iTunes “is really starting to show its age. Its underpinnings are becoming increasingly creaky thanks to the weight of features, files and expectations being shovelled upon it – and its fast turning into bloatware of almost Redmond-like proportions,” TechRadar writes.
Here are 10 things we think Apple should do for iTunes 9:
1. Clean up the user interface
2. Bar the Genius
3. Better file handling
4. Better handling for multiple libraries
5. Better file tracking
6. Better database handling
7. Better codec support
8. Multi-room for the rest of us
9. A better, cheaper iTunes Store
10. iTunes Pro
Full article, explaining each of the 10 points above, here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “‘spinaltap'” for the heads up.]
About the beef about the remote:
If you have a Mac with a display, you already have a remote. Only recently did Apple stop bundling remotes with MacBooks. The argument about controlling it from other rooms is bogus (what other remote can do that?), not to mention rather week; while you can’t do this with any other traditional device (TV, cable box, TiVO, receiver, VCR), you can control iTunes from another room if you happen to have an iPhone/Touch.
@predrag
Well what if that friends computer also has iTunes? I suppose there is some check within iTunes concerning this correct? I tells then, there will always be a need for a PC then. And here I was thinking I was going to buy a mac to replace my pc.
Looks like I might buy a mac to go along with a pc but not replace.
A good if not the best solution for…
“Better handling for multiple libraries” is….
“iPhoto Library Manager” from Fat Cat Software the best I ever used and for $19.95 it’s worth ever cent!
If “iTunes Pro” ever come into being it should be offered a part of “MobileMe” thus enriching that $99.00 service… I might even pay say $120.00 per year for a feature rich up grade to iTunes!
DID I REALY SAY THAT?
iTunes (and iPhoto) need to be redesigned to seamlessly support multiple accounts on a single computer. I maintain a single iTunes library for my family located in a shared folder, but additions that I make do not appear for them even though we all point to that shared folder.
The story for iPhoto is a little better. There are two workarounds for iPhoto, and I use the one that places my iPhoto library in a disk image. Unfortunately, when that disk image is mounted in one account, it cannot be accessed in any other account.
I say “F**K THIS F**KING F**KER !!!”
Olternaut,
Here’s how it works: your iPod can ONLY be synchonised with ONE instance of iTunes. If you hook it up to another computer, iTunes will warn you with something like: An iPod “[name]” is now connected to this computer, but it is associated with another copy of iTunes. Do you wish to associate it with this copy of iTunes? If you do, iTunes will remove all existing files and replace them with those on this iTunes.
In other words, you can only pair an iPod with exactly ONE iTunes. If you have multiple users on a single computer, you can pair an iPod with only ONE of those users, since each user has their own iTunes library.
There are software tools, both for Windows and Mac, that allow you to ‘rip’ your music from an iPod into an iTunes library. That way, you can import all that stuff back to your computer.
The other way round is fine; you can have as many different iPods as you want paired up with a single iTunes library (a Touch for watching movies/shows, a shuffle for jogging, a Nano for daily train commute, an iPhone…).
Bottom line: Labels demanded that music flow in one single direction — from a computer to an iPod. Not in reverse.
KingMel:
I have absolutely no problems doing exactly what you are doing. My iTunes and iPhoto libraries are in the ‘Shared’ folder. Every user has an alias of these in their own ‘Music’ and ‘Photos’ folders, exactly where their iTunes and iPhoto library folders whould have been locally. I have full permissions to all these users and anyone can add music, playlists, podcasts, purchase songs, etc. The library counts as one single authorisation against the iTunes store and the only limitation is that only one user can have iTunes (or iPhoto) open at any given time. Since I have passwords for all users, when I can’t open my iTunes because my daughter left it open in her profile, I swich to that profile and close the iTunes.
Now if only there were a way to reliably, consistently and accurately sync two iTunes libraries between two different Macs (and occasionally, Windows PCs), that would make it perfect!
iTunes isn’t perfect. Now that Podcasts, TV shows and Movies have been sandwiched in too there is definitely a need for better organization.
I would really like to backup JUST my music, not my podcasts or audiobooks – but how do I do it? The backup menu item only does everything!
Playlist creation could also be improved. My library is only just over 300Gb and sits on a NAS. I left my main library files on my laptop as streaming the album art wireless is just asking for a beachball.
Despite the silly article iTunes could be improved. How about more Genre artwork? It’s easy to think of improvements that could be made.
Mac user since 1988.
the iTunes interface looks like something Gates and Balmer dreamed up for Windows on a bad day.
Tries to be all things to all people and just confuses. Have a Mac interface person redesign it so that it works like Mac apps have always worked.
Thinker: @ ping
“The iPhone or iPod Touch with the Apple Remote app already is exactly what the author apparently missed…” I’m perfectly happy with my iPod 5G (except it has a small hard drive and doesn’t support FLAC). If I were interested in AirTunes, which I’m not, I certainly wouldn’t buy an iPhone or iPod Touch just so I could gain remote control functionality.
It is as near-perfect a solution as one could realistically hope for at the current state of technology.
For some reasons of your own you may not like the offering, but it exists and it is actually an excellent solution where the author falsely claimed there were none.
Thinker: “Get the respective codec plugin for QuickTime and you’re all set. iTunes uses the QuickTime framework and the codecs installed into it.” Apple does not offer a FLAC plugin for QuickTime, and the hacks of which I am aware are rather unreliable and/or impractical. I’d love to learn that I’m wrong about this! So please, provide more info if you can.
So an open-source codec for an exotic open-source format doesn’t work properly? How is that Apple’s problem, especially since only a small minority of potential users has even just heard of these formats?
I would like to see smart playlists become smarter.
For example, I want to be able to set up “rule sets,” to create one playlist.
In other words, (if condition ‘A’ and ‘B’ are met)
and (condition ‘C’ or ‘D’) is met, make playlist.
Another thing I would like to see is something like this:
10 random tracks from artist ‘X’
+
5 random tracks from album ‘Y’
+ all tracks from playlist ‘Z’
how about fix the friggin visualizer in multi monitor setups.
now it turns both monitors balack but only showsup on one of them.
i agree with 8 of the 10 points. don’t like the idea of sending my music list to apple to decide on what to play or what i should buy. also the codec issue is a major one. let people choose what codec they want to use. it’s time to let us use divx, since half the world is using it, along side h.264.
rickw: i agree with 8 of the 10 points. don’t like the idea of sending my music list to apple to decide on what to play or what i should buy.
Then simply decline the invitation to the feature and switch it off as I’ve done. Nobody is forcing it on you.
Not a problem.
rickw: also the codec issue is a major one. let people choose what codec they want to use. it’s time to let us use divx, since half the world is using it, along side h.264.
Apple does let you choose that already. Simply install the respective codec and off you go.
If you can’t even be bothered to do that, it can’t be much of a problem either, can it?
@rickw: just install perian. Very easy.
It seems that most peoples problems with iTunes stems from their lack of user knowledge.
Obviously this issue can be extrapolated across to other software apps / tools and operating systems. It is user ignorance, this is understandable as many people are too busy to find the time and / or maybe the inclination to fully understand the apparatus they are using.
I have never needed to use a spreadsheet extensively, thus I am ignorant about the deeper pros and cons needed to use a spreadsheet to its full extent –
Low and behold … that is why I would not be bitching about problems I surely would encounter with it.
Here’s a thought. If you have an issue with some bit of kit, software, hardware or firmware then spend some time with a search engine and try to edumacate’ yourself.
It only takes a few seconds to open up a search in Google, there is a vast amount of information out there on almost any given subject … Dive in.
–
On a side note, I suspect that “thinker” is trolling, badly, but trolling none the less.
I’ve scanned through the replies, but I didn’t see anyone ask for the ability to have 2 libraries of the same music only in different compressions.
I want to have a library of my full Apple Lossless for playback on my fairly nice Marantz receiver, and another library of 128 compression for use on my iPod.
Does anyone think the same way as me?
Is there a plug-in or extra software that can manage two libraries with the exact same music – names, etc. only with different compression?
@ ping
“It is as near-perfect a solution as one could realistically hope for at the current state of technology.” No, including an inexpensive-to-manufacture remote with each Airport Express would be the best solution for the largest number of consumers. Most of us do not wish (or cannot afford) to spend hundreds of dollars on a remote control that just happens to be an iPhone or iPod Touch. I’d rather get off my flat butt and manually skip to the next song than spend that much on a glorified remote control.
“For some reasons of your own you may not like the offering, but it exists and it is actually an excellent solution where the author falsely claimed there were none.” The author might have been ignorant of the iPhone & iPod Touch solution; I was. Also, “excellent” is a matter of opinion. To a person who cannot afford an iPhone or iPod Touch but could afford a dedicated remote control device for his/her existing Airport Express, the solution you suggest is hardly excellent.
“So an open-source codec for an exotic open-source format doesn’t work properly? How is that Apple’s problem, especially since only a small minority of potential users has even just heard of these formats?” If Google is to be believed, FLAC is much more popular than Apple Lossless. So although it would be to Apple’s advantage to officially support FLAC, it supports its own proprietary lossless format instead. It’s also worth noting that the FLAC development team has publicly offered to assist Apple in adding FLAC support to iTunes.
@ GregoriusM
“I want to have a library of my full Apple Lossless for playback on my fairly nice Marantz receiver, and another library of 128 compression for use on my iPod.” If your iPod is new enough, you should be able to sync your Apple Lossless files directly to it without any sort of conversion and/or duplicate library.
If you cannot sync your Apple Lossless files to your iPod, something called transcoding is probably the most elegant solution for you. Transcoding simply means copying converted files to another location. For example, I’ve seen iTunes transcode Apple Lossless files stored in an iTunes music library to an iPod Shuffle — AAC format at 128 kbps bitrate. I don’t know if there’s a method that will force iTunes to transcode to something besides a Shuffle.
I use a music manager called Foobar2000 to store my songs in FLAC format on my Windows PC. With the correct plugins installed, Foobar2000 transcodes my FLAC files to my iPod 5G in MP3 format.
iTunes seems fine for the most part… Just seems much heavier than early versions…
1) I wish the itunes music store responded to all multi-touch gestures in the same way as safari…
2) perhaps a hi-fi playback mode/interface that is visually based and easily controlled by multi-touch & remote…
Thinker,
At the risk of feeding the troll, I’ll respond again. FLAC is a direct competitor to Apple Lossless. Apple is a business (therefore, trying to make profit) selling its products, among which is Quicktime. One of the codecs inside that Quicktime is Apple’s own Apple Lossless (among other proprietary, as well as standard MPEG codecs). Apple’s business goal is to get the entire world to use Quicktime and its codecs, for content creation, distribution and viewing. The idea is to get everyone to abandon Windows Media, Real Media, OGG/DivX/FLAC and all other exotic stuff and have them use AIC, Apple Lossless or the various MPEG flavours.
Which competitive business would actually try to stun its own product growth by developing a solution for a competing product? It simply makes absolutely no sense! Is Windows Media Player (on Windows) capable of playing AIC or Apple Lossless? Or DivX? This kind of request is just naive and ignorant. If competitor wants to compete with Apple’s Quicktime, they’ll have to, well, compete. They will need to develop software solutions that would properly support their product. Apple is even allowing everybody to build plug-ins for QuickTime! They don’t have to; it’s their software, and plug-ins would take the market share away from Apple’s proprietary codecs, yet they do. So, OGG/FLAC/DivX folks, go ahead and compete! Door is wide open.
@ Predrag
As reported by Xiph’s QuickTime project, “Unfortunately, iTunes support for QuickTime formats and extension mechanisms seems to be very selective – it is not even clear what exactly is supported as there is no single page of documentation about it.” In other words, iTunes does NOT automatically support every codec supported by QuickTime.
You make good arguments regarding Apple’s business strategy, plus I’m sure that Apple is holding Apple Lossless in reserve for the possibility of adding lossless quality audio tracks to the iTunes Store.
Apple obviously pays royalties to support codecs like MP3 in iTunes. But FLAC is a royalty-free codec. FLAC is very well established among audiophiles, whereas Apple Lossless is less well established. Unless Apple is afraid that iTunes is not the best audio/video manager available today, adding support for any given codec will increase the number of iTunes users.
“Your missing the point.”
Which part of the body is “missing the point”?
Illiterate? Write for free help.
Not exactly an elegant solution, but you could always use Senuti to transfer your music from your iPod to your Mac. I’m not sure if it works for iPhones or the Touch, though.