4 ms·

> Right, because there's nothing to play. There's nothing there to play because "pause" irrationally became "stop" for no apparent reason (remember there's no

by Jkeg 16y ago

> Right, because there's nothing to play. There's nothing there to play because "pause" irrationally became "stop" for no apparent reason (remember there's no playlist in sight), and the user accidentally pressed it. There's no reason for it to be this way. Why shouldn't the play button apply to songs, especially when it was played individually and not as a playlist? Seems like the type of thing a music player should do.

thought_alarm 16y ago
The Previous, Play, and Next buttons apply to the screen you are currently viewing. They work just the same in the store as they do on any other iTunes screen.
- Jkeg 16y ago
  The way they work is exactly the problem. Considering there's a lot you can do in iTunes, it makes more sense to have the control buttons apply to items independent of where you're browsing, as for example, Windows Media Player. The current behavior is confusing and pointless.
  - thought_alarm 16y ago
    You are forgetting these iTunes use cases: - Select a track and push Play. - Select an album and push Play. - Select a playlist and push Play. - Select iTunes DJ and push Play. These are fundamental to iTunes. It is neither confusing nor pointless.
  - Jkeg 16y ago
    >You are forgetting these iTunes use cases: None of those are contradictory to the idea of control consistency throughout iTunes, why would they be? In fact, deliberately selecting something and choosing specifically what to do with it fits perfectly with the "Have the control buttons control items you select or can only be one other possible item" method. If the behavior isn't confusing, then why does it stop the track, but not let you restart it, even though there's nothing else to control? That is perfectly described as pointless and confusing.
    - thought_alarm 16y ago
      > None of those are contradictory to the idea of control consistency throughout iTunes Of course not. That's how iTunes already works, and iTunes is already consistent. However, those things are contrary to your suggestion: "it makes more sense to have the control buttons apply to items independent of where you're browsing". Look, it's clear you haven't really thought things through. You just need to learn how iTunes works. (You also need to learn how to reply to the correct comment) It's very easy: The playback controls "always" apply to the playlist you are viewing. If you want to get back to the currently-playing playlist, click the little back-arrow in the right-hand side of the main display. You can't get more consistent than that. You can also click the "Now Playing" window and that will also give you controls for the current playlist. It's very easy.
      - Jkeg 16y ago
        >Of course not. That's how iTunes already works, and iTunes is already consistent. What's consistent about arbitrarily removing 'pause' functionality when not necessary? That is not consistent, and it's poor usability. > However, those things are contrary to your suggestion: No. Browsing around non-playlist-determining sections of iTunes does not imply I want to change or stop a playlist/track. So why remove the pause function, if the only reason to do that is so you can start a new playlist? >It's very easy: The playback controls "always" apply to the playlist you are viewing. Which is of no use to anyone if they aren't viewing a play list at all. Really, this was established in my very first comment. It's the iTunes store. There is no playlist to play other than the one I selected to play in the first place. Why exactly prevent me from pausing, when there's just no reason that would be helpful. You still haven't answered this. > It's very easy. Multiple clicks/mouse positionings are never easier than just one. Never. > Look, it's clear you haven't really thought things through. You just need to learn how iTunes works. That's sort of pointless to claim. You haven't proven anything, so such grand pronouncements as to someones general comprehension of the issue are useless to everyone. I suggest you prove your point with a specific argument, instead of making unsupported assertions, basically that amounts to "You're just wrong." That's never really a help to a discussion. >(You also need to learn how to reply to the correct comment) And no, I already know which comment to reply to, but the link simply wasn't there. I suppose you think, as with the iTunes issue, that software always works perfectly.

by Jkeg 16y ago

thought_alarm 16y ago

The Previous, Play, and Next buttons apply to the screen you are currently viewing. They work just the same in the store as they do on any other iTunes screen.

Jkeg 16y ago
The way they work is exactly the problem. Considering there's a lot you can do in iTunes, it makes more sense to have the control buttons apply to items independent of where you're browsing, as for example, Windows Media Player. The current behavior is confusing and pointless.
- thought_alarm 16y ago
  You are forgetting these iTunes use cases: - Select a track and push Play. - Select an album and push Play. - Select a playlist and push Play. - Select iTunes DJ and push Play. These are fundamental to iTunes. It is neither confusing nor pointless.
- Jkeg 16y ago
  >You are forgetting these iTunes use cases: None of those are contradictory to the idea of control consistency throughout iTunes, why would they be? In fact, deliberately selecting something and choosing specifically what to do with it fits perfectly with the "Have the control buttons control items you select or can only be one other possible item" method. If the behavior isn't confusing, then why does it stop the track, but not let you restart it, even though there's nothing else to control? That is perfectly described as pointless and confusing.
  - thought_alarm 16y ago
    > None of those are contradictory to the idea of control consistency throughout iTunes Of course not. That's how iTunes already works, and iTunes is already consistent. However, those things are contrary to your suggestion: "it makes more sense to have the control buttons apply to items independent of where you're browsing". Look, it's clear you haven't really thought things through. You just need to learn how iTunes works. (You also need to learn how to reply to the correct comment) It's very easy: The playback controls "always" apply to the playlist you are viewing. If you want to get back to the currently-playing playlist, click the little back-arrow in the right-hand side of the main display. You can't get more consistent than that. You can also click the "Now Playing" window and that will also give you controls for the current playlist. It's very easy.
    - Jkeg 16y ago
      >Of course not. That's how iTunes already works, and iTunes is already consistent. What's consistent about arbitrarily removing 'pause' functionality when not necessary? That is not consistent, and it's poor usability. > However, those things are contrary to your suggestion: No. Browsing around non-playlist-determining sections of iTunes does not imply I want to change or stop a playlist/track. So why remove the pause function, if the only reason to do that is so you can start a new playlist? >It's very easy: The playback controls "always" apply to the playlist you are viewing. Which is of no use to anyone if they aren't viewing a play list at all. Really, this was established in my very first comment. It's the iTunes store. There is no playlist to play other than the one I selected to play in the first place. Why exactly prevent me from pausing, when there's just no reason that would be helpful. You still haven't answered this. > It's very easy. Multiple clicks/mouse positionings are never easier than just one. Never. > Look, it's clear you haven't really thought things through. You just need to learn how iTunes works. That's sort of pointless to claim. You haven't proven anything, so such grand pronouncements as to someones general comprehension of the issue are useless to everyone. I suggest you prove your point with a specific argument, instead of making unsupported assertions, basically that amounts to "You're just wrong." That's never really a help to a discussion. >(You also need to learn how to reply to the correct comment) And no, I already know which comment to reply to, but the link simply wasn't there. I suppose you think, as with the iTunes issue, that software always works perfectly.