Re: Songbird...

T i m <news@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Wed, 3 Dec 2008 23:18:04 +0000, usenet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Woody)
wrote:

<some snips>
It's the same thing as Picassa or iPhoto (is it). If they don't do
anything to the files collection then they are fairly pointless and if
they do I don't need / want them.

So basically you dont need any application other than explorer?

Now you know that's not what I meant or said.


You said they are poinltess if they don't and you don't want them if
they do. So can you tell me what that means?

If I want to listen to some Quo I choose the Quo
folder then the particular Quo album then the track and play it. I'm
not sure how a package could help me play that quo track (without some
prior effort on my part anyway). Scrolling down a longer single list
isn't necessarily easier for me.

what happens if you don't know which album a particular track is? or if
the track is on more than one album and you want to see which version
you prefer? Or even if that track is on a compilation and you want that?
I couldn't do that another way.

That question would be based on the assumptions that 1) I would have
duplicates, 2) that I cared or had preferences.

ok, well I think that is the crux of the matter. What you are saying is
that iTunes is no use to you as you don't have music, and what little
music you do have you can manage easily.

Which makes perfect sense, and explains why we differ in our use. I mean
for me the windows garmin software would be completely useless, but I am
sure it is of some use for you

In the case you are saying, you go to the collection and select an album.
Then press play

Yes (like I do atm).

yes, and like iTunes can do.

Once you have installed it and allowed (or told) it to 'find / import'
your collection into it's database. If I came along with a 100G
external drive filled with MP3's how would it cope.

It would cope fine.

How quickly would
it cope. How would another machine in your house cope when I plugged
it in that?

It would be as quick as anything reading 100GB of files, and you know
that can be slow (I handle multi gig datasets of text files on the pc
for a living, it is cronically slow at them).

but every machine would cope as well as it could. I assume the macbook
pro would be slower than the iMac, the main PC would probably be
somewhere between the two (although it is vista and vista is funny about
audio files), the xp machine wouldn't do it as it is currently killed
itself.

All of which is a bit irrelivant as I have all the music on one machine,
and listen to it from the others, so I just need it attached to one
machine. I can't be bothered carrying disks around just to listen to
music.

So what is All exactly (if that isn't a silly / obvious question)? ie,
Isn't All just what's below it in the list so could be selected via
'Select all' if that was your wish?

All is, for example, all the albums rather than a specific one. It is
efectively 'no filter'. Efectively it is the same as select all.

So 'yes' then. ;-)

Well, no, becuase there isn't a select all. But as I say, effectively
the same thing if there was one.

Ok, so, it's just you prefer the app to do what I do with a file
manager?

the file manager doesn't give you the level of control that makes it
easy to do. Yes, you could do it with file manager but you would lose a
lot of functionality, and then you still have to launch something to
play it.

Good, you are seeing it from my pov now. And that last bit is no issue
for me because everything other than iTunes launches nearly instantly
so is no issue for the odd time I might need them.

I see it from your point of view, because you don't seem to use music. I
have music playing all the time I am doing something, so I don't want to
be messing around track by track

iTunes is another app with its way.

I tunes is an App, FM is a tool (and I'm not being funny, I know they
are both 'apps' in your (programmer) eyes but I'm differentiating
between the two here as I believe most half literate might).

So you are calling me non half literate, thanks!

You are very welcome. ;-)

Well, I assume you are joking here (its hard to tell - you use smileys
on everything). but no, most non-computer litterate people don't
differenciate, and most computer litterate would also know they were the
same, so I would say only a small percentage of 'know a bit' people
would go for that view

No, they are both apps, they are both tools. They appear the way they do
to make people think they are different, but they really aren't.

I know that *are* in a coding sense.

Nothing to do with a coding sense. they are both applications for
dealing with data.

I also know they are in a semi
functional sense (one get's files, one plays music etc) but I would
define one as a tool, and the other as a program, something that
allows you to be creative rather than just manage what's there.

iTunes is for managing and listening, It really is the same as explorer,
but speciallised just for music. Any difference is really in your head


Finder
is another app etc
There is no difference

There is in my view.

And that is the idea of explorer, to make it look like there is a
difference, but it isn't.

Great, I don't care what it *actually* is I care what it does.

indeed. What they do is the same. One works on aranging general files,
one works on arranging music files.

There are a ton of windows shell plugins to
make it seem that way.

Again, different discussion. I'm talking out_of_the_box here.

So am I. There are a whole set of windows shell plugins that enable it
to do those things, and a lot come out of the box.


One is a tool to navigate and maintain the file
system, the other has other abilities ... like volume controls and the
like. You could do without WMP (as in maintain / manage your system)
but not FM.

You could do without either if you have something different.

What!? ;-)

You could happily run a windows PC without explorer or iTunes, if you
had another program to do what they do.

They open Word then move round the file system to select their files
within Word.

In the real world the files (now) exist even if Word isn't on there.

In the same way that they exist without explorer there.

No, not the point, they weren't created by explorer.

but from the scanner, or phone browser, or other plugins, they were
created by explorer.

Both of those applications are a means of manipulating files in
different ways. iTunes is speciallised and explorer is generalised.
Neither is more 'real'.

Ok, whatever.

ok, as you say we better leave that bit. I think the issue is more that
you don't actually understand how iTunes works!

Well I can 'not mind either' as long as it follows the same interface.
Like if I want to burn an image file I open a program (say Nero),
choose from the menu option 'Burn an image file', then choose the file
(Explorer stylee) and hit burn. I don't *always* like the drag n drop
thing unless it's obvious and still has the browse option as well (if
the required file isn't in easy view etc). That StreamClip is a good
example of that, one big basic box saying 'Drop file here'. Not an
array of places that may or may not allow you to drop the file.

Fair enough. I can cope with a variety of interfaces, depending on the
job.

I can sometimes cope. I'd prefer not to have to.

I prefer to have the best interface for the job.

Ok, but given I still don't know what is ideal for what and don't have
the likes of Toast it was the best I could think of. :-(

and that is fine, as long as you accept that the limitations you see are
partly down to it being used for something it wasn't designed for.
I mean my mitsibishi FTO *could* pull a caravan.

Oh I'm willing to accept anything, as long as I know why it is the
case. I have Nero on the PC (well, the Nero Vison sub module) and it
can make a DVD movie (tracks and sections of video brought together
etc). It also let me put a single track onto a DVD video and so why
wouldn't I expect (what_I_assumed_was) an Apple equivalent to do the
same and easier?

as you have already said, toast can, several other programs can. iDVD is
not the equivalent to nero, toast is an equivilent.



--
Woody

www.alienrat.com
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Songbird...
    ... So basically you dont need any application other than explorer? ... that iTunes is no use to you as you don't have music, ... It would cope fine. ... Than the limitations of your system isn't an issue to you. ...
    (uk.comp.sys.mac)
  • RE: Total Time in List Pane - Where did it go?
    ... in the oder I wanted it to play. ... Dragging and dropping from Explorer in the order you want it to play... ... Microsoft does nothing but play catch up with their software. ... I see WMP11 as a product that was rushed to its final release so ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsmedia.player)
  • Re: track number in the id3 tag data
    ... on the album folder in explorer" ... I will play around with library options in the actual player instead and see ... I then right click an album folder and then choose "play with ... See http://zachd.com/pss/pss.html for some helpful WMP info. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsmedia.player)
  • Re: track number in the id3 tag data
    ... play order. ... if it's going to be ignored by the player? ... You are in a context (Explorer) in which they are not being paid attention ... See http://zachd.com/pss/pss.html for some helpful WMP info. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsmedia.player)
  • Re: Songbird...
    ... So basically you dont need any application other than explorer? ... a column that list all the albums a column that lists all the ... and like iTunes can do. ... Yup, a media playing app, that's it's primary purpose. ...
    (uk.comp.sys.mac)