Talk:Yahoo! Music Jukebox

Does anyone else hate this product as much as Musicmatch Jukebox? crash crash crash crash... bloody hell...

April 2007 merge discussion of Musicmatch and Music Jukebox
With the disestablishment of musicmatch, its Musicmatch software, and the its merging with Yahoo!, I would like to propose the content of both the mentioned articles be merged in a format showing the evolution from previous musicmatch versions to is current music jukebox version.--Kevin586 16:50, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

-Gotta disagree with this proposal. Yahoo Jukebox and Musicmatch are two independent programs. Y Jukebox has some features from Musicmatch but it is a different program from MM.

This program is the biggest hog I have ever seen. It requires over 100MB of memory. Not disk storage, but main memory. It causes so much paging activity that my computer is virtually useless.
 * Yeah, it is a big memory hog. But when it came out it was one of the better music management programs out there.  I disagree that this should be merged with Yahoo! Musicmatch as it is very different software right now and the full transition to the old MusicMatch to Yahoo! Musicmatch hasn't been made yet. Users who currently have purchased a lifetime subscription are still stuck with the original version right now. Allholy1 15:58, 5 May 2007 (CST)

I got it with an RCA mp3 player, and was hopeing that it was like iTunes. Fat chance!!

Yahoo Jukebox is like jumping back ten years when compared to Music Match Jukebox. All to sell some music. I'm looking for something else


 * My first thought was to merge. I assumed anyone who searched Wikipedia for "MusicMatch" would be looking for the MP3 player, and not for the defunct company.  But after reading some of your comments here I favor keeping two articles separate, since many still see the old "MusicMatch" as something altogether separate from the newer Yahoo! product.  It seems a few smart & lucky souls never upgraded and hence still have access to the superior, older versions of MusicMatch.  When software companies come out with upgrades, it's customary for newer versions to outperform the older ones.  EVERYONE I know who used MusicMatch prior to 2004 prefers the older product to the newer one, and most people have now switched to iTunes or Media Monkey.  So it makes sense to keep these two articles separate, since "MusicMatch" and "Yahoo! MusicMatch" essentially refer to two different products, though I somewhat agree with Kevin586 that a page documenting the evolution/degression of this software might be informative.  I guess the question becomes: is there any way for those of us who have upgraded to switch back to older versions? M. Frederick 11:10, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Music Match Jukebox over Yahoo Jukebox hands down. Direct, simple, superior. No BS. I'm very suspect of the new product and as a user don't feel it's "my" library, more like "theirs" and that I'm a squatter with Big Brother watching. Think I'll be going to iTunes for now while holding onto my old Jukebox. User:JJ 8:11, 11 July 2007

Oppose. I know it's late, but I will add my opinion to the list. The MMJB software is still far superior to what Yahoo has to offer. This seems like a clear case of Yahoo buying out their competition and then killing it off (what they should have done is killed their own music player off and used MMJB as the new code base). The software share two different code bases. As an example, in MMJB I can apply the DFX audio enhancer plug-in settings to any files I am converter and more important when I am burning to a CD. And there are several fields in MMJB that Yahoo doesn't know of, so transitioning to Yahoo is painful just for all the lost information. If there was a MusicMatch (the company) article then that should be merged into a Yahoo article, but this article is about the much loved and now defunct MMJB software. I'd like to see more emphasis placed on the history of MMJB, the free lifetime upgrade offer in the early days (that Yahoo still has to honor), and reaction to buyout. Argel1200 (talk) 18:47, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Plugins
There are only 3 plugins available for this software, so the line A number of plugins should really be different 172.142.126.205 18:35, 28 July 2007 (UTC)