Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
It would be nice if it becomes 64-bit Vista compliant.

Probably not going to happen. I had a problem with iTunes and 64-bit Vista, and I just googled my problem and found a guide that made iTunes compatible with 64-bit Vista, so if you are still having problems I would try that.
 
Do This!

Everyone please go request the HE-AAC/aacPlus encoder for iTunes! I've put in so many requests.

iTunes Feedback :apple:

And mention that it will improve the sound quality of the internet radio! Maybe if everyone would do it they'd add support for it. :)
 
I'm not upgrading from iTunes 7.2 until they make sorting sane again.

Symbols come before numbers which come before letters. This 'gold standard' of alphanumeric sorting has been used for ages -- even the good old Dewey Decimal system recognizes this.

In iTunes 7.3, Apple decided -- against all conventions -- that it was a good idea to put symbols and numbers after letters when sorting tracks in the library window. I was certain at first that this was a bug, but numerous releases later the behavior is remains the same. This drives me nuts, and I refuse to adapt.

i'm so totally with you!
 
Hopefully they will make it suck a little less on windows.

I'd like to see some performance improvements. iTunes is just really bloated for when its just playing music. I also would like fewer and slimmer always-running background processes. I trashed the folder with the iPhone-related stuff that was added in the last update. iTunes itself seems unaffected, and I no longer have "ApplePhonewhatever" always on my process list.
 
Maybe they'll fix the stupid bug in iTunes for XP, where you close out iTunes, it'll crash out, then start back up again. -_-

I don't have this issue. Although I do have iTunes get launched automatically when I visit some websites in my Firefox, it doesn't play anything. It just opens the program, which wouldn't be so annoying if iTunes launched faster. I usually think the browser is choking on some badly written javascript until the window appears.

Why? I don't see any reason to since they already have a lossless format.
The point is to be able to play FLAC files from off the internet, which there is a range of public domain content as well as artist-released content out there. This isn't just about wanting to use some preferred lossless format for ripping CDs. Right now I have to decompress the FLAC files into WAVs before they can be brought into iTunes.

I want the ability to rate albums as a whole and not just individual songs. :rolleyes:
Shouldn't an album's rating be the average of all the songs on it?

I would love for iTunes to launch faster.
Amen.

Can I ask, what is so bad about the Windows version? I gave my nano to my girlfriend, who uses Windows XP, and she said it was a nightmare. But then again, she only had 192mb RAM, apparently.
I've always wondered.
She probably had a processor that was a little underpowered to run iTunes (or iTunes and anything else) if her RAM amount is any indicator to the age of her machine.

I wonder what the duplicate songs fix means. I know when I imported my CDs, iTunes would "The Beatles" and just "Beatles" as 2 different artists. Maybe 7.5 will see them as the same?
Why don't you make them the same yourself. shift-click on both entries in the Artist list, then cmd-a on the song list, and cmd-i to edit tags for all tracks, and retype the artist name. Done.
 
I would like faster start up more than anything - I use QS to control it so hardly see the UI anyway...
 
I'll be surprised if Apple doesn't address the lack of "notes" syncing with the iPhone and OS X.

On a side note, in update, I'm surprised Apple hasn't released 10.4.11 for Tiger. It has been a few months in beta now. :confused:

They're probably going to wait for a while so that when they do release it, it gives the public the idea that it's still being supported by updates :p
 
Shouldn't an album's rating be the average of all the songs on it?

Not necessarily. You can have an album composed entirely of four-star songs that is rated higher than four stars simply because it's consistent and hangs together well. On the other hand, a greatest hits album might not work all that well as a whole and sound like what it is -- a bunch of songs from different periods with different sounds and no underlying theme.

Also, that would mean that an album would have to be composed entirely of five-star songs in order to get a five-star rating, and that doesn't really happen. Even my favorite albums, that I would without hesitation give five-star ratings to, are not composed entirely of five-star songs. Plus, people often buy CDs now that are remasters of old albums with bonus live/unreleased/alternate/etc tracks on the end. You might think Dark Side of the Moon is a five star album, and give each and every song on there five stars, but if you have three bonus tracks of Roger Waters whimpering quietly while his mother spanks him, those might merely get a 1/2 star rating.

So no, I don't believe album ratings should be an average of the track ratings.
 
Shouldn't an album's rating be the average of all the songs on it?
Not necessarily. I mean, arguably, yes--but what kind? A straight average, weighting all tracks equally? One weighting the tracks based on how long they are? One that ignores tracks whose artist is not the album artist?
 
I want Time Machine support in 7.5

I'm still shocked that Time Machine support wasn't present at Leopard's launch since iTunes is another application where support makes so much sense. This was one of my main tests for Time Machine (I deleted a TV Show) so imagine my surprise when one of Apple's flagship products didn't work with it.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.