George Graves <gmgraves2@comcast.net> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> George Graves <gmgraves2@comcast.net> wrote
>>> Michelle Steiner wrote
>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote

>>>>>>>> OK, exactly what are iTunes' failings?

>>>>>>> Its not very intuitive when loading the ipod with mp3
>>>>>>> you already have on the computer for example.

>>>>>> Explain, please.

>>>>> I already did. Its much more intuitive for the ipod to appear
>>>>> as a drive and to use the normal file manager interface you
>>>>> are already used to than a special purpose app.

>>>> No it isn't.

>>>>>>> And what applications do those things better?

>>>>>>> Its rather more intuitive to just drag and drop those mp3s
>>>>>>> etc you already have to a drive which is the media player.

>>>>>> That's one option you have with iTunes.

>>>>> Not with the file manager you use for everything else.

>>>> And that file manager can't play music. Let's see, with your
>>>> preferred method, you use one application to download music,
>>>> another to play it, another to copy it to the iPod, and another
>>>> to burn it to CDs. I, on the other hand, use iTunes for all of
>>>> those functions in one easy to use, intuitive, integrated application.

>>> I think we've found ourselves another cross-posting Apple hater Michelle.

>> Not a shred of evidence that you are actually capable of thought.

> Ah, so now we degenerate into name calling.

Nope, you did. No name calling there, except by you.

>> So stupid it cant even work out that I didnt crosspost, I
>> just left the original crossposting in place, just like you did.

> I didn't look, sorry about that, but why the personal rancor?

Might just have been triggered by your juvenile name calling.

>>> Apple's way is no good because it's ...well....Apples way.

>> Wrong again. Its just much more intuitive for a device to
>> showup as just another drive, and be able to use the device
>> just like any other device when loading and unloading it.

> That's a matter of opinion, don't you think?

Nope. Matter of fact that allowing BOTH types of access is by definition
more intuitive than a single special purpose app for access to the device.

> Anyway, its not mine.

Your problem.

> There are things that I would change in iTunes, sure, but overall,
> its the best integrated app of its kind that I've seen so far.

You need to get out more.

And treating the device as a drive is much more intuitive than any app can be.

>> Sure, include a dedicated app for the stupids who dont even
>> know what a drive is, but let those who do know what a drive
>> is deal with the device just like any other drive if they want to.

> You can do that with an iPod is you wish.

Not easily by just plugging the iPod in and using it as a drive you cant.

> See Apple gives you the choice. But believe me,
> its a lot harder without iTunes than it is with it.

No it isnt when its properly implemented as a drive.

>>> Any other way is better because it's ... well, ... not Apple's way.

>> Just another mindless Apple bigot.

> Seems to be the attitude that you are projecting in this thread.

Then you need to get your seems machinery seen to.

>> Even someone as stupid as you

> Again, why the personal rancor?

Again, might just have been triggered by your juvenile name calling.

> I've not called you any names have I?

Corse you did, you called me 'another cross-posting Apple hater'

>> should be able to have a look at my posting history and see that
>> I hardly ever make any comment about Apple, and that when I
>> do, I have said that the ipod particularly is a very decent product,
>> albeit with some real downsides with iTunes particularly.

> Frankly, up until a few days ago, I don't remember seeing your name at all.

Irrelevant to my history in groups you dont read.

>> Its not a particularly intuitive app, even if you ignore the
>> fact that you cant treat the ipod as just another drive.

Try getting something out of an ipod and
putting it in another media player for starters.

>>>>>>>>>> But the iPod has the best UI of any portable
>>>>>>>>>> media player extant--until Friday, that is.

>>>> Right here, we're talking about the iPod

>>>>>>>>> Nope, plenty of cellphones leave it for dead, essentially
>>>>>>>>> because they integrate the media player with other capability.

>>>> Gee, right here, you're changing it to cell phones.

>>>>>>>> The iPod isn't a cell phone; how can you compare the two?

>>>>>>> Those others combined those functions long before the iphone
>>>>>>> ever showed up.

>>>> And here you're talking about cell phones
>>>> again, still in response to the iPod interface.

>>>>>> Huh? We were talking about the iPod.

>>>>> Nope, we're talking about media players.

>>>> And now, you're talking about media players.

>>>>> Nope, we're talking about media players.

>>>>>> But even though they did those functions before the iPhone ever
>>>>>> showed up doesn't mean that they do it better than the iPhone.

>>>>> They do anyway when the device is just another drive visible on the computer.

>>>>>> Heck, Verizon's phones don't do it at all--you can't download
>>>>>> music from the computer to the phone, period.

>>>>> Irrelevant to what hordes of phones can do in that regard.

>>>> But we were talking about one of the reasons I'm planning to switch from Verizon.

>>>>>> Apple did it with their very first phone; you can't get any faster than that.

>>>>> Corse you can, you dont have to lag the rest of the market so dismally.

>>>> Oh, so you're saying that Apple should have produced a cell phone years ago?

>>>>>> I see; all those other MP3 players that were on the market before
>>>>>> the iPod made no impression on them?

>>>>> Those that were suckers for the ipod, no they didnt.

>>>> 70% of those who have bought MP3 players are suckers?

>>>>>> And then when the iPod came out, they started screaming at Apple
>>>>>> to make it work with Windows (which the iPod originally didn't
>>>>>> do) because it was, by God, an *Apple*, whose computers they
>>>>>> refused to buy.

>>>>> Nope, they ignored them until they could be used with what they had.

>>>> If they hadn't shown an interest in wanting an iPod, Apple wouldn't
>>>> have made the iPod compatible with Windows in the first place. But
>>>> even if you're right, that means that people who had avoided both
>>>> Apple and MP3 players in droves suddenly swarmed to get iPods
>>>> because Apple made the iPod available for Windows? Do you realize
>>>> how senseless your thesis is?

>>>> I'll tell you one thing, though; if the iPhone won't do voice
>>>> dialing and if it won't upload its address book to my car (which
>>>> has Bluetooth capability for cell phones), I won't buy one. If it
>>>> does one, but not the other, I'll have to decide.

>>> It won't surprise me if it doesn't do one or the other.

>> Me neither, and when so many of its competitive products do
>> both, AND allow the device to be used just like any other drive...

>>> Rarely do I buy a technology product (or even a computer application) that will
>>> do everything I would put in it had I designed it. I suspect we're all that way

>> Pity that the functionality she wants is there in the competitive
>> products. With a real keyboard too, which is much better for email.

>> AND the competitive products allow you to add 3rd party
>> apps to do what the product itself doesnt come with too.

>> Yes, many of the stupids dont enhance their device with 3rd party
>> apps, but anyone with a clue does when some functionality is missing.

> Name calling again.

Corse you never ever do anything like that yourself, eh ?

> I don't get it.

Your problem.