Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

themarvelous3 · May 30, 2004, 02:24 PM

the coolest idea since DeskSaver (which runs screen savers on your desktop...i love it)

DeskTunes

someone needs to develope this. it would be an app that would run any iTunes Visualizer on your desktop. then you could close your iTunes window and work on other stuff with the music AND the vis. going and not have it in the way! (i would do it, but i have NO programming no how whatsoever) it would be amazing to see this happen...so i think anyway : )

SwarmyCurve · May 30, 2004, 02:37 PM

That would be so processor intensive that most people wouldn't bother with it.

I know I wouldn't.

It is a fun idea though.

Randman · May 30, 2004, 02:41 PM

Why would you want to run a processor-intensive application when you can't even see it because you're working on something else?

Sorry, but not a great idea.
But you could coming up with something like it for Konfabulator. Maybe it would work better as a widget. That way, I could see some interest and possibilities.

Ozzpot · May 30, 2004, 03:24 PM

Yeah, I've often thought how cool that would be. I've been using Backlight for ages now, running Marine Aquarium 2 as a desktop. I shouldn't imagine an iTunes Visualizer would use much more CPU than that. There'd definitely be people that would use that. I would! I'm surprised so many people here are against it - this is a GUI forum! I thought we were all eye candy junkies here!

I don't think Konfabulator is capable of anything like that by the way. As far as I know there is not even any way of doing a spectrum analyser of any kind as a Widget.

scaught · May 30, 2004, 03:29 PM

i mean. do you LIKE to have your computer run slower? animated desktops. pshaw.

Komisar · May 30, 2004, 04:18 PM

yeah i would never use desk saver anyways... i want my comp to actually run not move like a 28k powerbook 180

angelmb · May 30, 2004, 04:50 PM

maybe would be nicer to have it under Terminal, or as 'desktop' inside an iChat window !

Come on Apple, do it !

Komisar · May 30, 2004, 05:07 PM

that would be wierd i still cant comprehend how it would look?

themarvelous3 · May 30, 2004, 06:06 PM

Originally posted by scaught:
i mean. do you LIKE to have your computer run slower? animated desktops. pshaw.

uh...maybe you people should think of getting faster computers...?

i run my DeskSaver without ANY problem and i've only got the G4 1.4 gig machine.

Catfish_Man · May 30, 2004, 06:09 PM

Originally posted by themarvelous3:
uh...maybe you people should think of getting faster computers...?

i run my DeskSaver without ANY problem and i've only got the G4 1.4 gig machine.

Oh yes, only an almost new top of the line machine...

fireside · May 30, 2004, 06:26 PM

Originally posted by Catfish_Man:
Oh yes, only an almost new top of the line machine...

:: downloads "BackLight 2 ::
:: runs BackLight 2 ::

works smoothly for me.

powerbook 1.25 ghz

kinda.

okay maybe not.

Frisbee · May 30, 2004, 07:46 PM

I remember running a screensaver a while back as my desktop on my DP 1.25 GHz G4, and it was sluggish, but very little. You'd have to stop it every time you ran a game, probably.

mrtew · May 30, 2004, 07:58 PM

Some screensavers can run fine as desktops without ruining your experience if you're just surfing or typing emails etc. Obviously using photoshop you'd want to turn it off. Other screensavers use all the cpu power available and they drag everything down. Marine Aquarium is a good example of a very complex and beautiful screensaver that doesn't use too much power, whereas some simple ugly ones max you out. The same thing goes for iTunes visualizers except that almost all of them, including the Apple one, use 100% cpu. There are only a few that would work acceptably as a desktop pattern.

Komisar · May 30, 2004, 09:21 PM

bottom line is think logical no one wants a crappy app like this! Thank go dno one would make something like it!

Burk3 · May 30, 2004, 10:15 PM

My question is, who wouldn't want this!?

Well, I don't know if I would go that far, but still, it would be cool, regardless of its effect on my processing power. If I'm listening to music or something while I'm surfing the web, I think it'd be cool to have that as my background.

themarvelous3 · May 31, 2004, 12:13 AM

Originally posted by Komisar:
bottom line is think logical no one wants a crappy app like this! Thank go dno one would make something like it!

because apparently you DONT speak fo all mankind, lets be a little less 3rd grade with this. obviously, I would want something like this because MY computer would run it just fine. and the person who replied AFTER you wants it and even a few above you. or do you just sit around thinking, "man, i am the best person on this planet. if they think they want this app they obviously wrong and they really dont." well i'm sorry, God (i assume thats who you are) we arent all little robots with crappy machines thinking your thoughts.

i want this app.

cybergoober · May 31, 2004, 09:27 AM

Well, my main machines would probably run something like this just fine. I just don't understand what the point would be. If I'm doing something else I wouldn't be able to see the damn thing anyway.

That's not to say it wouldn't be a cool idea. Cool, but kinda stupid...

My opinion.

mrtew · May 31, 2004, 09:35 AM

Originally posted by cybergoober:
Well, my main machines would probably run something like this just fine. ...

I don't know about that. Most visualizers, including the Apple one use 100% of the available CPU on any machine I believe. If you have a superior machine, you just get superior visuals. You are still going to have a lag on other apps. Try it out with a big iTunes window running a visualizer and see if you can work in another app. I try it and it seems ok as the processor managers in OSX are pretty impressive, but working with the CPU pinned at 100% all the time has got to take it's toll on any computer.

themarvelous3 · May 31, 2004, 09:44 AM

why DOES it take that much CPU? its basically just a beefed up screen saver...why would it take so much more than that to run.

as for not beig able to see it. i've got a 19" screen. i'd be able to see plenty of it behind whatever i was doing.

Frisbee · May 31, 2004, 09:47 AM

Well, what if you have two processors. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think one process can run on two processors simultaneously. So, theoretically, the visualizer could eat away at one processor all it wanted, and the rest of the machine would use the other one.

Komisar · May 31, 2004, 10:17 AM

In response to your the marvolueos71.. most people on this planet dont have the kind of money that your mommy give you to buy ur 2 ghz g5... so stfu

fireside · May 31, 2004, 10:43 AM

Originally posted by themarvelous3:
why DOES it take that much CPU? its basically just a beefed up screen saver...why would it take so much more than that to run.

as for not beig able to see it. i've got a 19" screen. i'd be able to see plenty of it behind whatever i was doing.

it takes up so much CPU because it analyzes the song you're playing so that it visualizes the beats and wavelengths and stuff. thats why when you play it the little line vibrates, it vibrates in sync with your music. it has to do this in REAL TIME so thats why it takes up so much CPU.

fireside · May 31, 2004, 10:44 AM

Originally posted by Komisar:
In response to your the marvolueos71.. most people on this planet dont have the kind of money that your mommy give you to buy ur 2 ghz g5... so stfu

how about you stfu because you obviously don't know what your talking about. i would like to see this app. a lot of other people would like to see this app. i don't see what your beef is, saying that "no one wants to see this app" thats bullshit.

Komisar · May 31, 2004, 11:07 AM

i never said no one wants to see it i said alot of people dont want to see this so dont get your pony tail ina knot!

BurningBright · May 31, 2004, 11:40 AM

Sounds like a fun app to have to show off to people sometimes. I'm all for it!

You'll notice in this thread that there are several agreements. There are several disagreements. Thankfully, the disagreements are just people who may not use it, while the agreements are potential users. To me, that means go for it.

Hi I'm Mike · May 31, 2004, 11:56 AM

Originally posted by Komisar:
i never said no one wants to see it i said alot of people dont want to see this so dont get your pony tail ina knot!

why does it matter so much to you that people don't want it? are the type of person that says no to everything new? sure it doesn't change the rotation of the earth but who cares! don't stomp on people's dreams. they could save your life one day.

fireside · May 31, 2004, 12:10 PM

Originally posted by Komisar:
i never said no one wants to see it i said alot of people dont want to see this so dont get your pony tail ina knot!

OMG LOL NO.

Originally Posted by Komsair:
bottom line is think logical no one wants a crappy app like this! Thank go dno one would make something like it!

emphasis mine.

themarvelous3 · May 31, 2004, 12:18 PM

Originally posted by Komisar:
In response to your the marvolueos71.. most people on this planet dont have the kind of money that your mommy give you to buy ur 2 ghz g5... so stfu

oh I"M SORRY. actually i went out and got a loan for my computer since i've been living on my own from the age of 18. and my mom, having 4 kids and being divorced because my stepfather was a pedofiling f*ck, doesnt have that kind of money. some of us had to get off our asses and get full time jobs working 50 hours a week with NO over time and NO holiday pay to get things in our lives. sorry to dissapoint you

p.s. - i said a G4 1.4 gig. had to buy it without the monitor because i actually AM broke. and my 19" monitor my roomate sold me for $100 because he DOES have money and he bought a nice 19" flat panel. what are you, 12? you sound like my little brother. arrogant, annoying AND stupid all rolled into one. you must be such a delight for your parents...they must be so proud *tear*

Ozzpot · May 31, 2004, 02:13 PM

Holy s**t dude! That's some serious Springer **** right there.

Getting back to the subject, fireside is right in that a visualizer is more CPU intensive than a screensaver because it analyzes the frequencies of the music umpteen times a second and uses the data to affect the visuals of the visualizer. This, in my opinion, makes it less practical, but cooler than a screensaver.

I am hardly a power user, I use my iBook mostly for music, making Konfab Widgets and Icons, web browsing and eMail, so I can afford to burn some extra CPU cycles in the name of aesthetic pleasure. I am a Mac fanatic, and as such, aesthetics are important to me.
I have Marine Aquarium running as my desktop on my iBook G4/933 90% of the time. I do this because it looks cool, relaxes me, and impresses the s**t out of my friends and colleagues. It uses 15-18% CPU most of the time, which doesn't affect my other processes hardly at all. When I want to play a game like UT2004, I go to the Backlight menubar icon and click "Screen Effect Off" and off I go, usually turning it on again when I am done playing.

My friend Steve (Windows XP user) is the opposite to me. He has a kick-ass uber PC, top of the range. He doesn't even have a desktop picture (wallpaper I suppose he calls it) because he says it uses up resources! I don't understand his attitude at all. but I accept it as his opinion. It's his PC not mine.

I'm sure there are people out there that would use this application. I probably would, if only to show off to my friends. There are lots of things that I don't like. Instant Message apps for example. I don't use them nor have any friends that use them, but I don't begrudge their very existence.

Komisar · May 31, 2004, 04:01 PM

Well then i guess im sorry if i affended you and i wasnt directing that statement soley at you, but i know that alot of people's comp cant handle it it was quiet rude of me sorry

arcticmac · May 31, 2004, 06:43 PM

first off, it seems like it should be a screensaver... many people can afford to use CPU up when running a screensaver even if not a desktop. those of you who want a desktop could use deskshade or whatever it is that runs screensavers as a background... (I am assuming here that iTunes keeps making noise when you've got a screensaver going)

as far as actually making it, i personally wouldn't dream of attempting it, just cause it seems like the kinda thing that would be best to let apple handle. (the process of actually getting the data between itunes and the screensaver (if that's what it is) would be pretty tough I would guess)

themarvelous3 · May 31, 2004, 09:24 PM

so the biggest problem with the idea is the CPU usage. i can get that.

SO...how bout THIS idea.

an option in iTunes preferences that activates full screen visualizer when the computer has been idle for X-amount of time...like a screen saver. i'd rather run my iTunes MatrixJam as my screen saver than any ACTUAL screen saver i have but no one who uses my computer can remember to click the little visualizer button when they're done using the machine.

(yes i have red pill, matrix GL, and the standard matrix screen saver...i like MatrixJam a LOT better)

lenox · Jun 1, 2004, 10:48 AM

Now _that_ idea is cool.

I have a hot corner I use to invoke my screensaver when i walk away from my desk...i just drag the mouse to the lower right and walk away...and return to a locked screensaver...it'd be cool if i could drag it to the lower left instead to fullscreen the current itunes vis...if there's one running.

themarvelous3 · Jun 1, 2004, 04:50 PM

that would rock.