I'm not keen on the new icon - now there's too much blue in my dock.
and it pisses me off how videos doesn't have a section now jus a playlist. but I can't even play iTMS videos yet because you need the new quicktime that isn't on software update yet.
the cover view is made crappy by not grouping compilations - hence the same album art repeated for different artists.
so don't bother downloading the.dmg - just wait for software update.
the Apple airport express with airtunes is a wireless hub with a audio port. you plug speakers into it and they can then be accessed by anyone on the network (wireless or LAN, optional password). the speakers are normal speakers not wireless ones; wireless is handled by the airport.
think of your speaker amplifier with all the inputs and outputs. instead of having an input from your laptop that you plug and unplug every time you move your laptop you just have the wire go the airport and your laptop automatically connects just like it does to your wireless internet, keyboard etc.
so the point is that the computer playing the music doesn't need to be in the same room as the speakers (useful if you don't want your laptop open next to the speakers at a party with alcohol) let alone connected by wire. also, if you have multiple sets of speakers on a network you can redirect audio to different rooms from a single source.
okay so either you're trolling and forgot to click post as AC, or you're just plain retarded and don't understand that when I take my laptop home I plug it into a much larger monitor to watch films on.
for me better is all about the user experience. I don't believe there is anyone creating anything even remotely close to iPod + iTunes + iTMS, and some of the players put out there with better hardware specs than iPods treat their users horrifically (the one suggested by the other replier can't autosync and can't browse by artist, album, or genre!).
every aspect of Apple product design is an order of magnitude greater than their nearest competitor. and every great new product Apple releases makes the integrated experience even stronger. so I don't expect to even consider moving away from iPod in the near future but am still curious what "the best of the rest" is.
>Like someone else pointed out, iTunes and iPod are not easy.
while you don't seem to be a troll, you are definitely ignorant of how iTunes and the iPod work.
to 99.999761% of people easy to use simply means easy to actually use and doesn't come with the philosophical baggage of FOSS or hypothetical situations in which enjoying music has become dependent upon your ability to manually stream data from the iPod to your sound card via a command line.
I honestly think that the only way the iPod could be easier for me to use is if the USB interface was upgraded to sense when I was removing it and then auto-unmount the iPod. then my iPod would be a zero-maintenance device, but until then I'm happy to put up with it requiring a single mouse click.
how would YOU design a music player interface? if it needs more than one click for music, videos, podcasts, audiobooks, photos, calendars, contacts, notes, metadata... then I have no interest.
one click is easy and anything you say otherwise is ignorance or FUD.
and photos, which are automatically optimised for the screen size with an option to have full-res backups available when used as an external hard drive.
also remember that data like song ratings, playlists (smart and fixed), and bookmarks are synced. I often come home listening to a podcast on my iPod, plug into my Mac and play it from there where I left off.
the syncing ability of iPods is so simple and powerful it would take a level of quality that most companies simply can't be bothered with to make me think of turning away.
it's not that doing any of the individual things the iPod does is difficult, it's just that no one else does all of them with such ease.
I don't see that option, maybe because I only have 1 computer authorised and am accessing with it anyway.
but you can see it's limited anyway without the need for phone homes.
if you're going to pirate Apple is aware that people will just burn and re-rip rather than scam them out of 5 extra computers a year.
getting back to the original point once again, I can't imagine Apple disabling computers because they haven't been on the internet for some time, and everything else seems consistent with the fact that Apple do does not use a phone home system for authorisation.
as I said it was a special form, presumably reviewed by a customer service rep. if you try it more than once or twice you'll probably be disallowed from any more remote authorisations.
you can't deauthorise all. you can deauthorise from the actual computer. you can also deauthorise not from the computer in special cases e.g. my when my windows computer was so unstable I couldn't boot I got that deauthorised with a special form.
I'm no expert but I don't see why iTunes has to phone to check authorisation.
you can authorise 5 computers simultaneously. you want to addd a 6th then you need to deauthorise one of them online (I don't think it has to be done from the computer itself but it's easier that way).
so once it's authorised for an account, a computer is valid for all music bought with that account until you say otherwise. so why bother checking?
burn limits is the only possibilty but I would assume that is done locally in the software since I can't see Apple disallowing CD-writing because you don't have an internet connection. plus remember that burm limits was changed at one time with a program update, not (just) an Apple server update. and burn limits isn't too serious since you can just change the playlist by 1 track - not worth the hassle of breaking the "just works" philosophy with constant call-homes.
basically, it seems like Apple is one of the only companies in the world who understands how to sell digital media successfully, or who has enough power to not let Big Media dictate all the terms.
>they don't have to advertise or promote it, just have it there for people who want it.
that's not Apple's way when it comes to design and features: if it's not worth making a big deal of it, why is it worth including?
seriously, why would anyone want to use OGG? (I may be wrong but isn't it significantly more CPU intensive than AAC and lesser or comparable quality?)
the only reason is basically FOSS geeks with philosophical reasons and, as per their fundamentalism, they should have the courage of their convictions and not be using an iPod in the first place.
>Then how come all the Apple fanboys on Slashdot ddidn't cry foul when Apple started shipping iLife with all their Mac's?
2 reasons:
1. Apple is not a convicted abusive monopolist 2. iLife is a separate suite, not part of the OS, but you get a copy when buying a Mac. it's more like how you now get a remote control with all new Macs and an iSight camera with all new Macs with displays.
I had a look at the firefly section and the descriptions for the individual television episodes give away all the twists! they should have spoilers for that stuff.
boot camp: is it worth rebooting just to buy something from a company that doesn't care about your custom? parallels: unbox has some pretty hefty requirements. will parallels play it pefectly?
for me, windows on a mac is about necessity or about making me money. not so I can spend money.
Slashdot Mirror
it doesn't apply when new iPods first come out but may apply later.
but if I sort by album then it's all just "random"; who seriously sorts their albums alphabetically by name?
I'd like by artist and then by year ideally.
I'm not keen on the new icon - now there's too much blue in my dock.
.dmg - just wait for software update.
and it pisses me off how videos doesn't have a section now jus a playlist. but I can't even play iTMS videos yet because you need the new quicktime that isn't on software update yet.
the cover view is made crappy by not grouping compilations - hence the same album art repeated for different artists.
so don't bother downloading the
the Apple airport express with airtunes is a wireless hub with a audio port. you plug speakers into it and they can then be accessed by anyone on the network (wireless or LAN, optional password). the speakers are normal speakers not wireless ones; wireless is handled by the airport.
think of your speaker amplifier with all the inputs and outputs. instead of having an input from your laptop that you plug and unplug every time you move your laptop you just have the wire go the airport and your laptop automatically connects just like it does to your wireless internet, keyboard etc.
so the point is that the computer playing the music doesn't need to be in the same room as the speakers (useful if you don't want your laptop open next to the speakers at a party with alcohol) let alone connected by wire. also, if you have multiple sets of speakers on a network you can redirect audio to different rooms from a single source.
okay so either you're trolling and forgot to click post as AC, or you're just plain retarded and don't understand that when I take my laptop home I plug it into a much larger monitor to watch films on.
so which is it; troll or retard?
for me better is all about the user experience. I don't believe there is anyone creating anything even remotely close to iPod + iTunes + iTMS, and some of the players put out there with better hardware specs than iPods treat their users horrifically (the one suggested by the other replier can't autosync and can't browse by artist, album, or genre!).
every aspect of Apple product design is an order of magnitude greater than their nearest competitor. and every great new product Apple releases makes the integrated experience even stronger. so I don't expect to even consider moving away from iPod in the near future but am still curious what "the best of the rest" is.
out of curiosity: what is better than the current 5G 60GB iPod for a cheaper price?
n.b. must support mac.
the point is I only have 1 computer - a laptop I take with me to work and home every day.
at home I have wireless:
keyboard
mouse
internet
speakers
phone (sync + remote)
why NOT have everything wireless if it can be?
my laptop is only 3 feet from the monitor because it HAS to be to use the monitor.
and if it makes my computer easier to use and I'm willing to pay for it who the fuck are you to stand in the way of progress?
is this expected to be a "wireless monitor" or an airtunes-style limited app stream?
/dream
if the latter then hopefully there'll be an Airfoil equivalent, but I hope it turns out to be wireless monitor and speakers.
>Like someone else pointed out, iTunes and iPod are not easy.
while you don't seem to be a troll, you are definitely ignorant of how iTunes and the iPod work.
to 99.999761% of people easy to use simply means easy to actually use and doesn't come with the philosophical baggage of FOSS or hypothetical situations in which enjoying music has become dependent upon your ability to manually stream data from the iPod to your sound card via a command line.
I honestly think that the only way the iPod could be easier for me to use is if the USB interface was upgraded to sense when I was removing it and then auto-unmount the iPod. then my iPod would be a zero-maintenance device, but until then I'm happy to put up with it requiring a single mouse click.
how would YOU design a music player interface? if it needs more than one click for music, videos, podcasts, audiobooks, photos, calendars, contacts, notes, metadata... then I have no interest.
one click is easy and anything you say otherwise is ignorance or FUD.
>even including podcasts, calendar and contacts
and photos, which are automatically optimised for the screen size with an option to have full-res backups available when used as an external hard drive.
also remember that data like song ratings, playlists (smart and fixed), and bookmarks are synced. I often come home listening to a podcast on my iPod, plug into my Mac and play it from there where I left off.
the syncing ability of iPods is so simple and powerful it would take a level of quality that most companies simply can't be bothered with to make me think of turning away.
it's not that doing any of the individual things the iPod does is difficult, it's just that no one else does all of them with such ease.
>Any MP3 player than includes an FM radio and stopwatch
aaaaaaaahahahahhahahahaha
"you'll want an mp3 player with a stopwatch"
looks like you sucked up MS's propaganda campaign fully.
unfortunately you failed to see that not only do iPods have stopwatches, you can also do FM radio on them.
I don't see that option, maybe because I only have 1 computer authorised and am accessing with it anyway.
but you can see it's limited anyway without the need for phone homes.
if you're going to pirate Apple is aware that people will just burn and re-rip rather than scam them out of 5 extra computers a year.
getting back to the original point once again, I can't imagine Apple disabling computers because they haven't been on the internet for some time, and everything else seems consistent with the fact that Apple do does not use a phone home system for authorisation.
no I don't believe so.
as I said it was a special form, presumably reviewed by a customer service rep. if you try it more than once or twice you'll probably be disallowed from any more remote authorisations.
>Ergo, it phones home.
0 74279
no it doesn't, see my reply to mh101 for why
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=196163&cid=16
you can't deauthorise all. you can deauthorise from the actual computer. you can also deauthorise not from the computer in special cases e.g. my when my windows computer was so unstable I couldn't boot I got that deauthorised with a special form.
I'm no expert but I don't see why iTunes has to phone to check authorisation.
you can authorise 5 computers simultaneously. you want to addd a 6th then you need to deauthorise one of them online (I don't think it has to be done from the computer itself but it's easier that way).
so once it's authorised for an account, a computer is valid for all music bought with that account until you say otherwise. so why bother checking?
burn limits is the only possibilty but I would assume that is done locally in the software since I can't see Apple disallowing CD-writing because you don't have an internet connection. plus remember that burm limits was changed at one time with a program update, not (just) an Apple server update. and burn limits isn't too serious since you can just change the playlist by 1 track - not worth the hassle of breaking the "just works" philosophy with constant call-homes.
basically, it seems like Apple is one of the only companies in the world who understands how to sell digital media successfully, or who has enough power to not let Big Media dictate all the terms.
>Imho there ought to be a config option to allow you to specify that you don't have an iPod and so won't be needing the service
funny that you're complaining about a few kb of memory being used for this, WHILE YOU'RE RUNNING FREAKING WINDOWS.
drop cf. ocean.
>they don't have to advertise or promote it, just have it there for people who want it.
that's not Apple's way when it comes to design and features: if it's not worth making a big deal of it, why is it worth including?
seriously, why would anyone want to use OGG? (I may be wrong but isn't it significantly more CPU intensive than AAC and lesser or comparable quality?)
the only reason is basically FOSS geeks with philosophical reasons and, as per their fundamentalism, they should have the courage of their convictions and not be using an iPod in the first place.
>Wow, does it hurt to contort your justifications that badly?
wtf are you talking about, anonymous troll.
MS sells the OS Windows. There is no need to include "3rd party" functionality.
Mac sells computers, the complete package, "just works out of the box". They are selling the integrated experience when they sell you a Mac.
When they sell you OS X they are selling an OS, like MS does. That's why you don't get iLife.
Does it scare you to not be able to comprehend very simple concepts like these?
>Then how come all the Apple fanboys on Slashdot ddidn't cry foul when Apple started shipping iLife with all their Mac's?
2 reasons:
1. Apple is not a convicted abusive monopolist
2. iLife is a separate suite, not part of the OS, but you get a copy when buying a Mac. it's more like how you now get a remote control with all new Macs and an iSight camera with all new Macs with displays.
>Since this is just my speculating, I'd expect someone will reply with more info.
very few companies still source components for their flagship products from ebay.
well when you don't sell everything at a loss just to infiltrate people's living rooms with your branding the economics is a lot simpler:
the more units you sell, the more money you make.
a business model based on actually making a profit is a strange concept I know, but maybe it's just crazy enough to work!
>#5 Firefly
I had a look at the firefly section and the descriptions for the individual television episodes give away all the twists! they should have spoilers for that stuff.
true, but what's the performance like?
boot camp: is it worth rebooting just to buy something from a company that doesn't care about your custom?
parallels: unbox has some pretty hefty requirements. will parallels play it pefectly?
for me, windows on a mac is about necessity or about making me money. not so I can spend money.