Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Communications Windows Apple

No iPhone For 64-Bit Windows 762

Posted by kdawson
from the very-fine-print dept.
Mizled writes "After buying a new iPhone yesterday and bringing it home to sync and activate it, I found out that Windows 64-bit is not supported. Neither XP 64-bit nor Vista 64-bit works with the iPhone. I called the Apple support line and the rep said I needed to downgrade my computer from a 64-bit operating system. I also posted about my concerns on the Apple iPhone discussion forums, but my post was quickly removed."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

No iPhone For 64-Bit Windows

Comments Filter:
  • by niceone (992278) * on Sunday July 01, 2007 @08:03AM (#19705819) Journal
    the rep said I needed to downgrade my computer

    Look on the bright side, he could have told you needed to upgrade to OSX.
    • by tsa (15680) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @08:07AM (#19705837) Homepage
      Yeah, whatever. The customer should not have to worry that his/her computer is 'compatible' with the iPhone in any way, as long as it's fairly modern and mainstream. Isn't one of Apples 'soundbites' "It just works?"
      • by Odiumjunkie (926074) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @08:13AM (#19705869) Journal
        It "just works" with *our* hardware and *our* software.

        Come on, who'd buy a first-gen iPod without checking to see if it would work with their XP box? Or a Newton without checking to see if it could data transfer with Windows 3.1?

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by _pruegel_ (581143)
          Well, my pre-(first-gen-iPod) noname MP3 player does work pretty well with XP, Vista and the 64bit versions thereof.
        • by Dogtanian (588974) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @09:04AM (#19706201) Homepage

          Come on, who'd buy a first-gen iPod without checking to see if it would work with their XP box? Or a Newton without checking to see if it could data transfer with Windows 3.1?
          That's a poor and downright misleading comparison. The listed product requirements [blogsmithmedia.com] mention XP and Vista, but didn't (and at the time of writing still don't [apple.com]) mention anything about incompatibility with 64-bit versions.

          It's reasonable to assume that- unless otherwise stated- the requirements in Apple's list would be both necessary and sufficient. It's not like it says "see this obscure Apple doc for more details". Apple probably kept that on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'... ;-)
          • by doce (31638) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @09:39AM (#19706427) Homepage
            In fact:

            http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=305 703 [apple.com]

            The default search option only hits "Manuals" and ignores technical documents, leading any casual search to _appear_ empty. Changing it to search _everything_ rendered that link. Notice footnote (1) in the Windows section...
          • by Wordsmith (183749) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @12:03PM (#19707697) Homepage
            Actually, it says "Beware of the 64-bit Windows." It should work just fine with Leopard.
          • by Scrameustache (459504) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @12:16PM (#19707845) Homepage Journal

            Come on, who'd buy a first-gen iPod without checking to see if it would work with their XP box? Or a Newton without checking to see if it could data transfer with Windows 3.1?
            That's a poor and downright misleading comparison. The listed product requirements [blogsmithmedia.com] mention XP and Vista, but didn't (and at the time of writing still don't [apple.com]) mention anything about incompatibility with 64-bit versions.
            So they list the ones they support, and don't list the ones they don't support?

            What a shocker.

            The official name of the 64 bit product is Windows XP Professional x64 Edition [microsoft.com].
            That name is not listed on the iPhone page, don't expect it to be supported.
            • The official name of the 64 bit product is Windows XP Professional x64 Edition. That name is not listed on the iPhone page, don't expect it to be supported.

              At my most charitable I'd consider that downright pedantic, though more likely it's simply false. Are you honestly claiming that "Windows XP Professional x64 Edition" isn't being sold as a particular version of "Windows XP Professsional"?

              You can argue the toss about the actual code base, but if it's being sold as XP Professsional, that's all that is relevant. I guess you'd use the same argument against any product being sold as "Windows XP comptatible" that didn't work with 32-bit Home or Pro because, he

              • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

                by vux984 (928602)
                Are you honestly claiming that "Windows XP Professional x64 Edition" isn't being sold as a particular version of "Windows XP Professsional"?

                x64 isn't like the difference between Home, Pro, and MCE. Or between Home Premium, Business, Ultimate, etc.

                x64 isn't a feature set its an architecture.

                Suppose I released a Microsoft Office plug in, and just listed 'any edition of Microsoft Office 2003 or later' as the requirement. Would you really expect it to work with "Microsoft Office 2004: Mac" without a specific me
                • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

                  by Dogtanian (588974)

                  x64 isn't like the difference between Home, Pro, and MCE. Or between Home Premium, Business, Ultimate, etc. x64 isn't a feature set its an architecture.

                  That as may be- and I acknowledged this, whilst making clear that this wasn't my point. It's sold as "Windows XP Professional x64 edition". That strongly implies that it's a subset/variant of "Windows XP Professional", which *is* listed.

                  Suppose I released a Microsoft Office plug in, and just listed 'any edition of Microsoft Office 2003 or later' as the requirement. Would you really expect it to work with "Microsoft Office 2004: Mac" without a specific mention of the Mac platform? Of course not.

                  I probably wouldn't, but I think a lot of people would, and I wouldn't blame them for that.

                • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

                  by Saville (734690)

                  iPhone requirements [apple.com] as of today:

                  Windows system requirements
                  * PC with USB 2.0 port
                  * Windows Vista Home Premium, Business, Enterprise, or Ultimate Edition; or Windows XP Home or Professional with Service Pack 2 or later
                  * iTunes 7.3 or later

                  It does not specify 32bit. There is no indication Vista Ultimate needs to Vista Ultimate 32bit.

                  MS is really pushing 64bit. You can't get a 32bit driver WHQL certified anymore unless there is a 64bit version. This is so people don't need to worry abou

        • by timeOday (582209) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @09:51AM (#19706519)

          Come on, who'd buy a first-gen iPod without checking to see if it would work with their XP box? Or a Newton without checking to see if it could data transfer with Windows 3.1?
          I'm surprised to hear that the iPhone needs a computer at all. Why would it? The thing is a computer... the "real internet" on your phone. Especially if it's locked to a single provider (AT&T) anyways, it ought to be able to connect to that provider to activate itself without a computer.
      • by Kohath (38547) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @08:26AM (#19705965)
        64-bit Windows isn't mainstream.

        Linux is more mainstream than 64-bit Windows. iTunes doesn't support Linux either. But if you complain about that on the Apple forums, no one will listen to you. Why should it be different with 64-bit Windows?
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Tuoqui (1091447)
        Oh dont worry it works. If not they'll just delete any evidence to the contrary!
      • by vertinox (846076)
        Isn't one of Apples 'soundbites' "It just works?"

        Well it does on OS X.

        It is kind of like getting angry that your Zune didn't work on a 64-bit version of Linux.

        The fact of the matter is that Apple makes good hardware and a good solid OS, but they really suck at making software run on things that isn't theirs. (I'm looking at you Quicktime!)
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by mmeister (862972)
        Next up: complaints that iPhone won't sync with Sun, Amiga, Atari and Coleco systems.

        Relatively speaking, how many users do you think really are using Windows 64 vs. Windows 32? Maybe .5%. 64-bit is great for certain types of applications and is seriously overkill for others (like iTunes).

        Windows 64-bit is not mainstream AT all. And Microsoft has insured it never will be -- at least until such time as they follow Apple's lead and create a Vista 32-bit/64-bit combo that allows 32-bit apps to run alongside 64
        • by KarmaMB84 (743001) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @12:06PM (#19707731)
          If Microsoft didn't want x64 to be mainstream, why do they require that any software and hardware with a Certified For or Works With Vista logo to be tested and pass on x64 editions? Vendors got a free pass on XP x64 since it wasn't in the logo requirements so that is how we've gotten into this mess, but any new retail boxes with a logo for Vista must work on all version of Vista.
      • That's correct... (Score:3, Interesting)

        by msauve (701917)
        the customer shouldn't have to worry about compatibility. When they buy a product called "Windows XP," it should provide compatibility with all programs written for "Windows XP." Microsoft claims [microsoft.com] that "Windows XP Professional x64 Edition gives you access to greater amounts of memory while continuing to support 32-bit applications." and "seamlessly run 32-bit...applications." (emphasis added)

        So blame Microsoft, not Apple. Even Microsoft's own Zune didn't run on XP64 when it was released.
        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by KarmaMB84 (743001)
          Here I thought the Zune was a piece of hardware targeted at the consumer market. XP x64 was not a consumer release and not in the XP logo certification requirements. Vista x64 IS a consumer release and compatibility is REQUIRED for certification. Apple does not have theirs so it's not even guaranteed their stuff will work with Vista.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          Windows x64 does run 32-bit applications. However to plug something in you need a 64-bit DRIVER, and that's a whole other story.

          It's also annoying when you find out that a game has licensed a copy protection system that doesn't work on 64-bit Windows, and so stops you playing. In some cases without any message or anything, leaving you guessing about the problem. The last game that I got that did this also had a no-dvd crack out before release, so it seems to me that the companies should give up on copy prot
        • Re:That's correct... (Score:4, Informative)

          by Emetophobe (878584) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @05:03PM (#19710027)
          I already mentioned this in another thread, but take a look at the iPhone: Minimum system requirements [apple.com] page

          1. 64-bit editions of Windows are not supported

          Not sure if Apple added this after the fact or whether this little tidbit of information was there all along...
      • by MCSEBear (907831) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @11:12AM (#19707221)
        If Microsoft doesn't support Zune on Windows 64 bit, then why in the heck should Apple bother to write drivers for iPhone? 64 bit Windows is *not* mainstream and never has been.
    • The rep should have said "Stop whining. Noone supports desktop 64 bit windows"
    • Is there anything that DOES?
    • by speaker of the truth (1112181) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @08:42AM (#19706091)
      I thought by downgrade he did mean switch to OSX.
  • Locking down (Score:5, Interesting)

    by dreamchaser (49529) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @08:08AM (#19705849) Homepage Journal
    Apple has been so intent on totally locking the iPhone that you *have* to use iTunes just to use the damn thing. They through the anti-DRM a small bone with DRM free iTunes, but in almost every other area they show an almost manic desire to maintain total control over their hardware and software.

    This surprises me just a little. How hard could it be to port iTunes to Vista x64?

    The list of reasons I didn't and won't buy an iPhone anytime soon keep growing. No, not this one specifically as I'm not running Vista x64, but the overall arrogance Apple shows routinely plays a part.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 01, 2007 @08:31AM (#19706003)
      wow - I've never actually seen someone use "through" for "threw." I've seen the opposite - but you've correctly spelled the longer, incorrect, homophone. Congratulations sir.
      • It's called not having had my coffee yet when I posted. I'd been awake only a few minutes, hence the horrid spelling and bad mood ;)
    • Re:Locking down (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Kohath (38547) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @08:40AM (#19706069)
      I think you're confusing a "manic desire to maintain total control over their hardware and software" with Apple just not doing what you wish they would do. (You haven't specifically said what that is though.) I'm not sure why Apple should want to make you happy with their actions. They're offering some products. Your choice is to take them or leave them.

      Apple doesn't owe each individual person their dream product -- specifically tailored to your personal individual desires and biases. No one owes you that. And it's not "arrogance" when folks don't focus on what you want.

      If you don't like their products, you're probably outside their target market.
    • Missing the Point (Score:3, Informative)

      by asphaltjesus (978804)
      This surprises me just a little. How hard could it be to port iTunes to Vista x64?

      First, nearly all big-time software vendors wait quite a while before moving their products to the next flavor of OS. They don't allow engineering to get started unless the PHB's see compelling adoption of that platform. XP 64-bit is in a very awkward place in this regard. Microsoft has all their eggs in Vista.

      Second, it's a heck of a lot more work in the average big company dev environment.

      Third, it's really important to re
  • virtualize man! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by wwmedia (950346) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @08:11AM (#19705857)
    install xp in a virtual machine! virtual pc + windows xp FREE from microsoft! [msdn.com]

    or install your legal 32bit copy of windows in vmware

    or google for running osx in vmware [imageshack.us] like im doing
    • Re:virtualize man! (Score:4, Insightful)

      by dreamchaser (49529) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @08:12AM (#19705863) Homepage Journal
      Or buy a phone that doesn't make you jump through hoops to use it? I can't believe you're actually saying people should use kludges just to use a phone. Amazing.
      • by wwmedia (950346)
        well looks like the thread starter is already the bigger fool for buying an Apple product, so i was just trying to help the poor soul (well not poor financially anyways if he afforded an iphone)
      • Re:virtualize man! (Score:4, Insightful)

        by weave (48069) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @09:25AM (#19706325) Journal

        I can't believe you're actually saying people should use kludges just to use a phone. Amazing.

        Kind of like how I had to install XP inside a Parallels VM to use my Nokia smartphone on my Mac?

        Mac users have to live with that kind of crap all the time, and we hear it's because Mac OS is not mainstream enough. Well guess what, 64 bit Windows is not mainstream either.

      • by Hal_Porter (817932) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @11:13AM (#19707229)
        Or buy a phone that doesn't make you jump through hoops to use it? I can't believe you're actually saying people should use kludges just to use a phone. Amazing.

        It's not just a phone, it's the iPhone. Apple fans queued overnight to get one. Some dude sold his corneas on eBay just to get the $500. He can't see for shit anymore unless he holds it a few inches from his face, but he's got his iPhone and he growls at people like a dog when they try to take it away.

        You've got to be more careful. Apple fans monitor these forums. What you posted may get you bitten by some blind fanatic.
        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by ColdWetDog (752185)
          Some dude sold his corneas on eBay just to get the $500.

          I didn't know the multi touch interface had a Braille component. Cool.

    • Re:virtualize man! (Score:4, Informative)

      by ditoa (952847) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @08:12AM (#19705865)
      Unfortunately Virtual PC has no USB support so your plan fails :(
  • by ragingmime (636249) <ragingmime.yahoo@com> on Sunday July 01, 2007 @08:13AM (#19705873) Homepage
    ...on this page [apple.com].

    Apple's hardware is generally very well-designed, and their software is solid on Macs, but they can't seem to write a decent Windows program to save their lives. For example: why does iTunes run the iPod service even when iTunes isn't running and even though I've never used an iPod? Why does Quicktime automatically have your browser open MP3s in Quicktime instead of downloading them (and not give you the option of turning this "feature" off?) Why do Apple programs "break" the usual look and feel of Windows programs? Honestly, this isn't rocket science here. How hard would it have been to recompile the iPhone software for a 64-bit machine?
    • by doctormetal (62102) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @08:20AM (#19705923)

      How hard would it have been to recompile the iPhone software for a 64-bit machine?
      It is not just about recompiling the code. The device drivers for the iphone must be rewritten to run on a 64 bit OS.
      If they made their dfrivers right that should not be hard, But we are talking about apple here...
      • by weicco (645927) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @08:48AM (#19706125)

        The device drivers for the iphone must be rewritten to run on a 64 bit OS

        Not if you did it the right way at the beginning. MSDN has contained information on this one for quite a time. I remember that back in 2000, when I was writing network driver for Windows 2000, I thought "What are these stupid macros, why I can't just write unsigned int instead of that ugly looking DWORD." Luckily my code wasn't compiled to any 64 bit Windows since I think I unintentionally left couple of mines there :)

        But device drivers are just a small part of "iPhone software" what ever that is. I can envision that GUI and data transfer parts are much bigger things. User-space components are much easier to write to be 32/64-bit compatible unless you really don't know what you are doing.

        I don't know why Apple can't produce quality stuff for Windows (and many other companies). Or maybe they are and this is just a marketing decision "See? It doesn't run nicely on Windows because Windows sucks. Luckily we have nice OS X here for you..."

    • by mpe (36238)
      Apple's hardware is generally very well-designed, and their software is solid on Macs, but they can't seem to write a decent Windows program to save their lives. For example: why does iTunes run the iPod service even when iTunes isn't running and even though I've never used an iPod?

      To be honest this isn't just a problem with Apple software on Windows. Under XP the wireless service is enabled by default, even on machines which have never seen any wireless hardware...
    • by garcia (6573) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @08:39AM (#19706065) Homepage
      I use iTunes to play my MP3s which unfortunately requires QuickTime be installed. Is QT opening the MP3 because of your browser settings because it's not happening to me in Firefox (and I just had a computer upgrade at work and had to reinstall QT and iTunes).
    • by Thrudheim (910314)

      Why do Apple programs "break" the usual look and feel of Windows programs?

      True, but for that matter, one could say the same things over time about Microsoft programs on the Mac OS. Word 6.0 on the Mac was a disaster because Microsoft tried to use the same codebase as the Windows version. It goes both ways. If iTunes on Windows were as good as iTunes on the Mac, a lot of complaints about it would go away.

      With respect to Safari, I think one reason could be the development angle. Apple wants Safari to

  • by CSHARP123 (904951) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @08:20AM (#19705925)
    People are waiting in line to buy our product and you are complaining about not working in 64 bit OS. Man, this was not released to people like you. The buyers we thought would shell out this kind of money to buy our product will only be running 32 bit OS. You sir, should get a life. Thanks Apple Customer support.
  • by C R Johnson (141) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @08:24AM (#19705941) Homepage
    I am required to have a computer to use the phone?

    Huh?

    You would think that with the supposed capabilities, you would it could be your computer.
  • not surprising (Score:5, Informative)

    by edwardpickman (965122) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @08:25AM (#19705947)
    A lot of apps still aren't supporting 64 bit. Might have been a good idea to ask. That would have been my first question. I have both Macs and PCs so I don't forsee a problem when I make the plunge. Personally I'm waiting for the dust to settle. There seems to be a few issues that are going to be resolved with software upgrades and the service provider wasn't ready for the onslaught so I can wait a few weeks to make the switch.
  • Join the club (Score:5, Informative)

    by Alioth (221270) <no@spam> on Sunday July 01, 2007 @08:28AM (#19705979) Journal
    Join the club, I bet the iPhone doesn't support Linux at all either.

    I like Apple hardware but I won't be buying the iPhone. Too expensive, too locked down. FIC are apparently releasing an open phone (the OpenMoko project), if I upgrade any time soon it'll be to the FIC product.
    • OpenMoko Neo1973 (Score:3, Interesting)

      by SteveM (11242)

      "Too expensive, too locked down." Well, one for two ain't bad. From the OpenMoto [openmoko.org] site (for the mass market version):

      "We will sell this device through multiple channels. Direct from openmoko.com, the price will be $450 for the Neo Base and $600 for Neo Advanced."

      Not much of a price advantage, although discounts and subsequent costs are unknown.

      I agree with you about the lack of third party access, although access to the source code while nice is not of great importance to me. YNMV.

      "... if I upgrade

  • Apple Forums (Score:5, Informative)

    by WrongSizeGlass (838941) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @08:34AM (#19706031)

    I also posted about my concerns on the Apple iPhone discussion forums, but my post was quickly removed.
    There are several threads in the iPhone forums mentioning that 64-bit Windows isn't supported. I'm guessing Mizled's iPhone post may have been removed because it might have been less charming than this one about his iPod [apple.com] calling iTunes 7 Junk and crappy software. I don't think Apple should remove a legitimate post (and Mizled's iPhone issues are definitely legit), but perhaps it was a little too unpleasant (and who can blame him after dropping $$$ on an iPhone).
    • Insane relatives (Score:3, Interesting)

      by matt me (850665)
      I once visited the iTunes forums. The majority of posts were windows users being driven insane by iTunes adding a shortcut to itself on their start menu, quicklaunch and desktop every time *any* user ran it.
  • Cheer up. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jrq (119773) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @08:58AM (#19706163)
    At least if you downgrade you can run Google Desktop, and a whole host of other programs and utilities that don't properly support XP 64bit.
  • So,
    this is waht we from the Free world use to claim: closed source slows down inovation and locks you out.

    In a few weeks there will be some reverse engeneered software to synch IPhone with GNU/Linux.

    Yes, if I want to use it on the day it is out, I will have to compile it (which likely ammounts to typing three or four commands on my console), and quite possibly it still be a command line tool but in a few more days, it will be improved to integrate nicely with other tools I already use, under the same interface, without changes. Open specifications anyone??

    And...it will work with 32 or 64bit gnu/Linux, and possibly even with other Unix variants.

    But people prefer to be trapped to a monoculture of badly writen code than "pioneering" very nice software.

    I should remember that the fact that now we have to wait for having iPhone or other vendors official support is mainly due to not having a "meaningfull slice of desktop share" of desktops in use. And even then...if they invent things like "no 64 bit support" - we can run our own.

  • by nurb432 (527695) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @09:37AM (#19706409) Homepage Journal
    You can count the number of apps that currently support 64 bit windows on one hand.. ( ok, not quite that bad, but close ).

    Hell, not all of micrsoft apps dont even support it yet, and its THEIR OS.

    By the time this matters to their target market, it will have been taken care of.
  • PEBKAC (Score:3, Interesting)

    by WhatAmIDoingHere (742870) * <sexwithanimals@gmail.com> on Sunday July 01, 2007 @10:08AM (#19706661) Homepage
    The iPhone requires iTunes to work. Does iTunes support 64bit Vista or XP?

    I don't see how you can make that mistake.
  • His own fault. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Beer_Smurf (700116) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @10:44AM (#19706965) Homepage
    I'm sorry.
    Windows 64 bit is not listed as supported.
    http://www.apple.com/iphone/specs.html [apple.com]
    How is this guys problem anything but his own fault?
  • Now you know (Score:5, Insightful)

    by theolein (316044) on Sunday July 01, 2007 @11:28AM (#19707371) Journal
    "After buying a new iPhone yesterday and bringing it home to sync and activate it, I found out that Windows 64-bit is not supported. Neither XP 64-bit nor Vista 64-bit works with the iPhone. I called the Apple support line and the rep said I needed to downgrade my computer from a 64-bit operating system. I also posted about my concerns on the Apple iPhone discussion forums, but my post was quickly removed."

    Now you know what it's like to be a Mac or a Linux user.
  • Ha ha ha (Score:3, Funny)

    by pjt48108 (321212) <pjt48108&yahoo,com> on Sunday July 01, 2007 @05:03PM (#19710023) Homepage
    Anyone who would spend several hundreds of dollars on an iGadget from any company WITHOUT FIRST confirming that it is supported on their OS, is simply naive.

    Anyone who goes out of their way to get the 64-bit implementation of any Windows (in the first place), and THEN spends said fortune on a shiny iToy WITHOUT FIRST confirming support under their 64-bit Windows OS, is a chump.

    Perhaps using Macs has gotten me used to checking system requirements religiously when making software and peripheral hardware purchases. However, even when I have owned/used Windows systems, I always checked to make sure those systems were supported before shelling out a fistfull of cash.

    So, cry me a river. 'nuf said.

"Pok pok pok, P'kok!" -- Superchicken

Working...