[Robo]

http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1321

Yeah, so, in short, Apple filed "Vingle" with the USPTO. In short, it has to do with downloading and streaming audio and video, but the patent mentions many other community features. It almost sounds like the iTunes Whatever Store, only taken out of iTunes, and given it's own app ("Vingle") with lots of community features. It's also described as a retail store service (?).

How cool would it be if Vingle was this "next-generation" of download store? You could download music, movies, games, etc. (the patent covers basically anything digital), but you'd download them through the Vingle program, and it'd have lots of rad community features. Sign me up - well, not literally (I hope it isn't a subscription service).

[Wrao]

I did notice that the latest iTMS has more 'community' type features already. It started with iMix, now they've added Direct music gifting, User Reviews and the whole "Just for you" feature which could potentially be incorporated with a peer review type system.

Ultimately, I would love to be able to send songs to friends and have them send me songs and have a forum to talk about the songs, and have playlists made for me based on what I buy or what my friends buy...etc. I think that would add a very nice dimension to the music store angle.

Of course, the more the user base can interact with the store, the more likely there is going to be lamers cluttering up the system, but hey, we'll see where this goes.

edit for a fanboi wetdream: the name 'vingle' sounds like it could be a google product, remember there was a rumor recently that apple and google might have something brewing. Shrug.. that would be incredible.


oh yea and. I WANT MY ASTEROID DAMNIT!

[Robo]

I hope the iTunes Music Store gets taken out of iTunes. Then we'd never have to deal with the naming mess that is the "iTunes Movie Store."

Seriously, though. A separate "iStore"/"Vingle" app, with lots of nice community features, download management, etc., serving up content for iTunes or Front Row. I'd dig it.

[Wrao]

Originally Posted by Roboman Seriously, though. A separate "iStore"/"Vingle" app, with lots of nice community features, download management, etc., serving up content for iTunes or Front Row. I'd dig it.

Some friends of mine are going to bust a valve at this though. they have been actively brainstorming and laying the groundwork for their own 'vingle' type application. They have a lot of great ideas that in theory could truly revolutionize the way we deal in media. Ultimately, their idea is very google-esque, which, if this 'vingle' is anything like their idea, further supports my crackpipe idea that google might be involved with 'vingle' in some capacity.

[alexluft]

I hope this is the future iApp whatever store for all things digital. Also, my eye caught the following desriptions which might or might not be what I have been wanting done the Apple way for quite some time (and bit**ing about also). Here is the text from AppleInsider (3rd paragraph):

"A final filing is more vague, describing Vingle as "Computers; computer hardware; computer peripherals; hand held computers; computer terminals; personal digital assistants; electronic organizers; electronic notepads."



computer hardware, hand held computers, computer terminals, personal digital assistants, electronic organizers, and electronic notepads!!!

Is it just me or might this have something to do with the rumored (and applied to the patent office?) Tablet-like device from Apple, or maybe some input features on an iPod (or a separate device in itself?)?

I mean, finally Mac users can finally organize their day/tasks/appointments, etc natively (without Mark/Space) and Palm (seeing how Palm just went over to Windows mobile with the Treo... we feel sort of ALONE???).

Electronic notepad means we can WRITE on it, not just read stuff (like on the iPod right now), right? If so, this is going to be a great great device... done the Apple way.

Or am i completely off track here?

[709]

vin·gle slang:

1. Shortened form of 'Video Dingleberry'. An often overheard term at Apple Computer after the introduction of the piece of shit that is iTunes 6. Mostly used to describe the software that was supposed to be introduced at the time to manage video content. Instead, Apple rushed to incorporate 'just enough' video features into iTunes, leaving the more robust and capable application to hang in limbo like an unwiped piece of toilet paper on Steve Job's ass.

[chucker]

Post of the day.

[Robo]

[Wraven]

Why is everyone whining so much about iTunes 6? Give it some time people. Video is new. Apple will make it better.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Wraven Why is everyone whining so much about iTunes 6? Give it some time people. Video is new. Apple will make it better.

My dictionary doesn't define "video" as a form of "tunes". That is Brad's problem, that is everyone else's problem, and that is my problem.

Apple has strictly enforced the 1 app = 1 purpose idea since Mac OS X, which is part of the reason we'll never really see an OS X-style AppleWorks -- it's several apps in one.

You can see this in Apple's PIM: they use Mail, Address Book, iCal, iSync. They all share data using frameworks, but they're separate applications and separate user interfaces. Microsoft Entourage and Outlook have pretty much the same basic purposes, but are one app fits all. Apple doesn't like this. Neither do I.

iTunes? Entirely different. With each new release, they add one feature after another that has little to do with, well, "tunes". The worst move, in my opinion, was to remove iPod calendar and contacts syncing from iSync and put it into iTunes. Did they have a reason for it? Yes: Windows doesn't have iSync, and they want Mac OS iTunes and Windows iTunes to be as similar as possible. So in order to have calendar and contacts syncing work on Windows without either porting iSync (which also requires Windows users to download a separate application or have even one more application bundled with iTunes) or using ActiveSync (which I'm told basically sucks), they added the feature right in iTunes. And in order to maintain the "have Mac OS iTunes and Windows iTunes to be as similar as possible" goal, they did the same for the Mac version. Stupid? You bet.

Now, with video, things are getting worse. They could have created a new application -- iFlicks (yes i know the trademark exists already), iVideos, whatever. But instead, they didn't. There's multiple reasons for that, and I think the main one is marketing: they already convinced millions of users to use iTunes, and now they can trojan video functionality in and have millions of users use that already, without relying on their decision on whether or not they want to download, install and use an additional application.

From a marketing point of view, that makes perfect sense. From a user's point of view, it's somewhat annoying. From a usability and user interface design's point of view (a topic I specialize in), it is downright atrocious and unexpected from a company like Apple.

[Brad]

I applaud you, chucker. Well put.

chucker.reputation++;

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Brad I applaud you, chucker. Well put. chucker.reputation++;

Awww

*feels special*

[scratt]

Originally Posted by Brad I applaud you, chucker. Well put. chucker.reputation++;

So is chucker a static variable, or did you just let the forum dynamically allocate there and then?

Shouldn't it be...

appleNovaUsersDatabase->chucker.reputation++;

[Brad]

Every one of us is a static variable deep down inside, silly!

[chucker]

Do I get to be a constant?

[Brad]

"I am constant as the northern star."
"I'd give real money if he'd shut up."

[Bryson]

Vingle = Video Single. Probably the name they were going to sell videos of songs under, until they realised one day that it was a terrible, terrible name.

I dunno why everyone gets upset about the name iTunes. The app has grown beyond it's original remit. So what? Word does more than just words. It doesn't really matter. Outdated names stick around because the brand identity is worth more than the slight increase in clarity of having a more descriptive name.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Bryson I dunno why everyone gets upset about the name iTunes.

Because the name is, or at least was, symbolic of the purpose.

The app has grown beyond it's original remit. So what? Word does more than just words. It doesn't really matter.

To me it does, and I'm obviously not alone. I have explained this in detail above, but I'm glad you're bringing up Word: it's another example of many applications mixed into one. WordArt, for instance. If Apple had made that, they would have put it into a separate app. Don't believe me? Look at FinalCut Pro then: LiveType, which serves a similar purpose, is a separate application, as is Soundtrack (or its Pro version). And rather than filling FinalCut Pro with lots of importing, exporting, converting, compressing, en-/de-/transcoding options, they put even that into a separate app: Compressor.

Heck, even QuickTime: on Windows, it ships with "Picture Viewer", because the main app used to focus entirely on movies, hence its apt old name "Movie Player".

They could have done the same with iTunes. They chose not to, and you give one reason:

Outdated names stick around because the brand identity is worth more than the slight increase in clarity of having a more descriptive name.

Isn't that part of the problem? Brand identity? "Brand" reeks of marketing, of business, of money. Not of "we have the user in mind".

[Bryson]

Many would argue that making money is, in many ways, the way to eventually get better products to the consumer. Apple is currently making a ton of money off the back of the iPod/iTunes phenomenon, and I truly hope that at east a bit of that is going back into the development of the products. Anyway, Apple is a business, despite most of us wishing it was our own private computing charity. They have to make the money.

I really, truly, don't think that the name is a big problem. The interface peculiarities of iTunes are a different matter, though! (Especially in 6.) They are a big problem.

[jimbo123]

Originally Posted by chucker My dictionary doesn't define "video" as a form of "tunes". That is Brad's problem, that is everyone else's problem, and that is my problem. Apple has strictly enforced the 1 app = 1 purpose idea since Mac OS X, which is part of the reason we'll never really see an OS X-style AppleWorks -- it's several apps in one. You can see this in Apple's PIM: they use Mail, Address Book, iCal, iSync. They all share data using frameworks, but they're separate applications and separate user interfaces. Microsoft Entourage and Outlook have pretty much the same basic purposes, but are one app fits all. Apple doesn't like this. Neither do I. iTunes? Entirely different. With each new release, they add one feature after another that has little to do with, well, "tunes". The worst move, in my opinion, was to remove iPod calendar and contacts syncing from iSync and put it into iTunes. Did they have a reason for it? Yes: Windows doesn't have iSync, and they want Mac OS iTunes and Windows iTunes to be as similar as possible. So in order to have calendar and contacts syncing work on Windows without either porting iSync (which also requires Windows users to download a separate application or have even one more application bundled with iTunes) or using ActiveSync (which I'm told basically sucks), they added the feature right in iTunes. And in order to maintain the "have Mac OS iTunes and Windows iTunes to be as similar as possible" goal, they did the same for the Mac version. Stupid? You bet. Now, with video, things are getting worse. They could have created a new application -- iFlicks (yes i know the trademark exists already), iVideos, whatever. But instead, they didn't. There's multiple reasons for that, and I think the main one is marketing: they already convinced millions of users to use iTunes, and now they can trojan video functionality in and have millions of users use that already, without relying on their decision on whether or not they want to download, install and use an additional application. From a marketing point of view, that makes perfect sense. From a user's point of view, it's somewhat annoying. From a usability and user interface design's point of view (a topic I specialize in), it is downright atrocious and unexpected from a company like Apple.

I think one has to remmeber that this is the start of video. At this moment in time Apple do not have enough content to justify having a new application.
Remember most of the video content they have is music videos so to me ITMS is the place to hold these.

Interface design is very subjective but I do agree Apple should concentrate more on this as they seem to break their own rules all the time.

[jimbo123]

final static variable

[chucker]

Originally Posted by jimbo123 Remember most of the video content they have is music videos so to me ITMS is the place to hold these.

What about video podcasts? (Yes, iTunes 6 supports them, though Steve didn't really talk about this at all, afaict.) I just don't see them eventually forking iTunes into two, unfortunately. If they plan to, more power to them.

[Brad]

And the TV shows... and the Pixar shorts...

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Brad And the TV shows... and the Pixar shorts...

Well, he said "most of the video content they have is music videos". But I think aside from the (currently) lackluster number of TV shows available, and the, well, somewhat irrelevant (albeit nice) Pixar short films, people are forgetting that iTunes is now also a platform for video podcasts. In fact, there's an interesting use to that, combined with del.icio.us (my take).

But that's where it starts getting really absurd and -- excuse the language -- downright retarded. Watching videos in an application designed thoroughly in any way for music. Songs. Tunes. Not anything else.

[curiousuburb]

sooo....

Vingle = Video Single

can we expect...

Valbum, Vox Set, Vompilation, Vatalogue,...

OMG!!1! V is teh new X.

[psmith2.0]

"v" is the new "i"



I'm with Bryson: vingle = video + single, the new catchy name Apple will be calling it's music video purchasing.

[ast3r3x]

Why download from the iTMS when I can download HD for free?

[psmith2.0]

Because most folks aren't "hip-to-the-jive" Torrent monkeys and hacker geek Jolly Roger types, with the inside track on where to get what for free. And even if they were, some might not like that idea.

[dviant]

Apple was smart with naming the iPod. Generic enough to fit it's evolving feature set. Why they don't make sense out of "iTunes" is beyond me.

Sure there's brand equity there, but it can still be the iTunes Music Store. Between iTunes, the OS X UI inconsistancies (how many corners and brushed metal sets do we have?) and other little things, it really gives the impression that Apple is just flying by the seat of their pants. I don't seem to remember the "old" Apple straying from the fit and finish like this. Wish they'd pay more attention to these sorts of things the way they used to.

[Messiahtosh]

Originally Posted by dviant Apple was smart with naming the iPod. Generic enough to fit it's evolving feature set. Why they don't make sense out of "iTunes" is beyond me. Sure there's brand equity there, but it can still be the iTunes Music Store. Between iTunes, the OS X UI inconsistancies (how many corners and brushed metal sets do we have?) and other little things, it really gives the impression that Apple is just flying by the seat of their pants. I don't seem to remember the "old" Apple straying from the fit and finish like this. Wish they'd pay more attention to these sorts of things the way they used to.

Well said.

It seems like Apple is content with just putting little buttons within one App to distinguish completely different functions. A video folder for videos within iTunes....uh...

Front Row sorts this out a bit, at least.