I like Itunes in a lot of ways. The interface is very clean and efficient, the ability to archive music into non copy protected MP3s is appreciated (not because I want to be sharing it all over town but just because I'd like to be able to switch it between hard drives and computers without worrying about a counter.) It has a very extensive database of track listings and the like to draw upon, so far none of my CDs has gone unrecognized, and it's highly customizable. That being said there are some things I find irritating about it, chief among them being the genre tags. We can start with the "Alternative & Punk" tag. Whoever thought this one up obviously doesn't like music much, because the category is so ludicrously broad as to make it virtually useless. Any time you can put Rage Against the Machine and Dashboard Confessional in the same musical category something has gone horribly wrong with your archiving system. I have very eclectic music tastes but even I don't consider Fountains of Wayne and Limp Bizket to be in the same genre, even if I can appreciate both. Limp Bizket isn't even alternative OR punk anyway, if anything it's "Commercial crap" or "Rap/Metal fusion." If Limp Bizket is Alternative what's it an alternative to?
That brings up another issue, which is that the tags seem to be applied almost at random. Why is Ben Fold's Five rock music but Smash Mouth is alternative? It's just weird that a program that seems so well designed for music lovers would have an archive with this kind of weirdness in it. It also has a very limited view of what qualifies as "Metal," but the Metal/Rock divide has always been unclear so I'll let that one slide.
I don't mean to come off as some sort of super-anal guy who cares primarily about the labels of the music I listen to, because I'm not, but if you're going to have categories you might as well be specific and accurate. I presume the genre labels exist so that people can sort their music based on type and listen to whatever type they're in the mood for. How many people think to themselves "Gee, I'm really in the mood to listen to some R.E.M. OR some AC/DC right now." (Both are in the "Rock" category.) I'm going to hazard a guess and say not many. I've seen other programs that have neither the popularity nor the commercial value of Itunes divide music up into many more categories, sometimes excessively specific categories (R.E.M. was put under jangle-pop, whatever the heck that is). I prefer that to the sweeping catchalls of Itunes, although I think the ideal would be to have a big category and a sub-category, the best of both worlds. Specificity is important too, I know that Itunes can't hire someone to listen to and genre select every album out there but there should be an easy interface to lodge a complaint about a genre selection and they could let the user base sort it all out. I'm pretty sure that the Itunes population at large would not put Barenaked Ladies under Folk. Until that happens I'll just have to sit here and pretend that I agree that Alice in Chains and Spin Doctors reside in the same musical genre.
Oh, and it puts Frank Sinatra under "80's Music" while Randy Newman goes under "Pre-1950s" stuff. Jimi Hendrix goes under 1990's, despite the little known fact that he died in 1970 and did very little performing after that. It's not perfect, that's all I'm saying.
In more personal news I'm still doing basically okay, still frustrated with how I'm doing, basically just muddling by. I feel okay with my progress despite its limitations, mostly because I think that my internal advancement is proceeding at a breakneck pace even if the results aren't clear on the outside. I'm doing a lot of thinking, watching less TV, and motivated in ways I haven't been before. Life transformation takes time, and I can't expect to become who I want to be in a day or a week or a year or a decade. Progress is what counts.
On Wednesday while lunching with my boss at a Korean restaurant I saw the most beautiful girl sitting in the booth behind him. I couldn't focus on our conversation, which was about important issues, because she was so fucking distracting just sitting back there eating and talking with her friends. I'm never sure what it is about these women that I find so striking. I don't think she was the sort who most people would think of as drop dead gorgeous but there was just something about her, the way her eyes moved, the shape of her face, her dark hair, I don't know. I've been accused of falling prey to striking beauties with alarming frequency, and while I don't believe that to be the case it is interesting to me when it does happen. I could talk about the feelings of inadequacy and shame it brings up in me, but frankly why bother? I've been through those literally dozens of times. Instead I'll just say that I'm sorry for people who are NEVER struck by the beauty of a gorgeous female, because it's an experience that can't be matched. I've been to many places in the world and seen some of the great sights, from Victoria Falls in Zimbabwe to the Coliseum in Rome. Let me tell you that a truly beautiful woman beats them all, hands down, no questions asked.