Talk:ITunes/Archive 2

message: I don't like this line of the article:
: On October 12 2005, Apple introduced iTunes 6.0 which added support for purchasing and viewing of video content from the iTunes Music Store.  iTMS offers Music Videos and five TV shows including most notably ABC's  Lost and Desperate Housewives 24 hours after airing as well as the collection from past seasons.  iTMS also gives the ability to view Apple's large collection of movie trailers.  Format for purchased Videos is 128 kbit/s Protected MPEG-4 video (H264).
Okay, maybe the specific info on the new shows belongs in the iTMS article, but I think it at least should be modified to something like this:
: On October 12 2005, Apple introduced iTunes 6.0 which added support for purchasing and viewing of video content from the iTunes Music Store.  iTMS offers Music Videos and five TV shows including most notably ABC's  Lost and Desperate Housewives 24 hours after airing as well as the collection from past seasons.  Since then, Apple's collection of television shows has expanded. iTMS also gives the ability to view Apple's large collection of movie trailers.  Format for purchased Videos is 128 kbit/s Protected MPEG-4 video (H264).
--RayaruB 14:00, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: How about just adding that one line, given that we already link the ITMS more than once. You have noticed that we have a whole section in this page on the ITMS right? ITunes#iTunes_Music_Store AlistairMcMillan 15:02, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

text: And changing the line that reads "iTMS offers Music Videos and five TV shows..." to "iTMS offers Music Videos and initially offered five TV shows..." AlistairMcMillan 15:04, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I made those changes. I think it sounds better now. --RayaruB 15:09, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  iTMS Video 

message: For some strange reason iTunes (windows) is not letting me edit some of the songs info. All of the music files that wont let me edit are ones that i have put in via CD. Anyone have any ideas on why this is and how it can be fixed? Euphopolus 12:03, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Have you moved the folders the songs are in since you ripped them? Markyour words 20:23, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editing songs 

message: *That section needs to be reworded. I'm uncertain exactly what it means, otherwise I'd do it myself.
**It doesn't even need to be there.  It's implicit in the article that iTunes is THE media player designed for the iPod.  I'm removing the section.  raekwon 03:29, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: iPods section

message: Discussion is ongoing at this page.  TheJabberwock 22:23, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blacklist issues 

message: Is there a version disparity between iTunes for Windows and iTunes for Mac? I have the latest iTunes on my Mac and it lists as 6.0.4 (3) - Googling 6.0.4.2 however shows a new version. I'm wondering if this a Windows' only version. I've rolled back my changes to the version till I can find the correct number. TDS  (talk • contribs)  05:12, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correct Version 

message: If a CD's tracks are untagged (the info is empty), can you tag them in iTunes by finding and grouping the tracks in the same CD so you can edit their info as a group, assuming the tracks' filenames do not share any common words? Shawnc 10:49, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tagging a CD/album 

message: Does anyone know the real releasedate for iTunes? I think it was sometime in 2000.
*The date in the article is correct. iTunes was unveiled with an immediate release as part of Steve Jobs' keynote at MacWorld SF in 2001. -- Steven Fisher 06:20, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Releasedate 

message: The article raises the minor complaint that users can not re-download songs purchased from the iTunes Music Store that they've lost. I have a first hand experience that says otherwise. When my PowerBook's hard drive was replaced, my local dealer suggested I contact Apple, because some customers reported to him that Apple had allowed them to download their songs again. Sure enough, a couple days later all the tracks I've ever bought were waiting for me to download. I haven't seen this reported anywhere yet, so I'm not sure how to address the inaccuracy. Should the complaint just be struck from the article until this becomes better known? -- Steven Fisher 21:19, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll leave it to someone else to decide whether this qualifies as a reliable source: http://thecontent.wordpress.com/2006/05/24/itunes-lets-people-re-download-all-your-music-once/ AlistairMcMillan 12:43, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Unfortunately, I don't think it does. Is there any problem with leaving it marked as dubious until we get a better source? -- Steven Fisher 17:48, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've also been able to redownload my music from Apple after I had my hard drive crash along with my iPod, although it is evaluated on a case-by-case basis. You can try talking to Apple for confirmation. Will 05:23, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This seems like a legitimate complaint.   From the apple store:  "In the event that a customers entire music library is lost, the iTunes Music Store does re-grant the purchases history. Please keep in mind that Apple does not offer protection against the loss of purchases, so this is a one-time exception"  Justforasecond 04:44, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recovery 

message: I've listed tihs up for review as a good article as it lacks references. Other concerns are voiced here. Computerjoe's talk 20:01, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good Article Review 

message: For some reason, this link was removed in June: http://www.oldapps.com/itunes.htm It contains an archive of older versions of the software. Why was it removed? I think it is a valuable resource that pertains to this article.
--66.140.152.89
: Because it was spammed throughout a number of articles.  Because it doesn't really tell us anything new about the subject(s).  Please read Wikipedia: External links.  AlistairMcMillan 17:34, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Older Versions 

message: Why would it merge to iTunes if it doesn't relate to it but specifically to the iTunes Music Store. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Toosmart215 (talk • contribs) 01:11, 31 July 2006
: Would you mind explaining what you are referring to? AlistairMcMillan 01:51, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind.  Worked it out.  Pre-order status AlistairMcMillan 02:02, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge, why? 

message: *The EQ button that used to be on the bottom right hand corner of the iTunes interface
*The visualizer button and option to change the size (small/medium/large) ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kingyj (talk • contribs) 09:23, 13 September 2006
: The buttons may be missing, but the features are still there. AlistairMcMillan 23:57, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing Features in iTunes 7? 

message: Why do my genuine changes keep getting reverted? The version of the program as said in the "About iTunes" section of the help menu clearly says 7.0.0.70, not 7.0 Lakeyboy 12:27, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  no, the version number in the about window says 7.0 (70).  More importantly, the version number of the actual application is simply 7.0 Stuph 20:15, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Actually, the Macintosh version is 7.0 (70) and the Windows version is 7.0.0.70, following each platform's version numbering semantics. I agree with Stuph though, the public, cross-platform version number is simply 7.0. 71.38.14.195 11:26, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: iTunes Version Number

message: iTunes 7 offers some new features that may be worth including in this article:
*Multiple libraries
*Library backup
*Gapless playback
*Parental controls
*Cover Flow (flipping through album images)
Also see iLounge's discussion of the new features. cluth 20:11, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In addition, there REALLY should be a mention (at least in passing) of the Grouping feature. I just discovered it yesterday, and it's incredible. It needs mentioning, but I have no information on when it was implemented, so I've no idea how to integrate it into this article. Seasonsinthesky 19:36, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New features to discuss? 

message: Okay, I did a quick search of the talk page and the archive and this doesn't seem to have come up before, but am I alone in thinking that prefacing "digital media player application" (which is ridiculous wording in its own right) with "proprietary" is a bit..um..loaded?  Browsing through other software articles, the only place I see something similar is the opening sentence of the MPlayer article, which specifically states that MPlayer is "free and open source" -- also a stupid opener.  Whether or not software is "proprietary" belongs in the license section of the Software info box, not in the introduction.  Come on, can't we think of a better "first thing" to say about iTunes than that it's proprietary?  To do so would be neither to hide nor mislead.  While it could be argued that iTunes in particular is indeed notable because it's proprietary (vertical integration with iPod and iTMS, etc), I think this is more an instance of WP:WEASEL or thinly veiled advocacy WP:NOT#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox.  Oh sure, we're going to tell you about iTunes like you asked, but watch out!  It's proprietary!  Whoooooooa.  Alwarren@ucsd.edu 05:20, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree completely and have removed the offending word. None of the other articles on proprietary software (eg Microsoft Windows) have this mentioned about them. I don't see why this is such an important characteristic of iTunes as to warrant its position in the first sentence of the article. Willnz0 04:36, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  On "proprietary"... 

message: Does anyone know how to merge the music and videos libraries into just a single library, so I can see both in the same window? v6 was fine with it, but now it's taking up way too much space in the playlist window. It also turns out that it's organizing all of my videos into the "Videos" folder, under the "iTunes Music" folder.  I had them previously organized under artist folders, such as "Red vs Blue" or "HomestarRunner.com" (It makes sense because I don't have "Red vs Blue - The Blood Gulch Cronicles:  Season IV - The Arrival" for the title; I just sort it like the rest of my music). Does anyone know if you can direct the way it organizes the videos? —Akrabbimtalk 15:21, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  iTunes 7 library 

message: Would anyone like to suggest how we may improve this article? --Tarret 00:09, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see any discussion about merging the "iMix" thing, if there isn't any, that template should be removed. Otherwise, we should plan on what to merge into that section. Homestarmy 23:51, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that we should merge the "iMix" article with this one but am I the only one who thinks that this article focuses too much on the faetures? --Tarret 00:04, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Can anybody see why the references aren't showing up, in either IE or Firefox?  I copied & pasted from the current article of the day, still no refs appear.  I want to tag this for Version 0.5, but only once the refs are visible. Thanks, Walkerma 06:17, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: GA collaboration

message: How does iTunes like to deal with double disc albums?
QWERTY | DVORAK 01:42, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You can enter a disc as disc _ of _. I assume it would order them according to tracks and discs.--roger6106 03:33, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So I would want to give them the saame name (not put Disc One in the title)?
QWERTY | DVORAK 20:44, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Give both discs the same album name (and artist, etc.). Then mark them (in the appropriate fields) as disc 1 of 2 and disc 2 of 2. If you sort your library by album, the tracks will all show up in the proper order, with the second disc following the first. BJ Nemeth 22:54, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Double Discs 

message: In History edit 19:07, 12 October 2006 AlistairMcMillan says:
"Gracenote - Remove "Controversially..." paragraph. (1) Factually incorrect. (2) That two and a half guys are bothered about this, doesn't constitute a controversy.)"
It is factually accurate -- the Gracenote service can't be turned off. And he has not just edited the word "controversially" -- but removed all mention of the non-optional, spyware-like behavior of the new Gracenote implementation.
Applications automatically sending private data without user consent -- and without the option not to do so -- is a major legal and ethical issue today. 
Recent examples are the iTunes "MiniStore" which Steve Jobs had to publically defend as not being spyware, and then modify to be off by default, and the "Microsoft Genuine Advantage" application which Microsoft has  modified under public pressure as well.
In this context, a major application like iTunes engaging in any kind of spyware-like behavior is inherently "controversial" as it is engaging in a class of "controversial" behavior.
But I have reworked (and streamlined) the text to simply inform the reader of the existence of the involuntary-data-submission phenomenon.
: I just opened the preferences and found a well-marked checkbox in there for "Automatically retrieve CD track names from Internet". I'm not quite sure how this "can't be turned off". If it actually turns out to not work for some reason, that seems like the sort of thing that would have to be verified by a third-party reliable source. Zetawoof(ζ) 16:38, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I also have that option (under advanced, importing - Windows version).--roger6106 17:10, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Readded important subject of Gracenote involuntary user data submission 

message: In the recent wow patch, functionality for itunes was added, should this be put in the article, under 'intergration with under aplications'?
:What kind of functionality exactly? If, for example it shows what songs you're playing, etc, than I am not sure, as there are many applications that do that in the first place --Illyria05-- 05:32, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  World of Warcraft 

message: I think the articles iTunes and iTunes Store (prevesoly knowen as iTMS) shoude be merged into iTunes. Due to  most people access Tunes Store using iTunes, and they need the software to get the content onto their iPos or CD.
:No, though they should be linked to each other, there is too much information in these to merge them. Merging is usually done to get rid of short articles; both of these are quite long. You can use iTunes without the store, even if it's a major functionality loss.--HereToHelp 21:06, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, there are distinct issues concerning both of them (eg. DRM concerns the Store, not iTunes the application). Hippo X 15:28, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: Um, actually, Mkdw I think that only the most recent logo is necessary; see Microsoft Windows as an example. Linux does not even have an official logo, but one is still posted. Scoutersig 16:02, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, it's either one or all. And all looks really too complicated. The fair use rationale is questionable.--HereToHelp 22:33, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just the latest logo, please. I think it's representative enough of all of the iTunes releases so far. Individual, older logos may go into the history article and placed by their respective versions. –-  kungming·2 (Talk) 22:36, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Will do.--HereToHelp 03:51, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks great! Thanks! –-  kungming·2 (Talk) 04:21, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: iTunes 4 also used the green icon, but it isn't mentioned in this article so I thought I'd omit it. But you're right, it's better not foster wrong conclusions.--HereToHelp 04:30, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I thought that the mulitple diminishing-size logos looked "good," but good looks are not the standard: simple information is. Their location below in the article, as well as in the ITunes version history page is where they should be.  Scoutersig 07:20, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  iTunes logo 

message: This article has no criticisms. How about how iTunes is way too big and takes up system resource. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.240.104.159 (talk) 07:12, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: An unknown editor attempted to create a criticism section however, it was poorly written, contained stereotypes and what appeared to be editor opinion, and the sources were either out-of-date or from some little-known blogger's opinion. It's ok to have criticisms in the article but as the section standed it was unfortunately not up to Wikipedia standards so I removed it (for the second time it appears). If anyone informed would like to work on it, include reliable sources using WP:RS and using a neutral point of view WP:NPOV. Also reference the Wikipedia Manual of Style It would also help to have reliably sourced criticism from both Mac and Windows users. Chikinsawsage 19:12, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism? 

message: Hello, in bothe the iTunes and the iTunes history articles, I added that iTunes 7.0.0 dropped Mac OS 10.2 support. Anyway, does anyone know what versions of iTunes dropped support for 10.0 and later, 10.1? (I do not mean the last version for those platforms; I mean the first version to not support them). I feel this is important for users of those platforms, so they can see what is the latest version of iTunes they may use. I think iTunes dropped 10.0 support very early on, perhaps the last release of v3? And I know 10.1 support went to at least to v4.x... Anyway, any ideas? Thanks, --Illyria05-- 05:30, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Last iTunes releases for OSX 10.0+10.1? 

message: User:Ed g2s deleted the gallery, saying it was an inappropriate use use of fair use images. i agree with him; however, we now have a bunch of orphaned fair use images. I list them below. I would like help integrating them into this article or the version history article, and then delete the rest.--HereToHelp 15:36, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gallery