or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Mockup of new iTunes 8.0 interface published
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Mockup of new iTunes 8.0 interface published - Page 2

post #41 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by faeringen View Post

Looks fine to me. But really - isn't it about music above all? What I want is high quality music - not just 128 or 256 kbps AAC files - encoded as Apple Lossless files. This should be possible, as all files delievered by record companies or indie-musicians today are encoded in Apple Lossless. To be able to purchase music in this quality would be good news.

Are you sure they are given to Apple as a master copy or CD or some other format? I find it hard to believe that they deliver it to Apple in Apple's own lossless codec. I think 256kbps AAC is fine, but I think it would go a long way to make then 320kbps, which has been considered "CD quality" by most, despite the nature of the MP3s that it was encoded in.

That is only an extra 64kbps added to the song, so I think that is doable. whereas Apple Lossless would be around 1Mbps. That is about 7.5MB per minute of audio. The DL times and storage space are now about 4x as much as 256kbps audio and 8x as much as 128kbps audio.

Another issue that Apple has to consider is that if they dropped 128kbps audio from their store would have to change the way they measure the capacity of their iPods. The iPod Classic would go from being holding 40,000 songs to 20,000 overnight. While we know what is going on, there are many that look only at the superficial packaging because that is what they can understand. I suspect that the people who I'm talking about probably don't care much about the kbps, which is why Apple continues to dominate with iTunes. I recall Sony listing a player or two as being able to hold x-many songs but we using 96kbps as the bitrate. It was there in the fine print, but the people they are marketing aren't likely to look at that.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #42 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

Unless there are some MAJOR changes to iTunes for OS X, it'll be the same old bloated piece of shit that it's been since iTunes 4.

By major change, I do not mean putting more bloat in. I mean, trimming the app by separating what's video into a new app.

I do not expect major changes. I fully expect more bloat. I fully expect Apple to complete destroy this once beautiful app.

RIP iTunes.

So... to put movies, tv shows and music on your iPod, you'll need to open two applications? That makes little sense. If you don't want video in your iTunes, don't put it in?
post #43 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by sausage&Onion View Post

So the Genius only recommends you the music you already own? What a bunch of shit.

no, i believe that this Genius recommends based off of what you own. so a 'if you like Coldplay (and clearly you must since you bought it and ranked 4 of the songs as 5 stars and the rest of 4 stars), try X, Y and Q' type thing.

but here's what's funny. it's already there. it's called the iTunes MiniStore. it's been there for like 3 versions of iTunes. so this is nothing new. just a different name. and perhaps better programming.
post #44 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColeSQ View Post

...perhaps it will afford users of the new subscription service


assuming there ever is one. i'm not believing that rumor until I see it.
post #45 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColeSQ View Post

On the surface I know it sounds lame, but we already have multiple apps exposing data for all these devices and it's getting a lot more cluttered and confusing when you really sit down and develop good playlists/albums/etc. with 15,000 songs, a couple hundred movies, 25,000 photos, and lots of TV shows.


yes but you have to also think about Joe and Jane Public who would be confused as heck if they had to open up 3-5 different programs to get stuff on their iphones and ipods. they are the ones that itunes as a one stop shop for syncing was designed for and they are still a dominant market for apple. some 70-80% if not more of iphone and ipod buyers are PC users and Apple hopes to get at least half of them using Mac computers instead. but if you make the handheld to confusing for them, they won't want to make the switch.
post #46 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by agentlion View Post

How about they implement this one interface change:
Move the "browse" button to the main toolbar!! And second, change it from that strange eye icon.

I have talked to several people who claim they don't like iTunes because it's hard to find music by a certain artist, a certain song, a certain album, etc. I tell them when you use the Browse feature, it's easy. "What's that?" is the most common reply. So, i tell them to click the "eye button" down in the lower right, which makes the iTunes interface infinitely more user friendly.

I have no idea why 1) Browse-mode isn't enabled by default (when you install itunes for the first time, it just gives you a big long list), 2) it looks like and eye (i "get it", conceptually, but surely they can create a better icon), and 3) why it's buried in the lower-right corner, where very few people look. It should be promoted in a prominent spot in the main toolbar!

For me, the absolute worst part of iTunes is the search engine. If the artist or album you are searching for is misspelled or slightly incorrect, it chokes. Google and Amazon have much better search technology that allows for the inevitable errors on the part of users.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #47 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

Maybe because its HIS JOB as a journalist to report the news.

there is reporting the news and then there's leaking it out early, trying to call it just 'my theories' or 'rumors on the web' and turning a major event into something majorly anti-climatic.

and that's the issue some folks have. that some 'journalists' are leaking stuff out early and disrespecting that the folks behind the news don't want it out there just yet.

just like some tv show and movie writers don't want whole scripts out there in advance, record companies don't want leaks of whole albums etc.

and saying "if you don't want to know don't click the link" isn't enough. the link is still there. places like this site and MacRumors etc are still there. still posting the information and spreading the information early. in some folks views also disrespecting that Apple, Microsoft whatever doesn't want the information out there until they put it out there.
post #48 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by skottichan View Post

So... to put movies, tv shows and music on your iPod, you'll need to open two applications? That makes little sense. If you don't want video in your iTunes, don't put it in?

That method won't work. But what about Apple releasing a second commercial app called iTunes Lite, that does simple music and video playback and syncs your iPod/iPhone. This could even a toggle switch of the normal iTunes so users can see a much simpler iTunes for the syncing tasks that the perform often.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #49 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

Unless there are some MAJOR changes to iTunes for OS X, it'll be the same old bloated piece of shit that it's been since iTunes 4.

By major change, I do not mean putting more bloat in. I mean, trimming the app by separating what's video into a new app.


or perhaps they found a way to remove some of the bloat and still keep audio and video together for ease of syncing etc. why don't we wait and see
post #50 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

For me, the absolute worst part of iTunes is the search engine. If the artist or album you are searching for is misspelled or slightly incorrect, it chokes. Google and Amazon have much better search technology that allows for the inevitable errors on the part of users.

which could be something they are fixing in this new version.
post #51 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by skottichan View Post

So... to put movies, tv shows and music on your iPod, you'll need to open two applications? That makes little sense. If you don't want video in your iTunes, don't put it in?


Yes...what the fuck is wrong with opening another app and syncing movies to your iPod? It makes lots of sense. YOU make little sense. iTunes can't be the end-all app that syncs everything but the kitchen sink (haha) to your iPod...because that makes it unnecessarily bloated.

Listen to what you're saying, man. What if I told you "So... to read e-mail or browse the web on Mac OS X, you'll need to open two applications? That makes little sense. E-mail and browsing the web are two internet-related activities and should be combined into one app."

My ass it does. YOU make no sense.
post #52 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

I wish iTunes8 would let us rip DVDs directly in iTunes for ATV and iPods- wishful thinking.

if there was a way that they could have iTunes attach some kind of id to the file so that it would only play on ATVs and iPods that you own and not on every device out there (ie, someone using itunes to rip a dvd and then pirate it to the world) the studios might think about letting you do it.

but at least they are getting more hip and some new releases have a free download of the movie included when you buy it. that's better than nothing at this point
post #53 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

So you have proof that someone broke their contract?

anyone that works in a company like Apple will have a contract that says that you keep your mouth shut. you don't talk about what's coming out, when, what they are thinking about maybe doing at some point etc.

if it had been some blogger that had never said a word about itunes and suddenly posted that he managed to grab one of those accidental copies and here's what was inside that would be one thing. but Kevin has been posting about itunes for a while and it's going to be very suspect if his guesses and theories turn out to be correct.
post #54 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Are you sure they are given to Apple as a master copy or CD or some other format? I find it hard to believe that they deliver it to Apple in Apple's own lossless codec. I think 256kbps AAC is fine, but I think it would go a long way to make then 320kbps, which has been considered "CD quality" by most, despite the nature of the MP3s that it was encoded in.

That is only an extra 64kbps added to the song, so I think that is doable. whereas Apple Lossless would be around 1Mbps. That is about 7.5MB per minute of audio. The DL times and storage space are now about 4x as much as 256kbps audio and 8x as much as 128kbps audio.


here's the catch, many ipod users can't tell the difference between 256 and 320 or 120 and 160 or whatever. so the loss of a 1000 songs by stepping up the 'quality' is going to not make any sense to them.

now I could see itunes offering a couple of qualities at slightly different prices so that the generic "I just want my music and a lot of it' folks can have theirs and the 'I want my music to sound fan-bloody-tastic' can have theirs. like perhaps 160 at 99 cents a track and 320 at the 1.29 they were using for the DRM free for a while.
post #55 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

Yes...what the fuck is wrong with opening another app and syncing movies to your iPod? It makes lots of sense. YOU make little sense. iTunes can't be the end-all app that syncs everything but the kitchen sink (haha) to your iPod...because that makes it unnecessarily bloated.

Listen to what you're saying, man. What if I told you "So... to read e-mail or browse the web on Mac OS X, you'll need to open two applications? That makes little sense. E-mail and browsing the web are two internet-related activities and should be combined into one app."

My ass it does. YOU make no sense.

A bit angry there, kkp. The problem with having an iTunes that ONLY syncs your music and an iTunes that ONLY syncs your videos is that it offers no convenience and makes the work of doing a simple sync more complex and convoluted. Should there also be a version of iTunes that ONLY syncs your apps and games, too? You want a simpler iTunes, we get that, but making multiple iTunes that require a lot more effort to perform a simple task is going the opposite way. You can uncheck Movies, TV Shows, etc from the side bar. If you have none installed the only evidence you'll see of this is the tab listing when you click on the device.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #56 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

That method won't work. But what about Apple releasing a second commercial app called iTunes Lite, that does simple music and video playback and syncs your iPod/iPhone. This could even a toggle switch of the normal iTunes so users can see a much simpler iTunes for the syncing tasks that the perform often.


how is that any different than what there is now. all you have done is removed the store from the application. otherwise your itunes lite still plays and syncs just like itunes does. and you can select your syncing already.
post #57 of 97
Yawn... \
post #58 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

iTunes can't be the end-all app that syncs everything but the kitchen sink (haha) to your iPod...because that makes it unnecessarily bloated..

sorry but I disagree. itunes as a one stop shop is what makes the most sense for the most people. remember the power users like yourself are only perhaps 5% of the computer users out there. perhaps much less.

and I disagree that being the OSS for syncing is what might make itunes bloated or that it is an unnecessary bloat. Microsoft Office for the Mac is 200MB and most of it is tons of clip art and crap. now that is bloat. itunes and the library file is maybe 1/4 that.
post #59 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

here's the catch, many ipod users can't tell the difference between 256 and 320 or 120 and 160 or whatever. so the loss of a 1000 songs by stepping up the 'quality' is going to not make any sense to them.

I agree, I can't tell 160 from 192 on any of the equipment I've ever owned. I mentioned 320kbps because of the perceived "CD quality" of the bitrate, but I think you are spot on that the average person would understand he loss of song capacity but not the increase in bitrate and have no idea that this iPod is still the same size. Apple has to cater to the 80% when it comes to iPod/iTunes.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #60 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

Please!!! (that's a sarcastic please in case you missed it). Thanks for your flawed inductive logic ... Maybe that's more of your inductive logic, thinking that because you feel that way every else MUST also feel the same way.

Yeah, yeah, blah, blah blah etc.

Someone who argues the way you are here should hardly be calling anyone out on their logic or lack of same.

This is going exactly no where. You have just repeated your claim that it's "his job" with the implication that it's also "about the money." I purposely did not answer your question about why I clicked on the link because it's irrelevant to the point at hand. Again, possibly someone else besides me should brush up on their logic.

Let me be the first to back out here and let you "win" if it makes you feel better*.

What I posted is just my feelings about leakers, with a tiny add on argument about how people are just going a bit too far lately. A lot of people feel the same way and no, I am not going to go out and get statistics for you to back up that rather self-evident claim.

I stand by the claim that this was a bit of a last minute and completely unnecessary deflation of the tires on Apple's big event tomorrow by Kevin rose, but it isn't the end of the world and I am not claiming it is. I also don't have a hate on for Kevin Rose or whatever, so if he's your best buddy or something you should probably chill. Everyone gets criticised now and then and it's how you react that says the most about you.

*note: you haven't actually won anything, I just threw you a lolly.
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
post #61 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

Unless there are some MAJOR changes to iTunes for OS X, it'll be the same old bloated piece of shit that it's been since iTunes 4.

By major change, I do not mean putting more bloat in. I mean, trimming the app by separating what's video into a new app.

I do not expect major changes. I fully expect more bloat. I fully expect Apple to complete destroy this once beautiful app.

RIP iTunes.

Completely agree! I hate trumpet the 'good old days' like some kind of old dude, but I really miss the way iTunes and iPod worked so easily and simplistically up until about '04 or so (whenever they added all the drop downs to the left bar). Simply put, it's the reason I switched to a Mac in '02.

I know I'm sounding kinda hayseed in my description here but it always worked, it was extremely simple, and it was as beautiful for being simple as Microsoft apps are typically painful for their complexity. I still use Newsfire as my RSS for this reason yet it is missing the sync capabilities I would really love to have.

Can't Apple break this thing up a little and simplify it?
post #62 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

how is that any different than what there is now. all you have done is removed the store from the application. otherwise your itunes lite still plays and syncs just like itunes does. and you can select your syncing already.

Scratch the music and video playback. maybe they need something like AT&T has for activating iPhones. Like the mini-player in iTunes, but this only shows you info for syncing, no burning, no music, no Apple Store, no opening the full iTunes just to charge and do a sync. Honestly, I don't think any of this ideas are practical but I try to see thing the opposing argument. Sometimes it's just not that easy.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #63 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

yes but you have to also think about Joe and Jane Public who would be confused as heck if they had to open up 3-5 different programs to get stuff on their iphones and ipods. they are the ones that itunes as a one stop shop for syncing was designed for and they are still a dominant market for apple. some 70-80% if not more of iphone and ipod buyers are PC users and Apple hopes to get at least half of them using Mac computers instead. but if you make the handheld to confusing for them, they won't want to make the switch.

I'm not sure if they'd be more at home or not based on the presence of segmented apps like Address Book, iCal, Mail, iMovie, and iDVD. My guess is there are Windows users who expected to see the first three of these all in one app (like me back in '02) and were pleasantly surprised to find they could work with each app functionally while exploiting the data from the other apps. It's very elegant in its simultaneous simplicity and functionality, and was a major element of me getting used to and happy with a Mac.

I think we're seeing a lot of people right now in the press going crazy over the new task paradigm that iPhone presents through a limited size interface which requires single task focus when it's been in Apple's DNA all along. What's seemingly made applications unattractive to most users in the past has been interface complexity. This would be a big step toward the original design of these applications and another key platform differentiator that would return the huge glob of media governed by iTunes into something with much greater immediacy (for lack of a less marketing-esque term).
post #64 of 97
Knowing the traditional "Wrath of Jobs" for (unauthorized) premature leaks, I'm guessing he has Steve's blessing. It's been hypothesized for many years that these announcements are orchestrated by 1 Infinite Loop, and if there isn't any blow-back from Apple to Rose, I'm guessing he's in on the announcement.
NW '98
"Everything works, in theory..."
Reply
NW '98
"Everything works, in theory..."
Reply
post #65 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColeSQ View Post

I'm not sure if they'd be more at home or not based on the presence of segmented apps like Address Book, iCal, Mail, iMovie, and iDVD. My guess is there are Windows users who expected to see the first three of these all in one app (like me back in '02) and were pleasantly surprised to find they could work with each app functionally while exploiting the data from the other apps. It's very elegant in its simultaneous simplicity and functionality, and was a major element of me getting used to and happy with a Mac.

I think we're seeing a lot of people right now in the press going crazy over the new task paradigm that iPhone presents through a limited size interface which requires single task focus when it's been in Apple's DNA all along. What's seemingly made applications unattractive to most users in the past has been complexity. This would be a big step toward the original design of these applications and another key platform differentiator that would return the huge glob of media governed by iTunes into something with much greater immediacy (for lack of a less marketing-esque term).

It's not about taking the features out, it's about how they're used. This is what makes the best Apple apps great. When I want to rip/organize/watch/rate video media it might be logical to just see video media. If I want to play music through the house, I don't want to see all the other crap, including which iPhone applications I have installed.

I know I'm jumping in the middle of a firestorm here, but it seems to come down to a fundamental approach to interface development that Apple is normally zealous about, yet in this case has continued to bloat and cross their own lines on ease of use. Average users (none of us) just don't want to take their learning cycles in this big of a chunk, which is partly why there is so much talk around the elegance of good apps on the iPhone - one function.
post #66 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

assuming there ever is one. i'm not believing that rumor until I see it.

That's the wishful thinker in me... keep hoping this event is going to have some sizzle, and thinking this would be one smart move to bundle with MobileMe at a great price.
post #67 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

A bit angry there, kkp. The problem with having an iTunes that ONLY syncs your music and an iTunes that ONLY syncs your videos is that it offers no convenience and makes the work of doing a simple sync more complex and convoluted. Should there also be a version of iTunes that ONLY syncs your apps and games, too? You want a simpler iTunes, we get that, but making multiple iTunes that require a lot more effort to perform a simple task is going the opposite way. You can uncheck Movies, TV Shows, etc from the side bar. If you have none installed the only evidence you'll see of this is the tab listing when you click on the device.

...but what of the fact that we're doing this right now with our photos in iPhoto, er at least that's where we have to go to sync what's been taken on the iPod/iPhone?
post #68 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

sorry but I disagree. itunes as a one stop shop is what makes the most sense for the most people. remember the power users like yourself are only perhaps 5% of the computer users out there. perhaps much less.

and I disagree that being the OSS for syncing is what might make itunes bloated or that it is an unnecessary bloat. Microsoft Office for the Mac is 200MB and most of it is tons of clip art and crap. now that is bloat. itunes and the library file is maybe 1/4 that.

Attributing bloat to app size just shows how ignorant and out-of-touch you are.

I think you should use a PC. There's lots of bloated software and one-stop shops on Windows. You'll be soooooooo happy.
post #69 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Are you sure they are given to Apple as a master copy or CD or some other format? I find it hard to believe that they deliver it to Apple in Apple's own lossless codec. I think 256kbps AAC is fine, but I think it would go a long way to make then 320kbps, which has been considered "CD quality" by most, despite the nature of the MP3s that it was encoded in.

AFAIK, Apple has been requiring music to be submitted in Apple Lossless for 2-3 years now. I hope 256Kbps becomes the new standard (anything below 192Kbs is unacceptable), with iTunes Plus files jumping to DRM-free lossless for $1.29 each.
post #70 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColeSQ View Post

...but what of the fact that we're doing this right now with our photos in iPhoto, er at least that's where we have to go to sync what's been taken on the iPod/iPhone?

True, and I hate it, but the answer to preventing iTunes AND iPhoto opening up is not to have iTunes Music, iTunes Video and iPhoto open up. I would like a "whisper sync" method that would do everything without having to call these large apps every time.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #71 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

A bit angry there, kkp. The problem with having an iTunes that ONLY syncs your music and an iTunes that ONLY syncs your videos is that it offers no convenience and makes the work of doing a simple sync more complex and convoluted. Should there also be a version of iTunes that ONLY syncs your apps and games, too? You want a simpler iTunes, we get that, but making multiple iTunes that require a lot more effort to perform a simple task is going the opposite way. You can uncheck Movies, TV Shows, etc from the side bar. If you have none installed the only evidence you'll see of this is the tab listing when you click on the device.

Yes...there should be an app for the App Store/iTunes Store. It should ALL be broken up into separate apps.

It doesn't make things more inconvenient unless the integration between these apps is non-existent. But I have several ideas how these separate apps can work together and sync together without things be complicated and convoluted.

Pretending like the sync task would be complicated and convoluted if audio, video and app management was handled across 3 apps isn't going to fool anyone but people that have no imagination and PC app developers.
post #72 of 97
Is Kevin's penis so small that he has to give away all the hard earned products before Apple has a chance to present them? Think of all the programmers and designers, not to mention shareholders, that Kevin is crapping on all so he can get his little ego boost.

We know you weren't "the popular kid" in high school Kevin, but sorry this doesn't make up for it.
post #73 of 97
The new (old) vizualizer is amazing. How beautiful with that look on a 65" flat panel!!


Why don't they have visualizers for the music contained on AppleTV???

Any mods for adding visualizers by chance?
post #74 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

Yes...there should be an app for the App Store/iTunes Store. It should ALL be broken up into separate apps.

It doesn't make things more inconvenient unless the integration between these apps is non-existent. But I have several ideas how these separate apps can work together and sync together without things be complicated and convoluted.

Pretending like the sync task would be complicated and convoluted if audio, video and app management was handled across 3 apps isn't going to fool anyone but people that have no imagination and PC app developers.

It's PCs where apps are notoriously separated. I don't see how you think hat opening up one version of iTunes to sync your music, then closing it and opening up another version to sync your videos, then closing it, then opening up another for your apps, then closing it, would make any sense and be easier for the end user. The point of progress is to eliminate effort. Would you are recommend a separate app for games and for each kind of video (Movies, TV Shows, Music Videos, Podcast)?

I agree that iTunes is bloated, but making a bunch of separate apps is not progress. I remember trying to make a DVD backup on Windows which required me to run an app to remove the CSS, then run another app to shrink it fit on a SL-DVD, then another to actually burn it. Now DVD backup can be done in a single step. That is progress.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #75 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Mozzarella View Post

Also iTunes should definitely default to being in the browse mode.

I would agree, but you just switch browse mode on once and it stays on forever.
post #76 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

It's PCs where apps are notoriously separated.

NO...gtfo.

Quote:
I don't see how you think hat opening up one version of iTunes to sync your music, then closing it and opening up another version to sync your videos, then closing it, then opening up another for your apps, then closing it, would make any sense and be easier for the end user.

Perhaps because you're only using a few synapses in your brain to actually think about a solution that would make syncing easier than closing and opening apps.

Quote:
The point of progress is to eliminate effort. Would you are recommend a separate app for games and for each kind of video (Movies, TV Shows, Music Videos, Podcast)?

No...because it all pertains to video. In fact, I always propose that DVD Player get merged into an iTunes-like video-only app. iTunes handles music and music CDs, iTheater could handle video and DVD movies.

Quote:
I agree that iTunes is bloated, but making a bunch of separate apps is not progress. I remember trying to make a DVD backup on Windows which required me to run an app to remove the CSS, then run another app to shrink it fit on a SL-DVD, then another to actually burn it. Now DVD backup can be done in a single step. That is progress.

You're silly.

iTunes could be separated into multiple apps and act like iTunes and iPhoto currently act and how other apps can tap into iPhoto/Aperture/iTunes libraries.

A single syncing app would tap into this library much like iWork and iLife tap into these libraries using the Media Inspector.

It's not rocket science. It's not voodoo magic. Take the fuckin' bloat out of iTunes, create specialized apps to improve the experience for music, video, and iTunes Store/App Store, and app syncing.

In 99% of cases, people won't simultaneously be doing all four of these things...so it makes little sense to combine all 4 activities into a single app.
post #77 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

A single syncing app would tap into this library much like iWork and iLife tap into these libraries using the Media Inspector.

1) You might want to cut back on the personal attacks. It doesn't help your argument and it's the only rule that AI has.

2) DVD Player is a dedicated app for playback only that makes sense since it can't integrate with any of the iTunes local storage nor be used on iDevices. What strikes me as odd is your complaints about iTunes being bloated, wanting all the common aspects of syncing to an iDevice to be separate, but then want to bloat iTunes with a DVD app that offers no benefit to iTunes in any way. This doesn't make any sense.

3) In the text I quoted above, you mention the exact thing I stated earlier about having a SINGLE SYNCING APP that would do nothing but sync. No opening iTunes, no opening iPhoto, just syncing. What happened to your multiple apps for syncing different types of content? Again, this doesn't make any sense.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #78 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

Maybe because its HIS JOB as a journalist to report the news. And part of a journalist's job is getting his site/publication/station/whatever more readers/viewers/whatever so that it makes more money. And one of the best ways to get that extra traffic is by breaking news stories BEFORE everyone else. Otherwise, it becomes OLD NEWS no one really cares about.



If it meant that much to you, why did you click on the link to read this story? Oh right, because you wanted to know about iTunes 8. I guess Kevin did his job pretty well then.



Whoever writes his paychecks might have cared. He has a JOB to do simple as that. He's trying to make money just like anyone else with a job.

If you don't want the surprise ruined, don't click the link. It's not rocket science.

Well said Kevin!!
A reputation is not built upon the restful domain of one's comfort zone; it is made out of stalwart exposition of your core beliefs, for all challenges to disprove them as irrelevant hubris.- Berp...
Reply
A reputation is not built upon the restful domain of one's comfort zone; it is made out of stalwart exposition of your core beliefs, for all challenges to disprove them as irrelevant hubris.- Berp...
Reply
post #79 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

1) You might want to cut back on the personal attacks. It doesn't help your argument and it's the only rule that AI has.

2) DVD Player is a dedicated app for playback only that makes sense since it can't integrate with any of the iTunes local storage nor be used on iDevices. What strikes me as odd is your complaints about iTunes being bloated, wanting all the common aspects of syncing to an iDevice to be separate, but then want to bloat iTunes with a DVD app that offers no benefit to iTunes in any way. This doesn't make any sense.

3) In the text I quoted above, you mention the exact thing I stated earlier about having a SINGLE SYNCING APP that would do nothing but sync. No opening iTunes, no opening iPhoto, just syncing. What happened to your multiple apps for syncing different types of content? Again, this doesn't make any sense.

I said iTunes-LIKE video app! I also never said that the separate apps couldn't sync their own content. I'm sorry but my personal attacks are RIGHT IN LINE with your intelligence level. Gawd. I hate this place. I'm going to attack you intelligence as long as you show none and moderators can ban if they want but it won't change my perception of you.
post #80 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

Yes...what the fuck is wrong with opening another app and syncing movies to your iPod? It makes lots of sense. YOU make little sense. iTunes can't be the end-all app that syncs everything but the kitchen sink (haha) to your iPod...because that makes it unnecessarily bloated.

Listen to what you're saying, man. What if I told you "So... to read e-mail or browse the web on Mac OS X, you'll need to open two applications? That makes little sense. E-mail and browsing the web are two internet-related activities and should be combined into one app."

My ass it does. YOU make no sense.

Mind the personal attacks, dude... \

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Mockup of new iTunes 8.0 interface published