Foxfyre's point that it is *possible* to have a OS that doesn't react to bad drivers by crashing is correct, but what he utterly fails to grasp is that such an OS does *not* exist in the consumer market.

So yes, we're going to "whine" when our only options are compromised by faulty drivers, and yes, we're going to expect driver makers to do a better job than this.

Why?

Because *they* know the faults of the OS as well.

They aren't coding drivers for a bulletproof OS. They are coding drivers for operating systems that try desperately (and futilely, I might add) to be *everything* to *everyone*.

You comments, foxy, are meaningless in a space where such an alternative as you suggest simply doesn't exist. You can laugh and post condescendingly to us all you want, but there it is.

There is no viable option in the consumer market for such an OS. Not in terms of support, compatibility, or hardware/software availability.

So why doesn't MSFT, Apple, or the Linux crowd change their OSes to be this way?

...you'd have to ask them. My assumption is that it would break more than it fixes including compatibility and availability of software that will run on them, but I don't write OSes.

"Unfortunately iTunes is known for pushing out components that Windows users don't necessarily want"

Aren't they the pot! Case in point--Windows Vista. From forcing computer makers to drop support for XP to making new games only compatible with Vista, Microsoft has no right to point their finger at any company for "pushing" users to do anything.

You sir are an idiot,

Its the evolution of the OS

You had 8 years with XP

Time to move on or leave the Windows ship

Why doesn't Apple, Sony, Nintendo, Adobe, Samsung, HP, Xerox, IBM etcetcetc allow you to continue using their products with new technology?

Its just the way things are.

No one is forced to use Windows Vista but Itunes installs Mobile Me without even telling you, it also loads itself in your startup (again without telling you)

There is no way to remove it that Apple provides

You can hack the registry though to get it removed but a little ridiculous

iCrash, iFail, iSuck.

You can put lipstick on iTunes, but it's still iTunes.

This must be a MS / Vista problem, probably personally programmed on purpose by Bill Gates himself.

Everyone knows that Apple products have always perfect in every way and always will be.

Now leave me alone so I can go back to writing Steve Jobs love letters on my Lisa.

"This must be a MS / Vista problem, probably personally programmed on purpose by Bill Gates himself."

LOL

No doubt via a directive by the Anti-Christ, George Bush.

So, does reinstalling it mean, you have to wait for genius to run again and add everything to the library? Or will this all be saved?

Please let me understand something. When an application is so badly written that it crashes the OS, its the OS's fault now???! EVERY application can make ANY OS crash, no matter how bad or good the OS is. If Microsoft writes an app for Mac OSX crash, its microsoft's fault, and not Mac. (Im sure you diehard apple fans would agree with that).
How apple fanboys are trying to justify the fact that apple cannot and probably never will be able to write good software for windows, is totally out of control.

you know, you can't really reasoning with apple fanboys, they are called fanboys for a good reason. They don't respect facts

Vista blows.

So not only is your name wholely unoriginal your comments are too... at least you got that fanboy attitude down so there's that...

Switch to OSx and you do not have a problem.. In fact just get a iMac for your iPhone and iPood. $3000 for a mp3 player.

Use your windows machine for work and games..

Looks like iTunes is heading down the crap trail that Quicktime is already on.

I need to correct my earlier comment...Itunes is already happily skipping down the crap trail and it is getting pretty far down it.

As a user of Free software this is a revealing discussion. Not that we never see finger pointing or insults, but we move on quickly to consensus and resolution.

I know better but from this discussion you'd think proprietary software brings out the worst in people.

Maybe I am being a conspiracist here (if that is even a word), but doesn't it seem ironic that since the last few Apple/PC commercials, poking at all Vista's flaws, that an Apple product seems to only affect Vista boxes giving them the dreaded Blue Screen of Death? This is the very thing Apple is marketing to try and get people to switch over. Now I am not a fanboy of either, I use both hand in hand in my everyday work and home environment, but it seems Apple may have blindly or unintentionally, yet in their sub conscious, created something to make their own computers and operating system look much better over Vista with one of the most popular applications in today's society... maybe I am reading into this a little to far... I'm not usually one to promote conspiracy.

Haha... the best post so far.

Nah...

Apple would never do anything like that.

Oh, wait...the iPhone stores screenshots of everything you do....and there's no way to disable it.

I'm sure that's Vista's fault though...(at least according to the "brain trust" here...)

OMG

THIS

"Anyone who cares about privacy is a criminal or a money-grubbing loser afraid of society finding out that they really DON'T care about other people."

Posted by: Lee | Sep 11, 2008 8:47:06 PM

Wow, just wow hopefully that guy isn't involved in security...

And yet so many here champion the attempt to author malware to intentionally prove they can compromise OSX.

regardless of what system you might use, it is instructive to note the difference between routine occurrences and exceptional events...

I find it rather humorous that so many here even use iTunes, just as well as I find the lack of adequate exception handling in Vista (and too many other OSes that folks tout here as "ENTERPRISE READY") humorous. ...Just listen to so many who champion them whine about the weaknesses.

You are right on.

Example #2: Safari for Windows. Apple purposely makes text look bad. In Safari for OS X text looks good.

Chrome uses the same engine and yet the text looks good too.

Apple has sunk to the level of saboteur .

LMAO

Having read this entire thread, I find it ever so rich that *Vista users* are the alleged Fanboyz!

Love is blind.

Tell me about it...

sure is... just look at internetworld7

SharePod, you fools. It's free, it runs right from your iPod and you can share all your music with anybody you want.

You can create playlists, load videos, it supports covers etc..... and it's under a meg in size.

I've never used iTunes from day one.

And how did you go about formatting your iPod then?

Good question,

My wife's PC has iTunes installed. You have to sync it at least once before running SharePod.

I hear ya on SharePod!

I used iTunes occasionally a couple of years ago when I first got my 30GB iPod, but since SharePod, never again. It works perfectly.

I'm not sure about Winamp's iPod compatibility improvements over the past few releases, but I also continue to use ml_ipod instead.

Basically... anything but iTunes.

Just thought I'd test you there.

/already uses SharePod

Isn't it fun listening to so many Vista zealots whine...

Always nice to see fanboys cry when their OS crashes instead of just the app. Can we say "robust"?

Evidently not!

Its driver. If driver has problem. Every OS will be crash. Drivers problem just like hardware problem. Its not fault of any OS.

Ignore the apple drone...

I'm not a huge fan of Vista, but this is in no way the fault of the OS. The problem is caused by the driver that iTunes installs, so this is completely Apple's fault. Thanks for playing though.

"robust" like apple's code writing

apple can't write good code for windows

I wouldn't go as far as to say they can't, more that they choose not to, doing so makes their Operating System perform and look better against the competition (obviously I am not writing for fact, just a mere assumption given the skills Apple has shown in other areas of coding). Funny though, Microsoft writes their code better for OS X than their own OS as well... look at Office 2007 vs. office 2008... MUCH better 2008 on the mac than on the pc side.

Exactly, especially since Vista is tied so tightly to the hardware now. This is actually a good thing for Vista since it can allow for better handling and faster processing. This is the main reason the masses are having so many issues with Vista, either A.) the developers write shottie driver support or B.) the end user installs the device drivers improperly. Vista is actually showing us how lazy previous versions have made our developers. Now that it is time to step up to the plate, everyone is blaming the OS instead of dealing with their own slackish in house development team. There are PLENTY of apps that run flawless... I have 8 machines in my current shop running Vista, none has been reformatted since launch, they all stay up and running all day, and every app we have runs flawlessly. I work in a heavy production environment where drivers ARE tied to the OS heavily. Printer Rips, Plotter Rips, and other manufacturing and design software. As well as a few OS X machines which also run flawlessly... it's just a matter of the public getting better education on the new landmarks Vista is trying to hit (not to mention 16gb of RAM support!!!! YAY for better memory handling).

*laughing*

Blaming Vista for an app failure.

Your "erudite" analysis completely fails to take into account that it is *not* the app, but the driver, that is causing the failure.

I know you know that. You know you know that. So what are you trying to prove here? That you're just as bad as the rest of the Apple Zealots out there trying to make it seem like something it is not just so you can get another jab in at Vista?

One would think someone as "astute" as you might have better things to do...

Newsflash. There are other more robust environments where a screwy app or driver failure does NOT crash the OS.

For you desktop and overpriced low-fi music jocks (from ANY manufacturer!)- let me give you an example. In AIX the Enhanced Error Handling allows for event and resource isolation in the case of an error. This enables error recovery to occur without affecting any other adapters and subsystems on the system. Without it, machines would checkstop in the event of a driver induced bus error. And you have the functionality to freeze an adapter in the event of an I/O error and avoid the checkstop. An adapter reset is tried and is allowed to fail three times before the adapter is marked as dead and fenced. And the result is a notation in the error log - NOT a crashed machine.

And the machine continues to run. Duh!

And I guess we shouldn't even comment on the apparent FACT that so many erudite users fail to have any kind of change management system where they simply run out and load whatever new update pops up on their system without a plan for testing or rollback...so tell us about how a company should write software when so many can't even manage the much simpler process of managing their own desktop toy.

Nope, blaming Vista for not handling the exsception and crashing!

Apple is to blame for the flaky driver.

MS is to blame for a flaky OS that can't handle exceptions.

Except this happens the same way in OSX and Linux environments as well, you call them kernal panics...

"Its driver. If driver has problem. Every OS will be crash. Drivers problem just like hardware problem. Its not fault of any OS"

Wrong! And I don't care if you are an Apple fanboy or a Vista fanboy.

THIS IS THE FALLACY THAT I AM DEBATING, Tool.

So many here think, most probaly because it is true in the systems to which they have been exposed, that this is the case, and it is simply not true.

But if you folks would get out of the advanced WalMart and Best Buy IT departments for a few minutes, you might discover this. ;-))

Whoohoo!

Vista is finally tied to hardware?
And they FINALLY have support for 16GB!!! of RAM!!!

And yet they still can't avoid such basic exception from bring it down!?

Wow, much of the rest of the enterprise world was already there 12-15 years ago. ;-S

*laughing*

But none of those other OSes are as flexible and adaptable to the many functions of Windows/Mac.

Those OSes are specialized to specific tasks and held to a higher standard because of what they are used for.

Do you always compare commodity parts with their performance counterparts and express shock over the differences? Most of us take those differences for granted.

One would think one as erudite as you could grasp that.

AIX!=Windows/Mac. Never will. Isn't intended to.

Except that this thread is focused on iTunes and Vista and the limited exception handling capabilities of Vista.

He's talking about AIX.

Which of course, we apparently should all be running (even though they'd have to remove half of the "enhancement" to get the majority of functionality we get on Windows/Mac, thus negating any benefit)...

Pure comic genius. Mission critical business requires a different set of rules and standards than the consumer market....who'da thunk it?

So you can bring up other OSes (AIX) which have no relation to the market in question, but we can't bring up OSes that actually *exist* in this market?

*laughing*

You *are* trolling. I must admit, you are getting very good at this...

AIX is specialized for specific tasks? Nonsense. It is just more suited for mission critical use because of the features they chose to incorporate. But your circular logic is entertaining to read.

Yes, they are designed to be more robust and as a result it has become a standard in enterprise environments precisely because of that feature - among many other design parameters they chose to incorporate. And the irony is that MS makes the same claims about being suited to enterprise environments for its Windows line - which ironically lacks many of the said design concepts enabling exception handling and regards to which they fail to deliver.

But I love the excuses made for Vista - "but it wasn't meant to be robust or able to handle exceptions. IOW: it was designed to crash." LOL!

So which is it? Vista is an enterprise ready system suitable for the desktop, or Vista is not suited for the enterprise by virtue that it lacks adequate exception handling and can be brought down by something as 'COMPLEX' as iTunes?

Of course we could mention the same about the lack of 'sandboxed' environments making Vista less able to deal with malware as well...

And...And... And...

I love listening to folks who make excuses for systems not being able to deal with such issues as malware and exceptions - and yet complaining about the limitation in the same post.

HERE is the disconnect! I am not trying to push AIX. It is just an example of the the technology many have said could not be done to which I was responding!

Nope, I'm talking about the features IBM incorporated that can rather easily be incorporated in other environments as well.

And AIX is NOT the only other environment that features this. It is simply an example of a real system that does.

And noting prevents AIX from running on the desktop, and many do! The fundamental limitation is that the desktop app developers haven't written for it. And thats not a fault of the OS. I personally would love for more developers to write the small apps for it.

But then I understand that they are not going to and I don't whine like the Vista users who expect their system to do what it was not designed to do.

Oh, and just to confuse the issue still more, most of the systems that are employed in AIX have been open sourced by IBM over 10 years ago.

Just like their Logical Volume Manager was incorporated by HP into HP-UX. If more vendors were as savvy as they claim, they could easily port them over to their systems as well.

Thus far only Linux seems to be savvy enough to be using the technologies to various degrees. Their biggest problem seems to ironically be that so many in the Linux world came from Windows and seem preoccupied making it work and look like Windows! Such lofty standards! LOL!

*YAWN*

Vista - Consumer OS, excepting the business SKU.

Windows server 2000/3/8 - Enterprise.

You keep implying Vista is supposed to be a server OS like AIX. Where did you get that crack you are smoking from?

But I love the excuses made for Vista - "but it wasn't meant to be robust or able to handle exceptions. IOW: it was designed to crash." LOL!

In your words, maybe. The rest of us realize that if they even attempted to enforce the standards AIX are held to in a consumer Windows product, it simply wouldn't function, at the very least, not for the tasks most consumers would want to use it for.

Please, feel free to continue this charade of comparing two completely different products, aimed at two completely different markets, for two completely different tasks...and the feigned shock at why they don't actually compare.

It's all highly amusing.

can be brought down by something as 'COMPLEX' as iTunes?

*Still* confusing the app for the driver? Are you purposefully trying to mis-state the issue, or are you just retarded?

So which is it?

*You* are the only one comparing a consumer desktop OS to an enterprise server OS. You are the only one comparing two completely different products and then acting all surprised that they don't *actually* compare.

So no. *You* tell *us* which it is. Is AIX a desktop OS? You seem hell-bent on comparing it to one, and you seem to *love* telling *us* how it is.

*yawn*

This is pointeless.

Let us know when they get iTunes on AIX...or HP-UX..or any other OS you'd like to play your absurd comparisons with.

Until then you're comparing apes to fish. You can't compare them because they are completely unsuited to the same tasks, and designed for completely different uses.

I'm amazed you even mentioned Linux...as it is just as vulnerable to driver failure (since their strides towards becoming a desktop OS began) as any other desktop OS.

Do you have a link to the apes and fish manuals to substantiate your outrageous claims here?

Wat was absurd and what was respondied to initially were the claims that robust exception handling cannot and is not done in any OS made by some here for whom OS design is limited to debates over which accomodates the most games. Remember?

Personally I couldn't care less that iTunes crashes Windows - and even less about iTunes.

The blame belongs with both the flaky driver and a OS that cannot handle such basic exception.

What is fun to watch is the mighty Windows camp and Apple toy camps point fingers at each other when it is the combination of both that is the problem.

Enjoy your toys.

No, unfortunately, the only person I trusted with them was recently turned into a newt.

....she hasn't gotten better yet. ;)

I hate it when that happens...

The blame belongs with both the flaky driver and a OS that cannot handle such basic exception.

Never claimed neither was at fault, but is the very fact that other USB devices can operate fully on Vista *without* crashing the system meaningless?

What is fun to watch is the mighty Windows camp and Apple toy camps point fingers at each other when it is the combination of both that is the problem.

Agreed. It's also fun to watch folks who claim to not be bothered with such things pointing fingers at everyone else. ;)

Enjoy your toys.

Oh, we do. Some of us actually get work done on them as well.

AIX was but ONE SPECIFIC example of an OS that routinely addresses such exceptions and fences off the resource and continues on its way. It is not the only one.

And I don't care if you use it or not.

Many here erroneously made the claim that such capability does not exist and that all OSes suffer from this vulnerability. That is not true and it needn't be.

In fact, Windows server doesn't even come close to having this capability despite making claims regarding being a robust enterprise server!

So your focus on AIX is a red herring. The technology and design is available and able to be incorporated. The major server OS as well as the major desktop OS has chosen not to impliment it. Just as they failed to impliment many of the best practices in OS security design - thus rendering the systems vulnerable to many flaws that could be rendered moot.

The point was and is, that Windows OS design chose to 'ignore' such best practices and as a result renders itself prone to such catastrophic failure - and NOT because it is impossible to do as many seem to think!

That must come as a big shock to so many here who seem to think that the world of real world OSes reaches its pinnacle of development in Windows, when in fact it is rather low on the list of available robust powerful server class OSes.

So go debate those who claim that such capability is not possible.

Not that it matters, but this recurring claim that AIX could not be used in a desktop environment as is is simply complete BS. It is a fully compliant BSD/SystemV UNIX.

There is NOTHING about it that precludes its use on the desktop other than the fact that many developers have not ported their toys to UNIX.

And there is nothing unique about error handling that limits it to AIX or precludes its use in a consumer OS or the enterprise Windows products - other than the fact that MS chose not to do it!

Your notions that AIX is some weird variant only suited to enterprise server use is humorus at best and tends to point to your never having worked on it. In fact, using Lotus for business functionality, it is a perfectly good desktop.

And it COMPLETELY MISSES THE POINT that error handling can be implimented in a desktop or server OS depite the repeated erroneous claims of many!

And the fact that IBM included robust error handling capabilities 10-15 years ago in the system is more a function of what is capable in UNIX without a lot of extra work than anything else. But then it was 32/64 bit compatible then too!

However you want to try to make a distinction regarding the targeted market is amusing, and your preoccupation with AIX a bit pathological. AIX was just an example of a use of the design practices. And there is nothing unique about AIX (its just IBM's UNIX) that renders it incapable of being a perfectly good desktop except for IBM's not targeting the desktop with it and instead choosing to keep it for their higher end use while using open source Linux for the less demanding uses.

But the fact that is that such design elements could potentially be included in a desktop or an enterprise server like any of the Windows line (precluding fundamantal design limitations), and the fact that MS has failed to do it does not mean that it can't be done as many have claimed.

So, try talking about OS design practices for a change. Windows decided that such error handling is not important. And its rather humorus to see that some of you disagree.

I think its fun and comical to listen to so many claim such robustness does not exist and cannot be implimented.

It can and has. The fact is, Windows hasn't. So we will continue to listen to the hordes complain that it is solely the domain of 3rd party developers to prevent Windows from crashing, when in fact MS shares responsibility by virtue of having decided that robust error handling is not important and that the occurance of crashes is not considered a critical issue.

It would seem from the complaints of some that they disagree.

If it's so spectacular, so light years ahead of other desktop OSes...and it *could* be used on the desktop...

Why hasn't it been?

I'm not actually looking for an answer here, because I know you'll blame it on marketing or the fact that people are stupid or some other lame excuse.

AIX was just an example of a use of the design practices

*laughing* You can use it as an example, but I can't use that same example to simplify things? I'm sorry, perhaps I should just generalize it and call it, "foxfyre's wetdreamOS"? Talk about trying to find something, *anything* to argue about. Nice stretch. Feel better?

And it COMPLETELY MISSES THE POINT that error handling can be implimented in a desktop or server OS depite the repeated erroneous claims of many!

*laughing* again... god you're amusing today...

I never *once* said it was impossible to code such an OS. My implication, which I thought was quite clear, was that it was a realistic impossibility. Any Current Desktop OS deciding to go that route *now* would have to break backwards compatibility 100% (except possibly via emulation/virtualization). Do you think there's a chance in *hell* that the market would allow Apple or MSFT to do that given the absurd backlash over what amounts to the current ~10 incompatibility Vista represents?

You seem to be unable to grasp the basic concept that not every OS needs to be UNIX. Well, for sane people anyway.

So your focus on AIX is a red herring

Whatever. I took *your* example, and in the interest of keeping it simple, ran with it.

Whine about it. It's funny.

Windows OS design chose to 'ignore' such best practices

...in favor of backwards compatibility and the knowledge that there was no way in hell they'd have been able to convince the industry to go along with it. Remember when they tried to harden the Vista Kernel? How'd that go over?

such robustness does not exist and cannot be implimented(sic).

Show me where I claimed such.

Thanks.

Aix is simply ONE an example where effective error handling has been implimented.

And implimenting such does not compromise compatibility - except that many would not recognize their OS if it doesn't routinely crash!

What?????????????????

You have become pathological.
I am not arguing for AIX to take over the world.

It dominates a niche now.

Ans in response to your pathological preoccupation with what you said, read the thread!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

By darkxiiindp edited Sep 12, 2008 - 12:57 AM

Its driver. If driver has problem. Every OS will be crash. Drivers problem just like hardware problem. Its not fault of any OS.

That is just ONE example!
Tool, I know you think you are important, and I enjoy hassling you as you seem to have a much greater grasp of larger pictrures than some, but you have utterly lost it here and you are arguing some imaginied issue that is of your own making.

But, sit down before I say this, your ideas are not the only ones in this thread to which I respond.

There, there...it will be OK...

You have successfully misconstrued an issue of OS design, whereby the 'so called impossible' has been given just one example of where it has been done and you now take this to be an AIX should take over the world thread.

Again: robust exception handing at the hardware and the software level has little to do with compatibility. Period.

But congrats on finding a great nonsensical position to take - After all it is a Friday.

But then it is you Windows nuts who are preoccupied with the fac that your beloved OS crashes all due to ploaying with a toy called iTunes and a lousy driver. :-((((( LOL!

You have lost it, man!

The fact is, robust error and exception handling CAN be incorporated into an OS. Its not that hard. And the fact is that MS seems to lack the will or the knowledge, or both , to impliment it into their line of products. And like security, its an afterthought at best.

But as you said, its more important to be compatible with some 1983 program that has been orphaned long ago than to actually impliment modern OS design techniques.

But then we have so many here thinking its impossible - after all, MS hasn't done it - it must be impossible! LOL!

Have a good weekend.

Maybe I should have quoted you to make it easier to understand...

"except that many would not recognize their OS if it doesn't routinely crash"

Except it doesn't, it only crashes when there is either a bad driver or the hardware itself is failing.

The BSODS tell you the majority of the time what went wrong.

You are clueless. What I am talking about only results in a fenced piece of hardware or an entry in the error report.

It keeps right on running.

Stick to Windows. You don't know to what I am referring.

I believe his point is in the current consumer OS market (where these type of issues would happen because they have unrestricted control) whether it is OSX, Ubuntu or Windows they are all suspect to having a driver cause a kernel panic(BSOD in windows)

In an IT controlled environment I would hope the system admin is smart enough to lock down the machine as much as possible to avoid user error.

If its as easy as you claim how come it happens in OSX and Linux still?

I said it has been claimed in this thread!

And I quoted it somewhere in this mess. Look for it in bold!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (I will find it and paste it in here later just for you!)

Here:

By darkxiiindp edited Sep 12, 2008 - 12:57 AM

Its driver. If driver has problem. Every OS will be crash. Drivers problem just like hardware problem. Its not fault of any OS.

I know its hard to believe, and perhaps I shouldn't pay attention to what anyone else posts aside from you, but sometimes the lunacy of what is posted simply piques my interest - if only in a perverse manner!

Your welcome!

...you egomaniacal self absorbed nut job! (How is that for a Friday?) Oops! time to get out of here! Take care and have a good one - if you can keep your machine from crashing!

;-)))))

Because idiots like you just whine here and keep buying the crap!

get the Feck back to work. you folks are straight crazy. find some porn. go outside.
---
oh man now i have to take my own advice. it's okay!!

Yeah, you are the one clueless, I was referring to your comment about an OS that routinely crashes.

Because I am going to go on a wild guess here, BSODS do not happen in AIX...

Well, when they come out with something that is not "crap" let me and the rest of the world know because we obviously haven't heard of it...

As the three big contenders OSX, Ubuntu and Windows are all crap...

You really are an ass.

b!tching about products that Tool says were never designed to be robust proving that they are not robust!

What was that again, genius? You *never* said *I* made that claim?

Really?

Pathological, indeed...

You can't even keep track of your own comments...

And read you response to that post you quoted while you're at it, you even called the guy, "Tool".

Yeah, you're firing on all cylinders, right?

ADD much?

b!tching about products that Tool says were never designed to be robust proving that they are not robust!

Yeah, you said it.

you might remember if you weren't so busy being a complete nutjob yourself.

I installed it on my Vista ultimate computer with no problems whatsoever. plays great no blue screen I've stopped started rebooted no problems at all maybe some of you don't know how to install it correctly.....

Here's an idea. Get any MP3 player that's not an iPod and you'll more than likely not need to install any software.

I'm shocked, surely not iTunes. So where are those people that were gushing over how great iTunes 8 was a few days ago?

My guess is that they are out using it instead of whining like you and the Zunies are.

This is an ignorant comment, he's right everyone was praising itunes 8 a few days ago.

Zune wasn't even mentioned in the context as I am sure you are aware there are a lot of other mp3 players other then the Zune.

I thought you had more class then to bring up trite snips at a product you never have used and a market you consider all lo-fi toys, yet here you are talking about a market you have no interest in...

Does not liking iTunes automatically mean a person owns a Zune? Well I don't have a Zune or an ipod, isn't that amazing! Well not to most people really, maybe just to you.

In his defense, he said "Zunies", implying people who own a Zune.

It was ignorant though, I agree.

Why did you have to bring up the Zune?

Flamebait?

Poor babies, I make the comments in context of the threads and posts over the past few days, not simply during the previous 15 minutes that constitutes the average attention span here.

Go back and peruse the 120GB Zune and 'new' iPod announcements, clueless ones.

You might note that in the iPod thread the Zuneboys are out in throngs, just as in the Zune announcement plenty whine as well.

Bottomline, anyone playing with a low-fi audio player that costs upwards of $250 has issues, and an OS that is so easily brought down by what should be an inconsequential driver error without the ability to exception and avoid a checkstop and fence the resource could stand to be a bit more robust.

I think both are hilarious - just as are the users who are clueless with regards to both!

Regardless you use NONE of these services, why are you commenting on something that means nothing to you?

Everyone knows mp3 players are not about vast superior sound quality, its purpose is to make things easier.

Same thing with Cell phones the quality is not nearly as good as a standard landline but its more convenient. (not the best example but you get the idea)

Its a hell of a lot more convenient to carry a mp3 player around then multiple cds and some people like to listen to music outside of their home.

I'm commenting on the whining of so many b!tching about products that Tool says were never designed to be robust proving that they are not robust!

If you knowingly choose to use a system prone to such failure, accept it as a condition of the product you chose! Don't then come out and b!tch about whose fault it is that it intentionally designed that way!

Except the alternatives for the consumer would all lead to the same result - bad driver for the consumer market will crash their choice OS.

Itunes would never be installed in a corporate environment, (at least I hope it wouldn't)

Plus in the IT environment this stuff is tested thoroughly before giving it to their users. We just got SP2 recently and I work for one of the largest banks in the US.

AIX is not used in the average consumer setting, hell I don't think anyone does...

So because Vista can be crashed by a driver, we should just buck up and take it when someone writes a bad driver that does it?

We should completely stop demanding that any QA or testing be done?

Are you seriously implying that because poorly written drivers can panic the OS, we have no right to complain about the driver manufacturer's inability to accomplish a task so many others have been able to do without problems?

Really?

Really??

Yeah Tool, like I said poorly writen anything is good. And yes, stop QA and testing.

It MUST be Friday, you are sadly slipping in yur usual astute observations.

I am saying that we have a right to complain about poorly written drivers, apps AND OSes that fail to offer such features as robust exception handling, be it software or hardware based!

So you see, while lousy drivers are lousy, so are OSes that compromise larger environments and resources that can't handle such puny issues as an iTunes driver.

Really! Really! ;-))

It is used in A LOT of settings, much of which you are obviously clueless about! Hell, even Intel develops on it! (and on Power!)From workstations on desktops to the largest distributed highly available supercomputer complexes!

And the same OS can be used by anyone if they are conversant with UNIX. Heck, AIX can now be run on the PC as it has been released for x86.

But this isn't a call for everyone to use it! (Read that sentence again! and again! and again! until you get it!)

And to the degree that you and Tool think(sic) it is, you have utterly missed the point!

It is just ONE example where robust HW and SW exception handling has been implimented. Duh!
And it an be done WITHOUT ANY compatibility issues! In fact, it should be transparent to any app!

If you knowingly choose to use a system prone to such failure, accept it as a condition of the product you chose

Keep backtracking, genius.

I'm slipping? You're so emotionally involved, you can't even type anymore, not to mention your apparently lack of ability to remember your own posts...

What else is new!
Apple will never get it!
Apple never tests anything!
usbappl.sys should be called a virus

Ditto. Never had a Vista BSOD until today. Twice.

Friggin iTunes 8.

Speaks volumes as to the robustness of the Vista OS when an app can crash it.

Then by that logic, no OS is robust... Every OS out there has been brought down by an shoddy app, at one point or another.

It wasn't the app, was it?

For someone who seems so intent on detail, you sure seem to let that all come to a screeching halt when Vista is concerned.

It's the driver issue, not the App.

BS. Not all OSes, AIX and HP-UX in particular, crash when a driver or app goes awry!

But then folks whose only experience with OSes extends to their game platform might not know this.

...and how many 3rd party companies are manufacturing drivers for these systems?

...and what are these systems generally used for?

Comparing Windows to AIX. Beautiful...

Commodity is less stable than performance/specialized? How shocking! How insightful of you for pointing that out to all us brainless windoze users...

If you understand the bloat this useless "tool" carries, one does understand why it crashes everywhere.

Kinda funny. As a windows admin, I just walked a coworker down to the mac store and showed them how to buy a mac.

Pigs be flyin' folks.

Nevertheless, yeah, Vista. I just use it for the games and to move my mouse around when I'm bored.

Could your coworker not walk him/herself down there?

That's why he got a Mac :D
That start button was just too darn confusing...

lol...
that and maybe 2 buttons or more on mice

They couldn't find the start menu in Vista.

Yup, those 3 button mice came from UNIX....of course that UNIX is tres confusing to the erudite Windows folks.

And why did MS feel compelled to move to a GUI and abandon s viable oh so advanced command line interface?

LOL!

I love your low level of intelligence...it makes me feel so great that I am not you ;)

I'm sure they could.

But perhaps this example will enlighten you as to why some people seek the help of others on matters to which they do not know: As a baby, Were you abandoned and fended for yourself, or did a parent help you out?

I am a caveman with a rock for a screen. Are you suggesting I had parents?

So your co-worker is a baby then. Sounds like they got some deeper issues then buying a computer

Everything crashes in Vista...!

Start Taking the hint:

It's not the Software, IT'S VISTA!!!

oh here we go again...flaming the operating system when 3rd party software doesn't work on it. you are an idiot. What do you think software testing/beta testing is for? Apparently Apple doesn't even think about having users beta test their programs, that's why it always Fails. Trolls like you make me sick.

I think someone is metally retarded. :P

You are an idiot...a troll (a bad one at that)

If a blue screen comes up and it lists usbappl.sys,

I'll give you 3 guesses to figure out who's driver that is...

Works on XP, but doesn't work on Vista? I could understand why people would be pissy with Vista. Doesn't really matter who's fault it is to the end-user: it only matters which one works. :p

But its not happening to all Vista users, either
but the one thing in common that most are experiencing is the usbappl.sys driver which I'll give you three guesses who makes it...

No, it's the user!

Nice to know the Apple driver is like so many other native drivers for Vista...

Its the stupid user who uses Vista.

Yes, true, it is not Vista, it is stupid users who do not know how to use Vista's driver support properly. However, in the iTunes case, it IS something with how it handles the new audio support. Vista cut out direct hardware ties to older audio cards and now emulates it through software. If iTunes is calling for it to read from hardware, there might be a misscommunication. Newer machines with Vista compatible hardware sound cards shouldn't have any issue, my machine works perfectly fine, however, few cheaper Dell's in my office I tested for argument sake, crashed. The same crashed machines operate flawless in everything else.

ummm, Apples USB driver?... lol, this is fun, give me another!

That is because Apple knows their products "Just Work" ;)

Well like Ed the blogger noted, before installing the new v8, backup the old GEARAspiWDM.sys file and restore it after the upgrade.

as with mobileme we all know what software installs like that are, maybe it's time to re-tag iTunes as Adware ;)

After upgrading to get used to the new stuff I played with my library correcting some things and the bug that still corrupts the text on screen with itunes is still there. Sadly bonjour is also crashing while transferring music, vista starting ect. Every time I start itunes i must see the damn your bonjour service is disabled, you will not be able to use some features such as sharing, apple tv and blah blah. Very tired of it. Tried reinstalling and nothing seemed to save it.

It sounds like you got a bad Vista install TBH...

I was able to uninstall the bonjour service without issue but I wanted to use simplify with my touch and it requires it to stream music to the device.

Could just change the title to "iTunes Causes Headaches" and you could use it for all occassions.

No way. No how. No iTunes.

Did you get that from somebody's bumper today?

Well, that is no big deal. Vista causes Vista user headaches, after all. :)

I'm not a fan of iTunes on the PC. But, on the Mac, it ran great in OS X 10.4.

The only headaches Vista might be somewhat accountable are from correcting Forums trolls lies about it.

Toolie, you stink of desperation, just like Billy boy and his buddy seinfeld. Go buy another zunie, and stop whining about Apple.

I did not whine about Apple, did I? Can't read, can you?

Here's a deal for ya:

I'll stop "whining about Apple" if you stop whining about Microsoft.

Deal?

Love how your one and only contribution here is a troll for me.

I'm blushing...

Great, didnt know itunes could get much worse, but I guess it just did.

One workaround is remove all other usb devices seems to resolve issue.

"Another driver being identified in crash reports is an updated USB controller driver, which appears to be in use when the iPod device is connected. Since the crash happens as the iPod is recognized via USB, this is a likely cause"

Most people who are getting a BSOD with this problem shows usbaapl.sys caused the error which is the apple mobile usb driver.

The only way I seen to remove mobile me was removing the mobile device which is needed for the ipod unless I missed something, will check on that when I get home...

EDIT

Yeah removing the mobile device does not remove mobile me

you have to hack the registry to get rid of it

Apple Mobile Device Service is not needed unless you are using an iPhone.

its needed for the touch :/

Apple really are getting bad at bundling other crap with their software even after specifically telling it not to install.

Some bugs always slip through I suppose, but big ones really shouldn't happen if you had a limited beta test group outside of their sterile environment. For some reason they refuse to do this.

Yup, and I'm waiting for inevitable rattling of the class-action-lawsuit saber LOL. I think we all know it's likely to come.

lol it would be amusing.