like Apple and prevented them from playing the outcome is plausible.
They’re called “customers” 🙄 And customers who were new to Apple (not already Mac users) were mostly Windows users. So yeah, “Windows users” boosted Apple’s revenue. You could also say that right-handers boosted Apple’s revenue, because most customers are right-handed.
Don’t treat something incidental as having real significance. And I’m glad you’re no longer claiming that Windows users “saved” Apple. In fact, it’s Apple who saved Windows users from the insecurity of XP and the incompetence of Vista.
You do realize that MS got in trouble for the way it manipulated other companies access to the Windows OS and the terms it imposed upon them. Aren’t you?
Not that I condone that, I don’t, but Apple extends restrictions to developers and users. Contrarily Apple sues Realnetworks into oblivion for Realplayers’s ability to manage an iPod.
Do YOU realize that Apple designs and produces the whole device, from hardware to software, and therefore has the justification to define and enforce access to that whole device? Mac, iPod, iPhone, iPad, Watch…
Apple could have given up like others and started making stylish-looking Windows PCs. Or stopped investing resources into iOS and just used Android like everyone else. But Apple chose to make the whole device, to ensure the best possible customer experience. That gives Apple control, and the legal right to sue others who try to profit without paying the cost. Apple has obligation to its shareholders to maximize profit.
In contrast, Microsoft (at that time), just supplied the OS to other companies. Furthermore, because Microsoft was the only viable OS source for lazy PC makers, it was considered a monopoly. And that’s why Microsoft was restricted from being overly aggressive in leveraging that monopoly. NOT because Microsoft was somehow being noble. Don’t make me laugh.
@ken1w
Apple does not code each and every App, nor do they own them.
Post sale Apple doesn’t even own the device.
Apple was saved by Microsoft’s 150 million dollar investment in Apple in August 1997. At that moment, Apple had a serious liquidity problem. MS later profited by Apple’s dramatic stock price increase , driven by increased iPod sales. The success of the iPod gave Apple visibility.
Bluntly, I could see the usefulness of the Macintosh from the start but I never really liked them until OS X. When Apple switched to Intel, I was in.
My nephew brought home an iPod at Christmas and after listening to one song, I bought one. I haven’t looked back. When the iPhone came out, I was under contract with a Raze and when that ended I got a 3G. I won’t have any phone except an iPhone.
I paralleled you. It was Vista that got me into my first MacBook in 2008. In 2009 they started sealing them. First by removal of Expresscard and unibody, them with solder.
I gave to my 2008 to my daughter, and got a 2009. Not yet accustomed to being Apple’s “protectorate” I took for granted that Expresscard would be there. It wasn’t. Went right back to the store to exchange it for the 17 in model and was told I would have to pay a $300 restocking fee. I was stuck with USB2 in the USB3 era on a $2200 machine! No computer ever left me so “wanting” and disappointed.
Fortunately Win7 was much better than Vista and went back like a bitch.
you grossly misinterpreted what I said. I was not impressed with Macs from 1984 to 2001 when OS X came out. I felt OS X was compelling. When Apple went to Intel in 2006, I started the process to switch.
I went from MSDos to Win 3.1 to NT 3.5, NT 4.0 to XP. I never used 95,98 or Vista.
The notion that I would buy a $2200 device without KNOWING something like a USB 3 port or a needed “Expresscard” was missing is impossible. When I bought a “sealed” iMac in 2012, I fully understand what was included and what wasn’t. Was I happy about buying a CD/DVD Drive and a CF card reader? Nope. I just factored in the additional cost. I will tell you that in the 7 years since I bought that CD/DVD drive, I used about 10 times. Today it generally isn’t needed.
Overall, I have bought 14 devices for more than $100 from Apple and I’m very happy with them all.
Having said all that, if I bought an expensive laptop and the “butterfly” keyboard failed, I’d be one upset cookie.
Sorry, Rp1, but you are repeating a semi-falsehood that Microsoft lovers and Apple haters would like you to believe.
First, Apple still had sufficient liquidity in 1997. The primary benefit of the Apple-Microsoft agreement was that Microsoft committed to maintaining Microsoft Office on the Mac for five years. The agreement also included the Microsoft investment in Apple stock, but that was intended more to boost confidence in Apple than to acquire cash.
In my opinion, Apple was saved by a series of decisions/actions. In rough chronological order:
1) 1998 Bondi Blue iMac with USB ports and future iMac iterations
2) Mac OSX
3) iPod and iTunes
4) Transition of Macs from PPC to Intel processors
5) iPhone
6) iPad
7) App Store
8) Evolution of cutting edge MacBook and MacBook Pro laptops based on the MBA
I agree with everything you say above but I stand my statement about how important the MS investment was. Apple at that point was in serious trouble. And, no doubt, the 8 things said and access to MS Office are important reasons why Apple went from where they were to where they are now.
Apple’s stock price was $0.63 on 8/1/1997 and a billion shares where traded a few days later with the stock reaching $0.93 per share. This was because of MS investment but don’t kid yourself Apple needed cash at that moment.
I distinctly remember this because an Apple customer of mine was livid at this because he thought this meant the end of Apple and I was like “no, this just gives Apple the time to come up with a killer product”. That product was the first iMac. Everyone that I knew that had one, loved it.
You can “believe” any falsehood you want but the $150 million dollar Apple stock buy-in from Microsoft was symbolic and did not make the slightest difference whether Apple financially survived (they had over a billion dollars in the bank at the time). This has been debunked countless times but you know better right? Try doing some research instead of holding fast to faulty information.
As KingMel said the Mac Microsoft Office 5 year support agreement was by far the most important thing at the time. (Also the fact Microsoft had to pay Apple and settle a suit from them copying the Mac OS in Windows.)
Microsoft were no angels and faced antitrust problems if they did not comply so you can say Apple also helped Microsoft. When Microsoft foolishly sold their stock in Apple they made a tidy profit. If they had held on to it it would have been several orders of magnitude higher. But then the Microsoft leadership at the time was never the sharpest pencil in the box.
I am generally in agreement with what you are saying but I don’t think you remember how serious this situation was.
https://money.cnn.com/1997/10/15/companies/apple/
When your sales go down 30% and your loses are 10% of your sales and your operating expenses (not the cost of what you are selling) are about a quarter of your sales, you are in DEEP TROUBLE and you need EVERY penny you can come up with. Some of those pennies came from Microsoft.
No doubt, good will from Office was part of the bail out. And, no doubt Microsoft has NEVER been and will never be “angelic.”
Apple almost went belly up, it is to their credit that Jobs, Ive, Cook and many others came up with the products like the iMac and iPod and then the iPhone/iPad that turned Apple into the most profitable company and one of the largest companies in the world.
In addition, I’m not sure when Coon showed up but streamlining the production supply chain was also critical. Now, I think his challenge is to make Apple products inside the United States at competitive and profitable prices.
When Cook showed up not “coon”. That was a typo and not a slander. I apologize.
I just looked it up, from Apple’s 1997 financial statement:
“In August 1997, the Company and Microsoft entered into patent cross licensing and technology agreements. Under these agreements, the companies provided patent cross licenses to each other. In addition, for a period of five years from August 1997, Microsoft will make future versions of its Microsoft Office and Internet Explorer products for the Mac OS, and the Company will bundle the Internet Explorer product with Mac OS system software releases and make that product the default Internet browser for such releases. In addition, Microsoft purchased 150,000 shares of Apple Series ‘A’ non-voting convertible preferred stock for $150 million. While the Company believes that its relationship with Microsoft will be beneficial to the Company and to its efforts to increase the installed base for the Mac OS, the Microsoft relationship is for a limited term and does not cover many of the areas in which the Company competes with Microsoft, including the Windows platform. In addition, the Microsoft relationship may have an adverse effect on, among other things, the Company’s relationship with other partners. There can be no assurance that the benefits to the Company of the Microsoft relationship will not be offset by the disadvantages.”
===
This is a direct cash payment from Microsoft to Apple of 150 million in exchange for convertible shares. These convertible shares were converted later and Microsoft profited greatly. Had Apple gone belly up, MS would have lost 150 mil. This 150 provided instant liquidity and prevented Apple’s end of year balance sheet from “looking really, really bad”. In that sense, it “saved” Apple. 🙂
One thing we forgot was part of the deal was Internet Explorer was set to the DEFAULT browser in OS 7(?) for five years. At the time of the browser wars, this was extremely important to Microsoft.
You all have your points of view which I generally agree with. My point of view is that Apple was in serious trouble and Microsoft’s 150 mil was key to Apple’s recovery. You may disagree on how key this was but I think we can agree that Apple was in big trouble.
Btw… I had a 3rd Gen FireWire iPod. PC had FireWire ports.
So…? Most Windows PCs did not. Apple allowed Windows users to be iPod customer, at their inconvenience. But Apple did not target Windows users until it was ready, with 4th gen iPod, the HP+iPod partnership, and iTunes for Windows. Starting in 2004, when Apple could afford to expand its business.
Almost all did.
Very few PCs had FireWire (IEEE 1394a) ports back in the early to mid 2000s. They were mostly on higher end PCs and were targeted at people working with digital video cameras – one of the few types of electronic devices that widely adopted the FireWire interface.
The fact that your Windows PC had a FireWire port is not a powerful argument.
I won’t argue facts. Would you agree they were cheap and easy to add?
But I owned at least 15 computers in the early 2000s. They all had them.
15 computers? How crappy were those PCs that you had to buy 15 of them in just a few years? Wow.
Not to defend applecynic, nor praise or bury him, but it’s Apple that saved Apple by having products customers were willing to voluntarily buy in the billions.
Now imagine if applecynic pulled an Apple and produced products and services people wanted, rather than just forcing us all, yes forcing us, to put up with endless negativity and cynicism.
To his credit, his moans and groans have never interferes with billions buying Apple products.
I dread that it ever will, but insignificance ‘twas ever thus.
“Now imagine if applecynic pulled an Apple and produced products and services people wanted”
Just look in the mirror my wooly friend…
I produce products and services people buy. You just yabber jibber jabber nonsense on a message board.
And you are my product on this message board.
What a sad attempt by applecynic to feel he has some kind of power over anyone. Just sad.
applecynic is a sad, manipulative, steaming sack of Windows and Android, the love child of Gates, Ballmer and Lucifer – worse than Citizen Superior Whiny X.
There a multiple times where Apple made significant changes that brought huge benefits to the company. The first was obviously when SJ rejoined and Next was bought. Next is probably Jobs rationalizing the product line and the success of the iMac.
The release of OSX had massive impacts but over the long term. It is still paying dividends.
For iPods, it was the release of the mini and correct me if I am wrong the parallel release of iTunes for windoze. The mini was a great form factor and ideal price. Having the windoze app obviously increased the available customer base. Remember back then most people had windoze machines in their home. Not so much nowadays but then Apple were only selling 1-2MM macs a quarter and laptops were not as ubiquitous as they are now.
It will be interesting how the broken up iTune apps are received by PC users. It will need to be installed as a total package and I bet a lot of users will not realize what the apps are for. Music yes but the other apps maybe less so.