more iTunes for Windows Mobile 5.0 pictures…

I made some more pictures of iTunes for Windows Mobile 5.0 that show how it looks when it’s playing songs. And some more detailed pictures of the interface itself. They tried to make it one-hand accessible which means that you can easily control iTunes for Windows Mobile 5.0 with just one hand. You literally never have to pick the pen to click on something on the touch-screen – just use your thumb.

if you press on top information pane the pane is pulled aside and the toolbar is shown:

See the “toolbar”? There it is: Shuffle, Repeat, Equalizer. The button on the left is used to pull out the toolbar and pull in the information pane

…and as we know it from the other iTunes versions…

Finally some more words on the technical aspects: It seems that it’s entirely written in some .NET language since it requires the .NET Compact Framework 2.0 to run. And that leads me to the conclusion that there will not be an iTunes for Windows Mobile for earlier Windows Mobile versions like 2003 and 2003SE.

I so far was not able to actually buy anything in the apple store – iTunes just crashed when I tried. So there’s obviously more work to do for Apple than I thought yesterday.

30 thoughts on “more iTunes for Windows Mobile 5.0 pictures…

  1. maybe i should justify myself…theres no way on earth apple would use .net, and you cant do list boxes like that in CF 2.0 wihtout an extreme amount of effort. nice photoshopping tho, i liked it.

  2. ramond: Apple have made .NET examples for the Windows Bonjour API. It’s not impossible, and if they were going to get on Windows Mobile and had to rewrite it, .NET would be a good place to start.

    However, I’m wondering what parts of QuickTime they ported – iTunes’ playback is just a layer over QuickTime.

  3. Jesper, it doesnt have bonjour. What I meant was they would have to write all the mp3 and aac playing stuff, theres no way they would write .NET code for that when they can just recompile their existing libraries for arm. And even if they did that just for the libraries I dont see why they would choose to p/invoke and write the UI in C# when they already have all the UI code ready to be copiled for native using the windows source. fake.

  4. This is either:

    1) A fake
    2) A violation of an NDA
    3) A pirated copy from someone who violated an NDA

    I understand that Mr. Kirstenpfad works for Microsoft but why would Apple allow Microsoft to leak about a new product, whereas they sued the living daylights out of Mac enthousiast websites?

  5. I must be missing something here. Why on _Earth_ would Apple put iTunes on Win Mobile?? I mean, as it stands, the labels are at the door, clawing at the 99 cents for a hike + a larger slice. The Music Store is just barely breaking even. All the money is made on iPods. And if iTunes on Win Mobile this would have any effect, it would be to cut into Apple’s iPod revenues. Makes no sense whatsoever.

    Besides, aspects af this, including the buttons and info window, look awfully lot like AspectoSoftware’s WiFiTunes…

  6. I have one kind request: could you please make search for “msmobiles” in podcast search of this iTunes for Windows Mobile and then send me or publish here 2 screenshots : one showing search result of “msmobiles” search and 2nd with Podcast 85 playing in it???

    If you will do it then I will publish another news story at portal – with link to this very page/website.

  7. Let’s have more proof. Leak your binary to someone, like Engadget. Do an iChat AV video conference with them.

  8. Leaking it to me (i.e. editor of makes even more sense: apart from testing it, I can also decompile the code and check whether this application is not a mock-up developed in prototype-like way to pretend being iTunes or whether it is really made by Apple. Engadget can’t do such decompilation because they’re not developers.

  9. THis one is a fake, since Apple specifially said that it won’t make a pda with osx/itunes. They don’t want the iPod to be overrun by PDA’s.
    That’s also why they didn’t “allow” the ROKR to have more then 500 songs…. if the ROKR would be able to have 1000-2000 songs, people would lose a reason to buy a Nano ;)

  10. It would be more believable if the font rendering in your screenshots wasn’t so smooth or at least matched the font that iTunes for Windows uses.

  11. look at the interface of iPod and ROKR, it’s the interface for handheld player with small screen. first it is tree structure for easy one hand navigation with buttons on handheld device, second it save screen space

    the original iTunes is designed for manage, import cd, burn cd, purchase and listen to music. the iTunes for ROKR and the interface of iPod is just for listen to music only. you don’t import cd, burn cd, manage music on your “iTunes for windows mobile”, it’s pointness to have the same interface design, and so much search function, column sort etc on it.

    the windows media player also have different design for desktops and handheld. why the “iTunes for windows mobile” have the same design of original iTunes? why you need such a full size play button, scroll bar, search bar etc. on this mobile version? because everyone can use photoshop these days.

  12. your work look fake to me on my first sight. try again with the iPod interface. you can find images from

  13. Obviously fake… Why on earth would Apple launch iTunes for ROKR (which sucked) and then launch something bloated, but at least good looking for a MS OS? Bah! Humbug!

  14. You could easily build an app like this for Win Mobile. It’s not the complexity of the app, it’s the interface that makes it what it is. The only tricky technical part is porting FairPlay over to a new platform, which is doable but non-trivial for a host of reasons.

    Heck you could even build an app like this in Flash that *looked* legit. But the real deal would be in getting the device to sync with iTunes on PC/Mac and playing m4p’s…

  15. What screams fake to me is the time on the pictures. In the first and last picture the times on the device show 4:11, the first picture shows the song position at 8 seconds, and in the second picture it shows it at 2 minutes 40 seconds. There is no way the song could have played 2 and a half minutes of the song with out taking the device time to at least 4:13. Obiviously fake.

  16. Come on you guys, 3 years ago, even 1 or 2, how many of you would have immediatly dismissed it as a hoax if you heard apple was developing an OS for pc’s? And now they are. Just google osx86

    Hell, how many of you would think itunes was coming to pc’s when ipods were being bundled with musicmatch?

    Apple does many things people don’t expect…

    It’s probably the real deal.

    Then again, do any of you remember when someone did a flash ipod OS that you could put on your pocketpc? That was pretty convincing, this could be like that…

    Oh and atom, youre being an ignorant dumbass. He could have done something called “pausing!” Oooh, spooky concept, huh?

  17. Free and quality wallpaper images for your computer desktop in many categories such as animal, 3d, , movie, nature and many more

  18. Hey this doesn’t look at all like a fake. First off, how are you going to make a pixelated overlay like that (it even matches in the number of pixels across and down) The colors of the bottom blue bar and the pixels in itunes even blend together. I believe it could be legit.

    Also, Atom had noted about the time. However, if you look at it in the first two pics the song was paused, causing the album art to be shown and the song to remain at 0:08 at 4:10 and stay there at 4:11. Also, whats to say that he didnt post these pictures out of order, and then changed them so that the article would flow logically? Then, when the song was at 2:30, yes the time was still at 4:11 but whats to say that he didn’t drag the slider over to a different portion of the song that he liked (he may have even wanted to show the slider function online but didn’t post a pic of it yet.

    This may have been test software for a new smartphone that runs windows mobile and itunes together that apple would sell (iLife, perhaps). If it runs windows, then you can send pics, txt messages, videos, run wifi, type documents or do homework on it, and all sorts of other cool things without having to build, complie, and copyright a bunch of new software that wont work half as well as the windows platform.

Comments are closed.