Slashdot Mirror
5 Reasons Not to Buy an iPod
TommyH1000 writes "CNet has posted an article with five reasons not to buy an iPod. " The article really just shows the major shortcomings with the iPod (Battery, Cost, Moving Parts etc) and gives several alternatives. A great summary of the major things going on in the portable MP3 player market.
1. 6 hours is not enough battery, ok fine.
2. Jogging with an iPod could be bad, ok fine.
3. iPod is expensive, duh.
4. Voice recording is an add-on. Find a better one.
5. Since when is the online store a part of having a portable mp3 player? Alsoi, "Microsoft's secure WMA files" made me laugh.
All-in-all, seems like weak reasoning. Yes, its expensive, but I think its high quality.
It's not like there's anything better. What, should we buy a Nomad or one of those Napster branded ones? Forget it. The iPod might not be perfect, but it's a damn sight better than anything else on the market. I'd get an iPod, if only I had any money......
I have a series one iPod and I get around 10 hours battery life if I leave it on repeat album and random play. This mode loads an album at a time into cache (if it will fit) so that HDD access is minimized. Not only that but for the adventurous geek there is an aftermarket battery pack with an ~15% higher rating than the stock unit available here, it appears they have even added one for the series 3 ipod's.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
Jogging can damage it? Then I should be more careful, as not only do I run with it (though mostly to classes), I regularly play squash or work out while jammin' to "War and Peace" from audible.com. Not to mention the many times I've dropped it (note: get a carrying case!).
It should not be difficult, however, to refute their claim. Considering the accelerations present when jogging with it, compared to the internal velocities of the hard drive, it really seems inconsequential. Though don't take my word for it.
That wasn't the point. This is not a review. It is a state-of-the-market analysis, using the iPod as a comparison point.
The iPod is the best all-round mp3 player today. Many would say it is perfect. CNET doesn't agree: they point out the areas where it could be improved (and list alternatives if that specific feature is important to you). The point is to show what mp3 players in general need to work on. The iPod is just an example.
'Sensible' is a curse word.
I have one of the first generation iPods. One of the first things I did with my new player was slam it in the car door. HARD!! It didn't seem to mind a bit.
I read a few months ago about a fellow who slammed his iPod in the hood of the car--kept opening and shutting the hood on the sturdy little iPod with no damage at least to the iPod.
As long as Mom and Dad keep makin' IdJits glad that Apple is makin' iPods ;)
Harpo Tunnel Syndrome--my wrist feels funny.
High-quality digital recordings on a MP3 player? You have to be kidding, you will probably use a feature like that maybe once or twice in your life unless you are a professional and then you will probably have dedicated equipment that is way better than any MP3 player.
But what about the millions of amateur musicians out there? I would LOVE to have a device that I can take to an informal gig or jam session and make a decent-sounding recording, and then transfer it to my computer later. Right now I use a Sony Minidisc recorder, but you're limited to just a couple hours per disc if you want any sort of quality, and then you have to do an analog transfer of the audio to your computer later! Almost defeats the purpose of recording it digitally in the first place.
I was really hoping that the new iPods would record 44 KHz 16-bit audio from any line in, but alas, it looks like it's just voice quality. Quite a bummer. I'm definitely looking into some of those other devices.
Major shortcomings??
1. The battery is a major shortcoming? The thing plays for hours and hours. It's not a shortcoming, just because the newly released Dell player does 20 hours.
2. The moving parts (hard drive) are a major shortcoming? I've jogged with my iPod hundreds of times. You set a playlist for the duration of your jog, press play the iPod fills up the memory cache with tunes, you jog. I maybe get one or two skips. Hard drive still not dead in my unit.
Indeed, not only "some experts", but even Apple says jogging with the iPod is okay, according to their official iPod FAQ:
Question 9: Can I use iPod while running, or doing other activities? Will my music skip?
Answer: iPod was designed for people with an active lifestyle. It is compact and lightweight enough to take with you wherever you go. It was designed to fit comfortably in the palm of your hand or to be slipped into a pocket or purse for easy transport. iPod offers up to 20 minutes of skip protection - twice that of other hard drive-based MP3 players on the market - so you can enjoy outdoor athletic activities without missing a beat.
3. The iPod is expensive. It is pretty expensive, but it's also very high quality. I've dropped the thing on hard ground a few times now, and it still works like a champ. It is well-designed, and it integrates with iTunes seamlessly.
The author suggests MP3 CD players as an alternative, but doesn't this violate his point #2? Yes. It does, you think jogging with an iPod is bad, but jogging with a cheaply manufactured MP3 CD player is better? These units probably have some skip protection, and probably almost no shock absorbtion (walking, driving).
4. You want to make high quality recordings. This is true, rumors are Apple is working on this, who knows.
5. You want a choice in online music stores. Well, I do have a choice in online music stores. I download AACs from iTunes Music Store, and I download MP3s from emusic.com and import them into iTunes.
I heard people bitch for years about how horrible and flakey MusicMatch and others were. Why would I want to go use them? iTunes Music Store is superb, and far exceeds the other choices out there.
Sure the iPod doesn't support "secure" (read: DRM-laden) WMA files, but I don't want to buy those, because they strip me of choice. I want unladen MP3s and perhaps minimally-DRM'd AAC files that are flexible, not draconian "secured" WMA files (which I HAVE experienced, thank you).
This article is just full of bullshit, and I wouldn't be surprised if it was shadow authored by John Dvorak or some MS PR drone*, with the stereotypical bone to pick with Apple.
* Note: I am not a Linux zealot.