My previous post elicited the exact comment I predicted it would:
you do understand that data is not from apple but from the legendarily inaccurate gracenote right? CD names are calculated by the exact number of tracks and track lengths – my favorite are classic CDs – often duplicate names. Also, the data isn’t vetted – so what would you rather, show the wrong one or give you a choice? Now if you want to gripe because you can’t see which one has the wrong spelling of Eleanor Rigby on it, that I can almost see…
Anyway, if you have an alternative more accurate service, file a bug with Apple, maybe they’ll use it…
While I anticipated this comment, I did not address it. Of course I understand where the data comes from. And of course Apple understands this as well.
Given the obvious knowledge that the data is suspect, any reasonable user interface would provide more detail than this:
A user friendly interface might, for example, recognize duplicates, and offer to show additional details such as track names. This additional information would allow users to make more intelligent choices.
On the other hand, as currently implemented, the UI is completely worthless. If all they do is show a list of identical titles, they may as well merge the list into a single item and randomly choose one. Because as currently implemented, my only option is to randomly choose from one of the identical titles.
- We all know the data is unreliable, and Apple knows this as well
- As currently implemented, the UI shows a list of identical names, offering no additional details
- Two possible solutions:
- Offer to show additional details when there are duplicates
- Filter out the duplicates and choose one for us
The bad data is not Apple’s fault, but the bad presentation most certainly is.