m.b.lankhorst at gmail.com
Mon Feb 18 18:02:43 CST 2008
2008/2/18, Stefan Dösinger <stefandoesinger at gmx.at>:
> Am Montag, 18. Februar 2008 06:34:04 schrieb Edward Savage:
> > Maarten why not focus on supporting applications that don't have viable
> > open source solutions first? I can think of hundreds.
> > The only thing iTunes will add, with full support, is ipod syncing (that
> > isn't useless).
> > Or should we avoid that debate?
> I think it would probably be better not to debate, but the issue is this: For
> you there are viable itunes alternatives, and for you there are other
> applications which do not have alternatives. Compare this to the discussions
> wether working on Microsoft Office is a waste of time or not. Everyone has
> other expectations, so it is *very* hard to judge which application will be
> useful and which not.
> In the same way the usefullness of $APP in Wine differs from person to person.
> A bug which is worth a small remark on a review for one person is a killer
> bug for another.
> To come back to iTunes, I have met a few people who considered Linux but were
> stopped by iTunes for various reasons. Some may seem laughable to tech-savy
> people(Other apps look differently), some are technically reasonable(iTunes
> shop, DRM support). Of couse you can find 100 reasons why AutoCAD is more
> important than iTunes, but you can also find 100 reasons why iTunes is more
> important than ACAD
Well I bought an ipod touch. But there are no other apps then iTunes
that can do the firmware upload so it's sort of laying on my desk
until I can figure it out. That aside, the alternatives rely on
tactics that are similar to loading malware. Real alternatives for
iTunes? Not so much.
More information about the wine-devel