[jahcreation]

i was wondering if anyone can help me out, whats the best way to restore my library, cause i was just gonna drag it over, what you guys think? theres gotta be a better way. i got so much exclucive underground music and i had to label at least 100 some gigs worth of music when i put it into itunes, im worried when i drag it from the libary folder it will show up un labled (genere, track name). i just dont feel like doing all that labeling!

[yugenro]

Ok, my iTunes Music Library.xml file is 65MB; my iTunes Library file is just 10.4 MB...
However, I'm still not seeing much of an improvement in response times when rating songs or adding tag data... I AM very anal about filling out my tags fully and properly...

[garyi]

I wish they would sort this out, more and more crap added to more and more crap for kids.
There are those of us out there with serious listening habits that would like to know that itunes is for instance doing bit perfect rips, and outputting its audio in the best possible way.
Also get rid of the bloat, get the iphones and pods and other crap out of there into its own app, let itunes be what it was always meant to be. Make the library the best it can be find innovative new ways for me to access my library etc etc.
itunes DJ! who gives a s*

[Podesta]

I would like to see better organization in the iTunes Library. Everything should not be tossed into the iTunes Music, as it is now. There should be separate stand-alone folders for each category, with the content alphabetized and date tagged within. I don't know why the iTunes Library has been so sloppy for so long.

[sngwriter510]

You do realize that iTunes, was basically made for iPod. First came iTunes, then the iPod was released. Do you think Apple released iTunes, then magically got the idea to make an mp3 player? NO! They had the iPod, they released iTunes, pre iPod, so people can get used to the idea of an Apple music software. Then BAM! IPOD! iTunes only exists because of the iPod!

Yes the library sucks, and it needs to be improved, I don't argue you there. New features are a good thing. I myself very much enjoy the Genius feature; I think it needs improvements, so I submited feedback to Apple, via iTunes on my Mac! (PC can do it too)

If you have issues, instead of fussing over it in a forum, which Apple doesn't read, or care about; SUBMIT ITUNES FEEDBACK! FEEDBACK HELPS THEM WITH DESIGNS, IT'S WHY THERE IS MORE THEN ITUNES 1.0! FEEDBACK!

And separating iPod/iPhone from iTunes would be awful. Worse then having to use iTunes, but at least all of my music is in one place, where I can get it into my iPod, or onto my iPhone. Though eventually an iPhone super program with all my iCal, Address Book, and other data is, would be nice.

[kirkmc]

I'm seeing very clear improvements in tagging and ripping. (My library has about 40,000 tracks.)

[mdawson]

Quote

tmpatrick wrote:

>

Quote

I still don't get Party Shuffle/DJ, but whatever.

The concept behind Party Shuffle is pretty simple, so what exactly do you not get?

[mdawson]

Tags are embedded in the files, so you cannot lose them.

[mdawson]

Quote

yungero wrote:

>

Quote

However, I'm still not seeing much of an improvement in response times when rating songs or adding tag data... I AM very anal about filling out my tags fully and properly...

Updating tags are disk-based operations that require iTunes to write data out to the media files. Improved application performance has zero impact on drive performance. iTunes may have improved database management, but it cannot improve read/write rates unless something in the software was creating an artificial bottleneck.

[mdawson]

Quote

Podesta wrote:

>

Quote

I would like to see better organization in the iTunes Library.

I am guessing that you mean the iTunes Music folder as opposed to the iTunes library which is a binary database file that you can only see through the iTunes user interface, in which case, I am in full agreement.

Quote

Podesta wrote:

>

Quote

Everything should not be tossed into the iTunes Music, as it is now. There should be separate stand-alone folders for each category, with the content alphabetized and date tagged within.

Correct. I use iTunes strictly for music and despite having written feedback to Apple about four times on the matter, the music library still does not use the Sort Album Artist field to properly name Artist folders in an ?organized? music folder so that folders for artists with proper names can be correctly sorted in the Finder by the artist?s last name thus maintaining consistency with the iTunes UI. Add iPhone apps, audiobooks and podcasts into the mix and I can imagine that the organization of the music folder is anything but.

Quote

Podesta wrote:

>
I don't know why the iTunes Library has been so sloppy for so long.

Apple seems to take the approach that most people could not care less how the media is stored on their hard drives. Unfortunately, Apple is correct in this assessment as most people do not even bother to make sure that their music is correctly and consistently tagged in iTunes let alone keep track of what is going on with how their music is stored on the computer.

Unfortunately, this situation, as always, leaves power users that do things correctly blowing in the wind because the software is catering to the disorganized masses that do not care to properly catalog their music; regrettably, these same people seem to be the ones that submit highly erroneous metadata to databases such as Gracenote CDDB. As I have often stated in the past, iTunes is as powerful as the user is organized. Apple needs to emphasize to people that they need to properly and consistently tag their media to truly benefit from iTunes features, but then documentation from Apple for iTunes in general is sorely lacking.

[hearingexchange]

All iTunes 8.1 press notices say, "...including many accessibility improvements..." but after searching extensively, I have not been able to find out what the specific accessibility improvements are to this update. Apple has been in hot water with disability advocacy organizations frequently. http://www.patriciae...essible-itunes/ It seems they only offer features to help deaf, hard of hearing and blind consumers when under pressure. If Apple is working toward better accessibility of their products and services, why not do more detailed press on it for the populations it is trying to serve?

[hayesk]

[quote name='Jon Seff']
>

daveerato said:

Supposedly a new feature is the ability to rip CDs in "iTunes Plus" format of 256-kbps AAC. You couldn't do this before? Too bad they didn't fix the poor job of managing the library restoration process.

Apple's release notes say "Allows CDs to be imported at the same sound quality as iTunes Plus," but unless I'm missing something, that's very deceptive. You could easily rip AAC files at 256 Kbps using the higher quality preset in iTunes 8.

It's also deceptive since Apple makes their tracks from higher quality masters, not CDs.

[Steve_S]

sngwriter510 said:

You do realize that iTunes, was basically made for iPod. First came iTunes, then the iPod was released. Do you think Apple released iTunes, then magically got the idea to make an mp3 player? NO! They had the iPod, they released iTunes, pre iPod, so people can get used to the idea of an Apple music software. Then BAM! IPOD! iTunes only exists because of the iPod!

I agree that iTunes compliments the iPod well. I also believe Apple found a way to leverage their iTunes product with sales of the iPod. However, iTunes was coming regardless of the iPod. Wind the clock back and you'll notice that with the advent of file sharing services like Napster, etc. MP3 jukebox software was all the rage and Apple didn't have a solution. Macs had SoundJam (which Apple bought as the basis of iTunes 1.0) and they had Audio as well as a few others hardly worth mentioning.

When Apple first started selling iPods for Windows, they bundled it with MusicMatch software. It wasn't until the iTunes Music came along that Apple needed iTunes as it's solution to sell music. Still, Apple was going to provide Macs with a solution for managing music whether the iPod came along or not. Similarly, Apple provided iPhoto as a means of managing photos and Apple doesn't sell cameras.

[context]

yugenro said:

"working with large libraries"?!?!?! I hope this is a VAST improvement!

My Library file is upwards of 50MB, and just rating a track takes about 20 seconds on my old 1st-gen MacMini.

I agree! I just checked and my iTunes library file is 150 MB! The .xml file is 99 MB. The (poor) way that iTunes manages the song files, my root music folder now contains 1,434 subfolders, and that is after workarounds to minimize the number.