Talk:ITunes version history

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

↓    Skip to table of contents    ↓

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the ITunes version history article.
Article policies
This article is part of WikiProject Macintosh. This means that the WikiProject has identified it as an article pertaining to the Macintosh, but is not currently working to improve it. WikiProject Macintosh itself is an attempt to improve, grow, standardize, and attain featured status for Wikipedia's articles related to Macintosh and Apple Inc. We need all your help, so join in today!
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
Low This article is on a subject of low-importance within Macs for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on September 13, 2007. The result of the discussion was Keep.

Contents

[edit] XP/Vista vs. 2000?

Is iTunes 7.3.1 the first version to have a different download for XP/Vista than 2000? --70.71.224.200 16:39, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] First version to be Universal Binary

Was it with version 7 that iTunes became a universal binary for Mac OS X? If someone knows for sure which version it was, please add it to the article; it's a fairly important addition, I'd say. --Ali 24789 14:13, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

It was v6.0.2...Josephberte-Talk 17:01, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup

This article is nothing more than a glorified changelog. We need to either strip it down to the bare minimum, or delete it entirely. I doubt anyone needs to know when support for various bugfixes in OS X 10.3 were introduced, and it's definitely not notable. -Mysekurity 00:56, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I disagree entirely. You're the only person on this talkpage so far who agrees with a cleanup or a deletion. We may not need to know, but many people are curious to know about it including myself. This is part of a project so I highly doubt it would be deleted and this article does exactly what it says on the tin, 'iTunes version history', what did you expect when entering this page really? The article is clean enough anyway. For now I will delete this template and if anyone disagrees with my actions, they are more than welcome to replace the template. 172.159.17.59 17:06, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
I agree with 172.159.17.59, this article is easily one of my most visited on Wikipedia, if someone nominates it for delition I'll more it to a subpage of my userpage immediatly, and to several different wiki's, its an extremely useful article, and as 172.159.17.59 so rightly put it, does exactly what it says on the tin.
Ferdia O'Brien The Archiver, Reformatter And Vandal Watchman (Talk) 20:27, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Agreed, it is very useful. Epson291 09:29, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Hey you guys, check this out... (Plus, first anon, I'm not only the only person saying there should be a cleanup--I'm the only person saying it at all!). You guys, really. And you can't just sub-page everything. If you want to take it to your own wiki, be my guest. You can provide a link to it from the iTunes article and everything. Have fun. -Mysekurity 05:06, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
I have AFD'd it. This article should not exist. --Fredrick day 20:08, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
But its gonna, check out your own AFD
Ferdia O'Brien The Archiver, Reformatter And Vandal Watchman (Talk) 23:05, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Don't crow so soon - still got three days to run... --Fredrick day 09:20, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Very true, very true.
Ferdia O'Brien The Archiver, Reformatter And Vandal Watchman (Talk) 12:54, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Okay, I'm done with editing the iTunes version history page for a while... Josephberte-Talk 02:01, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] References

Thanks to Josephbertes efforts, this article now has references, time to delete the tag at the top me thinks?
Ferdia O'Brien The Archiver, Reformatter And Vandal Watchman (Talk) 21:35, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

It only has references for some things, the added features area needs sources. I will attempt to find those..Josephberte-Talk 21:37, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Look

I like the new look, although we could possibly have the changes in bullet point format? Just to make it a little easier to read. And maybe we should have one table for each of the major release (one for all the 1.x's, 2.x's, 3.x's etc)
Ferdia O'Brien The Archiver, Reformatter And Vandal Watchman (Talk) 02:35, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Be bold, please, change what you want, I'm done editing this page for a long time, I've spent way too much time into it..Josephberte-Talk 02:37, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion!?!

I don't get why this page is up for deletion. iTunes is a major application and goes through many versions. I think it is kind of interesting to be able to see when certain versions were introduced and the new features that they offered. Is it really hurting anyone by being here? Its not like is is false information. Cartman0052007- Talk 1:17, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Go make your thoughts known on the Proposal Page then :)
Ferdia O'Brien The Archiver, Reformatter And Vandal Watchman (Talk) 10:10, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Okay, um, as most of us have mentioned, if it is decided to be deleted, I WILL transwiki it.. Okay? I don't see the problem, it's not like it would be going away forever, just from Wikipedia... Josephberte-Talk 21:35, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Yup, but as most of us have said on the AfD page, theres no need for that to happen, it can stay right here. The decision should be here soon.
Ferdia O'Brien The Archiver, Reformatter And Vandal Watchman (Talk) 23:57, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Did I say I 'knew' it was going to be deleted? I was just mentioning that ASSUMING it is voted to be deleted, I would transwiki it.. Josephberte-Talk 00:33, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
And I didnt say you said that, but you did emply we were making a deal over nothing, but where not, I for one, and I'm sure I'm not the only one, honostly believe its fine where it is.
Ferdia O'Brien The Archiver, Reformatter And Vandal Watchman (Talk) 00:46, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] colors...

It would be nice if the colors corresponded to the colors of the musical notes for each iTunes version's icon. Just a suggestion. Also, that dark blue is too dark to read the text (especially linked text) easily. PaulC/T+ 04:16, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I fixed it, it turned out I used the wrong color.. You can change it to the icon color, does not matter to me, go ahead, I just though it'd be consistent to use a different color for a different version..Josephberte-Talk 21:19, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New version vs. Old version

Do you prefer the [[1]] version of the page, or old version #2, or the version before I changed anything? As for the current version, I plan to make it more like the History of Mozilla Firefox page, including more history information, screenshots re-added, etc.. Josephberte-Talk 00:33, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

If you are prepaired to bring in that far, then I say keep the table, and maybe we should move the page to History of iTunes.
Ferdia O'Brien The Archiver, Reformatter And Vandal Watchman (Talk) 12:06, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
I don't really have the time to do this, I should not be on Wikipedia as much as I currently am, but I have quite frankly done a lot to this page in the last two to three weeks..Josephberte-Talk 21:50, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Uch

Ok, even though a 5h1t load of other articles use the exact same format for there gallarys someone has decided to put another tag on this page, I've never so much as dipped my little fingure into the images of Wikipedia so can someone more versed comply with the tag and get rid of it?

Also, this article now has more References then most, even more then some FAs, is there really a need for such a rediculous amount of "citation needed"s?
Ferdia O'Brien The Archiver, Reformatter And Vandal Watchman (Talk) 14:48, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

The 'cication needed' is very important as it shows what sources we still need to find for the various versions, as for the images, I only put in what was previously in the non table versions of the page, I don't mess with images anymore, they're too eeky with the tags and everything IMO..Josephberte-Talk 21:49, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough in the citations needed thing, and I totally agree, there so trigger happy with tags its unbelieveable
Ferdia O'Brien The Archiver, Reformatter And Vandal Watchman (Talk) 11:27, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Couple Of Ideas

Ok, now that that nonscience is over, 2 questions, should we move this page to History Of iTunes? And should we keep the tables or go back to the lists? Personnaly I say hes to the move and keep the tables, what are peoples opinions of this?
Ferdia O'Brien The Archiver, Reformatter And Vandal Watchman (Talk) 11:32, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I like the lists personally. At least a few pictures need to be reintroduced if we were to keep the table layout though. Anyone else agree? 172.215.115.68 17:02, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

I did re-add the images before, but they were removed because the images themselves had inappropriate tags. Josephberte-Talk 16:40, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Definately needs some pictures. Maybe the iTunes icon and a screenshot of each major version (i.e. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7).--Cartman005 01:52, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] iPod/device support

Similarly to Operating systems, it would be helpful to have info regarding which iPods/iPhone/etc. are supported by specific versions of iTunes... Is this doable? PaulC/T+ 22:36, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

We could do the minimum version required. No iTunes version to date has removed support for the original iPod... But I can start the table none-the-less...Josephberte-Talk 16:41, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Colours Are Too Bright....

The Colours Need Changing. ASAP, they resemble nothing to iTunes and have an annoying colouring,

User:JoWal [[[User:81.77.195.238|81.77.195.238]] 17:09, 12 October 2007 (UTC)]

I agree. We can use some blues, grays and greens maybe?--Cartman005 01:50, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Windows 2000

I removed the "Requires a 32-bit version of 2000" from the line "‡Windows 2000 does not support the iPhone. Requires a 32-bit version of 2000." once before but someone has added it back again. Why? - there were never any 64-bit versions of Windows 2000, so it looks wrong to say requires a 32-bit version when there were only 32-bit versions!

Also, as far as the other versions of Windows are concerned (XP and Vista), iTunes works on the 64-bit versions but is just not supported by Apple, so "required" should maybe be changed to "recommended".

78.146.72.50 20:32, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

There is a 64bit version of Windows 2000, while rare, it still counts.. Read Windows 2000..Josephberte-Talk 17:22, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] iTunes 7.5 features

I have to question this feature: "Also adds a battery charge indicator to the left pane when an iPod is synchronized". I don't see it when I sync my iPod. Can anyone clarify on this feature if it does in fact exist? --Lakeyboy (talk) 02:15, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

it only does it for 2007 iPods/iPhone (excluding Shuffle)..70.162.139.99 (talk) 22:35, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Album ratings

This must've been brought in with 7.5 or 7.6, but I see no mention on this page... Seegoon (talk) 21:24, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 64 Bit Windows

iTunes is now available for 64 bit Windows as shown on http://images.apple.com/itunes/download/. Should this be mentioned on the page? 81.159.56.52 (talk) 22:51, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] iPod Nano 1G Incorrect

I have an iPod Nano 1G and it works on iTunes 4.9. I can take a screenshot if no one believes me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yellow Thirteen (talk • contribs) 11:27, 24 March 2008 (UTC)