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.

Comments

Here's my low tech solution.

[i_want_you_to_throw_]

Rip all my CDs and then burn them back onto CDRs. You can fit like 12 CDs on one CDR in MP3 format. I have a wallet case when I travel and I manage to pack the music of 144 CDs with me that way. Best Buy has portable CD players that they sell for 30.00 that read MP3s and there you go, the cheap solution. When I get my cut of this money that the Nigerians are transferring to me though an iPod is the first thing on my list!

Re:Here's my low tech solution.

[akedia]

And your MP3 player won't skip, either. Because it will be cushioned by about $380 in cash.

Re:Here's my low tech solution.

[2nd Post!]

All will be fine until, of course, you find out you really like iTunes.

Re:Here's my low tech solution.

[tgibbs]

Rip all my CDs and then burn them back onto CDRs...

Which is discussed more completly in the article that you obviously didn't read.

Re:Here's my low tech solution.

[zwaffle]

I was using the same solution at work (I'm a coder) for almost a year.
Disadvantages: no playlists, so you end up swapping CDRs quite often. It's also a major pain to organize your CDRs: if you've ripped 12 CDs in one CDR it's already hard to list them all on the disk, but if you have to burn hundreds of individual songs (from the ol'napster days) on one CDR, you gotta keep some sort of separate catalog to be able to find what you want to listen.
I eventually got an 40gig IPod and I'm saving at least 30 min a day from not having to manipulate CDRs and I now enjoy my library much more (takes only a few seconds to switch album or playlist and therefore keep me in the zone more easily by selecting the right music to match my mood).

let me spoil the article for you....

[wanderers_id]

"Don't buy it"

"We love it, but it doesn't blah blah blah blah...."

"But it's still the best"

Thanks for nothing....

Re:let me spoil the article for you....

[Daniel_Staal]

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.

Re:let me spoil the article for you....

[dasmegabyte]

Yeah. I liked this article...it reminded me of one of those Kung Fu movies, where each of the five members of a gang has a speciality area in which they can beat the protagonist. Maybe one is an axe wielder, one is tough as nails, one is very fast, etc. Each one of them has an area of expertise in which they are the master.

Of course, in those films, all the protagonist has to do is step outside of that area of expertise and he easily kicks their asses. Which I think is exactly what the iPod does overall, kicks ass.

• Yes, it could have more battery life but then it would be larger (like the model they show). Since its small size and weight are what make it perfect for sitting in pockets or running with without getting sore hands, that wouldn't be that useful to me.
  
• Yes, it could be solid state -- i did have mine skip at the gym yesterday and have decided from now on I shall have to run a mile in under 6:39 and I'll just run along to Metallica's Blackened -- but then it would also have a TINY capacity, the biggest player they listed was 512 meg and there's no way i could deal with that after overflowing 27.4 gig.
  
• Sure, it could be cheaper...and a total piece of shit like those CDR units they showed (can't run with it, no interface, no battery life, have to carry a supply of discs with you, unwieldy). I traded in a stack of similar devices when I bought my iPod, which was the easiest $538.92 I have ever spent.
  
• Sure, voice recording would be nice, and it's coming...that was the point of adding the dock connector.
  
• And as for "choice in music services"...well, I choose iTunes because AAC ounds so damn good and I have both Macs and PCs. WMA is not an option for me, so I don't have a choice.
  

Aw, brave iPod. How easily you have destroyed the warriors of the C-net. The spirit of the Wu-tang Clan flows within you -- in fact, the complete DISCOGRAPHY of the Wu-tang Clan flows within you.

Re:let me spoil the article for you....

[zurab]

Here is a better portable audio player that does the stuff the article talks about (and some more) and has a very reasonable price - Neuros.

- First off, it comes with a small memory card and optional 20GB HD attachment, so you can go light when you are jogging and attach HD for long road trips;

- Speaking of road trips, it has an FM transmitter that lets it play any audio on any FM radio without extra connections;

- It has FM radio, and is able to record directly from FM radio to MP3 format;

- It has a microphone and a voice recorder;

- It has full Linux support;

- It has Vorbis support;

- The whole package - the unit itself, software, USB cable, earphones, 20GB HD attachment, regular charger, car charger = $230.

That would be less than half the price of iPod. I would like to see some reviews of this baby.

Re:let me spoil the article for you....

[dasmegabyte]

Oh, more stuff for you. This is just looking at the specification BEHIND the dumb features that have you floored (proprietary transfers over FM...only a true geek would get impressed by that)

128 meg Neuros: $230
2.5" x 4.3" x 1.3" x 5.9 oz
Res: 128x128
Input: USB 1.1 max 12 Mb/s
Time to full charge: 8 hours

The backpack adds a further 7.6 oz to a pleasant 13.5 oz, or 3/4 of a pound en total. And the unit size becomes 3.1"x5.3x1.3"

20 GB iPod: $399
2.4" x 4.1" x.62" x 5.1 oz
Res: 160x128
Input: USB 2.0 / Firewire, max 400+ Mb/s
Time to full charge: 3 hours (at 80% after an hour and 20 minutes on the charger is usually enough for my hour and a half workout)

So what you have here is a unit which is, i admit, check full of neat ideas and features for $170 less. But it also takes twice as long to charge, up to 40 times as long to copy files (USB 1.1 is absolutely unacceptable for a hard drive and you KNOW this), is nearly three times heavier, twice as thick, an inch taller, has 20% fewer pixels, the headphone jack is on the bottom (which is just wierd)...the buttons aren't inlaid, the hand interface just looks unwieldy (with buttons on either side of the face, how do you GRAB it without pushing them in all the time? Even with a lock they'll jam up pretty quick).

All in all, it looks like an iPod knock off that tried really hard and nearly succeeded in being a better unit. You're right, integrated FM and microphone are neato...and these are two features Belkin and others are trying their damnedest to shove into the iPod...but they're also features most people will never use.

There's a design rule I like to follow, one that I think always makes devices easier to use: make common things simple, and complex things possible. I think Apple has done that -- common things, like selecting songs, copying songs, and walking around with the thing -- are easier. I think the Neuros has taken the opposite approach...laden the device with features, tried to keep it smallish (and yeah, 13 oz is still pretty small, smaller than those 2 lb Archos machines) and succeeded in making a device that I would probably buy if the iPod hadn't been invented.

Re:let me spoil the article for you....

[Bob Davis, Retired]

You forgot...

- It's so honking huge with that it creates its own black hole!

They complain it's hard drive based

[Anonymous Coward]

Yet, that's the only way to get huge capacities at a somewhat affordable price. If they had gigs of flash media, they'd be too expensive for most people. It's a trade-off, not a defect.

Re:They complain it's hard drive based

[Anonymous Coward]

But Apple says it's built to withstand that. They apparently don't believe Apple, although they don't bring up any evidence to support their point of view. I'm sure Apple tested it for this before they said it was okay for it, and I'm sure lots of people would've run into problems already if it wasn't.

Re:They complain it's hard drive based

[tgibbs]

Yet, that's the only way to get huge capacities at a somewhat affordable price. If they had gigs of flash media, they'd be too expensive for most people. It's a trade-off, not a defect.

Which is essentially what the article says--far from being about iPod "defects," it merely points out there are certain people and uses for which these trade-offs favor another type of player, despite the acknowledged virtues of the iPod.

Re:They complain it's hard drive based

[Graff]

My favorite thing about the whole article is they give 5 reasons that the iPod isn't the best and then each reason shows different music players that could replace the iPod. Notice however that there is no player that will fill all 5 roles by itself, in order to get all these "features" you would need to buy 5 different players.

The fact is that the iPod does a pretty good job at filling all these roles, but it can be beat by a specialized player in a particular function. If you want an overall good player then the iPod is a great choice.

All of the reasons are pretty flimsy or can be overcome easily, such as the battery life/airplane flight reason. 6 hours is plenty for most flights that people take and if you are going on a longer one then you can get a power adapter that works on planes. As for jogging, the iPod has an extremely long buffer so it has little chance of getting hurt by vibration. Price, yeah it's on the expensive side but you have to pay for quality and solid features.

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.

Choice in online stores? Well given that the iTunes music store has about the same prices as everyone else, and the choice is similar to everyone else, and that it has had 80% of online sales of music, don't you think that just having the iTunes Music Store is enough? I mean what is the point of being able to purchase the same music for the same price at 4 or 5 different stores? Aren't you only going to purchase from 1 anyways?

I also love how they bracket the entire article with "it's still hands down the best-designed MP3 player in the world." Ok so you think it's the best and yet you decided to write an article about how all these other players are better. Talk about hedging your bets, I'm guessing that they got paid for every mention of a MP3 player or music service in the article. They probably just needed a reason to mention as many as possible in order to make the maximum amount of cash.

Re:They complain it's hard drive based

[Golias]

He's talking about the completely stupid and unfounded claim that you could damage it by jogging with it, not the battery issue.

Also, if you want longer battery life, Belkin offers a cheap add-on pack that extends it considerably.

Re:They complain it's hard drive based

[Golias]

I run with an iPod all the time. It does not skip, nor do I ph34r damage. If you bump it REALLY HARD during one of the few moments when the drive is spinning, it usually responds by shutting off, but the minor jostling from a jogger's stride doesn't cause that to happen.

Pure FUD, nothing more.

Re:They complain it's hard drive based

[Digital11]

Really? I'd say the Neuros pretty much satisfies all of those complaints: Battery life is VERY good in my experience. You can't beat the price right now: Something like $220 for the 128mb flash/20gb hdd combo. You can use the flash backpack for jogging if you're worried about damaging the hard drive. You can record 44khz 16-bit WAV through either the built-in MIC or the 1/8" mic-in (there's also options from 160kb/s to 64kb/s MP3 recording, as well as a couple lower WAV qualities). DI (the developers of Neuros) don't believe in DRM, so buy your music from wherever youw ant. Oh, did I mention it has a built in FM tuner and FM transmitter? In my opinion the Neuros beats the iPod hands-down in features. Granted, it may not look as cool, and it's a little bit on the big side, but they're working on that for future versions. I LOVE my Neuros.

Re:They complain it's hard drive based

[Dominic_Mazzoni]

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.

Re:They complain it's hard drive based

[Karadryel]

I love Slashdot. Seriously. It's the only place outside junior high where you can be considered insightful merely by comprehending the point of an article and regurgitating that point.

My favorite thing about the whole article is they give 5 reasons that the iPod isn't the best and then each reason shows different music players that could replace the iPod. Notice however that there is no player that will fill all 5 roles by itself, in order to get all these "features" you would need to buy 5 different players.

The fact is that the iPod does a pretty good job at filling all these roles, but it can be beat by a specialized player in a particular function. If you want an overall good player then the iPod is a great choice.

This was *precisely* the point of the article: that the iPod is a great overall player, but that it can be beaten in particular niche areas by more specialized tools. The parent isn't "insightful" - all he did was understand the point the author was making. Congratulations.

Re:They complain it's hard drive based

[plastik55]

I think that there's a big lesson to be learned in the portable electronics industry... The device that makes it big isn't the first to market, or the most advanced... it's the one that fits in your pocket.

Why did Palm kill Newton? Newton was (is) technologically superior by far, Palm wasn't substantially cheaper at the outset... but a Palm fit in your pocket.

When did cell phones become ubiquitous? When they got small enough to fit in your pocket.

Why is Gameboy Advance SP the top-selling gaming platform? It fits in your pocket.

Why does the iPod continue to outsell the Archos, Neuros, etc., when its competitors are cheaper and have more features? It fits in your pocket.

Why aren't people buying the "convergence" devices with camera, cell phone, PDA, game player, etc. combined? They don't (yet) fit in your pocket.

I disagree with the article

[squarefish]

it seems odd that for each point, they suggest different mp3 players- which all have some of the same faults the ipod was critiziced for previously. I also don't think that the lack of support for windows media files means it won't work at all with other services, I think the services need to give you an oportunity to convert the music to mp3 or some other less controled standard.

the end of the article says it all: Of course, if you don't care about low battery life, aren't fond of jogging, have ample disposable income, don't need to record/encode music portably, and want to purchase music downloads only from the iTunes Music Store, then the iPod is the best the way to go. While not ideal for some niche activities, it's still hands down the best-designed MP3 player in the world.

Re:I disagree with the article

[Carbonite]

The author says, "Don't get me wrong; it's still our favorite overall MP3 player." He agrees that the iPod is the best MP3 player, but that doesn't mean that it's ideal in every single situation.

The article discusses several of these situations and suggest alternatives. If you do care about low battery life or do want to jog with your player, perhaps you may wish to consider one of these alternative.

Re:I disagree with the article

[DrEldarion]

it seems odd that for each point, they suggest different mp3 players

I don't really find that odd. It's more of a "If you want to go jogging with it, don't get an iPod, get one of these instead." - "If you need over 15 hours of battery life, don't get an iPod, get one of these instead."

They're not claiming that any one thing is better than the iPod, just that some are more suitable for certain niches.

Most of these objections are invalid

[Anonymous Coward]

... such as the ones about excessive weight for jogging (what kind of wimp can't carry 6 extra ounces?) and hard-drive vulnerability. The author clearly fails to understand how rugged those microdrives actually are. I doubt you could wreck one on purpose with anything short of an attack with a blunt instrument.

However, I'm concerned about the non-replaceable battery point he raises. I've already had to buy a $300 replacement lithium-ion battery for my two-year-old Vaio. Is it actually true that the IPod's battery can't be replaced, even by sending it back to Apple? If so, that's the mother of all deal-breakers for me. Modern technology is great and all that, but batteries still suck hard, and I certainly wouldn't want to give up the ability to replace them as needed.

Re:Most of these objections are invalid

[JayPee]

You can replace them. You don't even have to send them to Apple.

Go here: http://www.ipodbattery.com/

Re:Most of these objections are invalid

[devnull17]

There are third-party battery replacements available, and they're under $100.

Re:Most of these objections are invalid

[Bombcar]

Clickety click! for the cut'n'paste impared!

Re:Most of these objections are invalid

[br0ck]

Dot.Com.CEO?????? What the hell is this, the 90s?

Re:Most of these objections are invalid

[Mr_Silver]

... such as the ones about excessive weight for jogging (what kind of wimp can't carry 6 extra ounces?)

I run Marathons and 6 extra ounces means a lot.

Plus i still don't like the idea of shaking a HD whilst I'm running.

No thanks. I'll stick with a flash based MP3 player. They're smaller, lighter, you can shake them as violently as you want without breaking them and if you get hit by a flash thunder storm which soaks you, then you don't have to pay big bucks to get your MP3 player replaced.

Alternative?

[Anonymous Coward]

This article doesn't make sense, because there is no other MP3 player that offers solutions for all 5 reasons either.

What the article shows

[The Limp Devil]

is that there is no MP3 player that will fit all uses and users (as if we didn't know that). I still prefer my iPod to any other player I've tried, but longer battery life would have been nice.

More like 3 Reasons.

[El Neepo]

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.

Re:More like 3 Reasons.

[ekephart]

You forget numbers 1 and 2 do not apply. Who leaves their computer for more than 6 hours at a time? And come on! No one here actually goes outside and runs.

and buy what?

[herrvinny]

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......

Confused

[BWJones]

Of course, if you don't care about low battery life, aren't fond of jogging, have ample disposable income, don't need to record/encode music portably, and want to purchase music downloads only from the iTunes Music Store, then the iPod is the best the way to go.

Well, I routinely get 5 to 6 hours on my iPod and that is plenty for me. I have never had to have more battery life even on cross country plane flights or drives. I jog routinely with the iPod and have never had a problem and I tried the other music outlets for downloadable music. The iTMS is simply the best there is so.....What is his point?

And then at the bottom of this rant, the author saysWhile not ideal for some niche activities, it's still hands down the best-designed MP3 player in the world.

What gives? Is this guy totally out to lunch?

Re:Confused

[afidel]

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.

Re:Confused

[Chibi]

And then at the bottom of this rant, the author saysWhile not ideal for some niche activities, it's still hands down the best-designed MP3 player in the world.

What gives? Is this guy totally out to lunch?

I get the impression it's an article simply meant to point out some of the flaws of a very good product, especially since the iPod and iTunes have been the centers of some major love-fests, especially in the press. I don't think it hurts to acknowledge that a good product may have some negatives. It's something that future versions of the product could try to improve upon.

If something only has positive attributes, then that make my BS detector go off. Once in a while, you'll find that rare gem which really is all positive. But I think being able to consider a product's drawbacks gives a more accurate impression of it, and can in the long run give a better perception of the product.

Anyway, would you rather see another "me too" article about how great iTunes and iPod are, or a slightly different take on all of the buzz around them (although I'm sure C|NET probably has plenty of "me too" articles, as well)?

Re:Confused

[tuckerclerico]

Some of us travel internationally. My shortest flight in my 150k butt-in-seat miles this year is 11 hours. I guess I'm in the niche.

Then spend a couple bucks and get the damn Belkin battery add-in. You'll get 6 hours plus another 18 hours.

The Belkin add-on is great because (a) it's cheap, (b) it adds *INSANE* amounts of time to the iPod, and (c) is there only when you need it. When you don't want the added weight, you simply unsuck from the back of the iPod and stash it away. Then the iPod is sleek and lovely and thin (because if it wasn't sleek and lovely and thin, these insane "Why I Don't Like the iPod" articles from (airquote) Professional (airquote) reviewers would complain about it being not sleek and not lovely and not thin.

Re:Flamebait?

[dreamchaser]

That's right, because we all know that here on Slashdot it's automatically flamebait if you don't agree with it...

(this was typed with tongue in cheek, for the sarcasm impaired)

Re:there are no moving parts

[afidel]

What do you call the HDD???

I could only think of like 400 reasons

[netsavior]

and they all start with an $

Re:Flamebait?

[Carbonite]

Did you RTFA? It's stated right at the beginning:

Don't get me wrong; it's still our favorite overall MP3 player. Although everyone can think of reasons why they want an iPod, I've decided to use this column to list a few reasons why not to buy one.

Before you send me rants for putting down the iPod, please read the list, realize that we still love the iPod, and take a deep breath.

If CNET ran an article with the title "5 Reasons Not to Buy a Windows XP PC", would that also be flamebait or would you consider it an alternative view? Follow the advice of the article: take a deep breath.

buy a neuros instead

[Anonymous Coward]

Neuros is great.

Huge discount right now: $229 for the unit with swappable 128meg CF and 20gig HD backpacks.

Works with Linux
Plays Ogg vorbis
Plays mp3
Plays wma
Records to mp3
Records to wav
Built in FM transmitter so no line-out to tape dongle to hear the thing in your car

This thing is great. It's cheap now because they will be introducing a newer version soon.

www.neurosaudio.com

Re:buy a neuros instead

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah... I'm using one. I lusted after it ages ago when it was first covered on /.

It has some shortcomings, but for the price ($229 for both backpacks) I couldn't say no.

The sound quality is great.
FM transmitter is great for playing through car radio. Some people have had less luck with this than I have.

Their support is great. Check out their forums on www.neurosaudio.com .

Their PC Sync software is less than great. Not a big deal though.

USB 1 is less than great. Still, not a big deal. I'm not moving files all the time.

Their OpenSource initiatives are great.

They use a standard laptop hard drive. People have popped in 80 gigs into the backpack.

Some have complained that it is too big. This was one of my worries. When I got it, I was actually pleasantly surprised at how small it is. Easily fits into a jacket pocket, cargo pants pocket. If you use the CF backpack instead of the HD backpack, it's really small.

Again. The thing has some quirks. If you buy, you'll be getting a great product on the cheap that plays ogg, mp3, wma and is soon to be replaced by a better model for much more money.

Those are my random thoughts, presented in random order. I'd be happy to address any specific questions if you have 'em.

Re:buy a neuros instead

[senatorpjt]

I've looked very hard, and I can find no indication on their site that it uses CF. It only refers to it as "embedded flash." Sounds like it's not expandable, which is unacceptable.

No, the real point is...

[mizidymizark]

I don't give a damn. Yes, the iPod isn't perfect, but none of the products he mentions is. I am a bit sceptical of the jogging argument as well, seeing as the iPod has 25 minutes of skip protection. But in any case, I think the guy just wants to point out flaws in the iPod. All this is fine, but do you really want the Dell alternative that has the one feature that the iPod doesn't have, and is missing all of the other things that make the iPod great?

Don't buy a Ferrari or a Mercedes.....

[rixster]

not that I'm comparing and iPod to the above, but I'm sure you could somehow mangle those reasons to argue against anything that costs more than dree-fiddy.

More battery problems

[SilentWatcher]

Not only does the battery only last about 6 hours, but at least on mine, it doesn't give you much warning before it dies.

There is a charge indicator which displays a full charge right up until death. After that, you have to charge it, watch it reboot, reset the date/time if you aren't tired of doing that, then repopulate the playlist. PITA.

Other irritations: The front and (especially) the back of the iPod get scratched. The touch sensitive pad seems too sensitive. The "Brick" game is buggy.

Don't get me wrong, I like my iPod, but contrary to the hype it is by no means a perfect player.

Way to state the obvious

[rritterson]

Okay, except for maybe the battery life point, the other four points are:

2,3,4,5)Because it doesn't do something it's not designed to do.

Btw: If you won't buy an iPod because it's expensive, you obvious aren't in the target market for the device. It's actually reasonably priced in it's segment.

It's like saying 5 reasons not to buy a house:
1)It's expensive
2)You can't take it to the grocery store... etc.

Re:Way to state the obvious

[ramk13]

How long will it take people to realize that what is obvious to you isn't obvious to anyone. There are people in the market for an mp3 player who might know very little about them. Maybe they saw a few ads on TV and that's it. This article is informative, and not especially biased (I think).

What if you don't know anything about mp3 players, have $200 to spend, but are interested in getting one? Would article be useful for you? YES. Are there people in that situation? YES. A lot.

I'm going to forward article to someone who asked about buying an mp3 player the other day. I said the ipod is the best out there, but that it's a little pricey and there might be some other things to consider. WHOA! An article that talks about those considerations. It's like they read my mind and wrote the article for me.

Don't crap on the article just because it's something you already know. Not everyone is blessed with as much nerd knowledge as the average slashdot reader.

5 reasons to agree with this story...

[contrabassoon]

1 - the things in the list have nothing to do with technological flaws with the unit itself.
2- the author's expectations for battery life versus product size exceed that of most major military technologies.
3- I, like the author, need a bigger paycheck so I don't have to buy cheap, lower quality music devices all the time.
4- Making high quality digital recordings is something I should be able to do from a $500 device that fits in my pocket.
5- The picture of the author inspires me to buy a new pair of headphones.

Re:Ogg Vorbis sucks

[Anonymous Coward]

It's more than mp3 with variable bit rate. It supports more than 2 channels (mp3 is limited to stero). It also has tested as better sounding at lower bitrates, and supports bitrate peeling, which allows you to reshape a file on the fly for differing circumstances.

AAC != MP3 != WMA != OGG

[Gothmolly]

He calls WMA "Microsoft's secure format" hyping that its secure (so as not to scare you from an otherwise notoriously insecure Operating Environment. What he ignores is that WMA = DRM just like AAC. Online DRMd music is NOT MP3, and none of these devices play Oggs, which is a technically supieror format.
This was written for Joe Sixpack, who doesn't want the burden of actually having to understand 'all that technical stuff'.

The iPod Is Not Perfect

[Pave Low]

or even close. I bought 15 gig 3rd gen iPod almost on the first day it came out, after hearing all the raves it got before. While I do enjoy it very much, this article does make some good points.

The battery life really is not great, and it continues to suck power even when you don't have it on so you have to recharge the thing constantly. The other issues like weight, and expense are valid too, I also dislike the the touch-sensitive buttons, no manual EQ settings, no line-in.

Apple zealots don't do Apple any favors as they set themselves up so high on the pedestal, that they're bound to get knocked down a peg. The iPod really isn't THAT much better overall nowadays.

Don't get me wrong, I still like the iPod, but it's not so clear-cut nowadays with all the new competitors. Hopefully, Apple will address these issues in the next revision to stay ahead of the pack.

Re:The iPod Is Not Perfect

[Jordy]

The battery life really is not great, and it continues to suck power even when you don't have it on so you have to recharge the thing constantly.

You may have to upgrade your firmware. There were a few bugs in the earlier versions of firmware that made use more juice than it should have. My iPod will play for 9-10 hours on a single charge. I recharge it about once a week (I use it a little more than an hour per day on average).

The other issues like weight, and expense are valid too, I also dislike the the touch-sensitive buttons, no manual EQ settings, no line-in.

I have real buttons on mine (2nd gen), so I don't know much about this. I do however flip the key lock switch when I stick it in my pocket since I do tend to bang the buttons somehow.

Re:The iPod Is Not Perfect

[AzrealAO]

How about this?

Sony D-NE1 ATRAC3/MP3 CD Walkman. 5 3/8" x 5 3/8" x 5/8", 6.25 ounces, 90-150 hours on a charged set of batteries. [2 NH14WM(a) Rechargeable batteries for the player and 2 "AA" Batteries for the Backlight Remote] The NH-14MW are 1.2v 1350maH batteries.

Sony D-NE1

Apple iPod (40 GB Model)

4.1 x 2.4 x 0.62, 6.2 ounces. 630mah LiON Battery, 8 hours on a charge (Apple Literature)

Re:there are no moving parts

[Phrogz]

Well, FWIW, if you're not constantly fast forwarding or skipping songs, the hard drive buffers 20 minutes of music and then spins down.

Jogging

[Da Penguin]

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.

Valid points....

[gsdali]

apart from the recording and music store ones, but it is still the smallest HD player and still the best looking and it has the best interface (not that I have tried them all). And besides I've got one and there's no way that you're going to persuade me that my 299 was poorly spent.

The only way I can respond to this post

[Anonymous Coward]

It also has tested as better sounding at lower bitrates, and supports bitrate peeling, which allows you to reshape a file on the fly for differing circumstances.

Ground Control to Yoda Doll...

Lack of radio

[Midnight Thunder]

Lack of radio is a small but important one for me. Considering that it costs less than 50 cents for an integrated radio chip, and that the iPods UI is ideal for radio tuning, it is certainly something I would like to see. Sometimes I want to hear the news and other live events.

Apple could open up a bit more in terms of media formats, but then again, so could the online stores. AAC is far more open that WMA is at the moment. Heck AAC, is even part of the MPEG4 standard.

Re:Lack of radio

[Phrogz]

Lack of radio is a small but important one for me.

It isn't an issue for me, and only 1 out of 5 iPod owners I know wanted radio. For that 1 person, it was simple to buy a tiny inline receiver that works with the iPod.

5 real reasons

[banky]

1. Apple hasn't partnered with Cnet to sell their device via click-through, resulting in less revenue for CNet from the apparent #1 player.
2. Were Apple to increase in marketshare as a result of 1)the #1 portable music device and 2)the #1 online music store, we'd have to have people cover it more, potentially resulting in less coverage of Microsoft-based products.
3. Anyone can find something wrong with anything, and I have, and since I work at CNet and you don't, you have to listen to me.
4. Microsoft creates standards, not Apple. If Apple creates standards, or supports ones not approved by billg, we'll be back in the chaos of the 80's and early 90's. I can't go back to installing WinSock! I can't!! Buy WMA devices, please!
5. Ha ha, sucker, thanks for the ad impressions. Coming up next: 5 reasons why you shouldn't use Linux, Mac OS X, and/or Mozilla!

Solution to Battery Life

[clarencek]

I personally get about 8 hours from my iPod. And when I need more juice I use this:

http://catalog.belkin.com/IWCatProductPage.process ?Merchant_Id=&Section_Id=201526&pcount=&Product_Id =148969

If you need to listen to music for more than 10 hours having an optional battery pack is a must, and it uses AA's so I just swap those for more power.

I don't see one offered for the Dell or Samsung player.

Re:Ogg Vorbis sucks

[Anonymous Coward]

And your music collection is only ever on your "digital jukebox"? You don't understand bitrate peeling. It lets you encode things at a super high quality to stay on your hard drive (say with 5.1 sound), but then strip it down on the fly as you transfer it to your "digital jukebox" or email it to a friend or stream it on the internet to a lower bitrate and fewer channels. And, not everyone plugs their "digital jukebox" into headphones. You could plug it into a real speaker set, or a sound system.

Article extremely skewed

[diamondsw]

Sent this missive off to CNET:

While there certainly are downsides to the iPod, your article took a very skewed and biased approach.

1) Battery life - you mention the iPod has "6 hours". Not sure where you got this information since Apple quotes 8. I've routinely gotten 10 hours (full drive from Memphis to Chicago, including some rush hour traffic). Meanwhile, Dell quotes 15 hours and you helpfully add "lasted almost 20 hours in our battery test". Okay, you want to run your own tests, fine, but do it for the iPod as well. I don't dispute that the Dell has a much longer battery life, but your reporting is extremely biased here.

2) Jogging - First off, you give the impression that the iPod drive is running much more than it is (" hard drives spin thousands of times per minute") - it's on for a couple of seconds. You yourself say that experts agree the iPod hard drive will not suffer problems from sudden shocks. Yet even with that, the gauntlet comes down from your "expert" opinion - "Some experts say that it's impossible to damage the drive in this way, but I'm not buying that". Some experts say journalists are supposed to have some objectivity and quest for truth, but I'm not buying that.

3) The iPod is expensive. Agreed.

4) You want decent recording. Yup, the iPod won't do that.

5) Choice - So, you get the iPod and can use the most popuar music store with the most liberal DRM and largest catalog. Or you get some other playerand either get locked into its service (ala Dell) or maybe not be able to play purchased stuff at all - many players have major issues with DRM WMA.

However, what strikes me most is you make several points and back them up with an example. However, the examples given fail the other points. The Dell has great batter life, but is expensive and will suffer the same claimed jogging problems. The CD MP3 player is cheap but is all moving parts and is far, far too big for jogging (and certainly no recording). Flash players can't generally record and while they might have great battery life, that means you can play your 20 songs over and over and over. Which leads me to my final point...

You neglect the key benefit of a hard drive based player - for many people, this means they can take their ENTIRE music collection with them. If they're jogging, it's there. In the car, it's there. No remembering CD's and switching them in and out. No getting locked into burned playlists on MP3 CD's. No limitations on the tiny, tiny limitations of flash based players.

Re:6. No Ogg Vorbis!

[iJed]

As much as it pains me to say it I think WMA would be more useful to the masses that Ogg.

What would also be nice is support for some sort of compressed lossless codec rather than using huge AIFF or WAV files.

Re:Flamebait?

[banky]

Billg will write Perl scripts with vim before CNet ever, ever releases an article bashing a Windows operating system or mainstream PC.

Sure, they're "fair and balanced", I saw them give something a 7 once.

Re:6. No Ogg Vorbis!

[wankledot]

The fact that this is mod'd +1 Funny is really sort of telling.

Screaming "Ogg! Ogg!" is almost seen as a joke now. I know I'm laughing at you.

Re:Flamebait?

[jared_hanson]

Don't get me wrong; you are still my favorite overall insightful poster. Although everyone can think of reasons why your posts are good, I've decided to use this comment to list a few reasons why they are not.

1. You are an idiot.

Just because I put the disclaimer up, does not mean that this isn't flamebait. Likewise with the CNet article. They are trying to provoke a reaction, and probably a negative one given how popular the iPod is.

It is one thing to post a review of one of the best products and still point out its flaws. It is another to post an article that is structured in an entirely negative way, despite the fact that they admit it is great. This is simply a case of beating up on the popular guy, just to provoke a reaction (and draw hits to their site so they can sell ads).

Looks like they really had to stretch

[nocomment]

It looks like they really had to stretch to find 5 reasons. "choice in music stores", look, it doesn't matter, the fact is that they still cost $.99.

The skipping while playing is pretty iffy, because they are suggesting that the flash buffer is completely empty before the HD spins up to refill it, which is completely untrue. It spins up long before it's empty to fill up the buffer. A lot like the way burning a cd works (only different ;-). Still, it's nice to see someone being objective about it.

Re:Looks like they really had to stretch

[CKW]

The skipping while playing is pretty iffy, because they are suggesting that the flash buffer is completely empty before the HD spins up to refill it, which is completely untrue.

I actually researched this a while ago because I wanted music while in the gym and while jogging.

It's widely known (and this was on Apple's own message boards) that the only iPods that are reliable and usable while jogging are the original 5GB models, the newer 10/15/20 GB models are not capable of playing without skips when you are jogging, not unless you take very careful measures in where and how you attach it to your body or hold it.

Re:Looks like they really had to stretch

[thparker]

Of course they're stretching. Skipping? Come on, geeks don't jog, silly.

Re:Looks like they really had to stretch

[Ancient Devices King]

OK, now I agree that this isn't really applicable to most (any?) Slashdot readers, but there are people out there who may have an interest in some of these features who don't know that there are other things besides the iPod which do them better (or at all). When those people think "I want an MP3 player," what do you think they're gonna do? If they can afford it, they're probably going to get the small flashy one they see lots of people carrying around (the iPod, in case it wasn't obvious). Or they may ask someone else who knows more about it than they do for advice, and if that person doesn't know that the iPod doesn't do what they want, they may suggest that.
Just my 2.

Re:Looks like they really had to stretch

[dipipanone]

Well, this is how so much content for consumer media is generated. ZDnet or whoever trawl through their advertisers to see who has new products. Five big spending companies say 'yeah, we've got new MP3 players', and they say 'OK, we'll do a review piece. Wanna buy some advertising?'

Now you *know* that they aren't going to say anything critical about any of those machines, so they say 'yeah, look, it has these new cool features.'

That's how it works. That's how it always worked. But in this case, either they know they can't get away with all of the usual hyperbole, or alternatively they used a writer with some small modicum of integrity, and so what's his conclusion?

"There are a couple of new machines with new features, some of which improve on the iPod, but the truth is, as a general all around useful MP3 player, the iPod continues to kick the shit out of everything else."

Intellectual honesty is a real rarity in consumer product reviews where editors will tell you to eat shit, and then criticize you because you complained that the odour was pungent when it should have been fragrant, and you didn't wear the appropriate shit-eating grin while dining.

I suspect that this guy wrote an intellectually honest review, but then some asshole editor or subeditor decides to present the story as 'five reasons not to buy an iPod' -- but the writer refuses to concede that anything else out there comes close as an all-around general mp3 playing type thingie.

Disclaimer. I don't and never have worked for Ziff Davis, nor have I ever owned an iPod. However, I do have friends who own them and they wouldn't use anything else.

also bitrate peeling and EQs are not the same

[Ayanami Rei]

bitrate peeling = multiple streams at different quality from one source file. You could implement a power-saving mode in a portable with that.
Or fit a lower-bitrate playlist (longer play) onto space-constrained solid state players from a high quality archive without re-encoding.

Heh.

Klutz Proof--IdJit Proof

[malia8888]

The article didn't address fully the durability issues with iPods

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 ;)

"Experts say...but I'm a frigging moron, so I'm.."

[rthille]

Some experts say that it's impossible to damage the drive in this way, but I'm not buying that
Yeah, because he knows way more than any expert. He even figured out that you have to wait until the buffer is completely empty before you refill it.
And I'm sure he pored over the specs for the hard drive and saw that the G's he would put on the iPod while jogging would exceed the specs for the drive.
Basically, despite the line at the end calling the iPod the best designed player (added by an editor perhaps?), it's just an anti-iPod rant.

Go Minidisc

[CastrTroy]

I've found that the best thing out there is the Sony Minidisc. They offer models for every budget out there. I got mine for $150 CDN, which is like nothing. I've actually tried to make the thing skip, shaking it violently for liek 3 mintues... it doesn't skip. You can carry as much music with you as you want. Don't have to spend $500 on a 40 gig model if you don't need that now. If you're going to need more than 2.5 hours of music (what fits on one disc in good quality) before going back home, to get more discs, you're probably going to be carrying some sort of bag on you, where you can put more discs. Anyway, that's just my two cents. I love the Minidisc, the batteries last forever, the thing never skips, you can always carry more music with you, and it won't empty your wallet

iPod Battery Replacements.

[hero]

The articles mentions that the iPod battery is not replaceable, but that's not true. Check out http://www.ipodbattery.com/ I haven't used their service, but presumably it works. $49 sounds like a reasonable price to me, especially when you take into account the cost of the iPod itself.

-hero.

Re:"Experts say...but I'm a frigging moron, so I'm

[StrawberryFrog]

> Some experts say that it's impossible to damage the drive in this way, but I'm not buying that
Yeah, because he knows way more than any expert

It has moving parts. Sooner or later, it will fail.

Comparing Apples to a Buschel of Oranges

[levin]

Gee, would you rather buy an iPod, or a device that is comprised of the best features of _SEVEN_ other devices? What, you can't buy such a device? This article is more a collection of reasons another device might suit your needs better than an iPod, not a collection of reasons not to get one. Sure, if you could make an MP3 player that has better battery life, was shock proof, costed less than an iPod, held as much music, could act as a recording studio, and could play any format ever created, I'd buy it. But you can't. That's why this guy has to use seven different devices to beat the iPod hands-down. I wonder how much free stuff this guy gets from Microsoft for spouting this shit.

6. You don't want to use 3rd party software...

[Aetrix]

6. You don't want to use 3rd party software to manage files.

Although it has major other faults, the Archos jukebox has one selling point - No third-party software is necessary to upload and download files. It's just a hard drive that plays mp3s (and other stuff in later models). You can load and unload mp3s from it using Explorer, or mount it in Linux. Copy your mp3s just like any other files and play them. There is no necessary uploading software and no download controls. It's fully linux-compatible.

When I was researching MP3 players last May, this was a big selling point of the Archos.

Boy, Bill's getting desperate

[kelzer]

Pull up the article, and check out the picture of the author, "Eliot Van Buskirk". Yeah, look real close. Look familiar? Tried the old Superman/Clark Kent trick of taking off his glasses. Threw on some headphones just to be extra careful.

Well nice try Bill, but we're on to you. Your FUD isn't going to work this time!

Archos Multimedia Jukebox

[Mr. White]

I have a 20gig Archos Jukebox. It's a souped up mp3 player. In additition to storing and playing mp3s, the thing has a little LCD screen, and it plays MOVIES! Or it can output the signal to a TV.

Additionally, it has compact flash and SD adaptors, so you can download the pictures from your camera to the device. This is handy when travelling: you can empty your CF cards and browse photos on the Archos whenever you feel like.

Best of all, it's easy hackable so you can stick a 60gig drive in there.

Revolutionary? Hardly. I've had mine more than 1 year. Currently, there's bigger and better Archos players out there, and doing more for less. Compared to Ipod hype and price, Archos stuff is a steal.

Witold
www.witold.org

...and One Missed Point

[shking]

The iPod is not just an MP3 player. It is also a darn nice portable, plug & play, hard drive. It's very handy for backing up and/or transporting a swack of files. It's often used when rebuilding an old mac or moving to a new one.

Re:Quality loss

[zenyu]

Er, considering that you're most likely going to be listening to it through a car stereo or headphones, I don't think there's really a need for monstrous, extremely high-quality files.

1/ I know a few people with iPods that do plug them into their stereo, where you can hear that those things are not hi-fi.

2/ It's nice to not have to convert your music to lo-fi to put it on your portable music player.

That said, I wrote a script that converts my hi-fi MP3s (that I'm too lazy to re-encode) and OGGs to lo-fi MP3s as it transfers them to my flash MP3 player... But I paid $35 for it, which is a bit less than my SO paid for her iPod... I expect more from the iPod.

Sedan vs Truck

[QEDog]

As you say, they don't tell you an mp3 player better than the iPod overall. An iPod is like an expesinve european sedan, and the reviewer is comparing it to trucks, motorcycles, SUV's and rollerblades and saying how those are better for some things than the sedan. Of course the truck can carry more weight. Of course the SUV is better in rough terrain. Of course the motorcycle is easier to park. Of course the rollerblades are cheaper. So what? It is totally a meaningless comparison.

iPod is a great product. Period. My friend had one, and he just loved it. I couldn't figure out what was about it, and, having my own MP3 plays, I used to think 'it's about the same, i guess'. Then, I borrow my friends iPod for a few hours. I was convinced, sold my mp3 player, and bought an iPod. Then, a second friend saw me with the iPod, and asked me about it. He borrowed it for 3 hours, and that weekend, he was buying one. Have you ever heard of anything like this with any other consumer electronics? It is a quality product, I haven't been so satisfied with a consumer electronic products in a looong time.

Cheap ploy to attract readers.

[YouHaveSnail]

This article seems like little more than a ploy meant to increase CNet readership, not unlike the grumpy columns that John Dvorak spouted years ago on the pages of MacUser. But at least Dvorak usually took a position and stuck to it for the duration of his column, unlike this CNet author who can't make up his mind.

Of course, if you don't care about low battery life, aren't fond of jogging, have ample disposable income, don't need to record/encode music portably, and want to purchase music downloads only from the iTunes Music Store, then the iPod is the best the way to go. While not ideal for some niche activities, it's still hands down the best-designed MP3 player in the world.

battery life: If, after listening to your iPod for 6+ hours straight, you cannot stand to be without your music for a short while, I think you should be concerned about your own life, and not your battery life.

price: Price is always an issue, but you get what you pay for. If you have modest needs and not much money, go elsewhere. But if you want a good value, the iPod's not a bad bet.

jogging: I suppose this could be a problem, but that's true for any disk-based player. Apple's current TV ads show dancers boogying like crazy while holding an iPod in hand or clipped to a belt, and I don't recall that the iPod comes with any particular warnings about motion.

recording: Possible with iPod (plus add-on), but quality probably not great. However, if you want great quality, you probably want to record raw data and not compress it until after production. And you want a decent mic, and mixing, and and and... I don't think there are any tiny, battery powered, highly portable devices that would do the job. Get a PowerBook, a good mic, and an amp instead.

iTunes Music Store only: Fair enough, but you've got to pick your poison. You can be tied to Apple and AAC, which at least has reasonable DRM and improved sound quality, or you can be tied to Microsoft and WMA, which has no quality improvement over mp3 and shitty track record for any sort of reasonableness.

still hands down the best-designed MP3 player in the world: In other words, the author already knows all of the above, and is just looking to raise people's hackles for a cheap spike in readership and maybe a mention on Slashdot. I guess he knows what he's doing, but I think it points to a lack of integrity.

It should be Blatantly Obvious To The Most Casual Observer that the iPod is not the perfect player for all consumers, just as a BMW 325i is not the perfect car for all drivers. But it's a pretty nice player, and it offers a lot of features that others do not.

Kill the WMA FUD

[kherr]

Microsoft has everyone talking about the wide selection of players that support WMA as being better for you. What a load of crap.

WMA is a proprietary, closed format that can only be implemented via deals directly with Microsoft. Sure a lot of players support it now, but what about five years from now? Or in 18 months when Microsoft comes out with "WMA-Enhanced" or "WMA-Palladium"?

You can argue that AAC isn't an open standard, but it's at least a standard promoted by the MPEG LA. You can hate it for not being free, but it's an industry standard instead of a single company's product format.

Free is best, but industry standard trumps single-company product in this case.

I was thinking the opposit, actually...

[joggle]

Out of the possible solutions, he doesn't mention MiniDisc (which uses Sony's proprietary format). It's great for doing portable recordings (so long as you get a model with a mic jack) and has extroardinary battery life, with the extra bonus of only neading 1 cheap AA battery.

Re:I was thinking the opposit, actually...

[qigong]

While I suppose that MiniDisc is a possible alternative to an iPod, it really has completely different strengths and weaknesses. I love my MiniDisc portable, but in all honesty it's no iPod replacement.

MiniDisc is great if you like making "mixed discs". The editability of the format makes it perfect for that (rearrange the order of songs, erase one's that don't quite work out in your mix, etc.) I use my MD portable mostly for live recoding, which it also does very well. The discs are very durable (unlike CD-Rs), the decks are almost impossible to make skip (unlike CDs) and so in combination with the excellent battery life, could prove very useful to someone.

However, you can't really hold all that much music on a disc, even in the long-play formats. It's not a jukebox. This means you'll have to tote your MD collection around with you, which means bulk. The point of a portable MP3 jukebox like the iPod is the reduction of that bulk.

Re:I was thinking the opposit, actually...

[k31bang]

I had been looking at Minidisks for recording, and while its nice that they are so small, i just can't stand the idea of waiting around to transfer two hours of recorded sound to my computer. I still might buy one (a sharp model), but i'm looking at these alternatives instead:

The MR-8 8-Track Digital Recorder "Genuine 16-bit/44.1kHz uncompressed linear sound quality. 2-track simultaneous recording and 8-track playback is just the tip of the iceberg. 38 self-illuminating keys, 13 knobs, and 7 smooth-moving faders combined with a 128x64 backlit LCD make it way easier to operate than any other full-featured digital recorder. Onboard guitar distortion, amp modeling, built-in mic, mic modeling, digital reverb and delay section, plus advanced editing and archiving features make stellar demos a breeze. Mastering effect for stereo bus, USB port for WAV transfer to PC, and optical S/PDIF out. Battery or included power supply operation."

SME Marantz PMD222 " Portable 3-head, 2-Speed Cassette Recorder with XLR"

NOMAD Jukebox 3

" # 20GB storage space holds up to 8000 songs encoded in WMA at 80kbps or 5000 MP3s encoded at 128kbps. 40GB of the storage space doubles that!
# High audio quality: 98dB Signal-to-Noise Ratio Playback
# Frequency range of 20Hz to 20kHz
# Maximum output 100mW
# Analog/Optical Line-In for direct high quality recording from external audio devices
# Firewire (IEEE 1394) and USB 1.1 Transfer
# Second Battery Bay: Up to 11 hours of continuous playtime with one lithium-ion rechargable battery, up to 22 hours of uninterrupted playback with both batteries
# Quick and easy navigation Scroller to find songs in seconds
# Smart Volume Management (SVM) for normalization of audio output
# AudioSync to synchronize your PC music library to the NOMAD Jukebox 3
# Anti-skip protection of up to 7 mins for smooth listening
# EAX-enabled
# Time-Scaling - Speed up or slow down audio playback without distortion
# Creative File Manager - Use the player as a portable storage device
# Personalization features: LCD color, faceplates, accessories, startup logos"
(according to some sites, i'd need a mic preamp to record with this)


Theres a whole section dedicated to "uploading facilities" here: http://www.minidisc.org/

Re:Flamebait?

[generic-man]

CNet is biased. They're being paid off by Microsoft.

Just look at the unjustifiably bad review they gave to the 12" PowerBook.

And they've been brutal on the iPod. "Battery life compromised somewhat by small size?" What the hell?

But to save the best for last, look at all the lies they printed when they "reviewed" the Power Mac G5. Frankly, I think they hired Microsoft to write that review for them.

I don't believe anything CNet ever writes. I only trust unbiased sources like MacNN or Macworld magazine.

Re:Battery life

[li99sh79]

That's my experience as well. My second generation iPod lasts for a full work day, easily. I've had it crap out on the commute home once or twice, but only because I kept it going all day without hitting pause once.

I've found my second gen iPod lasts around 9 to 10 hours easy. Plus, if you've got your Powerbook handy you can always cheat and charge up the iPod a little bit to stretch the battery out farther. And of course the third-gen's have an external battery pack available if you really need it.

-sam

Why people buy an iPod

[Mr_Silver]

Because it looks good. Seriously. Most of the people I know has bought one because it looks good and it feels good. It's got nothing to do with the "Apple" name - at the most they know they make computers, at the least they know they make MP3 players.

The reason other manufacturers of HD based players don't get it is because they think they can compete and win on price and features. Which is true, they can do pretty well - but in their desire to push the price down lower than an iPod they end up using cheaper materials which means that what they end up with:

1. Looks cheap and nasty
2. Feels cheap and nasty

When a HD based MP3 player hits the market which looks and feels good (and i'm sorry to say it but this is butt ugly and this looks only marginally better but still feels cheap and nasty) then they'll be onto a winner. Even if it has the same or less features.

For many people, if you're going to pony up several hunded quid for a HD based MP3 player - it better not look like something made by Fischer Price.

However, there is light at the end of the tunnel, Toshiba might come up with the goods (and also Panasonic, but I can't find the product I was thinking of) ...

Re:The Non-replacable battery is a showstopper

[squarefish]

just look here

actually, I didn't even know about this till I saw it in someone's earlier post in this story.

Re:Five Rebuttals (You'll hafta RTFA)

[tshak]

4. What percentage of the owners of portable MP3 players are DJs that want to record their sets? DAT is lossless and is an industry standard, which makes it considerably better for recording your live sets.


You're ignoring his other points. There's probably a large percentage of users who have vinyl and cassets who would want to make backups of their media. Also, as consumer become more empowered with technology, they generally start do do more things with them. Go beyond the average consumer and you have audio engineers, producers, and DJ's as well. There's multiple markets to target with such a feature - why do you think even low end portable cassette players have audio inputs?

Replacement batteries for iPod higher capacity too

[gricholson75]

Clicky Clicky

devils advocate

[dmnic]

(fyi, I love my DAT decks)

the LONE manufacturer of DAT assemblies have stopped production and the last "new" DAT deck made is almost 3 years old.

so yes, musicians and other people in the industry are looking for a replacement for the DAT

But, but, but...

[Trolling4Dollars]

...what if I want to go jogging for 30 hours and don't want to carry a pack of CDs with me? Then what? Huh? ;P

Re:Flamebait and FUD.

[cens0r]

A: Oh please. I got mine for $239. The best $239 I've ever spent. I never leave the apartment without it. I never carry my CD-wallet around. Amortize it over the next year if you want to. If you get a the 10GB $299 model that I got, that's $0.82 a day for a year, and after that it's yours to keep. And they laser-engrave now for free. That looks cool.

For that $299 you could also get a player from a different company that hold more music. Expensive is a realative term

And the suggestion here: CD-MP3 players! HA! I used two models of those and they are worthless. You have to burn mixes, just like regular CD mixes, but these mixes have to be about 20 hours long or you're wasting your time and CD. Sure they're under $50 now, because no one would pay more than that for 'em.

I love my slimX cd based player (i also have a nomad IIc flash player). The best thing about it is taking it on vacation. When I go on a vacation I take two mix CD-RW's. They take almost no time to make and that's more than enough music to get me by. I don't have a laptop, so that's the only music I'm going to have on the road. The reason I love it the most though is this. I often buy CD's when I'm taking a trip. It plays CD's. I don't have to wait until I get home to listen to them.

Give me another "Oh please." If you want to make hi-fi digital recordings with your portable MP3 player, that's like saying "I want to win a demolition derby in my new Toyota Prius Hybrid. The Prius is cool for a totally different application--driving efficiently on streets.

I actually do think this serves as a selling point to many people. If you buy a player that supports hi-fi recording, you don't need a computer. Plug in your cd player and record all your discs. Do the same thing with your turntable. At a friends house, want to record one of his cd's easy as pie.

Choice? Please. You do have a choice. Good quality, legal AAC's, or good quality, legal AAC's/MP3's from your own CDs. Or un-legit MP3's too. That's way good enough for me. WMA stores are inadequate. The DRM is stifling at many. Why mess with a good thing?

Please explain this too me. As far as I can tell most of the WMA stores have exactly the same DRM as the iTMS. The differences are only with the streaming music by subscription which iTMS does not offer!.

I get his intent, but he's stretching a bit

[HarveyBirdman]

The main problem with the article is that it's the iPod versus the world, and not one particular other device.

Note that each of the 5 has a separate list of alternative players that the iPod beats head to head.

For example, in one point he crows that one alternative has no moving parts and weighs less than the iPod, but in another point, he presents a solution involving an MP3 CD player (moving parts) that is also saddled with a case of CDs (total is far heavier and more unweildy than the iPod).

So it seems if I follow the advice of this article, I need to buy about 3 to 5 different players to beat the functionality of my iPod.

Obligatory car analogy: It's like saying, if you want a sports car, you should not buy Corvette because it's more expensive than a Mustang, might break more easily than a Lexus GS300, hauls less than a Chevy full size pickup, has a smaller fuel tank than a Hummer and is not as "cool" as an Aston Martin.

My reason...

[Xunker]

My reason (aside from not wanting to drop that much cash) for not getting an iPod is quite simple -- I don't like iTunes and I don't like having to use it (or any other program for that matter).

I mean, I'm a Mac user, but I don't like that the iPod functions as a hard drive and yet I can't just copy MP3s to it and have them play; I have to load them in iTunes and build playlists and syncronize everything (at least, the last time I payed with my gf's iPod it was like that -- if this is not the case then someone please let me know). This to me is counterintuative.. the only thing that iTunes gives you is playlists and something similar to that can be effected by using directories as artist/album delimiters. It's a hard drive and I should be able to treat it just like a hard drive and it should be smart enough.

Instead, I got a (comparativly) cheap PocketPC and a 256MB CF card or about half the cost of an iPod (and it's a PDA, ad infinatum). Yes, I know that 256MB != 15GB but if I transcode things to .10 quality Ogg I can fit maybe 10 albums on it and it gives me incentive to change what music I have on it regularly.

Re:Quality loss

[redgopher]

It's come to my attention that a lot of people scream "bad headphones/speakers = less quality" which is true, yes, but Ogg and AAC sound much better for the *same* *file* *size* which would, of course, enhance your listening pleasure or whatever you want to call it.

And as far as people stuck on Ogg and complaining that the iPod doesn't have Ogg support, well, I suggest installing iTunes, ripping some Ogg and AAC in the same bitrate, and listen to them back to back. You'll see that there is no difference.

Ogg triumphs for lower bitrates, and I support it for that, but as of this moment when you hit 128Kbps it just doesnt really matter if you use AAC or Ogg.

My 2c.

Re:6. No Ogg Vorbis!

[fenix down]

Ogg make electronic death ray with power of alternating current! Ogg create industrial paridise and end warfare by bringing world closer together! Ogg hate fucking Edison!

Re:The Non-replacable battery is a showstopper

[Golias]

As the article points out, these batteries will lose their ability to store a charge in a few years (all rechargable batteries do so), and buying a replacement battery (as one does for one's camcorder or discman every few years) isn't an option.

Instead one has to throw away the ipod and buy a new one...

Holy crap, I thought this was Slashdot! You're afraid that you might someday need to open an old out-of-warranty MP3 player to replace a battery!? What the hell kind of hacker are you, anyway?

Slashdot's stated purpose is "news for nerds." Go read CNN.com or Drudge Report or something if that doesn't apply to you.

How resiliant are those hard drives really?

[dspyder]

I have an Archos Multimedia with a 20gig 2.5" laptop drive in it (Hitachi). I've always treated it super-sensitively, especially when it's spinning (and doubly so when it's spinning up or down). Are the 1.8" drives in the newer iPods any better? I know those IBM CF microdrives are much stronger.

Can these drives really handle jogging? Anyone have URLs with real-world tests?

I would love to be able to not worry about it, but just assumed it came with the teritory of hard-drive based mp3 players.

--Darren

Re:Great troll

[pHDNgell]

*None* of the MP3 players he's hawking resolves all 5 points

This is what I was looking for someone to point out. After each point, a player was shown that was better at that point. I didn't see two pictures of the same player. Does this suggest that no player is even good at two of them?

My list

[genka]

I own a "docking" IPod. This is my 3rd mp3 player and the best one.However, there are some things I don't like about it:
1 "Touchpad-like" controls- you touch it in a pocket, and it skips a song or does something else
2 Sometimes those buttons don't respond- have to touch up to ten times (not sure if I got a bad unit, or this is typical)
3 Can't "drug and drop" mp3 files on iPod- must use a software
4 Doesn't understand file names or directories- identifies fiels only by ID3 tags
5 Battery life- have to charge it as often as analog cell phone. Forget about overnight trips without a charger
6 Forgets the last played track after being connected to a PC, sometimes does it for no reason at all. Very annoying to audiobook listeners.
7 Clip on the remote is designed in such a way that the controls face outside only when clipped to a shirt with buttons on the left- ladies style.Does it confirm a popular Slashdot opinion that Apple is for gays?

Re:My list

[Otto]

1 "Touchpad-like" controls- you touch it in a pocket, and it skips a song or does something else

There's a switch on top of the thing that turns off the touchpad buttons. Flip the switch before you slip it in your pocket, and flip it back when you slip it out to mess with it. Problem solved.

2 Sometimes those buttons don't respond- have to touch up to ten times (not sure if I got a bad unit, or this is typical)

If it makes a click noise, but doesn't do anything, then it's just lagging. I've noticed that in some situations, it has to load data from the drive and this takes a bit of time.

3 Can't "drug and drop" mp3 files on iPod- must use a software

Fair enough. iTunes is pretty good, but not great and still has issues, so you win on that one.

4 Doesn't understand file names or directories- identifies fiels only by ID3 tags

I'd consider this a plus. Filenames can be anything at all. ID3 tags are the way that you label data in files correctly.

5 Battery life- have to charge it as often as analog cell phone. Forget about overnight trips without a charger

I've gotten 8 hours out of mine. But yeah, that does kind of suck. No way I'd fly anywhere with it without the charger.

6 Forgets the last played track after being connected to a PC, sometimes does it for no reason at all. Very annoying to audiobook listeners.

Agreed. But it should remember your position in an audible audiobook no matter what you do. www.audible.com, my friend.

Re:6. No Ogg Vorbis!

[pyros]

I recall one of the biggest holdups to ogg support in portables was in the hardware. I think it was that none of the portables shipped with an FPU, and ogg required one. So perhaps you bought a player before there was technical ability for portables to support ogg. I'm sure someone will post a link or two and take any potential informative mod points i might have received were i more motivated to research futher.

Re:6. No Ogg Vorbis!

[Mr. Sparkleru]

There is an integer only version of ogg available.

Hope that helps.

pain?

[twitter]

As much as it pains me to say it I think WMA would be more useful to the masses that Ogg.

Sure it pains you, but so must research of any kind. If you don't bother to read anything, I'm sure it really pains you to write.

Would you mind telling me how WMA is better for "the masses" or anyone than ogg? WMA is one of the lowest quality formats out there, ogg kicks it's ass in every way. Because ogg is patent and royalty free, there's no reason for it not to be adopted by everyone and be everywhere.

iPod "shortcomings"? Demystifying crack smokers

[greygent]

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.

MiniDisc player as alternative

[RowdyReptile]

Yep, I shopped at CircuitCity for an MP3 player about a year ago, and the salesman told me most of the employees there use MiniDisc players for that. Each disk (a couple bucks each?) could store 5 hours or so of MP3's. Overall it's a cheaper, more flexible alternative to other MP3 players.

Though I'm not sure if it has any real advantages to a mp3-cd player, if you can burn 700mb worth of MP3s per disc.

Re:MiniDisc player as alternative

[phossie]

as the owner of a (portable) minidisc recorder i have to tell you... you're absolutely fucking right. it's a real pain in the ass. it's got decent a/d converter, ATRAC sounds far better than same-size mp3. fine. i can record 80 minutes at good quality, double that for passable - that 4 hours quote is for atrac4, which is ok for voice notes but not much else.

the bitch is that to move your nice recordings around without more loss, you need to have a component mp3 player. and not a cheap one, either: the cheap ones only have digital in, not out. my father bought one of sony's first component consumer minidisc machines, and *that* has digital out. but his newer one, at the same point in the model lineup, doesn't. there's the rub.

don't get me wrong - it's wonderful to have a portable minidisc player. i get around 32 hours playback time on one standard AA battery. (recording eats batteries much faster, as you might expect.) it sounds good. it's ultra-stable and more durable than i'd ask. i'm very happy with it, overall. but getting my recordings off the thing really irritates me. if it had digital out i'd be a zealot. but i have to use a different machine for that.

if you're willing to spend $1000 on one, you can get something i think is better than any other solution (if you're looking for a recorder). but not less.

Zealotry, Ogg, and WMA

[Llywelyn]

The reason why WMA would be more useful is because more people use WMA.

It doesn't matter if, on some ideological (or even technical) level Ogg is "better" (why do I get the image of that guy from SG1? Kom-chy-a!) most people do not use it. Full stop, end of story.

If I produce a word processor and I had a limited number of file formats I could support it would behoove me to select Word over OpenOffice. Why? Because more people use Word than OpenOffice and if I want to appeal to more people that is the way to go.

There is also the point that no one is selling DRM-wrapped Ogg files (not that this is not possible). They /are/, however, selling DRM-wrapped WMA files. Appealing to more customers again.

>Because ogg is patent and royalty free, there's no reason
>for it not to be adopted by everyone and be everywhere.

There /is/ a reason not to support it on an iPod: they already are paying for support of AAC and MP3s and can only fit a limited number of formats in its memory.

AAC is a given, the Apple Music Store distributes in it and its what's used in mpeg4 files.

MP3 is a given.

AIFF/WAV are givens.

I want to see support for (smaller) lossless formats before I see Ogg support.

For me as an end user, I never (directly) see the license fees paid by Apple for mp3 or AAC support (if they even have to pay the latter). iTunes is distributed to me for free and it does not support ripping to ogg and my iPod won't play ogg, why should I bother with it?

Re:Zealotry, Ogg, and WMA

[kavin]

: I want to see support for (smaller) lossless formats before I see Ogg support.

ogg is a container (like mov), and has lossless support already (flac):

http://flac.sourceforge.net/

what you meant to say was ogg vorbis.

- p

Re:6. No Ogg Vorbis!

[the unbeliever]

If Ogg hates fucking Edison, then maybe he should put that corpse back in the ground where it belongs.

Sorry.... had to be done.

-1 wrong.

[morgue-ann]

emusic.com

If it was buy one song at a time, I might go for it, but I pay enough monthly subscriptions between dish, cell, dsl and netflix.

Their webpage hawks the free trial at you like crazy and hides the real price but it starts at $9.99/month for 40 downloads per month.

I'm trying to be satisfied with stuff I found through Links to Tens of Thousands of Legal Music Downloads and avoid supporting the dinosaurs completely. GarageBand looks promising- I can listen to RealAudio songs & "radio" at work, add the ones I like to my playlist & download 'em to my iPod at home.

Re:Yup.

[Kevinv]

I probably would go with the belkin battery extender if i needed more battery life.

http://catalog.belkin.com/IWCatProductPage.proce ss ?Merchant_Id=&Section_Id=201526&pcount=&Product_Id =148969

But the time I get now is more than enough for me.

5 Reasons to not read CNET

[mach_5]

1. Amount of content is not sufficient
Compared a sample web page from CNET to Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment and found the Dostoevsky's single book to provide far more content that CNET single web page.

2. Switching screens while viewing CNET is not cool
Compared switching between CNET web site screens and found it was no where near the fun of pushing buttons to switch screens on our new 42" Pioneer Plasma TV.

3. CNET is slow
Compared the load times of cnet.com and found the page load times to be significantly slower than localhost.com. What gives CNET? can we have a little optimization?

4. CNET does not allow to make high quality margaritas
Once again CNET faltered when compared to our new KitchenAid blender when it came to making margaritas. We were not even able to find any third party accessories to add this functionality to our CNET homepage.

5. You want a choice in online advertising
You would think that with an article on the Ipod you would atleast be able to check prices on it as they provide for most of the other players.

Stereophile Review

[nuxx]

I think you might want to take a look at the Stereophile Review of the iPod. If you read the article, what is actually (between the lines) reviewed is the DAC of the iPod, which is incredible. I'll attest to this*. Sure, MP3 generally sounds like ass, as to lower bitrate AAC files, but that's a product of lossy compression, not the player itself. iPods themselves sound absolutely wonderful, especially if you use the line out (often from the dock) into your stereo.

*At home I have my iPod dock in the living room hooked to a mid-range NAD receiver and some Gekko speakers. It just sounds amazing.

Re:My similar poor-man's solution

[Ohreally_factor]

I bought a 10 GB 2nd Generation iPod from the Apple Store's Special Deal refurb section for $169. They sell out fast, so you need to check in the morning, and frequently. Good luck!

Oh, it was sold as refurb, but it was brand new "old stock" they were clearing out.

Re:Ogg Vorbis sucks

[Trogre]

Are there actually any tools out there that can take advantage of bitrate peeling? I know that Vorbis can toeoretically support it, but has it ever actually been implemented?

Wah Wah

[ZxCv]

.... . Don't recording engineers spend years of time in the studio to learn how to properly EQ whatever they're recording?

I don't give a rat's ass how many years some recording engineer spends learning how to properly EQ something. What I do care about is that the music sounding good to me. What is more reasonable--adjusting my EQ so that I like the sound or going out and spending money on "good,good speakers or headphones" in the hopes that I will like the result?

Maybe the average person doesnt understand an EQ, but that hardly makes "giving the general public an EQ" a "huge mistake".

Re:Wah Wah

[schematix]

wah wah? looks who doing all the wah wah

Re:My list - Item 7

[grocer]

Yes, women's shirts generally have the buttons on the opposite side of men's shirts.

Why is this?

It's easier to dress someone else when the buttons are oriented towards your right hand. Back when women didn't dress themselves, they had servants to do it (or daughters, if they weren't rich). Shirts just kinda carried over the tradition.

(Although I'm lost on the remote comment...now I have to go look at my wife's iPod clip)

iHP-120

[Querty]

I just got my iRiver iHP-120 last week, and I'm extremely impressed.

I'm very happy with Ogg Vorbis, and I wanted to buy the first good quality player that supported it. Well, iRiver, I must say you have outdone yourself. The iHP-120 is simply amazing:

• Great sound quality. This player is one of the best sounding out there; very low distortion, flat frequency response, high signal-to-noise ratio and a good amplifier for enough output volume to drive more demanding (large) headphones.
• Ogg Vorbis support
• Optical, and line in and outputs. External Mic in. Built in microphone
• Comes standard with clip-on microphone and Sennheiser earbuds.
• Did I mention Ogg Vorbis support? ;-)
• Great battery life, about 15hrs
• Upgradable firmware
• A standard external USB2.0 20Gb drive, no special software required
• OpenSource (3rd party) Linux version available of the software to create the indexed DB (not required)
• FM radio
• Remote control with backlit LCD display

I could go on and on, but I think you get the picture. Sorry, but the iPod doesn't even come close...

Re:anti-ogg zealotry

[Llywelyn]

>Your analogy is stupid. People share (legally) Word files a
>lot more often than they legally share music files. Unless
>you are somehow actively advocating the illegal sharing of
>music files, I don't see why popularity base has anything
>to do with your choice of music format.

The analogy is good, your understanding is flawed. People don't share music legally very often, but that's not particularly relevant.

Popularity has everything to do with why Apple would select mp3 over Ogg and AAC over Ogg (they are making it popular). It also has everything to do with why they should take WMA over Ogg, should they be forced to make that decision.

Without Ogg support in the iPod, I have no reason (whatsoever) to rip my files in Ogg format. I can rip them in 192 kbps AAC and get excellent quality and it will play on my iPod with no difficult and even work with the visualizer (which I never use, but hey, its there) in iTunes.

[quote]
Moore's law has just about caught up to portable players to the point where they can reasonably be expected to support additional file formats for almost no marginal cost. Any modern player should support all of the formats.
[/quote]

The problem isn't computation (which is what Moore's Law deals with--transistor counts) but with memory and hardware encodings. Upping the speed of the processor only helps so much with this kind of thing.

I do not consider lacking ogg to be a deficit--at all. Virtually my entire library is 192 kbps AAC (what I rip myself), 128 kbps AAC (what I buy from iTMS), or 256 kbps MP3 (VBR) (older rips I haven't gotten around to reripping yet). Therefore, when I look at portable players, I rank lacking ogg with lacking MPC, Blade, or WMA.

I think most consumers are in the exact same boat.

But iRiver plays OGG

[jbuilder]

Perhaps the iHP-120 from iRiver IS ugly...

But it plays Ogg and I'd buy it for that over an iPod any day.

iRiver & OGG

[chill]

Some of the iRiver players support OGG Vorbis. iRiver is trying ahrd to get support on most of their players -- since most have upgradable flash memory.

Check out this link for more info.

I don't *UNDERSTAND* you people!

[FredFnord]

I mean, this is PATHETIC. Try to keep up with me here.

I love the iPod. It's nice. But god, it's not the be-all and end-all. The article says 'if you're really concerned about battery life, then don't get the iPod.' IF this is the major factor for you, THEN this is a reason not to get the iPod! Get it?

I mean, it's like we've got this really nice four-door car, plenty of trunk space, really reliable, really pretty, good gas milage, good power, etc. And they wrote an article called 'Five reasons not to buy this vehicle'.

1) You need a car that gets 50 miles to the gallon
2) You haul furnature for a living
3) You need to drive through the outback 40 miles each way every day
4) You can't afford it
5) You were actually looking for a boat

Get OVER it, it's a perfectly valid article! There are people for whom that car ISN'T the best vehicle; there are people for whom the iPod isn't the best portable media device! And THEY SHOULDN'T BUY ONE. Maybe that's only 10% of customers, but believe it or not, THEY NEED REVIEWS TOO!

Goddamn. Makes me embarrassed to be an Apple enthusiast, with people around who can't understand stuff like this. I mean, MacUser ran an article 10 years or so ago called 'Top Ten Reasons Not To Buy A Mac'. You guys would have flayed and roasted them, instead of taking it as constructive criticism, and useful information.

Sad.

-fred

recording capability seriously useful

[PanamaCongress]

I almost didn't read this article when I saw it, but I was so glad I did. The article revealed that there were two devices that had stereo audio input and supported digital recording. I have been dreaming for this for more than a year. This is an extremely useful and powerful development that Apple really should not underestimate in their micro-managed effort to have the most elegant mp3 player design. It seems that there is a strong, ignornant force at Apple that does not understand the value of analog audio inputs. Repeatedly, Apple has removed analog inputs from both their desktop and laptop computers. Thankfully, the current machines have them -- but only from massive consumer requests (including a letter from myself). I already own the original revision iPod and I would jump in my car tomorrow and drive to an Apple store and buy a new one if it simply had a high-quality audio input.

How do you define 'few files'?

[2nd Post!]

I've an iPod. I define a 'few files' when I sync something on the order of magnitude of one to four CDs, which is about 60mb to 300mb. So I plug in my iPod, and 5 to 30 seconds later everything is done!

On a USB 1.1 interface that would become... 75 to 450 seconds later... or something like 1 to 7 minutes later...

Then lets say I want to back up my home directory once a week. All 300mb! Only a minute on the iPod (plus synching music, all at 16mb/s) vs 15 to 20 minutes on your Neuros...

So in the end, the question is 'What do you pay for usability?'

Neuros is huge, 3/4 of a pound, the size of a paperback novel, and slow.

The iPod is small, 1/3 of a pound, the size of a pack of cigs, and fast.

Plus if you leave them both in for 10 minutes (say you go to the bathroom or get a drink), the iPod will have charged by 10%, while the Neuros will have charged 2%... Effectively giving the iPod an additional hour of play!

Re:The Rest of the Truth

[dadman]

Unlike Windows, booting a Mac from the iPod or any Firewire device doesn't mean a Mac was crashed. A typical PC user's point of view, I can tell.

It is because I *can* have my whole environment carrying on the portable device and booting from it means I do not have to ask the client for the necessary applications, settings, and all that hazzles only to find out that an important component is not loaded that the whole demo has to be postponed or the deal blew.

$249 expensive? This is priceless, man!

Re:I Remember The Good Old Days...

[Trurl's Machine]

I understand you need to troll, sir, but I strongly disagree that it's not a good thing. The same cultural change happened to the automobile freaks about 80 years ago. In 1910's or 1920's a fan of the automobile was usually someohe who spends entire day in his garage, endlessly tweaking and troubleshooting his self-made machine. Since about 1930's an automobile fan is just a person who likes to drive, who frequently buys a new machine, who is usually knows what new models are to be announced next quarter etc. But it is no longer a person who enjoys spartan interiors and thinks that automatic A/C or heated seats are "feminine". On the contrary, he enjoys everything modern techonogy can offer to make his voyage even more comfortable.

The same thing happened to the computers. My wife is not a computer geek, but she uses the same equipment that I do (after all, I do the shopping ;-)). She appreciates the same things I do appreciate - ease-of-use, well-thought interface, robustness. The only difference is that I can always tell the build of the OS we both use and probably she does not even know the version or the proper name, because she just doesn't care.

To say that it's not a good thing is like to say that it's not a good thing that we don't have to start our cars using a manual handle because of the feminine invention of a key-activated electric starter.

Rebuttal

[kongjie]

A lot of this boils down to personal reasons, and not hard facts.

1. Battery life: I used to take 12-14 hour flights and the iPod battery was enough. Why? Because I didn't listen to music for 12 hours straight, dummy! I ate, watched movies, talked to the fellow next to me, slept, etc.

2. Jogging with hard drive based player is not cool: Erm, jogging with ANY music device isn't cool, it's STUPID. Excellent way to get run down. And if you're using a treadmill, I would suggest that the impact from the ground is less severe than asphalt. In any event, I have an original iPod and jogging on a treadmill has never hurt it. Now the darn thing is outdated, I want a NEW iPod, so maybe I wish the hard drive WOULD die to force me to buy a new one.

3. Yes, it is expensive. 4. It plays music. It's not a high quality recorder. Did anyone ever want to use their cassette for high quality recording of band sets? I, for one, don't need devices that do 6 things in a mediocre way. I like the iPod cause it does one thing VERY WELL. I didn't buy it for breakout, either, by the way.

5. Obviously, as a Mac user iTunes store is enough for me. It is lacking in selection but the other stores won't have the titles I want, either. For the time being, those eclectic bands and hard to find releases will still be CD purchases for me.

Five reasons not to read CNet

[peebeejay]

Five reasons why I stopped reading CNet.
Don't get me wrong, CNet is still my favorite PC cheerleader on the web. So, before you send me rants for putting down CNet, read my list, and realize that I used to love CNet a lot (OK, I lied).
1. Page download times are longer than my homepage. True, my homepage is about 600 bytes of html with pink type over a turquoise background saying, "look, Mom, I'm on the internet," but it loads two to three times as fast as any CNet page.
2. Cannot surf CNet while taking a shower. Although I cannot prove this, I believe that reading CNet articles while taking a shower can hurt your browser, and even your whole computer. Experts say this is impossible, but listen to me instead. If you want to read while in the shower, a plastic laminated copy of your local paper would be a far better choice.
3. CNet is expensive. I spend over $40 a month on my internet connection, and I wonder why. I could go see five movies, drink over ten lattes, or hang out at the cigar store reading foreign magazines until they chase me out of there - for less money than it takes to connect me to CNet.
4. I want porn from CNet. I heard there's lots of porn on the internet, but none of it is available on CNet. Clearly CNet is not your best choice for porn. There are millions of other sites that are only too happy to exchange porn for your credit card numbers.
5. I want choice in my computer industry news sources. When I read CNet, by defiinition, I am not reading hundreds of other high quality news sources. But I want those news sources. The only way I can do this, I found, is to stop reading CNet, and go to one of the other sites. What a shame!
Of course, if you don't care about load times, aren't fond of showering, have $40/month to blow, don't like porn, and don't want to read something else at the same time, CNet is the way to go. While not ideal for most humans, it's hands down the best Dell-sponsored shill you can read.