iTunes for 64-bit Vista.

F

Finkus

Gawd
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
931
FINALLY! WOOT!

No more syncing my phone with a dying PC, louder than a jet engine.
 
lol, I was just about to post this

On a whim I opened the download page in 64-bit Internet Explorer and poof, the (64-bit) tag pops up

gah, [H] needs a lurker tag. 4 years and I'm still a n00bie
 
ok. where?

edit: ok, so you have to use a 64 bit browser to dl it. being apple, they assume they know best and dont give you any options on what version you want.
 
I found that odd too when I went used Firefox, I got only the 32 bit version. I had to go into 64-bit explorer... weird...
 
Nice I'll be picking this up today also....

Although I mainly use my mini to sync with now it'll be nice to have it on my vista 64 box.
 
I'm so happy! No more VMWare syncs. Those were slow but worked in a pinch. Meh, it was only a few weeks that I had to put up with it.
 
I downloaded the 64bit version from Apple. When I go to install iTunes it determines to put iTunes in the Program Files (x86) folder. Why is this? If it's 64 bit shouldn't it just go in my Program Files folder?
 
No because Itunes, even though it says it is "iTunes 64bit", is still a 32bit program, it is just written/coded (for lack of a better term) to install and function correctly on Vista 64bit.
 
I'm bowled over. I went from 32-bit iTunes, to 64-bit iTunes for Vista AND upgraded my iPhone from 1.1.2 to 1.1.3 as well as associating it with a completely different computer and everything worked... flawlessley. No loss of anything.
 
Martyr said:
damn, apple is a motherfucker.
Click to expand...
Untrue.

Apple is a big company with tens of thousand of employees. It is more accurate to say Apple are motherfuckers, in plural. And they're not — they just seem to assume they know best, even when they clearly don't.
 
32bit/64bit I don't give a shit, as long as it doesn't crash, erase my library and or it's physical files and I can sync my iPod touch in Vista 64, I'm a happy camper. Anyone notice how smooth cover flow is since the last iTunes update? I actually like the app now.
 
Martyr said:
no, you went from 32 bit itunes to modified 32 bit itunes
Click to expand...

But that included a bunch of 64-bit drivers for the phone, for some kind of virtual-phone-backup-USB-drive, optical drive burning drivers etc. etc.

I'm amazed it all worked without Vista coughing its guts up in outrage that I might dare install something on it without clicking 'OK' eleventy bazillion times. That or at least messing up my library and losing a bunch of songs.
 
Yeah, I can finally rip CD audio from my USB DVD burner. I'm very excited about this release. I love when things work properly.
 
This is incredibly odd. I've been using Vista x64 for almost a year and iTunes has always worked... I've been syncinc my iPod with no issues whatsoever the entire time.

Now, granted I got a message every time I opened iTunes stating that something was installed incorrectly and I couldn't rip CDs, but even with the message, CD ripping worked fine, too.

:confused:
 
Thrash said:
This is incredibly odd. I've been using Vista x64 for almost a year and iTunes has always worked... I've been syncinc my iPod with no issues whatsoever the entire time.

Now, granted I got a message every time I opened iTunes stating that something was installed incorrectly and I couldn't rip CDs, but even with the message, CD ripping worked fine, too.

:confused:
Click to expand...

The issue is us with Iphone's or Ipod touch's were unable to sync with itunes in vista x64... older ipods worked fine.
 
Safari also won't download the 64-bit compatible version of iTunes. There's something ironic about having to use IE to make Apples's software work right :rolleyes:
 
wow, are you guys ever happy? first you bitch about not having a 64 bit version of itunes, and now you bitch about it when it works. you complain about apple "knowing best when they really dont," when the web-site is doing the exact same thing that millions of other web-sites are doing. looking at your browser version and forwarding you to the most compatible version of the site, or the files being downloaded. (if you dont notice this, maybe you should start paying more attention while you browse) this is not apple being imperialistic or whatever you wanna call it, is just the norm in html coding now. and even better, once you install the update, and find that everything works flawlessly (which i guess is not normal in the windows world?) you still bitch about it for one reason or the other. you bought you products knowing their compatibility issues. if you dont like that, dont bitch about it not working like you want it to. it has a compatibility set when you bought it, knowingly, so you are just gonna have to be patient in waiting for more compatibility.

i really only expected to hear anyone bitch about it if it crashed their system, erased their contacts and songs and stuff like that. guess thats not true. guess the "standards" of how well a program SHOULD work have gone up so high that now they must contain all of your "uber-1337" opinions as well as its expected functionality. or is it just any reason to bash on apple?
 
an intelligent downloader would look at YOUR OS. you know, the thing it gets installed on?

and of course we would bitch about not having a 64bit version. it was the only thing most of us were keeping xp around for. excuse us for expecting a company to support its products.

and it is pretty crappy to not have options when downloading. ive never seen anything like like that anywhere else.
 
ive seen pages look for the os, for the web browsers, at your location, everything you can imagine. how do you think sites determine which mirror to route you to? and what the point at looking past the browser to the os if you are already downloading a product from a windows specific page? the browser will tell them 32 bit or 64 bit, except in the case where you are mish mashing your software. so maybe you guys should complain about firefox not being 64 bit?

and as for a company not supporting its products, i think you should consider the fact that itunes works on a pc at all a good sign. how long has it taken for microsoft to put out a universal binary for office for osx? the itunes/iphone/ipod product line is well supported considering they are CODING IT FOR AN OS OTHER THAN THEIR OWN. and with the changes from xp to vista, not to mention the myriad of multiple version of windows, or even vista alone, it is gonna take some time.

if you guys dont like dealing with itunes, go by a zune, or a windows mobile smartphone. sure, there isnt the cool factor there that you are going for, but hey, at lest it works... supposedly.

i mean hell, i have a windows mobile based pocet pc. you dont hear me bitching every day about how microsoft needs to release an osx version of active sync. and to be quite honest, microsoft will probably NEVER release an osx version of active sync. so, if you wanna bitch about support, maybe you oughtta take a look at the other side of the fence first.
 
wankrtron said:
ive seen pages look for the os, for the web browsers, at your location, everything you can imagine. how do you think sites determine which mirror to route you to? and what the point at looking past the browser to the os if you are already downloading a product from a windows specific page? the browser will tell them 32 bit or 64 bit, except in the case where you are mish mashing your software. so maybe you guys should complain about firefox not being 64 bit?

and as for a company not supporting its products, i think you should consider the fact that itunes works on a pc at all a good sign. how long has it taken for microsoft to put out a universal binary for office for osx? the itunes/iphone/ipod product line is well supported considering they are CODING IT FOR AN OS OTHER THAN THEIR OWN. and with the changes from xp to vista, not to mention the myriad of multiple version of windows, or even vista alone, it is gonna take some time.

if you guys dont like dealing with itunes, go by a zune, or a windows mobile smartphone. sure, there isnt the cool factor there that you are going for, but hey, at lest it works... supposedly.

i mean hell, i have a windows mobile based pocet pc. you dont hear me bitching every day about how microsoft needs to release an osx version of active sync. and to be quite honest, microsoft will probably NEVER release an osx version of active sync. so, if you wanna bitch about support, maybe you oughtta take a look at the other side of the fence first.
Click to expand...

word up dood, i agree with you
 
wankrtron said:
ive seen pages look for the os, for the web browsers, at your location, everything you can imagine. how do you think sites determine which mirror to route you to? and what the point at looking past the browser to the os if you are already downloading a product from a windows specific page? the browser will tell them 32 bit or 64 bit, except in the case where you are mish mashing your software. so maybe you guys should complain about firefox not being 64 bit?

and as for a company not supporting its products, i think you should consider the fact that itunes works on a pc at all a good sign. how long has it taken for microsoft to put out a universal binary for office for osx? the itunes/iphone/ipod product line is well supported considering they are CODING IT FOR AN OS OTHER THAN THEIR OWN. and with the changes from xp to vista, not to mention the myriad of multiple version of windows, or even vista alone, it is gonna take some time.

if you guys dont like dealing with itunes, go by a zune, or a windows mobile smartphone. sure, there isnt the cool factor there that you are going for, but hey, at lest it works... supposedly.

i mean hell, i have a windows mobile based pocet pc. you dont hear me bitching every day about how microsoft needs to release an osx version of active sync. and to be quite honest, microsoft will probably NEVER release an osx version of active sync. so, if you wanna bitch about support, maybe you oughtta take a look at the other side of the fence first.
Click to expand...


I'm sorry, but what exactly are you trying to add to this thread? Wait, you are THREAD CRAPPING! Now, go away troll. This thread is about itunes and Vista 64, thread crappers. Do you have an iphone or ipod touch? Do you have Vista 64? If the answer is no, then please, go away. I do have both, as do the other people posting here, so this pertains to us.

Now off with you.
 
yeah, mature. youve got no idea what i run, or what hardware i run it on. nor the number of devices i use with that hardware, os combination.

and if you wanna be technical, this whole thread filled with incessant bitching is actually just one big crap pile in the apple forum. hmmm. go figure.

look buddy, im glad you guys finally got a way to sync you iphones to x64. that is great. the question is why cant you leave it at that. why do you have to bash a company that is supporting products on other os's because of they way the files download? it doesnt make sense, and what i boils down to is you are bashing apple in the apple forum just because they are apple. that my friend is real mature.
 
Jeez who cares about the page coding.. I'm just happy Apple finally got vista x64 supported considering I just bought a new ipod touch and was disappointed to find I have to pull out my XP hdd just to use it. Good job Apple :D

I was able to pick my OS (x64 vista vs Windows 32) using Firefox 32.
 
Son of a bitch!!!

I got an iPhone 2 weeks ago, but had to find out the hard way that it didn't work on 64-bit architectures... so I downgraded to 32-bit.

Ughhh...
 
wankrtron said:
yeah, mature. youve got no idea what i run, or what hardware i run it on. nor the number of devices i use with that hardware, os combination.

and if you wanna be technical, this whole thread filled with incessant bitching is actually just one big crap pile in the apple forum. hmmm. go figure.

look buddy, im glad you guys finally got a way to sync you iphones to x64. that is great. the question is why cant you leave it at that. why do you have to bash a company that is supporting products on other os's because of they way the files download? it doesnt make sense, and what i boils down to is you are bashing apple in the apple forum just because they are apple. that my friend is real mature.
Click to expand...

By what you just posted, I do know that you: Do not run Vista 64bit. So, I know what you DON'T run, so you have no business in this thread.

Personally, I smell an Apple employee... or else you have no real reason to be posting the whining (about our supposed whining...how funny).

Again I say go away troll. You obviously do not run Vista 64bit (hey, read the thread title!) so you need not post in this particular thread. If you would like to make your own so you can defend Apple from us whiners, oops, I mean paying customers, then go right ahead.

The only immature posts here are yours, considering you have absolutely nothing to do with this thread and what it was about.

Now again, go away,

Now, back to the thread...

I feel your pain, The18thLetter, i just broke down and installed VMWare w/XP sp2 so I could run iTunes on my main rig on Saturday. If I had just waited a few more days!
 
hmmm. it never occurred to you that the only difference between your setup and mine is that i dont have the iphone? (there for no reason to bitch)

apple employee? heh, no way buddy. im living in korea ATM. thanks though.
 
I was able to pick my OS (x64 vista vs Windows 32) using Firefox 32.
Click to expand...
ya, they added the choice because they realized nobody uses 64-bit IE

why do you have to bash a company that is supporting products on other os's because of they way the files download?
Click to expand...
a) because being tied to one browser was stupid enough that even Apple realized it and placed a link for the 64-bit version, much like they have had the option to download the version for OSX from Windows and vice versa
b) support should have been there from the start; Vista support should mean all versions of Vista are supported unless otherwise noted. Just an FYI, nothing on the box or iTunes ever specifed incompatibilities at launch time. They eventually noted it on a subnote of a subnote for XP
c) if the ipod didn't work with Windows Apple wouldn't be selling it; as long as OSX is a vast minority of computers support for windows is mandatory and not a bonus we should be mearly happy for.
d) other ipods worked with Vista64 and the problem with CD drivers was fixed long ago by the driver's coders; taking so long with a working itunes was just laziness on Apple's part.
 
At the risk of adding to the crap in the thread, don't you think that it's the PC support for iTunes/iPods that had put Apple in the position it's in today? Do you think that if iPods were Mac only that Apple would even feature in the average consumer's vocabulary?
 
Finkus said:
At the risk of adding to the crap in the thread, don't you think that it's the PC support for iTunes/iPods that had put Apple in the position it's in today? Do you think that if iPods were Mac only that Apple would even feature in the average consumer's vocabulary?
Click to expand...

Apple wouldn't be nearly as successful today as they are if they hadn't started to support the PC market, no doubt about that.
 
What, nobody remembers the PC compatible "HP" Ipods? Ugh... The day I got my Ipod Video, I tossed the old one against a concrete wall, it was horrible and dying a slow death.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top