I normally play games on one monitor and play podcasts on the other monitor with itunes. I never really have an issue with slow down or lag or my PC being hogged up. I don't even have a badass PC. Just a budget one I built a couple years ago with a phenom II 940, 4 gigs of ram, 5870.
[QUOTE=Odellus;36230217]idle
[img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/8914988/Captures/excelcapture479-20120606.png[/img]
playing a song
[img]https://dl.dropbox.com/u/8914988/Captures/excelcapture480-20120606.png[/img]
wtf kind of computer do you have[/QUOTE]
That's bloat in my book.
But I also put efficiency higher than a snazzy GUI with lots of effects.
[url]http://www.anythingbutipod.com/forum/showthread.php?t=67199[/url]
[url]http://www.hifivision.com/media-streaming-players/26378-dac-mobile-tabs.html[/url]
Seeing as the Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0's got the Wolfson DAC and supports Voodoo sound, I'd recommend that.
[QUOTE=Odellus;36230217]idle
[img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/8914988/Captures/excelcapture479-20120606.png[/img]
playing a song
[img]https://dl.dropbox.com/u/8914988/Captures/excelcapture480-20120606.png[/img]
wtf kind of computer do you have[/QUOTE]
Trough in the bonjour service and probably some other stuff that apple bundles and autostarts with itunes.
who cares it's still probably max 100 MB
if you have an average computer with 4GB of RAM that's a whole 2% of your RAM omg so bloat
[QUOTE=Odellus;36239738]who cares it's still probably max 100 MB
if you have an average computer with 4GB of RAM that's a whole 2% of your RAM omg so bloat[/QUOTE]
If every programmer had that attitude :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=Van-man;36239902]If every programmer had that attitude :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
Yeah sure it sounds awful when you put it like that but really, how much better does your PC perform if you use Foobar instead of iTunes? I can personally guarantee unless your PC is awful iTunes will not make your computer run worse.
[QUOTE=Van-man;36239902]If every programmer had that attitude :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
Sounds like the average Microsoft developer.
[editline]8th June 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Protocol7;36240181]Yeah sure it sounds awful when you put it like that but really, how much better does your PC perform if you use Foobar instead of iTunes? I can personally guarantee unless your PC is awful iTunes will not make your computer run worse.[/QUOTE]
Yes, you are right, it shouldn't affect a modern PC that much, but it sets an awful precedent. At least back when we had seriously limited hardware, the late 80's early 90's you wouldn't dare write crap like that.
[QUOTE=Odellus;36239738]who cares it's still probably max 100 MB
if you have an average computer with 4GB of RAM that's a whole 2% of your RAM omg so bloat[/QUOTE]
Except it doesn't [b]need[/b] 100 MB of RAM to do what it does. And it especially doesn't need 54 MB dedicated to loading and playing a song - iTunes doesn't support FLAC, and a 320kbps MP3 weighs in at 9 MB for 4 minutes.
Now if you were converting a song, I could see 100 MB usage. If you were playing a FLAC file, I could see usage going up by about 50 (if it was like a ten minute song). But as it stands, iTunes can't justify it's memory usage.
[img_thumb]http://images.amazon.com/images/G/01/electronics/detail-page/B002JPITY8-1.jpg[/img_thumb]
Whyyyy?
Why don't you love me?
:(
[QUOTE=lavacano;36242327]Except it doesn't [B]need[/B] 100 MB of RAM to do what it does. And it especially doesn't need 54 MB dedicated to loading and playing a song - iTunes doesn't support FLAC, and a 320kbps MP3 weighs in at 9 MB for 4 minutes.
Now if you were converting a song, I could see 100 MB usage. If you were playing a FLAC file, I could see usage going up by about 50 (if it was like a ten minute song). But as it stands, iTunes can't justify it's memory usage.[/QUOTE]
keep saying that until you realize that itunes isn't a barebones music player like you're expecting it to be
if they took the store out, which is pretty much a browser inside of an audio player, you would see resource usage like foobar
[QUOTE=Odellus;36242952]keep saying that until you realize that itunes isn't a barebones music player like you're expecting it to be
if they took the store out, which is pretty much a browser inside of an audio player, you would see resource usage like foobar[/QUOTE]
And why don't iTunes have the store as a separate plug-in module that's only loaded when needed then?
See, that's a simple way of shaving down resource usage, but did Apple do it? Nope, too busy snazzing up the GUI.
[QUOTE=Van-man;36245824]And why don't iTunes have the store as a separate plug-in module that's only loaded when needed then?
See, that's a simple way of shaving down resource usage, but did Apple do it? Nope, too busy snazzing up the GUI.[/QUOTE]
That's all apple does with a lot of things. If you make it look good, people will think it's better than the competitors.
[QUOTE=/dev/sda1;36242384][img_thumb]http://images.amazon.com/images/G/01/electronics/detail-page/B002JPITY8-1.jpg[/img_thumb]
Whyyyy?
Why don't you love me?
:([/QUOTE]
The Zune HD looks so much nicer than the iPod.
If only Microsoft actually advertised it.
[QUOTE=Van-man;36245824]And why don't iTunes have the store as a separate plug-in module that's only loaded when needed then?
See, that's a simple way of shaving down resource usage, but did Apple do it? Nope, too busy snazzing up the GUI.[/QUOTE]
it takes up 70 fucking megabytes on a bad day. if that's really a dealbreaker to you then it's time to upgrade your computer.
it uses less ram than any internet browser for christ's sake
[QUOTE=Protocol7;36248203]it takes up 70 fucking megabytes on a bad day. if that's really a dealbreaker to you then it's time to upgrade your computer.
it uses less ram than any internet browser for christ's sake[/QUOTE]
So just because you can easily make it more efficient doesn't you should?
Oh well lets just waste power and create heat just because of a lazy bunch of programmers.
And let's not forget how it all adds up on the electricity bill.
[QUOTE=Van-man;36249284]So just because you can easily make it more efficient doesn't you should?
Oh well lets just waste power and create heat just because of a lazy bunch of programmers.
And let's not forget how it all adds up on the electricity bill.[/QUOTE]
I'm pretty sure it's not just "lazy programmers" considering iTunes does a lot more than play music.
If it's easy to make it so efficient why don't you go down to Apple's headquarters and do it yourself?
[QUOTE=Protocol7;36249650]I'm pretty sure it's not just "lazy programmers" considering iTunes does a lot more than play music.
If it's easy to make it so efficient why don't you go down to Apple's headquarters and do it yourself?[/QUOTE]
Because I don't use Itunes?
Especially since there's plenty of lightweight alternatives.
Foobar2000? Mediamonkey? heck even Winamp with classic theme and useless modules disabled/uninstalled is light, nimble and easy to use.
And that's just those I remember the names on.
Apple could learn [B]A LOT[/B] if they looked at the competition to Itunes, but as said before, they're too busy with bullshit.
So what you're saying is you have no idea what iTunes actually does because you've never used it, and compare it to programs that do nothing else but play media, and say "WELL LOOK AT HOW BLOATED IT IS"
Here's the point. It does play music, videos, and all that jazz. But it's more than a media player, it's a hub for iDevice PC connectivity.
[QUOTE=Protocol7;36250139]So what you're saying is you have no idea what iTunes actually does because you've never used it, and compare it to programs that do nothing else but play media, and say "WELL LOOK AT HOW BLOATED IT IS"
Here's the point. It does play music, videos, and all that jazz. But it's more than a media player, it's a hub for iDevice PC connectivity.[/QUOTE]
So is Winamp, it contains a full android sync function too, which works rather well.
[editline]8th June 2012[/editline]
In fact, Winamp will sync to any mass storage device plugged into it.
But Android is drag and drop, iTunes has a convoluted proprietary syncing system. It's not hard to extend drag and drop functionality to an application.
[editline]8th June 2012[/editline]
I mean, I guess my point is that Apple could learn a few things development wise, but comparing its memory footprint to a less feature-filled application is ridiculous.
[QUOTE=Protocol7;36250283]But Android is drag and drop, iTunes has a convoluted proprietary syncing system. It's not hard to extend drag and drop functionality to an application.
[editline]8th June 2012[/editline]
I mean, I guess my point is that Apple could learn a few things development wise, but comparing its memory footprint to a less feature-filled application is ridiculous.[/QUOTE]
Even so all it has to do is handshake and send an encrypted data stream, which admittedly takes memory. But 80Mb?
[QUOTE=Protocol7;36250283]But Android is drag and drop, iTunes has a convoluted proprietary syncing system. It's not hard to extend drag and drop functionality to an application.
[editline]8th June 2012[/editline]
I mean, I guess my point is that Apple could learn a few things development wise, but comparing its memory footprint to a less feature-filled application is ridiculous.[/QUOTE]
My point is it uses more RAM than it needs at the time.
From Odellus' screenshot, iTunes takes approx. 28 MB of RAM idle (I'm going to assume he's in the library view and not the store view). My instance of foobar2000 when idle (subtracting the RAM used by components I've added) is about 15 MB. Will that 13 MB extra cause immense slowdowns? No. But that doesn't mean "go ahead and use it", and all it says to me is someone at Apple doesn't know how to optimize properly.
I'm not saying foobar2000 is flawless in this regard - if I didn't subtract all my components from my RAM usage above I'd be working with a 70 MB idle usage figure. Admittedly I don't know if this is the components system or each individual component doing this, but still. But I'm saying most of that RAM used by foobar actually goes to a feature I can identify - album lists, last.fm support (radio and scrobble), automatic config backups, various remote control components I've installed, iPod support, special playlists, and even Winamp API emulation. iTunes has a store, music/video playback, and iPod support (including apps on iOS devices). Oh, and shiny graphics.
[QUOTE=Van-man;36245824]And why don't iTunes have the store as a separate plug-in module that's only loaded when needed then?
See, that's a simple way of shaving down resource usage, but did Apple do it? Nope, too busy snazzing up the GUI.[/QUOTE]
biased apple hating ignorance in its purest form
you probably think "why doesnt crysis only load what i can see so i can get good fps"
[QUOTE=Odellus;36253146]biased apple hating ignorance in its purest form
you probably think "why doesnt crysis only load what i can see so i can get good fps"[/QUOTE]
[I]"oh no I can't come up with a good argument, TIME TO STRAWMAN"[/I]
At-least stick to the discussion about how Itunes is a bloated memory whore that should only use 25% of the resources it actually uses.
[QUOTE=Van-man;36253244][I]"oh no I can't come up with a good argument, TIME TO STRAWMAN"[/I]
At-least stick to the discussion about how Itunes is a bloated memory whore that should only use 25% of the resources it actually uses.[/QUOTE]
there's nothing else to say, but lol i'll spell it out for you
obviously if they could've done it they would've, you're just being a child and hating on something because it's apple and because it's using the appropriate amount of resources it should be for the features it provides
saying something like 'why didnt they just do this' is dumb because you couldn't make an itunes clone yourself, if it was as simple as what you suggested it would've been done
[editline]8th June 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=lavacano;36252158]My point is it uses more RAM than it needs at the time.
From Odellus' screenshot, iTunes takes approx. 28 MB of RAM idle (I'm going to assume he's in the library view and not the store view). My instance of foobar2000 when idle (subtracting the RAM used by components I've added) is about 15 MB. [B]Will that 13 MB extra cause immense slowdowns? No.[/B] But that doesn't mean "go ahead and use it", and all it says to me is someone at Apple doesn't know how to optimize properly.
I'm not saying foobar2000 is flawless in this regard - if I didn't subtract all my components from my RAM usage above I'd be working with a 70 MB idle usage figure. Admittedly I don't know if this is the components system or each individual component doing this, but still. But I'm saying most of that RAM used by foobar actually goes to a feature I can identify - album lists, last.fm support (radio and scrobble), automatic config backups, various remote control components I've installed, iPod support, special playlists, and even Winamp API emulation. iTunes has a store, music/video playback, and iPod support (including apps on iOS devices). Oh, and shiny graphics.[/QUOTE]
apparently it will because you said you had to dedicate your computer to using itunes lol
'Project Lead, Internet Explorer for Linux' you of all people should know why itunes uses the resources it does, kind of sad
[editline]a[/editline]
back to ggd, this section is the same shit as it was months ago
[QUOTE=Odellus;36253287]saying something like 'why didnt they just do this' is dumb because you couldn't make an itunes clone yourself, if it was as simple as what you suggested it would've been done
[/QUOTE]
"If you can't do better, you shouldn't have an opinion!"
Guys, can we stop now, please?
[QUOTE=Odellus;36253146]you probably think "why doesnt crysis only load what i can see so i can get good fps"[/QUOTE]
dear fucking god that's stupid
i knew there was a reason I added you to the ignore list in the first place, looks like you're going right back.
Cowon J3
[IMG]http://www.mysite.by/files/tovar/Cowon-J3-AMOLED.jpg[/IMG]
Considered best in what it does, playing music. Almost bought it myself but instead settled for an Android phone with PowerAmp. If you're after apps and games then your only player option is the touch, but if you don't use apps or already have an iPhone/Android phone go for the J3.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
