You buy one or two of Apples Mac Pro 12 core machines just to rip CDs and listen to them? Gosh! Get real!
You've got a serious attitude problem.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iTunes 10 Now Available to Download
- Thread starter bob616
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You buy one or two of Apples Mac Pro 12 core machines just to rip CDs and listen to them? Gosh! Get real!
You've got a serious attitude problem.
I couldn't resist, and installed it.
Feels snappier than 9.2.1... time will tell.
I do miss the colors though.
Feels snappier than 9.2.1... time will tell.
I do miss the colors though.
u don't .. u can change it... i put in a nickname for the first name and a full stop (period) for the lastname
Faster than you claim!
I could not agree more!
If you think, iTunes is slow, then try this:
1. In Toast 10.0.7, create an Audio CD disk image from an Audio CD. That is slow, because the CD drive is slow.
2. Mount this Audio CD disk image with the Toast tools (disk image mounting options menu).
3. Open iTunes and import the "virtual" Audio CD (use AAC or MP3 as you like).
4. You will notice, that iTunes is pretty fast. On one of my Macs (MacBook Pro Mid-2009, 2,8 GHz Core2Duo) iTunes 9.2.1 imported the "virtual" Audio CD (identical to a real Audio CD) over 150 times faster than realtime! And that was with VMware Fusion 3.1.1 and a Win XP VM in the background! Now if that is not fast, then i do not know, what it is! I think the speed limitation came from my internal harddisk, because it cannot read the data as fast from the Audio CD disk image, as iTunes or the CPU need it.
You have a 12 core machine. You are in the extreme minority of iTunes users. Apple's only going to optimize what the majority of users are complaining about.
CD importing can only go as fast as your CD drive can read. Doesn't matter how fast your CPU is, you're limited to the speed of the drive. I imagine the # of people importing CDs is dropping fast, and those who are, don't do it enough to worry about the speed, so Apple is probably not paying much attention to that feature anymore.
Most people have 1 or 2 cores, that is all Apple is going to optimize iTunes for until that changes
I could not agree more!
If you think, iTunes is slow, then try this:
1. In Toast 10.0.7, create an Audio CD disk image from an Audio CD. That is slow, because the CD drive is slow.
2. Mount this Audio CD disk image with the Toast tools (disk image mounting options menu).
3. Open iTunes and import the "virtual" Audio CD (use AAC or MP3 as you like).
4. You will notice, that iTunes is pretty fast. On one of my Macs (MacBook Pro Mid-2009, 2,8 GHz Core2Duo) iTunes 9.2.1 imported the "virtual" Audio CD (identical to a real Audio CD) over 150 times faster than realtime! And that was with VMware Fusion 3.1.1 and a Win XP VM in the background! Now if that is not fast, then i do not know, what it is! I think the speed limitation came from my internal harddisk, because it cannot read the data as fast from the Audio CD disk image, as iTunes or the CPU need it.
Colors Please!
Did I just go color blind? What was Apple thinking? I navigate easily using colors. THIS IS RED - - I AM ANGRY.
However, performance seems quick.
Did I just go color blind? What was Apple thinking? I navigate easily using colors. THIS IS RED -
- I AM ANGRY.However, performance seems quick.
Um, if it's virtual, actually you know what, never mind. I'll let you figure out the problem in your scenario on your own.
This should be fun.
I know right!? I've heard several people here mention about it. It's lovely and all but wouldn't be even screen saving to just switch to the Mini Player...?
Please troll go away and wear your "elitist t-shirts", if you use the "super slow" iTunes software on your V.I.P. Mac Pro (12 cores of course)!
We won't miss you.
They are clearly trying to make iTunes 10 look like the the iPod app for the iPad. This explains the lack of colors and the weird color of the volume bar. Even the icon looks lOS like.
Why aren't more people pissed that iTunes 10 is not 64 bit? Its been over a year sense Snow Leopard got released and iTunes, iWork, iPhoto... none of the iLife apps are 64 bit. WTF Apple, stop being lazy bums and rewrite your apps.
Why aren't more people pissed that iTunes 10 is not 64 bit? Its been over a year sense Snow Leopard got released and iTunes, iWork, iPhoto... none of the iLife apps are 64 bit. WTF Apple, stop being lazy bums and rewrite your apps.
If it is just a disk image, then it is a virtual disk, not a real disk. Where is the problem?
Uhm, no. Not better period. Better in the eyes of the company they are loyal to. Just as users here with more posts are better than others and get improved elitist categories above "newbie." It's all around us. Don't pretend you're not a part of it.
You buy one or two of Apples Mac Pro 12 core machines just to rip CDs and listen to them? Gosh! Get real!
You've got a serious attitude problem.
Well, honestly, the entire operating system (which is what iTunes runs on) is at its peak performance level. This saves time. The same time savings Final Cut Pro users are looking for when rendering video clips. We all use Macs for different things.
The problem is if its not a real disk, there is no physical bottleneck to deal with. It's going to be faster because its off the hard drive, which has far faster read/write times than an optical disk.
I'm very bummed about the lack of color. It makes me feel like everything is disabled. Seems like a poor usability choice by Apple.
I'm considering going back to 9, as long as iOS 4.1 works in 9.
Bummer.
I'm considering going back to 9, as long as iOS 4.1 works in 9.
Bummer.
Itunes 10.0.. my *ss!
80~ megabytes? i went in and deleted
all the localizations and re-compressed it and it 's down to 20.
75 FRICKING percent of the update is just localization files and,
to add insult to injury, PPC code! I understand some of you
people are still using older PPC mac computers with older versions
of OSX, but seriously.. downloads for you need to be migrated to a legacy
version of apple.com called getoffmylawn.apple.com.
And my point was to prove the OP (at least partially) wrong, because he said, that iTunes is slow. I did show, that it is not slow.
Uh, post count has nothing to do with anything unless you think spending more time on a website somehow makes you better than someone that hasn't.
Please troll go away and wear your "elitist t-shirts", if you use the "super slow" iTunes software on your V.I.P. Mac Pro (12 cores of course)!
We won't miss you.
The troll is you, buddy. You reply to a post making valid factual points from a valid point of view with venomous disdain and no further contribution to the discussion. Worthless.
Maybe I'm not understanding this correctly.
Didn't someone point out earlier that Itunes encodes slowly because it imports one song, waits to convert it, then moves on to the next?
Unless your point was that the encoding itself isn't slow, which I'll concede it isn't, but the process itself is slower.
Did I just miss the point entirely? I apologize if I did, its 2 am here
Last time I checked, post count is not "time on a website," but actual contributions to the forums. Seriously, how hard of a point is this to get? Maybe we all should get LESS money for working MORE hours at our jobs?