Re: iPod Shuffle / ITunes

["noel_pilot" <HA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Just a little positive in a n otherwise nailing Apple ocean!! :)

Personally never had a problem with itunes or ipods! Never noticed any
slowdown or CPU drain on the pc and it by far kicks the ass IMO of any
other mp3 playing/indexing/sorting application.  used to use winamp
and musicmatch many many moons ago and Itunes for me is far far superior!!

Just so any people that haven't tried them don't think Apple is a
complete pile of poop!! :)

and for what its worth my ibook never ever given me a prob networking,
to get past the delays associated with waiting for other network
devices to popup I use an Applescript that mounts specific folders by
IP address which never fails for me :)

I don't doubt for a minute that there are lots of unhappy Mac
Users/purchasers however ffor every one unhappy one Im sure theres
lots and lots of truly happy ones!! :)


merry Christmas!!




--- In ukha_d@xxxxxxx, "Ian Lowe" <ianlowe@x...> wrote:
>
> > Quite frankly my experiences of using the ipod shuffle have
quashed any
> desire to buy and sort of
> > Mac...
>
> Consider yourself lucky - my enthusiasm for Mac got crushde by buying
an
> imac... :
>
> Admittedly, it's an old G3, so not exactly your normal Mac Pricing,
but
> still smarted a little.
>
> Actually, I had the opportunity recently to build a suite for
demonstrating
> interoperability and business systems - a very nice environment, with
a
> frankly delicious set of environments to play with ^H^H^H^H^H^H
demonstrate
> ;)
>
> We had Ubuntu linux on desktops, talking to a mixed back end of the
> Contribs.org e-smith server and SBS 2003, with AD integration all
round - we
> had XP workstations happily using resources from either server without
> blinking..
>
> The only fly in the ointment? That would be the OSX machines, which
> resolutely refused to play nice. The Directory tool saw the AD, yet
refused
> to bind to the domain - we could only get basic SMB networking
going, and
> even then... The powerbook would be fine for half an hour, then
suddenly
> decide that it couldn't see the Linux server - until you rebooted
the beast.
> The big iMac (one of the 20" screen ones) would play better, as
(bizzarely)
> it had a different version of the Directory softwre, despite both
machines
> saying that they were up to date.
>
> What really did it for me was what seemed to be the sheer perversity
of
> Apple's devs - SBS defaults to a domain name of mydomain.local to
prevent
> the whole "can't see our own website" thing: it's an
eminently sensible
> configuration, and something that the Linux and MS boxes implement
> trivially... But OSX won't!
>
> It's the most fiendish problem going - you can ping a host but can't
resolve
> it, but can resolve anything else. DNS seems to work okay, for
everything
> except your MS servers...
>
> Cue the frankly bizzare discovery that apple have chosen to resolve
any
> domain which ends in ".local" using a multicast DNS
implementation
that only
> works with... Mac OS! It's hard to see it as anything other than
> deliberately breaking interoperability with Windows, and frankly,
that's no
> more acceptable  from Apple than it is from Microsoft.
>
> Basically, I can see the appeal of Apple kit - it's *very* nice, but
their
> business practices (ie, the clone vendor fiasco, DRM implementation,
DRAM
> lockout, GPL issues etc) just make me want to scream. Bizzare though
it
> sounds, I actually that Balmer and crew are a little *more* ethical
than
> Steve Jobs.
>
> If I bought myself a powerbook... I'd be running Ubuntu on it, and
I'll
> stick with a Creative ipod lookalike (without the dodgy DRM!), thanks!
>
> I.
>