Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › why do people dislike itunes?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

why do people dislike itunes? - Page 16

post #226 of 281
Originally Posted by Roller View Post

Because that's how people want to use flac rolleyes.gif

What do you mean? I'm just pointing it out to counter the claim that it cannot play flac. If you save them in ogg containers when you rip it's not like it requires any extra effort.
post #227 of 281
Originally Posted by FloconsDeMais View Post

Originally Posted by Roller View Post

Because that's how people want to use flac rolleyes.gif

What do you mean? I'm just pointing it out to counter the claim that it cannot play flac. If you save them in ogg containers when you rip it's not like it requires any extra effort.

Again, it's another extra step that ONLY iTunes has to do in order to play a resemblance of FLAC.


Who in their right mind would EVER do such nonsense of ripping their collection to an original archiving format, using an ogg container? Seriously...


Now basically every cat and dog can play FLAC. But then again, cats and dogs can roam freely at their own will, their not bound to invisible shackles and whiplashes from an all powerful overlord *cough cough... Jobs... cough cough*

post #228 of 281

Why? Simple answer really.


Because it's Apple. LOL :D

post #229 of 281

Remember CD's, there was a standard for them. You could plug and play a CD on anything with the Compact CD logo on it without any hassle. Today without any standard for computer audio, we're all forced to some degree to go from window to window to  make things work, and still were left wonderin if it could all sound better if we hooked it up somewhat differently. The folks at Apple are smart. They know acceptance of their products for the masses means the products must be convenient, and easy to operate, which they are. Of course some sort of standardization might make things better. However, right now without a standard format for computer audio creative, folks are busy inventing better mouse traps, which is also good .

post #230 of 281

The original I-tunes I was using was kind of slow and cliched at times even with 3 gigs of ram. Really Rockbox sounds better in the I-pods that will run with it. The best improvement I made was to switch to the 64bit I-tunes program. It looks better, runs with out an issue and works super smooth as well as fast.

post #231 of 281

It doesn't work in Windows. I tried hard to make the iTunes "work" in my Win 7 64 bit to sync my iPhone 3GS and failed. Just using foobar to do the job.

post #232 of 281

Why do people dislike iTunes...


Haters gotta hate.

post #233 of 281

I love when people hate things like iTunes. As far as software goes, it's not bad. That, and it's just software. How can you really hate simple software? Dislike, fine but hate? What a wonderful life you lead where the worst thing in your life is the existence as iTunes.


Just sayin'.

post #234 of 281

It's a shame for Apple that iTunes is such an inferior product. But then again, that's more noticeable on Windows, while working on its native environment it is passable.


@sterling1: Couldn't agree more on standardization, which could be very easy to happen since the whole world uses FLAC. So why should a proprietary format be the way to go?


@matbhuvi: You're right, thanks for reminding me of that. It was discussed on another thread that the Xiph solution only worked on OSX.


And DougofTheAbaci, I agree that hate is both a strong word and feeling to have towards a piece of software. People seem to get carried away, and then things happen they way they do.

post #235 of 281

I have been supporting free open source codecs and software before iTunes was around, and will be using free open source codecs and software after iTunes is no more.  I do not wish my lossless music collection to be held hostage by commercial interests (or at least minimize it).   This appears to be less of a concern now, but back when iTunes and other commercial software was deep in DRM I wanted no part of it.  I use Foobar now.  If something better comes along, I have no real loyalty to continue using Foobar and it will have no impact on my collection.

Edited by ert - 5/18/11 at 1:01pm
post #236 of 281
  • iTunes is resource hungry.  More CPU usage reflects more CPU noise.
  • iTunes limits you to graining, low quality, rips from nearly all composers.
  • Apple is a software company that is biased to their own hardware.  Performance increases for mac but not for all software companies.  I'm not going to buy an overpriced, cheap, low quality machine to listen to low quality rips.
  • iPod users are limited to a shoddy program for their entire music listening experience.  Likewise, the iPod is of similar quality.


iTunes does not offer any benefits for music lovers.  It is a garbage application.

post #237 of 281
Originally Posted by DougofTheAbaci View Post

I love when people hate things like iTunes. As far as software goes, it's not bad. That, and it's just software. How can you really hate simple software? Dislike, fine but hate? What a wonderful life you lead where the worst thing in your life is the existence as iTunes.


Just sayin'.

If you have used I-Tunes from 2005 until now like some of us have then each time you use it there was a waiting process and times when the software did not function correctly even though 99% of software out there seems to work perfect and fast in our daily life. And if you reload your I-Pod twice a week or have to replace the software in another computer, you start to get a little perturbed. It just simply waists a little of your time. It just seems if something was so widely used and so popular that it simply would be a little better.


It would be like having a faulty car which would not start and no way to replace it. This is why Rockbox is such a joy. I have to say though that hopefully this new 64bit late copy of the program has become what I-Tunes was really designed to function like from day one. Time will tell, so far so good!

Edited by Redcarmoose - 5/18/11 at 1:56pm
post #238 of 281

@Redcarmoose: Don't get me wrong, I dislike software. I would say I strongly dislike Windows because it has a nasty habit of forcing me to restart my OS when I'm in the middle of a game. "You didn't need me for the next 10 minutes, right?" There are dozens of apps that I dislike for varying reasons but I don't think I truly hate any of them.


However, many of the complaints I hear about iTunes are completely valid. However, at least on the Mac, nothing compares. There are programs that will do a better job of audio playback, as well as support more open-source formats, but the problem is none of them organize tracks as easily as iTunes or integrate with devices like the iPhone as easily as iTunes.


In an ideal world, I'd love to see a program that had all the management features of iTunes with the audio-playback capabilities of something like Audirvana that used the iTunes Library file. That way I could use it for my day-to-day audio playback and just use iTunes for syncing. of my devices. However, no such app exists.


@domino584: I can think of a number of benefits it offers music lovers. Chiefly is a way to easily manage and organize music on a Mac in a clean, powerful way. Playback could be better, agreed, but that is just one factor of any application. It's like hating an BMW M3 simply because it has no second set of doors. It's a valid complaint, but that doesn't mean you say the entire car is a piece of crap. iTunes is a very large piece of software with a large number of features, only some of which deal with playing music.


Personally, had I my druthers Apple would split out the various components (audio, video, apps, syncing...) into separate applications. However, I doubt that's going to happen. Though, it may. The App Store wasn't integrated into anything else. Maybe Apple will realize how much better things could be if they broke the bits up.


And while Apple may favor it's hardware, I could say the same of a dozen different software vendors. Microsoft is so bad about it that there have been multiple class-action lawsuits against them, including action taken by multiple governing bodies. And, yet, I bet you still use Windows. The majority of us do.


@ert: it would be nice if there was a single, accepted open-standard for everyone to use. It wouldn't just be a good thing for the music industry, it would be very handy for the web industry as well. HTML5 Video seems to finally have narrowed it down to two codecs (h.264 and WebM) but HTML Audio supports multiple codecs (MP3, AAC, OGG...) in a variety of configurations depending on what browser or device you wish to target. WebM for Android, h.264 for iOS, then randomly scattered for browsers...


The problem is there isn't such a standard, not with wide-spread support, and probably won't be for a very long time. The reason is simple: Large corporations have a lot to lose by going open-source. Sure, they don't have to pay a licensing fee but you get things for a licensing fee. For example, legal protection. If someone wanted to sue Apple for h.264 they would have to go through the MPEG-LA patent pool. One of the major reasons WebM hasn't caught on as it might otherwise have is because Google refuses to back up anyone's implementation with a legal guarantee. They're starting to make their own patent pool to solve that, but it's still a little ways off and what should people do in the mean time?

post #239 of 281

Apple was one of the first companies to implement the mp3 into a device which changed the way folks carry around portable music. Before we had a choice of rewinding a cassette tape to find the desired song, even pulling the tape out and rewinding it back with a pen to get the dam thing to play again. There were issues with cassette as well as CDs in portable players skipping and only having a limited playing time of one hour per CD. So yes the mp3 transformed this hobby with the I-Pod. I give Apple credit for that.

If a person feels they do not like a product they can change. We know that there are handfuls of mp3 players out there for purchase. I would have to say this thread is really love -hate.  I really like my Apple laptop and I own 2 windows laptops. My first windows laptop was purchased in 1995. The issue here is that many have a distain for I-Tunes.  Yes they can move to another product. If someone made a questionnaire on Head-Fi  and made a quantifiable poll as to how many have left Apple I-Tunes the results may be staggering. Then again maybe not as many just go with the flow and are not worried about using a program slower than the DMV.


The great part of this thread is that people can wake up and figure out that I-Tunes is a hassle and they do have choices. For the meat and potatoes of this rant I am really centering on how slow the program is. It somehow has to overpower 90% of the ram around and becomes slow at processing even then. The reality starts to become apparent when you really see how easy mp3s can be processed around in a Mac or PC environment.  My issue was I was waiting for years, I really thought that at some point with either software or hardware the I-Tunes program was going to speed up and become part of the 21st century. The truth is it may have!


A minimum requirement here I figure would be a 64bit operating system and Windows 7 or Vista. I-Tunes finally has the processing power to move the big sled around. Now we have the organizational power to keep everything is nice order. The look is new and smooth running. This process may have taken years and years but I feel we are finally here. I feel worried even writing this as in fear of jinxing the success. I may be missing something but I figure the only thing missing from the equation is the playback of FLAC. A great work around is to rip FLACs into wave for I-Tunes.


The other issue is folks need 3gig of ram and a 64bit operating system. All this talk of I-Tunes running somehow better on an Apple does not seem true. I had issues with both until I went 64bit.

So every year we see companies come and go. Business is tough some times and Apple has always done many proprietary system moves. The largest was at the start not letting  3rd party software developers make programs for their operating system. Microsoft encouraged the 3rd party developers and that was the major key to their success. Apple made the I-Pod use proprietary software and even made lossless rips which ended up being proprietary to Apple Systems. They made the I-Pod a disposable $300.00 product with a limited irreplaceable battery. They made the I-Pod completely unserviceable forcing users to pay for an Apple insurance policy. People still love them though! I still like them too.  

Edited by Redcarmoose - 5/18/11 at 6:28pm
post #240 of 281

Why do i hate itunes? Well because it is slow and buggy and looks awful. Personally i use Zune player to play my music. Winamp is for syncing my iPod (rockboxed)

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Computer Audio
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › why do people dislike itunes?