Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft's Tips for Buying an MP3 Player
An Anonymous Reader writes "In another extension of Microsoft's 'Plays for Sure' campaign, the company has launched a web page with six tips to help consumers purchase the 'correct' MP3 Player for them. Among the insights of the article hard drive-based players suck and a stopwatch is a useful feature to have on your player. Unsurprisingly, the iPod meets none of Microsoft's criteria. A humorous commentary is available, of course." From the article: "6. Don't get locked into one online store. Have you ever been on the hunt for a particular song? Some obscure indie rock tune or rare jazz performance you heard on the radio? You might have to shop at more than one store before you find the song you're looking for."
They didn't say microdrive players suck, but the page IS about flash players. About the display thing, I wholeheartedly agree, I think people assume any ipod is "teh coolness", but I'd rather buy a flash player with a display and fm tuner for the same price as an ipod shuffle, I think apple manages to confuse a decent amount of people, and the apple fanatics, well, they'll buy anything apple.
The Neuros is a brick when compared to the iPod, and that's the only reason it never sold that well. Had it had its current feature list and been the same size as an iPod it would have done much better, even with its limited marketing budget.
Sure, the iPod's looks carry it a ways, but it's the size of the thing, and its smootheness (which makes for better pocket-ability than any of its last gen competition) that have made it so popular. Most consumers care far more about how big a DAP is than about its format support or even battery life...
Unsurprisingly, the iPod meets none of Microsoft's criteria.
Is that so? Up until recently, I seem to recall every iPod sold having a display.
Some obscure indie rock tune or rare jazz performance you heard on the radio? You might have to shop at more than one store before you find the song you're looking for.
Rare jazz performance? Sure, I often want stuff like that, but why would I buy it off of an online digital music store? Nearly every store supplies its songs in a mediocre 128kbps-ish format, generally sub-par to the equivalent LAME encoded 128kbps VBR MP3. Why would I want jazz, with all its high-hats and dynamic range, in an uber-low quality format? Britney Spears' new single, sure.. but jazz??
And don't say AllOfMp3.com (who have changed CC processor to someone else)..
The whole purpose of having an MP3 player is not to have to listen to the radio...
Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity
why isn't there a Linux mp3 player?
Maybe because... an MP3 player doesn't NEED a freaking OS?
Seriously, with these mindless Linux plugs you guys just support the "Does your toaster run Linux?"-jokes, and heavens know we are fed up with them.
Sigged!
i run and listen to mp3s, then at some point i get bored with my choices, and yearn for something random and fresh: voila, radio, different channels, different tastes
You obviously live in a place where the the FM stations are not unholy portals of heart-wrenchingly bad music. This is a fairly rare and precious thing. In my town the only stations worth listening to are low-power (including the pirate station I used to DJ for), and the reception in my neighborhood is too crapy for a portable player. I listen in the car, but then of course I don't need a portable player at all.
All but one of the other stations are owned by Clear Channel and suck in a utterly uniform manner.
isn't that incredibly asocial and self-important and stuffy?: "i know all there is to know about my musical tastes and my tastes will never change on a moments notice and yearn to hear something new and fresh"
This statement makes the assumption that people that don't listen to the radio don't have other means of hearing new music.
Radio is *not* the only way to hear no things, and is my experience, the *worst* way to hear anything new and fresh.
Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
How many people would choose an iPod Shuffle over one of these?
You mean, how many people would choose a 1024/512 megabytes players over 256/128 megabytes players? Count me in. And as for the price difference - it will be eaten up quite soon by the non-rechargeable batteries.
You know, in a way I tend to agree with MS here, in the sense that I always thought moving parts are a bad thing for mobile entertainment devices. Idealy, if it is possible, I'd like my MP3 player to be fully solid state tech. Less power consumption, more rugged, and perhaps higher data density.
Of course, when the price factors in he equation, HD starts to look much more attractive...
Sigged!
Except, of course, for all of the ones that don't and haven't. Because the average consumer (as opposed to the average Slashdotter) doesn't care if their music is OGG, MP3, WMA, CD, or cassette. They want to be able to access it and listen to it when they want. All the other questions pale in significance by comparison.
Basic conclusion? Determine your size needs. This is based on A. How long do you listen it in one go. B. What is your tolerance for repeats. C. How often do you chance your songs. If you use it 4 hours per day, can't stand to hear the same song more then once in a week and never replace your songlist you are going to need more space then someone who likes to listen to the same album over and over again. HD's also can be damaged more easily by extreme rough use. Not by carrying them with you in your pocket while running but if you throw your stuff around the hd might not survive. For most people there will be no problems.
So don't be tempted by "extras". Extras are easy. Making a damned good solid mp3 player is not.
As for the whole wma nonsense. My hearing is pretty bad but on the whole
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
I assume what everyone is talking about when they dismiss radio as being teh suck is commerical radio. Personally, I stopped listening to commercial FM long before it became the province of Clear Channel and friends.
What is readily available on FM that is not commerical includes the following:
If you're interested in music only, you may want to start with something like this station if you don't have something similar in your own backyard. Most likely more interesting than what you're listening to at the moment.
Then, of course, if you're not the musical type and have a preference for animated conversations in which people share their opinions with others who have identical opinions, there's always AM radio.
Call me stupid, but I thought that the store using closed & DRMed formats were the ones doing the locking in, not the player that didn't support the locked format.
After all, had they used a open format, I would be able use it on any fscking device wouldn't I?
Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
I don't know.... I can see the validity to the argument that the Shuffle lowers the bar for "Apple quality" - since it's just a "me too" flash player for people who only shop for "cheap".
On the other hand, it went along with the Mac Mini, which is another experiment by Apple to cater to the lower end of the market - and most people consider the Mac Mini a stunning success.
I'd never buy a Shuffle, but by the same token, I'd also never buy an iPod Mini. They seem like "all style, no substance" to me. You pay close to the price of a player that can store 4x as much music or more, and you get the exact same thing except in a little bit smaller, colored casing? But nonetheless, it was a huge success.
Sometimes, you can't just go by the "feature set for the $" to determine what will be a "hit". It may determine what the "technophiles" among us buy, but the general public has other motivations. I've talked to a number of iPod Mini customers, and generally - they don't do lots of MP3 downloading. They jusy buy a few things here and there off iTunes and rip the CDs they already own - so 5GB is plenty of space for 'em.