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."
I know about Linux PDAs and such but is there a Linux-based mp3 player. It seems like a great idea since you wouldn't have to pay fees on the OS. Plus Linux is pretty customizable. Open the player up so people can write plugins and new features. Why hasn't anyone thought of this?
The best education consists in immunizing people against systematic attempts at education. - Paul Feyerabend
few with fm radio
how come mp3 players with fm radio are so hard to find?
doesn't it occur to manufacturers/ consumers how much functionality is added with so little effort by adding fm radio?
i have an iriver IFP-180T solely on the basis of it having an fm radio
how much does the fm radio circuitry add to the cost of an mp3 player? 50 cents?
will someone please enlighten me then how come fm radio is so hard to find in mp3 players?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
From the article:
"*Approximate figures based on CD-quality WMA (64 Kbps)"
Am I the only one who don't think 64kbps WMA is "CD quality", or is it because the quality of todays recordings on CDs are quite a lot worse than they used to be, of could I just be insane?
Make me doubt one fact, and I'll start doubting all facts...
Microsoft says 64kb/s WMA is CD quality.
What does that makes 128kb/s? Or 192kb/s? Sooperdooperaudiophonicbeyondcompare quality?
The only thing that is CD quality is...a CD. And while 128kb/s AAC is fine (and somewhat better than MP3 and WMA), it isn't even close to CD quality.
64kb/s? That isn't even FM radio quality. I'm not talking Clear Channel 99.something playing the top five hits over and over FM. I'm talking real FM quality (i.e. WGMS in Washington DC, or hundreds of PBS/NPR stations across the U.S.). Heck, I've not heard a WMA that I would compare to CD, and I'm not talking expensive stereos; I'm talking about listening on a stock car stereos.
I realize this is a silly rant, and there are people who listen who really can't tell the difference. But lets stop pretending on audio quality. It reminds of the 60's when every amplifier manufacturer was claming the most ridiculous power outputs until the government stepped in and made them stop.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
Let me be the first to think you for dumping lots of "fun" chemicals into the wastestream by using AA batteries to power your portable electronics.
Of course, you refer to using recordable CDs as an "utterly disposable format" so I guess you're one of those folks who thinks that plastic comes from the magic plastic tree and that when you put things into the trash can, they magically "go away".
Unfortunately, in the world I live in, we have landfills, batteries and plastic require raw materials and energy to create and are difficult to actually degrade into their components.
But hey - why consider anything but your own convenience when buying a product?
And for those ready to complain about Apple's "proprietary" battery, I think $100.00 every couple of years for a thin-pack L-Ion battery, proper disposal of said battery, and a product that doesn't eat little toxic sausages constantly is a pretty fair price to pay. YMMV.