Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
typodupeerror delete not in

Comments: 570 +-   Some Users Say Win7 Wants To Remove iTunes, Google Toolbar on Wednesday October 21, @04:23PM

Posted by timothy on Wednesday October 21, @04:23PM
from the you-choose-the-teapot-you-choose-the-tempest dept.
upgrades
google
windows
apple
Foofoobar writes "Due to a strike with the UK's postal system, people in Great Britain are getting copies of Windows 7 early and have already posted their experiences about the install process. Some have an easy time but others post installs taking 3 hours including Windows asking them to remove iTunes and Google toolbar prior to installation." The article indicates that many of these early users, though, are having better luck.
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Sounds good to me (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 21, @04:25PM (#29828953)

    iTunes and Google Toolbar are annoyances anyway. If they could permanently get rid of Quicktime, I'd be a happy camper.

    • Re:Sounds good to me (Score:5, Interesting)

      by MyLongNickName (822545) on Wednesday October 21, @04:31PM (#29829035) Journal

      Seriously. I actually like iTunes, but damn is it a resource hog. Sometimes it will chew up 90%+ of CPU for no apparent reason. It will often be unresponsive to clicks for a couple seconds. I am not sure what is so complicated about a music player that causes this.

      And then every time it asks me for an upgrade, it insists on installing Quicktime and other things that I don't want on my PC.

      I don't use Macs, but wonder if all of Steve's apps behave this way...

      • by Anubis IV (1279820) on Wednesday October 21, @04:40PM (#29829145)
        As with most of these types of things, they perform far better on the original platform. Microsoft does the same thing with the Office suite, for instance. I tend to agree that Safari and Quicktime on Windows bug me, but on the Mac, they're great. iTunes on Windows is far inferior to the Mac version as well, not in terms of features, but certainly in terms of performance.
      • Re:Sounds good to me (Score:4, Informative)

        by maccodemonkey (1438585) on Wednesday October 21, @04:41PM (#29829163)
        QuickTime is what iTunes uses for it's MP3/AAC decoding engine, which is why it's installing QuickTime. It's not just installing it to force it on you, it's actually a dependency. This is why iTunes on Mac OS X is still a QuickTime 7 app. It can't move to QuickTime X because QuickTime X is not cross platform.
        • by Rix (54095) on Wednesday October 21, @05:01PM (#29829387)

          First off, there's no legitimate reason iTunes has to use QuickTime for MP3/AAC decoding. There are plenty of other options. If Apple insists on eating their own dogfood, there's no excuse for installing more than is necessary. Installing iTunes doesn't mean I want their stupid, crippled movie player or plugins.

        • by Bacon Bits (926911) on Wednesday October 21, @05:14PM (#29829527)

          So why can't Apple do what the rest of the world does when it needs to use code from another application... use libraries. You don't need Quicktime's plugins or media player. Just the libraries should be sufficient.

        • by nmg196 (184961) on Wednesday October 21, @05:27PM (#29829639)

          You posted that like you thought QuickTime is decoding engine, which it's actually an awful cheap media player from the early 90s. An encoding engine is a small DLL - not an entire media player application. There is no NEED for Apple to require QuickTime to be installed, but like much of Apple's software.

          iTunes is one of the most badly written awful pieces of software in mass usage today. It's no wonder Windows needs it to be out of the way while it's installing - it does a LOT of horrible things to your system including installing all sorts of pointless services and modifying many critical bluetooth settings.

            • Re:Sounds good to me (Score:5, Interesting)

              by EdZ (755139) on Wednesday October 21, @06:50PM (#29830325)

              Do you honestly think a half dozen audio codecs, and another half dozen video codecs would make for a "small" DLL?

              Yes. e.g:
              CCCP: 5.9mb (plays damn near everything you'll encounter, including .mov if you rename them to .mp4, as for the past few revisions that's all they've been anyway)
              Quicktime Alternative: 17.8mb (just the quicktime codecs and the plugin, no player)
              Quicktime: 30.94mb

            • Re:Sounds good to me (Score:5, Informative)

              by Achromatic1978 (916097) <robert AT pennyonthesidewalk DOT com> on Wednesday October 21, @07:02PM (#29830431)

              Again, the components of QuickTime that seem to annoy people are very small, and easy to remove. Do you honestly think a half dozen audio codecs, and another half dozen video codecs would make for a "small" DLL?

              Huh, what?

              A codec is a mathematical algorithm. Are you telling me that the codecs for interpreting an MP3/AAC stream, etc, are SO COMPLEX that the math for them can't be contained in less than 40 or 50 megabytes of compiled code?

              Survey says: horseshit.

              Check out VLC sometime. It does more in a quarter of the size of Quicktime than Quicktime does, by far, in terms of codecs.

            • Re:Sounds good to me (Score:5, Informative)

              by Per Wigren (5315) on Wednesday October 21, @07:13PM (#29830529) Homepage

              Do you honestly think a half dozen audio codecs, and another half dozen video codecs would make for a "small" DLL?

              libavcodec [ffmpeg.org] currently has decoders for 242 audio and video codecs, encoders for 100, demuxers for 129 container formats and muxers for 89.
              The resulting DLL is about 7 MB.

      • Re:Sounds good to me (Score:5, Informative)

        by tepples (727027) <<moc.thgienip> <ta> <6002hsals>> on Wednesday October 21, @04:49PM (#29829235) Homepage Journal

        And then every time it asks me for an upgrade, it insists on installing Quicktime and other things that I don't want on my PC.

        If you're talking about QuickTime Player and Safari, consider this: The iTunes application relies on the QuickTime framework to play media and the WebKit framework to display iTunes Store and iTunes LP. Trying to run iTunes without QuickTime and WebKit is like trying to run Windows Media Player without Windows Media or trying to run VLC without libavcodec.

      • by oldspewey (1303305) on Wednesday October 21, @04:50PM (#29829251)

        Sometimes it will chew up 90%+ of CPU for no apparent reason.

        It's thinking different.

      • by bertok (226922) on Wednesday October 21, @08:14PM (#29830963)

        Seriously. I actually like iTunes, but damn is it a resource hog. Sometimes it will chew up 90%+ of CPU for no apparent reason. It will often be unresponsive to clicks for a couple seconds. I am not sure what is so complicated about a music player that causes this.

        And then every time it asks me for an upgrade, it insists on installing Quicktime and other things that I don't want on my PC.

        I don't use Macs, but wonder if all of Steve's apps behave this way...

        I actually need and use iTunes (to talk to my iPhone), but one thing that shits me to no end is that every time I get a point-release update of iTunes, it installs two hidden "on startup" items. I have to use the 'msconfig' tool to get rid of them every bloody time.

        Programs should really stop the habit of silently installing background processes that mostly do nothing except slow down the computer's boot time.

        For example, since Vista, Windows has had a great task scheduler API that lets developer schedule system tasks like "check for update" on lots of complex criteria, such a "30 minutes after the PC goes idle". That way, the processes are only run once per machine (not user), don't slow down the boot, and can close to conserve memory after the check is done.

        And don't get me started with the hideous piece-of-s*** that is Bonjour, which is a system service installed by iTunes that intercepts and modifies DNS requests. It opens your computer to vulnerabilities and has broken some apps. A music player has absolutely no business fucking around with system-wide DNS.

        Every time someone complains that their machine is 'slow', it's either a virus, or I just use msconfig to disable the 50 startup processes installed by crap like iTunes. Miraculously, it turns out that there was nothing wrong with their hardware after all.

  • by icebike (68054) on Wednesday October 21, @04:26PM (#29828965)

    First, this obviously applies only to upgrades.

    Second, iTunes does horrible things to your USB stack, and it needs to go.

    After Win7 is installed you can add it back, and not lose any of your music.

    Don't make a big deal out of Microsoft trying to remove the effects of misbehaved software corrupting the install.

    There is no issue here.

      • by icebike (68054) on Wednesday October 21, @04:50PM (#29829247)

        Yes you could make that claim.

        But some parts of iTunes don't run in user-space.

        Apple Mobile Device runs as a service as does Bonjour.

        Its this device driver that needs to go (temporarily) and the system needs a reboot with it gone (in true Microsoft fashion).

        After the upgrade, when you re-install iTunes, the Apple Mobile drivers will be subordinate to the new Windows 7 Device Stage, and all will be well.

  • Wow (Score:5, Funny)

    by Kratisto (1080113) on Wednesday October 21, @04:27PM (#29828973)
    Windows 7 recognizes how bad iTunes is? Even XP can't do that! I'm switching right now... Where'd I put my MSDNAA login?
  • So (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 21, @04:27PM (#29828977)

    If they didn't do this we would be reading about how the upgrade breaks competitor's software. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

  • by rwade (131726) on Wednesday October 21, @04:29PM (#29829013)

    Here's the a quote from the article of a user who found that Windows 7 asked that the user uninstall iTunes:

    ...and I reinstalled iTunes which worked fine without any configuration, my library and apps were all there.

    While I agree it is suspicious that iTunes and the Google Toolbar were the only applications that Windows 7 ask that particular user to uninstall, it should be made clear that Windows 7 did not impede the user from using that software or foist a MS application on him.

    I will note that many users had significant difficulties with using non-Apple software after upgrading to Snow Leopard.

    I myself have had significant difficulties using already installed software after upgrading various shared libraries via ports on FreeBSD.

    I would suggest that these issues are along the lines of what Microsoft was doing when it asked the user to uninstall iTunes and the Google Toolbar.

  • Oh, FFS! (Score:5, Informative)

    by R2.0 (532027) on Wednesday October 21, @04:29PM (#29829017)

    From TFA:

    "The upgrade process gave me a list of about 5 programs to un-install," he says. "Which I did, it was some drivers, iTunes and the Google Toolbar. After that the whole thing was automatic, I just left it sitting there... At the end of it, Windows put back the drivers I removed, and I reinstalled iTunes which worked fine without any configuration, my library and apps were all there. I have to say that is about the most successful Windows upgrade I have ever personally experienced."

    Yep - a disaster in the making.

  • by pandrijeczko (588093) on Wednesday October 21, @04:30PM (#29829023)

    I've no plans to upgrade to Windows 7 from XP whatsoever but if people are being asked to remove iTunes and Google Toolbar, this implies they are using an "install over the top" upgrade method, rather than "backup, format and install from new".

    And if these people **REALLY** believe that upgrading any OS in this fashion, let alone MS Windows, will end up giving them a nice clean install afterwards, then they probably shouldn't be anywhere near a computer in the first place.

  • Crappy Summary (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Codger (96717) on Wednesday October 21, @04:32PM (#29829061)

    What a crappy, dishonest summary! I despise MS as much as anyone, but this is too much. Yes, it asked them to remove iTunes, etc., but then it reinstalled them! And everything worked.

    • Re:Crappy Summary (Score:5, Insightful)

      by GF678 (1453005) on Wednesday October 21, @05:06PM (#29829457)

      I despise MS as much as anyone, but this is too much.

      For me, the more Slashdot bashes Microsoft unfairly, the less I despise Microsoft. If Microsoft is supposedly so rotten, why does Slashdot feel the need to lie? It makes Slashdot look like it's run by a bunch of idiots with an agenda, and makes me question how much of the bashing of MS is legitimate.

  • by Useful Wheat (1488675) on Wednesday October 21, @04:39PM (#29829129)

    Did the poster even read the article? The summary is longer than the sentence that mentions this.

    "The upgrade process gave me a list of about 5 programs to un-install," he says. "Which I did, it was some drivers, iTunes and the Google Toolbar." What does the author say about this horrible, horrible thing? "I have to say that is about the most successful Windows upgrade I have ever personally experienced."

    That's not sarcasm, that's not some biting commentary at microsoft, that is a user who is content with his instillation of Windows 7 on a computer. This is not an article about how microsoft is afraid of competition and squashes even the slightest attempt at competition, this is about how 3 people were relatively happy with their instillations.

    The poster picked the single most insignificant statement out of context, and made it their headline. I'm not sure if the poster was being ironic, or trying to troll linux fans into reading a pro-microsoft article, but the summary has almost nothing to do with the article.

    The upgrade didn't make you purge your computer of open source software. Windows 7 didn't make you uninstall OO.O, or even Lotus Notes (which really, needs to die). The upgrade did not purge your computer of competitor's software, it just so happened that those 2 programs needed to be reinstalled.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 21, @05:06PM (#29829447)

      The upgrade did not purge your computer of competitor's software, it just so happened that those 2 programs needed to be reinstalled.

      I can even tell you specifically why those 2 programs should be uninstalled then reinstalled after the upgrade. No, it's not because Microsoft's trying to stick it to competitors.

      iTunes messes with your USB stack by installing system-level drivers, and since the whole underlying OS is changing, those drivers will likely not work right after an upgrade for reasons that should be blatantly obvious to anyone who considers themselves 'good with computers'. The best practice is to let the iTunes installer see that it's installing on Windows 7 and configure the drivers correctly for the new OS.

      Google Toolbar installs differently depending on which version of Internet Explorer it's installing into. Vista users may be using IE7, whereas Windows 7 comes with IE8. Technically using the IE7 interfaces to extend IE8 is supported, but it forces some backward-compatibility hacks to be enabled, which slows the entire browser down. By uninstalling and reinstalling after the upgrade, you get the IE8 version of the Google Toolbar and it runs better.

  • Compatibility? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by holiggan (522846) on Wednesday October 21, @04:47PM (#29829209)

    Can I play a bit of devil's advocate? My guess is that the need to remove iTunes and Google toolbar might be related to compatibility issues (i.e., the version that the users have currently not being the "latest" one, or the one "100%" compatible with 7). Without any more concret info, like the version number for iTunes of all the machines involved, if 7 "demands" diferent things with the same version installed, etc, we can't really be sure what's the issue here, and assume it's for the best for the users (not having potentialy incompatible software installed on 7).

    Now before someone says "but I've been using iTunes 2.0 with 7 since forever!!", well, I'm just speculating as much as the next guy :) Afterall, this is Slashdot, right? ;)

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 21, @04:53PM (#29829303)

    I'm definitely not a windows fan(or user). I'm totally a Linux guy, but it seams there's no issue here. The only issue I see is /. loosing credibility with this kind of stories. A major version change of operating system should be installed by a clean install and only morons upgrade. It's only natural that in the process of a new installation Windows tries to uninstall shitty software that mess with the core of the system.

    Windows has plenty of real issues to bash about without this kind of shit.

    If I was some windows user or Fan I would say: "If this is the kind of arguments /. has against windows all the other windows stories must be non-issues also"

  • iTunes is evil (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Toreo asesino (951231) on Wednesday October 21, @05:11PM (#29829503) Journal

    For some reason, Apple decided to use their own USB driver; one not exactly known for it's stability, evidently. Yes, Apple would rather risk your system instability than use a standard tried & tested driver to write files to any iPod. That'll be why Windows 7 doesn't like it I expect.

    http://www.google.com/search?q=itunes+BSOD [google.com]

    Sometimes I wonder if Apple make PCs crash deliberately to fuel their ad-war

    • Re:I'm confused (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Sir_Sri (199544) on Wednesday October 21, @04:50PM (#29829255)

      Supposedly windows 'upgrades' are basically an install of the new OS then it tries to copy over/grab all the stuff from the 'old' windows. It's an ugly process, and probably errors are caused by programs it doesn't know how to copy over. Stuff that embeds itself in the OS, itunes messes with USB, Google with search and god knows what, Anti virus with everything could work fundamentally differently on a new OS than an old and figuring out how, if at all, to copy that over is probably a difficult business. This might even be problems with specific versions of said programs rather than the application as a whole.

      Uninstalling applications in an automated way is a bad idea. They may or may not remove *data* associated with the application that the user wants to keep, and may not know how to easily copy over. Believe it or not most people care more about their data, and access to it, more than the OS they use to launch the applications. It's probably better that people who know something about what a 'directory' is, and how to browse them, try to figure out how to copy data over than a lot of users for whom such a terrifying concept is completely foreign.

    • by icebike (68054) on Wednesday October 21, @04:52PM (#29829289)

      > iTunes for Windows is maximum bloatware with questionable value...

      Unless you own an iPhone, in which case its value is pretty well dictated to you by Steve Jobs.

      You really can't own an iPhone without it.

      But somehow, Apple gets a pass for that kind of behavior, and Microsoft suffers FUD posts like this on Slashdot for Apple's misadventures.

    • Re:Windows Upgrades (Score:5, Informative)

      by Itninja (937614) on Wednesday October 21, @06:16PM (#29830057) Homepage
      I upgraded Vista Ultimate x64 to Windows 7 Ultimate x64 and had no significant issues [blogspot.com]. The 'upgrade advisor' program even advised me to deauthorize my installation of iTunes before continuing. No fuss, no muss, as they say.
      • by bill_kress (99356) on Wednesday October 21, @07:43PM (#29830749)

        If it's asking you to de-authorize it and not remove it, that kind of makes sense.

        I imagine something in the upgrade process can fubar Apple's DRM system and cause it to make iTunes think it's not authorized. If that old install information remains in their database, it might be annoying to remove it (or not, I'm just guessing).

      • by Lord Byron II (671689) on Wednesday October 21, @04:53PM (#29829307)

        I don't know ... why don't you have these problems? What is your secret?

        In my experience, if you have a real, live system and you upgrade Windows, you can expect everything non-MS to break. Critical registry entries get deleted, DLLs go missing, directories get moved and everything goes to hell in a hand-basket.

        • by Brad1138 (590148) <brad1138@yahoo.com> on Wednesday October 21, @05:18PM (#29829557)

          Critical registry entries get deleted, DLLs go missing, directories get moved and everything goes to hell in a hand-basket.

          This is Windows, what's your point?

        • by Joe U (443617) on Wednesday October 21, @05:56PM (#29829911) Homepage Journal

          In my experience, if you have a real, live system and you upgrade Windows, you can expect everything non-MS to break. Critical registry entries get deleted, DLLs go missing, directories get moved and everything goes to hell in a hand-basket.

          Exactly, and you want to know why?

          Microsoft follows their publised API's and published guidelines. Most other companies DO NOT. They take shortcuts to try and get things done quicker and almost always get it wrong.

          If it runs on Vista, it should run on Windows 7, if it breaks, the developer fucked up.

          Apple, Real, AOL, Apple, Symantec, Adobe, McAfee, IBM and Apple I'm talking about YOU. Especially Apple, ITunes is an over-engineered crapfest that touches things it shouldn't touch in the OS. (In their defense, they have gotten slightly better lately, but itunes still lives in a dedicated VM on my computer).

            • by nstlgc (945418) on Wednesday October 21, @06:57PM (#29830389)
              If you call "relying on side effects" "using undocumented features", then yea, maybe. Like that time developers thought everyone runs XP as administrator. Oh wait...
        • Re:Windows Upgrades (Score:5, Informative)

          by w0mprat (1317953) on Wednesday October 21, @06:06PM (#29829985)
          Software like iTunes and Google Toolbar make deep low level changes to the operating system, so I'm really not suprised that these have to be uninstalled before upgrading.

          I wouldn't be suprised if most 3rd-party applications that install system services have to be uninstalled before the upgrade.

          Many applications like these mess with things that really you really shouldn't be messing with, especially when many comparable applications seem to have no need to embed themselves so deeply, and likely have much less bloat.

          As for upgrades breaking your old applications - running in compatibility mode for a older OS will solve 9/10 compatibility issues, but this feature seems to be ignored.
        • Re:Windows Upgrades (Score:5, Interesting)

          by nstlgc (945418) on Wednesday October 21, @06:55PM (#29830369)
          As someone who installed Vista 2 years ago, updated to the Windows 7 RC when it came out and then to the final, allow me to say - what the heck are you talking about? The only thing that broke was Daemontools. This includes but is not limited to Firefox, Chrome, mIRC, Sony Acid, Sony Soundforge, Photoshop, GOM player, uTorrent, Emule, FTPrush, video codecs, and, as you already stated, numerous MS applications I run. They've all been there from Vista to the RC to the final.

          Really, what do you guys run that causes all these problems?
            • Re:Windows Upgrades (Score:5, Informative)

              by Allador (537449) on Thursday October 22, @04:05AM (#29832945)

              All that fear mongering was a bunch of hooey.

              What is locked out?

              Nothing.

              Do P2P apps work properly?

              Yes

              Are there unexplained phone-homes?

              Vista and W7 are much more thoroughly instrumented than XP was. Many of these will send anonymous usage and config data back to MS. These are all well documented and understood, and don't really cause any concern for privacy.

              They're largely all disable-able, though they are scattered, as many of the product groups rolled their own systems for this (ie, office vs. media player vs wga, etc).

              Can I still play out-of-region CDs?

              This is dependent on the hardware and software you use. But the OS in no way gets involved.

              Do I have to fight UAC like someone with Vista?

              Loaded question. UAC on Vista (post SP1) worked exactly as it was intended. Any problems you had you should blame on your app vendors.

              Or yourself, if you chose to not customize UAC behavior to your liking. It is tremendously customizable (even in Vista) in how it behaves, how it prompts, whether or not to use the secure desktop, etc etc. If you don't like it, just configure it so that you do.

              W7 loosens it a bit so that many actions that the OS perceives as 'initiated by the user' dont cause an elevation. This is how it ships. You can turn it back to Vista style if you want, or otherwise customize it.

              Can I copy any standard file type on to any standard media?

              Yes.

        • Re:Windows Upgrades (Score:5, Informative)

          by GIL_Dude (850471) on Wednesday October 21, @05:41PM (#29829771) Homepage
          I would have put myself solidly in the "never upgrade, always do wipe and load" camp until Windows 7. I've now upgraded three machines and it has gone very very well. (I would still wipe and load for corporate purposes to be sure the machines are 100% the same).

          For this specific item they mention here about iTunes... The beta version of the upgrade advisor merely recommended that you deauthorize iTunes on your computer before upgrading. Apparently nobody could figure out how to do that, so they now recommend that you uninstall iTunes, then upgrade your machine, then re-install iTunes. I guess this is to make sure your computer remains authorized for any content you bought although I can't give results for that as I only have content I ripped from CD myself. I can say I have done one machine each way - I uninstalled for this notebook I am on now and I just deauthorized for my wife's notebook. Both upgrades worked flawlessly.
Because I don't need to worry about finances I can ignore Microsoft and take over the (computing) world from the grassroots. -- Linus Torvalds