Virgin's New iPod Rival

design... by selderrr · 2004-10-13 00:15 · Score: 4, Insightful

I don't really like the design of the device... This shows why apple doesn't rush to market : they redesign and redesign and redesign until it's perfect. The Virgin player looks somewhat a quick & dirty design.

Their portable speakers on the other hand look nifty.

--
When will I end this grieving ? When will my future begin ?

Re:design... by mirko · 2004-10-13 00:25 · Score: 4, Funny

While searching Google for iPod Killers, I found one that might succeed, though, it's elegant, light and support economy modus... Here it is...

--
Trolling using another account since 2005.
Re:design... by herrison · 2004-10-13 00:40 · Score: 1

Also it looks like the world's ugliest cell phone.

--
You know what I miss? Leeches.
Re:design... by Fredrik+Leijon · 2004-10-13 00:44 · Score: 0

indeed it's quite ugly
Re:design... by shepd · 2004-10-13 01:12 · Score: 2, Interesting

I disagree. Looks really nice. I like how they've outlined the buttons with what appears to be a ridge so that it's easy to use in poor light without having to light up the device.

From what I can see of the picture, it seems like the clear LCD protector covers most of the front of the unit. I like that, too.

The blue-grey on silver-beige two tone scheme sets it apart from all the copycat white-only products out there.

By choosing not to use an identical interface to the iPods, Virgin will attract users who find the iPod interface displeasing.

Basically, thank God it's not an iPod clone.

I wish I could load virgin's site for more pictures. :-S

--
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
Re:design... by Threni · 2004-10-13 01:15 · Score: 1

> Also it looks like the world's ugliest cell phone.

No, that (admittedly fiercely contested) crown goes to Nokia's N-Gage.
Re:design... by Lussarn · 2004-10-13 01:29 · Score: 2, Funny

Yeah, they redisigned until it looked like a white brick. Most of apples products these days looks like a white brick. What if I don't live in cloud city and need some other design?
Re:design... by cubicledrone · 2004-10-13 01:55 · Score: 1

Most of apples products these days looks like a white brick.

And then their stock price triples. Everybody wants to be Apple.

--
Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
Re:design... by macthulhu · 2004-10-13 02:02 · Score: 2, Interesting

I love all of my Apple products, but I always thought that the last few years worth of designs (iMac, G3, G4, iBook, & especially the iLamp) looked like set dressing from A Clockwork Orange... which in my book isn't a bad thing, just sort of odd. I'm not thrilled with the all white lineup... It starts looking shabby after all of the handling. This is particularly annoying in the case of the iPod and iBook...

--
Someday a real rain is gonna come...
Re:design... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 02:09 · Score: 0

You only need to worry when Steve Jobs starts to wear white suits with a black bowler hat and one false eyelash.
Re:design... by macthulhu · 2004-10-13 02:43 · Score: 4, Funny

Worry? I think I'd like to see Dvorak receive a beating to "Singin' In The Rain"... or how about Steve Ballmer getting one in the yarbles...

--
Someday a real rain is gonna come...
Re:design... by tbase · 2004-10-13 02:46 · Score: 2, Funny

I agree. But even Apple can't beat the design of this iPod killer

--

666-607: 6th floor apartment of the beast
Re:design... by johnrpenner · 2004-10-13 03:41 · Score: 1

Perfection is achieved not when there is nothing more to add,
but rather when there is nothing more to take away.
(Antoine de Saint-Exupery)

with each revision, the ipod seems to be moving closer to perfection.

the new iriver seems to have taken a step away...

which do you choose?

j
Re:design... by johnrpenner · 2004-10-13 03:57 · Score: 1

lol - that's funny -- from black products to white products;
stever jobs from black turtleneck to white suit -- god help us.
that would be scary indeed! methinks bill gates is the one
in the white suit with the false eyelash.
Re:design... by Nogami_Saeko · 2004-10-13 04:14 · Score: 1

Well, he already is an evangelist, so it probably wouldn't be all that much of a stretch to see Jobs in a white suit - PRAISE THE LORD (of spin)!!! ;P

N.

--
"Nothing strengthens authority so much as silence." - Charles de Gaulle
Re:design... by Blakey+Rat · 2004-10-13 04:40 · Score: 1

Hah. You know you've already lost if a huge tech news sites links to your product using the name of your main rival!

Seriously, though, who's in charge of the linking around here? Linking the word "iPod" to a device that is certainly NOT an iPod is going to screw up Google sooner or later.

--
Comment of the year
Re:design... by Kent+Recal · 2004-10-13 05:58 · Score: 1

Heck, I agree. Gimme a standalone MP3 player that looks like that!
Add a nice display, upgradable 2.5" hdd, wifi for streaming and a non-IR-remote and they'll sell like paris hilton.
Re:design... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 06:01 · Score: 0

Looks more elegant than an iPod mini to me. Your just pulling ideas out of your ass.
Re:design... by meme_police · 2004-10-13 06:14 · Score: 1

I agree with white not being the greatest color. I'm thinking about painting my iPod because, damn, the rest of the design is simply perfect. I'm just stunned out how horrible all these other HD players look.

--
The meme police, They live inside of my head
Re:design... by Black.Shuck · 2004-10-13 06:22 · Score: 2, Informative

I disagree to some extent. I received an iRiver H340 yesterday. While I won't get much initial use out of the following features it is good to know they are integrated and I won't need to purchase a seperate device to get them later: FM tuner with recording, dictaphone, image and text-viewer, and support for connecting to cameras and other devices through USB.

The other features I couldn't be without: Playlists, multiple audio-formats (with upgradable firmware which could support more in future, and even video), the awesome equaliser that includes WOW, SRS and TruBass, 16 hours of battery-life, 40GB of disk-space with no restriction on what you can load on it (essentially a portable HDD), and a verbose but simple-to-use tag-browser.

And lets not forget, the interface is damn sexy, and usable with it.
Re:design... by Ath · 2004-10-13 06:56 · Score: 1

Oh my gawd! They killed Kenny! Those bastards!
Re:design... by bjohnson · 2004-10-13 07:46 · Score: 1

DAMN! DON'T do that while I'm eating lunch! Now there's blueberry pie all over the monitor...
Re:design... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 08:58 · Score: 0

Interesting moderation results in this story..

Anyone who does not like it and references the iPod is better gets +5 insightful.

Anyone who does like the unit and references the iPod gets no moderation or maybe a +1.

Seems to me, these comments should be moderated exactly the same but it appears zealotry might be involved here or people are modding comment based on agreement, not content.

"I like the iPod design better" is far from insightful.
Re:design... by mattkinabrewmindspri · 2004-10-13 10:58 · Score: 1

That would definitely kill your iPod.

--
Albuquerque PC
Re:design... by Demolition · 2004-10-13 11:17 · Score: 1

I agree with white not being the greatest color. I'm thinking about painting my iPod because, damn, the rest of the design is simply perfect. I'm just stunned out how horrible all these other HD players look.

Like you, I'm not a fan of the appearance of most HD players on the market (including the Virgin player). It seems to me that companies are trying to hard to create crazy designs in the hope that they'll catch people's attention. Frankly, I can do without the weird styling and settle for the pure functionality (and minimalist-looking whiteness) of the iPod.

By the way, if you want to change the look of your iPod, perhaps something like a PodSkinz would work. A friend has the "pink fur" skinz on her 3rd-gen iPod. At first, it was rather jarring, but it grows on you after a while.

D.
Re:design... by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · 2004-10-13 15:23 · Score: 1

By choosing not to use an identical interface to the iPods, Virgin will attract users who find the iPod interface displeasing.
And that would be like... maybe... three slashdot nerds?
Besides, it looks like an iPod clone to me. It just has it's buttons re-arranged slightly. I think it's safe to say that the iPod still has much better navigation. Virgin aren't really into creating a high quality device like Apple are, they just want any old thing to place their brand name on.
Re:design... by sandwiches · 2004-10-13 16:06 · Score: 1

I like their speakers, too, but I, particularly, like their subtle reference to Spinal Tap.
"It goes to 11" ;)
Re:design... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 18:51 · Score: 0

I like your mom better. It's just because, well, she's better!
Re:design... by shepd · 2004-10-14 05:59 · Score: 1

>And that would be like... maybe... three slashdot nerds?

Contrary to slashdot belief, not everyone thinks that everything Apple makes is well designed for them.

For a primary example, let's look at Apple input devices. Note that most major mouse manufacturers almost have a line of trackballs. Note the lack of trackballs made by Apple. Note that most major mouse manufacturers rarely make a single button mouse. Note that mice included with Apple computers (made by Apple) are only single button.

>Virgin aren't really into creating a high quality device like Apple are

*cough* iPod high quality? *cough*

iPods have/get:

- Easily scratched and quickly uglified
- Sealed battery packs that often die within 1 - 2 years

And let's look at the tiBook, another top of the line "quality" Apple product:

- Broken hinges in no time
- Scratched amazingly fast

Apple hardware isn't particularly *worse* than most any other company's, however, it's not particularly better than most any other company's. It has it's faults, and isn't exactly "high quality", but "consumer quality".

"High quality" would be something like this, which can be used by a military officer during war and still survive. I seriously doubt an iPod could survive a war.

>they just want any old thing to place their brand name on.

That's funny, I thought that was what Apple was about. So many OEM products with Apple logos, so little time to classify them all...

--
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
Re:design... by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · 2004-10-14 15:49 · Score: 1

For a primary example, let's look at Apple input devices. Note that most major mouse manufacturers almost have a line of trackballs.
Apple have done research and have found that one mouse button works well for their OS. People who are used to 2, or prefer trackballs can easly buy one of the many non-Apple products that will work fine with Macs
As for the rest of those points. Never said Apple was perfect, or produced the highEST quality products. But compared to most other companies, they do.
As for that tough book. You seem to be confusing quality with strengh. Apples products are fine for what the majority use them for.
Have you ever seen a PowerMac? Liquid cooling, seperately designed cooling zones which are monitored and cooled by many, low-speed fans that are controlled to spin only as fast as they have to, to reduce the noise. Please show me a high-end desktop PC from another big brand which also does this.
And no. Apple don't want just anything to place their logo on. They are, always have been, and always will be a computer company, and any projects that diverge from that are only their because they are closly realated to or benifit their core business of selling computers. This is completly the opposite of Virgin, who are in the bussiniess of getting into as many industries as possible. They may be good at what they do, but they are a completly different type of company to Apple.
Re:design... by shepd · 2004-10-14 18:19 · Score: 1

>People who are used to 2, or prefer trackballs can easly buy one of the many non-Apple products that will work fine with Macs

Yes, but it's not made by Apple. People that prefer 2 are left dissapointed that Apple makes poor hardware for them (_not_ "used" to 2, but genuinely prefer 2+ button mice, for example, X users [odd that Apple wouldn't make a multibutton mouse when they are basing their OS on what once was the OS of choice to run X])

>Liquid cooling

Not so good of a design, IMHO. If the liquid coolant cooling device fails, you melt parts down really fast without an instant shutdown (Well, this depends on how hot the CPU and other parts run. In the case of a PC, this can be true). A more passive solution, even if it uses a fan as an active component will leave the computer opportunity for a controlled shutdown and could avoid starting fires (!).

>Please show me a high-end desktop PC from another big brand which also does this.

Okay!

>This is completly the opposite of Virgin, who are in the bussiniess of getting into as many industries as possible

Nothing wrong with that. Big thinking has turned many smaller companies (and, at one time, Virgin didn't even register in my mind as a company I knew of until I managed to pick up a geography title by time back in the early 90's) into successful larger companies. And, of all larger companies, I don't see a lot of particularly bad mojo coming from Virgin.

I'm not suggesting Apple hardware if of low quality, but it isn't necessarialy high quality either. The perceived quality level of it is really going to depend on if it fits your needs or not. I find it usually doesn't.

Quality is just a qualitative factor, and, IMHO, top notch utility and ability to withstand abuse make a quality product. I usually don't care how fast something is, I just want what I buy to last not matter how much it is abused.

For others, a well rated artsy design and exciting new featres are #1. That's fine too. But both sides need to recognize that people on either side of the water have valid reasons to say Apple products in general aren't "quality" or are.

--
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
Re:design... by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · 2004-10-14 19:16 · Score: 1

Not so good of a design, IMHO. If the liquid coolant cooling device fails, you melt parts down really fast without an instant shutdown (Well, this depends on how hot the CPU and other parts run.
You've got to be kidding me. What if the system fails?! What if an ordinary fans fails? Do you have any evidence that the the cooling system in the PowerMacs are prone to failure?
I suspect that if Apple could have designed a practical passive cooling system, then they would have, as they have been a fan (excuse the pun) of this in the past.
Also. Alienware don't really count as a big brand.
I agree with some of your later points.
Re:design... by shepd · 2004-10-14 20:34 · Score: 1

>What if an ordinary fans fails? Do you have any evidence that the the cooling system in the PowerMacs are prone to failure?

They don't have to be prone to failure, they just have to be mechanical, and that means they *can* fail. I doubt it happens often, or even as much as "rarely", but I don't like my odds with a liquid cooling system.

The simple answer to why it is better to have at least part of the cooling passive rather than have it all active is available here. The thermal conductivity of that heatsink missing its fan is MUCH better than the thermal conductivity of water. That means the heatsink without the man will still be able to do some cooling work. The water, when not pumped, has a thermal conductivity 393 times lower.

To top it all off, the specific heat capacity of water is EXTREMELY high, meaning it takes a LOT of CPU heat before it is transferred to the water, and that once that heat in the water, it'll take a very long time before it is dissipated to the air.

Considering how quickly my athlon CPU heats itself up if I stop the fan and watch the BIOS temperature indicator, I would bet dollars to donuts that a liquid cooling pump failure would mean near instant death for it.

Now, of course, the liquid cooling systems don't use water, they add in antifreeze, but that doesn't affect the thermal conductivity much, it just stops it from freezing and boiling.

Anyhow, I find that all too dangerous a solution for me to consider it an alternative for my undermaintained computers. I would especially not consider it for expensive hardware unless it were something I rigorously maintained. For a home user, it's expected the machine will receive almost no maintenance. In my opinion, using liquid cooling for a home computer is a defective design.

>I suspect that if Apple could have designed a practical passive cooling system, then they would have, as they have been a fan (excuse the pun) of this in the past.

Well, yes and no. The one machine that comes to my mind are some older Apples that used convective cooling. It still wasn't passive, and failure of the monitor (or a full powersave, if it were possible [hopefully that was disabled]) I assume could lead to overheat. At least it wouldn't all be wrecked within minutes, though. :-D

>Also. Alienware don't really count as a big brand.

Well, in the scope of home computers... Apple isn't exactly a big player, either... Not trying to slam on them, but I think I'd be safe saying I have a 4 in 1 chance of a random computer user having an HP as compared to having an Apple.

--
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC

support for open standards such as WMA... by PoprocksCk · 2004-10-13 00:15 · Score: 5, Funny

In other news, Microsoft announced today that all of their intellectual property will, from now on, be fully licensed under the GPL.

Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by Amiga+Lover · 2004-10-13 00:22 · Score: 5, Funny

It's funny how used to saying that going the windows way is the way of 'choice' and apple is some kind of dead man's zone people are.

"Hi! Use WMA! it gives you CHOICE over which online stores you use!"

yes, you can use the online stores that have 2% of the market, 3% of the market, and 7% of the market, but you do miss out on the choice of using the biggest & best...
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by phrostypoison · 2004-10-13 00:29 · Score: 1

Sharing it in the so-called "real world" will be hard too. You can't pronounce WMA as easy as MP3 or AAC, can you?
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by peragrin · 2004-10-13 00:38 · Score: 1

Um you can't share WMA's unless you specifaclly tell it to turn off the DRM.

You can't share iTunes either.

RIAA failed Kindergarten.

--
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by blowdart · 2004-10-13 00:46 · Score: 5, Insightful

yes, you can use the online stores that have 2% of the market, 3% of the market, and 7% of the market
But does the end user care, as long as the music they want is available for purchase? Doubtful. With all the major labels, and a lot of the minors on all the stores most people will use the store that works for their device and not worry about anything else. It's when you try to track down a hard to find piece of music the problems arise. If you're a Beatles fan you're right out of luck.
Of course there's other "choice" available with WMA, you can choose a device from another vendor, you're no longer locked into Apple as controller of the format, seller of the music and only "manufacturer" of the portable device that plays it.
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by blowdart · 2004-10-13 00:49 · Score: 1

WMP 9 and WMP 10 no longer default to ripping with DRM enabled, so that hasn't been true for 1.5 years.
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by gfxguy · 2004-10-13 00:55 · Score: 4, Informative

Of course, the CNET article doesn't actually say that... and also mentions mp3 compatibility... so it was just a stupid post, really.

The Virgin site seems to be slashdotted at the moment, so I'll see what their marketing says about it, but I'm doubting they'll use open and WMA together...

--
Stupid sexy Flanders.
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by gfxguy · 2004-10-13 01:00 · Score: 1

Page is finally coming up without pictures...

Sounds pretty decent... built in radio, dual headphone jacks...

and despite what's been said, while it may not be as simple or elegant as the iPod, I don't think it's much uglier.

I still prefer solid state, though... I guess if I travelled a lot, but since I can rotate songs anytime I want, at home or work, I like the (what I presume to be) longevity of solid state.

--
Stupid sexy Flanders.
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by phrostypoison · 2004-10-13 01:06 · Score: 1

In one way, 'open' means 'not owned by microsoft'.
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by Mr_Silver · 2004-10-13 01:29 · Score: 4, Insightful

"Hi! Use WMA! it gives you CHOICE over which online stores you use!"
I appreciate that the parent poster was joking but it is worth pointing out that if the Apple store starts to jack up the prices, there is nowhere else you can legimately purchase the AAC files that they sell.
On the other hand, if a WMA shop does the same, you simply shift to another one.
Finally, everyone likes to blame Microsoft for the DRM in WMA. However they completely forget that Microsoft just provided the capability - it is up to the content providers on whether or not they use it.

--
Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 01:32 · Score: 0

Yes, it's similar to the way linux gives you CHOICE over what applications you run. The ones that suck and the ones that don't.
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 01:41 · Score: 1, Funny

It's funny how used to saying that going the windows way is the way of 'choice' and apple is some kind of dead man's zone people are.

I don't even think parse this, Yoda could.

"That was the most ridiculous, pointless answer I have ever [seen]. At no point did you have any coherent ideas. Everyone here is now dumber, having [seen] that. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 01:52 · Score: 0

Wow MP3... that means it is just like... well, EVERY OTHER FREAKIN PLAYER OUT THERE!!!!
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 02:15 · Score: 0

yeah..

since when is WMA an open standard?

what did I miss here?
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by thparker · 2004-10-13 02:24 · Score: 1

"yes, you can use the online stores that have 2% of the market, 3% of the market, and 7% of the market"
But does the end user care, as long as the music they want is available for purchase?
Um, yes? That's what market share shows -- what consumers care about. It's the end result of the sum of end users' choices. (It does not, of course, address WHY users made those choices -- product quality, slick marketing, lack of options, etc.)
I think users may also care that this thing is ugly as sin. It looks like the cheap COBY brand audio equipment they sell in airport newsstands.
Best,
tom
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by pknoll · 2004-10-13 02:27 · Score: 1

if the Apple store starts to jack up the prices, there is nowhere else you can legimately purchase the AAC files that they sell.
Magnatune sells AAC files. It is true that they carry only independent artists, so no Britney or Garth for you there, but I suspect this will change. If not at Magnatune, elsewhere.
Even if it doesn't, though, that isn't the only format the iPod supports.
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by imuffin · 2004-10-13 02:28 · Score: 1

Interestingly, the article doesn't have that quote at all. But if you read the comments below the article, it looks like it might have at some point, and then have been changed. In fact, if you search for the work "open" on the page, the first hit it is a reader comment saying that WMA is not an open standard.
And here. And here.
Could the author have realized how insipid of a quote that was and erased it from the story?
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by blowdart · 2004-10-13 02:39 · Score: 1

OK, but is the iTunes market share not driven by the ownership of an iPod? That's what I'm questioning. It's all very well to say iTunes is the "biggest and best", but I doubt that matters to people as long as a store that supports their device contains 95% of the music they want.
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by Refrag · 2004-10-13 02:46 · Score: 2

You can always buy CDs if Apple jacks the prices -- which they have no motivation to do.

--
I have a website. It's about Macs.
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by waynelorentz · 2004-10-13 02:52 · Score: 1

Page is finally coming up without pictures...and despite what's been said, while it may not be as simple or elegant as the iPod, I don't think it's much uglier.

You just said there were no pictures. So.... you're using your psychic abilities to decide if this gadget isn't uglier than an iPod?

--
World's tallest building rises in the desert
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by gfxguy · 2004-10-13 02:57 · Score: 1

If you read the first of my posts (the GP of yours), then my followup (the parent of yours), you'd see that I actually read the CNET article... wonder of wonders... and IT had a picture. It was Virgin's site that was loading slow...

--
Stupid sexy Flanders.
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by gfxguy · 2004-10-13 03:02 · Score: 1

You are correct... the author (or maybe an editor) claims to have fixed the "mistake" in the article.

--
Stupid sexy Flanders.
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by utexaspunk · 2004-10-13 03:07 · Score: 1

sorta like

yes, you can use the OS that has .5% of the market, .25% of the market, or .01% of the market, but you do miss out on the choice of using the biggest & best...
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by thparker · 2004-10-13 03:11 · Score: 5, Insightful

OK, but is the iTunes market share not driven by the ownership of an iPod? That's what I'm questioning.
It's probably not as clearly a factor as some would assume. The addition of iTunes for Windows boosted iPod sales, so a strong argument exists that the iTunes Music Store drives iPod market share more than the iPod drives iTMS market share. (I, personally, started using iTunes because I liked the interface, decided to buy a couple songs off the iTMS because it was integrated with iTunes, and only later decided to buy an iPod because it worked well with iTunes.)
But like I said, a market share number alone doesn't answer WHY. It's entirely possible that a growing number of non-iTMS-compatible devices will shift the market share breakdown. However, if most people buy digital audio players to rip and carry their own music, the music store is almost irrelevant. Most music is still sold on CD, and in that respect iTunes is compatible with almost every player out there.
tom
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by imuffin · 2004-10-13 03:15 · Score: 1

Oh, I see that now:
Posted by: Evan Hansen CNET
Posted on: October 12, 2004, 2:54 PM PDT
Story: Virgin takes on iPod

Thanks for pointing this out. We've fixed the mistake in the story. Microsoft's WMA, like MP3 and Apple Computer's FairPlay DRM, is a proprietary format. Ogg Vorbis is a rare example of an open audio standard, but as others have pointed out, few products support it.
So that still leaves one question unanswered: They say they "fixed the mistake in the story." Does that mean they removed the quote by Virgin, or does that mean that Virgin never said that in the first place?
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by deggy · 2004-10-13 03:32 · Score: 1

You see, 'Open source' and 'Open standards' are now becoming fashionable, which means they become buzzwords, which means marketeers and journalists will try to place them in their literature as often as possible to make themselves seem 'clued in'. And since when to people in Marketing actually care about correct application of terminology as opposed to slick presentation (see just about every shampoo advert!).

All of this plays into Microsoft and the likes hands, because they would like to use the term 'open' in the same way they use the term 'innovate' - to mean what they would like it to mean rather than what it actually means.
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by mblase · 2004-10-13 03:42 · Score: 1

But does the end user care, as long as the music they want is available for purchase?

If they've already bought an MP3 player, or want to buy one but can't afford an iPod--then yes, yes they do.

Personally, I love iPods and I love the iTMS (which I've used, even without owning an iPod). But I can certainly understand the perspective of someone who can afford a WMA-compatible player but not a $300+ iPod. It sucks, really, that you have to pay an additional $50-$100, or more, for an Apple iPod just so you can carry the music that only iTMS sells. Yes, you can burn those iTMS files down to a CD, then re-rip them to MP3 if you want to--but that's not so convenient, is it?
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by Drakonian · 2004-10-13 03:53 · Score: 1

But does the end user care, as long as the music they want is available for purchase? Doubtful.
It seems to me that it's like asking "Does the end user care what MP3 player they buy as long as it can play music?". Yes, absolutely. Apple's solution is the best right now - both the MP3 player and the music store.

--
Random is the New Order.
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by blowdart · 2004-10-13 03:55 · Score: 1

"It sucks, really, that you have to pay an additional $50-$100, or more, for an Apple iPod just so you can carry the music that only iTMS sells"
But how much of a gap is there in the selection that iTunes offers against Walmart, Napster (the legal one - stop that) and the MSN Music store offers? Is there really "music that only iTMS sells"?
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 06:06 · Score: 0

At least anyone can license WMA. Apple refuses to license fairplay.
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by afree87 · 2004-10-13 06:09 · Score: 1

Usually, marketing reps don't actually say the things attributed to them; instead, the story authors write a quote for them and ask them to approve it.
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by Amiga+Lover · 2004-10-13 10:25 · Score: 1

> I don't even think parse this, Yoda could. Ugh, that's what a night of too much studying does.
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by One+Blue+Ninja · 2004-10-13 11:41 · Score: 1

/me climbs back up on chair after falling off laughing...
Yes, I read this and for a moment had a flashback, and thought Satire Wire was back up again...
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 14:08 · Score: 0

U2 - Vertigo
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 19:04 · Score: 0

biggest, not best. Noone can claim the best software is out for windows.
Re:support for open standards such as WMA... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 19:07 · Score: 0

yes, all the best viruses and spyware. This idiot is infected with the windows virus. poor bastard.

Whatever by ibentmywookie · 2004-10-13 00:15 · Score: 3, Insightful

Every man and his dog is making an "iPod killer" these days. But none of em seem to get it.

I am yet to see a better combination than iPod + iTunes for managing music. And the interface on the ipod is really nice and easy to use. I haven't bought one because they're a bit pricey and don't play ogg :)

--
-- The doctor said I wouldn't get so many nose bleeds if I just kept my finger out of there!

Re:Whatever by dagur · 2004-10-13 00:20 · Score: 1

and don't play ogg :) yes they do! But only at 80% realtime thou. linux for ipod
Re:Whatever by mirko · 2004-10-13 00:22 · Score: 1

Especially when Apple allowed companies such as Belkin to bring their own accessories to enhance the iPod experience.
I just checked my IPod, and despite around 19200 killers, it's still, alive, well, and it sounds damn good :)

--
Trolling using another account since 2005.
Re:Whatever by Rytr23 · 2004-10-13 00:29 · Score: 1

Lucky for Apple and manufacturers of quite a few other music devices that you and the 4 others using OGG aren;t the only ones looking for this type of device.. Seriously, I know a lot of people playing music on thier pcs/portable devices and not a one uses OGG, whats out there is more than adequate for what 99.997 percent of the market.

--
So many injustices..so little time..
Re:Whatever by excessive · 2004-10-13 00:30 · Score: 2, Insightful

Theres the fact its a nicer looking product but theres another set of "iPod killers" that I think miss the point entirely. A lot of manufacturers seem to think that adding a screen and video playback somehow makes their product an "iPod killer". You generally only want video playback when you're moving but aren't controlling the movement, (e.g. trains, planes, passengers in a car...) anywhere else, you'd use a DVD player. Demonstrations, possibly, I suppose. DVD players are handier anyway - you'd have to get the video into the video ones anyway.
The iPods get used for things CD players used to get used for - but they're smaller, handier, lighter, hold more music, are easier to use, less likely to jump... People can use them at the gym, when out running or cycling.
Anyway, I suppose I'm the sort of person that likes a mobile phone to be a mobile phone and not a PDA, a games console and dozens of other things, so perhaps I'm missing the point.
Re:Whatever by cfuse · 2004-10-13 00:42 · Score: 1, Troll

Every man and his dog is making an "iPod killer" these days.
I thought the iPod killer was the iPod mini?
Re:Whatever by Proteus · 2004-10-13 00:50 · Score: 4, Insightful

I know a lot of people playing music on thier pcs/portable devices and not a one uses OGG
That's a bit of chicken-and-egg. I know lots of portable-music people who rip everything to MP3 because their favorite player has no OGG support. The industry says OGG won't be supported on portables until OGG is in wider use -- but OGG won't be in wider use until portables support it. It's a challenge.

Thing is, OGG is at least as good as any other psycho-acoustic encoding system -- even if the file sizes are slightly larger (with 20G in your pocket, who cares anyhow?). But, the majority of portable users will use whatever choices their portable gives them -- so if the iPod added OGG support and had iTunes enabled to rip to OGG by default, people would use it. As long as OGG lacks DRM, though, there is no compelling reason to add its support.

Of course, if you really want your OGG files, but have an MP3-based portable, you could always transcode... the loss from a Quality-10 OGG to a 192kbps MP3 isn't terribly significant -- and those that could tell probably don't use anything less than FLAC anyhow -- but the idea of transcoding is lost on the average consumer.

--
We may not imagine how our lives could be more frustrating and complex—but Congress can. – Cullen Hightower
Re:Whatever by blowdart · 2004-10-13 00:51 · Score: 1

A lot of manufacturers seem to think that adding a screen and video playback somehow makes their product an "iPod killer".
That may be true, but they'd never say it. It's lazy journalists that call anything that plays digital audio an "iPod killer" that have made the label meaningless.
Re:Whatever by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 01:00 · Score: 0

If you even have a dick you can get out your tweezers and put it back in your pants. Fucking moron.
Your post is an example of why brother and sister should not marry and have children. Dirtbag.
Re:Whatever by benzapp · 2004-10-13 01:13 · Score: 2, Insightful

Music companies are not going to even consider Ogg as a viable music format until it is completely integrated into Windows Media Player, and a plug-in is easily downloadable from a major website.

Until that time, it is going to be a niche format.

Further, the continued lack of a fully featured WMP plug-in just shows the vorbis people aren't too considered with wide market appeal.

--
I don't read or respond to AC posts
Re:Whatever by pHatidic · 2004-10-13 01:43 · Score: 1

Every man and his dog is making an "iPod killer" these days. But none of em seem to get it.
But not every "iPod killer" comes with a chance at winning a free trip into space. If Virgin Entertainment partnered up with Virgin Galactic, maybe it could take a chunk out of iPod if it was promoted this way. In general I do like the look, it is even amusing how much the page selling it looks and feels like an Apple.com page in terms of the quippy headlines, funny pics, and informative paragraph of text.
Re:Whatever by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 02:10 · Score: 0

Of course, if you really want your OGG files, but have an MP3-based portable, you could always transcode... the loss from a Quality-10 OGG to a 192kbps MP3 isn't terribly significant -- and those that could tell probably don't use anything less than FLAC anyhow -- but the idea of transcoding is lost on the average consumer.
I agree. Now that hard disks are so cheap, I encode to FLAC. I don't have a portable device yet, because I don't need one nowadays, but on smaller machines I use Ogg, and yes I can hear some of the artifacts. Mind you, ogg and mp3 etc. are much better than analogue cassettes, which we had to put up with in the days when I needed a portable device.
Re:Whatever by Simon+Garlick · 2004-10-13 02:23 · Score: 1

Music companies regard MPEG-4 AAC as a viable music format, and I can't see Windows Media Player supporting it any time soon.

--

-----
PGP Key ID 0xCB8FF658
Re:Whatever by the_pooh_experience · 2004-10-13 02:34 · Score: 4, Funny

blockquoteth the postser:
"The industry says OGG won't be supported on portables until OGG is in wider use -- but OGG won't be in wider use until portables support it. It's a challenge."

Is this a good example of the old addage "Which came first, the chicken or the OGG?"
Re:Whatever by swillden · 2004-10-13 03:00 · Score: 1

Thing is, OGG is at least as good as any other psycho-acoustic encoding system -- even if the file sizes are slightly larger
What are you talking about? Ogg Vorbis files aren't "slightly larger". File size in all of the audio formats is determined by bit rate, plus a negligible amount of container overhead. 128kpbs Ogg Vorbis files are the same size as 128kbps MP3 files or 128kbps WMA files, or 128kbps AC3 files. The only difference is that at a given bitrate Vorbis audio sounds better than MP3 and maybe even a bit better than WMA or AC3.
Now, it's possible that the Oggs you've run across are larger than the MP3s you've run across, but that's just because people use use Ogg are also, typically, people who want higher audio quality and will typically encode at higher bitrates.
But it makes no sense to say that Ogg Vorbis files are "slightly larger".
Personally, I think that if the Vorbis folks wanted to really stand out from the crowd, they need to implement "bitrate peeling". Vorbis files can theoretically be converted from high bitrates to lower bitrates without re-encoding. So, you could store your music at 256kbps or 320kbps on your PC and convert them to, say 128kbps when you copy them onto your portable player. This "conversion" process would be basically instantaneous... the limiting factor will be I/O speed, since almost no computation is required.

--
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Re:Whatever by darkstream · 2004-10-13 03:27 · Score: 1

OGG seems to have heavier overhead than MP3. Maybe it's the fault of the plug-in for Quicktime, but OGG files take longer to start playing in iTunes on my Mac and they don't support crossfading. I find them a bit of a pain and usually delete them after listening to them once or twice. I guess that makes me a heather around these parts, but my Mummy always told me to be honest. ;)

--
Fun with Inkwell | www.coo
Re:Whatever by Refrag · 2004-10-13 03:28 · Score: 1

Don't you mean Itunes instead of WiMP? Itunes is the standard after-all.

--
I have a website. It's about Macs.
Re:Whatever by darkstream · 2004-10-13 03:38 · Score: 1

Or a heathen. I could wear a wig if you'd prefer "heather"... lol

--
Fun with Inkwell | www.coo
Re:Whatever by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 03:56 · Score: 0

>What are you talking about? Ogg Vorbis files aren't "slightly larger". File size in all of the audio formats is determined by bit rate, plus a negligible amount of container overhead.

Yep

>Now, it's possible that the Oggs you've run across are larger than the MP3s you've run across, but that's just because people use use Ogg are also, typically, people who want higher audio quality and will typically encode at higher bitrates.

Yep

My own personal experience is that oggs tend to have better frequency response, and less artifacts at a given bit rate.

Of course I am an amateur audio engineer (do cd's for my friends) and am a little picky about how people mangle my files. I always give out an ogg, and only an mp3 when they come back and complain they can't play it, after a short lecture on the benefits of ogg and aquiring a player that plays them.

I do the OSS programmer thing for a living, so even if the quality wasn't superior in every respect, if it was identical, I'd still push it over mp3 or any other format which is patented(yes mp3 is patented) format, whether or not it requires a royalty.

Very good post swillden!

l8,
AC
Re:Whatever by Aero+Leviathan · 2004-10-13 04:54 · Score: 1

Virgin always tries to act saucy like that, and they've been doing it for a while. They think it makes them hip or something I guess. I have a phone with Virgin Mobile and it drives me nuts every time I go to their website.

--
~ Aero
Re:Whatever by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 05:38 · Score: 0

The Iriver h series is a nice alternative to the ipod. They play ogg, sound better, and have recording capabilities .... nice ...the design is not quite so elegant but it is not bad either ... . pricing is about the same.
Re:Whatever by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 08:38 · Score: 0

You do not need any type of permission to make accessories for a product. I understand Apples resistance to anything not made by Apple so I can see why you thought it might be required.
Re:Whatever by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 19:12 · Score: 0

shut up swillden! get an account or piss off.
Re:Whatever by Proteus · 2004-10-14 01:55 · Score: 1

What are you talking about? Ogg Vorbis files aren't "slightly larger". File size in all of the audio formats is determined by bit rate, plus a negligible amount of container overhead. 128kpbs Ogg Vorbis files are the same size as 128kbps MP3 files or 128kbps WMA files, or 128kbps AC3 files. The only difference is that at a given bitrate Vorbis audio sounds better than MP3 and maybe even a bit better than WMA or AC3.
Heh. Not true. Granted, we are comparing slightly different things, here. But, an OGG file averaged at, say, 160kpbs is going to be slightly larger than an MP3 file at 160kpbs.

OGG isn't just a better encoder for the MPEG3 standard, it's a completely different algorithm. The size difference is negligible, as I pointed out, but it is still there.
Now, it's possible that the Oggs you've run across are larger than the MP3s you've run across, but that's just because people use use Ogg are also, typically, people who want higher audio quality and will typically encode at higher bitrates.
The OGGs I've "run across" are the 80GB of music I have ripped from my CDs onto my home library. I use my own software to downsample and/or transcode my high-bitrate OGG files for various targets. My statistics show that OGG files at comparable bitrates are slightly larger than MP3 files. This is based not only on transcoding, but also on my previous collection of high-bitrate MP3s, which I re-ripped to OGG after 1.0 was released. It's not a criticism -- OGG sounds better at comparable bitrates, so who cares if the file is a bit larger?

--
We may not imagine how our lives could be more frustrating and complex—but Congress can. – Cullen Hightower

the 50th challenger for the throne by TAGmclaren · 2004-10-13 00:16 · Score: 5, Insightful

except, really, it doesn't do anything better than the king. Branson of all people should know that if you don't differentiate, you won't beat the incumbent. Especially when the incumbent has a flock of rabid followers and is singularly considered the coolest tech gadget in the past ten years.

--
Iran has endorsed

Re:the 50th challenger for the throne by I+confirm+I'm+not+a · 2004-10-13 00:22 · Score: 4, Interesting

Branson of all people should know that if you don't differentiate, you won't beat the incumbent

Not trolling, but (with one obvious exception - Virgin Galactic) when has Branson innovated? Virgin Atlantic was just another airline, Virgin Cola just another cola, etc. There's probably something obvious I've missed but when I think of Virgin/Branson, I *don't* think innovation, I think discount prices.

(Still, with Virgin Galactic I'm prepared to forgive him...)

--
This is where the serious fun begins.
Re:the 50th challenger for the throne by D-Cypell · 2004-10-13 00:32 · Score: 4, Interesting

You may wish to research Branson's early business history. He began with a telephone order music service that was (at the time) very innovative.

It seems that the smart thing to do in business, is to come up with a innovative product, make enough money to get your head above the water and from that point just lock-step.
Re:the 50th challenger for the throne by I+confirm+I'm+not+a · 2004-10-13 00:51 · Score: 1

He began with a telephone order music service that was (at the time) very innovative.

I knew that he started in mail-order music; I didn't realise it was considered innovative. I presume mail-order music hadn't really been done before? (Disclaimer: before my time ;)

--
This is where the serious fun begins.
Re:the 50th challenger for the throne by Threni · 2004-10-13 01:10 · Score: 2, Insightful

> Branson of all people should know that if you don't differentiate, you won't
> beat the incumbent.

Branson sells stuff cheaper, and he's `beaten` the people he competes against, to the extent that he's successful, anyway.

The Japanese `beat` the UK in terms of cars and motorbikes without differentiating. They do new stuff now, but in the 70's - 90's they were doing a lot of copying of successful western designs.

> the incumbent has a flock of rabid followers

So did the Amiga. You make money by selling stuff - having a bunch of lame fan boys trying to justify the fact they they paid hand over fist for what is basically a jumped up, over-priced walkman means nothing. In a few years time the iPod will simply be remembered as one of the first HD based music playback devices - not the cheapest, largest or whatever.
Re:the 50th challenger for the throne by Gumph · 2004-10-13 01:55 · Score: 1

In a few years time the iPod will simply be remembered as one of the first HD based music playback devices - not the cheapest, largest or whatever.
Your Trolling, right? Anyhoo I'll rise to the bait. The ipod is now as synonymous with HD audio player as the Sony Walkman was with Mobile Cassette player. It has had a huge impact on today's audio market, as can be seen from all these {pale} imitations. People even right articles about it's impact on society, weird as that seems.

--
'By the pricking of my thumbs, something wicked this way comes'
Re:the 50th challenger for the throne by Threni · 2004-10-13 02:55 · Score: 1

> The ipod is now as synonymous

Now? I'm talking about the future.

> It has had a huge impact on today's audio market, as can be seen from all these
> {pale} imitations.

The iPod is just another device following on from the original Sony walkman, just like minidisk players, diskman, usb/flash memory sticks, mobile phones with radios/mp3 cards etc. It just uses HD rather than tape, optical disk, non-volatile ram etc. Conceptually it's no big deal.

> People even right articles about it's impact on society

Journalists have to write about something.
Re:the 50th challenger for the throne by kubrick · 2004-10-13 02:56 · Score: 1

(Still, with Virgin Galactic I'm prepared to forgive him...)

Wait until the ships are up before you do that. Until that point, it's just hype.

Still, I'm hoping it's part of the downward progression in price that will see me in space before I'm too old to make the trip...

--
deus does not exist but if he does
Re:the 50th challenger for the throne by Tokerat · 2004-10-13 07:00 · Score: 1

So did the Amiga. You make money by selling stuff - having a bunch of lame fan boys trying to justify the fact they they paid hand over fist for what is basically a jumped up, over-priced walkman means nothing. In a few years time the iPod will simply be remembered as one of the first HD based music playback devices - not the cheapest, largest or whatever.
I smell a troll. First off, Apple has way more supporters than a few "lame fan boys", I know people who DISPISE all of Apple's other products who are fans of the iPod, the kind of people who would beat you down for being a Mac user. Face it: It has caught on.

Funny too, how you used the term "Walkman" in describing the iPod...The Sony Walkman was the first popular portable cassette player, and "Walkman" has actually become synonymous with "portable cassette player", just like "Discman" for portable CD players, or "Kleenex" for facial tissue.

Besides, this newest "iPod Killer" from Virgin (of all places) looks like an overgrown Tamogatchi. If it doesn't LOOK well build, everyone will assume it isn't.

--
CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
Re:the 50th challenger for the throne by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-18 19:58 · Score: 0

Hey, he didnt say innovate, he said *differentiate*

They're not the same thing, in fact they're the opposite thing.

Differentiation is just marketing a product differently so that people think you are innovating.

Qua?? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 00:16 · Score: 5, Insightful

support for open standards such as WMA

Since when is WMA an open standard?

I've already got my iPod and I hope it doesn't get killed by this device. Can I take Virgin to court if they kill my iPod?

Come on, this "iPod killer" thing needs to stop until the device is actually rated and used by someone, and is actually better than the iPod. Also, a key point: it needs to actually sell more.

Re:Qua?? by Alan+Cox · 2004-10-13 00:21 · Score: 1

The irony is the next story down is about the iRiver products - and those _do_ support OGG !

Alan
Re:Qua?? by Tim+C · 2004-10-13 02:33 · Score: 1

I have an iRiver HP-120 and there's no way I'd ever swap it for an iPod, if only because of the remote control. The main unit sits on my belt in its case, so having a remote with an LCD display is just so uesful there's no way I could use a player that didn't have one.

--
It's official. Most of you are morons.
Re:Qua?? by the_2nd_coming · 2004-10-13 07:03 · Score: 2, Informative

actually, Windows Media 9 format is open in as much as MPEG formats are open. the DVD folks required MS to do so.

--

I am the Alpha and the Omega-3

But does it play... by ayn0r · 2004-10-13 00:16 · Score: 0

OGG?

Re:But does it play... by phrostypoison · 2004-10-13 00:34 · Score: 0

Vorbis!
Re:But does it play... by insomnyuk · 2004-10-13 00:46 · Score: 0

It better fucking play OGG, and CPF (Cute Pony Format), and I want FM RADIO AND BELLS AND WHISTLES AND AND AND

WMA? by darkseid · 2004-10-13 00:16 · Score: 5, Insightful

Since when is WMA considered an open standard? How about FLAC or OGG?

Re:WMA? by TAGmclaren · 2004-10-13 00:23 · Score: 2, Insightful

Since when is WMA considered an open standard?

It's not. For users, anyway.

Virgin is getting confused. They're telling us the reasons they selected it, as opposed to the reasons we would select it. WMA is definitely not a selling point, not to anyone who knows shit about technology.

--
Iran has endorsed
Re:WMA? by leonmergen · 2004-10-13 00:34 · Score: 1

... too bad that's only a very small portion of the people interrested in portable music players. They only see WMA as a format that has the same quality as MP3 at a smaller size... so this is definately a good selling point for Virgin.

--
- Leon Mergen
http://www.solatis.com
Re:WMA? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 01:04 · Score: 0

How about FLAC or OGG?

Ogg isn't an acronym, so don't capitalise it. And FLAC is Ogg.
Re:WMA? by gidds · 2004-10-13 02:06 · Score: 1

And FLAC is Ogg

Why go to the trouble of linking a page which contradicts you?
If I've understood correctly, Ogg wraps FLAC, just as it wraps Vorbis and other streams. And just as FairPlay wraps AAC, and QuickTime wraps all sorts of stuff.
Sure, FLAC can be encapsulated in an Ogg stream, but it has its own lightweight native format that the command-line FLAC tools use, and which exists quite happily without Ogg.

--
Ceterum censeo subscriptionem esse delendam.
Re:WMA? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 03:36 · Score: 0

FLAC is a codec in the Ogg multimedia framework. Saying "FLAC is Ogg" is like saying "SVG is XML". It doesn't mean that FLAC and Ogg are the same thing, it means that FLAC is a type of Ogg.

What they don't realize by panker · 2004-10-13 00:16 · Score: 5, Insightful

iPod is cool, but its seamless integration with iTunes is what makes it the thing to beat. These iPod killers seems to forget that.

--
move along, nothing to .sig here.

Re:What they don't realize by Winterblink · 2004-10-13 00:49 · Score: 1

Wouldn't seamless integration with everything be more preferable? I would think the successful iPod "killer" (can't we just say competer instead?) would support as many media types as users use, and integrate with all the services and software out there.

--
"I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
-Hoban Washburn
Re:What they don't realize by Natchswing · 2004-10-13 01:07 · Score: 0, Troll

Seamless? I have yet to get iTunes to even recognize my ipod. I've tried numerous times over the past year or so. However, third party applications can access it fine.
Re:What they don't realize by Threni · 2004-10-13 01:12 · Score: 1

Not really. Being able to play MP3s is the only important thing to me. I can't be bothered ripping my CDs again - once is enough, thanks. I doubt I'll ever use iTunes. I'm never going to pay for lossily compressed music.
Re:What they don't realize by jrockway · 2004-10-13 01:26 · Score: 1

You are the dumbest troll ever to post to slashdot. You can't get iTunes to work with your iPod? You must be a cretin.

--
My other car is first.
Re:What they don't realize by jrockway · 2004-10-13 01:33 · Score: 5, Insightful

I agree with you. All the posts above mine (in reply to yours) seem to think iTunes + iPod sucks, but they are very uneducated.

If I listen to an audiobook on my computer for a bit, then sync with my ipod, the ipod resumes where I left off. When I get back to my computer and sync, the bookmark (on the computer) is right where it was when I was listening to it on the iPod. Perfect integration.

If I change the per-song EQ setting in iTunes, it is reflected on the iPod.

The song count, last-played timestamp, etc. are all synchronized between iTunes and the iPod.

Soundcheck works on both iTunes and the iPod.

(need I mention the iTMS?)

All of these things make the iTunes + iPod combination perfect. Everything that the iPod does, iTunes does. Everything iTunes does, the iPod does. It even syncs with iCal and Address Book, too.

That is why the iPod has not been killed by some "iRiver" (how did they get away with that name!?) or Sony ATRAC3 player. Nobody else has paid attention the software, all they pay attention to is bullet-points (0.3 megapixel camera! yay! that's just what my music player needed!) and names like "iPod killer".

--
My other car is first.
Re:What they don't realize by Natchswing · 2004-10-13 01:41 · Score: 1

That's one possible explaination. There are, however, others.
Re:What they don't realize by b-baggins · 2004-10-13 01:44 · Score: 3, Insightful

This statement is getting really old. CDs are lossy. Analog is lossy. Even your ears are lossy (the cochlea cannot differentiate an infinite range of frequencies.)

The key to lossy compression is to make the lossiness below the threshold of detection.

--
You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
Re:What they don't realize by Natchswing · 2004-10-13 01:59 · Score: 1

However, since you're an expert, would you care to help? I plug in the iPod. The iPod says, "Do not Disconnect". Windows gives it a drive letter. I pull up iTunes and I have nothing that allows me to work with the iPod. iTunes doesn't see the iPod, and doesn't give me a chance to tell it where the iPod is at.
If I close iTunes and open up EphPod it sees the iPod and gives me a list of what's on the device.
Re:What they don't realize by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 02:21 · Score: 0

Everything that the iPod does, iTunes does. Everything iTunes does, the iPod does.

gapless playback, crossfading?
Re:What they don't realize by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 02:23 · Score: 1, Interesting

You go on about how ipod+itunes is sooo wonderful. I have had itunes trash all the settings that i applied (one-by-one) to different songs.. MULTIPLE times.. but i wont get into that.

yea, apple focused on the software integration.. but what about something like the iRiver that focused on the need for NO software!! iRiver uses a standard directory structure and requires NO SOFTWARE TO USE. i can plug it in ANY computer and transfer songs without issue. Try that with an iPod.

I would rather not have a proprietary setup where i have to make sure all my ID3 tags are perfect and what not (only to have iTunes trash it repeatedly). If I have a file/directory structure that works for my on whatever computer i use, then i can just move the files right to my player and continue using my file/directory structure there.

portability, transparency, non proprietary, multi-platform
Re:What they don't realize by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 02:25 · Score: 0

No, there really isn't. You are a cretin. Accept it and move on.
Re:What they don't realize by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 02:30 · Score: 1, Interesting

If I change the per-song EQ setting in iTunes, it is reflected on the iPod.

That's bad. Difference devices use different transducers. You don't want you earplug EQ to be used on your desktop or HiFi speakers.
Re:What they don't realize by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 02:34 · Score: 0

Do ituneshelper.ex and ipodservice.exe show up as running processes for you?
Re:What they don't realize by Threni · 2004-10-13 02:51 · Score: 2, Insightful

> This statement is getting really old.

It's not an argument, it's a statement of opinion.

> CDs are lossy.

Red Book Audio CDs don't contain compressed data, therefore they can not accurately be described as lossy. The fact that for any given sample rate it's possible to say `ah, but you're losing data that you'd be able to store if only the sample rate were a little higher` changes nothing.

> Analog is lossy.

Again, analog isn't a method of compression, therefore in this context it cannot be described as lossy or lossless. It's just harder to copy accurately.

> Even your
> ears are lossy (the cochlea cannot differentiate an infinite range of
> frequencies.)

That's not the definition of lossy.

You sort of have a point with what you're saying, but it has little to do with my point. The fact that stuff isn't perfect doesn't mean that you should make the source any worse by removing information.

> The key to lossy compression is to make the lossiness below the threshold of
> detection.

There is no one threshold - some people have more keen ears than others. I listen to a lot of music, which takes me back to my original point.
Re:What they don't realize by alobar · 2004-10-13 02:54 · Score: 1

have you upgraded the firmware? http://www.apple.com/ipod/download/
Re:What they don't realize by MikeHunt69 · 2004-10-13 03:00 · Score: 1

With the iRiver, there is no syncing required.
Plug in the device (or put it in the supplied cradle) and it appears as a HD. Perfect intergration.
And through USB hosting, I can copy my photos from my camera to my iRiver while on holiday.
Re:What they don't realize by Natchswing · 2004-10-13 03:07 · Score: 1

Yup, latest iPod firmware.
Re:What they don't realize by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 04:40 · Score: 0

It doesn't sync notes with the Mac "Stickies" app, though, grrr. (Sorry, pet peeve! Yes, I know you can get 3rd party apps that do, but why iSync doesn't do it is beyond me.)
Re:What they don't realize by a7244270 · 2004-10-13 05:12 · Score: 1

My other car is a first

GREAT sig. How often do people get it ?
Re:What they don't realize by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 05:34 · Score: 0

You go on about how ipod+itunes is sooo wonderful. I have had itunes trash all the settings that i applied (one-by-one) to different songs.. MULTIPLE times.. but i wont get into that.

Meanwhile, the rest of the world goes merrily along using iTunes with very few problems. You must be retarded or something. That's not iTunes' fault, fucktard.

Please now to entertain me with a rant about the hordes of fellow retards who have the same problems. Use all caps a lot. Don't disappoint me.
Re:What they don't realize by ChuckleBug · 2004-10-13 05:46 · Score: 1

I have nothing against iRivers. I don't think iPods are the last word in wonderfulness.

However, I am a happy iPod user. I plug my iPod into my iBook, and it launches iTunes and performs a sync over firewire in very short order.

My point being, you say "no syncing required" as if that takes any effort. It's a lot easier than manually copying stuff - just plugging in.

I appreciate that for some, it's more useful to just mount as a HD (iPods will do that, too). But iPod's sync function works very well for most. I don't see how it can be denied that the integration is really well designed.

(AGAIN, I'm not putting any other players down! I am not saying iPods are perfect in every way! I have to make this clear, since expressing satisfaction with an iPod gets one flamed as a rabid Apple fanboi around here.)
Re:What they don't realize by b-baggins · 2004-10-13 06:39 · Score: 1

---
Red Book Audio CDs don't contain compressed data,
---

The analog input is continuous, the sampling is packetized. That's data loss

---
Again, analog isn't a method of compression,
---
Compression is just one method by which information is lost. In analog, the loss of energy of the sound waves due to interference, propagation, friction of the transmission medium, etc. also results in lost information.

---
That's not the definition of lossy.
---

The definition of lossy means loss of information. The translation of the sound wave into neural impulses by the human ear results in loss of information. It is, therefore, by definition, a lossy process.

---
There is no one threshold
---

Incorrect. There is a theoretical maximum threhshold above which the loss of information by the translation of sound into nerve impulses exceeds that of the source. As compression algorithms become more complex, and an understanding of how the human ear processes sound advances, it becomes possible to throw away even more information and still remain above the biological discernment threshold.

Most of the audiophile crap people spout is just another facet of the old brag: I'm better than you are.

--
You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
Re:What they don't realize by damiam · 2004-10-13 08:33 · Score: 1

With the iRiver, there is no syncing required.
So, if I add a track to the library on my computer, and I want to transfer it to an iRiver, how does that work? If there's "no syncing required", how does the new stuff end up on the iRiver?

--
It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
Re:What they don't realize by MikeHunt69 · 2004-10-13 10:06 · Score: 1

There's no 'library on your computer'. The iRiver can use winamp playlists, but there's no piece of software that manages the music files for you. To get the music on the device, you connect it, it then appears as a new harddisk and you then copy the files over.
Re:What they don't realize by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 12:21 · Score: 0

no, your home stereo has its own EQ on the device. you want the EQs to sync. we do, really!
Re:What they don't realize by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 12:24 · Score: 0

man, you're a moron, eh?
Re:What they don't realize by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 18:40 · Score: 0

...copy the files over? Didn't you just get done saying that there was NO syncing involved?

Logging on to the device, finding the song(s), and placing them in the appropriate folder(s) on the iRiver. That's a whole lot of 'syncing', right there.

Sure sounds like more work than plugging in a cable and watching it happen FOR you.

playforsure! by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 00:16 · Score: 0

does that tiny windows logo say "playforsure" ??

Its not like the iPod is compatible either... by cybrthng · 2004-10-13 00:18 · Score: 2, Insightful

Last time i checked vendors are having to hack the iPod to be able to download to it or pay fees to Apple..

I still think the market will be fragmented until the adoption of an open standard - that is royalty free is adopted.

The margins are so thin on online music the only way people can make a profit is through proprietary hardware.

Standardize on the hardware and make some profit on the services folks!

Re:Its not like the iPod is compatible either... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 01:44 · Score: 0

> Last time i checked vendors are having to hack the iPod to be able to download
> to it or pay fees to Apple..

No, there's no need for vendors to hack the iPod in order to pay fees to Apple.
Re:Its not like the iPod is compatible either... by rusty_rusty_rusty · 2004-10-13 01:46 · Score: 4, Insightful

Or legally rip your CDs into mp3 or non-drm'd aac (or wav or aiff or Apple Lossless!) and sync your iPod. No hacking and no "fees to Apple" necessary...
Re:Its not like the iPod is compatible either... by Refrag · 2004-10-13 04:32 · Score: 1

If a vendor wants to interop with the Ipod, all they have to do is sell MP3s or AACs without DRM. It's easy.

--
I have a website. It's about Macs.
Re:Its not like the iPod is compatible either... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 14:09 · Score: 0

Royalty-free? With the amount of royalties on the music itself? Forget about it. It's just another money-making opportunity.

Virgin Trains vs Virgin Player by Dynamoo · 2004-10-13 00:18 · Score: 4, Funny

Virgin is a classic case of "brand stretching", and in the UK they run an incredibly unreliable passenger railway service. Presumably people using the Virgin music service can expect their downloads to be 2 hours late, to break down regularly and to disrupt the entire internet when in progress.

--
Never email donotemail@WeAreSpammers.com

Re:Virgin Trains vs Virgin Player by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 00:26 · Score: 0

Virgin is a classic case of "brand stretching"
I agree. They've even got a "Galactic Airway" now...
Re:Virgin Trains vs Virgin Player by tolan-b · 2004-10-13 00:27 · Score: 2, Informative

To be fair they're not really any worse than any of the other privatised rail companies are they?

I don't use rail all that much so do correct me if I'm wrong.

(I'm sure someone will anyway ;)
Re:Virgin Trains vs Virgin Player by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 00:36 · Score: 0

No, they're not. On the griping hand Virgin Railways have at least attempted to introduce some new rolling stock on their routes, and some of it has even worked. They're not alone in upgrading their trains but it does put them among only three or four companies to do so, nationwide.
Re:Virgin Trains vs Virgin Player by Tony+Hoyle · 2004-10-13 00:37 · Score: 1

All rail in the UK seems determined to be as crap as possible.

They recently shut down the local lines for 3 months while the 'upgraded' it. Then they put the fares up to pay for the 'upgrade'.

The trains are still as late as ever, and the 'upgrade' seemed to consist of a bunch of blokes shoveling gravel around - nothing else has changed.

The trains still cost half the price of the busses though so I still use them...
Re:Virgin Trains vs Virgin Player by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 00:54 · Score: 0

attaching the "Virgin" brand to trains was a mistake, but to give Branson some credit - he has at least stuck with them. He may yet get the service he wants to rival BA flights to Scotland _eventually_.

If he doesn't it'll be as much the system's fault.
Re:Virgin Trains vs Virgin Player by dschuetz · 2004-10-13 01:03 · Score: 4, Insightful

All rail in the UK seems determined to be as crap as possible.

Hey, at least you've *got* serious rail. I recently spent a couple weeks in the UK (mostly in Yorkshire) and was impressed by the rail system, overall. We had one delay coming back from London (the Leeds train was late) but in general, we never had any problems.

And the whole "walk a few blocks into town to grab a train to go the next major city over" thing was fantastic. Just £6.50 for a 1-hour ride to/from York? Incredible. That'd be like driving to the nearest strip mall here in Northern Virgina and getting to downtown Baltimore for, what, $10 or so? I can't even do round-trip to DC for under $7 during rush hour, and the nearest Metro (subway) station is a 15 minute drive away.

So, yes, there are probably many problems, and there will *always* be problems. But having a large, well-used, cheap regional/national rail network is something we chaps on the left side of the pond will always envy. We're lucky if we can get regional rail around a single city, let alone networked between 'em. (and we'll never have a subway as pervasive as the London Underground, except in New York, and that's only because it was built so long ago).
Re:Virgin Trains vs Virgin Player by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 01:03 · Score: 0

To be fair they're not really any worse than any of the other privatised rail companies are they?

Virgin are pretty evil. My mum visits my elderly Grandmother and has been given the runaround whenever she wants the cheap advertised fare -- up to the point where she was told it was unavailable. Given that Virgin's greed is splitting apart families (also screwing people who work down South during the week and come home for weekends) I would say they are worse than the others. Part of the problem is that they are one of the main arteries between the North and South and so are hitting the people who it hurts the most.
Re:Virgin Trains vs Virgin Player by ajs318 · 2004-10-13 01:16 · Score: 2, Informative

When the UK's railway service was privatised -- which was probably the worst thing that happened to the railways since they were nationalised -- the Government of the day made sure that Virgin received the absolute worst rolling stock and worked the absolute worst routes. This was a deliberate attempt to discredit Richard Branson {who had previously expressed the belief that he could do a better job, and thus had to be taken down a peg or two}. Branson has money, for certain, but seems to realise that it is not the only thing which has intrinsic value.

The Public was conned into believing that privatisation would benefit them in some way, thanks to a series of privatisation initiatives throughout the 1980s in which Thatcher sold us all what we used to already own. Cut-price shares in the likes of BT, British Gas and the artificial companies formed from the breakup of CEGB were targeted towards small investors, who then sold them on to faceless investment banking corporations for a handsome profit. Why did people buy these shares anyway? Thatcher sold the family silver, that is certain, but how could the eventual purchasers live with themselves for being complicit in one of the greatest crimes a government has ever committed against its own citizens? Did you need a piece of paper saying you owned a share in a former Nationalised company? Wasn't it enough to know that the British blood in your veins entitled you to a share in the operations which make up this country's essential infrastructure? Or did you just feel the need to flaunt your superiority over your neighbour because you had shares in company X and they didn't?

If I was transport minister, I would at once re-nationalise the railways; and proceed to raise the money necessary to bring them up to a reasonable specification, by prosecuting everyone who had ever owned so much as even one single share in a privatised railway company, for knowingly dealing in stolen property. And for my next trick I would prosecute the "Labour" party for misrepresenting itself as the People's party {there can be no such thing as a Labour party without Clause Four, "To secure for the producers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry, and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible, upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry and service"}. After seven years of Blair, the nation's wealth is distributed less equitably than when he started, and fox hunting is still legal.

--
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
Re:Virgin Trains vs Virgin Player by CrackedButter · 2004-10-13 01:20 · Score: 2, Interesting

If you think that was good you should check out Tokyo, its linked rail and underground systems handles far more traffic and is more efficient than anything in the UK. Some of it is open 24 hours a day as well due to the amount of communters it carries.

--
Jonathanjk.com
Re:Virgin Trains vs Virgin Player by lisaparratt · 2004-10-13 01:24 · Score: 1

Parts of Yorkshire, especially West Yorkshire, have council subsidised public transport, which is far better than that provided in most of the UK.
Re:Virgin Trains vs Virgin Player by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 02:37 · Score: 0

Nice commie rant there. Tell me, is the Socialist Worker movement still really big at UK univesities? :-)
Re:Virgin Trains vs Virgin Player by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 02:41 · Score: 0

When the UK's railway service was privatised -- which was probably the worst thing that happened to the railways since they were nationalised

Sorry, but that's not quite the full picture. The UK's railways have been a problem since the beginning. All they way back to each company using a different track width. Poor service ensured and they were nationalised to sort the crap out. Due to the lack of subsidies and investments, service remained poor, while stock and track deteriorated.

As the govt couldn't fix it, parts were sold off hoping that private money would come to the rescue. It hasn't yet, but given time, it will, but only when the track and stocks are replace. Rude and stupid railway workers are a different issue, and drivers not turning up, and not calling in sick, will also cause problems and delays.

Just picking one of your examples, BT was losing money every year. After privatisation and extensive investments, it makes a lot. Furthermore, had you remotely knew what you were talking about, you would have known that the govt only sold off 51% of the BT stock. Which in simple terms means that they got a huge cut of the profits without coughing up the money to fix a fading telecoms company. If you want to moan, I suggest you ask your friend Blair why they started selling off the country's BT stock when it was having a net gain?
Re:Virgin Trains vs Virgin Player by ajs318 · 2004-10-13 03:27 · Score: 1

The UK's railways have been a problem since the beginning. All they way back to each company using a different track width. Poor service ensured and they were nationalised to sort the crap out ..... As the govt couldn't fix it, parts were sold off hoping that private money would come to the rescue.
Couldn't -- or wasn't trying hard enough? Nobody needs more than £100 000 a year to live on, and what a few men are paid -- I shall not dignify it with the verb "earn" -- to kick a bag of wind around a field for ninety minutes, twice a week for eight months a year is obscene. The Government could have raised income tax for the highest earners. Instead, they chose to cut income tax, and public services suffered as a result. They ended up increasing VAT, which is paid by rich and poor alike. Since Blair took power the burden of taxation has continued to shift from the rich to the poor.
It hasn't yet, but given time, it will, but only when the track and stocks are replace.
Unfortunately the train operating companies are so concerned with making a profit for shareholders, they have forgotten exactly what it is they are supposed to be doing, which is moving people from where they are at to where they want to be, swiftly and for a fair price. Some train operating companies are even referring to their passengers as "customers" -- which suggests to me that they don't even really understand what they are selling us. Passenger implies someone over whom you have a duty of care, someone you should endeavour to see reach their destination safely; whereas customer just implies someone who gives you money.
Rude and stupid railway workers are a different issue, and drivers not turning up, and not calling in sick, will also cause problems and delays.
I agree -- these problems were there in the nationalised days. It's unfair to blame privatisation for everything wrong with the railways. However, bureaucracy, centralisation and management control-freakery are working against passengers' best interests.
BT was losing money every year. After privatisation and extensive investments, it makes a lot.
There is a very good reason -- in two parts -- why privatisation worked for the telecomms industry. Firstly, the kind of businesspeople who do nothing but buy and sell shares in other companies absolutely need telephones in order to be able to do their jobs. Secondly, it is technically unfeasible to provide two levels of service on the telephone network; it's simpler and cheaper to give the plebs the same standard of service as the big businesspeople. As a result, the service tends to be run for the benefit of its own users {as opposed to the capitalist model where businesses are run for the benefit of shareholders, and to hell with everybody else; or the state-socialist model where businesses are run for the benefit of the workers, and to hell with everybody else}. Open Source Software also works along this kind of model {all decisions are made for the benefit of its own customers} and this, too, is highly successful.

Perhaps if we passed a law forbidding every worker in the field of Public Transport from owning a car, so that they would be reliant upon the services they provide, then the railways might improve dramatically!
If you want to moan, I suggest you ask your friend Blair why they started selling off the country's BT stock when it was having a net gain?
Blair is no friend of mine.

--
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
Re:Virgin Trains vs Virgin Player by FurryFeet · 2004-10-13 06:29 · Score: 2, Funny

I am intrigued by your ideas and wish to suscribe to your newsletter.
Re:Virgin Trains vs Virgin Player by kraut · 2004-10-13 09:50 · Score: 1

That might come as a surprise to the swiss who've believed for a century that they had a swift, efficient, clean and reliable rail system.

--
no taxation without representation!
Re:Virgin Trains vs Virgin Player by fiannaFailMan · 2004-10-13 09:55 · Score: 1

It'd be wrong to blame Richard Branson for the difficulties in running the trains on time. The problem with the British railway network is that it didn't suffer the same fate as the German one in WWII, i.e. get blown to smithereens, and hence instead of being able to build the network from scratch, you Brits are stuck with what you built at the time of the industrial revolution. That means you have congested lines, bottlenecks, and a host of other problems on an old network that your high-speed trains have to share with local services and freight services. The Japanese Shinkansen has often been praised because of its pinpoint accuracy with its schedules, but it runs on dedicated high-speed tracks. Getting that sort of thing into the British network amongst all the NIMBY merchants would be a major achievement, but it's not really in Branson's hands.

--
Drill baby drill - on Mars
Re:Virgin Trains vs Virgin Player by kraut · 2004-10-13 10:10 · Score: 3, Interesting

>The Public was conned into believing that privatisation would benefit them in some way....
You tell me with a straight face that you honestly believe that the privatisation of, e.g., BT, has not benefitted the British people, and I'll buy a copy of Socialist Worker off of you. When I've stopped laughing, which will take a while.

> Why did people buy these shares anyway?
To make money on the investment? Capitalism 101.

> ... that the British blood in your veins...
Oooohh, Nationalist and Socialist, nice ;)

> After seven years of Blair, the nation's wealth is distributed less equitably than when he started,
I'm not sure the focus on wealth distribution is entirely healthy; you should look instead at the levels of poverty. If everyone has enough to eat, and a roof over their head, access to services and education - why should they worry that someone else has more?

> and fox hunting is still legal.
And let's hope it bloody well stays that way!

Coming on to the real failures of the Blair administration:
* Completely fucked up the reform of the house of lords, achieving the seemingly impossible by making it less democratic.
* Huge increases in tax, nicely hidden away where it's not too obvious to the feebleminded.
* No visible progress on improving the things that actually need fixing - NHS, transport, education. But time to protect cuddly foxes.
* Still no Freedom of Information Act. Funny how they dropped THAT manifesto promise once they got their grubby hands on power.
* Continuing erosion of civil liberties. Come on, Blunkett makes Howard (previously universally reviled as the most repressive home secretary in history) look like a bleeding heart liberal in comparison. Let's look at some examples:
* RIP act - the government, the council, and any tom dick and harry has the right to snoop your email. And of course this will not catch a single criminal.
* Phone taps don't need judicial oversight anymore
* Foreigners (like me, in theory) can be locked up indefinitely without trial, charge, or any disclosed evidence
* Biometric ID cards - lots of government invasion into your life, huge costs, zero actual benefit.

Let's not even get into the mess of the pension system (admittedly that was a mess beforehand, but he's not done anything to improve it), or the fundemental injustice of meanstesting.

--
no taxation without representation!
Re:Virgin Trains vs Virgin Player by ajs318 · 2004-10-13 11:08 · Score: 1

I'll give you that the privatisation of BT did benefit people, for the reason stated in my post above. Most, if not all, of the other privatisations have made things worse not better. Yes, in theory, if something is privatised it means that if X does not happen then somebody gets no dinner on their table that night. In practice, though, it doesn't always work that way.
Why did people buy these shares anyway? To make money on the investment? Capitalism 101.
But the money they made was at the expense of the people who used to own the Nationalised companies, i.e. the rest of the public. If you steal my VCR {cost to you: nil}, then sell it to someone else for less than its true value {but still more than you paid for it}, do you deserve the money they pay you? If they then sell it to a fourth person for a profit, do they deserve the money they get? The point is, the Government were appointed custodians of tha Nationalised industries; their remit was to look after them. By selling them without the consent of the people who appointed them custodians, they have betrayed the people.
that the British blood in your veins... Oooohh, Nationalist and Socialist, nice ;)
Well, you're taking me a little out of context. What I meant was that the Nationalised companies belonged to every Briton by sole virtue of their Britishness. I was not implying anything beyond that. Quite where you draw the boundaries is irrelevant, as long as you apply the same rules to everyone within the boundary you draw. I'm not saying there is anything particularly special about being British, as compared to being any other nationality; just that it is the sole qualification for ownership of a stake in a British nationalised industry.

As to the real failures, yes, you've got them about right. The erosion of civil liberties is absolutely frightening. And I don't agree for one instant with means testing of any benefit. It is too expensive, and too prone to abuse, to work out who is entitled to what -- it would be simpler and cheaper to pay a single basic living allowance to every adult, and offset it through income tax {cf. the penny post}.

--
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!

Ipod Killer? by mrn121 · 2004-10-13 00:18 · Score: 2, Interesting

I keep reading about "ipod killers," but have yet to see the ipod dead.

Seems that these "killers" aren't real dangerous. It is the ipod that is killing everything else, truth be told.

Re:Ipod Killer? by olip · 2004-10-13 00:26 · Score: 1

calling it an iPod killer seems a bit premature

been done prematurely 19500 times before :

Results 1 - 50 of about 19,500 for "ipod killer". (0.26 seconds)
Re:Ipod Killer? by ViolentGreen · 2004-10-13 00:27 · Score: 5, Insightful

We have had so many "iPod Killers" that the term now just means "new mp3 player."

--
Not everything is analogous to cars. Car analogies rarely work.
Re:Ipod Killer? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 00:43 · Score: 0

"iPod killer" is just another name for "mp3 player" around here. Apparently, if it can play mp3s, it will kill the iPod. Or so Slashdotters have predicted for the last couple of years...
Re:Ipod Killer? by pantherace · 2004-10-13 03:14 · Score: 1

It's called the ipod's battery.
Re:Ipod Killer? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 07:09 · Score: 0

Agreed. Enough with these 'iPod killers'. It seems if I can ever manufacture an MP3 player from cardboard and potato, the media will call it 'iPod killer'.

Why don't we just wait and see how a product fares in the market before we dub it 'iPod killer'? Hmmm?

Open standard? by tkrotchko · 2004-10-13 00:18 · Score: 1

I've never heard of WMA referred to as an "open standard" before.

Is this now an ISO standard? Or is the person in the article just making stuff up?

--
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you

Clunky gray FM Thing by JasonUCF · 2004-10-13 00:19 · Score: 4, Funny

So, uh, it's the same price as a Mini, right?

And the same kind of storage, right?

And it doesn't have iTunes, right?

And it's got those 80's style recessed buttons for navigation, right? 80's style gray looks like, too.

So, the addition of an FM Tuner (i like) makes it a killer?

Has someone been drinking the Richard Branson cappucino?

Don't get me wrong, I admire the guy, I'm glad there's true entrepenuers (read: morning wood all day long) guys like him... but come on... try and read between the lines a little! Don't be another mindless hype blowhard!

Re:Clunky gray FM Thing by Pope · 2004-10-13 03:41 · Score: 3, Informative

I still don't understand why someone would want a radio tuner, I bought my iPod to listen to the music I want to hear, not what Clear Channel tells me to. Same thing with my DiscMan and Walkman before it. I gave up on radio years ago.

--
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
Re:Clunky gray FM Thing by hambonewilkins · 2004-10-13 05:28 · Score: 2, Insightful

Yes, but what about NPR?
I use my mp3 player to listen to FM radio, namely NPR, while running.

--

God Bless America. Why? Did it sneeze?
Re:Clunky gray FM Thing by peculiarmethod · 2004-10-13 06:35 · Score: 1

No, man.. you dont get it.. didn't you read the specifications? "Volume output settings 0 to 60".. to 60! Most only go to 10. This one goes to 60. That's 50 higher..

--
** "It's not my job to stand between the people talking to me, and the ones listening to me." -- Pego the Jerk
Re:Clunky gray FM Thing by djocyko · 2004-10-13 09:05 · Score: 1

NPR.

'nuff said.
Re:Clunky gray FM Thing by djward · 2004-10-13 16:53 · Score: 1

In addition to those arguments, any player with a radio tuner is technically not allowed to be on during a commercial airline flight. And I do love my iPod on a 6 hour flight.

"...friends not included" by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 00:19 · Score: 2, Funny

damn :(

lacking by Savves · 2004-10-13 00:20 · Score: 5, Funny

from tfm:

Share your music
Dual headphone jacks so you can listen with friends. Friends not included.

bummer... for once i thought i could finally get one bundled with a music player =(

Re:lacking by WiggyWack · 2004-10-13 10:49 · Score: 1

Dual headphone jacks? You're gonna be walking down the street like a pair of Siamese twins.

Seriously... How often will that feature be used? If you just wanna give someone a quick listen to the song you have on, it'd be easier to just let them borrow your headphones for a sec. Do you always carry an extra pair of headphones just in case? Might as well carry a splitter then and just have the one jack...

Heck, why are we stopping at dual jacks? Let's go tri!

--
Macintosh humor! MacComedy.com
Re:lacking by xerxesdaphat · 2004-10-13 18:10 · Score: 1

i think these dual headphones jacks are gonna be great - the amount of time i can think of going on school trips or watever trying to share music with a mate by putting one earphone per person. it sounds like shit. and because cd's are stereo, if an instrument is panned far left or something, then you miss out on that instrument entirely. dual headphone jacks is a fantastic idea i cant believe i havent seen this before

--
The Shoes of the Fisherman's Wife Are Some Jive Ass Slippers

Open Standards? by Constellation · 2004-10-13 00:20 · Score: 2, Insightful

Since when is WMA an open standard? The last time that I looked it was owned solely by Microsoft and jealously guarded by an army of lawyers.

Re:Open Standards? by ayn0r · 2004-10-13 00:23 · Score: 1

They since replaced the army of lawyers with an evil-looking army of gnomes. Arr.

"Apples To Oranges" Comparison by bdash · 2004-10-13 00:22 · Score: 2, Informative

Nice to see that Virgin Electronics has a sense of humor. If only it were a good one...

They just don't get it. by tclark · 2004-10-13 00:23 · Score: 4, Insightful

What these supposed challengers don't get is that the iPod is not just a nifty gadget. It's part of a system that includes an online music store, a desktop client, and the actual iPod device. An "iPod killer" has to take on the iPod on all of these points.

Re:They just don't get it. by Tony+Hoyle · 2004-10-13 00:46 · Score: 1, Flamebait

It does...

http://www.virgindigital.com/

I tried the ipod desktop client once in a store. It sucked (It actually crashed when I was using it). They really don't need to try very hard to beat that.
Re:They just don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 01:23 · Score: 0

Translation:

I clicked around in iTunes for eighteen seconds. Or maybe it was iTunes, I don't really know what that is. Anyway, it sucked because it didn't look all cool and Japanese like WinAmp. Then, like, I clicked somewhere and I'm not sure what happened, but anyway it sucked.
Re:They just don't get it. by jrockway · 2004-10-13 01:47 · Score: 2, Insightful

iTunes crashed on you? Go try it on a real computer (a Mac) and see what happens?

Ohh, it works perfectly and makes you smile. That's why there's no iPod killer yet :)

--
My other car is first.
Re:They just don't get it. by pknoll · 2004-10-13 02:24 · Score: 1

I tried the ipod desktop client once in a store. It sucked (It actually crashed when I was using it).
I'll see your anecdote and raise you: I've been using iTunes pretty much every day for something like a year, and less often before that, on Mac and Windows. And it's never crashed. Not even once.
Re:They just don't get it. by ttrafford · 2004-10-13 03:09 · Score: 1

Ohh, it works perfectly and makes you smile. That's why there's no iPod killer yet :)
I recently bought a Mac+iPod, and after a few weeks switched back to using my iH120. I didn't like certain things, like having to keep copies of the music on my computer and on the device, or the playlist-centric interface. The iRiver also got way more use out of it's battery, and I it's easier to use it to cart around other data files.

So iTunes isn't perfect for everyone.
Re:They just don't get it. by jt007 · 2004-10-13 06:07 · Score: 1

You don't _have_ to keep copies of all the songs that are on your iPod on your computer, you can if you like, but it is entirely up to you.

By selecting to manually update your iPod (rather than using the auto-sync options) you can just drag and drop what songs you want onto your iPod using iTunes - then when you're all done with that - delete the songs from your PC, they will still remain on your iPod. No fuss!

--
I never apologise, I'm sorry but that's just the way I am - Homer
Re:They just don't get it. by ttrafford · 2004-10-13 09:17 · Score: 1

Ah, that helps. Thanks!
Re:They just don't get it. by Scrameustache · 2004-10-13 15:18 · Score: 1

iTunes crashed on you? Go try it on a real computer (a Mac) and see what happens?

Some corrupted MP3s will crash iTunes, crash id bad.

Hard to identify too, 'cause it freezes up on the previous track's info, and if it did it on random, good luck figuring it out.

--
You can't take the sky from me...
Re:They just don't get it. by jrockway · 2004-10-13 18:43 · Score: 1

I haven't seen any, but that's a good point. Apple has good software, but if it's broken you can't fix it. That does bother me a bit (like iCal has some minor brokenness that I could fix in about 30 seconds if I had the code.)

--
My other car is first.

Buy your music from any download service by laurensv · 2004-10-13 00:23 · Score: 0

Buy your music from any download service... well, almost any. The Virgin Player 5GB runs music purchased from: Virgin Digital, Real, MusicMatch and coming soon, any Plays For Sure compatible service. Songs downloaded from iTunes are not supported. It's their choice, not ours. Well, it isn't, now is it? If iTMS is first and they make the device second, it is Virgins choice not to make it compatible to the iTMS (even if it's only MP3 they play).

Re:Buy your music from any download service by WegianWarrior · 2004-10-13 00:44 · Score: 1

..or could it be that iTunes somehow makes sure you have a iPod before it lets you use it? I honestly don't know myself, but it would explain why this wont work with them. If they think in the same way a lot of IM-companies thinks, anything coming from another client (or in this case, piece of hardware) is evil and will cut into your profit - and must logicaly be stopped.

One thing I do know however is that the iPod itself is overhyped. I had the opertunity to play with one a while back, and (at least to me) it's not worth the extra premium they charge for it compared to other digital music players. But then, thats my point of view =).

--
Everything in the world is controlled by a small, evil group to which, unfortunately, no one you know belongs.
Re:Buy your music from any download service by Kevinv · 2004-10-13 00:44 · Score: 2, Insightful

not really, apple refuses to license fairplay DRM to anyone else. So Virgin can't make a player that plays fairplay encoded AA4 (they could've supported non-DRM AA4 but since they don't even support MP3 I doubt they would do that).

To make a player that plays fairplay DRM without an apple license would probably violate DCMA (there's a test case I'd like to see). Even Real didn't do that, they just came up with a way to encode their stuff to fairplay so an iPod would play it.

That said -- Apple made a player that supports more than one format, most of them non-DRM. Virgin didn't support any of those, so I'd say Virgin loses in the "open" player category.
Re:Buy your music from any download service by Kevinv · 2004-10-13 00:50 · Score: 1

Whoops looks like I mis-spoke on one part -- Virgin player does support MP3. If I didn't already have my iPod i'd go Rio Karma or an iRiver for the OGG support.
Re:Buy your music from any download service by Proteus · 2004-10-13 00:57 · Score: 3, Interesting

it is Virgins choice not to make it compatible to the iTMS
Except that Apple owns the FairPlay system, which is what makes iTunes tick. Cracking the DRM on FairPlay AAC files is in a legal gray-area, and is likely to cause corporate animosity -- rarely a good thing.

If Apple refused to license FairPlay to Virgin, then Virgin is correct in saying that their lack of iTunes support is Apple's choice.
(even if it's only MP3 they play)
"Digital Music" is not all "MP3". iTunes are AAC, not MP3 (yes, I know, they both use MPEG-style encoding). Pedantic, perhaps, but important. Encoded music comes in lots of formats, not just WMA and MP3.

--
We may not imagine how our lives could be more frustrating and complex—but Congress can. – Cullen Hightower
Re:Buy your music from any download service by Kevinv · 2004-10-13 00:59 · Score: 4, Informative

iTunes can encode to MP3 OR (non-DRM) AAC not just AAC. iPod can play both MP3 and AAC (non-DRM or fairplay encoded)
Re:Buy your music from any download service by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 02:00 · Score: 0

I had the opertunity to play with one a while back, and (at least to me) it's not worth the extra premium they charge for it compared to other digital music players. But then, thats my point of view =).

And the point of view of someone that can't spell is worthless.

-1, Wrong by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 00:24 · Score: 0

No hacking required to download to the iPod, nor are fees to Apple. Feel free to pirate all the MP3s you want and cram your iPod full with the greatest of easb8'obonus_present=1

Re:-1, Wrong by cybrthng · 2004-10-13 01:19 · Score: 1

sure, you can download your own mp3's by using the apple software or other programs, but we're talking about a commercially viable solution here - not what you can hack out of your ipod.

Vrigin's been /.ed by fragzilla · 2004-10-13 00:25 · Score: 0

Hooh-hah!

Re:Vrigin's been /.ed by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 00:27 · Score: 0

It's as close to a virgin as /. can get...

/ducks
Re:Vrigin's been /.ed by toriver · 2004-10-13 00:44 · Score: 2, Funny

"We are all Virgin. I mean, Borg."
Re:Vrigin's been /.ed by amokk · 2004-10-13 17:02 · Score: 1

No, this is slashdot, your original statement stands.

--
I think, therefore I am an Atheist.

UK market? by julesh · 2004-10-13 00:26 · Score: 1

Virgin's site: "Currently this site experiences heavy traffic. Please try again at a later time." Kind of like their trains, really...

Presumably this product is primarily aimed at the UK market, which has always been Virgin's primary turf, and where the iPod isn't quite as popular as it is in the USA. Probably because iTMS hasn't been available here until recently.

Re:UK market? by Tony+Hoyle · 2004-10-13 00:34 · Score: 2, Informative

There's no mention of this on the UK sites, so I guess it's US only.

The UK market is much smaller, and is dominated by cheap clones - in fact most people have 128MB MP3 players.
Re:UK market? by Tony+Hoyle · 2004-10-13 00:44 · Score: 1

btw. virgin doesn't really do consumer electronics in the UK... it does a lot of other stuff though...

http://www.virgin.com/uk/atoz/default.asp?all=sh ow

'Virgin Brides' - where do I sign up?
Re:UK market? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 02:54 · Score: 0

Have you been using London's Tube lately? Take a look at the earphones people are wearing. During the last days I made up a sketchy (not representative: only the central stations of the Piccadilly Line) statistic (50 persons): 7 out of 10 People wearing headphones use the notorious white "hemisphere and stick" ones which end in an even-so notorious bright white cable vanishing in their pockets. Supposing the amount of people who just bought iPod-speakers for their USB-stick is vanishingly small, I would claim that your assumption about the iPod's popularity in Britain is wrong.

What's up with the geeky asian dude by BorgDrone · 2004-10-13 00:26 · Score: 2, Funny

I understand "Currently this site experiences heavy traffic. Please try again at a later time."

But what's up with the geeky asian dude with the weird shoes and is his name really George ? He doesn't look like a George.
If your site is experiencing heavy traffic, why include an almost 21 KB graphic on the error page, which adds absolutely nothing to the informativeness of the error, adds to the traffic and looks just creepy.

Are they trying to scare potential visitors away ?

Re:What's up with the geeky asian dude by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 01:16 · Score: 0

Well
I worked with this application called intershop enfinity, is a very good J2EE application server made by intershop, is very scalable and there's a flow management which is made graphically using java.
The message with George is the default message when somthing goes wrong, and the people at virgin obviously didn't thought that one day something would get wrong with their server so they didn't change this message.
You can add several servers to the application so you cab stand the slashdot effect, but I guess that they are running the application on one server (actually maybe two one for the storefront and one for the transactional side of the store).
Re:What's up with the geeky asian dude by Erik+Hollensbe · 2004-10-13 01:31 · Score: 1

Bandwidth is never the problem, after all, you wouldn't be seeing it at all if it was.

Normally it's the database. Sometimes it's the stuff in the middle.

iPod killer? by Quixote · 2004-10-13 00:26 · Score: 5, Funny

iPod killer, meet the website killer.

Did viriginelectronics.com get /.ed? by Apple+Acolyte · 2004-10-13 00:28 · Score: 0

I have not been able to reach the link to this so-called iPod killer over at virginelectronics.com. Were they /.ed? My traceroute dies on the 15th hop. How can Virigin expect to beat Apple when they cannot keep their online storefront open? Or perhaps Jobs has developed the power to project his RDF in such a way that he can discriminately decimate web servers at will.

--
Part of the hardcore faithful who believed in Apple long before it was cool again to do so

It is FUGLY by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 00:28 · Score: 0

I'm not an iPod lover, but this device is about as ugly as it gets.

People like iPods because they look elegant, not for any technology. These look like ugly little sardine cans.

Looks a bit crap to me by Tony+Hoyle · 2004-10-13 00:28 · Score: 1

Same price as I paid for my 20GB Thompson for a quarter of the storage (they're trying to compete at the ipod price points too!). Doesn't play MP3, plays WMA (which I have currently exactly zero use for).

If fact I can't see a good reason to buy this at all, except it looks prettier than an ipod and is smaller.

Re:Looks a bit crap to me by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 00:43 · Score: 0

Prettier than an iPod???
Are you on crack?

Oh, well, "tous les goûts sont dans la nature"...
Re:Looks a bit crap to me by lxs · 2004-10-13 03:17 · Score: 1

The thing looks like a thermostat controller to me. Something you hide in the basement.

Built in FM tuner, can you record? by linuxtelephony · 2004-10-13 00:28 · Score: 5, Interesting

I like the built in FM tuner. The big question is if you can record from it. It doesn't look like it. And that's exactly what I want.

I attend various conferences. Some of them broadcast on a low power FM radio signal for people in the audience that are hard of hearing. Those people can have a private radio with headsets and adjust the volume to make it easier for them to hear. It also is a great way to record the program without the distracting noises from the audience.

I'd like to find an MP3 player, HD based or replacement memory sticks (SD, xD, whatever), that has the ability to record using a built in microphone and an FM tuner. A microphone jack would be a plus.

The closest I've found is a small 128/256 meg device, but the memory is not interchangeable, it's built in.

Anyone know of anything like that? Who makes it? And where it can be found?

--
. 62,400 repetitions make one truth -- Brave New World, Aldous Huxley

Re:Built in FM tuner, can you record? by t482 · 2004-10-13 00:38 · Score: 1

iriver has what you want. except for the memory sticks/hd.

Supports up to 1 GIG of recording. For voice that is a heck of a lot. I bought one for similar purpose and so far have been very happy.

The advantage of the no HD models are that they are better for sports - running, biking etc. You can listen to your conferences again while on the treadmill.
Re:Built in FM tuner, can you record? by benito27uk · 2004-10-13 00:46 · Score: 1

The new h300 series from iriver can record directly from radio stations. Comes with a 20gb or 40gb hard drive
Also lets you view jpegs and bmp's and also supports OGG as well!
Re:Built in FM tuner, can you record? by Proteus · 2004-10-13 01:05 · Score: 1

I'd like to find an MP3 player, HD based or replacement memory sticks (SD, xD, whatever), that has the ability to record using a built in microphone and an FM tuner. A microphone jack would be a plus.
The Neuros does all of that.

MP3, FLAC, OGG, expandable/updatable firmware to add more and/or update codecs later. Gapless support for OGG on the way very soon (it's in the beta firmware).

FM-tuner, built-in FM transmitter (for listening [with a quality hit] on your car stereo and the like), record from FM to MP3. Mic port, line-in port, direct to WAV or MP3. Media is a "backpack" that's swappable, so you can have your 128/256MB lightweight memory player, or your heavier 20-80GB HDD player depending on what you need that day.

It's a little heavier and chunkier than an iPod, and the interface isn't good. It isn't an "iPod killer". But, it does come with software for Linux, Win, and Mac, and is reliable and fairly easy to use. The software-sync operation is almost as slick as iPod's, as well (not quite as automatic - requires a button-press on the software for sync - but really close).

Price point is iPod-comparable. Oh, and their software is OpenSource. :P

--
We may not imagine how our lives could be more frustrating and complex—but Congress can. – Cullen Hightower
Re:Built in FM tuner, can you record? by nxg125 · 2004-10-13 01:06 · Score: 1

Get a Neuros. You can record from FM, the built in mic, or the line in jack. You have the option to record in 4 different MP3 and 3 different WAV quality settings. You also have the option of using a hard drive based backpack in sizes from 20GB - 80GB or using the 128MB or 256MB flash memory backpack.

Not only that, but the customer support is phenominal, the user community is active and very helpful, the firmware is open source, and there are 4 (count 'em!) open source synchronization managers to choose from.
Re:Built in FM tuner, can you record? by Natchswing · 2004-10-13 01:09 · Score: 1

> The advantage of the no HD models are that they are better for sports - running, biking etc. You can listen to your conferences again while on the treadmill. Yes, because setting the device down on the treadmill panel might require a 3 foot headphone cable.
Re:Built in FM tuner, can you record? by bigboard · 2004-10-13 03:34 · Score: 1

Creative's Zen Touch does this with the addition of the wired remote control.

--
Cynicism is the natural defence of the romantic.
Re:Built in FM tuner, can you record? by linuxtelephony · 2004-10-13 03:41 · Score: 1

Thanks for all of the suggestions. I'll be checking them out. The radioSHARK idea is not portable enough. I need to be able to operate for an entire day, copy the data off (if necessary) and recharge/change batteries (as needed) at night, and be ready to go again the next day. I estimate needing to repeat this for 4 days in a row at the most. I like the 20 gig/256meg Neuros the best so far.

--
. 62,400 repetitions make one truth -- Brave New World, Aldous Huxley
Re:Built in FM tuner, can you record? by farble1670 · 2004-10-13 04:48 · Score: 1

for $99, you can get a TDK mojo RAM-based MP3 player. it has an FM tuner and can record. it has 256MB built in and has an SDC, MMC slot.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B000 0SVSNA/qid=1097685702/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl 23/103-7281354-0411825?v=glance&s=electronics&n=50 7846

now, i do not know that bit rate it uses to record FM. assuming it uses 48kps or something reasonable, you can record a lot of FM radio on a 512MB card.
Re:Built in FM tuner, can you record? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 05:03 · Score: 0

Virgin VP-02. Built-in 128mg SD/MMC slot. FM tuner
Record from Mic or FM
Re:Built in FM tuner, can you record? by WiggyWack · 2004-10-13 10:52 · Score: 1

I attend various conferences. Some of them broadcast on a low power FM radio signal for people in the audience that are hard of hearing. Those people can have a private radio with headsets and adjust the volume to make it easier for them to hear. It also is a great way to record the program without the distracting noises from the audience.
Is there a delay with that? That would annoy the hell out of me.

--
Macintosh humor! MacComedy.com
Re:Built in FM tuner, can you record? by linuxtelephony · 2004-10-18 04:54 · Score: 1

The delay is typically less than a second. For a person with good hearing, it will sound like annoying echo. For someone with bad hearing, they won't always hear the live voice, instead they'll only hear the FM broadcast with the volume turned up for their hearing needs.

Then again, you can use better headphones that block the outside noise and let you listen to just the broadcast.

--
. 62,400 repetitions make one truth -- Brave New World, Aldous Huxley

sdfdsfgdsg by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 00:31 · Score: 0

even without knowing anything about the ipod, at least at first glance it actually looks damn cool, that virgin thing looks like one of those old texas scientific calculators
i wish this branson chap was more like clive sinclair

George... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 00:32 · Score: 0

"He doesn't look like a George."

Yes he does. Like George Takei.

WMA? by freaksta · 2004-10-13 00:33 · Score: 1, Interesting

Just an FYI, I have -never- played or stored a WMA file on my ipod, or my harddriver for that matter. Calling it the iPod killer, because it supports WMA, is a joke.

--

Hrrm... I usually just sign my name.

You're wrong by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 00:36 · Score: 0

This device doesn't play MP3's.

Only pirates use them, I guess.

WMA? by DuranDuran · 2004-10-13 00:37 · Score: 1

> support for open standards such as WMA will let people select the music service of their choice.

This misunderstanding of WMA could be just marketing confusion, but I'd argue that many consumers would simply see this as A Good Thing. The more times something like "WMA" can be seen alongside or in the same sentence as "open standards", the greater the closed source foothold.

Letting me pick WMA is like letting me pick my master. I want freedom!

--
"You can justify anything by putting it in quotes, adding a famous name and making it a sig" - Albert Einstein

ANOTHER ipod killer? by ru-486 · 2004-10-13 00:38 · Score: 2, Insightful

For Christs sake, unless it has the friggin scroll wheel it's just another mp3 player! (And it must be lickable)

Re:ANOTHER ipod killer? by bmcphall · 2004-10-13 01:04 · Score: 0

I can just see it now...

WONKA: Must show you this. Lickable
MP3 players. Lick an orange, it tastes like
an orange. Lick a pineapple, it tastes like a pineapple.

Go ahead, try it.

GRANDPA JOE: Oh.

MIKE: Mmm, I got a plum.

CHARLIE: Grandpa, this banana's fantastic! It tastes so real.

WONKA: Try some more. The strawberries taste like
strawberries. The snozzberries taste like snozzberries!
Re:ANOTHER ipod killer? by UltraZwobot · 2004-10-13 01:14 · Score: 1

(And it must be lickable)
Talk about fetishism.

--
Christianity is stupid. Communism is good.
Re:ANOTHER ipod killer? by ru-486 · 2004-10-13 01:16 · Score: 1

A lickable Virgin isn't all too bad, but the way that Apple feels in your hand is where the magic is.
Re:ANOTHER ipod killer? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 02:19 · Score: 0

F that damn scroll wheel. That's why I DIDN'T buy a bloody iPod.

It's called choice jackass. You prefer to have iPods and only iPods on the market?

On the other hand, by SerialHistorian · 2004-10-13 00:39 · Score: 3, Insightful

WalMart's music store tends to have a wider selection of music than iTunes does (There's a lot of really new, albiet obscure stuff that WalMart has that iTunes doesn't.), and it's cheaper per track to buy stuff at WalMart online. The Virgin player would be capable of playing songs from WalMart's music store where iTunes and the iPod isn't.

There are good reasons to discount microsoft's media products as useless, but "they don't have the market share" is *not* one of them!

--

--
Vote for your hopes, not for your fears - Vote Third Party

Re:On the other hand, by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 06:32 · Score: 2, Informative

From Walmart's site:

Quickly find your favorites from over 400,000 songs - rock to country, hip-hop to pop. Exclusives, too!

From Apple's site:

Select from over 1 million tracks from all five major and more than 600 leading independent labels.

How is 400,000 a wider selection than a million?
Re:On the other hand, by Arru · 2004-10-14 20:47 · Score: 1

There are good reasons to discount microsoft's media products as useless, but "they don't have the market share" is *not* one of them!

That's funny, because market share still is the premium reason to dismiss Apple's products...except the iPod. Please stand by while we work hard to dismiss it in other ways.

--
There's no 'on' position on the Slacker switch!

"Incompatible" with what ? by mirko · 2004-10-13 00:39 · Score: 1, Insightful

incompatible with the most popular pay-per-download site

I bet Virgin will soon open some virtual Megastore quite soon.

--
Trolling using another account since 2005.

CNET does some editing. . . by Zobeid · 2004-10-13 00:41 · Score: 5, Interesting

It would appear that someone was stung by the many negative comments posted to that article. I can't find the previous quote (from Virgin) about open standards, but now the article has this somewhat more vague sentence:

The $249 Virgin Player, weighing 3.1 ounces, supports MP3 and WMA music formats and is capable of working with various digital music services, the company said.

Of course the iPod supports AAC and MP3 and "is capable of working with various digital music services" too. So I guess that's fair enough.

Re:CNET does some editing. . . by Midnight+Thunder · 2004-10-13 01:12 · Score: 1

As you say the article was edited. CNET provided this answer to some of the comments, confirming that it was edited. Should also note that they also understood that in Apple's case it is the DRM that is proprietary and not the AAC format.:

Thanks for pointing this out. We've fixed the mistake in the story. Microsoft's WMA, like MP3 and Apple Computer's FairPlay DRM, is a proprietary format. Ogg Vorbis is a rare example of an open audio standard, but as others have pointed out, few products support it.

--
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
Re:CNET does some editing. . . by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 08:45 · Score: 0

I read about this yesterday here
it supports both MP3 and WMA like has been noted before. It might not be an Ipod killer but it looks like a sharp little player from the features listed anyway.

Cute, but wrong by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 00:41 · Score: 0

WMA can be slightly better quality than MP3 at the same bitrate, but not enough to give up MP3's major selling point:

MP3's work on every device at this point. It *is* the standard.

Not to mention that MP3's are not encumbered by by DRM.

DRM is for LOSERS.

radioSHARK (Re:Built in FM tuner, can you record?) by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 00:42 · Score: 0

It would entail using your laptop (and be a bit bulky), but have you considered using the RadioSHARK that was featured on Slashdot recently?

WMA as 'Open Standard'? Who's kidding who? by rfc1394 · 2004-10-13 00:43 · Score: 1

If they wanted to call MP3 an open standard - even though it is subject to patent licensing - since there are plenty of software libre applications supporting it, I'd go along.

If they wanted to call OGG Vorbis an open standard I wouldn't raise a single reservation as it is clearly and obviously a fully-open and unencumbered standard.

But calling a closed proprietary system like Windows Media format an open standard is a double-plus ungood use of the word 'open'.

--
The lessons of history teach us - if they teach us anything - that nobody learns the lessons that history teaches us.

Re:WMA as 'Open Standard'? Who's kidding who? by dr_erick · 2004-10-13 03:18 · Score: 0

But calling a closed proprietary system like Windows Media format an open standard is a double-plus ungood use of the word 'open'. having tried to use windows media player on MacOSes of various vintages, I'd say it's also a lousy use of the word "standard".

Virgin Planes. by achilstone · 2004-10-13 00:43 · Score: 1

Have you ever tried flying with Virgin? After watching the safety video I was terrified. It's BA from now on.

Slashdotted? by threeofnine · 2004-10-13 00:44 · Score: 0

Looks like they have been /.ed. The site is timing out. Three of Nine

neuros by mgkimsal2 · 2004-10-13 00:46 · Score: 2, Informative

The neuros mp3 player will let you record from fm, and even broadcast FM to another receiver (though I never got this feature to work very well).

I've got an older one you can buy for $50 - contact me if you're interested (mgkimsal2@yahoo.com). It's just 128 meg - no HD. You can buy a HD separately if you like the player. I don't recall if there's a MIC line in or not, but there's a built-in MIC you can record from.

--
creation science book

... on Virgin's new iPod killer by DaneelGiskard · 2004-10-13 00:48 · Score: 4, Funny

Given the responsivness of their site it rather seems to be a story on "...slashdot's new Virgin killer" ...

Re:... on Virgin's new iPod killer by kilonad · 2004-10-13 02:29 · Score: 1

Slashdot's new Virgin killer? Talk about pandering to your target audience! ;)

"it's their choice, not ours..." by mgkimsal2 · 2004-10-13 00:49 · Score: 5, Insightful

Songs downloaded from iTunes are not supported. It's their choice, not ours.

I'm glad someone has put it in such basic terms, rather than in small print.

--
creation science book

hmm by catwh0re · 2004-10-13 00:51 · Score: 2, Insightful

iPod mini or new virgin player...
I'd go the mini, mostly because it doesn't look like a plastic remote control.

Now com'on I'm tired of hearing about 'Britney killers', and 'iPod killers'. All these products are merely trying to fill a market that is reaching it's peak momentum, a person will now just buy an iPod over other devices simply because it's 'cool', and their friend has one.

Not many people left in the game who just want a music player. (Hence why the iPod does so well, despite just being a music player.)

Re:hmm by Scrameustache · 2004-10-13 15:24 · Score: 1

I'm tired of hearing about 'Britney killers'

Oh, I never tire of hearing about those.

--
You can't take the sky from me...
Re:hmm by catwh0re · 2004-10-13 18:33 · Score: 1

i think i might just be tired of hearing about all new whiney female acts, ranging from pink, to christina aguilera and avril lavigne.

Apple wants itunes all to itself by rfc1394 · 2004-10-13 00:51 · Score: 0

Apple does not want anyone else making iTunes compatible hardware^W anything; anyone remember the threats Apple raised to invoke the DMCA because Real reverse-engineered apple's proprietary Digital Rights Management system? I don't remember if it was to allow Real's content to play on an iMac, or it was so that you could play Harmony-based content under Realplayer, or what it was, but Apple got very upset about this, despite the fact that the laws are not supposed to prevent developing compatible applications, but that's exactly what companies developing DRM schemes want to use the DMCA for, to lock up their content against anything that they don't deem appropriate under their terms.

--
The lessons of history teach us - if they teach us anything - that nobody learns the lessons that history teaches us.

Re:Apple wants itunes all to itself by Kevinv · 2004-10-13 00:57 · Score: 2, Informative

No playing Real content on a Mac just requires the mac version of Real player, this incorporates Real's own DRM system.

Real reverse engineered Fairplay DRM so they could encode Real content to play on the iPod.

Real could've have gone non-DRM MP3 and that content would play on a iPod just fine. But they wanted DRM protected stuff on the iPod so it had to be encoded in Fairplay, the only DRM format iPod supports.

Re:"Incompatible" with what ? by Tony+Hoyle · 2004-10-13 00:53 · Score: 3, Informative

What, you mean like This one?

iPod killer java game anyone? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 00:57 · Score: 1, Funny

I've written it before - with all the fuss about iPod killers why don't someone with a lot of time on their hands create a java game for us all to enjoy?

Either have the iPod being the killer - ie smashing/shooting/eating the pretenders (like this one, the stuck-in-the-mud Rio Karma, ...) or have the lot of them trying to kill the iPod.

Time for the real iPod killer to enter the frame.

Halonymous

Creative Zen Micro by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 00:57 · Score: 0

I'm holding out for the new Zen Micro that Creative will release soon. Same features as the Virgin player, but a better interface.

Re:"Incompatible" with what ? by mirko · 2004-10-13 00:58 · Score: 1

Thanks for the link!
Domain created on 11-jan-2003...
I guess it was a part of the plan.

--
Trolling using another account since 2005.

'Open standards' obfuscation... by deggy · 2004-10-13 00:58 · Score: 1

You see, 'Open source' and 'Open standards' are now becoming fashionable, which means they become buzzwords, which means marketeers and journalists will try to place them in their literature as often as possible to make themselves seem 'clued in'. And since when to people in Marketing actually care about correct application of terminology as opposed to slick presentation (see just about every shampoo advert!).

All of this plays into Microsoft and the likes hands, because they would like to use the term 'open' in the same way they use the term 'innoovate' - to mean what would like it to mean rather than what it actually means.

Coolest tech gadget? by pjt33 · 2004-10-13 00:59 · Score: 4, Funny

Surely you're forgetting the Segway!

Re:Coolest tech gadget? by Sneeka2 · 2004-10-13 01:42 · Score: 2, Funny

...Segway

But, does it play OGG?!

--
Bitten Apples are still better than dirty Windows...

Re:"Incompatible" with what ? by kaleco · 2004-10-13 01:02 · Score: 1

Ah, they already had the high street Megastore chain. However, it was sold off to W H Smith (UK newsagent) IIRC. It may be difficult for them to set up a music shop, even an online one, which would rival the store they sold off.

--
Prosperity is only an instrument to be used, not a deity to be worshipped. Calvin Coolidge

So near and yet so far... by pjt33 · 2004-10-13 01:02 · Score: 1

That's what they're really missing if they want a true iPod killer.

MSFT has a similar argument by rcs1000 · 2004-10-13 01:07 · Score: 1

What these supposed challengers don't get is that Windows is not just a nifty operating system. It's part of a system that includes a browser, a set of server software, and the actual Windows platform. A "Windows killer" has to take on Windows on all of these points.

--
--- My dad's political betting

Re:MSFT has a similar argument by tclark · 2004-10-13 01:22 · Score: 1

You're right, of course, except for one thing. There's more than one Windows platform. For example, a Windows desktop is really a different platform than a Windows file/print server. There could be many different Windows killers versus the various Windows systems.

In my office, Linux/Samba is a successful Windows killer, but we haven't killed Windows on the desktop yet. It's badly wounded and it's prognosis is not good, but it's hanging in there for now.

Re:"Incompatible" with what ? by mirko · 2004-10-13 01:10 · Score: 1

This really sounds stupid : I guess the perfect business plan would be quite opposite :

give away "vpod" that can only connect to the "vstore" with the possibility to fill it with mp3 which will only be played in low quality...
... or with "hi-quality" songs which will be fully supported but are only (and VERY easily) available on the "vStore".
Profit...

Yep, it'd be ethically questionable but it'd work better than copying a good idea and ripping its basics out in order to keep the bloat only.

--
Trolling using another account since 2005.

Instant karma by chegosaurus · 2004-10-13 01:13 · Score: 4, Insightful

Man says iPod is too expensive and doesn't play ogg. HOLD THE FRONT FUCKING PAGE!

Score 4 and counting. Love those moderators.

Re:Instant karma by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 01:46 · Score: 0

Man says iPod is too expensive and doesn't play ogg. HOLD THE FRONT FUCKING PAGE!

Funniest damn post I've read on Slashdot in months.
Re:Instant karma by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 02:30 · Score: 0

Yeah, I agree, that's solid gold. Nice work.

~jeff

Give me a call when.... by Richthofen80 · 2004-10-13 01:14 · Score: 1

give me a call when these devices are $100. That's my pricepoint for 4-5 GB. $200 for 20 gb.
I don't think this is an ipod killer. the regular 20gb ipod is more of an ipod mini killer than this, because its only $50 more.

--
Reason, free market capitalism, and individualism

Re:Give me a call when.... by smurf1974 · 2004-10-13 02:14 · Score: 1

That argument is about the same as:

I will not buy a 40GB 2.5" harddrives because a 120GB 3.5" one have more storage and just a little bit more.

The main reason for buying am ipod mini is it's size . You can't measure mp3 player by price/GB alone. There are other factors (mainly design and size).

Has to be BETTER or CHEAPER by cyngus · 2004-10-13 01:15 · Score: 3, Insightful

If you want to dethrone a wildly popular product, you have to put one out there that is wildly better or quite a bit cheaper. Companies traditionally haven't been able to compete with Apple very much on the better part (perhaps clock speed, for a while), so they've come out with cheaper products. You are not going to derail the iPod with something that is roughly the same at the same price point. A little more capacity or being compatible with a different set of incompatible standards (WMA DRM vs iTMS).

Looks like the iPod GUI by JBMcB · 2004-10-13 01:17 · Score: 1

Is it just me or is everyone ripping off the iPod GUI? Most of the player's I've seen have the progress bar at the the bottom, with a couple lines of text above. Virgin's device looks a bit more cluttered, and the buttons look terrible. I've played around with a bunch of MP3 players and nothing comes close to the intuitiveness of the iPod's interface. I got one for my Mom and she figured it out in a couple minutes, while it usually takes her weeks to get used to a new remote control. Brilliant design from Apple, someone is going to have to do their homework to beat it.

--
My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.

Re:Looks like the iPod GUI by TrancePhreak · 2004-10-13 05:30 · Score: 1

Creative did this a long time before the iPod did. It's probably just one of those things that's bound to happen.

--

-]Phreak Out[-

PLEASE MODERATE THESE POSTS REDUNDANT by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 01:22 · Score: 0

jesus fucking christ this is the TENTH POST ranting about how WMA is not an open standard. DUH! Why the fuck do you think its in the article description? DID YOU EVEN READ THE FUCKING ARTICLE?

WE FUCKING KNOW WMA IS NOT OPEN! SHUT THE FUCK UP AND DISCUSS THE REST OF THE ARTICLE!!!!

Unfair to Apple by Astadar · 2004-10-13 01:24 · Score: 3, Funny

Virgin can have articles which refer to its devices as "Virgin's new iPod killer", but Apple can't really go and announce "iPod's new Virgin killer."

(at least not without some outcry from the "virgin's rights" people)

--
--Coming up with something clever... please wait...

Re:Unfair to Apple by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 07:17 · Score: 0

(at least not without some outcry from the "virgin's rights" people)

You just have to say this on /., don't you? You'd get a better response from us if you just say "at least not without some outcry from Slashdotters".

25% more storage too, that counts for something by Smack · 2004-10-13 01:27 · Score: 1

5 MB vs. 4 MB. And it has two headphone jacks.

Re:25% more storage too, that counts for something by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 02:37 · Score: 0

5MB instead of 4? I can finally fit an entire MP3 song on my player!

WOOOOOOOOO!
Re:25% more storage too, that counts for something by tbone1 · 2004-10-13 09:19 · Score: 1

5 MB vs. 4 MB.
Ah, obviously they're going after the lucrative siamese twin market.

--

The Independent: Reverend Spooner Arrested in Friar Tuck Incident - ISIHAC, Historical Headlines

Please moderate guys who use all caps as "stupid" by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 01:29 · Score: 0

Dude, you need to take a valium or something.

Slashdot... by JediLuke · 2004-10-13 01:37 · Score: 2, Funny

the Site killer...

i was going to say Virgin killer, but that just didn't sound right.

--

JediLuke
-Do or Do Not, There is no Try

iPod Killer...No Way! by mlauzon · 2004-10-13 01:37 · Score: 0

Has anyone seen the MP3 players from Pogo! Products, specifically their RipDrive (http://www.pogoproducts.com/ripdrive.html)...they do have an 80GB version but it's not listed on their web site but is listed on ThinkGeek!

--
Michael
http://s1.sfgame.us/index.php?rec=58163

Devaluing the Virgin brand by NigelJohnstone · 2004-10-13 01:38 · Score: 1

I wonder if they realise that they're devaluing the 'virgin' brand with this stuff.

Here they're talking about 'open standards' when talking about Microsoft's proprietary DRM infested WMA format. Do they think the CNET crowd are stupid? If they can't keep it real when talking about their music player, how can I trust Virgin holidays description of a resort! The crap they talk in one market affects their other markets too.

Also what happens in the future? When Microsoft finally tries to make this DRM crap work, they will have to disable writing to unprotected CDs.

It's one thing for Microsoft to screw over their customers (its almost expected of them), but Virgin?

compare the volume by jxyama · 2004-10-13 01:45 · Score: 5, Interesting

just wanted to note that this player is much closer in size to regular (20 GB) iPod than iPod mini. since it's lighter than iPod mini, i imagine it will feel less "solid" and a bit airy compared to the mini. (which would make it feel "cheaper" imo.)

20 GB iPod: 2.4 x 4.1 x 0.57 = 5.61 cu. in.
(40 GB iPod: 2.4 x 4.1 x 0.69 = 6.79 cu. in.)
iPod mini: 3.6 x 2.0 x 0.5 = 3.60 cu. in.
Virgin: 3.78 x 2.23 x 0.62 = 5.23 cu. in.

Real IPOD Killer with Ogg support ? by flyingace · 2004-10-13 01:48 · Score: 2, Insightful

This might be slightly offtopic, however is there really an iPOD killer out there ?

The rio karma stuff I read yesterday here is discouraging. I dont want to thump my harddrive into spinning, when it hangs :(

BTW I dont know if Virgins ipod rival has ogg support. I did not RTFA, as it appears to be slashdotted.

Re:"Incompatible" with what ? by irn_bru · 2004-10-13 02:04 · Score: 1

From the link:

"Virgin Digital requires a computer running Windows 2000 or XP, Internet Explorer 5.5 and up,
an internet connection, a soundcard, ears, and a small talking loaf of cheese."

If you're going try to be funny, you could at least be funny...

iSheep by gosand · 2004-10-13 02:07 · Score: 1

Every man and his dog is making an "iPod killer" these days. But none of em seem to get it.

Apple has already won, simply by the fact that every new device that comes out is compared against the iPod. I just hear "blah blah blah iPod". Free advertising for Apple every time a competitor is released and/or reviewed.

Having said all that, I don't own one but played with someone's once. It is a portable music player. It was really nicely made, but are these things really that great? They play music. I have had a Rio500 for a few years, and it does essentially the same function. I love gadgets, but I think portable music players are just trendy now. Years ago, it was the Walkman. I am really surprised that people are willing to pay hundreds of dollars for these things. Are you that dependant on music?

I think Apple has done a marvelous job with the iPod. They marketed it (probably gave it away) to celebrities and whatnot to make it visible. They made a solid product at a price that, for reasons unknown to me, people are willing to pay for the new Walkman. They made it a wanted product, and as a country of consumer sheep, people lined up to get them. For some reason though, I just don't get it.

--

My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

Re:iSheep by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 03:04 · Score: 0

Apple has already won, simply by the fact that every new device that comes out is compared against the iPod.

That is a /. thing. Away from /., I never hear anything about an iPod. I have about a 90 minute each way commute across several different public transportation systems to and from work everyday. Of the 50 or so people I see with headphones on, I MIGHT see 1 or 2 with an iPod.
Of course my post will taken as anti-Apple and modded down but I am using the real world for an example, not as heard on /.
Re:iSheep by DurendalMac · 2004-10-13 06:21 · Score: 1

Ah, but they're not just portable music players. They're portable hard drives with a music player built around them, and not only that, they're BOOTABLE hard drives. I'll bet anything that Apple techs love the things. They can jam to music, back up their data, and they can also install Mac OS X on it and boot any Mac made in the past 5 years off of it and use troubleshooting tools, you guessed, installed right on the iPod. The charging via firewire is really handy too. But more than that, Apple just made it hip. I don't give a crap, but I love my old 5 gig model. Every other weekend, I drive an hour to, then an hour from. The thing has been invaluable on those trips. Much easier and more elegant than a discman and a bunch of CDs.
Re:iSheep by Chuqmystr · 2004-10-13 12:46 · Score: 1

True dat, tis just a music player. And I own one. The original 5GB in fact. I wanted an HDD based player at the time to replace my dead Creative Nomad. That was probably most of my drive to the iPod, having started out with that POS Nomad. The first Nomad. The non-USB DRM windoze only always hanging Nomad. Sigh... shoulda got the Rio back then.
Oh, anyway, back to the point. I do much driving for my job and so am fairly reliant on audible entertainment. I've had my share of CD changers - done with that. I've had my share of CDs in the car, period. They get thrashed too easily. I bough a cig adaptor and installed a permanent RF modulator so all I have is one cable showing and if I need a charge only then do I use the cig-adapt. And being a Mac user it all works well for me. But my needs are specific.
If someone came to me price concious and interested in a basic digital portable I think I'd steer them towards a nice, inexpensive and non-DRM-ed 512MB or so flash player. Something like the iRiver or one of the many Rio's. I've borrowed a few and they work well and can hold enough tunes for a trip to the gym, an afternoon in the car, doing the yard work, etc. Just about right for the same crowd who used portable CD players all the time and didn't find themselves carting around their entire music collection.
As for me, I'm getting a 4th gen iPod and finally handing down the old 5GB to the wife. She too works on the road quite a bit and although I drug her in kicking and screaming I now have her hooked on digital music. The old 5GB works fine except it's getting a bit crowded. That and the fact that the 4th gen iPods can be conected to certain Alpine head units for an audio path, controll AND remote display. The head unit in my truck is on it's way out and what with me being an old installer and having a buddy who works for Alpine it just seems like the only right thing to do is upgrade that ipod ;-)
Point to my diatribe, there's lots of different gizmos out there to suit everyone. I'll swear by my iPod but then I do have the good sense to consider that it may not be for everyone when asked about it. Oh, and as for the Virgin offering (Pun?) screw that thing! Did you see the little boombox tube speakers they have? That's what I want! To hook upto my 'pod ;-)

Re:First. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 02:12 · Score: 0

You are the MAN.

Virgin's New Rival by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 02:17 · Score: 0

a Slashdotter!

News Flash by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 02:27 · Score: 0

News flash for idiot:
iTunes and the iPod play MP3

You are why god cries.

Limewire by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 02:34 · Score: 0

i use limewire for pop music and wilwheaton.net for port and play it on my IPOD

Quick and dirty? That thing is butt-ugly. by tentimestwenty · 2004-10-13 02:35 · Score: 2, Funny

That is one of the ugliest gadget I've ever seen. It looks like a 10 calculator from the "soft-button" era crossed with the world's worst cell phone. Who's going to want to show off that poor mutant child?

Re:Quick and dirty? That thing is butt-ugly. by daviddennis · 2004-10-13 04:05 · Score: 1

I tend to agree. It just doesn't look like a consumer icon to me.

Come to think of it, it has a Windows 2000 look with all that funeral grey.

Even Microsoft's given that up!

D
Re:Quick and dirty? That thing is butt-ugly. by Basehart · 2004-10-13 05:46 · Score: 1

I remember the first time I saw a company logo on a piece of hardware that was obviously not designed by the same company. It was the Pan Am logo on a pair of those in-flight headphones.

I realized that Pan Am didn't design those headphones because they were a piece of shit, and the Pan Am brand was one of the cooler companies out there at the time (which I why I flew with them and not Braniff). The duh part is that I never questioned that the 747 I was sat in was NOT designed by Pan Am.

The Virgin logo on this player gives me the same feeling. It doesn't fit. Virgin is a really cool brand, yet they're sticking it on something that sucks, and worse they're aligining themselves with the Dell's and WalMart's of the world by making it into just another WMA pimp.
Re:Quick and dirty? That thing is butt-ugly. by daviddennis · 2004-10-13 10:34 · Score: 1

Interesting that you compare it with Pan Am because Virgin Air now has a similar high-class image.

After I sent the parent message, I remembered that Virgin Mobile used the same colour scheme on their mobile phones. So it actually appears to be their scheme even though the phones aren't their own either.

I guess Richard Branson wanted it gray to match his suits.

But he doesn't wear suits, does he?

A very strange misstep. I expect better from his company, which is normally pretty good at doing interesting things.

D
Re:Quick and dirty? That thing is butt-ugly. by grrrl · 2004-10-13 15:51 · Score: 1

I agree - I think virgin is a pretty good brand - we have had a slew of ads over their credit cards and their obvious design choice with the corner missing, and the range of colours- i quite like them (esp the pink ;P)

but this player is sooooo ugly ugly it looks like a stunted pre-paid samsung mobile phone or something.. ewww!

even if you dont like the ipod white or scratchy silver, it still looks far more solid and, for lack of a better term, classy - not plasticy and cheap like the virgin player

iPod killer? by Refrag · 2004-10-13 02:39 · Score: 1

I'm sorry but this is the true iPod killer.

I think that term should be retired. It's obviously overused without any meaning.

--
I have a website. It's about Macs.

The Real Killer... by blueZhift · 2004-10-13 02:40 · Score: 3, Insightful

All of this talk about an iPod killer seemingly every week now is just wishful thinking. The insiders must know that the true iPod killer will be the device that does the following.

1.) Looks really good, like the iPod

2.) Plays _all_ of the major formats including OGG

3.) Works with whatever music store you like

4.) Is competitively priced and reliable

Technically this is all possible. Having a good looking player that plays all of the major music formats is well within reach. The other stuff is where it gets tricky primarily due to copyright issues. If encumbering DRM would just go away the market would explode. It is the need for DRM that leads to the current incompatibilities. Yeah, if there were a single standard it would be better (maybe) but that's not going to happen because there is basic disagreement on just what the end user should be able to do with music and how much and how often they should pay. Right now, the iPod plus iTunes offer what IMHO is the most end user friendly set of circumstances. Yeah, the iPod doesn't play OGG, but nothing keeps me from converting OGG to mp3 and loading it that way. I can even get unprotected WMA on my pod. Unfortunately a lot of the Japanese music I listen to is on copy protected CDs which are a bear to deal with, but after some work (no cracking involved) I can get these on my pod too. No extra fees or subscriptions! I can pretty much deal with music the way I did in the days of making compilation cassettes for my car or walkman. Heck, this is even easier than that was! Right or wrong, I feel more like Apple wants to help me DO things, rather than STOP me from doing things.

Bottom line, no iPod killer is likely to appear anytime soon because the fundamental problems are nowhere near resolution. Microsoft could do a lot to unify things on the Windows side, but ultimately competition among record companies isn't going to allow the kind of unification that could pose a real challenge for Apple's iPod+iTunes dominance. And of course, Apple isn't likely to be standing still either.

--
To the making of books there is no end, so let's get started

Re:The Real Killer... by tonywong · 2004-10-13 05:35 · Score: 2, Insightful

Sorry, I have to respectfully disagree with your statement.

An iPod killer has to be cooler than the iPod. That's it.

Granted UI and integration are part of the mix, but to be honest, I don't think the public gives a hoot about OGG. OGG doesn't provide joe average with any perceived benefits, so mp3/aac are considered 'good enough'. On the other hand, if there was a new format that was 10x more compression with better audio, that would be interesting.

The working with all stores thing is a bit of a red herring too, as people would be complaining about iTunes music store being too expensive or constrained, etc. It seems that ITMS is good enough as well. However, if a hardware player had software that automatically searched p2p networks for albums etc, then there'd be many people interested (especially lawyers).

Pricing isn't a major issue either, although the top iPod is probably skirting the limits of an impulse buy device. It just has to give a better perceived value than the iPod, whether it's + or - compared to the iPod.

I'll give you the reliability point, but also add consistency of the product too.

Three constants in life by SengirV · 2004-10-13 02:41 · Score: 1

1. Death
2. Taxes
3. Someone will release an "iPod killer" and will fail miserably. That thing is Fugly.

--

Prof. Farnsworth - "Oh a lesson in not changing history from Mr I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!"

Censorship by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 02:46 · Score: 2, Interesting

How about the fact that I like having all the swear words in my music? I got burned buying a snoop dogg CD at a Wal-Mart. The entire CD was reduced to the word "Snoop" over and over again with the rap beats behind it. I don't want to buy the kareoke version, thanks.

Here's another one by Garabito · 2004-10-13 02:52 · Score: 1

Another iPod killer is shown here.

Uhhh by Danathar · 2004-10-13 02:53 · Score: 2, Funny

I'm sorry...but the case design is Butt/Ass ugly.

How can I feel "Hip" with that thing?

I Still Don't Get It by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 02:53 · Score: 0

I don't buy music online (and I don't buy current popular music at all). I buy CDs, rip the .wav files, convert to mp3 and then put the CD in a secure storage area. Why should I care about iTunes?

Re:I Still Don't Get It by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 03:27 · Score: 0

Because it's great for organizing and managing music.

Shades of Apple from the 80s... by Shivetya · 2004-10-13 02:54 · Score: 1

and their "our way or the highway" mentality. Apple could be screwing themselves in the long run for some short term profitability.

I have an iPod which I think is a very good machine and the iTMS has the best licensing deal available.

However, Apple is going to eventually have to share with others as these upstarts are not going to go away. Right now they are trying to be the hardware and "songware" provider. They tried that in the 80s with their PCs and had disastorous results. They will be headed for a repeat. All it will take is for the .WMA format to get traction, just like Windows of old.

--
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.

Re:Shades of Apple from the 80s... by blowdart · 2004-10-13 03:37 · Score: 2, Informative

and the iTMS has the best licensing deal available.
And lo, the MSN music store (launched today, wait for that story) has exactly the same rules.
Re:Shades of Apple from the 80s... by hondo77 · 2004-10-13 05:12 · Score: 1

and their "our way or the highway" mentality. Apple could be screwing themselves in the long run for some short term profitability.
If Apple finds themselves losing ground, it's easy enough to license FairPlay when that becomes necessary. It's not necessary right now so why do it?

--
I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.

dead iPod by Garabito · 2004-10-13 03:06 · Score: 1

There's a dead iPod shown here

Missing features by nwbvt · 2004-10-13 03:16 · Score: 2, Interesting

I see no support for ogg vorbis (and yes that is important, I'm not re-ripping my entire CD collection because virgin doesn't know what .ogg is) or gapless playback (my Pink Floyd albums sound crappy when there are millisecond long gaps in between each song when there should be smooth transitions). Unless this player really does support both of these, I'm still shopping for a Karma.

--
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.

Re:Missing features by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 08:03 · Score: 0

It only stands to reason that someone as full of himself as you would so churlishly demand support for a format no one else on God's green Earth gives a flying fuck about.
--
Sick of pompous windbags? Change "Karma Bonus" modifier to -1 penalty.
Re:Missing features by nwbvt · 2004-10-13 08:24 · Score: 1

You've clearly not been on slashdot very long, troll boy.
I was beginning to think you had decided there were better things to do with your life than be a troll and that I could change my sig. Oh well...

--
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
Re:Missing features by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 08:36 · Score: 0

Funny, I was beginning to hope you'd seen the error of your ways and committed to reforming. Then along comes this last post of yours, with a karma bonus attached to a thinly-veiled personal attack.

Ball's in your court, Nick.
--
Sick of pompous windbags? Change "Karma Bonus" modifier to -1 penalty.
Re:Missing features by nwbvt · 2004-10-15 02:40 · Score: 1

"Then along comes this last post of yours"
What, the post that was modded up by the moderators? Seems you are about the only one complaining about it. No news there.
"Ball's in your court, Nick."
What ball? I'm not playing any game with you. Your life must be really sad if you think otherwise.

--
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
Re:Missing features by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-15 04:55 · Score: 0

"This last post of yours" I was referring to was, in fact, literally this last post of yours: offtopic, irrelevant, unnecessary and factually fantastical. Yet you posted it at +2.

Until you demonstrate the ability to differentiate between comments that merit a karma bonus and comments that are merely the unfortunate spawn of your planet-sized ego, I will endeavor to educate you in this regard.
--
Sick of pompous windbags? Change "Karma Bonus" modifier to -1 penalty.
Re:Missing features by nwbvt · 2004-10-17 03:57 · Score: 1

There was nothing "thinly-veiled" about that personal attack. You are nothing more than a sorry ass troll.
And I would personally argue a post pointing out that you are an idiot is more than worthy of a +2 (not that it matters to most people, with most settings +2 shows up in exactly the same way as +1, which is likely why you are the only person ever on /. to whine about karma bonuses).
Its funny, I used to occasionally turn off the karma bonus modifier, but thanks to you I'm keeping it on indefinitely just to spite you.

--
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
Re:Missing features by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-18 09:56 · Score: 0

I don't believe you for one lousy second when you claim you used to "occasionally turn off the karma bonus modifier." Find me just one post that demonstrates this restraint, and I'll never bother you again. Of course, you'll also have to point me to a previous comment of yours that shows you had a karma bonus available to use at all.

Unless you're lying, Nick, this shouldn't be terribly difficult using the search functions here and on Google. I'm going to have to call bullshit on this one until you prove otherwise.
--
Sick of pompous windbags? Change "Karma Bonus" modifier to -1 penalty.
Re:Missing features by nwbvt · 2004-10-19 17:28 · Score: 1

Please enlighten me how to use google to search for posts on slashdot based on their moderation amounts. I would really like to know.

--
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
Re:Missing features by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-19 20:58 · Score: 0

I'll ignore your sarcasm, you supercilious asshole, and give you a hint: try this.
--
Sick of pompous windbags? Change "Karma Bonus" modifier to -1 penalty.
Re:Missing features by nwbvt · 2004-10-19 22:32 · Score: 1

Do you know how search engines work?
All that gives you is a list of sites which contain that exact string in the cached version. Thats far from a complete list. Or were you under the odd impression that I have my karma built up to "Excellent" after only nine posts? Or that all of my 674 posts are contained in a mere 45 articles?
Nice try genius. But you will have to do better than that.

--
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
Re:Missing features by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-21 13:50 · Score: 0

All right, but you're still going to have to prove your claim that you "used to occasionally turn off the karma bonus modifier." Given your posting history and self-worshipful personality, I think you're lying.

Show me just one example of your past discretion, and you'll never have to see me again.
--
Sick of pompous windbags? Change "Karma Bonus" modifier to -1 penalty.
Re:Missing features by nwbvt · 2004-10-22 09:17 · Score: 1

"All right, but you're still going to have to prove your claim that you "used to occasionally turn off the karma bonus modifier.""
Actually, no I don't.
"Given your posting history and self-worshipful personality, I think you're lying."
I don't give a fuck what some Nazi-troll that I occasionally mock and make fun of thinks of me. I thought you had realized that by now.

--
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
Re:Missing features by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-22 11:10 · Score: 0

Well, Nick, you seemed to be so irked by my presence that I thought you'd jump at the chance to be rid of me forever. All you would have to do is show me you voluntarily unchecked the Karma Bonus box just once. If you were telling the truth, it really wouldn't be that hard.
--
Sick of pompous windbags? Change "Karma Bonus" modifier to -1 penalty.
Re:Missing features by nwbvt · 2004-10-23 08:56 · Score: 1

Tell you what. Since you are the one and only person who cares about how karma bonuses are used, why don't you scroll through the thousands of stories submitted between when my karma went up to Excellent and when I met you. Besides, its not like you have a life anyways.

--
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
Re:Missing features by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-23 10:10 · Score: 0

You know, I figured from the start that you'd try to weasel your way out of having to support your incredible claim with evidence. However, in the interest of courtesy, I decided to offer you the opportunity to demonstrate your trustworthiness, just in case I was wrong about you.

It is now becoming increasingly evident that you were lying all along, as I suspected. You have, in fact, never opted to mark the "No Karma Bonus" checkbox.

Your shamelessness is annoying, your pointless deceit is petty, and your exaggerated self of self-importance is singularly pathetic. It is small wonder that more Slashdotters dislike than like you. And to judge from what I've seen of your behavior in this forum, I'd be surprised if the same were not true of those you associate with in everyday life.

You just can't seem to get along with people, can you, Nick? Poor boy.
--
Sick of pompous windbags? Change "Karma Bonus" modifier to -1 penalty.

Apple's biggest rival by HAKdragon · 2004-10-13 03:27 · Score: 2, Interesting

I honestly think that Apple's biggest rival, as it stands right now, is itself. I know that when the 4th generation iPods came out I was tempted to sell my 3rd gen. iPod to purchace the new one. I doubt that I'm alone in that as well.

--
"Our opponent is an alien starship packed with atomic bombs. We have a protractor."

and this is good because? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 03:43 · Score: 0

Archos *cough* 6gig *cough* records as well *cough* under 200bucks *cough*

nuff said

Neuros Audio Computer by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 03:56 · Score: 0

http://www.neurosaudio.com/

enough said.

- Oren

What about the battery? Is it end-user-replacable? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 04:55 · Score: 0

I use a PC, not a Mac. My music collection exists in MP3 and WMA form - therefore an expensive iPod would mean lots and lots of transcoding lossy->lossy time consuming fun.

However, to have an iPod killer, you'd better beat the iPod in every way. I read above that you can pause the iPod and it picks up the pause location in iTunes, and vice versa. Now _that_ fucking rocks.

So here's where the iPod falls short for me:
1. Very expensive.
2. Doesn't play audio in both of the formats I use.
3. Non-replacable battery - I think. I've been watching this closely and I've noticed that some third parties out there are selling replacement batteries for "2g" and "3g" iPods. That sounds promising, but what about the current 4th generation model? Did Apple figure out how to fuck you out of replacing the battery yourself?

4. Generations: It seems like Apple continuously comes out with better and better iPods. I'll be God _DAMNED_ if I'm going to let myself get caught up in that kind of expensive race. I hear there's a 60GB iPod coming that'll display pictures but not video, and cost $600.00. Meh.

So to beat the iPod, give me the same or better features like pausing and synchronizing the paused position (love that), give me a replaceable batterry, if you put an FM tuner (why no AM??) you'd better allow me to record it, and for that matter I should be able to schedule it all, both on the device and from the PC.

rather have this by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 05:26 · Score: 0

274 USD on ebay--- http://www.archos.com/products/overview/gmini_400. html

iPod killer? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 05:27 · Score: 0

If looks could kill...

Other AAC stores... by Otto · 2004-10-13 05:49 · Score: 3, Informative

I appreciate that the parent poster was joking but it is worth pointing out that if the Apple store starts to jack up the prices, there is nowhere else you can legimately purchase the AAC files that they sell.

Off the top of my head:
-Magnatune
-Real's Music store (yes, it sells AAC at 192kbps)
-Allofmp3.com (dubious legality aside)

AAC is by far a more open format than WMA. Anybody could setup a music store to sell AAC files. Now, doing it with DRM and supporting the iPod or iTunes is a different story, I grant you. But Real did it and following their lead might be a good approach.

--
- Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.

Looks like shite, but... by fbg111 · 2004-10-13 05:50 · Score: 1

at least it's got an FM tuner built in. Hopefully this will be the start of at trend that forces Apple's future iPods along with it.

--
Flying is easy, just throw yourself at the ground and miss. -Douglas Adams

Re:Looks like shite, but... by Hitchcock_Blonde · 2004-10-13 06:37 · Score: 0

"forces"? Hah! Obviously, the majority of purchasers don't see an FM tuner as essential.

--
Karma Schmarma

Completely off base by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 05:54 · Score: 0

That makes no sense. How do you integrate playlists/smartplaylists? How do you (as the parent says) resume books from the same point depending on which device you listened to last? How you keep files in sync without using a script involving rsync/unison to copy files over? Hard drives are nice for data storage. For humongous music libraries, very sophisticated shell scripts or nicely done programs are required.

File under failed iPod killer by EtherAlchemist · 2004-10-13 05:59 · Score: 1

I don't see anything about this that would give an iPod a run for the money. Compared against the iPod Mini, Virgin's device is only .4 ounces lighter, only has 1GB more storage and costs the same.

The extra features are not really much of a value add; dual headphone jacks? FM Tuner? I'm sorry, but if someone is in the market for an iPod and sees this, the chances they'll pick it over a pod are really slim.

--
R(k)

Competition is a good thing. by Trauma_Hound1 · 2004-10-13 06:10 · Score: 1, Interesting

"(and incompatible with the most popular pay-per-download site), so calling it an iPod killer seems a bit premature."

Well it's abvious it's incompatible, since Apple made the choice not to let anyone else use they're DRM. I personally would like a choice of what service I can use, and not be locked into one. Are you suggesting competition is a bad thing?

--
Don't Vote for Norm Dicks! http://www.nodicks2008.com Another nutless dirtbag that voted for the FISA bill!

Of course.. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 06:33 · Score: 0

it's incompatible with the "most popular pay-for-play service".. Apple won't allow it.

No sense in allowing competition when you can lock everyone else out, and make massive profits, right?

the smoking gun. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 06:49 · Score: 1, Informative

I looked through half this list and I only found one other person who noticed it.

You can debate all you want about capacity, DRM, WMA, MP3, open source and what not. That's important. But if you approach average joe who doesn't know the difference between all of that, what iPod succeeds where everything else has failed, is it's interface.

Every function on an iPod can be accessed by your thumb on a very simple user interface. Between 4 buttons and a wheel, the person has absolute control without having to push buttons in corners, sides, and what not.

The nature of the scroll wheel allows the overall package to be very slim and small. Until someone else can dream up of an interface that's easier to use and more efficient then iPod's scroll wheel, then iPod will reign king for a long time. And don't expect a scroll wheel to come out on a non iPod player anytime soon. Apple has the rights to it from synaptics.

Wait just a minute... by Performaman · 2004-10-13 06:51 · Score: 1

When was WMA an "open standard?"

--

I have gas, but my car uses petrol.

Re:Wait just a minute... by Ziviyr · 2004-10-13 08:35 · Score: 1

Since Xiph got a hold of it and, uhh, hmmm, no.

Well, as far as megacorps like Virgin go, perhaps it is open, to them. Thats my best guess.

--

Someone set us up the bomb, so shine we are!

Virgin Galactic by green+pizza · 2004-10-13 07:01 · Score: 1

Not trolling, but (with one obvious exception - Virgin Galactic) when has Branson innovated?
Heh. Pam-Am Airlines (a huge airline at one time, now long since bankrupt) gave away "free moon flight" tickets years ago. They wanted (and believed) they would be the first airline to offer flights into space.

Here's a pic of one of the goodies that came in their space packet:
http://www.asahi-net.or.jp/~ym9n-em/about/card.htm l

What about the Rio Karma... by aquarian · 2004-10-13 07:12 · Score: 1

Wasn't the Rio Karma just reviewed here on Slashdot?

It can only stay a Virgin if it's ugly by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 07:22 · Score: 0

That is the point of the design!

Looks Like a Killer to Me by $criptah · 2004-10-13 07:58 · Score: 0

I am probably one of the very few Mac users who does not rave about iPods or any other Apple products. I do not know why, but for some freaking reason I do not feel obligated to be a part of the crazy clan of Mac clowns that will sell their first-born for the latest shit-on-a-stick made by Apple. Also, I found it ironic that there are Mac users that blame the rest of the world for being corporate slaves and not thinking outside the box, while taking it up the ass whenever Steve and Co. decide to release yet another overpriced item. That's what makes this "iPod killer" semi-attractive to me.Here is why I would get this player over iPod:

1. I would hate to be a part of this whole damn Apple clan.
2. Simply retarded iPod commercials.
3. Apple featuring kids, who were caught downloading songs, in its commercials.
4. I refuse to shell out big bucks for a product that is going to be outdated (at least by our society's standards) within two months.

Plus, if you take a look at iPod, it is really expensive if you want to have all the damn functionality that can be desired by a vivid music fan. I want that damn FM/AM add-on to be included with the product, an extra battery (w/o the extra price), a belt-clip, a pair of headphones, a couple of cases, a small remote control, etc. If you add all these things up, iPod will be pretty freaking pricy.

The iPod juggernaut rolls on: 2M sold this quarter by phillymjs · 2004-10-13 09:09 · Score: 0

A little while ago Apple announced their quarterly financial results. Check out this tidbit:

Apple said it shipped 836,000 Macs and 2,016,000 iPods during the quarter, representing a 6 percent increase in CPU units and a 500 percent increase in iPods over the year-ago quarter. (Emphasis mine)

For the three months those numbers cover, Apple sold nearly one thousand iPods per hour. I'd say all the pretenders to the throne have their work cut out for them.

~Philly

Branson's innovations by fiannaFailMan · 2004-10-13 09:10 · Score: 1

when has Branson innovated?

Glad you asked because I'm currently reading his autobiography.

His first business venture was Student magazine, a publication produced on a shoestring budget but filled a gap in the market for the kind of news and information that students wanted and needed. He was subject to some ground-breaking courtroom action in which he had to fight for the right to publish information on where to get treatment for vinerial desease, and he opened a student advisory centre to help students with problems that they felt unable to speak to parents or their local doctors about.

Virgin records was his next invention - mail-order music at discount prices.

His music shops were the first of their kind. They were hip, cool, the sort of places where young people wanted to go and they only sold albums, as opposed to the dreary basements of corporate bookstores which was the only other place you could buy music up to then and most of which was pop singles.

Virgin Trains, whilst running on a clapped-out and congested network, still introduced a new era of customer service for first class passengers who can now relax in a first-class lounge in major railway stations.

Virgin Atlantic is not 'just another airline.' It was the first truly price-competitive carrier on the transatlantic route and gave British Airways a badly-needed kick up the backside. It was the first to introduce seat-back entertainment in ALL the cabin including economy class, something that some other carriers have still not gotten around to doing. Oh, and you can get a massage in First Class. And they have reintroduced the concept of the on-board lounge to civil aviation.

Then there's the publicity stunts, the world-record challenges like winning the Blue Riband, crossing the Atlantic in a balloon, flying around the world in a balloon etc.

If Virgin were a computer company, it'd be Apple but with even more flair. It's one of the most dynamic, innovative and fun companies I know of.

--
Drill baby drill - on Mars

Re:Branson's innovations by 16K+Ram+Pack · 2004-10-13 11:51 · Score: 1

I wouldn't class any of these things as real "innovations". Improvements, yes, but then in a whole lot of areas, other people can be given as much credit as Virgin for other innovations (Easyjet have done far more for airline competition than Virgin, for example).
What Virgin have done very successfully is establish a brand, and with all the publicity stunts, made themselves appear very go-ahead and innovative.
Re:Branson's innovations by fiannaFailMan · 2004-10-13 12:52 · Score: 1

I'd say they are innovative in terms of business practices, but as you say you could just say they are improvements. Semantics.
As for easyjet, they're only in the short-haul business - very different from long haul where you've gotta make your passengers comfortable and where the no food no frills approach would not cut it.

--
Drill baby drill - on Mars

Pendolino trains by fiannaFailMan · 2004-10-13 09:36 · Score: 1

I forgot to add that Virgin was the first to get tilting trains (Pendolino) working commercially, if you don't include the old APT that British Rail unsuccessfully experimented with in the 80s.

--
Drill baby drill - on Mars

Virgin vs. Apple by gjh · 2004-10-13 10:02 · Score: 1

If there's one thing that Virgin does well, it is actually honesty.

Witness Virgin UK's mobile phone SIM pack. Take any GSM phone. They will give you tips (or they did when I did it) on unlocking the phone from your previous operator. Insert the new SIM.

You can set up regular debit card payment if you want international calls - or you can pay as you go.

No monthly charge
Cheap calls
No contract, however you pay
No down payment at all, even to join.
Bring your number at no charge.
See all your billing online, however you pay.
Never pay for incoming calls.

But perhaps more importantly - they tell you all of this in plain English.

I find it sort of painful to see my two favorite benevolent companies at odds like this.

my other MP3 player is an MP3 player by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-13 10:05 · Score: 0

Whether or not I can use formats from pay per song sites doesn't affect whether I like a player or not. Aslong as it plays MP3s, the interface is nice, there is enough storage and the battery life is good.

Interesting to see that upon purchasing an Ipod, paying per song is not just polite, but a neccessity.

Looks like... by SuperKendall · 2004-10-13 10:24 · Score: 1

A lozenge. Or suppository...