Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×

iTunes Use Surges Past QuickTime, RealPlayer 281

Posted by CowboyNeal from the statisicians-and-liars dept.
QuatermassX writes "Forget increased sales of Mac computers, think media players. The iPod 'halo effect' shows its true power in recently compiled statistics from Nielsen/NetRatings and Apple. From the report on WebSiteOptimization.com: 'Podcasting is taking off and iPods are seemingly ubiquitous. Unique users of Apple's iTunes player should pass RealPlayer by mid-2006 with nearly 30 million users in the US alone. People are tuning in over twice as long with iTunes than with RealPlayer or Windows Media Player. As broadband penetration increases we are spending more time on our computers.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

iTunes Use Surges Past QuickTime, RealPlayer More

iTunes Use Surges Past QuickTime, RealPlayer

Comments Filter:

  • The Halo Effect (Score:5, Funny)

    by Mattygfunk1 ( 596840 ) * on Friday March 17, 2006 @08:50AM (#14940857)
    The iPod 'halo effect'....

    I've never heard of the "Halo effect" but apparently it kicks Slashdot's arse [googlefight.com]

    __
    Funny Porn videos from Laugh DAILY [laughdaily.com]

  • I wonder... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Seta ( 934439 ) on Friday March 17, 2006 @08:52AM (#14940861)
    ...if it has anything to do with the fact that everyone and their dog I see these days owns an ipod. Hmm.

    • Re:I wonder... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by fracex ( 591622 ) on Friday March 17, 2006 @08:59AM (#14940888)
      I wouldn't rule out the fact either that iTunes has a slick interface that makes organising your music, buying music, podcasting, listening to internet radio and so much more, really easy. Try saying that about RealPlayer.

      • Re:I wonder... (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Seta ( 934439 )
        Quite true, and given the number of iPod users that readily advocate it, the adoption rate is high enough i'm sure. Real...I don't have much to say about Real products. At least nothing that hasn't already been said.
      • This is our chance to get rid of RealPlayer once and for all! Let's all support this!

    • Re:I wonder... (Score:5, Funny)

      by pubjames ( 468013 ) on Friday March 17, 2006 @09:14AM (#14940954)
      My dog doesn't have an iPod!

      But then, I don't have a dog.

    • Who "uses" real player? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by glesga_kiss ( 596639 ) on Friday March 17, 2006 @09:28AM (#14941014)
      What is this figure trying to say? Is it refering to the installed base, as in, how many unique software installs you have? Or is it saying that you have X users who fire up the app everyday to browse their music?

      If the former is the case, then it is completely bogus. It is very difficult to get Quicktime without the iTunes bundle, first you need to know that they are bundled, then you need to google the link as the standalone Quicktime installer is hidden away on the site. I've never found a link to it on the Apple site.

      And everyone has the Quicktime player on their PC. It's in the list of bog-standard things you do when installing e.g. Windows for someone. Quicktime, Firefox, RealPlayer (maybe) and Acrobad Reader. The reason RealPlayer is a maybe is because they have been doing some pretty shoddy tactics to get their marketshare and profits up. Things like hiding the free cut-down version on the site, so that you have to download other nonsense that you don't want.

      Sounds like Apple has been reading Real's playbook. Just because someone has iTunes on their PC, it doesn't mean that they are an iTunes user. Especially when they trojaned the iTunes install in via a Quicktime download. The bottom line however is that Apple want to be able to say to the music industry that "we have X million users" when really they are saying "we have X million users running iTunesService.exe, but only a fraction of them actually use iTunes, but we want to omit that detail as the former marketing point is technically correct and way more sexy".

      • Re:Who "uses" real player? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Seta ( 934439 ) on Friday March 17, 2006 @09:39AM (#14941071)
        Chances are that they're following the age old corporate habit of following completely unreliable and sometimes unrelated statistics. For example, downloads doesn't equal users (See: Browsers, Chat clients, Websites, etc), discovering more bugs doesn't make the product insecure (See: Browser and Operating system security debates.), etc. However 9 times out of 10, someone will make an outrageous claim based on these statistics, and people, not knowing better, will write articles about it. In the end it's just publicity.
      • And everyone has the Quicktime player on their PC. It's in the list of bog-standard things you do when installing e.g. Windows for someone

        Err no. The bog standard thing I do is nuke the "Quicktime Nagware" and "Real Ad-Player" and install QuickTime Alternative [free-codecs.com] and Real Alternative (from the same site).
      • The reason RealPlayer is a maybe is because they have been doing some pretty shoddy tactics to get their marketshare and profits up. Things like hiding the free cut-down version on the site, so that you have to download other nonsense that you don't want.

        Actually, walk into any Best Buy, Circuit City, etc. Pretty much all new PC's have a trial version of Rhapsody pre-installed. OF course the Realplayer's going to be installed as well.

      • Re:Who "uses" real player? (Score:5, Informative)

        by hgavin ( 259102 ) on Friday March 17, 2006 @10:26AM (#14941326)

        the standalone Quicktime installer is hidden away on the site. I've never found a link to it on the Apple site.


        http://www.apple.com/quicktime/download/standalone .html [apple.com]. Just look for the link named "QuickTime Standalone Installer" on the main quicktime download page.

      • Re:Who "uses" real player? (Score:2, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward

        If the former is the case, then it is completely bogus. It is very difficult to get Quicktime without the iTunes bundle, first you need to know that they are bundled, then you need to google the link as the standalone Quicktime installer is hidden away on the site. I've never found a link to it on the Apple site.

        Very difficult? You gotta be kidding. Go to the QuickTime download page http://www.apple.com/quicktime/download/win.html [apple.com] and click on the link to your right that says "QuickTime Standalone Installe

    • Shit, I hope my dogs don't ask for IPods this next Christmas.

    • Re:I wonder... (Score:2, Interesting)

      by tdemark ( 512406 )
      According to TFA, in January '06, there were 18,568,000 unique users of iTunes. In 2005, Apple sold 32 million iPods.

      That's 32 million iPods and 18.5 million iTunes users. What are the other 14 million people using to get music into their iPods? The only way the 18.5 million iTunes users could be true would be if people, on average, bought two iPods for themselves over the course of the year.

      - Tony
    • ...if it has anything to do with the fact that everyone and their dog I see these days owns an ipod. Hmm.

      True. But, also have you ever tried getting the free version of the RealPlayer? How many wrong turns do you have to make before you can download it?

  • iTunes use surges past QuickTime? (Score:5, Informative)

    by dennism ( 13667 ) on Friday March 17, 2006 @09:00AM (#14940890) Homepage
    Last I checked, QuickTime was a part of the iTunes installation under Windows. I think they meant to say Windows Media.

    But, this has certainly done wonders for the adoption of QuickTime under Windows. It's the iTunes Trojan Horse -- get them hooked on a great music player and a great portable music player. As more installations of iTunes are done, more QuickTime installations as well. Suddenly, it becomes easier to convince the big websites (and small too) to put up QuickTime versions of the media. And to top it off, because of the increased usage of QuickTime, us Mac users get a better web experience as well.

    Bravo Apple :)
    • Last I checked, QuickTime was a part of the iTunes installation under Windows. I think they meant to say Windows Media.

      I think they really meant Quicktime Player, rather than Quicktime per se. Explaining that Quicktime is a framework which comes bundled with one possible player takes some time, and it's a game I gave up playing even here on Slashdot quite a while ago. You know the kind of thing: "Quicktime sucks! It can't play full screen!". Err...yes it can, you mean that particular player doesn't use th

      • The QuickTime Player does come bundled with the Windows version of iTunes though. Quite annoying, if you ask me. It's come to the point that I don't update iTunes anymore because for every bloody minor version I have to download yet another version of the QuickTime Player (that I didn't ask for) only to have it throw its icons around my start menu and completely ignore my preferences by showing up in the system tray.

    • iTunes Trojan Horse (Score:3, Interesting)

      by dirtfox ( 920178 )
      It's certainly a hefty package. I once noticed itunes added 50+ secs to a fresh windows instalation. You don't have to used iTunes at all, If you have an iPod shuffle - you can use the "rebuild_db.exe" 9k application and simple drag and drop your music onto the player.

    • Re:iTunes use surges past QuickTime? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by sakusha ( 441986 ) on Friday March 17, 2006 @09:59AM (#14941175)
      Precisely. I have been telling people for years, QuickTime is the crown jewel at Apple, and many of the most successful projects, like the iPod and iTunes, were created in the hopes of pushing QuickTime adoption on Windows.

      As a web video and multimedia programmer, I have long wished for one universal standard based on QuickTime. Everyone's web experience would be so much better if we could all standardize around QT. But many times I encounter users who work in corporate IT environments with locked down PCs that are forbidden from installing QT. This seems to be a relic of olden times when online video and audio were seen as frivolous, and a big waste of bandwidth.
      • "online video and audio were seen as frivolous, and a big waste of bandwidth."

        Man, if my machine at work was a tricked out as any of the boxez at home, I never get any real work done.

        Microsoft is pushing against the grain trying to get any if this shit acepted and businesses, Microsoft's biggest client base by far, aren't interested is in frivolity anymore than they're interested in the constant fight against viri.

        Apple is getting sucked up in the vacuum of the differences between what Apple delivers painle
      • I did a job about two years ago that involved programming to the QuickTime API. It was about the worst API I have ever had the displeasure of having to use. Unless they've added some nicer APIs in the last two years, I would never use QuickTime again if I had the choice.

        Here is an excerpt of some of the gross code I was forced to write. I didn't just make this up -- it is almost exactly the same as the sample code from Apple, as well as other QuickTime code I came across. Notice all the weird casts ever
    • Why wasn't Flash included in the survey?
      Because it would be impossible to discern any difference whatsoever betweeen WM/RP/QT - the Flash graph line would be several inches above the rest.
      This is a comparison of fringe media players. I guess they've conceded the race is over as any relevant survey would embarrass all three.

  • Podcasts with no Pod (Score:3, Interesting)

    by simon_hibbs2 ( 792812 ) on Friday March 17, 2006 @09:01AM (#14940895)
    I don't own an MP3 player, but occasionaly listen to 'podcasts' on my computer but I've no idea how representative I am.

    How good a solution to general multimedia handling is iTunes? Why might a non-iPod user like me use it?

    Simon Hibbs

    • Re:Podcasts with no Pod (Score:3, Interesting)

      by edgr ( 781723 )
      It is fantastic for handling all your music. I use iTunes to manage my music, even though I don't have an iPod (I play some music from my computer). Its by far the best of all the players I've tried; it is intuitive, works, and looks great.
    • The mac version is very good, the windows version is very similar (which of course means that it doesn't feel as much like the rest of teh OS as one might like), there is, unfortunately, no Linux version.

      To be honest it's free so why not try it and make the decision for yourself (unless you run Linux, in which case you can't)?

    • Itunes works really well. I like it alot. Some people hate it and want winamp to make a comback.

      My main problem with it are minor things. Like I'll type a song in the search box, release it doesn't find what I want because I'm searching a playlist, click the library and have to type the search again (no type ahead ala browser windows).

      Its pretty intuitive, although I've met people who couldn't figure out how to find all songs on one album (the "browse" button seems to be a mystery to a couple of my friends
    • And another use I've found is to keep all my PDF's in one place. You can drag them to the library and make a smart folder for type PDF and there they are. Real handy and you can sort by title,author and stuff (you do have put that in yourself, no CDDB for these babies.) Double click and you can view them. Keeps my references right at hand.

  • And the thing is (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Toreo asesino ( 951231 ) on Friday March 17, 2006 @09:04AM (#14940914) Journal
    iTunes is sorely lacking in so many areas too!

    'Automatic updates' consists of downloading a 35Mb new iTunes setup package each month or so...

    The library doesn't update itself automatically...

    There's no concept of 'checking for existing entries on import' - importing the same folder will just give you each track twice...

    It doesn't work very well at all with keyboard shortcuts...

    No plugin facility...

    It's weighty as hell in memory...

    but yet, after all these sore points, somehow, it's way cooler than WMP, RealPlayer, and sod it...anything else I've seen.

    If Apple were a woman, she'd be a sexy slim figure - and you'd buy anything shite from her, just because she was so damn fine! Not like the fat moose of a wreck a Microsoft woman would be - she could be selling the moon on a stick, and you wouldn't touch it with a barge pole!

    And on that note, perhaps I should mingle with real people some more.

    • Re:And the thing is (Score:5, Funny)

      by Thrakkerzog ( 7580 ) on Friday March 17, 2006 @09:34AM (#14941051)
      I don't think Microsoft would be a fat moose. Maybe a somewhat attractive lady, but you can't shake the feeling that "she" is a "he" under that skirt.

    • I agree on the flaws, which are unfortunate.

      I thought the program checks for existing tracks on folder or CD import, it's stopped me a few times and asked if I wanted duplicate tracks or replace them.

      I am not sure about library updating itself automatically, you mean somehow updating the media files or the back end code? If you mean updating the media files, I don't know what you are asking to automatically update.

      I thought there was a plugin system, it's just not obvious. Maybe I am thinking of Quicktime

    • Re:And the thing is (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Alioth ( 221270 ) <no@spam> on Friday March 17, 2006 @09:48AM (#14941108) Journal
      Apple isn't perfect, but they usually get the interface right. I use iTunes and friends on my PowerBook at home. I also sometimes use Windows Media Player for various training videos at work.

      The difference is like night and day. Both can play sound and video perfectly adequately - but Windows Media Player is just so awkward and cumbersome compared to iTunes. No, WMP isn't *hard* to use, it's just cumbersome. For example, when I watch video on my Mac, the screensaver doesn't kick in if I've not touched the keyboard and mouse. When watching video at work, I have to periodically waggle the mouse to stop the screensaver starting (or turn off automatic screen locking, which is also cumbersome). One training CD is made up of about a dozen WMV files with a menu. When you start the next WMV file, Windows Media Player forgets your last volume setting and blasts you through your headphones. By comparison, my PowerBook doesn't forget volume settings between files. (Even my Linux system doesn't forget volume settings between files - or turn on the screen saver when I'm watching video, for that matter). There are numerous other niggles with WMP that don't exist with the Apple product.

      • Re:And the thing is (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Tim C ( 15259 )
        For example, when I watch video on my Mac, the screensaver doesn't kick in if I've not touched the keyboard and mouse.

        Tools -> Options -> Uncheck "Allow screensaver during playback". Been there since at least WMP 8 if memory serves, which is when I started using it.
        • To add Insult to injury.... I reinstalled my windows some days ago. The option is unchecked by default. So, the poster, basically, complaints about a setting he has set himself. Now THAT is smart.
          • I _am_ the orginal poster - the option *IS* unchecked. But it doesn't stop the screensaver+screen lock from coming on - as far as I can tell, the option has absolutely no effect if your machine is set to automatically lock. Besides, I want the screen saver and screen lock to come on if I'm listening to music, but NOT when I'm watching video. That binary option either turns it completely on or off (well, it would if it actually worked).

        • Re:And the thing is (Score:3, Informative)

          by Alioth ( 221270 )
          That option IS unchecked. It doesn't stop the screen saver (and screen lock) from coming on.

        • Tools -> Options -> Uncheck "Allow screensaver during playback". Been there since at least WMP 8 if memory serves, which is when I started using it.

          You sort of proved his point - what situaton would you ever want the screensaver kicking in during video playback? None. iTunes just simply disables the screensaver and no option needs to be ticked. That's good design.

      • When watching video at work, I have to periodically waggle the mouse to stop the screensaver starting (or turn off automatic screen locking, which is also cumbersome).

        Ah, yes, that "feature" in Windows. For those who don't know, Windows does indeed go around to all the running applications and ask them "is it OK to bring up the screensaver?" so that media players can indeed prevent the screensaver from starting. Unless you have "automatically lock desktop" checked. Then it doesn't, and always brings

    • Re:And the thing is (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Tim C ( 15259 )
      For me, there's one thing that keeps me away from iTunes and on WMP - WMP's toolbar mode. I love the way that I can minimise the interface to the taskbar, so I can still access the controls while doing something else.

      The real killer features that iTunes brings, namely tight integration with iTMS and the iPod, are of little interest to me, as I don't *have* an iPod.
      • Well, it doesn't have a toolbar mode, but it does have a mini player in the advanced menu.
      • Here's how to control iTunes from the taskbar:

        -In iTunes, select Edit->Preferences

        -Click on the Advanced tab.

        -Check the box for "Show iTunes icon in system tray"

        Once enabled, right-clicking the icon in system tray gives you access to the iTunes controls.

    • iTunes is sorely lacking in so many areas too!

      Let me rephrase what you just said: "iTunes lacks features! They should add features! And use less memory!"

      These days, memory footprint doesn't matter. I don't know what iTunes does with all its space, but I suspect most of it is the Quicktime video codecs. That just gets swapped out to disk and doesn't impact the system. Although most of us can spare the RAM, certainly all of us can spare the disk space for 30 megs to get swapped out... Do you actually

    • If apple were a woman she would have a large blue vein extending from the nipple of her giant beasts. All your friends are like, "man, just look her tits."

      But you have your doubts. You have seen alot of Apple City girls, and know the pitfalls of large breasts. Sure, they are pretty, but they can come with alot of problems.

      Watch out if you ask one of these walking tit-bombs to improve herself. Maby loose a little weight, learn something new at the local community college. That bitch will send every one
      • If apple were a woman she would have a large blue vein extending from the nipple of her giant beasts.

        You've actually never seen a woman naked, have you?

    • The library doesn't update itself automatically...

      Not sure what you mean here - sure it does. You're interacting with your files via iTunes, right? I mean, if you're going out into your file system and moving stuff around, and then wondering why iTunes doesn't notice, you're just wasting your time complaining about it. The whole point is to use iTunes to interact with your music files and just let it worry about organizing that section of your file system. If you really must go futz with the files &
    • -> The library doesn't update itself automatically...

      Well, that is not the model. If you let iTunes to manage the library and drag files to iTunes to add them then there is no reason to 'update' the library - ever. Some people don't do it that way, but for most iTunes users an 'automatic Library update' would be a waste of cycles.

      -> There's no concept of 'checking for existing entries on import'

      Your iTunes works differently than mine. If I drag a file or folder to iTunes twice, absolutely nothing h
    • There's no concept of 'checking for existing entries on import' - importing the same folder will just give you each track twice...

      Yes, that does suck. The best it can do is "Edit -> Show Duplicate Songs". After that your on your own to remove duplicate tracks. Seems like it wouldn't be that hard to have the SW do that for you.

    • AFAIK, there is no plugin facility for iTunes under Windows. Run it under OS X, though, and you can put AppleScript files in your ~/Library/iTunes/Script (must be created by user first). So says the website: http://www.apple.com/applescript/itunes/ [apple.com]

      The two plugins that I have installed on my PB are LAME ("encode selection with LAME") and a batch ID3 renamer (eg: "Myartist - Mytrack.mp3 w/ no ID3 info" -> ID3:artist:Myartist, ID3:track:Mytrack). I downloaded both since there seems to be a large-enough dev
    • There's no concept of 'checking for existing entries on import' - importing the same folder will just give you each track twice...

      I've had the opposite problem. If I import a folder again, iTunes will gladly skip over the files already in the library, however, it will leave the files that are no longer there in the library.

  • iTunes (Score:2, Funny)

    by pwrtool 45 ( 792547 )
    Yeah, their Linux client is gre...oh. Wait.

    • Re:iTunes (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Yeah, their Linux client is gre...oh. Wait.

      I think the popularity of Macs on Slashdot really has shown how many users have abandoned the idea of having a usable Linux desktop system when they could have a UNIX workstation on a laptop or desktop by just buying a Mac running OS X. When I first got an iBook several years ago it was a dream compared to the headaches of trying to run Linux on a Dell Inspiron notebook while trying to get my wireless and sound working. In its defense, Linux support for my 6 ye

    • It's not needed on Linux. For audio podcasts, there's amarok, which is better than iTunes. For video (and audio, and other) podcasts, there's PenguinTV (use the latest unstable version).

  • WMP still No 1 and growing but slower than iTunes (Score:5, Interesting)

    by orlinius ( 181137 ) on Friday March 17, 2006 @09:10AM (#14940939) Homepage
    Did you notice that Microsoft is on a linear growth "curve" no doubt due to OS sales.
    iTunes is growing faster though, so if this trend continues, in a year or two, iTunes will be the No 1 media player on the market. Not bad at all. God bless those iPods :)

    Reminds me of Netscape when they launched version 4 and announced that Windows will become irrelevant as people will spend most of their time in Netscape. Is it possible that iTunes will do that in the near future as people will increasingly use their computers for entertainment (and not TV, radio, DVDs, outdoor activities, etc.)?
    • Linux prevented MS from leveraging their desktop monopoly to gain a monopoly on servers.

      Apple prevented MS from leveraging their desktop monopoly to gain a monopoly on media players (and DRM).

      MS failed miserably on their own when attempting a monopoly on mobile phones by stabbing their partners in the back (I guess they couldn't help themselves).

      It still remains to be seen if firefox, openoffice, linux etc will be able to break monopolies MS already has in place. lets all hope so for the good of mankind.

  • Apple of my eye (Score:5, Funny)

    by digitaldc ( 879047 ) * on Friday March 17, 2006 @09:13AM (#14940952)
    As broadband penetration increases we are spending more time on our computers.

    Broad penetration, however, has been decreasing as we are spending more time on our computers.

  • So, when should podcasts ditch MP3s for AAC? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Schlemphfer ( 556732 ) on Friday March 17, 2006 @09:20AM (#14940989) Homepage
    In light of this report, I'm wondering if and when I should ditch providing MP3s for my podcast and switch to AAC? I know I could provide both formats but that would entail a lot of extra work.

    I'm really eager to ditch MP3s for a couple reasons. First, I understand that AAC sounds at least twice as good at comparable bitrates. Second, I'm no more trusting of the MP3 coalition than I was of the JPG owners, whereas I can't picture apple ever seeking royalty backpayments from podcasters using the AAC format.

    An obvious solution is to provide both MP3 and AAC files, but I'm lazy and would prefer to offer only one format. Any thoughts on whether it makes sense for a podcaster to switch entirely to AAC? I'm sure most of my listeners would appreciate the enhanced sound quality. But what percentage of my listeners would be likely to disappear?

    • Re:So, when should podcasts ditch MP3s for AAC? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by tpgp ( 48001 ) on Friday March 17, 2006 @09:51AM (#14941119) Homepage
      In light of this report, I'm wondering if and when I should ditch providing MP3s for my podcast and switch to AAC?

      You would be an idiot to drop mp3 in favour of mp4.

      Mp3 is still the king. There is no format out there that comes close. You don't want to alienate all your listeners with old mp3 players (or the multitude who've bought the $20 256MB chinese cheapies)

      Dropping it for mp4 would make about as much sense as dropping it for ogg.

      First, I understand that AAC sounds at least twice as good at comparable bitrates.

      I don't know what sort of audio files you're distributing - but do your own listen tests. Different codecs perform wildly differently depending on the source audio type & most reviews are using pretty standard music with vocals.

    • Re:So, when should podcasts ditch MP3s for AAC? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Alioth ( 221270 ) <no@spam> on Friday March 17, 2006 @09:52AM (#14941127) Journal
      I _only_ use AAC podcasts. The nice thing about the enhanced ones for iTunes is they can include hypertext links (so when listening to 75minutes, I don't have to work out how that strange band name is actually spelled - the link is right there) and artwork. The AAC podcasts also make it easier to precisely skip the bits I don't want to listen to (for example, I don't like all the genres of music that 75minutes plays, but I can just click on the next track to skip the stuff I don't like, instead of having to carefully fastforward and rewind).
    • m4a aka aac are much better. The quality is much smoother and it is very easy to setup hyperlinking and skipping, image based chapters (for each song). These things work both on the downloaded .m4a file w/in itunes as well as the web based quicktime plugin. As itunes is so ubiquitous/free and quicktime also free I dont think there
      is much of a downside of going this route.

      To see an example of this, that I recently created check out :

      http://www.bloosqr.com/the%20essence/the%20Podcast /the%20Podcast.html [bloosqr.com]

      -best

  • Should surpass realplayer? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by tpgp ( 48001 ) on Friday March 17, 2006 @09:20AM (#14940990) Homepage
    I have to say that I'm very surprised that itunes hasn't long since surpassed real player.

    I know plenty of people who use itunes, but none who use realplayer.

    Still, both are irritating adware & nagware (along with WMP of course)

    We need a firefox for media....
    • We need a firefox for media....

      You mean something like Songbird [songbirdnest.com]? :)

      • You mean something like Songbird? :)

        Yup, something like Songbird, but complete, cross platform and with the licensing clarified [songbirdnest.com]

        Files that are our original creations are copyright Pioneers of the Inevitable LLC. We plan to keep the vast majority, if not all, of our source code available under a GPL license.[emphasis mine]

        Songbird looks cool, but with no linux client its useless to me.

        • does songbird do anything cool like add itunes-like features to generic usb bulk storage mp3 players? automatic upload of playlists, automatic download and transfer of podcasts, etc? now THAT would be cool and remove the few points that tie me to itunes/ipod at the moment...
          • does songbird do anything cool like add itunes-like features to generic usb bulk storage mp3 players? automatic upload of playlists, automatic download and transfer of podcasts, etc? now THAT would be cool and remove the few points that tie me to itunes/ipod at the moment...

            Nope, Songbird isn't ready for production yet. It does however plan to do everything you mention (and be extensible like firefox)

            You're probably best off sticking with itunes for now - and if you want to use a generic mp3 player, give th
      • Come on, what a blatant and yet crappy rip-off. Try something innovative, like amaroK [kde.org].
    • We need a firefox for media...

      But how could you afford to leave every song in memory?

    • I know plenty of people who use itunes, but none who use realplayer. Still, both are irritating adware & nagware

      Um, which iTunes adverts are you referring to? There's no version that requires payment that they try to nag you to buy. If you're talking about the MiniStore, try going to Edit > Hide MiniStore (this may be different in Windows; I'm using OS X).

      • Um, which iTunes adverts are you referring to? There's no version that requires payment that they try to nag you to buy.

        You say you use osx - I'm not sure if it does it too, but under windows, itunes installs quicktime which is irritating nagware.

        If you're talking about the MiniStore, try going to Edit > Hide MiniStore

        Errr right, I didn't say you couldn't turn it off, I just said (and thanks for confirming) that it is adware & nagware.

        Haven't used itunes for a while (and that was on my gf's laptop),
    • At what point does iTunes nag or present ads? You can turn off the ministore with a mouse click.
    • I think a big one for Real is that the nfl streams all their games on real. just think of all the fantasy football leagues there are...

  • I have little sympathy for real player (Score:3, Insightful)

    by helix_r ( 134185 ) on Friday March 17, 2006 @09:36AM (#14941056)

    Real player has really wore out the good-will of its users. It is now a pretty good player, but for years they annoyed the hell out of everyone that downloaded from them.

    You know...

    * having to click through and read 10 webpages to get to the free realplayer whose link was always hidden in a corner somewhere. What were they thinking? That users would accidently click on the non-free version and then give up and just pay for it?

    * Nag screens, annoying forms, when installing-- no real player, you will never fucking get my home phone number.

    * Remember the instability and the crashes...

    Sadly, I see some traits like this in iTunes. Recently, I had wanted to download JUST QUICKTIME. I was rudely surprised that I can't do that anymore. I HAVE TO download iTunes+quicktime-- whether I want iTunes or not. Screw that. It looks like iTunes has failed to learn the hard lessons of Real Player.

    • Re:I have little sympathy for real player (Score:5, Informative)

      by Xyde ( 415798 ) <slashdot@purrrrTIGER.net minus cat> on Friday March 17, 2006 @10:05AM (#14941206)
      Sadly, I see some traits like this in iTunes. Recently, I had wanted to download JUST QUICKTIME. I was rudely surprised that I can't do that anymore. I HAVE TO download iTunes+quicktime-- whether I want iTunes or not. Screw that. It looks like iTunes has failed to learn the hard lessons of Real Player.

      What? [apple.com]


      • Congratulations. You _found_ the standalone player. You have proven that the standalone exists.

        I admit that I just went to the apple website. Clicked on "Quicktime" and was brought to here... http://www.apple.com/quicktime/win.html [apple.com]

        Clicking on the download takes me to a place where it says "QuickTime" and "Free download". It then proceeds to download itunes+quicktime-- for me, it is very annoying to have something you don't want "bundled with" your download.

        I don't care if a standalone exists, if they bury i
    • I don't know where you were looking, but I find the Quicktime installer at http://www.apple.com/quicktime/download [apple.com]. It will bounce you to the installer for the system you are on, but there is a link to the other system on the page. It does not appear to install iTunes. I'd be interested to find out information to the contrary. One thing I found about the article, is that when you add the Quicktime player and iTunes together, it has surpassed Real. Of course the trouble with this survey is that Quicktim

    • Recently, I had wanted to download JUST QUICKTIME. I was rudely surprised that I can't do that anymore. I HAVE TO download iTunes+quicktime


      Guess you missed the "QuickTime Standalone Installer" link on http://www.apple.com/quicktime/download/win.html [apple.com]?

  • ObFreebies (Score:5, Informative)

    by Rob T Firefly ( 844560 ) on Friday March 17, 2006 @09:46AM (#14941099) Homepage Journal
    I tend to prefer a big heaping plate of Media Player Classic [sourceforge.net], with a side order of Real Alternative [free-codecs.com] and Quicktime Alternative [free-codecs.com].

  • Completely Un-Shocking (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Kozz ( 7764 )
    Considering that I use iTunes because I WANT to, but use RealPlayer and Quicktime only when I HAVE TO. I find both of the latter bloated, irritating. I'm not sure the actual root of my dislike for Quicktime, but maybe it's because I used to have lots of problems playing .MOV files on my previous dual P3-550 (1GB RAM), with no apparent fix.

  • What's RealPlayer (Score:3, Funny)

    by PhYrE2k2 ( 806396 ) on Friday March 17, 2006 @01:04PM (#14942644)
    What the hell is Realplayer? Oh! You mean that company that had a very brief up on Internet media a good 10 years ago and then lost it due to poor licensing, bloating their player beyond belief, privacy disputes, and restrictive supplier arrangements. Got it. They even still around?
    -M

Slashdot Top Deals

"Protozoa are small, and bacteria are small, but viruses are smaller than the both put together."

Close