Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

iRiver Preps Linux-based Media Player

Posted by michael on from the holds-thousands-of-baby-pictures dept.

Mr_Silver writes "Infosync is reporting that iRiver is soon to release the Linux based PMP-120 media player which through its colour screen can support MP3, ASF, Ogg Vorbis, JPEG, BMP, AVI, MP4, DivX 3.x, 4.x, 5.x, XviD, MPEG4 SP, Advanced SP and MPEG1. Technically very cool (even more so if it is hackable), but really really ugly. iRiver really should learn how to design nice looking hardware from the experts."

12 of 353 comments (clear)

  1. Enough already! by jargoone · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm so fucking sick and tired of people saying that things are ugly compared to the iPod. Yes, the iPod looks pretty decent, but who cares? I don't look, I listen! If you want to talk about size and ease-of-use, those are factors, but so are features and price. Not everyone needs a "good looking" mp3 player to validate themselves.

    Not to mention the fact that this unit isn't even ugly. I think it looks pretty damn nice, and probably will cost about as much as an iPod with FAR fewer features.

    1. Re:Enough already! by wooby · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Absolutely dead on. Function is beauty when it comes to something that feature filled. The only problem I can see with the unit, that is related to aesthetics, is the usability factor. I can't tell from the pictures how intuitive its interface will be. Even slight interface problems can really be annoying with devices that have few human inputs.

    2. Re:Enough already! by Jugalator · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I actually don't like Apple's designs, but it seems like people like me are in minority... :-P

      Sure, I found Apple's anonymous white boxes being cool for to their innovative minimalism but now I'm so fed up with this design in everything Apple makes.

      Same goes for Aqua btw. It's about as exciting as Windows XP's Luna is to me now. Of course not as candy-like and colorful, but still just as overexposed. Still just as boring and dull. Get rid of the fucking jelly buttons already! Oh well, I guess I just like new things every now and then and Apple don't. Probably to preserve their brand...

      I personally think that iRiver thing is perfectly fine for use amongst people without getting ashamed of it. And then the visual requirements are satisfied for me, and I proceed to look at the features. *gasp*

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  2. Ugly? you're wrong! by Quebec · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You find the iRiver ugly???
    I'm sorry not to agree with you, cheap plastic design "A La Apple" is definitivly not the norm in my book, actually the iRiver looks nicer than anything that was made by Apple. (Did my french head got the right "than" this time?).

    P.S.: can't wait to be able to buy one myself!

  3. I don't think it looks all that bad. by scootr1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm more concerned about the functionality and ease of use of it than the form.

  4. I second that by teko_teko · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think iRiver design is pretty slick, and I'd prefer to use that over something that's already too mainstream or too widely used.

    It's almost the same case as phpBB, I don't like to use it because almost every phpBB forums out there uses the same look and colors (the subsilver), and I'm tired of it :P.

  5. Functionality Looks by LaserLyte · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ugh...looks like it's designed for two-handed use...like some sort of gameboy-clone. I guess that makes it more suitable as a movie player or image viewer than an MP3 player. However, it looks a lot better (IMO) than the plasticy-toy type style of the iPod

    Maybe iRiver could learn something about ergonomic design from Apple, but hey, at least it's got a replaceable battery. And it's sounds like going to be more "open" than an iPod. It's always nice to see "hackable" stuff (as the article writer noted), rather than consumer-orientated "appliances"

  6. iPod Appearance by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I find the white iPods ugly. White clashes with just about everything else I own.

  7. Not for me by Jahf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sorry, but I don't see a reason to carry around a portable video player unless I can see stuff from my TiVo and/or a DVD on it without having to take a few hours prep'ing/converting the files.

    I realize that is a long way off, I'm not expecting it tomorrow. I'm just trying to figure out the mass market applications for this other than to have a box that does a ton of things (that it often isn't used for) while listening to my music.

    Part of the reason I use a portable player (Neuros, not iPod) is to have a device that is small enough to be convenient (ok, the Neuros isn't as good an example of that as the iPod) -and- is fairly rugged. As in doesn't have a screen that I am worried about cracking or scratching.

    Now if it plugged in to a DVD reader of some sort, even if over a network share to my PC, and allowed me to rip content to it for travel ... HELL yes, I would go for it. But not the current generations of machines.

    --
    It is more productive to voice thoughtful opinions (reply) than to judge (moderate) others.
  8. michael, I just gotta emphasise this. by James+A.+S.+Joyce · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Linux-based" does not, I'm afraid, imply the use of open source software/firmware. I enjoy open source software as much as the next Slashdot user, but given the past track record of hardware media players, it's not likely to be "open" or "hackable", much as you and I would enjoy this. Nonetheless, this does sound like a really cool product. Now all we need is a software media player that handles all those formats and actually works without segfaulting a la mplayer.

    --
    GNAA

  9. Re:The last time i-River tried to do that... by manWorkSucks · · Score: 5, Insightful

    definitely apple's idea too. nothing like a jog/shuttle dial on VCR.

    --
    NERDS!!!!
  10. Re:Questions by orthogonal · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Any limitations on name length are (I suspect) a "feature" of the ID3 spec rather than iRiver's fault, but I have no evidence for that - as I say, I haven't installed the index yet.

    I actually did a very small bit of coding on the Rockbox open source Archos firmware replacement, and as it happens, it was on the ID3 tags, so I know a little about this.

    ID3 version 1 is limited to thirty (30) characters per tag field (Artists, Album, etc.), but since the iRiver is limited to -- what is it -- 56 characters, this doesn't seem to be the same limit. ID3 v1, also, I think specifies a total size of 120 characters or something, so why not just set aside the 120 needed?

    ID3 version 2 tag filed length isn't limited.

    (Although Rockbox last I worked on it, was limited to ~300 characters (300 less null terminators) over all tags. I was careful to make sure that reading more than 300 characters was handled by (silently) truncating -- Rockbox doesn't use any dynamic memory allocation, so static structures and fixed sized were all I had.).

    Incidentally, MS Windows users looking for a really good and full-featured tagging program (with automatic abbreviation if you want it, various other forms of smart tagging, and regular expressions for converting tags), should look no farther than the free and open source mp3bookhelper.

    --
    Opinions on the Twiddler2 hand-held keyboard?