Permabanned
The party shuffle shows you what is coming up so that you can clear out songs you don't want to hear before they come on. I've never really used it but that seems to be the only difference.
pinkegobox said:snipped
Conrad11 said:i-Tunes is excellent and everything i would want from a music player but:
1. it has quicktime by default (although you can get rid of this).
2. it takes a lot of resources (which doesn't particuarly bother me, its just the fact you still have things running when you close it)
Those resons are exactly why i don't use it. I now use WinAmp
Clarkey said:Itunes is brilliant in my experience, nothing else makes it so easy to manage an enormous library. Ditched winamp a long time ago, rubbish in comparison.
JimmyEatWorms said:The party shuffle shows you what is coming up so that you can clear out songs you don't want to hear before they come on. I've never really used it but that seems to be the only difference.
not really - imagine it - you want to listen to some music, but can't feel stuffed what - you put on party shuffle and before you move away from the computer you glance through the list and take out a few tracks that you know are poo.William said:But then that defeats the purpose of it shuffling songs.
Augmented said:However, if you are just looking for free consumer software, I'd also recommend going with iTunes. But I would say that it has a huge failing as far as being able to act as a fully-fledged jukebox for a media PC. Namely the narrow range of formats it supports. Personally I'd want my media PC to be able to play anything I can throw at it, be it FLAC, musepack, OGG, MP3, AAC and so on.
Clarkey said:If you were using it with all legitametly(sp?) owned music then this is a non issue.
is rubbish. A licence for mechanical copyright (see relevant MCPS/PPL licences) does not mean you have to convert to an Apple-approved format, or have downloaded it from iTunes.Clarkey said:If you were using it with all legitametly(sp?) owned music then this is a non issue.
Augmented said:As far as I am aware it is not actually legal at this current time. It's merely that private users making digital copies for private use are not likely to be pursued. Until there's an official amendment to the Acts governing copyright (i.e. C,D&P Act 1988), I believe we're still on the wrong side of the law. But, yes,
Sic said:how does that make even the slightest bit of sense? it's now legal to rip cds for your ipod/personal copies. some people choose to rip using different compression techniques because they believe it gives a better sound quality at a better compression. it has nothing to do with legitimacy/source of the music
JimmyEatWorms said:But why would you have lots of different compression methods in the same library? I don't see any point. If you're ripping your own discs then surely you don't use more than one compression method?