Tech Tip: One Library, Multiple Accounts (mac)

One of the major advantages of iTunes is how it manages your library for you. Just import the songs, and let iTunes handle the rest.

Unfortunately, there are some aspects of library management that iTunes gets all wrong. For instance, if you share your mac with your spouse\siblings\roommates, you may be all too accustomed with having multiple user accounts. What this means media-wise, is that for each user account, there exists a separate iTunes library. This may be a preferred method if you and your mac-mates have different tastes in music. But, if you happen to share music interests, it would be handy to have every user access the same library. After all, there is absolutely no reason to have multiple copies of the same tracks on the same hard drive.

The ability to share one iTunes library amongst multiple users, is made possible by using aliases. First, it should be noted that there is a difference between an alias and a shortcut. Whereas a shortcut provides a quicker means of launching an executable or reaching a destination, without having to navigate through a folder structure, an alias acts more as a representative of another object. It references another object or location, and can be used in ways that shortcuts cannot. For instance, instead of two users having separate existing iTunes libraries, you can have one library, and reference that library to the other account.

A key preparation step, is to make sure that each user can navigate to the other user's iTunes folder, usually found under /users/username/music. You would normally be unable to do this, due to permissions. However, if you click on each folder in the path, and hit 'command i', you can grant the appropriate permissions towards the bottom of the info window. I would suggest granting the Read permission to the Music folder, and Read + Write to the iTunes folder under each account.

After permissions are granted, you may want to follow the steps outlined in my previous blog, to merge multiple existing libraries. Instead of navigating to a networked mac, you would navigate to the library location under the other user account. Once you have migrated the libraries under one account, or if you are starting from scratch, navigate to the iTunes folder of the account that will be hosting the library. Right (control) click the iTunes Library file, and select Make Alias. You then want to take that alias and move it to the same folder under the other user account's directory. Once the alias has been moved, delete the 'alias' from the name. It should read 'iTunes Library', but will be distinguishable as an alias by an arrow in the icon. Now, you are just about finished.

Once those steps have been performed, log in under another user account that you will be sharing the library with. Go ahead and launch iTunes, then head to Preferences>Advanced, and change the location of the library to the iTunes Music folder where the actual media files reside. This may be under the host account's iTunes folder, or possibly on an external drive, depending on how you roll. That's it, you're done! The beauty part is, as any user adds or removes files from their iTunes library, it will be reflected to the other user(s), the next time they launch iTunes. Just a precaution, make sure that multiple users are not accessing the library at the same time, or you may face corruption. Now be friendly, and share nice!

Disclaimer: Software has a tendency to be updated over time. Some concepts and menu locations are subject to change.

Tech Tip: Merging iTunes Libraries, The Easy Way

If you are like myself, and have become one with the ways of the iTunes, you may have come across the situation of fragmented libraries. For instance, let's say your main library resides on a desktop at home, while you also have a progressively growing collection on your notebook that you take with you while you travel. Or, you may have your library on your personal computer, while your sibling or spouse has theirs. You may have been tempted to merge those two libraries, but were discouraged by having to plan and implement a process that won't leave you or your music library feeling overwhelmed. This post will suggest one method of successfully and easily combining two iTunes libraries, while keeping both the method and results clean.

The first thing you want to do, is prep iTunes on the computer that you are moving the songs to. Launch iTunes, enter the Preferences, and navigate to the Advanced tab. Make sure you uncheck the boxes that state Keep iTunes Music folder organized and Copy files to iTunes Music folder when adding to library. While this is usually a best practice to follow, we don't quite want iTunes to perform these functions just yet.

The next step is to mount the drive of second computer. There are a few different ways to accomplish this, but that is a topic for another day. Mac-connect.com is a good resource for performing such feats in mixed operating system environments. Basically, you want to be able to navigate to where the iTunes library is stored on the second computer, from your original workstation. Once you have that ability, from iTunes on the first computer, go to File>Add To Library. Navigate to and select, the iTunes Library folder on the second computer. This will add those tracks to your library, but since we unchecked those boxes earlier, the files will not be copied over to the destination hard drive. This gives you an opportunity to sort through the junk.

While in iTunes, go to View>View Duplicates. Presented to you, will be the songs that you may end up with two of, after merging your libraries. Before deleting any duplicates, make sure that they are indeed the same songs, and not just two tracks that share the same name. Another house cleaning step you can take, is to view your entire library in iTunes, and sort by Date Added. This should place your newly added tracks at the top of your list. Skim through them and see if there are any that you don't want to keep.

Once you are finished cleaning up, go back into Preferences>Advanced tab, and re-check those two boxes that we unchecked earlier. Hit OK to apply your changes. Back in your main window, go to Advanced, and select Consolidate Library. This will take all of those files you just added to your library and sorted through, and copy those files to the location of the iTunes library on your destination computer. Be aware that this process may take quite awhile, depending on library size and connection speed. Once all is said and done, your two libraries should be merged and migrated together to live happily on one computer.

Disclaimer: Software has a tendency to be updated over time. Some concepts and menu locations are subject to change.

On Tour, BBL!

It always touches a warm spot in my heart when developers provide us with new and exciting ways to use products that we already own. Such is the case with Activisions upcoming iteration of Guitar Hero for the Nintendo DS. The game will be entitled 'Guitar Hero: On Tour', and will ship with a pretty impressive peripheral.

Activision stirred up quite a bit of rumors and anticipation over a year ago, when they revealed that they were interested in branching the Guitar Hero franchise onto the Nintendo Wii. How could a game that requires a guitar to be played on the home consoles, be translated to a hand held gaming system? I think it's fairly safe to say that usage of the touchscreen alone would not prove adequate enough for such a game. Leave it to the internet community to come up with some zany conceptions. Click the pictures for a larger view.



Surprisingly, the actual peripheral is rather creative and functional. The Guitar Grip will plug into the Game Boy Advance slot, and allow players to slip their hand through a strap and finger away at the chords. The game will play in the vertical book position, and will include a guitar-pick shaped stylus for strumming on the touch screen.
What will be interesting to me, is how the music will sound. So far, more than 20 licensed songs have been confirmed. However, it should be noted that the game is obviously on a cartridge, so don't expect CD quality tunes. Also, single player and local multiplayer modes have been confirmed, but no word yet on online play. I know I will be keeping a watchful eye for this awesome looking game.

Tele-Targets

The concept of targeted ads has become a staple of our internet structure. It is the foundation of revenue for many companies, and in some cases, the sole means of success. Certain aspects of our internet activities, such as purchase history and search terms, are tracked and ran through algorithms, so that only the most relevant and meaningful advertisements are displayed to us. This has been proven incredibly effective on the web, but has thus far been unable to surpass that boundary and make its way into our living rooms. That may soon change, as targeted ads now have a good chance at popping up on your television screen.

The New York Times reports that for months now, six of the US's largest cable companies have been coming together and formalizing a plan to bring targeted ads to our living rooms. Participating cable providers include Comcast, Time Warner, CableVision, Cox Communication, and Bright House Networks . Essentially, this would place a smarter cable box under our televisions, that could potentially use a variety of methods to indicate whom shall see what advertisements. Examples of targeting could include tracking what shows you watch, what commercials you fast forward past, your environmental surroundings, etc. In essence, if you are a male, living in a penthouse and spending most of your time watching The Sopranos, advertisers would know not to waist time showing you commercials involving diapers or Broadway musicals.

Though targeted ads may seem appealing to us consumers, does such a practice pose to be anti-competitive, and a direct violation of our privacy? You may ask how it could be considered anti-competitive, when basically the same concept has been accepted when it comes to the internet. How this differs from what we are used to on the web, is that with cable ads, the service provider will also be supplying the ads. Where on the internet, Google or Microsoft may be issuing the ads while AT&T or Earthlink for example, is supplying the internet to us. As is common practice for cable television, for every hour of content, the network (ABC, CBS) is allotted around 15 minutes for advertisements, while the provider (Comcast, Time Warner) is given about 2 minutes. If and when these targeted television ads become a reality, the advertisements will be presented to us through our cable boxes, via the cable provider. The networks would then have to go through these cable companies to get their advertisements to us. It is no secret that selling advertisements provides the vein of existence for cable networks. Obviously the cable companies would potentially benefit greatly from this balance shift, while the networks could take a revenue hit. Is it only a matter of time before the cable companies become pushy and demand more advertisement time to themselves?

As for our privacy, this has always been an issue on the internet, and this concern will only increase when it enters our living rooms. When surfing the web, more knowledgeable users may be skeptical when accepting certain cookies, or when opting in to usage tracking services. Will we have this option when it comes to our cable box? It is highly unlikely that we will be able to opt-in to certain networks tracking our viewing habits, while opting out of others. We all have our guilty pleasures, be them Flava of Love or Sex and the City; will those indulgences be exposed via commercial breaks? Furthermore, do we really want the powers to be to know what we watch, when we watch it? How long before someone's cable box is held as evidence and used against them in the court of law? We have already seen many cases where a PC has been confiscated for that exact purpose. At what point exactly do we realize we are living George Orwell's prophecy?

While both the consumer and cable companies may benefit from targeted ads, what price are we willing to pay for convenience?

Podcasts You Should Be Listening To, But Might Not Be...

Ever since the popularity explosion of the iPod and iTunes, podcasting has become more accepted than ever as a form of mainstream media. No matter what your interests are, be them Technology, Media, Cooking, etc., you are guaranteed to find a podcast to suit your needs. Allow me to recommend a few of my favorite, lesser known podcasts that you may want to check out...

If consider yourself a hardcore, or even casual gamer, there are quite a few semi-professional gaming relate podcasts for you, such as Xbox Live's Major Nelson Radio or EGM's 1UP Yours. My favorite video game podcast, however, would be the more independent Video Game Outsiders podcast. The shows hosts consist of John Jakobson, Kyle Jones, and Michelle Madison, all of whom come from different professional backgrounds and lifestyles. The weekly show, which was named podcast of the year by Gamertag Radio during its 2nd Annual Xbox Community Awards show, takes a neutral and unbiased look at the current events of gaming. The hosts have great chemistry, though they have been known to bicker, albeit humorously, at times.

If you are a fan of the TV show, LOST, and would like to keep up to date on news, easter eggs, and theories, there is no better place to look than the The Lost Podcast with Jay and Jack. This hilariously clever father and son (though you would never know it) team, manages to put out two shows a week. The first of which, is recorded immediately following the airing of a LOST episode. There, you can find a recap of the episode, as well as the listeners initial impressions. The following Monday's episode contains a review at what we may have missed, as well as a preview of the following weeks episode. The show would not be complete without one of Jack's Crackpot Theories of the Week. This podcast is a definite must-listen if you are a fan of LOST.

If your find yourself entertained by listening to a couple industry vets shoot the breeze, than look no further than the East Meets West Podcast. Hosted by Cnet's Tom Merrit, and Revision3's Roger Chang, this podcast touches on a variety of topics, but is naturally geared towards the tech side. Both hosts have earned their stripes in the tech community, and come together on their own time to share their expertise with us. The conversation doesn't stop with tech though, as they often discuss topics based on culture and society.

A little heavier on the tech side, we have PixleCorps's MacBreak Tech. This podcast gets straight to the nitty gritty of tech talk. If you can get past the monotone voices, you may learn a few things, as hosts John Foster, Kenji Kato, Ben Durbin and Craig Syverson pick a topic and chop it to pieces. Previous topics include Emulation, Mac myths, and Backups. This podcast may not be for everyone, but Mac addicts and tech heads alike will appreciate it.

AppleTV Take 2: One Month Later

About a month ago, Apple released the AppleTV Take 2 software update. This update took a handy, yet all but ignored, media center set-top box, and breathed some new life into it. I wrote my early review, summarizing my initial thoughts. After a month of road testing, I am ready to revisit my review and see if my opinions still stand.


In my early review, I mentioned my first impressions when it comes to using the graphical interface. I still prefer the classic AppleTV interface to the new one. It sometimes takes too many button clicks to get to the menu that you want to get to, and navigating with the Apple remote is never a fun task. Another gripe I had was that the focus was geared too heavily towards the apple store. Would it have killed Apple to place access to our own content at the top of each menu, as opposed to the bottom, underneath all of the store options? I should mention that it does get frustrating at times, to have to wait for the movie box art to load in the background before I can begin navigating. Why should my menu navigation have to be hindered by Apple trying to make a quick buck? However, none of this is a true show stopper, and you eventually get used to it. Consider it mere nitpicking, as I have seen much worse interfaces in my time.

The obvious selling point for the AppleTV is the ability to rent high definition movies. Though I was excited about this feature initially, I must say that I now have mixed feelings about the concept. Renting an HD movie does not work as a spur of the moment decision. It takes quite a while to download enough of the movie to begin watching it, so one must plan out the rentals before hand. That fact, coupled with the 'keep for 30 days, watch for 1 day' rental rule, makes for a more complicated equation. I shouldn't have to think that much when it comes to kicking back and watching a movie. It is because of this, I find myself going for the standard movies instead. One more note; in my initial review, I stated that the standard content was 'very near dvd quality'. Now that I have had more time to compare, the non-HD content looks decent, but is not quite good enough to be considered near dvd. Not with the upscaling capabilities that we have become accustomed to.

I originally stated that where the AppleTV really shines, is the Podcasts section of the iTunes store. This opinion still stands, but I did have to reevaluate my usage of it. Whereas, I originally saw this as a means of no longer having to download video Podcasts on my main computer before syncing it over to the AppleTV, I would now say this concept only works under certain conditions. For those video podcasts that are offered in High Definition, it may not be suitable to stream straight from the iTunes store on the AppleTV. Also keep in mind, that when watching podcasts streamed from the iTunes store, there is no easy way to tell when there is a new episode available, or to indicate which episodes you have already watched. There is also no way to bookmark where you have left off on a podcast, so I tend to shy away from streaming lengthy podcasts. The podcasts section does still hold a valuable place in the overall scheme though, and is ideal for those 1-5 minute, medium quality podcasts, that are good for killing some time. For those HD podcasts that I must watch every episode of, I will continue to follow the traditional download-then-sync method.

Apple has a unique ability to train you to think the way they want you to think. They decide when something should be done a certain way, and then force you to abide by their methods until you realize that they were right all along. When first becoming acquainted with the new AppleTV software iteration, I was discouraged by the fact that it was not easy to distinguish what is stored locally on the device, and what is available to stream from your main computer. All content is listed amongst each other, with no indication of where any file is stored. Though it was initially a nuisance to me, I quickly adapted and realized that I don't really care where the files are. The streaming works so well with an AppleTV, that there is no noticeable difference between media that is synced or streamed. It actually becomes rather convenient to have all your data in one menu location, as it limits the amount of navigating you have to do. Damn you Apple for being right once again.

After a month of testing, the AppleTV Take 2 has it's quirks, but it still remains an invaluable component in my home entertainment center.

The Video Game State of the Union

If there was ever one aspect of technology that has pushed the innovative boundaries at an always increasing rate, it is that of Video Games. Though we have seen our fair share of sequels and clones, there are always those gems that set the bar a little higher than the last wave of trend setters. You may agree that it is the competitive nature of the video game companies, be them indie or major, that brings the creative bests out of the developers. After all, it is only the top selling games that are able to recoup the losses occurred from the production costs. Small, hungry companies can't afford to release duds. But is being successful in today's day and age, considered a gift and a curse? How does it affect the video game industry when companies begin buying each other out and using unfair tactics to gain an advantage over their competitors?

Mergers of Video Game companies are nothing new. However, things get scary when it becomes a game of cat and mouse over dominance and market share. A couple of months ago, media company Vivendi, best known in the video game industry for World of Warcraft (under subsidiary, Blizzard), has begun taking steps towards acquiring Activision. Activision, whom was the first ever third-party game developer, is responsible for such franchises as Call of Duty, Guitar Hero, and the Tony Hawk series. Vivendi plans to merge Activision with its games division, and dub it Activision Blizzard. Individually, both companies have been quite successful, as last year saw record video game sales. Together, this merger would place Activision Blizzard at the number one spot, surpassing EA, in size. Lately, all eyes have been on EA, as a rebuttal has been certainly expected.



Video Game giant, EA is no stranger when it comes to acquisitions. In fact, they have often been criticized for buying smaller development studios primarily for their intellectual properties, and then running those companies into obscurity. Examples of such companies include Origin, Westwood Studios, and Bullfrog. More recently, EA has acquired game studios BioWare and Pandemic. BioWare is best known for it's Sci Fi oriented, action-adventure role playing game Mass Effect, while Pandemic has released the Star Wars: Battlefront series, as well as the shooter, Mercenaries: Playground of Destruction. It was perhaps, this movement that prompted Vivendi to up the ante and purchase Activision. Never to be out done, EA has made a 2 billion dollar bid for rival Take-Two Interactive.



Take-Two Interactive, publisher of the Grand Theft Auto series, has rejected EA's initial offerings, claiming that it undervalued the company. The offer comes at a peculiar time, as Take-Two's subsidiary, Rockstar, is putting the finishing touches on the highly anticipated Grand Theft Auto IV. There is speculation that EA is trying to capitalize on what is expected to be the top-selling game of 2008, while also obtaining Take-Two before their value becomes much higher. However, EA makes the argument that Take-Two is somewhat of a one-hit wonder, and a merger under the EA umbrella would be the smartest move to ensure a healthy pay-off for the shareholders in the long run. As is the trend with publicly owned companies, an offer can be denied by the board, however it is the shareholders that have the final say, thus possibly resulting in a takeover of a hostile nature.

Along with corporate takeovers, EA has been known to use other considerably underhanded tactics to ensure their dominance in the market place, while not taking into consideration what is best for the video game industry or its consumers. After Sega's line of NFL 2K titles (co-published by Take-Two) proved to be a threat to EA's flagship Madden series, EA responded by signing an exclusivity deal with the NFL, as well as a 15 year license agreement with ESPN. In other words, EA is the only company that can publish football games using official NFL teams, rosters, logos, etc. Well, at least College football is up for grabs, right? Nope, EA signed a 6-year licensing deal with the Collegiate Licensing Company (CLC), as well. This has forced companies to resort to releasing games such as All-Pro Football 2K8 and Blitz: The League, whom both consist of fictional leagues and former NFL veterans.



If the mergers of Vivendi and Activision, as well as EA and Take-Two, fall through, what will this mean for the video game industry? Essentially we will have two corporate giants that deem impossible to compete against. Will the few remaining third-party companies, such as Ubisoft, THQ, and Midway, be fearful of becoming too successful, only to get bought out by a bigger company? Does this mean that we will see fewer third party console-exclusive games? While some consumers may argue that console-exclusive games may force you to purchase multiple game consoles or risk missing out, those same exclusives ensure healthy competition amongst hardware manufacturers. Having multiple game systems to develop for, also pushes creativity and innovation amongst publishers. Is it only a matter of time before corporate greed leads the video game industry becomes as hated as the movie or record industries? Hopefully the consumer gets to make that decision.