iTunes playlist generation for Albums

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

John Holt - 22 Jul 2008 02:16 GMT

I would like to to have something like a smart playlist, except that I
would like it based upon albums instead of tracks. I can populate a
list for a random selection of tracks, but most of my music is in
albums where it makes more sense (to me) to play the album in the
correct order.

I can get a rotation with Smart Playlists by telling Smart Playlists to
select by album and only include tracks that have not been played for a
month.

I have not seen anything in either the Automator or the Apple Script
interfaces for iTunes that would let me enumerate albums and randomly
select some of hem.

What I am left with is the approach of exporting an XML version of the
library, and writing a program to: 1) perform the selection and write
an XML file; and 2) cause iTunes to import the XML as a playlist.

Does anyone know of a more enlightened approach?

Signature

John Holt

Reply to this Message

Sander Tekelenburg - 23 Jul 2008 06:18 GMT

> I would like to to have something like a smart playlist, except that I
> would like it based upon albums instead of tracks. [...]

Not entirely sure what you are loooking for. If you mean you want iTunes
to randomize playback, but keep albums together, you can set that in its
prefs: Playback->Shuffle:"Albums".

Signature

Sander Tekelenburg, <http://www.euronet.nl/~tekelenb/>

Mac user: "Macs only have 40 viruses, tops!"
PC user: "SEE! Not even the virus writers support Macs!"

Reply to this Message

John Holt - 26 Jul 2008 15:17 GMT

>> I would like to to have something like a smart playlist, except that I
>> would like it based upon albums instead of tracks. [...]
>
> Not entirely sure what you are loooking for. If you mean you want iTunes
> to randomize playback, but keep albums together, you can set that in its
> prefs: Playback->Shuffle:"Albums".

I would like the feature or function to randomly select an album, and
then play each track of the album in the correct order.

The preference Playback->Shuffle->"Albums" increases the likelihood of
the next track being from the same album, but does not make that happen
nor does it play the tracks in the order.

Order is a very important aspect in Opera or a Symphony, and even in
some Rock albums.

Thank-you for the reply.

Signature

John Holt

Reply to this Message

Sander Tekelenburg - 26 Jul 2008 23:28 GMT

[...]

> > prefs: Playback->Shuffle:"Albums".
>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> The preference Playback->Shuffle->"Albums" increases the likelihood of
> the next track being from the same album, but does not make that happen

Crap. You're right. Despite that setting it still now and then jumps to
a completely different album, and doesn't always start with another
album's first track. (Tested with iTunes 7.7 under 10.4.11.)

I really thought this worked, or used to work. Perhaps it's yet another
new bug in iTunes 7.7. (iTunes 7.7 royally screws up non-ascii id3
content.)

Perhaps you should submit a bug report to Apple.

[...]

> Order is a very important aspect in Opera or a Symphony, and even in
> some Rock albums.

Yup.

Signature

Sander Tekelenburg, <http://www.euronet.nl/~tekelenb/>

Mac user: "Macs only have 40 viruses, tops!"
PC user: "SEE! Not even the virus writers support Macs!"

Reply to this Message

AES - 27 Jul 2008 02:03 GMT

> > I would like the feature or function to randomly select an album, and
> > then play each track of the album in the correct order.
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> new bug in iTunes 7.7. (iTunes 7.7 royally screws up non-ascii id3
> content.)

I wonder what would have happened if Apple had created iTunes as
primarily a superb, highly flexible, Finder-friendly, multi-media
_cataloging_ application (which is what it actually is, in fact,
underneath all its other functions, except it's very difficult to use it
as such),

and programmed the iPods as flexible, directly-loadable-from-the-
Finder, user-controllable media players, basically independent of iTunes.

and then left it to third parties to create a number of _different and
competing_ third-party apps that would intermediate between the iTunes
catalog and the iPod players, in the way that iTunes does now (with
Apple of course also creating their own app).

These intermediary apps would let users specify how they wanted to
organize their playlists, record their evaluations, download items from
different web sites, keep records of what they've played, and so on --
all the functions, along with mandatory synching, that now have to be
built into both iTunes and iPods, making their interfaces complicated,
limiting their flexibility, and limiting the ways they can be otherwise
used.

I'd suggest that this modular approach could have made the media
cataloging functions of iTunes much more easily available and useful
for many other users and purposes besides just "tunes"-oriented types;
made iPods more usable in flexible ways for many other purposes besides
just its existing user base; and these competing third-party
"intermediary" apps, drawing on user feedback and the natural genius of
free-lance programmers, could have given all different types of iPod
users the exact features, like user controlled shuffle types or
whatever, that they liked best.

An opportunity missed, maybe?

Reply to this Message

sbt - 27 Jul 2008 04:21 GMT

> I wonder what would have happened if Apple had created iTunes as
> primarily a superb, highly flexible, Finder-friendly, multi-media
> _cataloging_ application (which is what it actually is, in fact,
> underneath all its other functions, except it's very difficult to use it
> as such),

Minor nit, but Apple didn't "create" iTunes. They acquired SoundJam MP
from Casady & Greene and made some changes (removing "skin" support and
adding CD burning, for example). iTunes was released about 9 or 10
months before the iPod. I still have the Rio MP3 player that I used
with it before the iPod came out.

Signature

Spenser

Reply to this Message

Davoud - 27 Jul 2008 05:44 GMT

AES:

> I wonder what would have happened if Apple had created iTunes as
> primarily a superb, highly flexible, Finder-friendly, multi-media
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> and programmed the iPods as flexible, directly-loadable-from-the-
> Finder, user-controllable media players, basically independent of iTunes....

But it's the smooth integration of iTunes and iPod that is a huge
factor in the phenomenal success of iPod/iPhone. As for user control, I
am in direct control of my iPod. I buy music for my iPods from a number
of on-line sources and, of course, I put many of my CD's on my iPods.
iTunes is a computer program. The Finder is a computer program. In
theory, it wouldn't make any difference to me what computer program
interfaced with the iPod, but a purpose-built application like iTunes
(adapted from the superb "SoundJam MP," by the way) seems like the
right idea to me -- and to millions of others. (About a million people
in just three days when the iPhone 3G was released, for example.)
Consumers vote with their wallets and iTunes has won by a landslide.

Don't forget the single-source factor that so many have criticized in
Macintosh computers and the Mac OS, but that has made the Mac OS the
world's pre-eminent computing platform for those seeking the best
computer user experience extant. It is that same single-source factor
that has made the iPod the world's pre-eminent portable music player,
full stop. You can't separate the phenomenal success of iPod/iPhone
from the iTunes integration.

> ...An opportunity missed, maybe?

The only opportunity at risk would have been the opportunity for
iTunes/iPod to become one of the most successful consumer electronics
products in history, one that completely destroyed the "competition" in
spite of being several years late to the party. The iPhone came to a
much larger party many years late. It will not destroy the competition,
(not all of it, anyway) but it immediately became the world standard;
*the* phone to imitate. It has also put the fear of Apple in the mobile
phone world, including RIM, which has no reason to fear the iPhone, at
least not yet. If RIM weren't paranoid about the iPhone they would have
ignored it; instead they have made a number of statements comparing
their sales to those of the iPhone.

I believe it's still true that nothing succeeds like success. An
executive from a market research firms told me that one of the things
about Apple that stuns and befuddles the competition is that when Apple
releases a product like the iPhone it makes news -- often front-page
news -- around the world, in places you might never imagine. Nokia is
huge, makes great phones. But they don't get as much ink in the
Mongolian press as Apple does, e.g. Ditto Dell.

What Apple did could be compared to a company that had never built
anything except, say, home appliances, suddenly introducing an
automobile that, within a short period, outsold all other automobile
brands combined. That sort of thing hasn't happened often in the
history of industry.

Davoud

Disclaimer: Warning! Demographic outlier! I'm 64, my wife is in her
50's. We have a one 3G iPhone, one first gen. iPhone, seven or eight
iPods, and a dozen or so Macs.

Signature

Don't re-elect the past. Vote for the future: Obama in 2008!

usenet *at* davidillig dawt com

Reply to this Message

Joe Kappus - 27 Jul 2008 08:33 GMT

> AES:
>
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> direct control of my iPod. I buy music for my iPods from a number of
> on-line sources and, of course, I put many of my CD's on my iPods.

Apple has direct control, under normal situations you do not have a
choice in what program to use with the ipod.

Consider this:

1. When the ipod was introduced, the firmware updater was kept seperate
from itunes, now it is built in. Hence, under normal circumstances,
without some knowledge of the command line itunes is required to keep the
ipod up to date.

2. In recent years, Apple packages a "software updater" that borders on
malware, installing unrelated applications such as Safari to the unwary
user.

3. 3rd party support has been lacking for the ipod namely because Apple
does not release specification on how its database works. Most of the 3rd
party applications you see for syncing an ipod/iphone have been reverse-
engineered. No "official" program is distributed with Linux. Consider
this from a company that wants to appear as if it's embracing opensource
because it's operating system just happens to have parts of UNIX in it.

> iTunes is a computer program. The Finder is a computer program. In
> theory, it wouldn't make any difference to me what computer program
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> three days when the iPhone 3G was released, for example.) Consumers vote
> with their wallets and iTunes has won by a landslide.

You didn't get a vote with the iPod, once you bought it you were screwed
into using iTunes.

> Don't forget the single-source factor that so many have criticized in
> Macintosh computers and the Mac OS, but that has made the Mac OS the
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> full stop. You can't separate the phenomenal success of iPod/iPhone from
> the iTunes integration.

The iPod became king because of the hardware, had nothing to do with the
software aspect. It truly was an innovation, massively increasing
storage space for music and providing a simple to use interface. It sold
itself, I didn't hear about it through the media, my friend owned a 2g
ipod and that was the first in my school. Most people didn't know what
it was, those who did know the mp3 market, knew it held 10 to 20 times
more music in a smaller space. Within only a couple years the 4g was out
and soon the mini and sales soared.

The single-source bullshit had nothing to do with the ipod selling, they
didn't take a commanding lead in the market until they supported USB on
the 3g (as opposed to just firewire which many PC's did not include and
required a pricy adapter), and forget it... if they didn't support
Windows, nobody would have bought it.

>> ...An opportunity missed, maybe?
>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> ignored it; instead they have made a number of statements comparing
> their sales to those of the iPhone.

I doubt RIM are concerned about the iPhone. In fact, other then LG, I
have not seen another phone company try to imitate the iPhone. I'm
suprised there has not been a bitter legal battle over why Apple was
allowed to release a network locked phone when the law states that a
consumer has the right to unlock the phone. It's not illegal to sell a
locked phone, but to not offer to unlock it out of contract is. Other
countries have contested this and won, but the US has a special place for
Apple. It baffles me as to why Apple seems immune to antitrust cases
when their marketing is far more agressive then Microsoft's ever was. Oh
lets not forget the agreement Apple Computer had with Apple Records.

The iPhone is not a device of innovation, it packed technology in it that
has been around, it was designed to be appealing to the eye and not to be
the most usable device. I figure Apple probably released it as an excuse
to release a "3G model" soon after and make money off the fools who
bought both.

> I believe it's still true that nothing succeeds like success. An
> executive from a market research firms told me that one of the things
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> huge, makes great phones. But they don't get as much ink in the
> Mongolian press as Apple does, e.g. Ditto Dell.

Did you happen to realize that Steve Jobs is THE commanding shareowner of
Walt Disney Company (at 7%, Eisner only has 1.7%), one of the largest
media outlets in the world? Of course it makes news because THEY OWN THE
NEWS. I don't think that executive heard the news about Walt Disney's
Pixar acquisition back in 2006.

> What Apple did could be compared to a company that had never built
> anything except, say, home appliances, suddenly introducing an
> automobile that, within a short period, outsold all other automobile
> brands combined. That sort of thing hasn't happened often in the history
> of industry.

Did you also forget Microsoft, they far outsell Apple on the software
front. To the point they were declared a monopoly. Hrm.. but I don't
seem to remember Microsoft ever forcing users to schedule appointments
for technical support, I also don't remember them locking their devices
to certain networks. Oh yeah, and there's quite a bit of software
developed for windows mobile products, whereas Apple greatly restricts
developers heavily from creating content for the iPhone. Seems like the
device you get from Apple does what Apple wants, and not what the
consumer wants.

Not to say I'm a fan of either company, but to pick the lesser of the two
evils, I'd pick Microsoft. Preferably though I'd like to see more open
platforms like Google's Android out on the market, and I think we will.

> Davoud
>
> Disclaimer: Warning! Demographic outlier! I'm 64, my wife is in her
> 50's. We have a one 3G iPhone, one first gen. iPhone, seven or eight
> iPods, and a dozen or so Macs.

I've owned about 6 or so ipods, I buy them because they have provided
fairly high quality components up until the current batch, and because
they provide a large amount of capacity. My last Apple computer was a
Macintosh 512k.

I do not intend to ever buy an Apple computer with the way they have been
marketing their products, my laptop is a durable Thinkpad that should it
ever break (it hasn't), I know I won't have to make an appointment to get
some f**king warranty service that I payed for and then have them tell me
"oh well that's actually a service so we need to charge $100 to replace
your defective part"

All of my computers run Linux and my ipods run rockbox. My cellphone is
a Sony Ericsson W810i, probably dated a bit for some of you, but hell
it's well built and does way more then the original iphone did (I can
live without youtube on my phone, after all I can just use bluetooth to
tether it to my laptop if i'm in the middle of nowhere). I'm just
waiting for the proper successor to come out that uses the T-Mobile AWS
network.

And that's where things stand.

Joe

Reply to this Message

nospam - 27 Jul 2008 10:16 GMT

> > AES:
> >
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
> Apple has direct control, under normal situations you do not have a
> choice in what program to use with the ipod.

nonsense. there are a number of alternatives available. and most
people are more than satisfied with itunes anyway.

> Consider this:
>
> 1. When the ipod was introduced, the firmware updater was kept seperate
> from itunes, now it is built in. Hence, under normal circumstances,
> without some knowledge of the command line itunes is required to keep the
> ipod up to date.

and this is a problem, how? if a firmware update is available, itunes
will notify you. prior to that, the updater showed up in software
update. never was the command line necessary.

> 2. In recent years, Apple packages a "software updater" that borders on
> malware, installing unrelated applications such as Safari to the unwary
> user.

nonsense. there was a checkbox to skip installing safari.

> 3. 3rd party support has been lacking for the ipod namely because Apple
> does not release specification on how its database works. Most of the 3rd
> party applications you see for syncing an ipod/iphone have been reverse-
> engineered. No "official" program is distributed with Linux. Consider
> this from a company that wants to appear as if it's embracing opensource
> because it's operating system just happens to have parts of UNIX in it.

the linux market is far too small to bother supporting, and it's not
just apple. there's a lot of software that simply does not exist on
linux, for instance, adobe creative suite.

> > iTunes is a computer program. The Finder is a computer program. In
> > theory, it wouldn't make any difference to me what computer program
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> You didn't get a vote with the iPod, once you bought it you were screwed
> into using iTunes.

once again, there are alternatives, and itunes isn't all that bad (not
perfect but it's certainly usable).

> > Don't forget the single-source factor that so many have criticized in
> > Macintosh computers and the Mac OS, but that has made the Mac OS the
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
> required a pricy adapter), and forget it... if they didn't support
> Windows, nobody would have bought it.

it was a combination of supporting usb and the itunes music store.

> >> ...An opportunity missed, maybe?
> >
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>
> I doubt RIM are concerned about the iPhone.

they are, as well as other carriers. have you seen people line up as
much as a week in advance for blackberries? or nokia phones? other
manufacturers *are* noticing.

> In fact, other then LG, I
> have not seen another phone company try to imitate the iPhone.

samsung instinct attempts to (but not particularly well). there are
others.

> I'm
> suprised there has not been a bitter legal battle over why Apple was
> allowed to release a network locked phone when the law states that a
> consumer has the right to unlock the phone.

cellphones are normally sold with a carrier lock and have a carrier
subsidy. apple is no different. the customer can unlock the phone on
their own if the so choose, and they are exempt from a dmca violation
if they reverse engineer it to do so.

> It's not illegal to sell a
> locked phone,

exactly. and that's why there wasn't a 'bitter legal battle.'

> but to not offer to unlock it out of contract is.

since those who bought iphones (at least those in the usa) signed a
*two* year contract, nobody is yet out of contract.

> Other
> countries have contested this and won, but the US has a special place for
> Apple. It baffles me as to why Apple seems immune to antitrust cases
> when their marketing is far more agressive then Microsoft's ever was.

there's nothing antitrust about it and what microsoft did was entirely
different. and as mentioned before, cellphones are normally sold
locked and with a carrier subsidy.

> Oh
> lets not forget the agreement Apple Computer had with Apple Records.

settled quite a while ago.

> The iPhone is not a device of innovation, it packed technology in it that
> has been around, it was designed to be appealing to the eye and not to be
> the most usable device. I figure Apple probably released it as an excuse
> to release a "3G model" soon after and make money off the fools who
> bought both.

actually it is an innovative device, combining a number of existing
technologies with some new ones into a very easy to use device.

> > I believe it's still true that nothing succeeds like success. An
> > executive from a market research firms told me that one of the things
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> NEWS. I don't think that executive heard the news about Walt Disney's
> Pixar acquisition back in 2006.

apple owns the news? now that's a new one. i thought it was the
liberals. or was it the conservatives?

> > What Apple did could be compared to a company that had never built
> > anything except, say, home appliances, suddenly introducing an
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> Did you also forget Microsoft, they far outsell Apple on the software
> front. To the point they were declared a monopoly.

being a monopoly is not illegal. *abuse* of being a monopoly (which is
what microsoft did), is illegal.

> Hrm.. but I don't
> seem to remember Microsoft ever forcing users to schedule appointments
> for technical support,

you'd prefer to stand in line? most people prefer to make an
appointment and minimize the time spent.

> I also don't remember them locking their devices
> to certain networks.

microsoft does not make cellphones. supposedly they're working on a
zunephone, and i can guarantee you that it will be carrier locked and
subsidized, just like every other cellphone.

> Oh yeah, and there's quite a bit of software
> developed for windows mobile products, whereas Apple greatly restricts
> developers heavily from creating content for the iPhone. Seems like the
> device you get from Apple does what Apple wants, and not what the
> consumer wants.

windows mobile has been around for a long time and the iphone is new.
obviously, there will be more winmo software. and yes, there are
restrictions on what can be sold at the iphone apps store, but it's
mostly porn and hacking type apps. furthermore, anyone who wants to
run that stuff still can, either by jailbreaking or by writing their
own software (they just can't sell it thru apple).

> Not to say I'm a fan of either company, but to pick the lesser of the two
> evils, I'd pick Microsoft. Preferably though I'd like to see more open
> platforms like Google's Android out on the market, and I think we will.

it remains to be seen what android does.

> > Davoud
> >
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> they provide a large amount of capacity. My last Apple computer was a
> Macintosh 512k.

a lot has changed since 1985.

> I do not intend to ever buy an Apple computer with the way they have been
> marketing their products, my laptop is a durable Thinkpad that should it
> ever break (it hasn't), I know I won't have to make an appointment to get
> some f**king warranty service that I payed for and then have them tell me
> "oh well that's actually a service so we need to charge $100 to replace
> your defective part"

no appointment is necessary. you don't even need to leave the house.
just call applecare, they'll dispatch a box, you ship the laptop back
to apple (all prepaid) where it's fixed and shipped back, usually
within 2-3 days. or make an appointment, drive to the applestore,
where it might even be fixed in the same day, and sometimes in just
minutes (e.g., swap out a defective airport card).

> All of my computers run Linux and my ipods run rockbox. My cellphone is
> a Sony Ericsson W810i, probably dated a bit for some of you, but hell
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> waiting for the proper successor to come out that uses the T-Mobile AWS
> network.

actually it does quite a bit less than the iphone but if it suits your
needs that's all that matters.

> And that's where things stand.

not really.

Reply to this Message

Davoud - 27 Jul 2008 15:47 GMT

Joe Kappus:

> Apple has direct control, under normal situations you do not have a
> choice in what program to use with the ipod.

You miss the point. It's the _total_ user experience that counts,
that's where Apple excels, and iTunes is an integral part of the user
experience that has made the iPod preeminent.

Between spelling errors, incomplete sentences and non sequiturs, that
is a bit hard to follow. But you seem to be suggesting that one has to
know the Unix shell in order to update iPod firmware. Sigh. Another
person writing about Mac hardware and software who knows nothing about
it. What you suggest is patently untrue and ridiculous.

> 2. In recent years, Apple packages a "software updater" that borders on
> malware, installing unrelated applications such as Safari to the unwary
> user.

No, the updater didn't install "unrelated applications such as Safari."
The Apple Windows s'ware updater installed Safari. Apple stopped the
practice after users complained. (Because their web browser no longer
fit with their low expectations!?) That was no doubt a misstep on
Apple's part. Maybe they thought that, on a platform on which any
software can be installed without the owner's permission, no one would
care about one more piece.

Apple doesn't publish the trade secrets that help to make it
profitable.? So what?

> You didn't get a vote with the iPod, once you bought it you were screwed
> into using iTunes.

"Screwed?" I don't imagine you have used iPod/iTunes, either. Zune user
perhaps? (Comes in brown, which the iPod doesn't.) That's like saying
that BMW buyers are "screwed" into using BMW engines.

> The iPod became king because of the hardware, had nothing to do with the
> software aspect.

Sigh. Another person writing about Mac hardware and software who knows
nothing about it. You couldn't be more wrong. It's the integration of
iTunes/iPod that has led to the overwhelming success of iPod.

> It's not illegal to sell a
> locked phone, but to not offer to unlock it out of contract is. Other
> countries have contested this and won, but the US has a special place for
> Apple.

Sosumi. (Bet you don't get that!) In fact, it's the cell carriers that
have a special relationship with U.S. lawmakers. They do, indeed, get
away with stuff they couldn't pull off in Europe.

> The iPhone is not a device of innovation, it packed technology in it that
> has been around, it was designed to be appealing to the eye and not to be
> the most usable device.

You *really* need to work on sentence structure. The iPhone brings only
one new thing in terms of what it can do: Visual Voice Mail. But it
innovates in its ease-of-use and and software that is unmatched for
elegance in the smartphone industry. Look at the number of people who
have smartphones that can do all that the iPhone can do (and possibly
more), but who don't use those "features" because they can't figure out
how to reach them through deep layers of pushing tiny, poorly labeled
buttons.

<irrelevant material expunged>

> I've owned about 6 or so ipods, I buy them because they have provided
> fairly high quality components up until the current batch, and because
> they provide a large amount of capacity. My last Apple computer was a
> Macintosh 512k.

I knew before I read that that you didn't know squat about Macintosh
computers.

(You *really* *really* need to work on sentence structure.) Sigh.
Another person writing about Mac hardware and software who knows
nothing about it. More made-up nonsense. AppleCare covers hardware and
software failures. The Genius Bar that you criticize without ever
having used it is the envy of the industry, and a major draw at Apple's
retail stores. Here's what Fortune wrote in January, 2008:

"How productive are Apple¹s (AAPL) retail outlets?

'Out of this world' according to a report issued this morning by Toni
Sacconaghi of Bernstein Research. In fiscal year 2007, he estimates,
Apple stores generated an average of nearly $4,500 in sales per square
foot a figure far higher than any other consumer electronics or
luxury retailer. That¹s nearly five times the productivity of Best Buy,
for example, one of the most efficient consumer retail outlets, and
nearly 12 times that of Saks. Only Tiffany & Company comes close, with
sales of $2,750 per square foot. (see charts at right)..."

Just as iTunes is an integral part of the experience that has made the
iPod the most successful product of its type, the Genius Bar is an
integral part of the most successful retail-store launch in history.

As for your Thinkpad, nice computer, durable, and all of that. If it
lasts a thousand years it will always have that crippling flaw: it
can't run the Mac OS.

> All of my computers run Linux and my ipods run rockbox. My cellphone is
> a Sony Ericsson W810i, probably dated a bit for some of you, but hell
> it's well built and does way more then the original iphone did (I can
> live without youtube on my phone...

And without Photoshop (or any other pro image software), GarageBand,
Aperture, Adobe or Apple video-editing software (or any other pro video
software) on your Thinkpad.

On the other hand, I'll imagine you could kick my a.s at PacMan.

Isn't it great that iPhone ownership isn't mandatory? That leads to the
question of why you are railing about products that you haven't bought
and that you know nothing about beyond the second or third-hand rumors
that your post reveals you are relying on. This is a classic symptom of
someone who has been bitten by the green monster.

Davoud

Signature

Don't re-elect the past. Vote for the future: Obama in 2008!

usenet *at* davidillig dawt com

Reply to this Message

Joe Kappus - 27 Jul 2008 23:28 GMT

> Joe Kappus:
>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> where Apple excels, and iTunes is an integral part of the user
> experience that has made the iPod preeminent.

You can BS about user experience all you want. The iPod + iBud
combination was more likely to sell it then iTunes.

>> Consider this:
>>
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> writing about Mac hardware and software who knows nothing about it. What
> you suggest is patently untrue and ridiculous.

Your attack is on my grammar and not on my message.

In case you didn't know, I was referring to the only way to update the
ipod without iTunes. Apple distributes the firmware as a zipped package
with the filename suffix .ispw. Now to get this onto the ipod and
trigger the firmware flash, you need a program that operates low-level
(ie. dd) and copies the data bitwise to the firmware partition of the
ipod. This REQUIRES one to be proficient in the command line as dd can
wipe over any partition including the music partition or even the
computer's harddisk drive. Now do you understand or do I need to break
it down step by step?

>> 2. In recent years, Apple packages a "software updater" that borders on
>> malware, installing unrelated applications such as Safari to the unwary
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> software can be installed without the owner's permission, no one would
> care about one more piece.

You admit it was a "misstep", we call that kind of "misstep" a form of
malware. It's no different then packaging junk like Bonsai Buddy with
other windows packages, you're given a choice to not install it, but it's
still there by default.

>> 3. 3rd party support has been lacking for the ipod namely because Apple
>> does not release specification on how its database works. Most of the
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> Apple doesn't publish the trade secrets that help to make it
> profitable.? So what?

This has nothing to do with profitability, the device would have sold
whether or not the database spec was published. Also, in most cases the
consumer would still use iTunes. No, this was done to restrict the user
to iTunes and its store which distributes crippled music.

Consider this. Apple chose to use the Apple Lossless format on the
ipod. This decision was made even knowing that FLAC was more widely used
and technologically superior in every way. Apple wouldn't have even had
to pay for it, so why did they use an inferior format? To restrict the
consumer more. I can't think of a single product not made by Apple that
supports APL, and most other music services provide FLAC as their
lossless choice. This restricts the consumer to the iTunes store for
high quality music and (ironically) fills their device up quicker as the
format is less efficient.

>> You didn't get a vote with the iPod, once you bought it you were
>> screwed into using iTunes.
>
> "Screwed?" I don't imagine you have used iPod/iTunes, either. Zune user
> perhaps? (Comes in brown, which the iPod doesn't.) That's like saying
> that BMW buyers are "screwed" into using BMW engines.

Couldn't read the bottom? I'm not bashing the iPod, I'm bashing Apple
and iTunes. While I'm not that happy I own an Apple product, I concede
there is no better device on the market in terms of quality and usability.

>> The iPod became king because of the hardware, had nothing to do with
>> the software aspect.
>
> Sigh. Another person writing about Mac hardware and software who knows
> nothing about it. You couldn't be more wrong. It's the integration of
> iTunes/iPod that has led to the overwhelming success of iPod.

Whatever, an argument like that can't be won against a raving Apple
fanboy.

>> It's not illegal to sell a
>> locked phone, but to not offer to unlock it out of contract is. Other
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> have a special relationship with U.S. lawmakers. They do, indeed, get
> away with stuff they couldn't pull off in Europe.

Actually I did, did you know Apple keeps "Sosumi" commented in the source
of their website? Just because I don't choose to use their software
doesn't mean I'm ignorant about it. AT&T was chosen by Apple because of
their notorious treatment of their customers. They are a company which
has always refused to provide unlock codes, yet lets the NSA have a
backdoor into every phone conversation. It was a perfect match.

>> The iPhone is not a device of innovation, it packed technology in it
>> that has been around, it was designed to be appealing to the eye and
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> how to reach them through deep layers of pushing tiny, poorly labeled
> buttons.

I agree, it's much shinier than the competition. Shiny appears to be the
trend nowadays and Apple certainly is an innovator in shiny devices.

Buttons are nice, they provide tactile feedback, something that most
touchpad technology can't do. Apple had a sick obsession with
touchbuttons, and the 3G iPod was almost universally rejected because of
the lack of feedback, no other model carried touch buttons after the user
backlash.

Not to say the touchscreen on the iPhone was an altogether bad idea, but
it was a delicate balance of losing some function as a phone, and gaining
some control as a smartphone.

>> I've owned about 6 or so ipods, I buy them because they have provided
>> fairly high quality components up until the current batch, and because
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> I knew before I read that that you didn't know squat about Macintosh
> computers.

I do have a macbook pro in the house, I *HATE* it. Eyecandy may sell
these computers but it sure doesn't make them usable. Everytime I use
the thing it feels like I'm developing carpal tunnel from the cramped
keyboard. All that space to work with and they use maybe 1/3rd of it for
a keyboard.

>> I do not intend to ever buy an Apple computer with the way they have
>> been marketing their products, my laptop is a durable Thinkpad that
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> failures. The Genius Bar that you criticize without ever having used it
> is the envy of the industry, and a major draw at Apple's retail stores.

I've used the service, and was extremely dissatisfied. Went to the mall
early in the morning with a clicker (ipod with a dead drive) some months
back. At the time I was unaware of the system and having bought
Applecare for my iPod expected to recieve decent service.

I knew the store wasn't open for another 10 minutes or so but I saw a
steady stream of customers going in and out. Went in and was asked if I
had an appointment. "Excuse me?" "You need to have an appointment, come
back when we open". Ok, granted they weren't open, I waited the 10
minutes.

Came back when the store was officially open and asked them about
warranty service. AGAIN I was asked if I had an appointment. I told
them that I was instructed to come back when they opened. At this point
I'm starting to get pissed at how they treat their customers. I made an
appointment. The time was over two hours later because the tech didn't
come in till noon. Finally, I was able to come back and the whole
process took less then 5 minutes. No appointment should have been
required as it was obviously broken and all it required was a button
pusher to ok the exchange.

That's not good customer service, if I'm going to pay for a service, then
I expect to get the service.

> "How productive are Apple¹s (AAPL) retail outlets?
>
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> 12 times that of Saks. Only Tiffany & Company comes close, with sales of
> $2,750 per square foot. (see charts at right)..."

Of course they generate a ton per square foot because of a few things:

1. The stores are usually fairly small, they are the size of Best Buy's
music section.

2. Their goods are notoriously overpriced. At least when they used
PowerPC hardware you got what you paid for. Intel gave the company a
super deal and they moved to standard x86 hardware, of course profits
would skyrocket without a price cut. Gold and skilled designers cost
Tiffany & Co. more then cheap chinese child labor does for Apple. (oh no,
ABC and Apple gave china the gold seal of approval for working
conditions, but any other news source will tell you otherwise).

3. There aren't enough stores to service all the customers, they have
what, less than 200 stores in the entire US? I may be wrong, but I seem
to remember the worldwide count of stores is under 300. Of course it's
efficient, they waste no money on building stores and/or service centers.

> Just as iTunes is an integral part of the experience that has made the
> iPod the most successful product of its type, the Genius Bar is an
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> lasts a thousand years it will always have that crippling flaw: it can't
> run the Mac OS.

Not exactly true, I have actually run the OS on here before. You seem to
forget that OSX was ported over to the Intel x86 platform, so the
hardware it runs on natively is not a whole lot different from hardware
provided by other companies like HP and Lenovo. Yes, I'd need to replace
my intel wifi with broadcom wifi in order to support wireless, but most
everything else works.

>> All of my computers run Linux and my ipods run rockbox. My cellphone
>> is a Sony Ericsson W810i, probably dated a bit for some of you, but
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> Aperture, Adobe or Apple video-editing software (or any other pro video
> software) on your Thinkpad.

I wouldn't want the Apple video editing junk, as for Photoshop, I run it
just fine either virtualized in windows or through wine. That's not
really even necessary as well because I can do most of what Photoshop
does in The Gimp. I don't use Adobe flash because it's junk (I could, I
just choose not to, instead I pipe videos from sites like youtube into a
plugin that can handle .flv), and as for Acrobat I have free solutions
that aren't bloated. Don't try to tell me Acrobat is an efficient
application, the world knows it isn't.

> On the other hand, I'll imagine you could kick my a.s at PacMan.

Not interested.

Joe

Reply to this Message

nospam - 28 Jul 2008 02:18 GMT

> In case you didn't know, I was referring to the only way to update the
> ipod without iTunes. Apple distributes the firmware as a zipped package
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> computer's harddisk drive. Now do you understand or do I need to break
> it down step by step?

that's absolute rubbish. there is *no* need to use the command line to
update firmware. it can all be done within itunes.

> Consider this. Apple chose to use the Apple Lossless format on the
> ipod. This decision was made even knowing that FLAC was more widely used
> and technologically superior in every way. Apple wouldn't have even had
> to pay for it, so why did they use an inferior format?

two lossless formats, yet one is inferior? how does that work?

> To restrict the
> consumer more. I can't think of a single product not made by Apple that
> supports APL, and most other music services provide FLAC as their
> lossless choice. This restricts the consumer to the iTunes store for
> high quality music and (ironically) fills their device up quicker as the
> format is less efficient.

most people can't hear a difference and they aren't about to load up an
ipod with lossless anyway, since the ipods are used in situations where
even if there was an audible difference, it would not be noticed (e.g.,
listening on a bus or jogging).

> AT&T was chosen by Apple because of
> their notorious treatment of their customers. They are a company which
> has always refused to provide unlock codes, yet lets the NSA have a
> backdoor into every phone conversation. It was a perfect match.

apple chose at&t because they abuse and violate the rights of their
customers? now that's a new one. also, at&t will *gladly* provide
unlock codes after a certain period of time.

> Buttons are nice, they provide tactile feedback, something that most
> touchpad technology can't do. Apple had a sick obsession with
> touchbuttons, and the 3G iPod was almost universally rejected because of
> the lack of feedback, no other model carried touch buttons after the user
> backlash.

the problem with the 3g ipod was that the buttons were often erratic,
not that they were touch buttons.

> I do have a macbook pro in the house, I *HATE* it. Eyecandy may sell
> these computers but it sure doesn't make them usable. Everytime I use
> the thing it feels like I'm developing carpal tunnel from the cramped
> keyboard. All that space to work with and they use maybe 1/3rd of it for
> a keyboard.

it's a standard sized keyboard. what are you talking about??

> I've used the service, and was extremely dissatisfied. Went to the mall
> early in the morning with a clicker (ipod with a dead drive) some months
> back. At the time I was unaware of the system and having bought
> Applecare for my iPod expected to recieve decent service.

by your own admission, you didn't know how it worked, yet you blame
apple?

> I knew the store wasn't open for another 10 minutes or so but I saw a
> steady stream of customers going in and out. Went in and was asked if I
> had an appointment. "Excuse me?" "You need to have an appointment, come
> back when we open". Ok, granted they weren't open, I waited the 10
> minutes.

so at this point you knew an appointment was required yet you still
didn't make one?

> Came back when the store was officially open and asked them about
> warranty service. AGAIN I was asked if I had an appointment. I told
> them that I was instructed to come back when they opened. At this point
> I'm starting to get pissed at how they treat their customers. I made an
> appointment. The time was over two hours later because the tech didn't
> come in till noon.

they're there when the store opens. i've dropped off computers at 10a
and picked them up at noon on the same day, fully repaired.

> Finally, I was able to come back and the whole
> process took less then 5 minutes. No appointment should have been
> required as it was obviously broken and all it required was a button
> pusher to ok the exchange.

are you are the only person who needed service? everyone else should
just let you go first?

> That's not good customer service, if I'm going to pay for a service, then
> I expect to get the service.

my experience with the genius bar is that they go *well* out of their
way to fix things, even ones that are out of warranty. for instance, i
had an old ibook whose airport card failed (one of the old airport
cards that's long been discontinued), and they happened to have a
spare, so they swapped it on the spot. it was *well* out of warranty.
basically every time i've brought something in, they've often done more
than they needed and in a very short amount of time.

> > "How productive are Apple1s (AAPL) retail outlets?
> >
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> 1. The stores are usually fairly small, they are the size of Best Buy's
> music section.

some stores are small and others are huge, notably new york city,
boston and san francisco.

> 2. Their goods are notoriously overpriced. At least when they used
> PowerPC hardware you got what you paid for. Intel gave the company a
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> ABC and Apple gave china the gold seal of approval for working
> conditions, but any other news source will tell you otherwise).

actually the prices are comparable for the same configuration.

> 3. There aren't enough stores to service all the customers, they have
> what, less than 200 stores in the entire US? I may be wrong, but I seem
> to remember the worldwide count of stores is under 300. Of course it's
> efficient, they waste no money on building stores and/or service centers.

apple has a lot of stores in major cities and not as many in smaller
cities. nothing unusual about that. macs and ipods are also sold at
other stores and of course, on line.

> I wouldn't want the Apple video editing junk, as for Photoshop, I run it
> just fine either virtualized in windows or through wine. That's not
> really even necessary as well because I can do most of what Photoshop
> does in The Gimp.

apple's 'video editing junk' is considered to be among the best in the
industry and the gimp isn't even remotely close to photoshop. anyone
who thinks that is totally unaware of what photoshop can actually do.

Reply to this Message

Joe Kappus - 28 Jul 2008 04:43 GMT

>> In case you didn't know, I was referring to the only way to update the
>> ipod without iTunes. Apple distributes the firmware as a zipped
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> update firmware. it can all be done within itunes.
>

To keep the mood, CAN'T YOU READ? The argument was iTunes is the only
way to update firmware, but what if you don't want to use iTunes or you
can't use iTunes? Hmm, what then? You need to follow the above.

>> Consider this. Apple chose to use the Apple Lossless format on the
>> ipod. This decision was made even knowing that FLAC was more widely
>> used and technologically superior in every way. Apple wouldn't have
>> even had to pay for it, so why did they use an inferior format?
>
> two lossless formats, yet one is inferior? how does that work?

Ability to provide an identical copy after compression and
decompression. FLAC's md5sum matches every time. Efficiency of
compression, FLAC saves more space. Finally, software support. iTunes
and the ipod are really the only major platforms supporting the format.

There's other issues too such as not being able to fit ALAC into any
container and speed of encoding and decoding. If they used FLAC you
would be saving more power as CPU usage is lower and higher efficiency of
compression allows the drive to spin up less.

>> To restrict the
>> consumer more. I can't think of a single product not made by Apple
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> even if there was an audible difference, it would not be noticed (e.g.,
> listening on a bus or jogging).

Not everyone uses the ipod with iBuds, it has been considered an
audiophile device numerous times and various modifications and headphone
amps, etc.. all allow it to bring out lossless music. Where better?
iPods provide a great amount of space at a small physical size.

>> AT&T was chosen by Apple because of
>> their notorious treatment of their customers. They are a company which
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> customers? now that's a new one. also, at&t will *gladly* provide
> unlock codes after a certain period of time.

WRONG, I suggest you goto howardforums. AT&T, and its former companies
Cingular and AT&T Wireless NEVER provided unlock codes ever. Other phone
companies will (ie. t-mobile after being a customer for 90 days), but
AT&T has never.

>> Buttons are nice, they provide tactile feedback, something that most
>> touchpad technology can't do. Apple had a sick obsession with
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> the problem with the 3g ipod was that the buttons were often erratic,
> not that they were touch buttons.

It had everything to do with them being touch buttons, they were erratic
because they provided no tactile feedback.

>> I do have a macbook pro in the house, I *HATE* it. Eyecandy may sell
>> these computers but it sure doesn't make them usable. Everytime I use
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
> it's a standard sized keyboard. what are you talking about??

Just because it has all the keys doesn't make it a standard sized
keyboard. The keys are cramped and poorly placed and a huge amount of
space is left unused. The touchpad, while one of the nicer on the market
is absurdly large and takes up space the keyboard should occupy. The top
row of keys are cut off, as are the directional keys and the ctrl and
function keys. It's not a comfortable keyboard and obviously wasn't
designed for hours of use. That and the build quality feels plasticky,
cheap compared to most other laptops and even the older macbooks. The
only thing that's nice about it is the backlight but that's not really a
necessity.

>> I've used the service, and was extremely dissatisfied. Went to the
>> mall early in the morning with a clicker (ipod with a dead drive) some
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> by your own admission, you didn't know how it worked, yet you blame
> apple?

I blame Apple for not accommodating customers who don't feel like wasting
time and fuel because they want to minimize operating expense. If the
stores are doing so well then why aren't they hiring more staff and
expanding the space to occupy the amount of people that come in.

When you begin to think about it, maybe that's some of the marketing
ploy. Keep less stores and put them in highly populated areas so they
are always full. Makes you think everyone's buying Apple when they
actually aren't, over half the people in the Apple store are either
screwing with the merchandise or requesting service.

>> I knew the store wasn't open for another 10 minutes or so but I saw a
>> steady stream of customers going in and out. Went in and was asked if
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> so at this point you knew an appointment was required yet you still
> didn't make one?

They didn't offer me one, and they kicked me out of the store.

>> Came back when the store was officially open and asked them about
>> warranty service. AGAIN I was asked if I had an appointment. I told
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> they're there when the store opens. i've dropped off computers at 10a
> and picked them up at noon on the same day, fully repaired.

Well I guess that's not always the case, else I would not have had to
wait.

>> Finally, I was able to come back and the whole process took less then 5
>> minutes. No appointment should have been required as it was obviously
>> broken and all it required was a button pusher to ok the exchange.
>
> are you are the only person who needed service? everyone else should
> just let you go first?

Read earlier comment, Apple is the only store I've ever been to where
they send you away if you don't register and pick a timeslot on their
website.

>> That's not good customer service, if I'm going to pay for a service,
>> then I expect to get the service.
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> every time i've brought something in, they've often done more than they
> needed and in a very short amount of time.

Maybe you got that one guy who wasn't an a.shole about things. My
experiance with their support has been "Well, it is out of warranty...
soo we'll give you the SPECIAL UPGRADE PRICE!!", which is like $10 off
the tag for a brand new item.

>> > "How productive are Apple1s (AAPL) retail outlets?
>> >
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
> some stores are small and others are huge, notably new york city, boston
> and san francisco.

Some are huge, a very few in the largest cities. All best buys are very
large, even when they aren't in a big city. There's a difference when
you are calculating an average $ per foot squared. A course in
statistics will show you how a statement like the above can be slanted by
doing the right calculations and setting the right limits.

I dug around for some numbers, seems Apple has 219 stores worldwide,
while best buy has over 1,150 with plans to open hundreds more. Tiffany
has a small footprint just like Apple, they have 167 stores in the world.

>> 2. Their goods are notoriously overpriced. At least when they used
>> PowerPC hardware you got what you paid for. Intel gave the company a
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> actually the prices are comparable for the same configuration.

I doubt it, do you honestly think Apple would have ported all its code
from PPC to x86 if it cost the same? It doesn't make sense, PPC is the
better architecture.

Well maybe it does. Those who program know the deficiencies of the x86
architecture, but much of that is overcome by years of coding
specifically for it (since the 1970's) and in recent years the 64-bit
back of dual-mode processors allow the programmer to finally have more
registers to work with.

Price may not have been the only factor, it could have just been that
Apple developers were not utilizing the full potential of the PPC arch,
IBM has itself released new compilers giving almost a 200% performance
boost for the old dual G4's. Going to x86 may have allowed more
developers to port applications from windows over to mac and vice versa.
I know myself I a couple utilities namely to work with hfsplus that were
ported direct from the intel version of OSX.

>> 3. There aren't enough stores to service all the customers, they have
>> what, less than 200 stores in the entire US? I may be wrong, but I
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> cities. nothing unusual about that. macs and ipods are also sold at
> other stores and of course, on line.

Yes, but official services are provided only one of two ways. One is by
going to an Apple store, and the other is by mailing it out. Really
that's not so bad but Apple should have seperated the stores and the
service centers.

>> I wouldn't want the Apple video editing junk, as for Photoshop, I run
>> it just fine either virtualized in windows or through wine. That's not
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> industry and the gimp isn't even remotely close to photoshop. anyone
> who thinks that is totally unaware of what photoshop can actually do.

Did I not mention that I use photoshop? I merely stated that for many
things The Gimp is perfectly suitable (and economical). I edit audio and
I do that just fine on Linux, I used to do it just fine on Windows (but
the realtime scheduling in Linux is so much better for it). I don't edit
video, but I'm sure if I did, there wouldn't be an issue.

Joe

Reply to this Message

nospam - 28 Jul 2008 06:10 GMT

> >> In case you didn't know, I was referring to the only way to update the
> >> ipod without iTunes. Apple distributes the firmware as a zipped
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> way to update firmware, but what if you don't want to use iTunes or you
> can't use iTunes? Hmm, what then? You need to follow the above.

what's wrong with using itunes to update the firmware? even if you
hate the program, all that needs to be done is launch it, click a
button and wait a few minutes. why make the process more difficult
than it needs to be?

of course, if you want to update the firmware in a totally unsupported
manner then the procedure won't be all that simple. nothing unusual
about that.

> >> Consider this. Apple chose to use the Apple Lossless format on the
> >> ipod. This decision was made even knowing that FLAC was more widely
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> compression, FLAC saves more space. Finally, software support. iTunes
> and the ipod are really the only major platforms supporting the format.

once again, if both are lossless, how is it one is superiour to the
other??

and with the ipod commanding 70-80% of the mp3 player market (i haven't
checked the latest numbers but it's around that), then apple lossless
*is* the dominant lossless format.

> There's other issues too such as not being able to fit ALAC into any
> container and speed of encoding and decoding. If they used FLAC you
> would be saving more power as CPU usage is lower and higher efficiency of
> compression allows the drive to spin up less.

since the ipod pre-fetches audio, spin up time is a non-issue.
furthermore, most ipods no longer have hard drives, so there is no
spin-up time at all. as for cpu load, i doubt there's a significant
difference, if there's one at all.

> >> To restrict the
> >> consumer more. I can't think of a single product not made by Apple
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> amps, etc.. all allow it to bring out lossless music. Where better?
> iPods provide a great amount of space at a small physical size.

it doesn't matter what earbuds they use. most people can't hear a
difference, even in ideal conditions. and ipods are generally used in
non-ideal conditions (bus, plane, etc.) so even if there was an audible
difference, it would not matter.

now if you want to use apple lossless (or flac) on a home music system
played through exotic audiophile speakers, then maybe it will matter.

> >> AT&T was chosen by Apple because of
> >> their notorious treatment of their customers. They are a company which
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> companies will (ie. t-mobile after being a customer for 90 days), but
> AT&T has never.

actually, howardforums is where i read that they'll unlock after 90
days.

> >> Buttons are nice, they provide tactile feedback, something that most
> >> touchpad technology can't do. Apple had a sick obsession with
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> It had everything to do with them being touch buttons, they were erratic
> because they provided no tactile feedback.

no, they were erratic because of a poor design and registered multiple
touches when only one touch ocurred.

> >> I do have a macbook pro in the house, I *HATE* it. Eyecandy may sell
> >> these computers but it sure doesn't make them usable. Everytime I use
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> keyboard. The keys are cramped and poorly placed and a huge amount of
> space is left unused.

nonsense. the keys are not cramped at all and the backlight makes
typing on it a joy.

> The touchpad, while one of the nicer on the market
> is absurdly large and takes up space the keyboard should occupy. The top
> row of keys are cut off, as are the directional keys and the ctrl and
> function keys. It's not a comfortable keyboard and obviously wasn't
> designed for hours of use.

you're among the few that dislike it. most people find it quite
comfortable.

> That and the build quality feels plasticky,
> cheap compared to most other laptops and even the older macbooks. The
> only thing that's nice about it is the backlight but that's not really a
> necessity.

the backlight is wonderful, and in my opinion, a necessity in any
keyboard. unfortunately, backlit desktop keyboards are hard to find
and not all that cheap.

> >> I've used the service, and was extremely dissatisfied. Went to the
> >> mall early in the morning with a clicker (ipod with a dead drive) some
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> stores are doing so well then why aren't they hiring more staff and
> expanding the space to occupy the amount of people that come in.

i'm sure apple has a very good idea (much better than either you or i)
of how much space to devote to selling products and how much space for
the genius bar, as well as the staffing requirements for the store.

> When you begin to think about it, maybe that's some of the marketing
> ploy. Keep less stores and put them in highly populated areas so they
> are always full.

you'd rather they put a lot of stores in rural areas and not as many in
populated areas? that makes no sense.

> Makes you think everyone's buying Apple when they
> actually aren't, over half the people in the Apple store are either
> screwing with the merchandise or requesting service.

and you base this on what? do you have sales records and patron counts
of the stores?

> >> I knew the store wasn't open for another 10 minutes or so but I saw a
> >> steady stream of customers going in and out. Went in and was asked if
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
> They didn't offer me one, and they kicked me out of the store.

i find it hard to believe that they didn't help you make an appointment
from one of the in-store macs. on the other hand, i'm not particularly
surprised they kicked you out.

> >> Came back when the store was officially open and asked them about
> >> warranty service. AGAIN I was asked if I had an appointment. I told
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> Well I guess that's not always the case, else I would not have had to
> wait.

it would depend what's wrong with the product. one time i brought in a
mac in and it had to be sent out to the repair depot in houston. it
was back two days later, also by noon.

> >> Finally, I was able to come back and the whole process took less then 5
> >> minutes. No appointment should have been required as it was obviously
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> they send you away if you don't register and pick a timeslot on their
> website.

really? ever visited an auto dealer? they won't even look at you
without an appointment.

i'd *much* rather show up at a predetermined time and wait maybe 5-10
minutes instead of waiting an indeterminate amount of time, which could
be hours on a busy day.

> >> 1. The stores are usually fairly small, they are the size of Best Buy's
> >> music section.
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> Some are huge, a very few in the largest cities. All best buys are very
> large, even when they aren't in a big city.

different type of store.

> I dug around for some numbers, seems Apple has 219 stores worldwide,
> while best buy has over 1,150 with plans to open hundreds more. Tiffany
> has a small footprint just like Apple, they have 167 stores in the world.

and mcdonalds has even more worldwide. what's your point?

> >> 2. Their goods are notoriously overpriced. At least when they used
> >> PowerPC hardware you got what you paid for. Intel gave the company a
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> from PPC to x86 if it cost the same? It doesn't make sense, PPC is the
> better architecture.

in some ways (not all), powerpc is better, but unfortunately, ibm and
motorola/freescale did not advance the chip anywhere near to what intel
was doing. plus, there are other benefits to x86 such as running
windows at native speeds alongside os x.

also, the roots of os x had been running on x86 long before there was a
powerpc port (early 1990s when nextstep was ported to x86). apple
maintained osx on multiple platforms until it was practical to make the
change.

> >> 3. There aren't enough stores to service all the customers, they have
> >> what, less than 200 stores in the entire US? I may be wrong, but I
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> that's not so bad but Apple should have seperated the stores and the
> service centers.

why? other stores don't separate them.

> >> I wouldn't want the Apple video editing junk, as for Photoshop, I run
> >> it just fine either virtualized in windows or through wine. That's not
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> Did I not mention that I use photoshop? I merely stated that for many
> things The Gimp is perfectly suitable (and economical).

it may be suitable for simple tweaks, but you said that you can do
'most of what photoshop does in the gimp' and that is absolutely false.
the differences between the two are staggering. for instance, the gimp
lacks adjustment layers, high bit, smart objects and camera raw
(dcraw/ufraw are very primitive), just to name a few.

> I edit audio and
> I do that just fine on Linux, I used to do it just fine on Windows (but
> the realtime scheduling in Linux is so much better for it). I don't edit
> video, but I'm sure if I did, there wouldn't be an issue.

you don't edit video, but yet you know that apple's video editing
software is junk?

Reply to this Message

Joe Kappus - 29 Jul 2008 06:37 GMT

>> >> In case you didn't know, I was referring to the only way to update
>> >> the ipod without iTunes. Apple distributes the firmware as a zipped
[quoted text clipped - 21 lines]
> manner then the procedure won't be all that simple. nothing unusual
> about that.

In my case that was the only procedule available, most manufacturers make
firmware updating operating system independant. Not to say it's a major
issue, however the old updater could be run under emulation, iTunes
cannot. I've never seen a company bundle it in with a completley
unrelated application.

>> >> Consider this. Apple chose to use the Apple Lossless format on the
>> >> ipod. This decision was made even knowing that FLAC was more widely
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> once again, if both are lossless, how is it one is superiour to the
> other??

I just gave you the reasons why, I want to know that when my ipod becomes
obsolete that I don't have to re-encode all my music over to a non-shitty
format that actually has both hardware and software support.

> and with the ipod commanding 70-80% of the mp3 player market (i haven't
> checked the latest numbers but it's around that), then apple lossless
> *is* the dominant lossless format.

It is most certainly not the most dominant lossless format. As you said
before, most people do not want to keep (nor can they keep) an entire
library of music in a lossless format on the ipod. If you actually pull
your head out of the Apple box, no other music site, and no sane consumer
would buy or use ALAC. Cars are being made now with HD-based storage
systems that support FLAC, many other portable players support FLAC. In
fact, the usual question I hear is "What the hell is this and how do I
convert it to something I can use?".

No, it is not the most dominant format, nor will it ever be. FLAC
carries a whole world of format support, if you want to be chained to
Apple for the rest of your life, stick to that format because Apple is
the only company that is ever going to use it.

>> There's other issues too such as not being able to fit ALAC into any
>> container and speed of encoding and decoding. If they used FLAC you
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> spin-up time at all. as for cpu load, i doubt there's a significant
> difference, if there's one at all.

I wasn't complaining about spin up time, I was complaining about spinning
it up more often, which does kill the battery. As for cpu load, that's
up for debate, I'll give you that.

>> >> To restrict the
>> >> consumer more. I can't think of a single product not made by Apple
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
> non-ideal conditions (bus, plane, etc.) so even if there was an audible
> difference, it would not matter.

You obviously live in a city. Headphones with a good seal block out most
of the ambient noise, maybe I can't tell the difference between mp3 V0
and FLAC on a bus, but I'm sure using a headphone amp in a quiet room I
could.

> now if you want to use apple lossless (or flac) on a home music system
> played through exotic audiophile speakers, then maybe it will matter.

Lossless provides a second pro, it allows music to be reconverted again
and again with no loss over generations, most people CAN hear the
difference between something that was WMA and converted to AAC or MP3,
two generations of lossless take such a great effect that it doesn't take
an audiophile to hear the difference.

>> >> AT&T was chosen by Apple because of
>> >> their notorious treatment of their customers. They are a company
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> actually, howardforums is where i read that they'll unlock after 90
> days.

I'll give it a shot and see where it goes, I tried it before about a year
and a half ago and the answer was a flat-out "no, we do not provide
unlock keys".

>> >> Buttons are nice, they provide tactile feedback, something that most
>> >> touchpad technology can't do. Apple had a sick obsession with
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> no, they were erratic because of a poor design and registered multiple
> touches when only one touch ocurred.

Touchpads do that, it's an inherant drawback of the technology. Sure it
was bad design but it had nothing to do with build quality. That kind of
touchpad needs an automatic lock and/or some mechanism of haptic feedback
to negate some of the drawbacks.

>> >> I do have a macbook pro in the house, I *HATE* it. Eyecandy may
>> >> sell these computers but it sure doesn't make them usable.
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> nonsense. the keys are not cramped at all and the backlight makes
> typing on it a joy.

Have you ever used a "real" full-sized keyboard, those keys are cramped.
There's a difference between consolidation and cramping it. As for the
backlight, does it warm your fingers or provide a soothing massage? If
not, it's irrelevant to this part of the conversation.

>> The touchpad, while one of the nicer on the market is absurdly large
>> and takes up space the keyboard should occupy. The top row of keys are
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> you're among the few that dislike it. most people find it quite
> comfortable.

I suppose if you're a plumber you get used to working with sh.t. Dell
has had some bad keyboards in terms of build quality, but none are worse
in layout. HP on the other hand goes a bit overboard with the "full-
size" idea even adding the number pad.

Apple though.. keyboard design has gone downhill. I'm gonna limit my
attack to the macbook pro, the other models are not so bad.

>> That and the build quality feels plasticky, cheap compared to most
>> other laptops and even the older macbooks. The only thing that's nice
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> keyboard. unfortunately, backlit desktop keyboards are hard to find and
> not all that cheap.

Other manufacturers use an even more practical method and provide a LED
on top of the lid that illuminates the keyboard and nearby space. This
is a much more cost effective solution. Oh, a keyboard backlight may
look pretty, but it's no necessity. I'd spend more money for a better
feeling plastic then cool glow-in-the-dark keys, seems kinda gimmicky to
me.

>> >> I've used the service, and was extremely dissatisfied. Went to the
>> >> mall early in the morning with a clicker (ipod with a dead drive)
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> of how much space to devote to selling products and how much space for
> the genius bar, as well as the staffing requirements for the store.

Right.. you said it before, anyone can buy an ipod from online or other
stores. I'm sure they could make some room for support.

>> When you begin to think about it, maybe that's some of the marketing
>> ploy. Keep less stores and put them in highly populated areas so they
>> are always full.
>
> you'd rather they put a lot of stores in rural areas and not as many in
> populated areas? that makes no sense.

No, build more stores where there are people. Then they wouldn't require
appointments, would they?

>> Makes you think everyone's buying Apple when they actually aren't, over
>> half the people in the Apple store are either screwing with the
>> merchandise or requesting service.
>
> and you base this on what? do you have sales records and patron counts
> of the stores?

Do you have sales records and patron counts to prove me wrong?

>> >> I knew the store wasn't open for another 10 minutes or so but I saw
>> >> a steady stream of customers going in and out. Went in and was
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> from one of the in-store macs. on the other hand, i'm not particularly
> surprised they kicked you out.

Course you wouldn't be, Apple users must be used to a.shole treatment. I
on the other hand, am not.

>> >> Came back when the store was officially open and asked them about
>> >> warranty service. AGAIN I was asked if I had an appointment. I
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> mac in and it had to be sent out to the repair depot in houston. it was
> back two days later, also by noon.

If there's one thing I will not disagree on, depot service is fast and
efficient. They do unfortunatley use DHL, but so long as your package
isn't lost it gets done rather quickly. I'm talking about on-site
service.

>> >> Finally, I was able to come back and the whole process took less
>> >> then 5 minutes. No appointment should have been required as it was
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> really? ever visited an auto dealer? they won't even look at you
> without an appointment.

To buy a car? I've never been requested to make an appointment, if I was
then I obviously would go elsewhere to buy my product.

As for service, a car is not a computer and requires a greater amount of
time to look at. (also a greater amount of parts, labor, etc.) An
electronics store cannot compare.

> i'd *much* rather show up at a predetermined time and wait maybe 5-10
> minutes instead of waiting an indeterminate amount of time, which could
> be hours on a busy day.

Again, build more stores?

>> >> 1. The stores are usually fairly small, they are the size of Best
>> >> Buy's music section.
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
> different type of store.

Flawed statistic.

>> I dug around for some numbers, seems Apple has 219 stores worldwide,
>> while best buy has over 1,150 with plans to open hundreds more.
>> Tiffany has a small footprint just like Apple, they have 167 stores in
>> the world.
>
> and mcdonalds has even more worldwide. what's your point?

My point is, of course Apple is going to be able to post higher sales per
sq foot because they don't have much area to begin with. It was a stupid
statistic that showed nothing.

>> >> 2. Their goods are notoriously overpriced. At least when they used
>> >> PowerPC hardware you got what you paid for. Intel gave the company
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
> was doing. plus, there are other benefits to x86 such as running
> windows at native speeds alongside os x.

Are you kidding me? It had nothing to do with IBM and Motorola not
advancing their chips. It had everything to do with the Apple developers
not utilizing those chips and the widespread use of x86-coded programs.

> also, the roots of os x had been running on x86 long before there was a
> powerpc port (early 1990s when nextstep was ported to x86). apple
> maintained osx on multiple platforms until it was practical to make the
> change.

The roots of Windows had been ported to PPC during the same time period,
and many speculate Microsoft still has versions of it running on PPC. In
fact, the Xbox360 is a PPC-powered device that uses much of the Windows
functionality.

>> >> 3. There aren't enough stores to service all the customers, they
>> >> have what, less than 200 stores in the entire US? I may be wrong,
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>
> why? other stores don't separate them.

Other stores don't have them, they leave that to service centers or
depots.

>> >> I wouldn't want the Apple video editing junk, as for Photoshop, I
>> >> run it just fine either virtualized in windows or through wine.
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
> lacks adjustment layers, high bit, smart objects and camera raw
> (dcraw/ufraw are very primitive), just to name a few.

For many trivial things it is perfectly suitable and I'll stand by it for
trivial work. If I was doing more advanced work of course I'd stick to
photoshop. The two are very different, and by no means am I calling them
equal.

>> I edit audio and
>> I do that just fine on Linux, I used to do it just fine on Windows (but
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> you don't edit video, but yet you know that apple's video editing
> software is junk?

I wouldn't waste my time with it, let's put it that way. If required I'd
find a better solution.

Reply to this Message

Davoud - 28 Jul 2008 05:23 GMT

nospam wrote in reply to Joe Kappus:

> that's absolute rubbish. there is *no* need to use the command line to
> update firmware. it can all be done within itunes....

I fear that we let ourselves get drawn into a "discussion" with a child
geek whose world view is limited to what he can see from his home in
his momma's basement--which, I suspect, has no windows. The ranting on
subjects he knows nothing about, his poor spelling, his inability to
write complete sentences, his juvenile punctuation--these all point to
a kid whose idea of a bold fashion statement is a white plastic pocket
protector with the name of a TV repair shop on the flap. Anyone who
thinks that The GIMP is a Photoshop equivalent and that Apple's video
editing s'ware is junk (he must have missed The Lord of the Rings and a
lot of other great movies and TV shows) has got to be *deep* in a
basement, physically and emotionally.

I'm out of this one because I don't know how to discuss, or argue, a
point with someone who hasn't even the tiniest clue concerning the
subject at hand. If people like that could see how silly they look,
authoring long rants without a single truth in them, I think they would
be more circumspect about opening themselves up to well deserved
ridicule. He must have missed his Psych. classes as well, because he
seems not to know that he is wearing his emotions--jealousy and
resentment--on his sleeve.

Davoud

Signature

Don't re-elect the past. Vote for the future: Obama in 2008!

usenet *at* davidillig dawt com

Reply to this Message

Joe Kappus - 29 Jul 2008 07:49 GMT

> nospam wrote in reply to Joe Kappus:
>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> Davoud

Have you lost your tact old man? I am not the one who's closed off to
the world and furthermore my initial response was hastily written and
lacked any and all sorts of proofing. You see, I usually don't waste much
time with your kind for this reason: The arguments you start, you can not
defend. I expected more from your age category but apparently not, you
had to get down to personal bashing.

You need to adjust your readers, I never once stated Adobe to be
equivelent to Photoshop; it was even noted that I run both. However, I
do find The Gimp perfectly suitable for trivial work.

Should you ever reference this though, here's what you missed:

1. You failed to defend how that sale per sq. ft. figure wasn't flawed.
2. You brought up a crap line about how you know someone in the "media
industry" who can't believe Apple's stuff makes it in the news, even as
their CEO sits on the board of one of the largest media giants.
3. You failed to give a compelling reason as to why iTunes alone sold
iPods when the first two generations didn't sell all that well
comparitively and a HUGE spike started with the addition of USB support.
iTunes Store didn't even take off until 2006 and iPod sales were soaring
in 2004, you can pull the sales data up if you want.
4. You fail to explain why stores treat existing customers like patients
and insist on refusing expansion in order to maximize profits with no
benefit to the consumer. They have the monopoly on harddisc players, so
there's no need to cater.
5. You refuse to acknowledge the move to Intel had nothing to do with
performance gain, it had everything to do with capturing windows users
and taking advantage of the deal intel gave them.
6. You went into this conversation having no knowledge of how a Linux
user accesses an iPod and were unable to process that information instead
exclaiming, "BUT THAT'S NOT HOW APPLE SAYS TO DO IT!!". For some of us,
there is no other way to do it, we aren't going to limit our choices.
7. You (and others) fail to realize that APL is a woefully inferior
choice as a lossless codec. Just as putting touchbuttons on the 3g ipod
was a bad idea, this is probably worse. No other company would ever want
to touch the format for reasons I specified in another post to this
thread.
8. Your biggest mistake of all was that you lost your cool and attacked
the other party. You underestimated who you went up against and you were
unable to deal with the consequence; having each and every one of your
foolish retorts shot down.

The one thing you did get right is that I wear my resentment for Apple
and your kind that I wear on my sleeve. Jealously though? Forget it. I'm
out of the fanboy room, this sidequest of boredom has given way to
irritation.

Reply to this Message

Richard Crowley - 29 Jul 2008 17:46 GMT

> 5. You refuse to acknowledge the move to Intel had nothing to do with
> performance gain, it had everything to do with capturing windows users
> and taking advantage of the deal intel gave them.

You're right. It wasn't performance *gain* it was merely coming
back to parity with the PC world. Apple rode the 68000 bus to
the end of the line and Moto/IBM were unwilling to keep the line
alive just for Apple. It was amazing that Apple managed to keep
suppliers interested even that long with their small volume.

"capturing windows users"? Are you joking?

Reply to this Message

D.F. Manno - 27 Jul 2008 19:29 GMT

> Did you happen to realize that Steve Jobs is THE commanding shareowner of
> Walt Disney Company (at 7%, Eisner only has 1.7%), one of the largest
> media outlets in the world? Of course it makes news because THEY OWN THE
> NEWS.

Exaggerate much?

Of the nine TV networks Disney owns, only one does any news: ABC.
Competing with ABC is CBS, NBC, Fox, CNN, MSNBC, et al.

Disney owns _no_ newspapers and _no_ newsmagazines. None of the
magazines it does own would be interested in Apple news (US Weekly? ESPN
The Magazine?).

And even though he is the top Disney shareholder, Jobs is a minority
shareholder. Seven percent is not nearly enough to start dictating news
coverage.

Signature

D.F. Manno | dfmanno@mail.com
The modern conservative is engaged in one of manâ€™s oldest exercises in
moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification
for selfishness. (John Kenneth Galbraith)

Reply to this Message

Joe Kappus - 28 Jul 2008 00:41 GMT

>> Did you happen to realize that Steve Jobs is THE commanding shareowner
>> of Walt Disney Company (at 7%, Eisner only has 1.7%), one of the
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> Of the nine TV networks Disney owns, only one does any news: ABC.
> Competing with ABC is CBS, NBC, Fox, CNN, MSNBC, et al.

And? One major network is enough to influence the rest of the media.
It's free advertising.

> Disney owns _no_ newspapers and _no_ newsmagazines. None of the
> magazines it does own would be interested in Apple news (US Weekly? ESPN
> The Magazine?).

What does it matter if they don't own newspapers or magazines. They
still have TV and radio outlets.

> And even though he is the top Disney shareholder, Jobs is a minority
> shareholder. Seven percent is not nearly enough to start dictating news
> coverage.

But a spot on the Board is.

Reply to this Message

Jolly Roger - 28 Jul 2008 09:26 GMT

> >> Did you happen to realize that Steve Jobs is THE commanding shareowner
> >> of Walt Disney Company (at 7%, Eisner only has 1.7%), one of the
[quoted text clipped - 21 lines]
>
> But a spot on the Board is.

A real discussion of who / what truly drives the U.S. media wouldn't be
complete without all sorts of conspiracy theories ranging from
government control to subliminal advertising. ; )

Signature

Send responses to the relevant news group rather than to me, as
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR

Reply to this Message

Tim Smith - 28 Jul 2008 03:48 GMT

> I would like the feature or function to randomly select an album, and
> then play each track of the album in the correct order.
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> Thank-you for the reply.

What exactly are you doing? When I set playback->shuffle to albums, and
then hit play, it in fact does pick a random album, play the tracks in
order, and then go to another album.

The album is chosen from those that are displayed in the list below the
genre/artist/album panes. If I select there a particular genre or
artist, it confines itself to albums of that genre or artist.

It follows track order regardless of how I happen to have the list
sorted.

It works the same way regardless of whether I am viewing the whole
library, or a particular playlist.

I'm using iTunes 7.7.

Signature

--Tim Smith

Reply to this Message

Mac Forum / Applications / Mac Applications / July 2008

iTunes playlist generation for Albums