NEWS: Nokia tops iPhone and BlackBerry (again), Apple as Nick Clegg
in [Wireless Internet]
|
Prev: Automatic File Translation Utility for Windows-based Mobile Devices
Next: Help With Free WiFi !!
From: John Navas on 24 May 2010 15:44 On Mon, 24 May 2010 12:02:41 -0700, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote in <240520101202413317%nospam(a)nospam.invalid>: >In article <ifhlv5132sskuhql1bc4l5lj0n1r94qole(a)4ax.com>, John Navas ><jnspam1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >> >> The iTunes database is an abomination that can all too easily get >> >> corrupted / out of sync with the music library, resulting in songs >> >> missing from the index and songs in the index missing from the library. >> >> I've wasted more time fixing such problems for my non-technical friends >> >> than I care to count. >> > >> >nonsense. it does not get out of sync unless you are doing something >> >*very* bizarre. >> >> It either gets out of sync fairly easily, > >not unless the user is doing something weird or unusual. > >how is it out of sync? maybe your diagnosis is in error. > >> or my friends and clients are bizarre. ;) > >that must be the case. > >> Worse, it has no tool to get the database back in sync. > >it doesn't need one when it rarely, if ever happens. > >> >> Android needs no such nonsense. Real-time indexing of music takes only >> >> a few seconds even with a 16GB memory card, and is never out of sync >> >> with the library. >> > >> >what about 160 gig ipods? with 10x the capacity, those 'few seconds' >> >are now 20-30 seconds, assuming a 'few' is 2-3. >> >> What matters is how many files need to be indexed, and how fast they can >> be indexed, not how much space there is on the device, > >and if someone buys a 160 gig ipod, the probably have a lot of music to >put on it, otherwise they'd have bought a lower capacity unit for less >money. in other words, there *are* a lot of files to index. > >> and only the >> changes need to be indexed, not everything. > >and then it will need to be merged with the main database. With all due respect, you clearly do not understand the technical issues. >> "It's not a bug, it's a feature!" :) > >it is a feature, one which hundreds of millions of ipod owners prefer. Good for them. Lots of people also believe in Astrology. -- Best regards, John If the iPhone is really so impressive, why do iFans keep making excuses for it?
From: nospam on 24 May 2010 15:48 In article <4pllv5h50o5555n1cdrjahlsjdg308dop5(a)4ax.com>, John Navas <jnspam1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > With all due respect, you clearly do not understand the technical > issues. nor do you, from what i can tell. plus you apparently don't know how to use itunes nor do your friends. it doesn't get out of sync unless the user deliberately fucks it up. > >> "It's not a bug, it's a feature!" :) > > > >it is a feature, one which hundreds of millions of ipod owners prefer. > > Good for them. Lots of people also believe in Astrology. straw man.
From: John Navas on 24 May 2010 15:49 On Mon, 24 May 2010 12:05:53 -0700, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote in <240520101205534786%nospam(a)nospam.invalid>: >In article <akhlv5t0bdkp82l7j9p16g4tij9313m32n(a)4ax.com>, John Navas ><jnspam1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >> My mobile device is able to store all the music on my computer. >> I don't keep music on my computer I don't want to hear. > >then you don't have very much music, ... I have well over 100 CDs worth of music on my mobile, which I personally consider to be "very much". Likewise most of the people I know. You know, the weird ones that keep corrupting their iTunes databases. ;) -- Best regards, John If the iPhone is really so impressive, why do iFans keep making excuses for it?
From: nospam on 24 May 2010 16:10 In article <6qllv55g7in8uupa2ia0u8copi1019id5l(a)4ax.com>, John Navas <jnspam1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >> My mobile device is able to store all the music on my computer. > >> I don't keep music on my computer I don't want to hear. > > > >then you don't have very much music, ... > > I have well over 100 CDs worth of music on my mobile, > which I personally consider to be "very much". you might, but others would consider that to be small. assuming 10 songs per cd, that's 1000 songs, which based on apple's ipod specs, is about 4 gig. that's less than the smallest ipod nano. > Likewise most of the people I know. You know, the weird ones that keep > corrupting their iTunes databases. ;) you still haven't explained how it's corrupted. why am i not surprised.
From: John Navas on 24 May 2010 16:36
On Mon, 24 May 2010 13:29:50 -0700, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote in <240520101329507050%nospam(a)nospam.invalid>: >In article <clnlv5p8epsn65l7q56r57bjpk5ncu4164(a)4ax.com>, John Navas ><jnspam1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >> Then you know that iTunes on Windows is poorly designed, way too >> bloated, and not terribly robust. Right? ;) > >it's worse than the mac version but a lot of that has to do with >windows itself. you can't put lipstick on a pig :) nearly all of it is >the same source code on both platforms. Total nonsense. Evidence abounds in comparable but properly-designed non-bloated robust Windows software. >as for the bloat, it has too many features (music, movies, apps, email, >activate phones, etc.) but on the other hand, that makes it easier to >sync everything with one click. It's not just features. It's design, horribly bloated by any measure. >> You've proven that iTunes is not ready for prime time. > >it's very ready for prime time. it has its faults but not the ones >you're claiming. Too late -- you've already conceded the point. >> The average user isn't willing to get special training -- >> they expect it to just work. Imagine that. ;) > >training? what in hell are you talking about? it's very easy to use. on >first launch it asks to look for music. after that, just drag new music >to it. you can even set up a watch folder to auto-add music. sorting is >no more difficult than a single click. It's you that's brought up the issue of training. >anyone that can't figure out how to use itunes has bigger problems. It's not bad software, so it must be bad users! >> You've just demonstrated that you don't have relevant expertise. > >i've done no such thing and i'm not the one with the corrupted itunes >databases. Actually you have. >> >not to mention that a system crash is rare and itunes can rebuild the >> >database, but why let that get in the way of anything. >> >> Unfortunately it doesn't. >> Unless you have a manual backup, your playlists are history. > >wrong. Then prove it. >and you still haven't explained this so called corruption. i'm >beginning to think it doesn't exist. I've explained it sufficiently for anyone with even less expertise than you've claimed. -- Best regards, John If the iPhone is really so impressive, why do iFans keep making excuses for it? |
