Nomad Jukebox 3 Officially Out
An Anonymous Coward writes: "It seems that the long awaited Jukebox 3 is officially out. Features include time scaling, to play files at different speeds without affecting pitch, multichannel effects, optical input, wireless remote and two battery ports. Probably not an iPod killer yet, although it has many, many more features and welcome firewire port. Now when will this thing be available?"
Is this one of those paid advertisment/article things????
if common sense was common, wouldn't everyone have it?
why people buy mp3 players shaped like cd players; the circular design is not nearly as convanient as a small rectangle. is there something I'm missing here?
no sale...
better luck next time, creative.
Someone has to manufacture an ASIC to decode vorbis. You can't do it on a general purpose processor because the usual embedded processors like ARM are not fast enough and processors that are fast enough use too much power. I don't think anyone will produce a vorbis ASIC until a huge market for portable, low-power vorbis players exist.
The only likely scenario would be an existing MP3 ASIC manufacturer adding vorbis support to their product. At least that wouldn't require (much) more space on the circuit board.
Reasons the iPod rules over the Nomad:
-iPod is way smaller.
-iPod software (iTunes) rocks.
-The iPod is a pretty rugged little box.
-Proven to be extensible.
-Works as a standard IEEE 1394 external disk.
Reasons the Nomad rules over the iPod:
-Holds 20Gb of MP3 data (as opposed to iPod's 5 or 10GB).
-You can add a second battery and double the life to 22 hours. The iPod only is good for 10 or so.
-Safe assumption - the Nomad works better with Windows, no 3rd party software needed. No Linux drivers for either.
-Both USB _and_ 1394 on board. Hopefully the port isn't some kind of funky "almost-standard" version.
Reasons the Nomad may kind of suck anyways:
-Size. Why make it look like a CD player if it relies on a hard drive?
-Ruggedness - every Nomad I've seen yet has been kind of flimsy. Until proven otherwise, I'll assume this one is, too.
- It uses a Sound Blaster for "enhanced MP3 encoding". Requiring an add-on product for best results is lame. Though I guess to some a Mac is an add-on product for an iPod...
-- Josh Turiel
"2. Do not eat iPod Shuffle."