MP3 Player Shoppers Guide

An anonymous reader writes "Says this three-part rundown of the latest DAPs "When Sony execs crowed a few weeks ago that their latest MP3 players were THE iPod Killers one thing was obvious. They were oblivious to the fact that the term "iPod Killer" had already gone from clever market-speak to running joke." Still, quite a few neat players here and I bet most don't scratch up as bad as iPods do."

Comments

And I bet...

[chipset]

They won't put a dent in the iPod sales, either.

This issue is user experience. You can add all the gadgetry you want, but it becomes a complex tool. People want their music device simple, easy to navigate and elegant. They don't want the kitchen sink thrown into the tool.

Re:And I bet...

[DWIM]

You can add all the gadgetry you want, but it becomes a complex tool. People want their music device simple, easy to navigate and elegant. They don't want the kitchen sink thrown into the tool.

This is a tiresome argument anymore. At one point, it had more credibilitiy, especially when discussing the merits of competitors to the iPod, such as the iRiver H-1xx & H-3xx line of DAPs. But with the iPod gaining first a color screen (so you can view pictures on your music player!) and now video, it is almost laughable hearing about the desire for simplicity. Apple are slowing throwing the kitchen sink into their product. It won't be a surprise at all if they eventually provide FM tuning & recording features in a future iPod.

DAPs are becoming more complex for the average Joe. The challenge, which is where Apple continues to shine, is in continuing to make it easy to navigate and elegant (which you rightfully point out).

Re:And I bet...

[jsebrech]

But with the iPod gaining first a color screen (so you can view pictures on your music player!) and now video, it is almost laughable hearing about the desire for simplicity. Apple are slowing throwing the kitchen sink into their product.

Apple throw the kitchen sink in there in a way that makes it invisible. The video functionality if the ipod is completely invisible unless you use it. The basic behavior of the ipod is pretty much unchanged, except it has gotten a little glossier over the years.

Same thing with itunes. Even though it can do a LOT more, its user interface has actually simplified over the last few versions (in my experience at least).

Seems odd...

[NVP_Radical_Dreamer]

Looks like sony wants to have their cake and eat it too. If its not legal to rip their music. Then how is their MP3 player supposed to be filled? I guess its ok to rip OTHER peoples music.

Re:Seems odd...

[Jonny_eh]

I would REALLY like to see Sony Consumer Electronics called to the stand by people suing Sony over the rootkit. They could ask them if they believe ripping music is 'fair use', and if not, what the point of their product is.

Re:Sony eh?

[canuck57]

And do keep in mind that the Sony rootkit could in theory come in from a USB device like it does from a CD. I would go with iPod. Apple is not likely to make the same mistake that Sony did. Or I would hope not.

It's iTunes

[hsoft]

I briefly looked at the list, and I didn't see any player supporting AAC format (Of course, I guess that apple don't license their format for other players). All my music collection is managed by iTunes, and most of my files are AAC. If I wanted to buy a portable player, what choices I have other than iPod?

The iPod Killer must come with an iTunes Killer!

Is anyone competing on price?

[JayBlalock]

I mean, seriously. Where is it? Why are none of the major brands seriously trying to push the price point down?

HD-based players are still too pricy for the average consumer. Yet the price of them hasn't changed significantly in years. Surely the drives in them are cheaper and easier to produce than they were in 2001 - so why has the price not come down significantly?

Instead, the consumer is forced to make ridiculous compromises like "will you pay $100 less and get 1/10 the storage?" Or, "How about $200 less, and you don't get a screen or any control over the playlist either."

I look over that list, and pretty much all of them, within their subclass, are IDENTICAL. The only difference is the brand name and the particular shape of the player. And, in fact, it seems like the entire industry is becoming LESS innovative, not more, especially with Rio leaving the market. I couldn't even tell you the difference between most of those.

And then people wonder why Apple has all the market share. It's the only brand name most people can name, the only one they've heard of, and none of the other models offer ANYTHING substantial to recommend themselves over it. And in the meantime, no one seems willing to try to open the market up a bit by making good players available at affordable prices.

It seems like, once again, an example of the music industry collectively shooting itself in the foot, and then whining about why no one else lives in the same world they do.

/uses a buggy out-of-production player he found on clearance for $50

Screening : My First Question

[Fantasio]

Is it seen as a USB mass storage device ? If not, you have failed. I do not want to see any kind of your proprietary software on my PC to get access to your device.

Re:Trojan Horse?

[TheRaven64]

I believe the grandparent was using the term Trojan Horse in the classical sense, rather than the malware sense. iTunes is used to sneak in QuickTime. A lot of people now have QuickTime installed as a result of iTunes requiring it who would not have installed it as a stand-alone download. It does not imply that anything underhand or illegal was done.

Re:Maybe

[mr_shifty]

One main thing kept me from buying an iPod when I was MP3 player shopping.

The fact that you need to use an app (like iTunes) to load music onto it that you want to listen to.

To me, a hard-drive based digital audio player should be able to play music copied to it via Windows Explorer or Konqueror or whatever file manager you prefer to use, on whatever operating system you prefer to use.

Making it so that the iPod will ONLY play music loaded onto it via iTunes frustrates me and makes me feel restricted, like they want me to ONLY use it the way they want me to.

I don't like paying that kind of money for a device and feeling restricted.

Which was why I took my $300 and went with a different player. What I ended up with actually does more, as it turns out, than the iPod, and does it cheaper and it works the way I want it to.

Drag, drop, play. Simple. No annoying applications necessary, no annoying and unnecessary compulsory synchronization with my computer.

Personally, I think the iPods are pretty slick, but that one thing is enough to make me unwilling to shell out my bucks for it.

Re:Maybe

[Bud]

Making it so that the iPod will ONLY play music loaded onto it via iTunes frustrates me and makes me feel restricted, like they want me to ONLY use it the way they want me to.

You might have missed the point of the iPod. Remember that computers are great at handling large amounts of tiny pieces of information, and great at performing rule-based actions. Managing your MP3 player manually is like editing your web site using a text editor. Sure, you have 100% control. Sure, your HTML looks exactly like you want it to. But it just doesn't scale. Have more than N pages, you need a content management system. iTunes is your content management system for music. Stop micromanaging, give up control, gain command.

--Bud