iTunes is pathetic...

Message

#1 Post by **underclocker** » Sun Jan 27, 2008 9:18 am

I just updated my iTunes installation to version 7.6. In general, iTunes is the slowest, most bloated and least user friendly software that I use, but installing version 7.6 garnered special recognition. It took longer to install than Microsoft Office!

At least Apple crafted a reason to upgrade to a fast, dual CPU with loads of memory. What crap.

mattbiernat · #2 Post by **mattbiernat** » Sun Jan 27, 2008 9:46 am

underclocker wrote: In general, iTunes is the slowest, most bloated and least user friendly software that I use

iTunes is slow and bloated but I would say it is one of the most user friendly music organizers. For example I've been using WMP for so long and I still can't get to completely organize my playlists the way i want them to be organized. I do it in iTunes in 5 minutes. And take a look how many people use iTunes versus WMP to organize their music.... i don't have have iTunes nor quicktime on my system anymore because they were designed to crap all over your windows. Which makes sense because then you will be tempted to get a Mac.

SafeHarbor · #3 Post by **SafeHarbor** » Sun Jan 27, 2008 2:43 pm

Yes, it's slow to install. I'm impressed, though, at how nice purchased TV shows ("Sarah Connor" Terminator) look inside the viewer now. It looks better than the first viewing from Dish Network. It was also a 550 MB download over DSL.

I have to give them a thumbs up there.

Lamar

Trekk69 · #4 Post by **Trekk69** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:12 am

I never used itunes, maybe I'm just old school, but I still prefer good old 'Winamp lite'
Just have it running in the background for all my music needs, simple and easy

RasmusP · #5 Post by **RasmusP** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 7:27 am

My favorite is J. River Media Center or Jukebox. It is way better than iTunes, and it syncs to iPods too. I tried iTunes a while back and it simply used to many system resources.
Anybody look for a good media player should check out J. River Media Center (IMO).

mattbiernat · #6 Post by **mattbiernat** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 8:19 am

anybody tried amarok on windows yet? i wonder how would that compare to iTunes and WMP9.

dsigma6 · #7 Post by **dsigma6** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 8:25 am

I've always avoided Apple/iTunes like the plague...I swore to never put Apple software (well, outside of the occasional Quicktime install) on my ThinkPad...

Well, I gave in at some point and bought an iPhone. I hacked it when I got it, put some music on...and will never plug it back in again. God knows it'll overwrite everything that's current with the old stuff on the computer.

#8 Post by **KristianJ** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 8:09 pm

Trekk69 wrote:I never used itunes, maybe I'm just old school, but I still prefer good old 'Winamp lite'
Just have it running in the background for all my music needs, simple and easy

Ditto. I have bought some music through iTunes, but in terms of playback of my entire collection I find it more than easy enough to stick with Winamp

BigWarpGuy · #9 Post by **BigWarpGuy** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 8:13 pm

Have you tried eMusic? I think the url is http://www.emusic.com I am trying it on my eCS pc since one does not have to download the software (this is good since they do not have one for eComStation).

Stargate199 · #10 Post by **Stargate199** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 9:10 pm

Winamp all the way baby! I have used iTunes, rhapsody, and WMP. iTunes gets the lowest rank because it just plain out terrible on windows (but excellent on OS X for which it was DESIGNED FOR!) Rhapsody is next. I like the interface, and has good online music collection to download if you have an account. The downside is that is uses a lot of memory and tries to log in each time you open it. WMP is next. Uses a lot less memory and has that nice feature of the controls on the task bar when the program is minimized (nice if you don't have media controls on you keyboard). Winamp is #1 for me. Fast, easy to use, easy to set up, and uses the least amount of system resources. Anyone have some good plug in recommendations that i should try?

ulrich.von.lich · #11 Post by **ulrich.von.lich** » Tue Jan 29, 2008 8:51 am

Some old versions of iTunes are excellent. I still have the version 4.6 that came with my iPod 4G. It had the instant search feature which WMP10 didn't have at that time it wasn't bloated at all. It's a pity that many good things have to come to an end. I also stopped using Ad aware after they had no longer provided updates for the old version.

Winamp is really excellent. I hope I'll still be able to say it in a couple of years.

t20user · #12 Post by **t20user** » Tue Jan 29, 2008 10:09 am

ulrich.von.lich wrote:
Winamp is really excellent. I hope I'll still be able to say it in a couple of years.

I have been using Winamp for 10 years now and never have I been tempted to use anything else. The nice thing about it is it NEVER changes. I stopped upgrading at 2.91. I think that is the best version, but even if it is not I can always go to oldversion.com and find one that is.

skitty4gzus · #13 Post by **skitty4gzus** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 11:34 pm

i couldn't DISAGREE more. I love iTunes, it works great for everything i do with music. It is the best music library i have ever used. It is alot easier to use over Windows media player. I only have a couple knocks against it
-sound check feature is almost useless, software does a poor job at leveling output volume
-no way in the software to convert apple lossless files to mp3 or any other widely accepted format
-no way to add fade outs to a song during live playback to switch songs

qviri · #14 Post by **qviri** » Fri Feb 01, 2008 12:16 am

I find it pretty incredible this thread has 12 replies and not one mention of foobar2000.

beeblebrox · #15 Post by **beeblebrox** » Sun Feb 03, 2008 5:40 pm

In the past 10 years I have constantly been trying out new software for my music collection (now 2000 CDs ripped by myself).

Unfortunately iTunes is still the best to organize your music in an efficient way.
I tried all kinds of winamps, foobars and mediamonkeys. But those are computer programs, not intended to be a jukebox in the living room.

Apple TV is complete crap (you can not turn that darned thing off), winamp has no useful skins, most of them are nice to look at but crap to work with.

Helium seemed to be the best so far, but it could not really handle my iTunes ripped collection without constantly fixing the ID 2.3/2.4 tags.

I had the Sonos box for a week. I just loved it, but the screen is so outdated and that whole thing slows dramtatically down if you have more than a few hundred CDs.

WMP11 is beyond my understanding. I have given up on their way to organize music. It is a mystery.

So, I am back to iTunes 7.5. Coverflow is simply the best way to browse you collection and the Genre/Interpret/CD organization is the most user friendly. And itunes is the only software that can read the covers embedded in the files.

I wish, Apple would have an iTunes Light version for folks who only use music. Apple Quicktime video has a performance of a frozen toad on drugs. I can't believe it.

I wished there were folks at Amarok who could create a speed-up iTunes version with many more features for categories of music and e.g. have two separate libraries for classical and modern music.

mattbiernat · #16 Post by **mattbiernat** » Sun Feb 03, 2008 6:58 pm

I feel just the same way you do about winamp, foobars, etc... they just don't do the in organizing my music library. iTunes has been the best for the ~4gb of my mp3s. But after editing tags is done I simply go back to WMP9 and find it decent enough to play my music and radio.

snessiram · #17 Post by **snessiram** » Tue Feb 05, 2008 7:48 am

I've used a lot of music players too.

Ever since I bought my first mp3-player (a Creative Zen Touch) I started tagging all my music as it was so handy on the mp3-player. Offcourse, the same became true on the pc and I've wanted a music player with media library support since.

I've used Windows Media Player 10, Winamp, MediaMonkey, MusikCube and a few others I don't directly remember, all with it's advantages and disadvantages. If I had to choose between the above I think musikcube and winamp are the ones making the list.

When I switched to a mac, my music library switched with me to itunes which is nice, but I don't have a "wow-this-is-way-better-then-everything-I-used-before" feeling like many people seem to have.

There are some features I like, like the sharing library so I can access it from anywhere in the house with my thinkpad. Also the smart playlists are nice though I don't use it that often. For some, coverflow might be fun, I however couldn't care less.

Then there are some things I don't like. First of all the fact that there's no way to synchronize an itunes library between a mac and a pc. Then there's the library-management, handy that it automatically sorts the files into folders but I can't tell it how I want it to do that. Next up is the fact that there's no queue, so where in Winamp I would push q (I believe) to add a file to the queue to play next, I can't do the same in itunes.

As I currently own an Archos XS202 mp3-player (like the on-the-go playlist support much more then the one on the ipods and as I hardly use something else...), syncing with iTunes was a pain. I now have a script for itunes on mac to synchronize a playlist with a folder and thus allowing me to sync the songs I want with my Archos (which mounts as an external harddrive), but it could be nicer. And for people owning an ipod it probably is.

So iTunes is ok (at least on mac), but sure as hell isn't a miracle to me.

Website · #18 Post by **tfflivemb2** » Tue Feb 05, 2008 9:11 am

Aside from being in alphabetical order, I don't organize my music. I like to set it on random in WinAmp. I too have been using WinAmp for close to 10 years...I don't even bother with other programs, because it just what I need it to do...

cqvenus · #19 Post by **cqvenus** » Tue Feb 05, 2008 2:31 pm

i know my PC is an older POS model (actually, it's a nonamer, built by my FIL) but itunes always crashes my PC. i hate it. and it thinks it's smarter than i am w/ all its auto-thisandthat.

winamp is the man. i use realplayer on my PC and winamp on my TP 600E.

skitty4gzus · #20 Post by **skitty4gzus** » Tue Feb 05, 2008 7:09 pm

ive never had iTunes crash any of my computers over the last few years ive used the software. and, CQVENUS are you saying or implying that realplayer is better? in my opinion realplayer and WMP are completely useless. Bill Gates himself may be the only person who knows how to use WMP and both WMP and realplayer have horrible audio playback quality. for a free software iTunes is pretty handy.

mattbiernat · #21 Post by **mattbiernat** » Tue Feb 05, 2008 8:12 pm

i had iTunes and quicktime crash my PC several times as well.

cqvenus · #22 Post by **cqvenus** » Wed Feb 06, 2008 7:55 am

i agree with you there, WMP is horrible.

i like winamp best. then realplayer.

so, i guess i AM saying realplayer is better than itunes. at least in my own experience.

beeblebrox · #23 Post by **beeblebrox** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 9:35 am

snessiram wrote:I've used a lot of music players too.

Ever since I bought my first mp3-player (a Creative Zen Touch) I started tagging all my music as it was so handy on the mp3-player. Offcourse, the same became true on the pc and I've wanted a music player with media library support since.

I've used Windows Media Player 10, Winamp, MediaMonkey, MusikCube and a few others I don't directly remember, all with it's advantages and disadvantages. If I had to choose between the above I think musikcube and winamp are the ones making the list.

When I switched to a mac, my music library switched with me to itunes which is nice, but I don't have a "wow-this-is-way-better-then-everything-I-used-before" feeling like many people seem to have.

There are some features I like, like the sharing library so I can access it from anywhere in the house with my thinkpad. Also the smart playlists are nice though I don't use it that often. For some, coverflow might be fun, I however couldn't care less.

Then there are some things I don't like. First of all the fact that there's no way to synchronize an itunes library between a mac and a pc. Then there's the library-management, handy that it automatically sorts the files into folders but I can't tell it how I want it to do that. Next up is the fact that there's no queue, so where in Winamp I would push q (I believe) to add a file to the queue to play next, I can't do the same in itunes.

As I currently own an Archos XS202 mp3-player (like the on-the-go playlist support much more then the one on the ipods and as I hardly use something else...), syncing with iTunes was a pain. I now have a script for itunes on mac to synchronize a playlist with a folder and thus allowing me to sync the songs I want with my Archos (which mounts as an external harddrive), but it could be nicer. And for people owning an ipod it probably is.

So iTunes is ok (at least on mac), but sure as hell isn't a miracle to me.

You should evaluate Silverjuke, which is by far the best jukebox software. It is pretty much like the old Wurlitzer Jukebox (a lot of great skins) at your old salon bar.

lightweight · #24 Post by **lightweight** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 4:16 am

I recently started to use iTunes again for the first time in years after an impulse iPhone purchase. Previous to this I was an Amarok (itunes like) or Audacious (winamp like) user, and back in the day I procrastinated moving off Windows because of foobar2000 and Exact Audio Copy, which still rule. True there is much to dislike about iTunes. My complaints are:

1) It's a pig.

2) The DB and logic can be dumb. For example, artists labelled First Name Last Name (eg Bruce Springsteen) generally yields good results with a cover search. Changing these tags to Last Name, First Name (eg Springsteen, Bruce) does not yield covers for most artists. This is the same when you label using, say, Rolling Stones, The instead of The Rolling Stones.

3) Why does iTunes lock during syncs and such? Weak sauce.

4) No native support for FLAC and Monkey's lossless? Weak sauce.

5) Linux/BSD release will likely never come.

Still, iTunes is pretty cool and stable on a modern box, and there's still old releases floating around. Also, music shares are killer, especially in an office. I find myself dedicating whole days to listening to my coworker's shares, and this has led to an experience I've not quite had with other players. Simply, people who do not care about directory structure or networked shares like using iTunes, and in doing so, enjoy and (legally) share their music with everyone more easily.

mattbiernat · #25 Post by **mattbiernat** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 5:24 am

lightweight wrote:Simply, people who do not care about directory structure

i believe there is an option to prevent iTunes from organizing your music folders.

Superego · #26 Post by **Superego** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 8:39 am

mattbiernat wrote:
lightweight wrote:Simply, people who do not care about directory structure
i believe there is an option to prevent iTunes from organizing your music folders.

Yes there is. Sorry I'm Linux right now so I can't check it exactly, but I think it's something like uncheck "Keep folder organized". I use itunes but I keep my folders organized in a certain way for my non-ipod mp3 player.

lightweight · #27 Post by **lightweight** » Mon Mar 03, 2008 2:45 am

Superego wrote:
mattbiernat wrote: i believe there is an option to prevent iTunes from organizing your music folders.
Yes there is. Sorry I'm Linux right now so I can't check it exactly, but I think it's something like uncheck "Keep folder organized". I use itunes but I keep my folders organized in a certain way for my non-ipod mp3 player.

For clarity, I mean those who aren't past parent and sub directories or keeping mp3s in say their documents, azuerus downloads folder, or just select every subdirectory under their home account. When using a Winamp-like player or browsing someone's networked (say smb or nfs) share, it's way easier if they use something like /Artist - Album/Songs or /Artist/Album/Songs, but some folks use completely non-sensical directories/folders and instead depend on tags, making finding good tunage usually not worth the time. But plenty of folks who don't care about directory structure listen to great, great music, and many of them use iTunes to manage their unwieldy collections. It's the everyman's music player, and because they spent some time on exporting shares/libraries, Apple built a killer feature.

tylerwylie · #28 Post by **tylerwylie** » Mon Mar 03, 2008 3:31 am

Apple making subpar software? No way!

dietpepsiaddict · #29 Post by **dietpepsiaddict** » Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:04 pm

Am I the only one here who does not have an ipod!!!!!

At the moment I have a Creative Zen 2gb, I love it

The music quality is greatand it plays videos holds pics, and obviosely plays music. And it is technically smaller than an ipod nano! It is only 80-100$ at Wal- mart.

Anyway...about itunes. I rip all my music from cds. Its mostly Rush and the Beatles. Im a HUGE Rush fan! I went to see them on thier snakes and arrows tour in september in Toronto at the Air Canada Centre. ( the best day of 2007 in my eyes.)

tylerwylie · #30 Post by **tylerwylie** » Mon Mar 03, 2008 3:10 pm

dietpepsiaddict wrote:Am I the only one here who does not have an ipod!!!!!

At the moment I have a Creative Zen 2gb, I love it
The music quality is greatand it plays videos holds pics, and obviosely plays music. And it is technically smaller than an ipod nano! It is only 80-100$ at Wal- mart.

Anyway...about itunes. I rip all my music from cds. Its mostly Rush and the Beatles. Im a HUGE Rush fan! I went to see them on thier snakes and arrows tour in september in Toronto at the Air Canada Centre. ( the best day of 2007 in my eyes.)

I refuse to purchase Apple products, so no iPod here

iTunes is pathetic...

iTunes is pathetic...

Re: iTunes is pathetic...

eMusic?

itunes is still the best, infortunately

Re: itunes is still the best, infortunately

itunes stinks

no not WMP

Who is online