iTunes Music Store Sucks

[cheddarsnax]

The problems start with the download. 19MB? What for? I'm downloading a music player and web browser. This is not necessary. But I can handle it, as long as the program is good.

Too bad it sucks. When I first opened it, the window was way too small. My attempts at resizing the window resulted in redraw rates slower than anything I've seen since I threw out my old Pentium 2 box. Why is this? Must be the non-standard Mac-like interface, which results in a window which redraws slowly, cannot be maximized, and does not conform to my Windows color settings. Drop-down menus have cool looking Mac-style graphics... until you click on them. There's no graphical response, and the menu is presented in the standard Windows style. But hey, it's OK, as long as the actual store is good.

But it's not. Here's a shitty deal: Blur's Think Tank. The album is $16.99 at iTunes. It's $3.00 cheaper at Amazon or Best Buy (which has free shipping). And the selection blows. Matador recently joined the iTunes store. A search for Yo La Tengo produces four albums. eMusic has 12, all on Matador. I purchased three CDs today at Best Buy, only one of which is available at the iTunes Music Store. And even if I did find something I liked (and I'll admit that I did), I wouldn't buy it. Apple's AAC files work on iPods only. Nothing else.

If you're looking for a poorly made application and a music store with occasionally questionable pricing and a semi-complete selection of major label music that's only compatible with one brand of digital music players, you're in luck. But me, I'll stick with stores and eMusic for now.

[rjung]

Originally posted by cheddarsnax
And even if I did find something I liked (and I'll admit that I did), I wouldn't buy it. Apple's AAC files work on iPods only. Nothing else.
Nitpick: That should be "...nothing else yet." Since AAC is an open standard (part of the MPEG4 audio standard, IIRC), there's nothing preventing anyone else from creating a portable music player that supports AAC files.

Can't comment about the suciness/non-suciness of the Windows iTunes music store, since I use the Mac version. And it's been smooth as buttah since day 1. :D

[Troy McClure SF]

Originally posted by cheddarsnax
Apple's AAC files work on iPods only. Nothing else.

Except for computers and CD players.

Anyway, no one's forcing you to use the damn thing.

[Revtim]

I downloaded it out of curiosity, and although the OP's points may be true, I note it has an interesting assortment of free streaming radio stations, many at 128kbps. Yes, this isn't tremendously unique, but the more the better.

[Crusoe]

I downloaded it. I'm not interested in the online store (especially not with a dial-up connection), and as a library management application I'm not sure what it's offering me over MusicMatch other than playlists based on ratings. Haven't noticed any performance problems, though.

[cheddarsnax]

Originally posted by Troy McClure SF
Except for computers and CD players.
There is absolutely no consumer CD player in existence capable of player AAC files. Yes, I know what you meant.
Anyway, no one's forcing you to use the damn thing.
Really? Oh. I retract all rants of mine, past present and future due to this insightful comment. :rolleyes:

Originally posted by Revtim
I downloaded it out of curiosity, and although the OP's points may be true, I note it has an interesting assortment of free streaming radio stations, many at 128kbps. Yes, this isn't tremendously unique, but the more the better.
Meh. There's a much better selection of Shoutcast streams, and I don't need iTunes to listen to them.

[cmason32]

Originally posted by cheddarsnax
The problems start with the download. 19MB? What for? I'm downloading a music player and web browser. This is not necessary. But I can handle it, as long as the program is good.

It also has a cd burner


Too bad it sucks. When I first opened it, the window was way too small. My attempts at resizing the window resulted in redraw rates slower than anything I've seen since I threw out my old Pentium 2 box. Why is this? Must be the non-standard Mac-like interface, which results in a window which redraws slowly, cannot be maximized, and does not conform to my Windows color settings. Drop-down menus have cool looking Mac-style graphics... until you click on them. There's no graphical response, and the menu is presented in the standard Windows style. But hey, it's OK, as long as the actual store is good.

But it's not. Here's a shitty deal: Blur's Think Tank. The album is $16.99 at iTunes. It's $3.00 cheaper at Amazon or Best Buy (which has free shipping). And the selection blows. Matador recently joined the iTunes store. A search for Yo La Tengo produces four albums. eMusic has 12, all on Matador. I purchased three CDs today at Best Buy, only one of which is available at the iTunes Music Store. And even if I did find something I liked (and I'll admit that I did), I wouldn't buy it. Apple's AAC files work on iPods only. Nothing else.

Some albums are more expensive - but that is because the artists or record company is not letting Apple sell the album for $9.99. Further, while some albums are more expensive, the majority of albums are $9.99.

Apple can only have the albums that the companies/artists agree to put on iTMS. Blaming Apple for the artists refusal is like blaming the weatherman for the weather - there's nothing that can be done about it.

As far as AAC is concerned, you can convert the files into mp3s and you can burn AAC files onto a cd which will play in any cd player.


If you're looking for a poorly made application and a music store with occasionally questionable pricing and a semi-complete selection of major label music that's only compatible with one brand of digital music players, you're in luck. But me, I'll stick with stores and eMusic for now.

Perhaps if you learned a bit more about the product, your thread wouldn't look like blatant astroturfing.

[yosemite]

Oh, thanks for starting this thread. I was wondering when Apple was going to release the Windows version of iTunes! I downloaded it as soon as I read this thread.

I love iTunes on my Mac. As rjung said, smooth as buttah (butter, whatever ;)). And this was almost as smooth. Didn't have any problems resizing the window at all. (Windows XP Pro, Athlon 1800+ XP CPU, 1 GB RAM). I don't know if it's just one of those bugs that affects only certain systems--I don't know. It seems fine and is very similar to my Mac version. And I love the way iTunes is laid out.

It works very smoothly, with one exception so far. I did have a problem with it when I first started--I was trying to transfer some of my purchased tunes (burned on CD from Mac) over to the PC. iTunes "stopped responding" while I was trying to do this--I was transferring over some big honkin' files from the CD onto the hard drive while iTunes was simultaneously trying to play one of the tunes from that same CD. But Windows does this with me sometimes--stutters or falters when I try to do too many things like that at once. So I don't blame iTunes for that entirely. Though yeah, that was a bug I could have done without.

Anyway, unless it's got some horrible crashy, nasty problem, it is now my default MP3 player. I am so sick of Windows Media Player on the PC, and I never did like WinAmp very much. iTunes is the only way to go, baby.

Transferring my "purchased" tunes over to the PC (via CD) was seamless. Logging in using my Mac membership username was sealess. Buying an audio book (Jerry Goldsmith and some other guys talking about music) was seamless. Downloading of the purchased audio book was seamless.

So far it's been as seamless (except for that initial freezing up thing) as the Apple version. So far.

Oh, happy day. I have iTunes on my PC! :D

[cheddarsnax]

Originally posted by cmason32
It also has a cd burner
Windows has built in CD burning support. iTunes should interface with CD burners through IMAPI (if it doesn't already)

Some albums are more expensive - but that is because the artists or record company is not letting Apple sell the album for $9.99. Further, while some albums are more expensive, the majority of albums are $9.99. Apple can only have the albums that the companies/artists agree to put on iTMS. Blaming Apple for the artists refusal is like blaming the weatherman for the weather - there's nothing that can be done about it.

I'm not blaming Apple for this, at least I didn't intend to. But if a real life store doesn't have the products I want, or sells them at an unreasonable price, I won't go there. Just as I won't be using the iTunes music store (for a variety of other reasons, too).

As far as AAC is concerned, you can convert the files into mp3s and you can burn AAC files onto a cd which will play in any cd player.
Converting to MP3 results in a loss of quality, and I highly doubt that Apple has a built-in function to circumvent their own DRM that easily (correct me if I'm wrong). Are there any programs which convert protected AAC files to MP3s? And I don't want CDs. I don't even own a CD player. I have a Nomad Zen MP3 player, which cannot player AAC files, at least for now.

Perhaps if you learned a bit more about the product, your thread wouldn't look like blatant astroturfing.
Blow me.

[cheddarsnax]

A question to iTunes subscribers: Can you redownload music you have already purchased? For free, I mean.

Here's another complaint: It installed an iPod service, which runs every time I start my computer. I don't remember being asked about that. I don't own an iPod. Why did I get an iPod service?

[Daisy Cutter]

Originally posted by cheddarsnax
There is absolutely no consumer CD player in existence capable of player AAC files. Yes, I know what you meant.


Wrong.
:smack:

CD players which can playback AAC files exist, and they are consumer.

[Revtim]

Here's one:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B00005O02X/104-8990923-5396704?v=glance

[cheddarsnax]

Amazing. But I'm not out to spend $120 on a CD player.

[Hodge]

Apple's AAC files work on iPods only. Nothing else.Others corrected this statement, but I thought I'd rub it in some more: AAC Plugin for Winamp2 (http://www.softpedia.com/public/cat/11/1/3/11-1-3-40.shtml)

OGG's still the best, though.

[cheddarsnax]

Originally posted by Hodge
Others corrected this statement, but I thought I'd rub it in some more: AAC Plugin for Winamp2 (http://www.softpedia.com/public/cat/11/1/3/11-1-3-40.shtml)
I intended that to refer solely to portable digital music players (Rio, Zen, etc.)

[Mr2001]

Here (http://www.epinions.com/Personal_CD_Players-AAC) are some more AAC CD players, including four players under $80. But I'm suspicious - doesn't iTunes use some kind of DRM? Do you have to decrypt the file before you can play it on a CD player? If you don't, then what exactly is the purpose of the DRM?

[Meros]

The main purpose of the DRM is just to keep the record industry happy and allow the store to exist at all.

The main function is just to prevent the files from being shared from computer to computer in their original format (beyond the three computers you're allowed to have)

Not being nitpicky here at all, it's just been an observation of mine that Apple's DRMing has had a tendency to be the minimum to keep the Record Industry crying foul while still giving the user reasonable use of their data. The fact that it's usually circumventable to a reasonable degree by common actions supports this (at least IMHO)

I wouldn't be surprised at all if the CD players were interpreted by the file the same way as an iPod is currently in which case there wouldnt be any decryption problems.

[Meros]

Um....that should say keep the record industry from crying foul.

[cmason32]

Originally posted by cheddarsnax
Windows has built in CD burning support. iTunes should interface with CD burners through IMAPI (if it doesn't already)

You asked why the file was big. I never said there weren't other cd burner programs.


I'm not blaming Apple for this, at least I didn't intend to. But if a real life store doesn't have the products I want, or sells them at an unreasonable price, I won't go there. Just as I won't be using the iTunes music store (for a variety of other reasons, too).


Fine. Don't buy products you can get cheaper. But don't pick out 3 albums that are more expensive and act like it's the same for every album on iTunes. Whether you intended it or not, it was misleading.


Converting to MP3 results in a loss of quality, and I highly doubt that Apple has a built-in function to circumvent their own DRM that easily (correct me if I'm wrong). Are there any programs which convert protected AAC files to MP3s? And I don't want CDs. I don't even own a CD player. I have a Nomad Zen MP3 player, which cannot player AAC files, at least for now.

So you complain that Apple doesn't support mp3s while simulatneously complaining that mp3s have poorer quality?

To convert an AAC file do the following:

1. Highlight the track
2. Go to the "Advanced" tab
3. Choose "convert selection to mp3"

Taa-daa!


Blow me.

:rolleyes:

[Meros]

To convert an AAC file do the following:

1. Highlight the track
2. Go to the "Advanced" tab
3. Choose "convert selection to mp3"

Taa-daa!



:rolleyes: [/B]

Unless it changed with the new version doesn't this only work with AAC files you rip from CD and not with the DRMed files you get from iTMS?

[cmason32]

Originally posted by Meros
Unless it changed with the new version doesn't this only work with AAC files you rip from CD and not with the DRMed files you get from iTMS?

Yes. But you can also just import cds as mp3s.

[cheddarsnax]

So you complain that Apple doesn't support mp3s while simulatneously complaining that mp3s have poorer quality?
No, I complain that if I want to use an iTunes Music Store song on my portable music player I have to convert it from one lossy format to another lossy format. Lossy formats are less than CD quality to start with, and it doesn't help when you start converting between them.

Note that my rant title is: iTunes Music Store Sucks. I don't give a shit about unprotected AAC files. That's not what you get from the iTunes Music Store. I'm complaining about not being able to use files from, get ready for it, the iTunes Music Store on my portable music player. If I have to burn them to a CD, then rip them back into MP3 format to do this, I would not say that I can use them on my portable music player.

[cheddarsnax]

Originally posted by rjung
Nitpick: That should be "...nothing else yet." Since AAC is an open standard (part of the MPEG4 audio standard, IIRC), there's nothing preventing anyone else from creating a portable music player that supports AAC files.
Sure there is. At least, supporting iTunes Music Store AAC files. As I understand it, Apple wraps the iTMS files with its own custom DRM. Unless they're willing to open it up to other portable music player manufacturers, I doubt we'll be seeing support for iTMS files on anything other than an iPod anytime soon.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that this also applies to AAC CD players. So my original statement as I intended it to be read stands: Apple's AAC files cannot be used on anything other than an iPod. In the words of Creative support representative Harvey Fong, "iPods are the only players that will accept the Apple wrapper."

[yosemite]

I have been having all sorts of problems burning CDs on my PC. (I think it's mostly software related.) So I wasn't all that hopeful that iTunes would burn me a CD. But it did. Seamlessly. Fast. Nice and fast. Much faster than XP's built-in burning software, much faster (and easier, and much more seamless) than Windows Media Player.

I love it. Unless some funky bugs or weird shit starts cropping up, iTunes for Windows is it for me. It was always it for my Mac. iTunes is the bomb, man. :D

[neutron star]

For approx. 75-125% of the price of a CD elsewhere (depending on the CD), you lose:

Liner notes
CD and case
Full CD quality - AAC files are lossy compressed
The ability to easily convert your music to any audio file format with minimal quality loss


Yeah, it's more convenient than buying CDs and you can purchase individual tracks, but that doesn't make up for the disadvantages. Start offering non-DRM, losslessly-compressed tracks for half the price of CDs and we'll talk.

[friedo]

Who the fuck actually reads liner notes?

Those things waste more paper than the operating manuals for toasters.

[Nightime]

Did anyone ever doubt that iTunes sucked?

I can get higher quality music for free than I can get from paying exorbitant amounts at iTunes.

And as far as I know, iTunes doesn't even have a subscription thing like eMusic, to let you download lots of music. So what, really, is the point of iTunes in the first place?

Paying boatloads of money just so you can say "I used iTunes!"?

[Max Torque]

Originally posted by neutron star
Yeah, it's more convenient than buying CDs and you can purchase individual tracks, but that doesn't make up for the disadvantages. Start offering non-DRM, losslessly-compressed tracks for half the price of CDs and we'll talk.

Actually, I thought being able to buy individual songs rather than entire albums was the whole point. Die-hard fans of a particular group will of course still want their original, machine-pressed copies and shiny cases. But if I'm a casual listener who only wants two or three Grateful Dead tunes, the iTMS makes more sense. I've been pondering buying some Leon Redbone albums from iTMS for a while now, because while I like the music, I don't care about the casing.

[cheddarsnax]

Originally posted by friedo
Who the fuck actually reads liner notes?
I do. Convenient place to find lyrics, most of the time. Sometimes there's a nice piece written by the band, like with NOFX's War on Errorism. Nice art. Fun stuff, too, like that crazy collage that came with Dead Kennedy's Fresh Fruit For Rotting Vegetables. Don't bash the notes.

You know what? Right here *points* is a great local music store. They almost always have what I want. If they don't, they order it. Prices are low - I've never paid more than $14 for a new album, usually around $11. Sure, it's an inconvenience. But ya know, I think I'll just go there anyway. Why did I even bother with this music download crap? What a waste of time.

I must have been deceived by all those who hailed iTMS like it was the second coming of Christ. Good God people, it's a slightly above average media player, a CD burner no better or worse than any other I've used, and a worthless music store. What's the big deal? Seriously.

[cheddarsnax]

Originally posted by Nightime
I can get higher quality music for free than I can get from paying exorbitant amounts at iTunes.
Well, I wouldn't call it exorbitant, but it's certainly too much for DRM-crippled music with lossy compression and no physical materials.

[Latino Yoshi]

Just a small note from an experienced iTunes user:

The DRM in the AAC music from the music store disappears as soon as you burn the music to CD. This is because the music gets converted back into AIFF, which has no support of DRM, when burned to CD. The exception would be if you're burning your music as a "data cd."

You can still tranfer .m4p music (AAC with DRM) to any computer, but to play the music, you must have a particular computer "authorized" by iTunes.

That is all.

[rjung]

Originally posted by cheddarsnax
A question to iTunes subscribers: Can you redownload music you have already purchased? For free, I mean.
No, you should back up your music, just like any other important computer file. Luckily, iTunes will easily let you do that, since it can burn data CDs with your music files as well. I imagine Apple doesn't allow re-downloading to prevent people abusing their bandwidth.

Here's another complaint: It installed an iPod service, which runs every time I start my computer. I don't remember being asked about that. I don't own an iPod. Why did I get an iPod service?
Because that way, if you do get an iPod in the future, you can plug it in and have iTunes launch immediately. There is no need for such a service on MacOS X (at least as far as I can see, with a quick check of "top"), so maybe this is due to a limitation with Windows.

I'm complaining about not being able to use files from, get ready for it, the iTunes Music Store on my portable music player.
If I buy an anamorphic DVD and my antiquated DVD player doesn't support anamorphic widescreen, do I blame the studio that made the DVD, or kick myself for not having a more recent, up-to-date-with-the-standards DVD player?

Good God people, it's a slightly above average media player, a CD burner no better or worse than any other I've used, and a worthless music store. What's the big deal?
The ability to buy "War on Drugs" without buying the entire "Everything to Everyone" album, maybe? A new paradigm for music sales? How about being able to find all songs with the word "love" in the title across 30,000 songs in your library in under a second?

But hey, some folks are never satisfied...

[Mr2001]

OK, so apparently the DRM wrapper means you can't play iTunes music files on anything but a computer or an iPod. That doesn't really set iTunes apart from other services.

But you can't redownload songs for free? That sucks. You can with the new Napster, from what I've heard. Speaking of which, although the new Napster uses WMA files instead of AAC (AFAIK), I believe it uses DRM, so I doubt you can play those files on a WMA-savvy CD player either.

[Snooooopy]

Originally posted by cmason32

Perhaps if you learned a bit more about the product, your thread wouldn't look like blatant astroturfing.

What is astroturfing?

[cmason32]

Originally posted by rjung
No, you should back up your music, just like any other important computer file. Luckily, iTunes will easily let you do that, since it can burn data CDs with your music files as well. I imagine Apple doesn't allow re-downloading to prevent people abusing their bandwidth.


Actually, you can to any one of the three authorized computers.

[cmason32]

Originally posted by Snooooopy
What is astroturfing?

http://jargon.watson-net.com/jargon.asp?w=astroturfing

It's basically a term used to describe people who go around bashing or praising a product while acting like a neutral third party, when in fact they are being paid or have a vested interest in the matter.

I didn't say that cheddar was astroturfing, just that it looked like he was (though I don't want to reprise the argument - I only bring this up because you asked).

[yosemite]

cmason21 wrote:

Actually, you can to any one of the three authorized computers.Yeah. I'm sharing my tunes on 2 computers so far (one Mac and one PC). I am not sure which computer will be the third--probably this other G4 Mac I have. (I have too many comptuers, but that's another story.) If I sell a computer or it breaks down, I can deactivate it and activate another in its stead.

So far iTunes works just perfectly for me. Sure, I wish there was more of a selection in the store, but that's hardly Apple's fault. They got as many artists signed on as they could; I am sure. And more are added each week.

I still consider a commercial CD to be more "real," but the fact is, I simply can't afford to buy a whole CD for one song. This usually isn't a problem for most of my purchases (Sibelius, Jerry Goldsmith, etc.) because everything on the CD is something I'd want. So no use in buying bits and pieces of the music--I want the whole thing--so I'll just get the CD.

So as someone mentioned earlier, iTunes is great for picking an odd piece here and there. So far I've bought a few Johnny Cash tunes, a few Warren Zevon tunes, one Blur tune (ordinarily I am not a "Blur" kind of person) and even some Duran Duran and Toby Keith! :eek: No way am I buying all of these CDs. Just a few songs was all that I wanted.

And Apple's store has made it so quick, painless, easy, and fast. And even if I had no interest in the store, the iTunes software is so far the best that I've encountered. (And I've tried quite a few MP3 programs on the PC side.) I intend to install it on (yet another) PC (that will not be "authorized" to play my purchased music).

iTunes is the bomb, man. :D

[cmason32]

cmason21?

I got demoted. :(

[yosemite]

Damn this keyboard. I am having all sorts of problems with it. Sorry, man.

[cmason32]

No problem at all. :)

I don't understand why people are bitching so much about iTunes. It can't be everything to everyone - nothing can - but it seems like people are really reaching for things to bitch about. It is what it is. A well-designed legal music downloading program that also lets you organize your music and burn cds. Are the advantages to a cd? Sure? Are there advantages to iTunes? Sure. Let's say you get a sudden urge to hear an album at 3:00 am, you can't really go run down to Tower Records. Let's say you only want one song off the album and don't want to pay $15.99 for one song. iTunes might have it for 99 cents.

So yeah, iTunes is not the end all be all of anyone's music solution. But it's available for those who choose to use it (and you can still use it to organize music and burn cds for free even if you don't buy music). So instead of looking for anything to bitch about, why not appreciate the FREE software that Apple is sharing with the Windows world?

[cmason32]

bah, can't go back and edit mistakes. I blame my errors on my sleepy-ness.

[Snooooopy]

We forgive you, cmason16.

[Geek Mecha]

So far the suckiest thing I've discovered about the iTMS is sharing it with Windows users.

Seriously. What I liked most about the iTMS was that it belonged to Mac users. After years of being unable to buy certain popular software titles because the manufacturers didn't create Mac versions, it felt wonderful to know that the iTMS and the buzz surrounding it was for Mac users only. I knew a PC version was inevitable, and that achieving popularity among Windows users would be a sweet affirmation of sorts, but I still didn't want to see any of it for a long time. It sounds weird and fanatical to say this. But I can't help it.

Now, the iTMS isn't going to make CD stores and its online competitors obsolete. The files you can download from it aren't superior quality or replacements for CDs. The iTMS didn't reinvent the wheel. But it was the first to legally bring consumers quality digital music by mainstream artists on fair and simple terms. It did this at a time when it seemed it would be impossible to do so. It has an amazingly diverse selection and it is frequently updated. It has exclusive content. Its music is designed to play on the most popular portable digital music player on the market. And now it delivers to both Mac and Windows users. While it's far from perfect, it ain't doing much wrong, either.

YMMV.

[PunditLisa]

There was an article in US Today on Tuesday which explained the key differences between iTunes, Napster, and the other music subscription services such as Rhasody.

Acc. to the article, iTunes has a library of 200,000 titles while Napster has a library of 500,000. However, iTunes has negotiated exclusive rights to some artist's catalogs, such as The Eagles. The writer gave both services 3 stars.

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/techreviews/products/2003-10-13-download-options_x.htm

I attempted to download iTunes for Windows today but you have to have Windows 2000. I'm still running on Windows 98. :( (I know, I'm light years behind in my technology.) Went to Napster and same story. Rats!

And now I'm stuck with the age-old question. Should I bite the bullet and buy a new computer and hope that I can transfer all my old files or should I give more money to MS and buy Windows 2000? And if I buy a new computer, should I buy a Mac or Windows? I love the idea of iTunes and iPod but I do so much more with my computer than just music. All my games are window based....

[cheddarsnax]

Originally posted by rjung
Because that way, if you do get an iPod in the future, you can plug it in and have iTunes launch immediately. There is no need for such a service on MacOS X (at least as far as I can see, with a quick check of "top"), so maybe this is due to a limitation with Windows.
Very true, but why not wait until I actually have an iPod to waste my resources with that?

If I buy an anamorphic DVD and my antiquated DVD player doesn't support anamorphic widescreen, do I blame the studio that made the DVD, or kick myself for not having a more recent, up-to-date-with-the-standards DVD player?
The iPod has roughly a 25% market share. It is the only portable music device capable of playing Apple's DRM'd AAC music files. Creative just introduced the Nomad Zen Xtra. It does not play iTMS files. iRiver just introduced the iHP-120. It has support for 5 different audio formats, an integrated FM tuner, a voice recorder, real-time MP3 encoding, and optical output. Clearly an advanced device. But it does not support iTMS music files. Unless you're going to define Apple and the iPod as the standard, I wouldn't say that my problem is not having an up to date portable music player.

The ability to buy "War on Drugs" without buying the entire "Everything to Everyone" album, maybe?
Yep, I'll give you that. But that doesn't matter much to me, I prefer to download full albums.

A new paradigm for music sales?
eMusic's been doing it since 1998. PressPlay and listen.com's Rhapsody launched way before iTMS for Mac.

How about being able to find all songs with the word "love" in the title across 30,000 songs in your library in under a second?
I cand do that with the Windows "Find" function. I just did. I have 72 song with "Love" in their title. I believe MusicMatch Jukebox does this too, and I'm sure there are others.

Originally posted by cmason02
I don't understand why people are bitching so much about iTunes..
Because there was so much fanfare surrounding its Mac launch, and so many positive things said about it to us lowly Windows users that I assumed it would be, you know, impressive. Or something I'd want to use. Unfortunately it is neither.

So instead of looking for anything to bitch about, why not appreciate the FREE software that Apple is sharing with the Windows world?
Because, as has been noted, I don't like the store, and I prefer another program for music playing.

[GaWd]

Wait, this shit won't even catalog my existing MP3s? What the fuck is the point then?

Sam

[beagledave]

Originally posted by PunditLisa
There was an article in US Today on Tuesday which explained the key differences between iTunes, Napster, and the other music subscription services such as Rhasody.

Acc. to the article, iTunes has a library of 200,000 titles while Napster has a library of 500,000. However, iTunes has negotiated exclusive rights to some artist's catalogs, such as The Eagles. The writer gave both services 3 stars.


Actually, according to Apple (http://www.apple.com/itunes/), the number is more like 400,000 titles by the end of October..including 200 signed independent labels.

Phil Shiller from Apple has said that the ITMS has been a loss leader so far, they really haven't made money on it. They view it as a "trojan horse" to increase purchases of iPods..where they have been making shitloads of dough.

[GaWd]

Originally posted by GaWd
Wait, this shit won't even catalog my existing MP3s? What the fuck is the point then?

Sam

I stand corrected. Buried, and I do mean BURIED within the drop down menus, under "options", is the place to add your folder.

We'll see how this works out. It looks ok, seems to work ok, but I
haven't even played a song yet.

Sam

[Jeeves]

Well, just to throw in my 2 cents worth, I really like iTunes. The program was the only one that from the mac I ever liked, but because I have a hard time dealing with the mac interface, I didn't play with it much (Besides, the iBook is really more my bf's computer anyway) Now that is is out for windows I love it. As far as the drm management, you can so easily circumvent it by burning a cd that it is bassicly a non-issue to me. Also, I know I am probably going to be excoriated for this, but I can't tell the difference between cd's and lossy files. I realize that others can though, but for me its a non-issue. And I love being able to buy inidividual tracks, or if there are enough tracks on a cd I like, a whole cd for $9.99. Tower certainly isn't that cheap.

[MilTan]

Originally posted by GaWd
I stand corrected. Buried, and I do mean BURIED within the drop down menus, under "options", is the place to add your folder.

We'll see how this works out. It looks ok, seems to work ok, but I
haven't even played a song yet.

Sam

Actually, there's a much easier way: Drag the folder containing all your music directly onto the iTunes library window. Voila! It's all cataloged. If you have "copy files into library" and "organize my music" checked in the Advanced preferences, it will create a folder heirarchy in your specified library location sorting the files in by Artist, Album and Title. It's really quite simple, no digging through menus involved.

[GaWd]

MilTan-

That's just not intuitive. In Musicmatch, I click a button and it refreshes all of my music titles, voila.

One thing I find missing in iTunes is some sort of an "autoDJ"(in MusicMatch that's what it's referred to). I don't always want to create a damned playlist song by song or band by band. Anyone know if this function does exist?

Sam

[Revtim]

Assuming you don't have "copy files into library" checked, it simply leaves the files where they are, correct?

[Latino Yoshi]

GaWd,

Create a 'Smart Playlist'. Mess with the options all you want. Afterwards, all the music based on that criteria should get automatically dumped into the playlist. If you change the options, the music in the playlist will be changed.

[Meros]

That's just not intuitive. In Musicmatch, I click a button and it refreshes all of my music titles, voila


It's all relative. Intuitive for who would be the question. Is it intuitive for a Windows user? No, not likely because Drag-And-Drop is for the most part restricted to moving files about in folders. For a Mac- user it is QUITE intuitive given that almost anything can be done by drag and drop on the MacOS from moving text between documents to grabbing pictures from webpages to opening a document with a particular program rather than with it's default.

The main issue here is that the WiniTunes is too much a Mac program to be intuitive for people used to the way Windows operates. This isn't a bad thing or a good thing, it's just different. Being a recent switcher (well....REswitcher) I can feel the pain of people trying to figure out some of the little things about the interface such as simply dragging the folder to add anything, or dragging to do just about anything. It takes some getting used to but eventually I think you'll find it MORE intuitive than the way it's done by other programs if for no other reason than the fact that there is a layer of abstraction removed between action and effect.

[rjung]

Originally posted by cheddarsnax
Very true, but why not wait until I actually have an iPod to waste my resources with that?
*Shrug* Call it the "Mac philosophy," if you will -- the user's ease of use is paramount. Spending a few extra nanoseconds to make your life easier beats removing a user-friendly feature all together. The clock cycles you save won't be of any use six months down the road when you plug in your iPod and the computer doesn't have any idea what to do with it.

And again, not to be snarky or anything, but I think the "wasting resources" could be a nuisance merely because you're using Windows. On my MacOS X box, for instance, almost all the extra services consume no resources (except disk space) until I actually need them. I can only imagine that Windows is missing some sort of comparable OS functionality, so the extra process is needed instead.

Unless you're going to define Apple and the iPod as the standard, I wouldn't say that my problem is not having an up to date portable music player.
Again, as far as I know, AAC is not an Apple-only standard, and there's nothing preventing other folks from creating AAC-friendly music players. But I'm not an expert on these things, I just lurk on Slashdot. ;)

Because there was so much fanfare surrounding its Mac launch, and so many positive things said about it to us lowly Windows users that I assumed it would be, you know, impressive. Or something I'd want to use. Unfortunately it is neither.
I have similar feelings about American Idol, but when I get disappoitned, I just don't watch the show and let its fans enjoy themselves. YMMV. :)


Originally posted by cmason32
Actually, you can to any one of the three authorized computers.
You can play your music on any one of the three authorized computers. You can copy them to all 500 computers in your lab, but only the authorized ones will be able to play them.

You cannot, however, download the same song to all 500 computers for free. That's what a LAN is for. :)



Originally posted by GaWd
I stand corrected. Buried, and I do mean BURIED within the drop down menus, under "options", is the place to add your folder.
Actually, under the "File" menu, there should be an "Import..." option. I prefer that over drg-n-drop, myself.



Originally posted by Revtim
Assuming you don't have "copy files into library" checked, it simply leaves the files where they are, correct?
Yes, but in my experience, it's just easier in the long term to let iTunes manage your files. It's awfully convenient (hey cheddarsnax! ;) ) to just plop in a new CD, then let iTunes rip it, title it, and stash it away, without having to worry about where it's going or how it's filed. Let the servant do the job, as it were. Besides, it's not like you'd have a hard time finding the file on your drive if you really wanted to.

[LeeshaJoy]

Originally posted by GaWd
Wait, this shit won't even catalog my existing MP3s? What the fuck is the point then?

Sam Really? That's weird. When I installed the first version, back in '01, it had an option to search my hard drive for MP3s the first time I started it up. Does it not do that anymore?

Which brings me to the one thing that really bugs me about iTunes (and Apple apps in general): the lack of documentation. Apple seems to think that their programs are so easy to use that they don't need any sort of manual. Which is true--for about a third of the features of any given app. To find the other two-thirds, you have to *hunt*. True, there is the Mac Help program, but it's set up in such a way that it's well-nigh impossible to find anything useful in it. I want easy-to-read documentation that tells me EXACTLY what the app can do, and how to do it.

[cheddarsnax]

Originally posted by rjung
Again, as far as I know, AAC is not an Apple-only standard, and there's nothing preventing other folks from creating AAC-friendly music players. But I'm not an expert on these things, I just lurk on Slashdot. ;)
Anyone can use the AAC format, but Apple wraps iTMS downloads with a proprietary DRM system. You'd need Apple's help to create a device which can play iTMS songs.

[squeegee]

I use iTunes the Mac, and I really, really don't like my Mac, but I like iTunes and itms a *lot*. iTMS seems like the only (barely, barely) acceptable online music source out there. The number of songs needs to go up by a factor of 10. or even 100. But it's a start.

And the Drm... :rolleyes: It is stupid. I buy a disc of songs, burn it in iTunes to CD on my Mac. Walk over to my PC and rip it back to MP3 and up to the Big Home Music Server. Whee. It's dumb, but it works.

So for the last few weeks, I've been buying iTunes AAC and burning etc on my Mac. Relatively contented. Now (drum roll!) buh buh buh bah!!! iTunes on the PC !! YAY. I don't have to use my stupid Mac any more to buy some songs!

Sigh... except stupid iTunes on PC thing can't find my CD/DVD burner. The setup dialog sees it -- "CD Burner: G: SONY DVD RW DRU 510A" but the Burn icon and menu never undimms.

Goddammit. I was hoping to get off Apple's (Jobs! Sieg Heil!) platform and stop screwing around with 2 platforms just to buy some music. I was hoping iTunes was going to work right on PC!

And it's not like this Sony drive is an obscure drive -- it's probably one of the top sellers: it burns DVD/RW DVD-R DVD-ROM CD-R CD-RW, damnear everything, AND it has firewire, so laptop people like it. And it runs on Mac. And apparently Apple didn't test with it. AAAAGHHH!

I'm sure they'll fix it, but right now I'm really pissed. Apparently, if I buy a drm'd AAC from iTunes on my PC, right now I'd have to share it to my Mac, burn it to CD *there*, then rip it back on my PC, all to get a stupid MP3 which is what I was willing to pay for in the first place.

:(

[squeegee]

Woah, that was my 1313th post. And on a Friday. In October. And I cursed Steve Jobs and Macs as I was typing.

Man, I'm going down now.
:)

[black rabbit]

First of all, for the record, the 12" Powerbooks kick some ass and I want one.

That said, I won't be buying (or even trying) the iTMS. 10 bucks a month for unlimited downloads from Emusic of high-quality mp3s beats the shit outta 10 bucks for an album. Even the pending change in the Emusic subscription rules isn't much of a deterrant; if I only get forty songs for my ten bucks, it's still a helluva lot better than what I could get from Apple.

Plus, they have a Linux client, or I can just use a perl script and wget.

Plus, there's no limit on what I'm legally allowed to do with the files, barring sticking them on a file sharing service. I can transfer them to as many computers as I want... Desktop? Check. Notebook? Check. Work PC? Check. Girlfriend's PC? Check. Parent's PC, for when I go to do laundry? Check.

Plus, they carry the catalog I'm interested in. If the iTMS is only carrying 200 indie labels (and, among others, fuckin' Matador counts as an indie), that means I'm not interested in 99% of the music that Apple carries in the first place. I don't buy my records at Media Play or Target. Yeah, it's snobbish, but Emusic carries a back catalog that's every music geek's wet dream.

Plus, I'm pretty drunk right now. Sorry if that came out boorish. Buy your music wherever the hell you want, but don't get all huffy when somebody else finds your choice lacking.

[GaWd]

Originally posted by LeeshaJoy
Really? That's weird. When I installed the first version, back in '01, it had an option to search my hard drive for MP3s the first time I started it up. Does it not do that anymore?

Yes, the option was there and I selected it...though it didn't do any searching. It took me 10 minutes to find the little menu selection under Options...


Which brings me to the one thing that really bugs me about iTunes (and Apple apps in general): the lack of documentation. Apple seems to think that their programs are so easy to use that they don't need any sort of manual. Which is true--for about a third of the features of any given app. To find the other two-thirds, you have to *hunt*. True, there is the Mac Help program, but it's set up in such a way that it's well-nigh impossible to find anything useful in it. I want easy-to-read documentation that tells me EXACTLY what the app can do, and how to do it.

Exactly. I have now discovered this. Overall though, it seems like a pretty good app. A touch laggy maybe, but I haven't restarted my machine in ages so maybe I've loaded the memory up a tad bit(lots of programs open all the time).

Sam

[spectrum]

iTunes won't function properly without a restart, and the first time you add a bunch of files to it it's going to slow down as it goes through the files one by one and analyzes them for soundcheck levels and the like.

I've loved iTunes on my Macs for years, and played with it on Virtual PC on my Mac at the office. It functions great for me, even on an emulated platform.

[E-Sabbath]

It sounds really good, though. Better than Musicmatch. And yes, I didn't have any trouble putting my mp3 library in it.

[rjung]

Originally posted by squeegee
Goddammit. I was hoping to get off Apple's (Jobs! Sieg Heil!) platform and stop screwing around with 2 platforms just to buy some music. I was hoping iTunes was going to work right on PC!
Why limit this to Apple? Nobody's software works right on Windows PCs. Blaming Apple for not making their software work right under Windows is like blaming everyone on Earth for living above sea level. :D

Steve Jobs might be a bit of a goofball (how many CEOs would hold a media event while wearing torn jeans and dirty sneakers?), but he's not the Messiah.

[yosemite]

Just for the record, iTunes works nigh onto perfectly on my PC. So far, anyway. Much better than Windows Media Player.

[cmason32]

It appears that iTunes for Windows is already affecting how the other online music companies do their business. Emusic will discontinue their unlimited music downloads and MusicMatch has indicated they are thinking about switching to the AAC format.

[cheddarsnax]

What makes you think eMusic's decision had anything to do with iTunes?