iTunes 4.1.1 for Windows

[MacRumors]

CNet (http://news.com.com/2100-1040_3-5095039.html?tag=nefd_top) reports that Apple posted version 4.1.1 of iTunes (for Windows) on its site on Wednesday.

The new update "aims to remedy some initial glitches with the jukebox software that Apple released last week."

The update is available at http://www.apple.com/itunes/

[Mudbug]

is the update for PC only, or both PC and Mac? the article seemed to lead me to believe PC only...

but that would be confusing.

[scorpion]

How will they be notified? At least we have Software Update...

[a_kim]

I hope it fixes the muddy sound I get from my work PC. Yes, I changed the Quicktime "Sound Out" preference. It even worked for a day. But when I restarted the following day, it reverted to the muddy sound. I played with preferences for about an hour (during work!), and I could not get it to sound good again.

In case you don't know what I mean by "muddy sound," the music just sounds less defined. Also, when you turn on Sound Enhancer, the greater the amount of enhancement you apply, the less you'll be able to hear the vocals. It's horrible on the ears!

-Alex

[chewbaccapits]

Apple has to act quickly went it comes to this baby...

[rainman::|:|]

*embarassing*

odd revision number...

pnw

[Laslo Panaflex]

yay! my friend wants to use itunes on windows but when he connects the ipod the song title don't show up. I hope this fixes that problem.

[jelwell]

Itunes 4.0 on windows crashed whenever I tried to launch it. Granted I don't have a monitor on my PC I just use Microsoft's Remote Desktop Client from my powerbook to connect to my PC (and sometimes VNC). But either way, for whatever reason iTunes crashed before but now with the update iTunes no longer crashes, instead it runs flawlessly.

Now I have to consider moving my Mp3 collection to my PC, since my PC tower has been converted into a file server anyways and my powerbook is always running out of disk space due to all the video editing I do on it.

Thanks Apple!
joe.

[mustang_dvs]

Good to see that Apple is being responsive -- should bolster their appeal to PC users - quite a few friends were hesitant to try out iTunes for Windows simply because they feared that Apple would treat them like red-headed stepchildren, only addressing issues when they were addressed on the Mac - kind of the same way most Mac users feel about cross-platform software.

:eek:

[MorganX]

In Apple's defense, not that they need one, they responded quickly to a critical (system crashing) flaw. In addition, the problem was with a previous version of Windows not truly intended for consumer use (Windows 2k).

Just a taste of what PC Developers have to go through with a million and one drivers, third party apps, and what not.

Still, Apple has delivered a helluvan applicaiton in iTunes4W. There's some new thinking going on at Apple.

[a_kim]

Originally posted by jelwell
Itunes 4.0 on windows crashed whenever I tried to launch it. Granted I don't have a monitor on my PC I just use Microsoft's Remote Desktop Client from my powerbook to connect to my PC (and sometimes VNC). But either way, for whatever reason iTunes crashed before but now with the update iTunes no longer crashes, instead it runs flawlessly.

Now I have to consider moving my Mp3 collection to my PC, since my PC tower has been converted into a file server anyways and my powerbook is always running out of disk space due to all the video editing I do on it.

Thanks Apple!
joe.

Sounds like a perfect setup for streaming your music from your PC to your Mac. It worked great for me (going from powerbook to PC), except for the crap sound I was getting out of my PC (see my above post).

[MorganX]

Originally posted by scorpion
How will they be notified? At least we have Software Update...

About as useful for third-party apps as Windows Update. Though both are talking about making the services available to third parties. Versiontracker works for Windows as well as all the media sites like ZDNN and C|Net.

This shouldn't be an issue as most software worth it's salt these days has an Internet update feature.

[mymemory]

I can imagine the people at Apple:

Yeah!!! we sold one million songs just with the PC market!!!

Next day:

Damn it, stinky PCs, now we have to deal with all the PC bugs.

_____
The dilema, bigger market, bigger problems. :rolleyes:

[daveL]

Originally posted by a_kim
Sounds like a perfect setup for streaming your music from your PC to your Mac. It worked great for me (going from powerbook to PC), except for the crap sound I was getting out of my PC (see my above post).
Another poster mentioned that the "Sound Enhancement" option on the Windows version of iTunes was degrading the sound quality. Have you tried turning it off? On my wife's XP machine, iTunes installed with "Sound Enhancement" at 50%.

[Macmaniac]

Its good to see that Apple has been fixing these bugs fast:) At least its way better then M$ when it takes months to fix anything, and by that time a virus has already expolited the flaw, and only then is a patch realesed.

[legion]

iTunes for Windows has a "Check for iTunes Updates" option under the help toolbar menu. There's also a place in preferences to turn on automatic check and update features (which I have turned off, of course.)

Only problem is that the "Check for iTunes Updates" returns a "This version of iTunes (4.1) is the current version." response. My guess is Apple hasn't loaded the new +0.0.1 update to the the update servers.

The other issue I see for Windows users is that the update is hard to get to/use on the Apple site. It appears as a complete new download of a full package verses just an update for exisiting software.

[Doctor Q]

There is another thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=42846) about this topic. And yet another one (thread #42842) seems to have disappeared.

[esome]

There's a post over in the Mac forum at Ars Technica where a user mentions that they got an email from the sysadmins at their workplace (1000+ employee tech firm that's entirely PCs) saying that iTunes for windows has caused some network outages. Maybe it's just too many people sharing or maybe there's some glitch that this new update fixes.

[tizza]

The main problem I've noticed is the delay in starting up of the app - anyway I'm downloading the new version now so hopefully that will show some improvement.

[pkradd]

4.1.1 is only available at the Apple website. It should be on the Software Update panel by tomorrow. One poster at MacDailyNews said it fixed his problem on a Win2000 computer. He bought 10 songs immediately.

[Macco]

Originally posted by Macrumors
CNet (http://news.com.com/2100-1040_3-5095039.html?tag=nefd_top) reports that Apple posted version 4.1.1 of iTunes (for Windows) on its site on Wednesday.

NOOOOOOO!!! Windows users have a higher version number than we do! Expect to see this in Software Update tomorrow:

New in iTunes 4.1.2 for Mac OS X:
- loads .01 of a second faster than 4.1
- fixes that thingie with the songs when they do that thing...
- displays 4.1.2 while loading
- minimizes to the taskbar
- wait, Mac OS X doesn't have a taskbar...
- never mind
- yeah
- whatever

[NoVi]

Originally posted by legion
iTunes for Windows has a "Check for iTunes Updates" option under the help toolbar menu. There's also a place in preferences to turn on automatic check and update features (which I have turned off, of course.)

Only problem is that the "Check for iTunes Updates" returns a "This version of iTunes (4.1) is the current version." response. My guess is Apple hasn't loaded the new +0.0.1 update to the the update servers.

The other issue I see for Windows users is that the update is hard to get to/use on the Apple site. It appears as a complete new download of a full package verses just an update for exisiting software.

Yes, this is confusing indeed.

I also noticed that under Help > About Itunes version 4.1.0.52 is being mentioned.
It would be nice to have some kind of feature like a message box popping up asking "New update available. Install update?"

Also noticed another stupid thing..I want to change an Artist name from CAPITAL to lower case, so I start typing over it. But there is some auto add function active that 'forbids' me to do so and the name in CAPITALS is being displayed, when I type in the first few characters in lowercase.

:rolleyes:

[MasterMac]

Originally posted by NoVi
Yes, this is confusing indeed.

I also noticed that under Help > About Itunes version 4.1.0.52 is being mentioned.
It would be nice to have some kind of feature like a message box popping up asking "New update available. Install update?"

It will be there eventually. I'm waiting until the end of the week before I start worrying about it :p

Originally posted by NoVi
Also noticed another stupid thing..I want to change an Artist name from CAPITAL to lower case, so I start typing over it. But there is some auto add function active that 'forbids' me to do so and the name in CAPITALS is being displayed, when I type in the first few characters in lowercase.

:rolleyes:

When it does the auto complete just press the delete key and it will remove the "rest" of it :)

[NoVi]

When it does the auto complete just press the delete key and it will remove the "rest" of it :)

I'm afraid you'll have to do better than that! :cool:

It's easy to reproduce..just find 2 tracks with the same artist name.
Now try to change one of the artist names from lower case to capital (or vice versa)

[punter]

I like the way Apple has started releasing things then quickly offering a fix. There's no testing like getting a milion people to download the program on a million different computers. It's sorta like open source in a way. Or beta testing (see safari).

I too just hope there is a "check for new version" function built in.

[MorganX]

Originally posted by Macmaniac
Its good to see that Apple has been fixing these bugs fast:) At least its way better then M$ when it takes months to fix anything, and by that time a virus has already expolited the flaw, and only then is a patch realesed.

Patching an Operating System is a much more complex task than patching a single-task application. It's just like making medicine. We can fix just about anything, the problem is limiting side effects.

Keep in mind, and operating system and hardware configured to meet C2 security requirements can't do jack s@*#t.

There will always be bugs as long as humans are writing code, and there will always be security vulnerabilities as long as software continues to do more "stuff" AND as long as some of the best programmers, don't write software, they spend they're time hacking it and writing virus'. That is a good and a bad thing, IMO.

[MorganX]

Originally posted by NoVi
I'm afraid you'll have to do better than that! :cool:

It's easy to reproduce..just find 2 tracks with the same artist name.
Now try to change one of the artist names from lower case to capital (or vice versa)

I just type a space first, then what I want to type, then delete the space. A kludge but it works.

[NoVi]

Yeah, especially considering it's "the best app ever written for windows" (c) Steve Jobs :D

Another thing I don't understand. After first installing WiTunes and dragging my mp3 lib to iTunes, I noticed it created a folder for every artist and put corresponding mp3's in the folder.

I wasn't too happy with it, but anyway..

Now if I drag mp3s from other HD locations into iTunes it doesn't seem to make folders for those artists. Is this 'normal' behaviour?

[a_kim]

Originally posted by daveL
Another poster mentioned that the "Sound Enhancement" option on the Windows version of iTunes was degrading the sound quality. Have you tried turning it off? On my wife's XP machine, iTunes installed with "Sound Enhancement" at 50%.

It sounds slightly better with sound enhancement off, but still not as good as it should. I know because for a while it actually was sounding as good as it should. During this time, turning on sound enhancement didn't degrade the vocals. But as I wrote earlier, on the next restart the good sound was lost for whatever reason, and no amount of fiddling/restarting has brought it back. :(

I'll try out 4.1.1 when I get back to work though. Maybe it's been fixed... or maybe a new install will make the problem go away.

[Blaaze]

i'm glad apple is being quick about releasing patches. you don't want people getting the wrong impression of iTunes.

[greenstork]

Originally posted by NoVi
Yeah, especially considering it's "the best app ever written for windows" (c) Steve Jobs :D

Another thing I don't understand. After first installing WiTunes and dragging my mp3 lib to iTunes, I noticed it created a folder for every artist and put corresponding mp3's in the folder.

I wasn't too happy with it, but anyway..

Now if I drag mp3s from other HD locations into iTunes it doesn't seem to make folders for those artists. Is this 'normal' behaviour?

Maybe if you read the instructions first you wouldn't have had that problem. You can add music to your library without changing it's location by simply unchecking "copy to my music folder".

[MorganX]

Originally posted by NoVi
Yeah, especially considering it's "the best app ever written for windows" (c) Steve Jobs :D

There will be a book written one day about Steve Jobisms, and this will be one. But to be honest, this is as close as he's come. It might just be the best multimedia app ever written if:

It supported Cd-Text (understand the Mac version doesn't so it was the right thing to do, but both should be upgraded quickly)

It supported DirectX

It supported more, selectable, visualizations

It also cataloged and played back mpg, mov, and windows media (goodbye WMP)

It followed defacto interface standards for control buttons

As it stands it's one of the best apps ever written for Windows.

[jettredmont]

Originally posted by MorganX
There will be a book written one day about Steve Jobisms, and this will be one. But to be honest, this is as close as he's come. It might just be the best multimedia app ever written if:

It supported Cd-Text (understand the Mac version doesn't so it was the right thing to do, but both should be upgraded quickly)



YES! Absolutely!

Despite the innate joys that come from prolonged iTunes usage, I'd really kinda like my home CD player being able to display the CD/Artist/Track names like it does for the CD's I burned TWO YEARS AGO in Nero!

Still, I'd never dream of going back to managing my music with WinAmp and burning with Nero ... not if you paid me ... On the other hand, with WinTunes, I might end up moving my collection back over to Windows and still burning with Nero ... Hmmmm ....

[tizza]

Originally posted by MorganX
There will be a book written one day about Steve Jobisms, and this will be one. But to be honest, this is as close as he's come. It might just be the best multimedia app ever written if:

It supported Cd-Text (understand the Mac version doesn't so it was the right thing to do, but both should be upgraded quickly)



I guess Steve's vision is for all of us to be using our iPods connected to our stereo or better still a rendezevous stereo such as the Phillips one with iSync, rather than burning to CD's.

But yeah, until I go out and buy my first iPod SOON, (the wife is making me save for it :) ), I'll be sticking to burning CD's for the car from iTunes!

[Analog Kid]

Originally posted by Macco
NOOOOOOO!!! Windows users have a higher version number than we do! Expect to see this in Software Update tomorrow:

New in iTunes 4.1.2 for Mac OS X:
- loads .01 of a second faster than 4.1
- fixes that thingie with the songs when they do that thing...
- displays 4.1.2 while loading
- minimizes to the taskbar
- wait, Mac OS X doesn't have a taskbar...
- never mind
- yeah
- whatever

I think you were kidding, but I was thinking it might be worth an update just to increment the version number on Macs. Not for status sake, but to prevent confusion later.

[ZildjianKX]

Originally posted by MorganX
In addition, the problem was with a previous version of Windows not truly intended for consumer use (Windows 2k).

I don't think you can justify a product not working since an OS wasn't "meant for consumer use". It wasn't marketed for home users, but we're all consumers, aren't we? Its not like people are installing it on Windows 2000 server... actually Windows XP Pro wouldn't be meant for consumer use either then...

[Analog Kid]

Originally posted by MorganX
Patching an Operating System is a much more complex task than patching a single-task application. It's just like making medicine. We can fix just about anything, the problem is limiting side effects.

Keep in mind, and operating system and hardware configured to meet C2 security requirements can't do jack s@*#t.

There will always be bugs as long as humans are writing code, and there will always be security vulnerabilities as long as software continues to do more "stuff" AND as long as some of the best programmers, don't write software, they spend they're time hacking it and writing virus'. That is a good and a bad thing, IMO.

The bugs get some help when you're a monopoly with a captive audience and have little reason to actually improve anything because, I mean, where can people really go? Your market share can't grow, so any effort spent developing cuts into your profits directly.

And then helped further when you make your tech support a profit center and start charging people for calling you with problems.

Then there's that whole "world domination is higher priority than quality" angle to things...

It's not an OS vs app question. MS can't fix their apps either. Of all the apps (Apple, MS, shareware, other) that I run, it's the MS apps that crash more often than any other. I tracked it for a while...

Forgetting Microsoft for a second, I'm really disappointed that Apple released a windows app that brought down Win2k. No, I don't think that's a hard thing to do, but when you're trying to really make a positive impression and statement about software quality, you don't lock up the hardware. It's not like they didn't have time to test this...

Fast response is good, but they shouldn't have had to respond to anything...

[Analog Kid]

Originally posted by ZildjianKX
I don't think you can justify a product not working since an OS wasn't "meant for consumer use". It wasn't marketed for home users, but we're all consumers, aren't we? Its not like people are installing it on Windows 2000 server... actually Windows XP Pro wouldn't be meant for consumer use either then...

Exactly. If they didn't intend for iTunes to run on Win2k, they should have said XP only. It doesn't work on Win98, and Win98 isn't listed as supported...

[Jeff Harrell]

Originally posted by MorganX
It supported Cd-Text (understand the Mac version doesn't so it was the right thing to do, but both should be upgraded quickly)What's Cd-Text? (Said the guy with over a thousand CD's in his collection.)

It supported DirectXWhat's DirectX? Seriously, I've heard the term but I never knew what it was. Isn't it like OpenGL, only awful?

It supported more, selectable, visualizationsI've been using the heck out of iTunes since before it was iTunes--I actually had a license for SoundJam MP--and I just discovered this "visualizer" thing last week. A more useless item I cannot bring myself to imagine.

It also cataloged and played back mpg, mov, and windows media (goodbye WMP)What part of iTunes was unclear? :)

It followed defacto interface standards for control buttonsYour point is well taken, but I think there's also a lot to be said for making a tried-and-true interface, arguably one of the best application user interfaces around period, available on a platform whose native UI guidelines and conventions do not exactly lend themselves to stunning works of art, if you know what I mean.

[MorganX]

Originally posted by ZildjianKX
I don't think you can justify a product not working since an OS wasn't "meant for consumer use". It wasn't marketed for home users, but we're all consumers, aren't we? Its not like people are installing it on Windows 2000 server... actually Windows XP Pro wouldn't be meant for consumer use either then...

In the case of clearly consumer software I think you can. There was no Home version of Windows 2000. It's not just Apple, many games were not "made" for Windows 2000. I accept that Windows 2000 is a workstation OS an not initially focusing on it is acceptable. As a matter of fact, I wouldn't have a problem with Apple not patching it, if they had let everyone know it was not compatible. I think Microsoft has a few consumer oriented titles that won't work with Windows 2000. Their Home Networking software doesn't even work with Windows 2000 (you cannot use Win2k to manage their "home" networking devices) and will not be patched.

[MorganX]

Originally posted by Jeff Harrell
What's Cd-Text? (Said the guy with over a thousand CD's in his collection.)

What's DirectX? Seriously, I've heard the term but I never knew what it was. Isn't it like OpenGL, only awful?

I've been using the heck out of iTunes since before it was iTunes--I actually had a license for SoundJam MP--and I just discovered this "visualizer" thing last week. A more useless item I cannot bring myself to imagine.

What part of iTunes was unclear? :)


CD-text allows you to write song title/artist/album to Audio Cds which can be read by most Car and home audio DVD/CD players so that when you play a burned CD you see the title and artist on the LED/LCD display and not Track 1, Unknown Album. All major PC burning apps have supported it for some time.

DirectX - Much more capable, developed hand-in-hand with current and future GPUs, and much more than a 3D api.

If you don't use visualizations, it's a non-issue.

The part where Steve Jobs said iTunes was the best Windows app ever :D To be the best Windows app ever it would have to do a litte more than manage songs and burn CDs, without CD-text at that.

[JEFBEAR]

The update is easy for the windows iTunes.
Go to:
Help/check for iTunes updates
Mine updated in no time...

Easy.

How... Apple :)

[nuckinfutz]

Originally posted by JEFBEAR
The update is easy for the windows iTunes.
Go to:
Help/check for iTunes updates
Mine updated in no time...

Easy.

How... Apple :)

Glad yours is working. My iTunes is acting asstastic :(

[Xenex]

Originally posted by MorganX
It supported more, selectable, visualizationsPlease feel free to write more (http://developer.apple.com/sdk/#iTunesWin).

[legion]

Originally posted by JEFBEAR
The update is easy for the windows iTunes.
Go to:
Help/check for iTunes updates
Mine updated in no time...

Easy.

How... Apple :)

Really? Yours updated? I just tried again and iTunes on XP Pro tells me I'm up-to-date at 4.1.0.52.

[solvs]

I tried the update option on my Win2000 P(iece-of)C(rap), and got nothin'. So I d/l'ed it manually, reinstalled, restarted... working great. Kept all my preferences. Little faster it seems. Works better than ever.

Of course, I was one of the lucky ones apparently. I never was having a problem with it. Using it since day one. Little slow at first, but it's been rock solid. Like I'm going to run XP (suffer through that at work). 2000 isn't great, but it's better than 98 or ME. Kinda (it's no OS X).

Best Windows app ever? Maybe not, but worth the price. WAY better than WMP 9. After that POS program thrashed my last system I still run 6.4 with the new codecs. Wish QT supported Real and WM files. And was just a little faster starting up.

Sometimes I wonder if it's more that I love Apple, or just that I hate M$.

[SeaFox]

Originally posted by NoVi
Another thing I don't understand. After first installing WiTunes and dragging my mp3 lib to iTunes, I noticed it created a folder for every artist and put corresponding mp3's in the folder.

I wasn't too happy with it, but anyway..

Now if I drag mp3s from other HD locations into iTunes it doesn't seem to make folders for those artists. Is this 'normal' behaviour?

Yes. It is. iTunes only organizes files that are in the designated iTunes Music folder (set in the advanced tab of the preference pane). When you drag files from other locations they are added to the library list but are not moved. The downside to this is you cannot delete the track when you clear the entry from the library. You have to manually drag the file to the trash after removing it from iTunes' list.

I have no problem with the auto-arranging feature except I can't define how the individual files are named. I want the artist on there too!

[F/reW/re]

When i launch iTunes nothing happens. In the Task Manager it shows up in prosesses using 23MB RAM, but in the applications view there's no sign of it.

This happens 80% of the times i launch iTunes. Crappy app!

And now I have to download 20MB again to install get the new version . .

[Analog Kid]

Originally posted by MorganX
The part where Steve Jobs said iTunes was the best Windows app ever :D To be the best Windows app ever it would have to do a litte more than manage songs and burn CDs, without CD-text at that.

Oh god, just please don't advocate iTunes Office... ;)

Personally, what i like about iTunes is that it does one thing and does it exceedingly well. Then again, I've never been one for "convergence". It's nice to have everything in one place, but there's too many compromises involved.

I'm with you on the CD-text-- I'm only vaguely aware of it's existence but it fits the "one thing well" requirement in my mind.

My big question is why on earth would you need DirectX support, basically a conduit to the video hardware, in an audio jukebox?!

[MorganX]

Originally posted by Xenex
Please feel free to write more (http://developer.apple.com/sdk/#iTunesWin).

The best app ever written for windows doesn't require plug-ins for basic functionality. I've been here long enough to know better than leave a semantical loophole.

Should have been: included more on par with competing windows applications in the class. ::sigh::

So how many selectable, customizable visualizations does iTunes support without an add-on again?

[MorganX]

Originally posted by Analog Kid

My big question is why on earth would you need DirectX support, basically a conduit to the video hardware, in an audio jukebox?!

This would most likely eliminate all sluggish UI, Window redraw, and visualization frame rate issues many are experiencing. The developer also wouldn't have to worry so much about all the different video and sound configurations. Might even reduce some of the 30MB overhead.

[Xenex]

Originally posted by MorganX
The best app ever written for windows doesn't require plug-ins for basic functionality. Originally posted by MorganX
So how many selectable, customizable visualizations does iTunes support without an add-on again?
Do you know what the word "basic" means?

iTunes' basic fuctionality is to rip, mix, and burn music (http://www.asia.apple.com/hardware/ads/ripmixburn-long.html). A choice of visualisation plugins are not required to achieve that basic functionality.

[SiliconAddict]

Originally posted by mymemory
I can imagine the people at Apple:

Yeah!!! we sold one million songs just with the PC market!!!

Next day:

Damn it, stinky PCs, now we have to deal with all the PC bugs.

_____
The dilema, bigger market, bigger problems. :rolleyes:

:rolleyes: Bugs that Apple programmed into the software. Yep when in doubt blame MS. Hey didn't you guys hear? MS is the root cause of global warming.

So much for Jobs claims of "best programmed application for Windows....NOT" :rolleyes:

[Wash!!]

Originally posted by MorganX
The best app ever written for windows doesn't require plug-ins for basic functionality. I've been here long enough to know better than leave a semantical loophole.

Should have been: included more on par with competing windows applications in the class. ::sigh::

So how many selectable, customizable visualizations does iTunes support without an add-on again?

What part of that don't you get...the visualization is just a nice little feature but not the reason to use the app. If you don't like that the visualizer sucks then stop using itunes and use the other players.

Even at my job the it manager who is a die hard winsuck fan admitted that itunes is far superior to anything out there.

[jeremy.king]

Tried running "Check for Updates" and iTunes thinks Im current.

mmmm...anyone else seeing this?

http://www.jeremyron.com/images/itunes.GIF

[MorganX]

>>What part of that don't you get...the visualization is just a nice little feature but not the reason to use the app. If you don't like that the visualizer sucks then stop using itunes and use the other players

Even at my job the it manager who is a die hard winsuck fan admitted that itunes is far superior to anything out there.<<

Oh, I get it now, thanks.

[gate]

I must use Windows at my job (**** I hate it!!!) and of course last week I installed iTunes. I wasn't able to read a CD. I downloaded the installer a second time and installed it again and it worked.

I downloaded the new version this morning and I had to reinstall it 4 or 5 times before making it work.

Now it's ok and I really like that look and feel of the Mac on that %#$%&$%$ Windows machine.

[MorganX]

Originally posted by Xenex
Do you know what the word "basic" means?

iTunes' basic fuctionality is to rip, mix, and burn music (http://www.asia.apple.com/hardware/ads/ripmixburn-long.html). A choice of visualisation plugins are not required to achieve that basic functionality.

The start of this thread was what i felt iTunes needed to be the best Windows app ever written given the class of app it's in. Not whether or not iTunes is not excellent because it lacks them. That minor point has gotten lost in "enthusiasm" so I'll probably... exit the conversation on a clarifying note:

Just about every "basic" music player in the PC world has basic CD-text support and a set of "basic" selectable visualizations among other things.

ITunes may be the best "music library" ever written, but it is not the best Windows app ever written, IMO. Even making allowance for the class it fits in.

I love iTunes and use it every single-day with my iPod BTW. I think expectations of "basic" are different based on the platforms. PC users have many "basic" choices. And a silly statement like "The best Windows app ever written" may go over with die-hard Apple fans, but might actually do harm with regards to PC users looking at iTunes with higher expectations based on that statement.

The library management features are most important to "me" which is why iTunes is my primary music management app. The CD-burning is used for archiving, burning audio CDs without CD-text is useless to me so I use Nero for burning CDs, even when I had my iMac. That doesn't stop it from being one of my favorite and most used apps, and a lot of that is because my iPod is a part of my lifestyle. But best windows app ever written, clearly no. It could be, but it would need a lot more "basic" functionality.

Steve should save the Jobisms for the Apple platform that accepts them without scrutiny. They can do harm to Apple's credibility on the PC platform. Even the most die-hard Apple fans have to realize that is not a good thing.

[neilw]

I agree completely about CD-text, it should be in there. Send your feedback to Apple, if you haven't done so. Hopefully for iTunes 5. As for the visualizers... eh. I've downloaded a crapload on my Mac, and still never use them. Not important to me personally. At least the one they provide is a good one (IMHO).

But as far as the Jobsism goes (best Windows app ever), we really need to take that for what it's worth. I mean, does anyone actually take such a statement seriously? I, and most Windows iTunes users no doubt, are content that WiTunes is simply a Very Good Windows application. Certainly there is room for improvement, and not just in the areas you mention.

Frankly, I as a Mac user really do wish that Jobs would tone down some of the ridiculous statements he makes, as they can undermine his message. It's like the infomercials that actually sell something decent, but wrap it in such a ridiculous message that you assume it has to be a scam....

[killmoms]

Good Lord, man, it's marketing. Microsoft spouts the same kind of crud. Everyone does! It's just that Jobs is constantly singled out for his, since he's the perennial whipping boy of the computer industry.

Oy oy oy.

--Cless

[encro]

Just to clarify!

CD-TEXT is available on the mac using Roxio Toast Titanium 5.2 or higher and possibly even Discribe although I'm not sure on that one.

I find the PC version of iTunes to be a lot faster than iTunes on the mac except for the visualizer but thats cool; my machine processes work not fancy OpenGL tricks.

I'm disappointed that the scroll wheel doesnt move up and down the playlist but it does adjust the volume when using the small iTunes GUI.

[Xenex]

Originally posted by MorganX
Just about every "basic" music player in the PC world has basic CD-text support...Winamp is the most popular music player for Windows, and it doesn't even burn CDs, let alone support CD-text.

Is burning CDs a "basic" function? Is supporting some non-standard CD naming scheme a "basic" function?

Originally posted by MorganX
...and a set of "basic" selectable visualizations among other things.One visualisation is basic.

Originally posted by MorganX
I think expectations of "basic" are different based on the platforms. PC users ave many "basic" choices.It seems that "basic" is the incorrect word to express what you're thinking. Perhaps "standard" is more fitting.

Many other Windows players do feature more varied visualisation features, but Apple seem to believe that visualisation isn't particularly important. However, they did leave the door open (http://developer.apple.com/sdk/#iTunesWin) for others to extend the functionality if they wish.

Apple didn't have to create a plugin architecture.

[neilw]

Good Lord, man, it's marketing. Microsoft spouts the same kind of crud. Everyone does! It's just that Jobs is constantly singled out for his, since he's the perennial whipping boy of the computer industry.

I believe there is a distinction (fuzzy though it may be) between "marketing" and "completely ridiculous statements". I believe that Jobs too often lands on the wrong side, this being one of those times. The statement has brought needlessly excessive nit-picky scrutiny and skepticism on what was otherwise a pretty darned successful product launch. Every problem the program has is referenced with "the 'best Windows app' can't even do *this*" or some such.

In any case, it's really not that big a deal, what's most important is that the program works well, and it does. Apple has done a very good job here, and the quick point release update to fix the Win2K problem is commendable.

[whooleytoo]

Originally posted by MorganX
So how many selectable, customizable visualizations does iTunes support without an add-on again?

Actually, there are several patterns, waveforms and colour tables you can select from, it's just not well documented.

IIRC, the keys are:
Q, W (to go to previous/next patterns)
A, S (to go to previous/next waveforms)
Z, X (to go to previous/next colour palettes)

L (to lock current settings)
F (display framerate)

There are others, but I can't remember them.

Mike.

[Lancetx]

Originally posted by SiliconAddict
:rolleyes: Bugs that Apple programmed into the software. Yep when in doubt blame MS. Hey didn't you guys hear? MS is the root cause of global warming.

So much for Jobs claims of "best programmed application for Windows....NOT" :rolleyes:

Oh yeah, Apple intentionally programmed bugs in there so it wouldn't work with older third-party CD burning software and non-standard mp3 files. Somehow Apple is supposed to be prepared ahead of time for every possible Windows configuration that may exist out there in the world. And it's all Apple's fault too I guess that a few people will have this junk loaded on their Windows boxes and it will cause problems. :rolleyes:

[Wash!!]

Originally posted by whooleytoo
Actually, there are several patterns, waveforms and colour tables you can select from, it's just not well documented.

IIRC, the keys are:
Q, W (to go to previous/next patterns)
A, S (to go to previous/next waveforms)
Z, X (to go to previous/next colour palettes)

L (to lock current settings)
F (display framerate)

There are others, but I can't remember them.

Mike.

I did not know that Thanks for the tip;)

[tny]

Originally posted by MorganX
DirectX - Much more capable, developed hand-in-hand with current and future GPUs, and much more than a 3D api.

To be the best Windows app ever it would have to do a litte more than manage songs and burn CDs, without CD-text at that.

1. DirectX is a Windows-only library. For iTunes Windows to use DirectX, they probably would need to fork even more of the code base and would gain only somewhat faster visualizations.

2. Apple already makes software for watching vid files: it's called QuickTime. If your point is that QuickTime needs to be rewritten to work more like iTunes, I agree with you somewhat. If your point is that iTunes and QuickTime should be the same app, you're simply wrong. One thing we've learned from the past 5 years is that massive, monolithic, swiss-army-knife apps are bad.

[daveL]

Originally posted by SiliconAddict
Yep when in doubt blame MS. Hey didn't you guys hear? MS is the root cause of global warming.
So, you finally figured it out. I've know it for years.

[edStar]

itunes worked like a breeze on my PC, just like it does on my mac.

I did hear whispers about some people having trouble installing itunes. I think the major gripe most PC users have is the memory it takes up. Seems like a very frugal thing to be complaining about... I mean the way some PC users went on about it... its as if they needed every last drop of ram ready for something special. Who knows.

I've heard lots of great comments about itunes on windows. The streaming music feature is absolutely killer and I used it all the time. This update just goes to show that Apple is pretty committed to ensuring a maclike experience on both Mac and Windows.

[SiliconAddict]

Originally posted by Lancetx
Oh yeah, Apple intentionally programmed bugs in there so it wouldn't work with older third-party CD burning software and non-standard mp3 files. Somehow Apple is supposed to be prepared ahead of time for every possible Windows configuration that may exist out there in the world. And it's all Apple's fault too I guess that a few people will have this junk loaded on their Windows boxes and it will cause problems. :rolleyes:

Don’t be dense. I didn’t say Apple intentionally programmed in those bugs. It was you who made that leap. I said they programmed in those bug, mistake or not. I loaded iTunes on 4 diff computers. Worked on 3. The Toshiba Satellite with its burner worked fine. The Dell Latitude with a CD burner did not. Both running the same ghosted image with the Dell having a few more apps on it but nothing out of the ordinary. Funny thing is I also own Music Match and it found the burner fine, installed fine, and runs fine on all my systems.
Look. If one is going to make the bold statement of best software ever coded on Windows one should back up his claims. Don’t make excuses for Jobs. He was trying to extend his RDF to Windows and IMHO it backfired on him. The iTunes is good, but it could be better hence the reason .11 within a week of release.

[grapes911]

Not to sound like an ass, but Rower_CPU, what were you thinking?

This thread was closed by Rower_CPU:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?threadid=42846

it was started on 10-22-2003 03:55 PM

A link was added by Rower_CPU to this post:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?threadid=42867&perpage=25&pagenumber=1

It was started on 10-22-2003 06:16 PM.

Why would you close the 1st post and leave the dup? I don't want to start and trouble, but don't you guys usually close the 2nd and 3rd and etc post ? Or is some other method used?

So does anyone know why we can't continue our post where we were? It's just kind of annoying.

[ddbean]

My Win2K pro just found the iTunes update and d/l it now. It wasn't there via Check for updates this morning.
It seems big for just an update. 20 MB is a large update.

[MorganX]

Originally posted by Xenex
Is burning CDs a "basic" function? Is supporting some non-standard CD naming scheme a "basic" function?

Considering both dominant desktop OS' include these basic facilities, yes, burning CDs is a basic function.

CD-text is very standard. It's supported by every Superdrive in every Mac made in the past two years at least. That's pretty standard.

Virtually all DVD players and Car Receivers made in the past few years support it. That's pretty standard.

Because Apple software doesn't suport it, doesn't mean it's new, non-standard, or that it's not of value.

[york2600]

Ok I just want to clarify this since every mac user seems to screw it up. BTW I'm a Mac user, but I'm a Windows admin too. Windows 2000 wasn't officially said to be a consumer OS just like Apple initially didn't ship OS X as the default OS. OS X 10.0 wasn't set up to be pretty and kind to your grandma. Windows XP is for the most part Windows 2000 with an improved GUI. There are plenty of consumers that continue to run 2000 (it's much more stable than XP) and there have been consumers running 2000 since it first came out. Initially games had trouble with it, but Microsoft released compatibility updates to ensure that older games ran. Newer games are also all designed to run on 2000 since XP and 2000 share a very similar kernel.

[Flowbee]

Originally posted by SiliconAddict

Look. If one is going to make the bold statement of best software ever coded on Windows one should back up his claims. Don’t make excuses for Jobs. He was trying to extend his RDF to Windows and IMHO it backfired on him. The iTunes is good, but it could be better hence the reason .11 within a week of release.

I think Steve Jobs knew *exactly* what he was doing when he made the statement. He know it would be very controversial. It was made to generate headlines. As for it backfiring, it seems to me that a lot of people have downloaded iTMS for Windows, and the overwhelming response seems to be very positive.

[Xenex]

Originally posted by MorganX
Considering both dominant desktop OS' include these basic facilities, yes, burning CDs is a basic function.
But the most popular music player for Windows (http://www.winamp.com/) currently doesn't even support it. Looks like Nullsoft don't consider it to be "basic".

Originally posted by MorganX
CD-text is very standard. It's supported by every Superdrive in every Mac made in the past two years at least. That's pretty standard.

Virtually all DVD players and Car Receivers made in the past few years support it. That's pretty standard.
Looks like you don't know what the word "standard" means either.

Just because a lot of things support something, does not make something a standard. Is this CD-text part of Red Book?

Originally posted by york2600
There are plenty of consumers that continue to run 2000 (it's much more stable than XP) and there have been consumers running 2000 since it first came out.
This is simply not true. Windows 2000 Professional was targeted at the same segment as Windows NT 4.0 Workstation - businesses. Until Windows XP Home was released, OEMs were shipping Windows Me with their consumer systems.

That's not to say that power users hadn't started using Windows 2000 Pro in 'consumer' environments, however it was never sold that way.

[iHack]

Originally posted by MorganX
snip.

If you don't use visualizations, it's a non-issue.

snip.

I tend to agree. I've looked at visualisations regularly, in WMP, Real player, iTunes, but the novelty wears off in about, say, 5 seconds. The only use I can imagine is when I would have a LCD projector and a party, I would project the visualisations on the wall - wouldn't that beat a 'rotating mirror disco ball' (or whatever they're called)!

So my question really is this: what do people do with the visualisations? Sit in front of their computer and stare at the screen? Auto-hypnosis? caal their friends and say; 'look at all the pretty colors'?

Can some-one please explain?

M.

[Snowy_River]

Originally posted by MorganX
It supported more, selectable, visualizations

As has already been mentioned, there are other visualizers available for iTunes. And, FWIW, other jukebox software that I've used (not an expansive list, but still) only offered one or two visualizer type functions. Others were available, as with iTunes, as plug-ins.

There is one "visualizer" type plug-in that I saw on a former co-worker's computer. It is the one visualizer plug-in that I've actually looked for for iTunes. It was of a dancing sheep that was quite amusing. Does anyone know where such a thing might be found?

It also cataloged and played back mpg, mov, and windows media (goodbye WMP)

While iTunes doesn't support windows media or standard .mpg files, you can play QT .mov files (audio only), as well as many other formats, including WAV, AIFF, etc.

As it stands it's one of the best apps ever written for Windows.

Well put.

[MorganX]

>>But the most popular music player for Windows (http://www.winamp.com/) currently doesn't even support it. Looks like Nullsoft don't consider it to be "basic"<<

Winamp is clearly not the Best windows app ever written and never will be, even making allowance for class becasue it does not include this basic functionality, JMO, OC.


>>Looks like you don't know what the word "standard" means either.

Just because a lot of things support something, does not make something a standard. Is this CD-text part of Red Book?<<

You tell me:

RED BOOK: CD-Audio, CD-Text (Standard Audio Recording) CD-DA (Audio CDs)
The Red Book describes the physical properties of the compact disc and the digital audio encoding. It comprises:

Audio specification for 16-bit PCM.
Disc specification, including physical parameters.
Optical stylus and parameters.
Deviations and block error rate.
Modulation system and error correction.
Control and display system (ie subcode channels).
An addition to the Red Book describes the CD Graphics option using the subcode channels R to W. This describes the various applications of these subcode channels including graphics and MIDI.
Recently CD Text, which also uses the subcode channels, has been added to provide content related information to audio CDs.
The current status and versions of the Red Book and extensions are listed below.

Format Version Date Comments
CD Audio - Aug 1995 Red Book
Subcode/Control and Display System - Nov 1991 Extension to Red Book for CD Graphics
CD Text 1.0 Sep 1996 Extension to Red Book

Frame: 1/75 Sec
Audio Recording w/ Optional Digital Text Area
Text can be read and displayed on LCD
User Data: 2,352 Bytes


Source Plextor:
CD TEXT is the latest extension of the standard Audio CD that contains additional information besides the audio tracks. This information can be the title of the CD, the name of the artist, info on the tracks (songtitle, artist), etc.

The CD TEXT information can be displayed by the newer generation Audio CD players and Audio CD multichangers.

Also the latest CD-ROM Drives, like the Plextor PX-40TS, and CD-Recorders, like the Plextor PX-R820T and PX-W4220T, can retrieve this information...

[Phil Of Mac]

Originally posted by MorganX
The part where Steve Jobs said iTunes was the best Windows app ever :D To be the best Windows app ever it would have to do a litte more than manage songs and burn CDs, without CD-text at that.

It has an intuitive user interface, so it's better than any other Windows app in human history.

Being the best Windows app ever is like being the richest man in Cuba. It's not very hard, there's no competition :D

Originally posted by MorganX
So how many selectable, customizable visualizations does iTunes support without an add-on again?

Hate to say it, but the standard, built-in visualizer of every player other than iTunes is crap. Like the WMP one, which is just a circle, that does some crazy stuff. Pssh. iTunes blows that out of the water.

Originally posted by MorganX
Steve should save the Jobisms for the Apple platform that accepts them without scrutiny. They can do harm to Apple's credibility on the PC platform. Even the most die-hard Apple fans have to realize that is not a good thing.

Anyone who doesn't realize that "Best Windows app ever" is hyperbole is just plain dumb.

[Analog Kid]

Originally posted by Xenex
Looks like you don't know what the word "standard" means either.

Just because a lot of things support something, does not make something a standard. Is this CD-text part of Red Book?


Actually I'd say you're a little confused about the meaning of standard. (Don't worry, I'm not going to quote Websters... ;-)

When a majority, or even "a lot" of new devices all follow a similar pattern, that pattern becomes "standard".

There are many shades of meaning-- a standard can be documented as a standard, or it can be a de facto standard.

The Red Book, on the other hand, is a specification.

[Analog Kid]

If anyone watches when Jobs makes the "best Windows app ever written" statement, even he laughs...

People need to stop getting their panties in a bunch about this. It was a dig at a competitor, and was meant for a Mac audience.

As far as backfiring, who cares? If someone says "I use iTunes every day, and even though it's not the best Windows app ever written, I like it better than the alternatives" so be it.

Microsoft has been calling their platform secure for years now, and throwing around phrases like "Trustworthy Computing" and "improved stability". Hasn't hurt their market share much...

[Analog Kid]

Originally posted by MorganX
This would most likely eliminate all sluggish UI, Window redraw, and visualization frame rate issues many are experiencing. The developer also wouldn't have to worry so much about all the different video and sound configurations. Might even reduce some of the 30MB overhead.

I'd guess a lot of that overhead is the need to load Quicktime. I'm not going to begrudge Apple that...

As far as needing to rely on some trap door to the hardware to do basic window drawing, that seems absurd to me. I mean, look at Quartz, it's not like Apple said, "Hmmm, basic window drawing is too slow, what we need to do is tap the 3D render engine to accelerate it"...

Err... nevermind... :rolleyes:

[MorganX]

>>I'd guess a lot of that overhead is the need to load Quicktime. I'm not going to begrudge Apple that...<<

I'm not begrudging them. I would simply be better, IMO, using the best APIs for the job. I cant' say it doesn't use DirectDraw. But pretty much anything other than Workstation Class 3D modeling (read consumer multimedia) can be done faster with Direct3D. OpenGL has it's own overhead for peak performance, finely tuned drivers (which is a rarity except in 3D workstations) for one.


>>As far as needing to rely on some trap door to the hardware to do basic window drawing, that seems absurd to me. I mean, look at Quartz, it's not like Apple said, "Hmmm, basic window drawing is too slow, what we need to do is tap the 3D render engine to accelerate it"<<

It's not a trapdoor it's just technology. Forget for a minute that you hate anything Microsoft. Cutting out the middle man is always faster barring any extaordinary circumstances (read, Nvidia's latest).

Apple has similar technology. And like DirectX (via DirectDraw), Apple's Quartz library provides 2D acceleration. Graphics hardware can always do a better job than software/cpu especially when you start adding effects like textures and transparency.

Quartz (w/display postscript) would be most analagous to DirectDraw. Oooh if Windows had Display Postscript.

Quartz Extreme most analagous to Direct3D.

Before Quartz weren't there some "sprockets" APIs? Game Sprockets? Same thing. Without "trapdoors" to allow writting directly to video hardware to accelerate 2D and 3D functions, you would see just how much overhead there is redrawing/sizing windows and playing back quicktime and windows media; and DVD playback would probably not be enjoyable at all.

[legion]

Originally posted by MorganX

>>As far as needing to rely on some trap door to the hardware to do basic window drawing, that seems absurd to me. I mean, look at Quartz, it's not like Apple said, "Hmmm, basic window drawing is too slow, what we need to do is tap the 3D render engine to accelerate it"<<

It's not a trapdoor it's just technology. Forget for a minute that you hate anything Microsoft. Cutting out the middle man is always faster barring any extaordinary circumstances (read, Nvidia's latest).

Apple has similar technology. And like DirectX (via DirectDraw), Apple's Quartz library provides 2D acceleration. Graphics hardware can always do a better job than software/cpu especially when you start adding effects like textures and transparency.

Quartz (w/display postscript) would be most analagous to DirectDraw. Oooh if Windows had Display Postscript.

Quartz Extreme most analagous to Direct3D.

MorganX

Analog Kid was being sarcastic (hence the "errr.. nevermind" bit at the end of his/her post.) A. Kid was also pointing out the Apple had issues with GUI draws and developed Quartz to supplement the process much as DirectX does. (And therefore Apple, if wishing to port software to XP, should take advantage of DirectX or look like poor coders; which is the current case with the bloat/overhead of iTunes for Windows.)

Part of me also wonders if this was done intentionally because there's a pretty good chance that iTunes on Windows would run considerably better than iTunes on Mac (which couldn't be good for Apple) as the Video Card manufacturers strongly support the DirectX protocols on a hardware level thereby accelerating the software to a higher degree if iTunes was properly code to the platform. However, I may just be too cynical about big business and this is just a classic case of a rushed job. I'm now wondering how Expose would port to Windows.... hmmmm... ;)

[MorganX]

>>Analog Kid was being sarcastic (hence the "errr.. nevermind" bit at the end of his/her post.)<<

Yeah, I missed that. :/


>>I'm now wondering how Expose would port to Windows.... hmmmm... <<

The effects of Expose are cool, but functionally I don't think it's really needed on Windows because of MDI and the Task bar. Font book I would like to see in Windows.

[Iconocat]

I was doing my daily checks at various news sites here at work, and when I checked to see what was going on over at wired, I saw one of the new "web" ads. Was a nice little brightener to the fact I always feel a bit wistful at work waiting to get back home to my mac.

Managed to get a screen shot... not the most exciting thing in the world, but I thought it was cool. :)

FYI - iTunes for windows is a massive hit with the people I know who have started using it. Already have one person I know looking to switch to a mac before the end of the year! Also, even though the windows users I know made the upgrade to 4.1.1, none of them had any problems with the initial release.

Well, I tried to attach the screenshot I took but it didn't work! Sorry about that. *sheepish grin* :rolleyes:

[m.r.m.]

most media center 9 users decide to stick with media center after trying itunes though. i never tried media center, so i´m on itunes at the moment, but it seems the smart playlists in media center 9 are more evolved.

[rjstanford]

iTunes does have some problems. The biggest easily-fixable ones would be simple things like it not remembering what playlist you were listening to when you restart the app, or where you are within it. For instance, if you have a "Music" playlist containing songs to be played (ie: no audiobooks, etc), its a pain to have to keep selecting it when the "Library" is the perpetual default.

From a pure interface standpoint, some things continue to be inexcusible (like using fastForward/fastBackward buttons for track up/down).

Much more aggrevating on a Windows machine is Apple's continual desire to change existing standards. Apple used to champion adherence to existing look-and-feel guidelines (although recent releases of their own software for OSX have suffered here too). Indeed, one of the first things that Microsoft products for OSX are judged on are their adherence to existing Apple standards!

Some examples? Not following system-set standards like title bar color (or shape for that matter). Redefining standard title bar buttons such as the "maximise" one (while keeping standard-ish logos for them - this is bizarrely awful). Likewise, changing the behavior of the window-move and window-resize functions. I would submit that the idea is for Windows users to get used to iTunes, the iTunes store, and AAC, not for Mac users to become more comfortable using Windows machines, no?

Also (but covered elsewhere), using their own graphics library and (poorly) reimplementing existing behavior (not talking about Visualizer FPS, which is bad enough - simple things like responding to mouse-in / mouse-out events are hideously slow (very obvious if you use "focus follows mouse" for activation)).

iTunes for Windows also changes many defaults. For example, the "My Music" folder was designated and is adhered to by just about every Windows application as the place to store music. This allows multiple jukebox-style apps to share a common file structure. iTunes benefits from this by reading it, but unless you change an "Advanced" setting will store music that it rips into a special My Music / iTunes / Music (or something like that) folder. Many other programs can figure this out, but they shouldn't have to.

Adherence to standards is more important than ever these days, with multiple viable platforms, and little quirks like these get very old, very fast. The Windows platform remains, sadly, waiting for a truly powerful yet simple standards-based jukebox-type application. Many Windows users (who already have solutions that they're comfortable with, if annoyed by) may revert after realizing that, while pretty, the new iTunes app is really no easier to use (in a Windows framework) than many of the others.

-Richard

[Snowy_River]

Originally posted by rjstanford
I would submit that the idea is for Windows users to get used to iTunes, the iTunes store, and AAC, not for Mac users to become more comfortable using Windows machines, no?


But what you're talking about is changing iTunes to make it more like Windows. How is that going to help Windows users get more used to iTunes? As it stands, iTunes functions, for all intents and purposes, exactly the same on both platforms. The maximize window button (the behavior of which is unique on the Mac side, too) behaves the same on both platforms, the uniqueness is a nod to the usefulness, not a pull away from standards, IMO.

Still, if the point is to give Windows users a taste of what the Mac platform is like, and to let them get comfortable with at least some small element of that, then changing iTunes to be more Windows like would utterly defeat that purpose.

Every Windows user that I know that's used iTunes has been thrilled with it, even if its title bar is the wrong color. (Most like the consistency of the grey title bar with the metal window, in fact.) I don't think that most of the issues you've brought up have much merit.

I will grant that there are a few things that could improve, including, as you mentioned, playlist memory. But, for the most part, these are fairly minor.

P.S. What's the issue with the FF button being the same as the next track button? I have several CD players that function the exact same way. It seems to me that this is a, more or less, standard interface...

[rjstanford]

Originally posted by Snowy_River
But what you're talking about is changing iTunes to make it more like Windows. How is that going to help Windows users get more used to iTunes?Ah, so Office X should be changed to look more like a Windows application? Same issue, from the other side, and I don't think that anyone would argue that point .. no?P.S. What's the issue with the FF button being the same as the next track button? I have several CD players that function the exact same way. It seems to me that this is a, more or less, standard interface... Standards have fast forward and reverse being two triangles stacked horizontally, angled in the direction of time motion. An automatic forward/reverse to the end of a track should be noted by the addition of a vertical bar indicating that the movement will "stop" at a boundary (if limited for space, a triangle may be dropped, but not the vertical bar). Almost every consumer device and software app, virtual CD players, physical DVD devices, whatever, follow this standard.

-Richard

[Snowy_River]

Originally posted by rjstanford
Ah, so Office X should be changed to look more like a Windows application? Same issue, from the other side, and I don't think that anyone would argue that point .. no?

Not quite. Yes, MS could take that approach, and, to some extent, until recently, did. In general, however, the response was negative. Mac users didn't want to "get a taste of Windows" on their Macs. Indeed, I think that part of the near total domination of the Office Suite software on the Mac side has only come since MS fully embraced the Mac interface for MS Office.

Now, if Windows users end up feeling that way too (not wanting a "taste of Mac" on their Windows machines), then one of two things will happen. Either iTunes for Windows will be a dismal failure because most Windows users will hate the Mac-ish interface, or Apple will have to change the interface to be more Windows-like.

However, I don't think that will happen. As I've said, every Windows user I know that's used iTunes has praised it, so far (present company excepted). Not only that, but I know that their are a lot of applications out there that don't follow the standards for Windows. This opens the field up a bit. Most Mac users know what it's like to use Windows machines (and frequently express dislike of such), whereas most Windows users don't know what it's like to use a Mac. Therefore, using iTunes is a taste of something new.

In any event, it should be interesting to see how it plays out.

[m.r.m.]

the worst thing about itunes (mac or windows) is if you start playing a song (like the first one of an album) and browse to another menu, itunes doesn´t play the second one after the first one is done. the music just stops. it only goes on if you play the first song off a playlist, or if the song is played off the main library menu. that´s horrible. i´m not going to make a playlist for every album. if by any chance all this isn´t true and i´m just too dull to understand apple apps, my humblest apologies. i´m new to itunes and i haven´t gotten my mac yet, so this is all new ground for me.

[Phil Of Mac]

Originally posted by rjstanford
Ah, so Office X should be changed to look more like a Windows application?

No, the Mac user interface is better, therefore all apps should use it, Mac or Windows.

[Phil Of Mac]

Originally posted by m.r.m.
the worst thing about itunes (mac or windows) is if you start playing a song (like the first one of an album) and browse to another menu, itunes doesn´t play the second one after the first one is done. the music just stops. it only goes on if you play the first song off a playlist, or if the song is played off the main library menu. that´s horrible. i´m not going to make a playlist for every album. if by any chance all this isn´t true and i´m just too dull to understand apple apps, my humblest apologies. i´m new to itunes and i haven´t gotten my mac yet, so this is all new ground for me.

If you're in iTunes and you start to play another song while one is still playing, it does indeed stop and then play the other song, it doesn't just queue them up.

If you really must play your songs in album format, they're conveniently arranged as such in the library.

[Snowy_River]

Originally posted by m.r.m.
the worst thing about itunes (mac or windows) is if you start playing a song (like the first one of an album) and browse to another menu, itunes doesn´t play the second one after the first one is done. the music just stops. it only goes on if you play the first song off a playlist, or if the song is played off the main library menu. that´s horrible. i´m not going to make a playlist for every album. if by any chance all this isn´t true and i´m just too dull to understand apple apps, my humblest apologies. i´m new to itunes and i haven´t gotten my mac yet, so this is all new ground for me.

I'm not sure if I understand your problem. When I start a song on a playlist, even when I go to other playlists or the library, it continues to play through the playlist, regardless of whether I started on the first song or not.

[m.r.m.]

@ snowy, that´s true, but that´s only the case if you play the song from a playlist. what i mean is you press browse and select the first song to play from an album in the album window. then you close the browse window and look through your library (maybe to edit tags or whatever). when the song finishes itunes doesn´t play song two of the album. it just stops.

a friend of mine noticed this as well. this is what he wrote:

"1. I use the three browse panes (ctrl+b) to browse Rock > 3 Doors Down > The Better Life
2. I select the song "Kryptonite" from the bottom pane and double-click it.
3. I rock out. It's a good song.
4. Whilst rocking out, I use the browse panes to browse RAP > Dr. Dre > 2001
5. I'm looking at the contents of this album while "Kryptonite" continues to play. NOTE -- "Kryptonite" is no longer visible in the bottom pane!!
6. I'm still perusing Dre. Or maybe I've gotten up from my desk or tabbed over to an IE window or whatever. The point is, the bottom pane still doesn't have "Kryptonite" in it.
7. The song ends. ALL PLAYBACK STOPS. It doesn't go to the next track of "The Better Life". "Kryptonite" was track 1. Where the heck is track 2? There's nothing playing now. Silence. Music's original alternative.

That's so incredibly lame. I can't browse about or use iTunes to do anything else (like maybe shop in their handy store) that involves browsing away from the track that's playing without PLAYBACK ENDING once the currently playing song is over? "

please excuse the rant. i´m not trying to slam apple here. the post is just to explain what i´m talking about.

so, as phil of mac explains, it´s only possible to automatically queue up songs in the library. that does defeat (or greatly limit) the browse feature, doesn´t it?

[Rower_CPU]

It makes sense to me. iTunes sees that you're browsing around elsewhere and figures that you want to listen to something else. If you don't navigate out of the chosen artist/album it keeps playing through.

Also, the only time playback stops when you're in the iTMS is when you listen to a song preview. Again, it makes sense. I browsed to an album started playing a song and went to the iTMS, it went to the next song no problem.

[rjstanford]

Originally posted by Rower_CPU
It makes sense to me. iTunes sees that you're browsing around elsewhere and figures that you want to listen to something else. If you don't navigate out of the chosen artist/album it keeps playing through. Nah, I'm with the original here. If I want to play something else, I would select it. Absent any directive to play something else, it should continue doing what it would have done had the user simply wandered away physically (instead of electronically) - play the next song.

The closest it could do if it was following the logic that you give would be to play whatever you were looking at. That would be strange, no? And yet, if its not going to do that (which it shouldn't), why does it assume that you want it to stop playing? Alternatively, if it assumes that you want it to stop playing when you navigate away, why does it keep playing the original tune until the track is over? The behavior is simply inconsistent, and should be corrected.

-Richard

[Snowy_River]

Originally posted by m.r.m.
@ snowy, that´s true, but that´s only the case if you play the song from a playlist. what i mean is you press browse and select the first song to play from an album in the album window. then you close the browse window and look through your library (maybe to edit tags or whatever). when the song finishes itunes doesn´t play song two of the album. it just stops.
...
that does defeat (or greatly limit) the browse feature, doesn´t it?

I think that you're expecting the browse feature to act more like a dynamic playlist function, which is not at all what I see its function as being. It doesn't remember what you were looking at before, so it can't know what the next song should be. If, on the other hand, instead of browsing to something else, you switch back to the regular Library view, it will, in fact, continue playing, based on whatever song comes next in the Library based on how you have it sorted.

Now, I'll grant that it'd be great to have a dynamic playlist function, but I really don't think that's what the browse function is trying to be. If you don't want to have a playlist for every album, you could have a list that you usually keep empty (call it 'dynamic'), and drag a handful of songs into it from your browsing whenever you want to.

[alameda20]

Most of these arguments +/- about Itunes for windows seem to revolve around the issue of name calling about Mac users superiority complexes that Apple software is somehow heads and shoulders above the quality of other software specifically MS.

Don't you see how silly this is. Why don't you people grow up and stop saying "mine is better than yours" game.

Children usually grow out of this after 10 years old.

[Phil Of Mac]

Originally posted by alameda20
Most of these arguments +/- about Itunes for windows seem to revolve around the issue of name calling about Mac users superiority complexes that Apple software is somehow heads and shoulders above the quality of other software specifically MS.

iTunes is superior to competing software.

Originally posted by alameda20
Don't you see how silly this is. Why don't you people grow up and stop saying "mine is better than yours" game.

You're so right! As consumers, we should totally disregard the relative value of competing products! What a revelation! :rolleyes:

[m.r.m.]

i really don´t see where any name calling or any such thing was involved in this debate. in fact i voiced my problems with itunes and phil and snowy answered politely and helped me understand the prog a little better. we just disagree on the way we´d like to see the browse feature implemented. ;)