Hacker News Reader

Comment by cookiecaper | Hacker News Reader

I consider iTunes for Mac to be a lousy piece of software, too. I've found it to be a memory hog with inadequate features on both platforms. I think that most people don't complain about it on Mac because it meets their needs and they don't know any better, as most lay Windows users don't complain against Internet Explorer.

View on HN

iTunes for Mac is totally adequate. One thing you're missing here is that iTunes is the only way you're able to use an iPod, and so - if we're arguing about general market behaviour - iTunes doesn't appear to be a problem for the millions of iPod users out there.

That said, I agree with OP's point about iTunes's performance in Windows. It is - quite frankly - terrible. So much so that when I switched over to OSX, I opened iTunes and marveled at how quickly it could actually do things.

iTunes for Mac is only adequate for music (a.k.a. yesterday's use case), and plenty of other players work very well for music too. In comparison, most people still don't have hard disks big enough to fit their entire movie collections, which is today's new use case for iTunes, and the only current way to push movies onto new-gen Apple devices.

I have an iPhone and enjoy it, but I've only played a movie on it once or twice in the time I've owned it for this reason. This is true of most people I know with iPhones, and it will similarly be true for iPads. It's a glaring problem that Apple's doesn't seem interested in solving; they'd rather you re-purchase every DVD as a movie from their store, and then be locked in to their platform or else lose your content.

I'm curious as to what your objection is to managing moves in iTunes?

I've got most of my DVD collection in there at this point, and I actually find it fairly pleasant.

> plenty of other players work very well for music too.

Well they work well for playback, but I've yet to find a comparable alternative to iTune's music library/organization features. You may have a point about movies and such - I tend to play them in VLC, and organize them according to folder in my external HDD.

Amusingly enough a lot of the 'default' linux music players have similar or better library/organisation features (I would prefer to use rhythmbox if it has a mac version).

Do you know of any better music player software for OS X?

If you only need something to play music/video files, I would suggest VLC Player; I haven't found anything better. However, if you're big into organizing your music (different playlists for different moods, etc.), you might find VLC to be lacking a bit.

One of the reasons I enjoy iTunes is that I'm not big into organizing my music and playlists-- iTunes does it for me. Will VLC move my music into an organized directory and let me play an album, or shuffle through all songs from an artist or genre without me having to create playlists?

No, it won't. That's what jazzyb was getting at I believe. VLC will play anything, but it's not a music library.

Check out Ecoute. A gorgeous UI "designed to be minimal, small and pretty so it doesn't take a lot of space on your screen. Just what you need to play your library."

http://ecouteapp.com/

One problem is what are your criteria for "better"?

As a for instance, I want a music player that handles flac and ogg files and that I can access in a terminal. Low memory usage is important to me also. I use cmus on a Mac, and I like it quite a lot.

If you're interested, I'm working on a command-line music organizer:

http://code.google.com/p/beets/

It has an MPD clone player built-in, so you can use ncmpc with it if you want. Or just keep using cmus.

There's support, albiet indirectly, for flac in iTunes via Fluke. http://blowintopieces.com/fluke/

Apple's refusal to support FLAC, in favour of their own crappy rip-off (which they refuse to licence to 3rd parties) was, for me personally, the moment they jumped the shark. I feel later developments have borne this out.

I mean you can buy music from Metallica and The Beatles in FLAC format. If Metallica and The Beatles are out ahead of you on some aspect of digital music, it's time for a rethink.

made my day. Thanks

I feel as if Songbird has reached that stage. I guess it's personal preference thing, but I am really impressed with the recent Songbird releases (even though they have been infrequent).

Perhaps may I suggest using QuickSilver or google quick search box with iTunes? QuickSilver lets you add global keyboard shortcuts and oodles of quick access to iTunes without ever going to iTunes.

This is probably the thing I use Quicksilver for most - controlling iTunes without having to look at iTunes, ever. It's so convenient that I've held off replacing Quicksilver for one of its actively developed successors.

I've noticed people complain about a lot of problems with iTunes on Windows that I just never see. In particular, people with much smaller libraries complaining about search and scroll performance problems. It strikes me that iTunes-on-Windows biggest problem is that it's frail.

FWIW: I've got iTunes running now; it's been up for about four hours, playing music and I did a sync of my iphone and ipad. It's bouncing between 45 and 55MB of memory [1].

[1] (library: 14,000 songs; 300 movies)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com