Text 5517, 125 rader
Skriven 2006-08-02 07:16:00 av Robert E Starr JR (6014.babylon5)
Ärende: Re: City of Dreams
==========================
  * * * This message was from Chris to rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.m * * *  
         * * * and has been forwarded to you by Lord Time * * *         
            -----------------------------------------------             

@MSGID: <pelzo63-FD31B1.01234702082006@news.west.earthlink.net>
@REPLY: <1153852960.155047.223180@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
In article <0m10d25fmkigvql7h06cbnkjpg6d1tsv51@gordol.org>,
 Jeffrey Kaplan <nomail@gordol.org> wrote:

> It is alleged that Chris claimed:
> 
> > the only reference i could find to anything like this on rhapsody.com 
> > was about a free plan that limited you to 25 songs per month. i could 
> 
> That's 25 free/streaming songs.  You can always +purchase+ a track if
> you like it.
> 

as i said, i'll take your word for it since i can't get beyond the 
introductory page to actually see any more detail :-)


> 
> Winamp doesn't wheedle its way into the system.  It doesn't set itself
> up as a system Service.  It doesn't always leave a portion of itself
> running when you're not actually using it.  Turn it off, and it's OFF.
> iTunes still has some parts of itself on my old computer, even after
> uninstalling it.

seems this whole "wheedling into the system" thing is pretty common 
among major commercial software on the pc side.  winamp being somewhere 
above shareware and somewhere below major commercial software doesn't 
get this problem. 

> 
> >  and since i know you're going to say it, "don't forget the overhead of 
> > quicktime", meh, a) quicktime itself is worth it and everyone should 
> > have it*, b) winamp requires it's own storage+a browser since it has no 
> > music store built in. 
> 
> Um, yes it does.  Also online streaming media.  www.winamp.com.

again, lack of ability to see for certain means i'll take your word for 
it. (website seems to indicate that you have to go to aol's music 
purchase service, but if you say the software has built-in purchasing 
power similar to itunes, that's good enough for me to accept :-)

> > > is slow to load, 
> > not here, or on the PC's i've used it on
> 
> My (limited) use of it was on an XP Pro system with an AthlonXP 2800+,
> 1GB PC2100 DDR ram.

my current main computer is an eMac G4 700 MHz with 192 MB ram(roughly a 
late 2002/early 2003 model system), not much of a speed burner.  not 
quite sure of the specs on the PC i've most commonly used itunes on 
since it's my friend's PC and just got totally overhauled(i am, oddly 
enough, the mac-user who my pc-user friends ask for help with their pc 
problems, so guess who set up all of their new software etc when they 
got it back from the overhaul ;-). but it handles itunes just fine, now 
if i can just convince them to get a friggin optical mouse(i'm almost at 
the point of handing them one of my extra ones)

> > not here, or on the PC's i've used it on(not being repetitive to be an 
> > ass, being repetitive to stress that each of these comments is being 
> > commented on individually, not "missing" one.
> 
> Understood.  It was a dog on +my+ system, then, even though my system
> was no slouch performer.

perhaps there was some sort of software conflict between it and other 
things, who knows, like i said below, you have what works for you, i 
have what works for me. i'm more or less just airing this stuff out to 
talk to anyone listening lest they be dissuaded from itunes simply 
because you have a bad experience with it :-)



> 
> > adding new music in winamp=looks like the only way is to add it threw 
> > menu functions. 
> 

i just want to point out that i was on the phone when i typed "threw" 
instead of through, i shall go flog myself now. 

> Just drop the directory into Winamp's watch folder location(s) that you
> configured and (re)start Winamp or wait for it to discover the change
> on the rescan schedule you set for it.
> 

> 
> OTOH, I haven't even +seen+ a Mac since my previous employer laid off
> my entire department.

take a look sometime, we don't bite...much ;-)

> > looking at the screen shots though, it looks cumbersome as you claim 
> > itunes to be, not intuitive, as i claim itunes to be :-)
> 
> Well, I find Winamp easy to use.  It has the controls I want in
> predictable places, and I find its library use and management pretty
> straight forward, once I learned a minimum amount of its query
> language.
> 


one question, since it's not clear from the website, does winamp have a 
"library" or any other named list that contains every single mp3 file 
loaded into it regardless of any further demarkation that you may apply 
to the songs/files and upon which any changes made to it reverberate 
throughout other lists(ie, delete a song from main library means it's 
also deleted from all playlists as well)? this is how itunes works and 
is something i find extremely useful

> > in short, whatever works for you, cool, 
> 
> In the words of G'Kar in "Born to the Purple", "This, at least, we can
> agree on."

...Chris
                                                                               
                                        
--- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)