49 Comments

Summary:

If you were paying attention to the media event today the iTunes announcement is already old news. I apologize, but I’m not as quick as I used to be, so I’ve only just downloaded the update. Hi, I’m iTunes 7. I look familiar, but I’m only […]

If you were paying attention to the media event today the iTunes announcement is already old news. I apologize, but I’m not as quick as I used to be, so I’ve only just downloaded the update.

Hi, I’m iTunes 7. I look familiar, but I’m only kinda related to the iTunes you’re used to. I’m greyer. I have more eye-candy. And I hog memory. You weren’t using that, were you?

I am less than pleased with the new version of iTunes. To be honest, I was completely content with iTunes 6. Heck, even iTunes 5 was alright by my standards. As the older versions of WinAMP demonstrated (and my personal favorite Windows player, NAD), sometimes simpler is just better.

Where’d the RAM Go?

I’m not a cheap man, but I’m still not quite ready to step out on a limb and grab a MacBook Pro just yet. Until I’m ready for a 110° laptop, I’m stuck with my old 15″ Powerbook and it’s paltry 512MB of RAM. In general, 512MB has been fine. I can run Firefox, Safari, Photoshop, Mail, Quicksilver, and Cyberduck all at once without a single hiccup.

I used to be able to add iTunes to that list. No more.

Don’t get me wrong, the Coverflow disc browser is nice, but it only contributes to iTunes eating about 100MB of real memory and over 300MB of virtual memory. Nice. So as long as I don’t mind watching my Expose windows stutter, I can still listen to music. I swear the original Coverflow.app was much faster. (Note: it gets a bit better with a mini-window, but that’s not really the point).

Not that some of the new features aren’t fun (iPod at a glance is brilliant). But entertainment at the expense of my system memory is a step in the wrong direction if you ask me. I don’t want a behemoth, just a nice player that syncs with my iPod.

Yeah, I’m whining a bit. I could always go buy more RAM — but I shouldn’t have to.

We’ve Painted. Again.

As is now becoming a tradition for Apple, they’ve gone ahead and revamped the iTunes interface as well. Those who remember the iTunes 5 release and the death of brushed metal, the pillaging continues. This time we’ve changed all of the sliders too. Sorry, Aqua, iTunes just doesn’t want to have anything to do with you.

Bye bye Aqua

I must say, iTunes continues to evolve into something that is looking more and more like Apple’s slow website redesign. I’m all for new design (heck, look at this place), but some consistency is nice. That’s what makes all of Apple’s hardware so unmistakeable: they carry design instruments through different pieces. Software, I guess, is completely immune to that rule.

Secretly, I’m a big fan of Apple’s new design elements. The column headers are clearer, the interface cleaner, and black-shininess is always appreciated. Oh yeah, and now we’re back to a blue icon.

That being said, I’m not sure why iTunes continues to be the only application that Apple continuously revamps. It’s a new version, Apple, I get it. There’s no need to change it completely for the world to notice that you’re now selling Disney videos and five flavors of iPod nano.

  1. Personally, I like the continual revamps of iTunes… I think the product continues to evolve for the better.

    And lets be honest here… if you want to run the newest flashy software, you’re gonna need the newest flashy hardware.

    Share
  2. Sure, but I don’t want the flashiest all the time. A simpler Apple-written option would be nice too.

    Share
  3. If you haven’t noticed the trend since the beginning of computing, as software progresses so does the hardware requirements, including memory. I don’t think they are going to stop development of their product just because a few people are whining about memory. This rant just seems more of a personal problem rather than a fault in iTunes 7.

    Sounds like its time for a much needed memory upgrade.

    Share
  4. I really dont complain if you have 512 RAM u are at the minimum i use 2 GB as i like flow in the machine. The thing is that we (the users) always want more and more requier better HW this is how it is and always will be.

    Share
  5. Don’t know if you noticed, but iTunes isn’t the ONLY audio player for OS X. It’s not even the only iPod manager. (http://www.yamipod.com/main/modules/downloads/) It’s not like apple have suddenly stopped you listening to music.

    Share
  6. If you don’t like it, don’t us it!

    Share
  7. [...] That being said, I’m not sure why iTunes continues to be the only application that Apple continuously revamps. It’s a new version, Apple, I get it. There’s no need to change it completely for the world to notice that you’re now selling Disney videos and five flavors of iPod nano. This post has been published in slightly different form at The Apple Blog. 09.12.06 / 4pm by Yasser Dahab. [...]

    Share
  8. All hastiness aside, I’m still going to continue to use iTunes because it’s still the best manager out there, even if I think it’s a bit bloated. I simply question why an application that at it’s core plays music requires as much of my system as my RAW image processor.

    You guys are right, though, I do need an upgrade. And I will — eventually.

    Share
  9. I don’t think Yasser was looking for comments like these. It’s more a question of why, why does an app like iTunes need to consume as much memory as it does? It does a lot, granted, for being a media player/manager. To any programmer out there, this question makes one wonder if the code isn’t as efficient as it should be.

    Honestly, I’m saddened at the video addition to iTunes, it breaks a logical organization Apple started in OS X. I get that from a market perspective, Apple went the route any company in their position would take. Yet, I harken for the day when my photos where handled by iPhoto, my tunes were in iTunes, my movies were in, they were in…

    See the problem that we have here? When did iTunes suddenly need to be the end all be all for iLife media management? How about some breaking up, because it’s becoming the WMP of OS X.

    Share
  10. First i like to say i agree that you should expect software to require more and more memmory.
    But it depends on the program, i would expect photoshop or any video editing program to “eat” memmory, but this is a music player, its suposed to run in the background while you are working, not in the front eating at your resources.

    But in any case next to the eye candy iTunes is like the media player for windows, an utterly useless player you have to use when you first get your mac and youre installing something else to replace it.

    Share

Comments have been disabled for this post