tech industry
08/26/2004, 10:15am, EDT
Thursday, August 26th
NYT: "Tunes, a Hard Drive and (Just Maybe) a Brain"
The New York Times today discusses the iPod's Shuffle feature as well as conspiracy theories that surround its effectiveness. The mood-wrecking potential of leaving the selection of thousands of songs to chance has pushed some away from ever using Shuffle, while others insist the iPod favors certain artists songs -- a notion that Apple's Director of iPod marketing says is false while insisting Shuffle is completely random.
Filed under: industry
,
, 32
,
,
,
,
,
,

subscribe to comments
for this article
Depending on how the algorythm identifies the artists/songs for randomising, there certainly could be some artists/songs which end up being favored.
In truth, the idea that shuffle is truely random is crap - no computer generates truely grandom numbers - hense the word "generates." It's deterministic.
Anyone who uses the "random" shuffle knows damn well, that once it picks an artists, the probability of that artist being played again in the near future skyrockets. I have hundreds of songs from some groups and those won't be played for hours, while 3 of the 8 songs from another group will be played on my drive to work. I should pull out my Stats book from college and calculate the probability some time.
morons.
Like Monday night. I got in my car after a Prince concert, put on my standard 1200+ song playlist of 4- and 5-star rated stuff, and before I got out of the stadium parking lot the iPod played two Prince songs in succession. I've got maybe 7-10 Prince songs in my collection.
A rather impressive coincidence, IMHO.