No matter how much I try, it just does not seem to drag & drop. Any keyboard keys you need to press while you're doing that?
Nope.
Well, apparently it's not that simple. That's plenty usable, right there. Of course, it did work - but what are the chances of me figuring that out on my own?
The iTunes help says that iTunes uses the IE web proxy settings. But if you're seeing the iTMS store, it's probably not a proxy setting.
That's what I figured, too. No idea why it still doesn't work.
Well, the drag-and-drop issues you're having aren't version specific, but (IIRC) Apple revised their dialogs to help prevent unwanted deletions in more recent iTunes versions (I don't have an iPod, so I'm not sure). Not to sound (too) snippy, but you might try using one of the more recent iTunes versions before saying "iTunes sucks." The early Winamp versions sucked too (I remember jumping ship to WindowsMedia as soon as it became viable).
(if you're worried about the removal of the network sharing features, there are workarounds for the 4.X and 5.X versions)
Hmm, I tried the 5.x install at home and it went when I was trying to copy some files over the network. I uninstalled 5.x, and the next thing I know, I can't install the newer or the older versions. And iTunes 6.x broke a lot of my podcast sites, although they had perfectly valid feeds. Turns out I'm not the only one.
So, you'll forgive me if I don't try going in for the "bleeding edge".
And btw - the early versions of Winamp were from ages gone by. Bad software is still bad software, and justifying it saying that just because it's new is tripe. Winamp was started by one developer, while iTunes is one of Apple's flagship products. There is a difference.
Of course, if the same was true of a Microsoft software, people would be up in arms. Somehow, Apple's software being absolutely crappy is acceptable. Hmmm.
That worked - I seem to be able to do it only when I select the song number track, but hey. Something's better than nothing.:)
God, this is not usable - this is some seriously crappy UI design. How would a new user figure this out, if ever? And they say Apple software has good interfaces.
I have no idea why we get different screens. Initially, I thought that might be because I was using a shuffle, but I get the same screen for my Nano, too.
And you're right, this could be an iPod setting change in itself.
I was just trying to be helpful. I'm really sorry you've had problems with iTunes and you have every right not to like it.
I did realize that, and thank you!:)
Yeah, I've no lost love for iTunes, but it just irritates me when folks defend iTunes when there are so many bugs (at least IMHO) that need to be taken care of.
I agree with the removing-files thing, because sometimes, iTunes may not like a particular file you've put on your iPod and just barfs. And the only way around it is for you to go back to the system where you copied those songs from and remove the offending song from iTunes (if you do not want to lose the existing stuff on your iPod that is).
But I still think that might a DRM/industry pressure thing and not an Apple thing.
There are always ways around these things, you know? The question really is, how valuable is your customer to you and what are you willing to do for them?
Not to flame, but Apple has seriously been lacking in that department!:-)
I can feel your pain, but if your files aren't tagged, it's going to make it hard to use most mp3 software, nevermind most DAPs
Funnily enough, Winamp seems to do a very good job of letting you use both the tags and path/file names in this task. Of course, the other option that I've long considered is to write a script that would grok the file names and insert them as ID3 tags, but that's too much effort. Maybe some day, I will.
Yup, I've found that on Windows, iTunes doesn't handle files on removable files that well (but it's not a problem on a Mac). It could be a Windows issue, but if Winamp doesn't have a problem doing it, it very well could be Apple incompetence.
Yeah, I was told that and for the longest time, I thought it was Windows messing things up, but since both Windows and WMP don't seem to have a problem doing that, I figured it could be an Apple issue.
Sure there is: drag and drop.
Weird - I'm on iTunes 4.0, and I just can't get it to do that. No matter how much I try, it just does not seem to drag & drop. Any keyboard keys you need to press while you're doing that?
Yes it does - and on my Mac and Windows machines, it does it automatically upon inserting a CD if iTunes is open and you have an internet connection. If it's not doing that for you, there's something wrong with your install (or maybe a firewall is blocking the connection?).
See - more weird behavior. iTunes is open and there is definitely an Internet connection. Even with the firewall disabled, and with a seemingly normal install, it does not seem to work. I could try using another proxy just to make sure -- do you know if there is any way for me to set another proxy to access the Internet on iTunes?
>Easy to blame someone else, isn't it?
As opposed to...
As opposed to coming up with solutions that work and are usable? Just a thought.
For one, I could not even find the option that you mentioned. This is the screen that I get.
The worst experience was when I lost a lot of music after a HDD crash and the only source was on my iPod - plugging it into another system (for the first time) just wiped out the contents of my iPod. I wonder what the hell Apple engineers were thinking, really.
Well, at last some valid comments other than j00 l0S3R!:)
I'm not sure that I follow you - when you say "putting music from various artists in folders" are you talking about the file system (e.g./Myfolder/Music/Beatnuts/watch_out_now.mp3)? iTunes does that, provided the files are properly tagged, and you can select the location of the library. Or are you talking about making folders (or playlists) in iTunes? There is no good way to do that, but you can sort by artist (or any one of many items) and/or create smart playlists.
I was referring to the file system - although, I would accept a similar functionality on the playlists, but iTunes does not support either. I know that I can add music from a path onto the library, but you're missing the point - I have a lot of music that is not necessarily tagged, but is otherwise well organized by file name and path.
Having to re-tag them just so that I can use iTunes is a pain. For instance, try Winamp - it does a search and categorization not just based on the tags, but also based on the file and path names. If I had a directory called Jethro Tull and mp3 files inside that had no tags, merely names like Track XXX, searching for Jethro Tull turns up nothing.
My music is already categorized into the folders over the years, why should I put in extra effort to let iTunes categorize it even more?
Are you using a Mac or Windows? One the Mac, you can move the files anywhere on the same volume and iTunes won't care. I'm too lazy to boot up my Tablet PC, but I don't recall having issues moving files on Windows machines. Can you be specific about your problem
I'm on Windows. And oh it does not care when you are on the same volume. Get on the network drives, and iTunes barfs.
You can rearrange files within a playlist and copy files between playlists. Do you want to copy a file from playlist 1 to playlist 2 and have it delete the file from playlist 1? IMO, that would be a bad thing.
I ought to have been clearer - I was talking about ordering the files within a playlist. There is no way for me to move Track Foo on top of Track Bar.
Another example - I was ripping a two volume CD, and I had the names as Track 1 - 01 - Foo Bar, Track 1 - 02 - FuBar, etc. for CD1 and Track 2 - 01 - Foo Bar, Track 2 - 02 - FuBar for CD2. iTunes just messes up the order - there is no way for me to get it to SORT right, without resorting to some really complex naming conventions.
? Are you talking about a change inside iTunes or on the file system?
In the file system. If I add a song to a folder, I have to delete the playlist and update it.
For ripped CD's, it most certainly does. For imported files, it doesn't, but there are plugins you can use to do that.
No it does not. I have several playlists full of ripped CD contents that's on my iTunes right at the moment with no tags. Check this out - the tags (artist, album and genre) are those that I put in there manually.
Valid criticism, but as long as the RIAA is calling the shots, that behavior won't change.
Yeah, but does it strike you that a good, usable system would not ask the *user* to go to pains to do something?
So now, let's see -- for the hundreds of CDs that I have, I would have to make a playlist for all the artists. That's time spent making over a hundred playlists from data that I *already* have organized in a folder format.
Now, try dragging and dropping a few hundred tracks called Track XYZ and watch iTunes sort it. Oh yeah, brilliant. The damn thing does not even fetch data from a CDDB to get names of CDs, sheesh.
Are all Apple users only good at abusing those that find bugs with their softwares? Maybe piss poor parenting and lack of civility is a hallmark of Apple users, hmm?
And oh, if I took my iPod to another machine, it automatically wipes out all the content - WTF?!
So, this means that I ought to have the exact music that I have on my desktop at my work machine, else iTunes simply has trouble grokking the fact that people might have music in more than one place.
I can't just add music from my desktop at home, take it to work, and add some more songs.
Of course, I could keep going on about why iTunes sucks, but this is just for starters.
If I was doing simple tasks (i.e. buy a song online, load it to my iPod and play music), it's easy.
However, I was talking about ripping CDs and attempting to categorize music. The thing is, I want my music player to be my music library, and iTunes is a lousy library.
I've the habit of putting music from various artists in folders, and iTunes does not even have the option of sorting it by the path. And of course, sorting by file names does not work very well, either. Heck, I cannot even move files around in the playlists. If I move files around manually, iTunes barfs. And I have to reload my library everytime there is a change. I've had several bad experiences trying to rip and burn CDs using iTunes, don't even get me started on that.
Combine this with lack of good keyboard shorcuts and the like, and you have a mediocre player at best. Anyhow, that's all IMHO, of course.:)
I'm far from a Google fanboy, but you're full of bullshit.
re: a music store. Oooooooooooh, a shiny new music store. How innovative, Google. They're like eight years too late with that.
It's a misstep for google to be opening a music store.
Ooooh, a search engine! How innovative, Google. I mean, given Yahoo!, Altavista and what not, a *search* engine?
Gmail? Another email?! How innovative, Google! They're like, what, 30 years late? Or 40 years late? But from what I see, most people who've used Gmail hardly ever tend to use anything else.
Ever strike you that the million users that *mail has might be - just *might be* - because they don't have spammers signing up for thousands fake addresses?
Sheesh.
Remember that first mover advantage is very limited and very short lived. First movers may sometimes make it big, but the ones that come later also have the ability to not do your mistakes and improve upon what you've already built upon.
And they know that there exists a market that they can tap into, which is more than what the first mover had.
If you take anything that Google's done (Search, Maps, News, Email, IM), they've taken what others have done it and tried perfecting it. A much better idea than finding new niche markets.
I mean, in all honesty, iTunes sucks. It's absolutely unusable and has a nasty habit of messing things up ever so often (sometimes I wonder what the hue and cry about Apple software is, but I digress).
If Google could come up with a better software (and I'm sure that if anyone can, it would be them), something that's not just for downloading music, but also to sync up with MP3 players, it would be a good selling point for Google.
Remember - iTunes started off with iPod, and that largely helped the iTunes Music Store kick off.
If that were to happen, Google could potentially steal away a lot of iPod users who would buy music elsewhere to come to their store. Well, except the typical MacHeads.
On every article on technology development, there is always someone who comes up with similar arguments.
*sigh*
Just why? I mean, do you really think that development should happen only if everything else falls into place?
Hell, the US has its own set of problems - are you going to stop everything and everybody from coming up with and using technology until they are all solved. Development is not a single task, nor is it for a single place.
Often, development is the coming together of a lot of things. While the points similar to the ones you mentioned should not be ignored, that in no way means that everything else should be put to a standstill while those problems are solved.
If all the money and everyone were bent on changing the world to fix the "problems" first, we'd never have any progress.
Like another poster said, the developing world is not a single place. It's a bunch of places, with differing cultures and needs. There is no one single solution.
I mean, what if a developing nation, say India, had focussed entirely on solving its problems and not on fostering and using technology? Do you think the software industry in India would have picked up? Do you think millions would have the jobs they do now and have a better standard of living?
To think that people should solve all the problems before doing anything else is ridiculous.
There are always problems, and while they need to be solved, they should not be the reason enough to give up looking at other ways of enhancing people's lives.
One of them was concerned that Wikipedia will eventually cause Britannia (and the others) to be pushed out of business and when she does need more and better info than Wikipedia can provide there will be no other sources.
ARRR!!!! England shall prevail! The Union Jack shalt never set down, you miserable liberal hippie scumbag! x-(
You know you like it. You know it makes you feel like a 13 year old girl and giggle everytime you see this.
*giggle giggle*
If it feels too annoying, you can always make yourself feel better by listening to Britney Spears. If that annoys you, she does look good with the volume turned off, you know?;)
Entities, like human beings, are subject to good, bad, evil, mistakes and what not.
Sometimes, Microsoft can be an ass and you'd hate Microsoft and other times, Microsoft could do something nice that would make you side with them.
But most of the time, just like most people, they're just trying to get along and do what's best for them.
So, sometimes those actions are in line with what the Slashdot crowd perceives to be "right" and sometimes it's not.
Re:how many billion dollar deployments...
on
Why Windows is Slow
·
· Score: 1
You're right.
Another thing most people forget is that Apple has the unfortunate habit of ignoring older users and moving on, and breaking stuff.
Despite everything, MS does not do that. Most MS applications tend to be quite backwards compatible, and while I've seen a lot from MS, they've not ever done something where an existing user base has been completely ignored, at least not after a very long time.
Sure, you might be a genius, but you sure as hell come across as being unprofessional and with a complex to boot. I think between a genius with an anti-social, superiority streak and an average person who is more accomodating, the choices would be obvious.
At 37, I haven't suffered any harm from this attitude yet.
Just because something has not does not mean that it will not.
Prejudice is still alive and well. POWER TO THE PEOPLE.
You are mistaking professionalism with prejudice.
If you are someone who is not willing to come dressed clean for your job, how would I know you are willing to do a lot of other things for your job? And if you are not even ready to dress to accomodate your employer, how would I know you would be able to design stuff that would accomodate others' needs?
Case in point - anecdotal evidence at best, of course - I've noticed that amongst software developers, the worst UI and human factors folks are the pony-tailed, jeans and sandals folks. Why? Because these are the ones that tend to think that somehow, "their way" is the right way. The kind that recommend *nix and Macs rather than work with what they have and improve what they've been paid to improve upon.
As another poster pointed out, there is little correlation between the "ragged, unshaven, jeans and sandals" look and a techie genius. Oh, sure, there are a few that are both, but that does not make every idiot in jeans and a ponytail a techie genius. Most tend to be wannabes, and between someone who would rather not care about what they wear but rather what they do, the choice is obvious.
Appearance matters. Now just in how others perceive of you, but also in how you perceive yourself. Good appearance not only boosts your confidence, it also tends to project you as a more socially skilled, accomodating person. Your job is not merely to churn out lines of code, at some level, you are doing something to accomodate others' needs and you are interacting with end users, customers and clients.
In that light, your appearance goes a long way on how your company would be projected to the outside world. Don't believe me? Dress like a homeless person and go to the bank, and dress in a suit and go to the bank. Or a bar. Or a restaurant. You'll notice the difference.
Oh, you don't have to like it, but sadly, accomodating it tends to make your life easier.
Re:some possible addenda to that comment
on
Why Windows is Slow
·
· Score: 0
Actually, like the other poster put it, Apple is a boutique company.
Apple is the designer store that people go to and spend an inordinately high sum of money because they're "cool" and because they want to be "different".
On the other hand, most folks that use MS tend to be normal folks who're happy getting that $20 pair of jeans off TJ Max, and don't care two hoots about style. And for a lot of people, associating themselves with the $20 pair is just... crass. The designer store might sell things that Joe User can buy, but it still remains a designer store.
(ooh, we're artists, we _need_ to have the "coolness" package)
Apple sells this point very well -- those that use Apple tend to see themselves as being different, and a very significant chunk of Apple users tend to be fanboys who'd buy Steve Jobs' used turtleneck for an obscene sum of money, just because.
Apple targets the "cool" crowd, MS targets Joe users who can use a normal thing that works. Most MS users are end users and consumers who're happy with something that works, and have better things to do than show off their designer elitism.
Re:how many billion dollar deployments...
on
Why Windows is Slow
·
· Score: 1
Thank you.
That was a wonderfully insightful post. Most folks on Slashdot are some overcome by their zeal for Macs or OSS that they fail to see the reality.
It's not as simple as folks think to remove legacy code and legacy interoperability components from MS systems. I work with Siebel, and I work with a lot of stuff that uses stuff that MS came up with a while ago, and they just haven't changed the way things work because things work.
Apple has never had that large a corporate client base to worry about such issues, but MS does. For that matter, even OSS does not have the kind of deployments and applications that have been developed for MS platforms. Most people completely ignore this, and rant on about how $FOO_BAR is better than M$ (the $ sign is a must, because most Slashdotters are wonderfully mature and think they're "cool" doing that). Real world is a little more complicated than that, and a lot of things can be done if there weren't billions of dollars worth investment riding on your systems. At the time, MS did what seemed to be the best thing to do, and they've come a long way.
Anyway, I agree with you. There definitely are parts of the OS that can be cleaned out, but while Windows is far from perfect, it most certainly has improved over the years. Like every other OS out there, it has its benefits and flaws. But unlike every other OS, MS cannot afford to make changes that will break investments worth billions of dollars.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course. Just proves my point that it works, and is not a bad idea for Google to be entering yet another market.
No matter how much I try, it just does not seem to drag & drop. Any keyboard keys you need to press while you're doing that?
Nope.
Well, apparently it's not that simple. That's plenty usable, right there. Of course, it did work - but what are the chances of me figuring that out on my own?
The iTunes help says that iTunes uses the IE web proxy settings. But if you're seeing the iTMS store, it's probably not a proxy setting.
That's what I figured, too. No idea why it still doesn't work.
Well, the drag-and-drop issues you're having aren't version specific, but (IIRC) Apple revised their dialogs to help prevent unwanted deletions in more recent iTunes versions (I don't have an iPod, so I'm not sure). Not to sound (too) snippy, but you might try using one of the more recent iTunes versions before saying "iTunes sucks." The early Winamp versions sucked too (I remember jumping ship to WindowsMedia as soon as it became viable).
(if you're worried about the removal of the network sharing features, there are workarounds for the 4.X and 5.X versions)
Hmm, I tried the 5.x install at home and it went when I was trying to copy some files over the network. I uninstalled 5.x, and the next thing I know, I can't install the newer or the older versions. And iTunes 6.x broke a lot of my podcast sites, although they had perfectly valid feeds. Turns out I'm not the only one.
So, you'll forgive me if I don't try going in for the "bleeding edge".
And btw - the early versions of Winamp were from ages gone by. Bad software is still bad software, and justifying it saying that just because it's new is tripe. Winamp was started by one developer, while iTunes is one of Apple's flagship products. There is a difference.
Of course, if the same was true of a Microsoft software, people would be up in arms. Somehow, Apple's software being absolutely crappy is acceptable. Hmmm.
Ahhh, thank you!
:)
That worked - I seem to be able to do it only when I select the song number track, but hey. Something's better than nothing.
God, this is not usable - this is some seriously crappy UI design. How would a new user figure this out, if ever? And they say Apple software has good interfaces.
*shakes head*
I have no idea why we get different screens. Initially, I thought that might be because I was using a shuffle, but I get the same screen for my Nano, too.
:)
:-)
And you're right, this could be an iPod setting change in itself.
I was just trying to be helpful. I'm really sorry you've had problems with iTunes and you have every right not to like it.
I did realize that, and thank you!
Yeah, I've no lost love for iTunes, but it just irritates me when folks defend iTunes when there are so many bugs (at least IMHO) that need to be taken care of.
I agree with the removing-files thing, because sometimes, iTunes may not like a particular file you've put on your iPod and just barfs. And the only way around it is for you to go back to the system where you copied those songs from and remove the offending song from iTunes (if you do not want to lose the existing stuff on your iPod that is).
But I still think that might a DRM/industry pressure thing and not an Apple thing.
There are always ways around these things, you know? The question really is, how valuable is your customer to you and what are you willing to do for them?
Not to flame, but Apple has seriously been lacking in that department!
I can feel your pain, but if your files aren't tagged, it's going to make it hard to use most mp3 software, nevermind most DAPs
Funnily enough, Winamp seems to do a very good job of letting you use both the tags and path/file names in this task. Of course, the other option that I've long considered is to write a script that would grok the file names and insert them as ID3 tags, but that's too much effort. Maybe some day, I will.
Yup, I've found that on Windows, iTunes doesn't handle files on removable files that well (but it's not a problem on a Mac). It could be a Windows issue, but if Winamp doesn't have a problem doing it, it very well could be Apple incompetence.
Yeah, I was told that and for the longest time, I thought it was Windows messing things up, but since both Windows and WMP don't seem to have a problem doing that, I figured it could be an Apple issue.
Sure there is: drag and drop.
Weird - I'm on iTunes 4.0, and I just can't get it to do that. No matter how much I try, it just does not seem to drag & drop. Any keyboard keys you need to press while you're doing that?
Yes it does - and on my Mac and Windows machines, it does it automatically upon inserting a CD if iTunes is open and you have an internet connection. If it's not doing that for you, there's something wrong with your install (or maybe a firewall is blocking the connection?).
See - more weird behavior. iTunes is open and there is definitely an Internet connection. Even with the firewall disabled, and with a seemingly normal install, it does not seem to work. I could try using another proxy just to make sure -- do you know if there is any way for me to set another proxy to access the Internet on iTunes?
>Easy to blame someone else, isn't it?
As opposed to...
As opposed to coming up with solutions that work and are usable? Just a thought.
But not at the expense of my music, dammit! x-(
For one, I could not even find the option that you mentioned. This is the screen that I get.
The worst experience was when I lost a lot of music after a HDD crash and the only source was on my iPod - plugging it into another system (for the first time) just wiped out the contents of my iPod. I wonder what the hell Apple engineers were thinking, really.
Well, at last some valid comments other than j00 l0S3R! :)
/Myfolder/Music/Beatnuts/watch_out_now.mp3)? iTunes does that, provided the files are properly tagged, and you can select the location of the library. Or are you talking about making folders (or playlists) in iTunes? There is no good way to do that, but you can sort by artist (or any one of many items) and/or create smart playlists.
I'm not sure that I follow you - when you say "putting music from various artists in folders" are you talking about the file system (e.g.
I was referring to the file system - although, I would accept a similar functionality on the playlists, but iTunes does not support either. I know that I can add music from a path onto the library, but you're missing the point - I have a lot of music that is not necessarily tagged, but is otherwise well organized by file name and path.
Having to re-tag them just so that I can use iTunes is a pain. For instance, try Winamp - it does a search and categorization not just based on the tags, but also based on the file and path names. If I had a directory called Jethro Tull and mp3 files inside that had no tags, merely names like Track XXX, searching for Jethro Tull turns up nothing.
My music is already categorized into the folders over the years, why should I put in extra effort to let iTunes categorize it even more?
Are you using a Mac or Windows? One the Mac, you can move the files anywhere on the same volume and iTunes won't care. I'm too lazy to boot up my Tablet PC, but I don't recall having issues moving files on Windows machines. Can you be specific about your problem
I'm on Windows. And oh it does not care when you are on the same volume. Get on the network drives, and iTunes barfs.
You can rearrange files within a playlist and copy files between playlists. Do you want to copy a file from playlist 1 to playlist 2 and have it delete the file from playlist 1? IMO, that would be a bad thing.
I ought to have been clearer - I was talking about ordering the files within a playlist. There is no way for me to move Track Foo on top of Track Bar.
Another example - I was ripping a two volume CD, and I had the names as Track 1 - 01 - Foo Bar, Track 1 - 02 - FuBar, etc. for CD1 and Track 2 - 01 - Foo Bar, Track 2 - 02 - FuBar for CD2. iTunes just messes up the order - there is no way for me to get it to SORT right, without resorting to some really complex naming conventions.
? Are you talking about a change inside iTunes or on the file system?
In the file system. If I add a song to a folder, I have to delete the playlist and update it.
For ripped CD's, it most certainly does. For imported files, it doesn't, but there are plugins you can use to do that.
No it does not. I have several playlists full of ripped CD contents that's on my iTunes right at the moment with no tags. Check this out - the tags (artist, album and genre) are those that I put in there manually.
Valid criticism, but as long as the RIAA is calling the shots, that behavior won't change.
Easy to blame someone else, isn't it?
Yeah, but does it strike you that a good, usable system would not ask the *user* to go to pains to do something?
So now, let's see -- for the hundreds of CDs that I have, I would have to make a playlist for all the artists. That's time spent making over a hundred playlists from data that I *already* have organized in a folder format.
Now, try dragging and dropping a few hundred tracks called Track XYZ and watch iTunes sort it. Oh yeah, brilliant. The damn thing does not even fetch data from a CDDB to get names of CDs, sheesh.
Are all Apple users only good at abusing those that find bugs with their softwares? Maybe piss poor parenting and lack of civility is a hallmark of Apple users, hmm?
And if that's the best response you can come up with for bringing up genuine UI issues, you must be very lonely indeed.
And oh, if I took my iPod to another machine, it automatically wipes out all the content - WTF?!
So, this means that I ought to have the exact music that I have on my desktop at my work machine, else iTunes simply has trouble grokking the fact that people might have music in more than one place.
I can't just add music from my desktop at home, take it to work, and add some more songs.
Of course, I could keep going on about why iTunes sucks, but this is just for starters.
If I was doing simple tasks (i.e. buy a song online, load it to my iPod and play music), it's easy.
:)
However, I was talking about ripping CDs and attempting to categorize music. The thing is, I want my music player to be my music library, and iTunes is a lousy library.
I've the habit of putting music from various artists in folders, and iTunes does not even have the option of sorting it by the path. And of course, sorting by file names does not work very well, either. Heck, I cannot even move files around in the playlists. If I move files around manually, iTunes barfs. And I have to reload my library everytime there is a change. I've had several bad experiences trying to rip and burn CDs using iTunes, don't even get me started on that.
Combine this with lack of good keyboard shorcuts and the like, and you have a mediocre player at best. Anyhow, that's all IMHO, of course.
I'm far from a Google fanboy, but you're full of bullshit.
re: a music store. Oooooooooooh, a shiny new music store. How innovative, Google. They're like eight years too late with that.
It's a misstep for google to be opening a music store.
Ooooh, a search engine! How innovative, Google. I mean, given Yahoo!, Altavista and what not, a *search* engine?
Gmail? Another email?! How innovative, Google! They're like, what, 30 years late? Or 40 years late? But from what I see, most people who've used Gmail hardly ever tend to use anything else.
Ever strike you that the million users that *mail has might be - just *might be* - because they don't have spammers signing up for thousands fake addresses?
Sheesh.
Remember that first mover advantage is very limited and very short lived. First movers may sometimes make it big, but the ones that come later also have the ability to not do your mistakes and improve upon what you've already built upon.
And they know that there exists a market that they can tap into, which is more than what the first mover had.
If you take anything that Google's done (Search, Maps, News, Email, IM), they've taken what others have done it and tried perfecting it. A much better idea than finding new niche markets.
Maybe if they came up with a better tool?
I mean, in all honesty, iTunes sucks. It's absolutely unusable and has a nasty habit of messing things up ever so often (sometimes I wonder what the hue and cry about Apple software is, but I digress).
If Google could come up with a better software (and I'm sure that if anyone can, it would be them), something that's not just for downloading music, but also to sync up with MP3 players, it would be a good selling point for Google.
Remember - iTunes started off with iPod, and that largely helped the iTunes Music Store kick off.
If that were to happen, Google could potentially steal away a lot of iPod users who would buy music elsewhere to come to their store. Well, except the typical MacHeads.
In a way there are a few countries that are more like the US than China.
W T F!
*blinks in confusion*
Care to explain?
Please stop trolling.
On every article on technology development, there is always someone who comes up with similar arguments.
*sigh*
Just why? I mean, do you really think that development should happen only if everything else falls into place?
Hell, the US has its own set of problems - are you going to stop everything and everybody from coming up with and using technology until they are all solved. Development is not a single task, nor is it for a single place.
Often, development is the coming together of a lot of things. While the points similar to the ones you mentioned should not be ignored, that in no way means that everything else should be put to a standstill while those problems are solved.
If all the money and everyone were bent on changing the world to fix the "problems" first, we'd never have any progress.
Like another poster said, the developing world is not a single place. It's a bunch of places, with differing cultures and needs. There is no one single solution.
I mean, what if a developing nation, say India, had focussed entirely on solving its problems and not on fostering and using technology? Do you think the software industry in India would have picked up? Do you think millions would have the jobs they do now and have a better standard of living?
To think that people should solve all the problems before doing anything else is ridiculous.
There are always problems, and while they need to be solved, they should not be the reason enough to give up looking at other ways of enhancing people's lives.
One of them was concerned that Wikipedia will eventually cause Britannia (and the others) to be pushed out of business and when she does need more and better info than Wikipedia can provide there will be no other sources.
ARRR!!!! England shall prevail! The Union Jack shalt never set down, you miserable liberal hippie scumbag! x-(
And oh, if that doesn't work, drink a lot of beer - that ought to make anything look good.
*hic*
Oh stop whining.
;)
You know you like it. You know it makes you feel like a 13 year old girl and giggle everytime you see this.
*giggle giggle*
If it feels too annoying, you can always make yourself feel better by listening to Britney Spears. If that annoys you, she does look good with the volume turned off, you know?
Entities, like human beings, are subject to good, bad, evil, mistakes and what not.
Sometimes, Microsoft can be an ass and you'd hate Microsoft and other times, Microsoft could do something nice that would make you side with them.
But most of the time, just like most people, they're just trying to get along and do what's best for them.
So, sometimes those actions are in line with what the Slashdot crowd perceives to be "right" and sometimes it's not.
You're right.
Another thing most people forget is that Apple has the unfortunate habit of ignoring older users and moving on, and breaking stuff.
Despite everything, MS does not do that. Most MS applications tend to be quite backwards compatible, and while I've seen a lot from MS, they've not ever done something where an existing user base has been completely ignored, at least not after a very long time.
Wow.
Sure, you might be a genius, but you sure as hell come across as being unprofessional and with a complex to boot. I think between a genius with an anti-social, superiority streak and an average person who is more accomodating, the choices would be obvious.
At 37, I haven't suffered any harm from this attitude yet.
Just because something has not does not mean that it will not.
Prejudice is still alive and well. POWER TO THE PEOPLE.
You are mistaking professionalism with prejudice.
If you are someone who is not willing to come dressed clean for your job, how would I know you are willing to do a lot of other things for your job? And if you are not even ready to dress to accomodate your employer, how would I know you would be able to design stuff that would accomodate others' needs?
Case in point - anecdotal evidence at best, of course - I've noticed that amongst software developers, the worst UI and human factors folks are the pony-tailed, jeans and sandals folks. Why? Because these are the ones that tend to think that somehow, "their way" is the right way. The kind that recommend *nix and Macs rather than work with what they have and improve what they've been paid to improve upon.
As another poster pointed out, there is little correlation between the "ragged, unshaven, jeans and sandals" look and a techie genius. Oh, sure, there are a few that are both, but that does not make every idiot in jeans and a ponytail a techie genius. Most tend to be wannabes, and between someone who would rather not care about what they wear but rather what they do, the choice is obvious.
Appearance matters. Now just in how others perceive of you, but also in how you perceive yourself. Good appearance not only boosts your confidence, it also tends to project you as a more socially skilled, accomodating person. Your job is not merely to churn out lines of code, at some level, you are doing something to accomodate others' needs and you are interacting with end users, customers and clients.
In that light, your appearance goes a long way on how your company would be projected to the outside world. Don't believe me? Dress like a homeless person and go to the bank, and dress in a suit and go to the bank. Or a bar. Or a restaurant. You'll notice the difference.
Oh, you don't have to like it, but sadly, accomodating it tends to make your life easier.
Actually, like the other poster put it, Apple is a boutique company.
Apple is the designer store that people go to and spend an inordinately high sum of money because they're "cool" and because they want to be "different".
On the other hand, most folks that use MS tend to be normal folks who're happy getting that $20 pair of jeans off TJ Max, and don't care two hoots about style. And for a lot of people, associating themselves with the $20 pair is just... crass. The designer store might sell things that Joe User can buy, but it still remains a designer store.
(ooh, we're artists, we _need_ to have the "coolness" package)
Apple sells this point very well -- those that use Apple tend to see themselves as being different, and a very significant chunk of Apple users tend to be fanboys who'd buy Steve Jobs' used turtleneck for an obscene sum of money, just because.
Apple targets the "cool" crowd, MS targets Joe users who can use a normal thing that works. Most MS users are end users and consumers who're happy with something that works, and have better things to do than show off their designer elitism.
Thank you.
That was a wonderfully insightful post. Most folks on Slashdot are some overcome by their zeal for Macs or OSS that they fail to see the reality.
It's not as simple as folks think to remove legacy code and legacy interoperability components from MS systems. I work with Siebel, and I work with a lot of stuff that uses stuff that MS came up with a while ago, and they just haven't changed the way things work because things work.
Apple has never had that large a corporate client base to worry about such issues, but MS does. For that matter, even OSS does not have the kind of deployments and applications that have been developed for MS platforms. Most people completely ignore this, and rant on about how $FOO_BAR is better than M$ (the $ sign is a must, because most Slashdotters are wonderfully mature and think they're "cool" doing that). Real world is a little more complicated than that, and a lot of things can be done if there weren't billions of dollars worth investment riding on your systems. At the time, MS did what seemed to be the best thing to do, and they've come a long way.
Anyway, I agree with you. There definitely are parts of the OS that can be cleaned out, but while Windows is far from perfect, it most certainly has improved over the years. Like every other OS out there, it has its benefits and flaws. But unlike every other OS, MS cannot afford to make changes that will break investments worth billions of dollars.
Hats off, sir.