[centerfold]

We are aware about that.

But what are internet forums for if noone is arguing with each other? : )

 

[squall343]

1. slow

2. cannot play other format such as ape and flac

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I don't really get the "slow" thing. What is slow? Load times are short enough to be insignificant. Are you talking about rip time?

P

 

[mark2410]

not getting slow?

how much music do you have and have you ever used anything else? itunes is easily the slowest player ive used

 

[m1abrams]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mark2410 /img/forum/go_quote.gif not getting slow? how much music do you have and have you ever used anything else? itunes is easily the slowest player ive used

See I do not have the slow complaint, and if you see my post above I have used a number of players. My music collection is not huge, but not small either. ~7500 lossless tracks.

My PC is not a powerhouse either anymore, just an older Athlon X2 chip with 2GB RAM.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mark2410 /img/forum/go_quote.gif not getting slow? how much music do you have and have you ever used anything else? itunes is easily the slowest player ive used

I haven't tried any other players, but I just don't understand what the problem is. Slow what? Slow when? I have nearly 15,000 songs in the system, and they play one right after another without undue pause between them. I'm just trying to get at what you folks are talking about when you say slow.

P

 

[etiolate]

lol, i knew this would spark quite the debate... now we should talk about DBT cables using itunes and foobar A/B/C/D/X testing.

i also don't see the slow factor being very relevant.

 

[mark2410]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phelonious Ponk /img/forum/go_quote.gif I haven't tried any other players, but I just don't understand what the problem is. Slow what? Slow when? I have nearly 15,000 songs in the system, and they play one right after another without undue pause between them. I'm just trying to get at what you folks are talking about when you say slow. P

go to the list view and give your mouse wheel a spin and see your comp grind to a halt. yes scrolling in itunes clearly ought to max a cpu.

wmp does it with out batting an eye

 

[rhythmdevils]

no spinning wheel for me except when my external hard drive goes to sleep and has to spin back up, which has nothing to do with itunes if I'm correct. But I do have 13GB of ram..

 

[m1abrams]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mark2410 /img/forum/go_quote.gif go to the list view and give your mouse wheel a spin and see your comp grind to a halt. yes scrolling in itunes clearly ought to max a cpu. wmp does it with out batting an eye

Just tried this test. No issues at all, even had task manager active and the cpu did not even blip.

 

[apnk]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mark2410 /img/forum/go_quote.gif go to the list view and give your mouse wheel a spin and see your comp grind to a halt. yes scrolling in itunes clearly ought to max a cpu. wmp does it with out batting an eye

Nothing happened on my Asus N81.

 

[Zai]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhythmdevils /img/forum/go_quote.gif no spinning wheel for me except when my external hard drive goes to sleep and has to spin back up, which has nothing to do with itunes if I'm correct. But I do have 13GB of ram..

Omg. Arch linux fully booted into X under Awesome WM plus all the services = 56 megs ram usage

 

[wordfool]

itunes is bloated IMO and is not fast to start up, but we're talking marginal differences on a decent computer (having to wait an adiditional second perhaps). The slow scrolling issue is odd... sounds almost like there's a third party software conflict... perhaps AV/firewall software is causing the problem?

I hate itunes for many other issues. Adobe and Apple software accounted for 90% of the problems I have faced on my PC in the last 3 or so years. Both are icky companies IMO.

 

[brooce]

For me iTunes slowness comes down to this:
1) start-up time. I want it virtually instant. iTunes feels like starting up a web browser or Adobe Reader or something. Far, far, far slower than foobar2000 and other small apps.
2) killing time. It also isn't really instant or near-instant when I want to kill it.
3) ram use. It uses too much. I have a fair bit but I'd still rather use it efficiently for those other apps. I don't want nor need its relatively huge ram use.
4) speed. It's really about speed to me. Foobar can be up in no time and be killed in no time flat. More than that, there is never, ever a time where in Foobar I'd get odd pauses or slight delayed reponses, and I favour responsiveness and efficient use of resources too much to torture myself with bloated programs in cases where I have a choice not to use them.

 

[brooce]

(iffy wi-fi, double post deleted)