The Latest iPod Assassination Attempt 310
Insani-CTO writes "David Pogue at the New York Times reviews Samsung's new Z5, the latest attempt at an 'iPod killer' He gives it a pretty favorable review, though doesn't quite count the Nano as dead quite yet. From the piece: 'The Z5, then, will not cause any discernible dip in iPod market share. It does, however, deserve to be a hit for Samsung. For someone who wants a Nano that's not a Nano, it's a close enough match in looks, sleekness, capacity and crystal-clear software design. In fact, if iPod didn't loom over every conversation as the screamingly obvious point of comparison, the Z5 could be the next little thing.'"
I love Samsung? (Score:5, Interesting)
Last year my Sony television finally died. I replaced it with a Samsung unit, and couldn't be happier. My cell phone needed replacement, and my Samsung t809 has to be the best cell phone I've ever used (I believe it earns me at least $300 a month more just through added efficiency in my life). The Samsung Origami unit is very promising. My next fridge will be a Samsung (based on my recent experience in India with the units I used there). Same thing with the microwave.
How is it that a quiet company from Korea can produce great products that actually work, and back it up with great customer service? When my cell phone gave me a few minor problems, Samsung replied within 6 hours. They offered to compensate me for my problems (I declined as most were just features I needed that weren't available).
The lady of the house has 2 iPods and she loves them. I know they're saving me time and money because we don't have to store CDs anymore, and the square footage savings alone reduces the clutter in my life. I personally don't like the iPod -- the interface is nice, but it isn't easy enough or fast enough.
I don't see the need to change things, yet, but as consumer goods go, for me it is more about time saved and my life made easier. I doubt there is anything they can offer to make me sell the iPods and buy the Z5. I wonder if there are enough happy iPod users out there to make the market ever-declining for the competition. Considering Samsung picked up the iPod brainstormer, it's possible they'll actually find ways to trump the iPod, but the momentum of sales so far will make it a very difficult path to take. It amazes me how much money is being spent by the competition for obviously sub-par products. What can Samsung do differently to attract the attention of the mass public who already is familiar with Apple's product?
Nonetheless, Samsung does have my attention -- here and in everything else they make. For those not familiar with their products, I highly recommend taking a look the next time you need a consumer appliance or product. I'm amazed at the pricing, features and overall service.
You thought you loved Samsung before... (Score:5, Funny)
Samsung Means To Come [yhchang.com]
(Warning: Flash-based and requires sound for full effect; content is all text but not necessarily safe for work)
Re:I love Samsung? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I love Samsung? (Score:3, Interesting)
I'll be buying Samsung stuff in the future when I need new stuff. I just hope that they don't all break once requiring on-site repairs!
Re:I love Samsung? (Score:5, Funny)
You should ask to borrow one of your mom's iPods. :)
Re:I love Samsung? (Score:2)
i liked my rio more, but i lost it. however, it DID have a hard plastic over the lcd, something i didnt realize was so nice to have :/
Re:I love Samsung? (Score:2)
No offense - I'm honestly curious - how is the iPod interface "hard?"
Re:I love Samsung? (Score:2)
I don't have an answer or a solution, but I think there is more "AI" style interface designs out there to be discovered. I love T9 on my cell phone, I'd love to find something not really similar but in the same vein for getting to a song, album or whatever quicker.
If I had the solution, I'd make the product. I don't, but I know there is still the killer app interface waiting to be found.
Re:I love Samsung? (Score:2, Interesting)
Another Samsung fan (Score:4, Interesting)
After many years of use, the report is that it is fantastic. I have never had an issue with it, the inside is well organized, and I actually like the ice maker/water dispenser. In fact this turns out to be one of the great things about the fridge. One thing you can't usually try in a store is the water/ice dispenser, and I have been to many people's houses over the interviening years and found all other kinds really inferior. Either they combine ice and water in one spout making you have to switch all the time between them (which mode is it in now?) or the spouts simply suck and deliver ice/water all over your feet and the floor.
So even a feature I didn't want just works without fuss. The Samsung fridge is truly the iPod of refidgerators.
We also bought a Samsung LCD TV for someone recently and that has been well received! It was a TV/monitor combo for someone with limited space and the Samsung unit was just might nicer than other comparible units.
With all that said, I agree with you on the iPods, we have two as well and the Z5 doesn't even sound close (the finicky scrolling control and lack of variabilty make it a no-show for me, not to mention lack of Mac support).
Re:I love Samsung? (Score:5, Interesting)
I have to echo your sentiments, Samsung rules.
When does Samsung roll out a gaming console? They've been thinking about it. We've been waiting for it. What's the holdup?
However, I really don't dig the idea of being wrapped in music while I'm out in public. I like to be aware of my surroundings since I usually have a good time when I am. Here's some Vonnegut:
Re:I love Samsung? (Score:2)
Re:I love Samsung? (Score:4, Insightful)
Gross mischaracterization. Samsung is huge, has huge resources. They've set their sights on taking a lead in consumer products manufacturing and they're exectuting well. Not suprising. How long has Sony been dominant now? Eventually inertia takes over, stagnation sets in. Oh, and lets not forget the pleasure a Korean business will take in popping off a Japanese business. Extra motivation right there.
Samsung is nicely positioned to provide high quality at lower costs due to the tremendous manufacturing capital they own. If they're smart enough to win on customer service (as you suggest) and design (or at least design replication), they will be at the top of the heap for many, many years.
BTW, I ended up with a Toshiba, but I agree with you on the quality of their TVs. I was very torn and my folks have a Samsung that's very nice for the price.
Re:I love Samsung? (Score:2, Informative)
1) Samsung was recently fined [engadget.com] $300 million for price fixing. This is evil on Microsoft and Ma Bell levels.
2) They supply flash memory to Apple for use in the iPod.
Re:I love Samsung? (Score:2)
Over time, anyone who tries to fix prices moves in one of two directions:
1. Someone else eventually competes wit
Dinosaur Killer? (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course, that would have required that Samsung independently invent the Z5 rather than hiring away the people that produced the iPod. Thus, without the iPod, there would be no Z5.
If Samsung wants to beat Apple at their own game, they're going to have to do better than hang on their coattails. Unfortunately, every new revision of the iPod and iTunes from Apple raises the barrier to entry [wikipedia.org] that much higher.
Re:Dinosaur Killer? (Score:2)
That's not the name of the game. You can't simply hope to defeat a competitor's lead in a technology by working full bore on something to surpass it, because by the time you are done, your competitor will simply have incorporated your enhancements in their own device as well as upg
Re:Dinosaur Killer? (Score:4, Insightful)
To a certain degree, yes. It actually had fewer features than many of its direct competitors. However, the iPod "won" on the total package as opposed to feature bloat. Its total package was smooth, easy to use, pleasant, rich in features that mattered to consumers, and decidedly unconfusing. Everything the average joe with a blinking VCR wanted in a device.
Even then, however, the iPod was only a leader in the market rather than the uncontested champion. It was the introduction of iTunes that took the total package experience of the iPod to the levels it's at today.
This is a feature that other players have trouble replicating. If they take Microsoft's DRM route (not that they have much choice), they must take the path of interfacing with third party software rather than attaining the vertical integration that Apple has. This convinces consumers that the device should work across many different music packages, thus causing frustration when the device is incompatible. (As the author of the story related about his experience with Rhapsody.)
The best positioned company to beat the iPod at the moment is Sony. They have a music store, a hardware business, and a record label. If they vertically integrate these, they might pose a challenge. Unfortunately, Sony seems to have been having difficulties in getting their act together.
This device (whilst it will almost certainly be no ipod killer in the ipod's major markets) looks & sounds pretty nice.
Agreed. My only point is that the only way to beat the iPod is to be better than the iPod rather than a psuedo-iPod.
Re:Dinosaur Killer? (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, this last one makes Sony less likely compete. If you were another record label, how willing would you be to help a direct competitor become entrenched in product creation and distribution to the end consumer? Sony's music store faces problems cauesd by its record arm, just like Sony's portable music devices suffer from its content divisions (see the Minidisc fiasco as well as the more recent ATRAC software debacle). If anything, Son
Re:Dinosaur Killer? (Score:2)
Re:Dinosaur Killer? (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, the iPod was an enormous improvement over the mp3 players which came before, because it combined three features which had not yet come together: form factor, storage capacity and ease of use. There were small players, but they had limited storage capacity. There were players with lots of storage, but they were large and heavy. An no other player had an easy-to-use interface. From my limited experience (i.e., I have played around with other mp3 players but have not undertaken a serious study of them) no other manufacturer has yet produced as elegant an interface as has Apple.
I think the comment above points out one of Slashdot's enduring biases and explains one of the reasons Slashdot as a whole has such a terrible track record in predicting success of failure of things like the iPod. The focus here is on technology and techno-fetishism, something the vast majority of the buying public doesn't care about. To that end, saying that the iPod was only an incremental improvement over previous players is pedantic. One may only say that if one only takes into account the hard tech itself. To do that one must ignore the very important things which often mark the difference between successful and unsuccessful products, namely the ability to take techology and make it availble to Joe and Jane Computer User. This is the genius of iTunes and the iPod: it makes the process of buying, burning and managing digital music and an mp3 player easy for even the most technologically ignorant person.
Such an ability often gets short shrift in the Slashdot and wider geek world, which has its own macho posturing built around how deep one can get into a command line or a kernel. But, while doing that, one must remember that, like any subculture, the values of that subculture are not the values of the wider society. The fact that the iPod doesn't play Ogg Vorbis files, while cause for concern here, is of absolutely no value in the wider consumer world. The fact that the iPod's tech wasn't very different from pervious mp3 players is equally unimportant: the iPod packaged what was there, along with a few improvements, in such a way that it was now easy for anyone to have an mp3 player. That is Apple's huge achievement, and that is what Apple understands better than almost any other computer or consumer electronics manufacturer.
If someone wants to beat Apple at this game, they are going to have to offer a better complete package than Apple, and I do not see that happening any time soon. Microsoft can't do it, because it isn't their focus: they've almost become a technology services company which happens to sell an operating system. The Sony of twenty years ago could do it, but that is very definitely not the Sony of today. Samsung can't do it, because they only offer, at most, one third of the player/store/software combination. if anyone is to knock the iPod off its throne, I think it will be Apple, when they introduce the next generation of iPod/video iPod/whatever they're planning.
Re:Dinosaur Killer? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Dinosaur Killer? (Score:2)
You think that, because you are comparing technical features, and not experience.
Re:Itunes=Feature? (Score:5, Informative)
I have no idea what you're talking about.
During a long drive your friend/gf asks you: "What do you want to listen to?"
Do you say:
"I really like band ______?"
or
"Itunes says I like band _______?"
What in the world are you talking about? You say, "I really like band _____", then use the search area in iTunes to find it quickly. If you are using your iPod at the moment, thumb through the categories and find what you want to hear.
All I want is something that can play and shuffle music with easily accessible volume buttons.
iPod shuffle? iTunes randomly downloads you new music when you plug it in, then it plays through those tracks. The controls are: Volume Up, Volume Down, Play/Pause, Skip Forward, Skip Back. They're arranged in a circle, so they look like this:Where "P" is play, and '-' is filler so my chart looks good.
You can clearly see the controls here [amazon.com]. A regular iPod can be told to do the same thing, except that it can hold your entire music library at once.
Why is Apple pretending that your Ipod isnt just a hard drive/flash memory, a PCB and a battery? Why doesn't it work as a normal drive without Itunes?
They don't, and it does. When you plug in your iPod to a PC, you can see it as a new drive. (It used to show up on Macs too, but I haven't paid enough attention lately to note if this is still the case.) Many people use their iPods as portable hard drives in addition to music players. A practice, I might add, that Apple actively encourages. (I learned about it when I overheard one of the seminars they were giving at the local Apple Store.)
But I don't own a Ipod though
Well, that explains why your post is so confusing. I think you have the wrong impression about the iPod. You might want to take another look.
And soon follows... (Score:5, Funny)
MMS-MMS (Score:5, Funny)
And while the Z5 can't play songs from Apple's iTunes Music Store, it can play songs from Rhapsody, Napster, Musicmatch, MSN Music, Wal-Mart, AOL Music Now, Yahoo Music and other members of the "MMS-MMS" consortium (Microsoft-based Music Stores with Minuscule Market Share).
Re:MMS-MMS (Score:2)
Real alone has 1.4 million subscribers paying between $10 and $15 / month for a service only available in the US. Apple has iTuens stores covering much of the globe so clearly has a bigger potential audience.
It took Apple 7 months to go from 500 million to 1 billion songs sold, so that's $71.4M revenue per month or $856M turnover per year.
Real has a turnover on 1.4 million subscribers of between $168M and $252M per year not icluding any song sales over and
Re:MMS-MMS (Score:3, Informative)
To the best of my knowledge, the only protected music store that's compatible with the iPod is iTunes. (There are stores that use unprotected files such as eMusic, but they tend to have limited selections.)
Re:MMS-MMS (Score:2)
Playsforsure... aren't those MP3's?
What a worthless piece of doublespeak for DRM.
Re:MMS-MMS (Score:3, Interesting)
Am I the only one who finds it incredibly ironic that the digital music most likely to not play is called "Playsforsure?"
Re:MMS-MMS (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, iPod killers... (Score:5, Insightful)
Recently on German news they covered CeBit and plainly stated that the next generation phones would be iPod killers. I was thinking by myself: WTF? Then they started to enumerate the advantages of having MP3 player in your phone. The main thing seemed to be that you could download songs on a whim. Essentially iTMS but over wireless. I fell over laughing. (I know that the device in the article is not a phone, but I just wanted to mention it)
So, I first am going to shell out money to get the song, then pay UMTS packets? Are you *insane*? How expensive will be a 3Meg song that way? Waaaaay beyond the current prices in iTMS.
The iPod is successful because it is simple and later on the seamless integration with iTMS was the big winner. Any competing product must at least match this and make it less expensive.
None of these so-called iPod-killers will fly. At least that is MHO.
iPod killer (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Yes, iPod killers... (Score:2)
You can't beat the iPod head-to-head (Score:4, Interesting)
People know instinctively that this is an iPod-wannabe. That (nicely anthropomorphic) form factor is burned into the public consciousness (such as it is).
The thing that will erode Apple's domination is the inclusion of iPod-like abilities in other devices. The only thing in the world that is more popular than an iPod is a mobile phone. Its interesting, because of the wrinkle that is the ROKR. Remember the hype around that phone? Everybody knew this could be a killer combination but something happened and it rolled out the door totally crippled; so people wrote off the phone-as-iPod idea in a sense.
Go look at the latest batch of Sony Ericsson phones, extrapolate the direction of the hardware +1.5 years and each one of those phones will be at least as capable as a Nano. And while you don't strictly have to have an iPod, there are many who would agree that a mobile phone these days is strictly necessary... like the PS2 with DVD -playing, people will rationalize the fancy phone as a "junior iPod" over an iPod + Phone separately most of the time. And the fanciest Bluetooth gadget in the world will never integrate the phone with the iPod in the way that they are when shipped in one device (receiving calls and handing off, etc).
All this applies to point-and-shoot digital cameras, as well.
Re:You can't beat the iPod head-to-head (Score:4, Funny)
And I'm sure that if I were to dig into Google Groups that Mac zealots were saying the same thing about Windows 3.1 when it first appeared.
Seriously though, I want a music player that plays MP3, AAC, WMA and (for completeness) OGG out of the box, looks pretty, where DRM is supported for each favorite music format and where the software that doesn't suck and lets you choose which format is right for the user. Can it be that hard to do?
Re:You can't beat the iPod head-to-head (Score:2)
You point is...?
Seriously though, I want a music player that plays MP3, AAC, WMA and (for completeness) OGG out of the box, looks pretty, where DRM is supported for each favorite music format and where the software that doesn't suck and lets you choose which format is right for the user. Can it be that hard to do?
For engineering, completely do-able. Licensing and
Re:You can't beat the iPod head-to-head (Score:2)
Since you need it spelt out... my point is that Windows 3.1 was arguably a look-a-like of MacOS in many respects and Microsoft still kicked Apple's ass all over the shop.
Just because the iPod looks pretty and its DRM is the least evil, doesn't mean it will always be that way. Just like with the Mac vs Windows, a lot of people will stop paying the Apple tax if something cheaper comes along that as good a job.
Re:You can't beat the iPod head-to-head (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:You can't beat the iPod head-to-head (Score:2)
Re:You can't beat the iPod head-to-head (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:You can't beat the iPod head-to-head (Score:2)
Re:You can't beat the iPod head-to-head (Score:2)
The point I was making was you can't scoff at a look-a-like. Windows was an enormous success because it took the same WIMP concepts as MacOS used and made them work on "inferior" and considerably cheaper PCs.
Re:You can't beat the iPod head-to-head (Score:3, Insightful)
Much obliged. Your argument sucks. Win3.1's success was only peripherally (at best) related to its actual quality. It had everything to do with market economies and Apple's bad decisions.
Just because the iPod looks pretty and its DRM is the least evil, doesn't mean it will always be that way. Just like with the Mac vs Windows, a lot of
Re:You can't beat the iPod head-to-head (Score:3, Insightful)
That's because of their leverage of monopoly position to illegally coerce the market. Did you miss the antitrust trial? Windows 3.1 didn't win on merits. Go use it for 10 minutes and then go to a Mac from the same time period and you'll realize that immediately.
Re:You can't beat the iPod head-to-head (Score:2)
Re:You can't beat the iPod head-to-head (Score:3)
The difference is that Microsoft was able to use illegal coercive OEM deals to solidify thier monopoly position, so the third-rate Windows 3.1 became the standard.
That's not true...it can be done (Score:2, Interesting)
Simply allow people to transfer files from mp3 player to mp3 player
That just requires a little engineering and a little software. Especially with usb 2.0.
The RIAA and music industry would flip, but you'd outsell the ipod. Make a decent price point don't make it look like crap, a relatively easy to use interface, and you have a goldmine.
Make a commercial
Kid 1 : "Hey what are you listening too?"
Kid 2 : "The ________"
Kid 1 : Cool....Hook Me Up [the tag line for the commercial
Re:That's not true...it can be done (Score:2, Interesting)
That's an excellent idea otherwise. Music is both social and solitary. If you could share the music in a secure way that allowed IP holders to limit it or feel assured that a shared music file would "die" rather than haning around on the target player, I feel that you might eve
Re:That's not true...it can be done (Score:4, Insightful)
Why stop there? Throw in a pony, make it even better.
There is absolutely no technical issue whatsoever involved in getting, say, two iPods to talk directly each other (especially older firewire models). But politically, that is currently verboeten. No label in the world will allow it. No music industry lobbyist in the world will currently let something like that go unanswered. Its not a technical problem at all, it has everything to do with the old guard holding the keys.
Re:You can't beat the iPod head-to-head (Score:2)
Navigation Component (Score:3, Interesting)
Yeah, but does it support Ogg Vorbis? (Score:5, Informative)
Some quick googling [google.com] says it does [cnet.com]!!! Woo Hoo!!!! I know what I'm getting for my birthday.
Re:Yeah, but does it support Ogg Vorbis? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Yeah, but does it support Ogg Vorbis? (Score:2)
...and exactly which flavor of Linux do you run iTunes one?
'thought so.
And the bonus round:
How much does iTunes charge for their unlimited download subscription service?
Thanks for playing.
Re:Yeah, but does it support Ogg Vorbis? (Score:2)
I have all my music, properly sorted, and with their respective album covers. I prefer amarok to itunes, so I don't feel like I'm missing out.
amarok will soon have the ability to transcode when uploading to the ipod, that way, I can store my music in ogg vorbis format, then, when I upload my music to my ipod, it will be transcoded to m4a (which sounds fine to my e
Re:Yeah, but does it support Ogg Vorbis? (Score:3, Interesting)
Nice format support though.
Re:Yeah, but does it support Ogg Vorbis? (Score:2)
Move along, nothing to see here (Score:3, Insightful)
The Z5 adds nothing to the table (no, extended battery life does not an iPod killer make). It is twice as thick as the Nano yet has the same capacity and most importantly, the same price point.
Re:Move along, nothing to see here (Score:2)
Re:Move along, nothing to see here (Score:2)
1. Significantly smaller (nope)
2. Much less expensive (nope)
3. Much higher capacity (nope)
This one just tried to match the nano, but, doesn't quite have the same sleekness. So, it's dead in the water for me. O
Re:Move along, nothing to see here (Score:2)
Honestly, there are only a few co
Fashion (Score:4, Insightful)
Although it may not be considered geeky to have another mp3 player today, the iPod is almost seen as a fashion accessory, whereas any other mp3 player is just that, an mp3 player.
To beat the iPod, I believe that the mainstream has to consider it "cool", and you have to have tons of accessories so your mp3 player can be cooler than the other 10million people who also have one.
Just my thoughts on a point I think was missed in the article...
Re:Fashion (Score:3, Insightful)
Your right, before the ipod, the other players like Archos were making big ugly boxes. But those players were very functional. Unfortunately, that meant 'geeky' and 'nerdy' to everyone else. Apple sexed up the product and now
I don't get it (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I don't get it (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I don't get it (Score:2)
(Personally any player/platform/store DRM lock in crap turns me right off, but YMMV).
Re:I don't get it (Score:2)
Re:I don't get it (Score:2)
Re:I don't get it (Score:2)
While Apple contracts with fabs and buys storage from Samsung, Samsung should eventually be able to tool a line for their own products with higher efficiencies and offer like hardware for lower cost if this thing gets popular and production is fully ramped. At the same time they can keep pulling a Mic
Re:I don't get it (Score:2)
How is that ripping Apple's design? *He* is the designer, he just did some work for Apple for a while. If you hire somebody to work for you, you own the work he did for you, you do not own his brain, he does not become your property. I know a lot of companies would prefer this to be the case, but it's sad to see people actually accepting this disgusting mindset.
Head bang (Score:3, Insightful)
At Samsung's suggestion, I tested the Z5 with Rhapsody's store, which is available directly from the copy of Windows Media Player provided by the Z5's installer. After banging my head on the keyboard for an hour, unable to get it to work, a Rhapsody rep finally let me know that, in fact, Rhapsody's subscription store doesn't work in Media Player -- only with Rhapsody's own software jukebox. (So much for the Microsoft "Plays for Sure" logo. Try "Plays for Some People.")
I don't want that experience.
Why Beating The iPod Won't Work (Score:5, Insightful)
It's always much harder to overturn an entrenched leader in a field than to jump ahead of the pack - and the iPod has massive marketshare. The article has this really important observation:
That's the problem for other manufacturers. That's a damn near insurmountable hill to climb. Sony had some solid electronics but terrible software. The players that use PlaysForSure are doomed with the horrendous WMP system, terrible DRM, and electronics that are crappily designed. Even if you get nicely designed hardware and nicely designed software, you're stuck in a world where you can get iPod accessories everywhere, but nobody's going to carry accessories for your particular product unless you can get a credible amount of marketshare - which is hard when you don't have the accessories to spur sales.
The only way the iPod can be beaten is if Apple screws it up (which is unlikely, but possible) or someone manages to buy their way into market. The only company that could compete with Apple is Microsoft, doing what they did to the gaming market with the XBox. If Microsoft wanted to create a product that would be a severe loss-leader (priced well under the iPod) and could totally redesign WMP to be halfway usable, they might have a shot at unseating the iPod - but not a good one. Microsoft won't do that because the XBox division is currently hemmorhaging money as it is and Microsoft's bottom line would be adversely affected by trying to go toe-to-toe with the most popular piece of consumer electronics on the planet.
The iPod didn't get it first, but it got it right, and unless the cachet wears off (which may happen, but not for a while), trying to beat the iPod is not a particularly sound business strategy.
Re:Why Beating The iPod Won't Work (Score:2)
There's a legion of buyers out there who want a portable mp3 player but don't use iTunes. They're buy
Re:Why Beating The iPod Won't Work (Score:2)
Of course, that doesn't mean you can't kill the iPod. You just have to supplant the whole market. So you need to kill off the portable music player market by increasing the cell-phones that hold all your music market, or some other convergence device.
What about the integration? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:What about the integration? (Score:2, Informative)
First I tried Napster, it was okay but their client sucked especially when syncing to my Treo as it would always hang up, then I tried Yahoo Music, the interface for their store was pathe
Song Rental vs. Subscription (Score:2)
Re:Song Rental vs. Subscription (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Song Rental vs. Subscription (Score:2)
nice product (Score:2)
Re:nice product (Score:2)
I've spent too much on iTunes (Score:2)
Re:I've spent too much on iTunes (Score:2)
Are you joking me? Just a tiny bit of googling could find a solution to your plight.
Decompress those files to WAV using Winamp. You change the output to Nullsoft DiskWriter then just put all the files you want in the playlist, voila, WAV files of your AAC files. Next download LAME and RazorLame (front end GUI for LAME), all free, all GNU. Throw all the WAV's into the batch
The title implies that..... (Score:3, Funny)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsuccessful
It's all about the wheel! (Score:2)
I'm suprised Sony didn't include a jogwheel into their walkman. Seems like that would have made it more of a competitor (rather than the hideous phone like menu that they used).
Hey! (Score:3, Informative)
I have a U3 and love it. Smaller than a Nano and even plays movies even though the screen is a little small for long term movie viewing. And yes you OSS guys, it even plays
Sound Quality? (Score:2)
From what I've heard of my wife's nano, it's pretty decent. No background hiss - which seems to be the bane of cheaply put together MP3 players.
So here's what I've got now:
1. NexIIa - Frontier Labs' compactflash reading MP3 player : This was bought because I figured hey, got a digital camera, have spare CF card... but I hate listening to this player on low ohm headphones becaus
Works with WalMart! (Score:2, Informative)
As long as you use Internet Explorer. Try the above link with Firefox.
The next step with portable music players is to break the link with the home computer. Think something that uses the cell phone network but doesn't make calls.
That's a clever disguise! (Score:2)
Making the same mistakes as the iPod (Score:2)
You step through lists by lightly tapping the pad; you hold down to scroll quickly. The best part is that your thumb doesn't have to move between scrolling and clicking; after scrolling by touching, pushing harder to click -- in exactly the same spot -- does the trick.
In other words, the primary control is a force-sensitive device, which means that it will have to have a "lock" on the control when it's just in your pocket. They might as well give
Message to would-be iPod killer manufacturers (Score:3, Interesting)
If no, then NO SALE.
Why? Because I'm already using iTunes on Windows, and I'll be making the switch to OSX within 12 months.
I'm not necessarily in love with iTunes, but I'll be goddamned if I'm going to waste my time futzing around with a new music organization software suite.
Why should corporate market share matter to you? (Score:3, Interesting)
Technology is fascinating but vicarious corporate bean-counting is a queer sport for free men. Titling this story with an assassination metaphor isn't witty or even cute; it's a sign of the banal elevation of corporate identity in a certain flat imagination. Remember: the tech is supposed to set you free, not call you to your prayer rug.
Re:Kill the "iPod Killer" Titles, ok? (Score:2, Interesting)
It would only make sense that if this product was trying to "assassinate" the iPod Samsung would at least bother to make it Mac compatible.
Re:Kill the "iPod Killer" Titles, ok? (Score:2)
If both sets of numbers are to be believed, vastly more iPods are connected to windows PCs than Macs.
Re:Kill the "iPod Killer" Titles, ok? (Score:2)
Re:Assassins... (Score:2)
Unless you're using a dual-G5 and a car battery to listen to your music....
Re:tired of the "killer" thing (Score:2, Funny)
Killer is sooooo 2005.
Assassin sounds much cooler and lets face it, it's got two asses, what could be better than that?!
Re:One word (Score:2)
Re:What? (Score:3, Funny)
Which portable playes provide good support for FLAC?