Talk:ITunes/Archive 4

message: OK, I have been "hearing" about songs (including a few I'd like to download) wrongfully labeled explicit on iTunes. According to Yahoo! Answers, a few people (probably teenagers) have been complaining stuff like "How is this song EXPLICIT?", and on a few of the responses, people have responded that on iTunes, every song on an album with a PA sticker on the front is automatically deemed EXPLICIT even if it is purely clean. Anyone here that would like to clarify this or talk a little bit about this? I certainly believe it's unfair! JustN5:12 01:06, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If this belongs anywhere it is probably iTunes Store, not iTunes.  Can you cite reliable sources (i.e. not forum postings) for this.  See WP:ATT. AlistairMcMillan 03:22, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  EXPLICIT? 

message: Citation: 
"introduced by Apple on January 10 by Apple lead developer Grigori Rasputin,in 2001 at Macworld Expo in San Francisco" 
I think it is a joke. The link leads to article about famous russian mystic. I don't know who presented iTunes back in 2001. I am really suspicious it was person having such name. Someone who knows real name of the guy edit the article.
:Yeah, I'm taking that out.--HereToHelp 14:55, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  RASPUTIN ???? 

message: Remember when we had a pic of a dude browsing through of all the iconic pink floyd album covers? Yeah...U guys got two days to add that back in, or that's it..I'LL DO IT MYSELF! 71.182.73.254 20:18, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remind me why we took out the Pink Floyd slector? 

message: Dell doesn't bundle iTunes with their computers, I think HP does though as they have previously made their branded iPods although I can't confirm it. iTunes is bundled with OS X on all Macs. That should be worded correctly in the line. 123.243.231.195 09:45, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, AFAIK Dell never bundled iTunes (their thing was a rebranded version of MusicMatch Jukebox), and HP did for a while, particularly while they were selling HP branded iPods, but don't seem to anymore. I don't have any firm sources for either, so I'll leave the edit to someone else. MacPrince 23:20, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bundleing with HP and Dell 

message: Am I the only one whose iTunes skips during songs? I'll be listening to a song and it will skip as if it's a CD. I thought maybe it had something to do with the new CDs I loaded, but I don't know.71.126.232.135 20:38, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  iTunes 7 

message: When I try to burn a CD, I get a "thwap" noise randomly inserted into the songs, like what used to happen when you download a corrupt file from Kazaa or wherever. I assume this is some sort of copy protection...it doesn't happen on songs I bought from iTunes, or songs I took directly from another CD. Is there any way to fix this? Does this normally happen with iTunes? Adam Bishop 18:09, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:FORUM MacPrince 23:23, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Gee thanks, that's very helpful. Adam Bishop 02:10, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Take it to someplace like iLounge if it's not about the article. MacPrince 23:06, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This has nothing to do with the article! Stephen Shaw 17:21, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  CD Burner 

message: I don't see the subject on iTunes U. Like, what is it exactly? I mean, shouldn't information about it be included here? --Esanchez(Talk 2 me or Sign here) 01:17, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  iTunes U 

message: It seems that the current versions do not support win98.  Did any previous versions support win98 or win98SE? -69.87.204.122 23:41, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Windows versions 

message: I think this is something that needs citation. Also, will this only work on a Mac? Or is it for Windows as well? In light of many people crying for  
"official" support of this format, I think there needs to be some sort of explication.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.192.118.32 (talk) 19:06, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  iTunes + FLAC? 

message: Exactly how many songs can iTunes hold? --MosheA (talk) 22:58, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Max 

message: Is it just me, or does this article seem like it was authored by Apple specifically? I don't see any indications of neutrality...I know I'm not the only person on the planet who doesn't worship itunes. I can't cite myself as a source for criticism for obvious reasons...Does anyone know what sources would be acceptable online or elsewhere that would allow this article to have some balance? (Heaven forbid.)
WP:Be Bold and add what you feel is necessary, but whatever you add must have reliable sources -- KelleyCook (talk) 15:20, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uhhhhhhh...... 

message: I see the article is flagged as needing a citation. would this  count? 67.70.94.222 (talk) drw  —Preceding comment was added at 10:58, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  iTunes Phones 

message: I changed the wording of the section to more precisely reflect the content of the sourced article.  If you're going to seek an edit, change it word by word.  There is too much relevant information in the section to just delete.
I also re-added the POV check tag.  If you disagree with that, discuss it here.  That's the whole point of the tag. 69.140.33.146 (talk) 05:56, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The Creative lawsuit was about the iPod user interface, not the iTunes user interface. So I've removed that from the article. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 09:40, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

text: How exactly is Apple's media player patent similar to the Apple v Microsoft GUI lawsuit? I would say this is exactly the opposite. Songbird is obviously a direct clone of iTunes, Apple has a patent, but IIRC haven't challenged the Songbird developers. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 09:56, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

text: I've removed the POV-check tag. If you want to discuss parts of the article that you think aren't neutral I'm afraid you have to actually state which parts specifically. How are we supposed to debate something with you, if you don't tell us exactly what you want to discuss? AlistairMcMillan (talk) 09:58, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Patents 

message: Presumably we should include citations where it says "iTunes can be scripted, using AppleScript for Mac OS X or using the Apple-provided SDK for iTunes on Windows..."
iTunes Scripts work for Windows and Mac OS.
Is this how I should create the citations? I can't work it out!
Windows:
Mac:
Soapynebula (talk) 12:06, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  iTunes Scripts for Mac and Windows 

message: It's a minor issue, but I am not convinced that the release date listed in the article is correct.  Looking through the history, that date has been listed for significant periods as January 8, 9, and 10.  The first 2001 date I can find in the history is January 9 (see ).  It was later changed to January 10 () and then back to January 9 again (.  Only recently do I see the January 8 ().  Note both the January 10 and January 8 dates were first introduced by anonymous users, and may have been subtle vandalism.
Currently I can't find a specific date mentioned in the cited reference: Macworld Expo San Francisco 2001.  However, in Apple's own press release, they give the date as January 9.  What evidence is there to support the January 8 date?  -- Tcncv (talk) 20:54, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yup, looks like vandalism. Anons often target the lead, and yes, specific dates and other figures can be "corrupted" over time. I'll fix it and provide a cite.--HereToHelp (talk to me) 22:06, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you.  -- Tcncv (talk) 23:56, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Release Date 

message: This may just be my opinion but it appears the neutrality of this article is not neutral. Haysead talk 13:20, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: As you weren't very specific in your accusations, please WP:Be Bold and correct the article. -- KelleyCook (talk) 14:46, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Point of View 

message: I know the page is probably going to be rewritten, but as it currently stands, iTunes is NOT open soruce(not a typo), nor open source.  It is freeware.  There is a very good chance(p=1.00,q=0.00 for you data management folks) that it will remain closed source for the lifetime of Apple.  I didn't check to see who made that change and if I did it wouldn't really matter because i wouldn't be able to change it anyway.24.36.133.217 (talk) 03:53, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Licence 

message: Springlake04 (talk) 15:28, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Information soon to be inaccurate 

message: This article should include what video codecs with what option are supported by iTunes and not just audio.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.34.246.247 (talk) 04:54, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Video format support 

message: This article reads more like a brochure than an non-biased encyclopedia entry.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Henrybaker (talk • contribs) 21:26, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, as a Linux user I find it hard to believe that despite constant complaints on forums, no-ones even mentioned Linux in the "free to edit" articles except for a small bit about reverse-engineering the protocol. Does no-one care or is it just being pruned out of the article by some fanboys?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Happysmileman (talk • contribs) 22:19, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Amen.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.161.208.225 (talk) 22:59, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advertisement 

message: I agree with most of the discussion here. There are no criticisms of iTunes' closed nature or the locked-in feeling some people get (I'd have to find some sources for this claim) when they use their iPods.
I'd make these changes myself, but 1) I'm at work and 2) I'm feeling particularly lazy about it ;) Grayda (talk) 23:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If that wasn't already mentioned in the article, that would be an excellent point to make. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 07:57, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

text: By all means, go read WP:RS and then edit the article to include criticisms that are well sourced. Well sourced criticisms won't be removed from the article. If you add your own personal criticisms, or ones that are sourced with anonymous postings on an internet forum, more than likely they are going to be quickly removed. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 19:12, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

text: The iTunes Store is not written in HTML. http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/hyatt/archives/2004_06.html#005666 AlistairMcMillan (talk) 15:09, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticisms? 

message: I saw in the history that someone said winamp can handle ipods. Is this not noteworthy since most people use itunes just because they think it only works with ipods?
Just had a look and you are right but I also noticed something else. The article certainly seems to imply they only work with itunes: 'While iTunes is required to manage the audio of an Apple iPod portable audio player'. Which is definitely false. There are a number of programs that can do so. Only a few can handle the newest gen ipods though. Winamp being one of them. I'd have thought this noteworthy as well.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.34.190.8 (talk) 07:40, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Winamp 

message: According to many complaints in discussion section and Wikipedia:Be bold principle, as well as WP:NOT#SOAPBOX and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view I've added Template:Advert to the top of main article. But I afraid that it will be removed soon by iTunes fans. Please pay attention.  --Varnav (talk) 07:01, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not removing it however I suggest highly it DOES get removed.... This page could be written badly but it is needed on Wikipedia.... May i suggest that Template:Cleanup be used instead. Stealth (talk) 09:39, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, written badly and needed. Template:Advert has nothing about the deletion of article, it only warnings the reader and encourages to rewrite the article according to NPOV principle. --Varnav (talk) 10:18, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

text: Tell us specifically which bits you think need fixed. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 11:53, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  The whole article needs to be rewritten. It looks like advertising brochure, and contains no "Criticism" section at all. Why I'm not doing this myself? As it is already told above - every such attempt to observe NPOV is reverted back by apple fans. And I am not going to start the Wikipedia:Edit_war. --Varnav (talk) 10:18, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Point us to sourced criticism from reliable sources and I'll gladly add it myself. Your personal opinions, which is exactly what your above post contains, are not acceptable. Please read WP:RS and WP:V. And please note the difference between iTunes the application and the iTunes Store. Criticism of the iTunes Store belongs in the article about the iTunes Store not here. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 10:41, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Is there a thing like sourced criticism from reliable sources exists at all? In the post above I wrote: iTunes music library functionality is very poor - only three types of views, while other media libraries like MediaMonkey or Winamp can group your music by any parameter - genre, artist, year - anything you like. iTunes media library as well cannot keep itself in sync with actual files on disc - if you delete or move any files changes will not be tracked by iTunes, and it will display error about missing files every time. There is a number of third party tools to solve this problem. - it's set of facts - it's not an opinion. Every of these facts anyone can verify by downloading iTunes - so, no references to any sources are needed. --Varnav (talk) 15:31, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  That is your interpretation of facts. What do you mean iTunes can't group music? What is it you are actually trying to accomplish? AlistairMcMillan (talk) 16:52, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  iTunes can group music by album only. Compare with winamp or media monkey. Or compare with iPod itself, music submenu. --Varnav (talk) 17:22, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  What do you mean it can only group by album? Click on the heading "Artist" and it groups by artist. Click on "Genre" and it groups by genre. Click on "Album" and it can group by album, by "Album by artist", "Album by year", etc. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 19:00, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's sorting, not grouping. Even Windows Explorer in table mode can sort this way. --Varnav (talk) 08:13, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Are you aware of the browser feature? In List mode click the little button in the bottom right with the eye icon, or select "Show Browser" from the View menu. Is that what you are looking for? I confess I still don't under what feature you think is missing, that WinAMP and MediaMonkey have. And neither of the sources you listed below even include the word "group" so that doesn't help. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 13:03, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  And our articles on WinAMP and MediaMonkey don't mention any grouping feature either. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 13:04, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Um, well - that "browsing" feature IS grouping I am talking about, right. But it is still inferior to other media libraries - take a look at MediaMonkey left panel on screetshots, or better download it youself. --Varnav (talk) 16:34, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advertisement warning box 

message: First item:
iTunes music library has very limited sorting and grouping functionality - only three types of views are supported, while other media libraries like MediaMonkey or Winamp can group your music by any parameter like genre, artist, year, etc.
Removed with comment: removing unneutral and false claim- iTunes can sort by artist, genre, etc. Who gets to decide how many views is enough?) - itunes can sort (in list mode), but can not group. No one decides how many views are enough, but iTunes clearly has only one type of grouping (by albums) where competing software and even iPod itself has much more types. Sources are: First source is a blog post where three types of views in iTunes are described. Second and third are feature list on the official pages of competing media libraries software.
Proposed new version, (feel free to edit):
iTunes music library has limited grouping functionality - only three types of views are supported, while other media libraries like MediaMonkey or Winamp can group your music by any parameter like genre, artist, year, etc.
:Just to clarify, what do you mean my grouping items?  I don't understand exactly how that's different than sorting.  Thanks. DaRkAgE7 (talk) 18:51, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I might be wrong, but don't you need to find a source that specifically criticizes iTunes?  Even if your source states a fact (like iTunes not following files) you'll need to find a reliable source that criticizes that fact, or else it constitutes original research.  DaRkAgE7 (talk) 19:11, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: True.  There are 3 million+ results for "iTunes sucks" in google but they all seem to be blog entries.  Some of the writers are well known, however.  Hmmmmm....  --mboverload@ 19:18, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Okay then, this item is more suitable for media management section. --Varnav (talk) 19:26, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed items to be added to criticism section 

message: In the last paragraph of the criticism section, should the person criticizing iTunes' inability to track files be listed by name?  He's not a particularly notable author, so the paragraph just feels awkward to me.  Don't get me wrong, I'm glad someone was able to find a good source for this point, I'm just curious if there might be a better way to state it that is more concise.  Cheers, DaRkAgE7[Talk] 09:53, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Named criticism? 

message: This article does not for a moment begin to address the problems.  It is still an iTunes PR piece.  JimZDP (talk) 02:36, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: So fix it.  Be Bold. DaRkAgE7[Talk] 06:42, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

text: What "problems" are you talking about? If you can give us more specific pointers as to what you think is wrong, we can fix it. But vaguely saying it's a "PR piece" doesn't help us. — The Hand That Feeds You:Bite 11:11, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Throwing the BS Flag 

message: What is the "Ogg and FLAC enclosed in an Ogg container" (from iTunes#File format support)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lykantrop (talk • contribs) 11:50, July 12, 2008
: There is a third party component that will let iTunes play FLAC encoded music but only when it is enclosed in an OGG container. If you aren't sure what a container is in this context, this article might help. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 14:32, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  to prevent further confusion I have placed a link to that article on the page. NightKhaos (talk) 09:22, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  FLAC support