So far so good. And yeah, iTunes remains bloated.
How so? It doesn't seem bloated to me. What features are there that will never be used by an significant number of users? Anticipating your reply. Thanks.
So far so good. And yeah, iTunes remains bloated.
How so? It doesn't seem bloated to me. What features are there that will never be used by an significant number of users? Anticipating your reply. Thanks.
How so? It doesn't seem bloated to me. What features are there that will never be used by an significant number of users? Anticipating your reply. Thanks.
+1. It is SUPER irritating. Glad to know "Recently Added" is the culprit, I'll turn it off although I like using it. But it is extremely irritating when the screen just jumps to top.I've been following an issue that I first saw in 12, reported many times thru feedback, where Album view would skip back to the top in a fairly annoying uncontrolled way. It happens whenever I selected a song to play that is of course way down in my list of albums. I've just come to the conclusion it's related to the 'recently added' section at the top. So I've just sent in yet another feedback for 12.3.2...
When 'Show Recently Added' is enabled in album view options, the screen will uncontrollably scroll to the top view, showing recently added, whenever the track changes, especially after I have selected a particular track to play.
Because of this I lose visibility of the album I am trying to view.
When 'Show Recently Added' is disabled, the display works as expected, and stays on the album I'm trying to work with.
I have reported this behaviour multiple times for mostly all the previous iTunes12 releases, and it still happens. I have however narrowed it down this time to the recently added view.
This is happening on 12.3.2 but your version selection for this report only goes to 12.3.1, so the feedback page also needs updating!
Anyone else fancy giving this a try and confirming?
Even with my large library I'm using 140mb of memory, sat between Dropbox at 80mb, and Firefox 350mb. That doesn't seem bad to me? It boots instantly on my 2011 iMac regardless of if I'm using Windows 7 or OSX. Quicktime takes longer to load and is less responsive on my system! I don't think bloated is the word.Does an audio player need 200MB of memory? Does it still make sense that iTunes remains the "hub" for media and devices for which it has little to do with? iTunes should revert back to handling "tunes". iTunes has too many jobs. Everything from AppleTV to the iTunes Store should be done differently. It barely made sense for iTunes to serve as the conduit for syncing iPhones even back when the original iPhone came out.
Does an audio player need 200MB of memory? Does it still make sense that iTunes remains the "hub" for media and devices for which it has little to do with? iTunes should revert back to handling "tunes". iTunes has too many jobs. Everything from AppleTV to the iTunes Store should be done differently. It barely made sense for iTunes to serve as the conduit for syncing iPhones even back when the original iPhone came out.
I understand your point of view. However, I still think iTunes is bloated with features that stopped making sense long ago. iTunes syncing iPods back in 2002 was reasonable. However now you have books, apps, photos, etc on devices that are not music-centric. It would have been better to move devices out of iTunes into a dedicated program. And don't get me started on AppleTV-iTunes dependence.This is one of those never-ending debates in software design, driven, imo, by "I don't need this feature, so nobody else does, either."
What I'd like to see is something more than a vague "should be done differently." Let's see a proposed architecture that encompasses all the functions encompassed by iTunes, with as little redundancy and as much functional clarity as possible.
iTunes was "just an audio player" for exactly one version, released in January 2001. Version 2.0 was released just nine months later in October 2001 with support for iPod syncing. Clearly, Apple knew from the first that iTunes was never going to be just an audio player - iPod was already in development when Apple purchased SoundJam MP from Casady and Greene in 2000.
Multiple small apps? Apple knows that approach well, since that's the iOS Way; separate stores and apps for nearly every type of media. It has its own logic and simplicity, but how many have posted, "Why do I need ______, when I don't ever use it? There are too many icons, and they're such wastes of precious Flash!" Further, under the hood, the architecture has to support seamless interaction between all those apps. Effectively, that means "apps" that are little more than UI, with all else being handled centrally by the OS. That approach works OK for OS X and iOS ("Those damn control freaks at Apple!"), but I'm not sure it's practical for all those people using iTunes for Windows (and just how many apps should be bundled with that download?)
And then there's syncing/backup (and since the cloud, and iCloud in particular, are nowhere near being universally embraced, we can't ignore syncing/backup)... I'm sure that, in a multi-small-app alternate universe, you'd be able to set preferences for which apps open when you connect an iPhone to a Mac. If you only sync a couple of media types, that'll be fine. But if you regularly manage more? A cascade of auto-opening media-specific apps???? I find the fact that (my choice of) Photos/iPhoto/Aperture/ImageCapture opens concurrently with iTunes to be annoying enough, even though I frequently do have to manage images.
Sure... there's no need to open all those apps - libraries can sync in background... until you need to actively manage the items being synced. Just how a la carte do we make this? Part of the point of a single, auto-opening, all-encompassing app is to serve all those who can't (or would rather not) "roll their own." How many apps should someone need if their single task is, "Sync my iPod?" "Oh, there are purchases made on the iPhone that have to be downloaded before they can be synced to the iPod? Whoops. I guess I have to open the iTunes Store, too."
In the end, the real problem may be nothing more then expecting "iTunes" to be about tunes, and nothing but tunes. At this point, though, I'd consider it an accident of history. Had Apple re-named the app when iPhone was introduced, expectations would have been managed long ago. Now, however... Is there a reason to re-brand iTunes for Mac/Windows? Would such a rebranding be worth the effort?
Happy to report this one updates with no issues. Unlike 12.3.1 which was a wheel of death disaster that required a time machine backup to the one before.
My complaint is that iOS sync is quirky and unreliable. But the UI is excellent in my view.
Ok... what useful feature has been removed or changed this time...![]()
There is now no way to manually update iCloud Music, ie iTunes Match.