MP3 - iPod or Sony HDD Walkman?
14 January 2005, 11:07 AM
#31
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Plymouth
Posts: 3,079
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Luan Pra bang
I hate my ipod with a passion it irritates me I know exactly what I want and what I want to do but my ipod thwarts me at every stage it seems determined to tell me what music I will and won't copy to it. It hates all my MP3's even though it is brand new. The itunes software is the worst peice of crap I have ever used it will consistently refuse to let you have two ipods with differnt music on and if you try to push he point it will delete all the songs off one of the ipods. I hate it and it hates me but I am bigger I am stronger and I have the my finger on the plug switch so the ipod will do my will or suffer the consequences. Death to apple ipods an ipod armagedden is coming soon.
If you want something good get an ipaq put some 2.2 or 4 gig cf cards in it plus a 1 gig sd card then have GPS films books and a speed camera detector on a device that does what you tell it rather than the other way round and its still thinner than an ipod.
If you want something good get an ipaq put some 2.2 or 4 gig cf cards in it plus a 1 gig sd card then have GPS films books and a speed camera detector on a device that does what you tell it rather than the other way round and its still thinner than an ipod.
14 January 2005, 11:31 AM
#32
'manage as an iPod with iTunes. Nothing comes close in that arena'
Why bother with a piece of software when the Iriver just plugs in and becomes a drive, I manage all my music on my PC's HD and can cart work stuff on it.
The Ipod is now a major success, I can see why, it does what its meant to do but having used both, the Iriver is a much better proposition, looked at them all, Creative's, Sony's the lot, did the reading, nearly bought an Ipod but I really think Iriver deserve a bigger market share, had a 350 quid budget and got it for 245 off Amazon.
I also was convinced the Ipod was plastic, some acheivement to get Titanium or whatever it is to look exactly like injection moulded plastic !
Why bother with a piece of software when the Iriver just plugs in and becomes a drive, I manage all my music on my PC's HD and can cart work stuff on it.
The Ipod is now a major success, I can see why, it does what its meant to do but having used both, the Iriver is a much better proposition, looked at them all, Creative's, Sony's the lot, did the reading, nearly bought an Ipod but I really think Iriver deserve a bigger market share, had a 350 quid budget and got it for 245 off Amazon.
I also was convinced the Ipod was plastic, some acheivement to get Titanium or whatever it is to look exactly like injection moulded plastic !
14 January 2005, 11:37 AM
#33
Scooby Senior
>Why bother with a piece of software when the Iriver just plugs in and becomes a drive, I manage all my music on my PC's HD and can cart work stuff on it.
It's the "I manage" that I don't want. How else would I have time to post on here, I use software to save my time and effort.
It's the "I manage" that I don't want. How else would I have time to post on here, I use software to save my time and effort.
14 January 2005, 11:43 AM
#34
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swilling coffee at my lab bench
Posts: 9,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by angrynorth
That is exactly what you get, just a music player that works perfectly, that is what I mean by the experience. The fact it is an MP3 player is not corrupted by it attempting to do other things like radio, recording...
The DRM is in the music file not the player.
The DRM is in the music file not the player.
DRM licence fees get paid per music file AND per player that supports them, which is why I choose not to buy a player which supports the technology.
14 January 2005, 01:10 PM
#35
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Was Manc now Camden
Posts: 2,689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by AndyC_772
DRM licence fees get paid per music file AND per player that supports them, which is why I choose not to buy a player which supports the technology.
14 January 2005, 01:12 PM
#36
I want to drag & drop my MP3 collection onto a device that works as a hard drive. No funky software needed, no DRM, just plug & play with any of the 3 PCs I use on a daily basis
)
14 January 2005, 02:25 PM
#38
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swilling coffee at my lab bench
Posts: 9,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by angrynorth
Well you are buggered then, as most players either support AAC or WMA, both of which are DRM'ed.
If I could get one that doesn't pay M$ royalties for WMA support at all then I would, but sadly that doesn't seem to be an option.
14 January 2005, 02:27 PM
#39
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swilling coffee at my lab bench
Posts: 9,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ALi-B
Archos drives work exactly like a hard drive when plugged in the PC, just drag and drop like a normal hard disc. Should just plug and play with no drivers or software needed (except for win98 and older IIRC) I backup all my stuff at work on it to take home every day (even the odd bit of software )
)
14 January 2005, 02:30 PM
#40
Scooby Senior
>The iRiver units (amongst others) support NON-PROTECTED WMA files only.
Oh dear, I didn't know that. That's the first minus point I've heard about that player. What about all those people who've bought tracks then bought the player and now can't listen to them.
Oh dear, I didn't know that. That's the first minus point I've heard about that player. What about all those people who've bought tracks then bought the player and now can't listen to them.
14 January 2005, 02:32 PM
#41
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Was Manc now Camden
Posts: 2,689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Which player would that be?
I'm genuinely interested to find out how it can only support non DRM'd wma's only, especially as MS apply janus to files you rip yourself.
I'm genuinely interested to find out how it can only support non DRM'd wma's only, especially as MS apply janus to files you rip yourself.
14 January 2005, 02:48 PM
#42
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swilling coffee at my lab bench
Posts: 9,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by JackClark
Oh dear, I didn't know that. That's the first minus point I've heard about that player. What about all those people who've bought tracks then bought the player and now can't listen to them.
ps. the US model of the H320 and H340 does support DRM, but not the European model.
14 January 2005, 02:57 PM
#43
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Was Manc now Camden
Posts: 2,689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DRM is a necessary evil unfortunately. On the whole though it does more good than harm.
The decision to only buy (rare
) players that only support non-drm'd music is erm weird.
Do you only buy region free DVD's?
The decision to only buy (rare
) players that only support non-drm'd music is erm weird.Do you only buy region free DVD's?
14 January 2005, 03:08 PM
#44
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swilling coffee at my lab bench
Posts: 9,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The whole argument about copyright, fair use, file sharing and so on is a rather tired one and can be read in great depth on plenty of other forums, so I won't bother repeating the arguments for and against here. Suffice to say that I disagree, I think DRM does far more harm than good - and I choose to vote in the only effective way I can: with my wallet. How else would you suggest I get the message across?
I don't only buy region-free DVDs, but I do only ever buy region-free DVD players - and I buy DVDs (and other products for that matter) from whichever market offers the best value.
I don't only buy region-free DVDs, but I do only ever buy region-free DVD players - and I buy DVDs (and other products for that matter) from whichever market offers the best value.
14 January 2005, 03:12 PM
#45
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: here
Posts: 10,641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by JackClark
The new Shuffle players are a fantastic idea, I use my iPod on random, all day, every day at work and charge it every night at home attached to my PC. The 1GB shuffle would perform that same task without effort and it's so inexpensive it's embarrasing most other players.
Creative answers.....
Sound Bites from Flash Market Leader, Creative
I’m delighted Apple joined the flash party but, I’m surprised it’s taken Jobs so long. You have to hand it to him, entering the market with a statement about pioneering the ‘shuffle’ function is certainly a bold move that will grab headlines – the problem is it isn’t quite true. The ‘shuffle’ or ‘random’ function as it was previously know has been around since the inception of portable music players.
It will be interesting to see whether Apple takes its lead and learns from us or if it continues to use its million dollar marketing machine to bulldoze its way into the market. They haven’t learnt from our experience yet; we’ve been there, done that and have a story to tell…
What’s the Story?
Whether people choose to buy an iPod Shuffle comes down to whether they want control over their music or if they want manufacturers to do that for them. I wonder if the Shuffle is really easier to use than a similar product which incorporates a screen that allows people to see what they are doing and to choose from a random or set play list.
In the three years we’ve operated in the flash market we’ve learnt that people want to be in control of their music. Years ago the original MuVo was launched without a screen; it did well at the time but we had to redevelop and offer more as the market evolved. We’ve listened to our customers and have since incorporated a screen and other features (FM radio & voice recording function etc) into our low-end products. Since then, we’ve gone onto lead the flash market with 21% share. (The flash market makes up 50% of the MP3 player market.)
It’s important to understand your market and not to under-estimate the consumer. Ease of use? Yes. But we don’t need to blindfold people by taking away functionality and choice. There’s a boundary, and when you cross that it can be seen as patronising.
Our business is built on choice. We offer different products to suit different needs and allow our customers to choose between functionality and price. Our MuVo and Zen products also work with a huge range of music content providers so that our customers are not locked in to our brand alone. We’re confident this strategy of choice will win through in the end.
I’m delighted Apple joined the flash party but, I’m surprised it’s taken Jobs so long. You have to hand it to him, entering the market with a statement about pioneering the ‘shuffle’ function is certainly a bold move that will grab headlines – the problem is it isn’t quite true. The ‘shuffle’ or ‘random’ function as it was previously know has been around since the inception of portable music players.
It will be interesting to see whether Apple takes its lead and learns from us or if it continues to use its million dollar marketing machine to bulldoze its way into the market. They haven’t learnt from our experience yet; we’ve been there, done that and have a story to tell…
What’s the Story?
Whether people choose to buy an iPod Shuffle comes down to whether they want control over their music or if they want manufacturers to do that for them. I wonder if the Shuffle is really easier to use than a similar product which incorporates a screen that allows people to see what they are doing and to choose from a random or set play list.
In the three years we’ve operated in the flash market we’ve learnt that people want to be in control of their music. Years ago the original MuVo was launched without a screen; it did well at the time but we had to redevelop and offer more as the market evolved. We’ve listened to our customers and have since incorporated a screen and other features (FM radio & voice recording function etc) into our low-end products. Since then, we’ve gone onto lead the flash market with 21% share. (The flash market makes up 50% of the MP3 player market.)
It’s important to understand your market and not to under-estimate the consumer. Ease of use? Yes. But we don’t need to blindfold people by taking away functionality and choice. There’s a boundary, and when you cross that it can be seen as patronising.
Our business is built on choice. We offer different products to suit different needs and allow our customers to choose between functionality and price. Our MuVo and Zen products also work with a huge range of music content providers so that our customers are not locked in to our brand alone. We’re confident this strategy of choice will win through in the end.
14 January 2005, 03:16 PM
#46
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Was Manc now Camden
Posts: 2,689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well region encoding DVD's is the same principal as DRM'd music, surely to get your message across you should also only buy non-region encoded DVD's. I take it you don't have Sky either?
14 January 2005, 03:29 PM
#47
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swilling coffee at my lab bench
Posts: 9,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree - though with DVD, region-free discs aren't a viable option for obvious regions. Buying non-copy-protected CDs IS an option - though I am disappointed that a few albums I would otherwise have bought are only available in copy protected form. Needless to say, they're sitting on the shelf too.
I do have a Sky box, but no viewing card. Completely free, unencrypted channels only
I do have a Sky box, but no viewing card. Completely free, unencrypted channels only
14 January 2005, 03:30 PM
#48
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Was Manc now Camden
Posts: 2,689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Daz, yes he does raise some valid points, but so does Jobs. For instance:
"We listened to you, and you told us that the most popular way to listen to your iPods is on random. So we introduced the shuffle."
"The iPods are built around simplicity and convenience. The new Shuffle takes that to another level, taking away everything that over-complicates the user experience of other flash players."
I find it funny how that guy from Creative says:
"Our business is built on choice."
Yes, so long as you choose our stuff.
Their are valid points from both sides, but this guy dissing Jobs and Apple only serves to drum up more publicity for the Shuffle. Marketing 101, never issue a statement ridiculing your competitors, not only does it make you look petulant, it also gives them more press.
"We listened to you, and you told us that the most popular way to listen to your iPods is on random. So we introduced the shuffle."
"The iPods are built around simplicity and convenience. The new Shuffle takes that to another level, taking away everything that over-complicates the user experience of other flash players."
I find it funny how that guy from Creative says:
"Our business is built on choice."
Yes, so long as you choose our stuff.
Their are valid points from both sides, but this guy dissing Jobs and Apple only serves to drum up more publicity for the Shuffle. Marketing 101, never issue a statement ridiculing your competitors, not only does it make you look petulant, it also gives them more press.
14 January 2005, 03:41 PM
#49
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Was Manc now Camden
Posts: 2,689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One thing Andy, I come from a "Creative" industry, in the same way the musicians do, so I get their point entirely. Would your opinion change in the following scenario?
I get a contract to design a billboard that will have nationwide coverage.
I am browsing Scoobynet one day and I think that one of your pics from the comps would be ideal. Instead of contacting you and asking for permission to use it, I just save it to my disk and slap it in the project.
Your image becomes the focus of a multi-million pound ad campaign, off which I will have made some good-cash, the company selling also make money every time someone buys something. All because of your image and you got nothing for it.
First time round you may be forgiving and let it go, but if I did it over and over you would eventually want to get paid too.
I get a contract to design a billboard that will have nationwide coverage.
I am browsing Scoobynet one day and I think that one of your pics from the comps would be ideal. Instead of contacting you and asking for permission to use it, I just save it to my disk and slap it in the project.
Your image becomes the focus of a multi-million pound ad campaign, off which I will have made some good-cash, the company selling also make money every time someone buys something. All because of your image and you got nothing for it.
First time round you may be forgiving and let it go, but if I did it over and over you would eventually want to get paid too.
14 January 2005, 04:09 PM
#50
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swilling coffee at my lab bench
Posts: 9,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you're missing a bit of the subtlety here. Rest assured, I wouldn't be forgiving at all!
However, that's not really what DRM is all about in practise. Thanks to the fact that the copying of music files across the internet is exponential, it doesn't matter if 99% of people suddenly become unable to copy music they've paid for - there only need be a couple of people worldwide with the knowledge and ability to convert a DRM-protected file into an MP3, and within a couple of days the file sharing networks are full of illegal copies. The fact that most of them are identical binaries (instead of being the output from 101 slightly different combinations of codec and settings) actually makes auto-resuming, multi-site capable downloaders work better and faster.
So, the point is that DRM only affects legitimate customers. Those who actually pay for their music get all the inconvenience it brings, but doesn't make any difference to those who would download stuff illegally. It introduces a delay of a few days at most.
Also, bear in mind that most music illegally swapped on-line is pretty poor quality MP3s, and that it's typically reproduced through equipment of similarly questionable fidelity. The additional loss of quality introduced by making an analogue copy instead of a digital one is neither here nor there - which means that if the goal of DRM is to prevent copies being made at all, it cannot work. There will always be someone out there who can work out how to connect 'line out' to 'line in' on his PC.
So, my objection in this case isn't based on a desire to see the musicians ripped off, it's based on a desire not to put up with DRM-induced inconvenience simply because I actually HAVE paid. Anyone else can just download.
However, that's not really what DRM is all about in practise. Thanks to the fact that the copying of music files across the internet is exponential, it doesn't matter if 99% of people suddenly become unable to copy music they've paid for - there only need be a couple of people worldwide with the knowledge and ability to convert a DRM-protected file into an MP3, and within a couple of days the file sharing networks are full of illegal copies. The fact that most of them are identical binaries (instead of being the output from 101 slightly different combinations of codec and settings) actually makes auto-resuming, multi-site capable downloaders work better and faster.
So, the point is that DRM only affects legitimate customers. Those who actually pay for their music get all the inconvenience it brings, but doesn't make any difference to those who would download stuff illegally. It introduces a delay of a few days at most.
Also, bear in mind that most music illegally swapped on-line is pretty poor quality MP3s, and that it's typically reproduced through equipment of similarly questionable fidelity. The additional loss of quality introduced by making an analogue copy instead of a digital one is neither here nor there - which means that if the goal of DRM is to prevent copies being made at all, it cannot work. There will always be someone out there who can work out how to connect 'line out' to 'line in' on his PC.
So, my objection in this case isn't based on a desire to see the musicians ripped off, it's based on a desire not to put up with DRM-induced inconvenience simply because I actually HAVE paid. Anyone else can just download.
14 January 2005, 04:48 PM
#51
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Was Manc now Camden
Posts: 2,689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't get how it brings any inconvenience though? It just works fine no matter what I want to do with it. If I want it on CD, its burnt (only x amount of times if its wma though) If I want it on my iPod, its there, if I want it on my mates iPod its there, if I want it on my stereo downstairs its there.
I haven't bought a CD for months, and I am liking that fact. I've not been forced to cough up £9.99 for an entire album even if I only wanted one track.
I think really its just swings and roundabouts, although I do enjoy the debate. DRM must, and will continue to be used to at least help towards the protection of intellectual property.
CD's put more restrictions on you these days, really who actually listens to CD's ? IT'S 2005! 15,000 songs in your pocket, or 15,000 songs filling a room.
If I buy a CD I have to spend the time ripping before I can play it on the devices I actually use day in day out. That for me at least is a much bigger restriction than, erm, well I don't have any restrictions with my DRM'd stuff.
So about that picture then
) If I want it on my iPod, its there, if I want it on my mates iPod its there, if I want it on my stereo downstairs its there.I haven't bought a CD for months, and I am liking that fact.
I've not been forced to cough up £9.99 for an entire album even if I only wanted one track. I think really its just swings and roundabouts, although I do enjoy the debate. DRM must, and will continue to be used to at least help towards the protection of intellectual property.
CD's put more restrictions on you these days, really who actually listens to CD's ? IT'S 2005! 15,000 songs in your pocket, or 15,000 songs filling a room.
If I buy a CD I have to spend the time ripping before I can play it on the devices I actually use day in day out. That for me at least is a much bigger restriction than, erm, well I don't have any restrictions with my DRM'd stuff.So about that picture then
14 January 2005, 05:04 PM
#52
Scooby Senior
Have to agree, I've never been restricted by DRM. But if I bought one of those iRiver things I'm restricted by design.
I'll still buy CD's - new and used - because I like bringing them home and unwrapping them, and I'll carry on buying from iTunes music store because it's simple. i.e. new Bjork single yesterday that I wouldn't see in the shops here, all of 79p, plus I picked up the weekly free track whilst I was there.
I should add that I clicked once to get the track I wanted, that was it. Paid for, on my PC, on my iPod, reciept in my inbox. No faffing, instant music.
I'll still buy CD's - new and used - because I like bringing them home and unwrapping them, and I'll carry on buying from iTunes music store because it's simple. i.e. new Bjork single yesterday that I wouldn't see in the shops here, all of 79p, plus I picked up the weekly free track whilst I was there.
I should add that I clicked once to get the track I wanted, that was it. Paid for, on my PC, on my iPod, reciept in my inbox. No faffing, instant music.
Last edited by JackClark; 14 January 2005 at 05:06 PM.
14 January 2005, 05:35 PM
#54
Originally Posted by AndyC_772
I have one already - it's had battery problems since day one which means it never charges properly and locks up after a few mins unless I use the mains adapter. I'd never buy another.
)Strange though, mine have been fine ( I have two...a Gmini and an old Jukebox). Both have been dropped, and thrown about (going round islands too fast in the scooby
) whilst switched on. And neither have suffered a single glitch, only exception is the odd dodgy downloaded MP3 file which can cuase it to lock. But all my own ripped stuff is fine. I did recently swap the batteries on the old Jukebox for 2000mAh ones (nothing wrong with the originals but seeing they were only 1500mAh NiMh AA's I though why not put some higher capacity ones in) Gmini battery does what it says on the tin.
14 January 2005, 05:41 PM
#55
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swilling coffee at my lab bench
Posts: 9,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's a quality vs convenience debate there too. Ripping a CD to MP3 is easy enough and doesn't take long, so I don't object to having to do it if I want to listen on my MP3 player at work.
I do listen to CDs at home, though, through a very decent hi-fi - and compressed music doesn't have nearly the same sparkle, subtlety or clarity that a CD does. I do hope the iPod generation doesn't forget (or worse, fail to ever experience) just how good music can sound when it hasn't been squashed down a phone line. This is why, DRM or not, I'm unlikely to ever buy much music online - though I can see that for anyone without a good hi-fi, the convenience of downloads is more important.
Do you have any evidence that DRM has actually reduced piracy in practise - or that its use has increased legitimate sales at all? I can see how it might keep basically honest people in strict compliance with the license conditions imposed upon them, but I can't see it actually resulting in increased sales somehow. I bet it's upset more than a few people who have suffered disc crashes though.
I do listen to CDs at home, though, through a very decent hi-fi - and compressed music doesn't have nearly the same sparkle, subtlety or clarity that a CD does. I do hope the iPod generation doesn't forget (or worse, fail to ever experience) just how good music can sound when it hasn't been squashed down a phone line. This is why, DRM or not, I'm unlikely to ever buy much music online - though I can see that for anyone without a good hi-fi, the convenience of downloads is more important.
Do you have any evidence that DRM has actually reduced piracy in practise - or that its use has increased legitimate sales at all? I can see how it might keep basically honest people in strict compliance with the license conditions imposed upon them, but I can't see it actually resulting in increased sales somehow. I bet it's upset more than a few people who have suffered disc crashes though.
14 January 2005, 05:45 PM
#56
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ipods are the spawn of the devil they are sent here to make me crazy if ever there was a piece of technology designed to irritate people the ipos was it. Its constant attemps to make descions for me makes me want to remove all technology from the world and go back to an arable, electricity free society with no computers internet or recordable music. The anger my ipods induce will destroy the whole world and mankind as we know it.
Last edited by Luan Pra bang; 28 May 2005 at 01:33 PM.
14 January 2005, 05:52 PM
#57
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Was Manc now Camden
Posts: 2,689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well for a start 300,000 legal downloads were made over the last 2 weeks, more than physical single sales.
That will be 300,000 less than would have been downloaded illegally.
I agree with you about the quality nothing sounds like a decent hi-fi, but nothing sounds like vinyl either and that is left to the hardcore these days.
The sound I get through my £60 JBL creatures and iPod is more than enough quality I need for most of the time. If I need to spruce it up a bit I use my DVD surround system via Airport Express from my G5 upstairs. All optical only one wire sounds great and is way more than I need.
The masses, myself included just want to listen to music, most wouldn't know the difference.
That will be 300,000 less than would have been downloaded illegally.
I agree with you about the quality nothing sounds like a decent hi-fi, but nothing sounds like vinyl either and that is left to the hardcore these days.
The sound I get through my £60 JBL creatures and iPod is more than enough quality I need for most of the time. If I need to spruce it up a bit I use my DVD surround system via Airport Express from my G5 upstairs. All optical only one wire
sounds great and is way more than I need.The masses, myself included just want to listen to music, most wouldn't know the difference.
14 January 2005, 05:53 PM
#58
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Was Manc now Camden
Posts: 2,689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Luan Pra bang
Ipods are the spawn of the devil they are sent here to make me crazy if ever there was a piceof technology designed to irritate people the ipos was it. Its constant attemps to make descions ofrme makes me want to remove all technology from the worldand go back to an arable, electricity free society with no computers internet or recordable music. The anger my ipods induce will destroy the whole world and mankind as we know it.
14 January 2005, 06:27 PM
#59
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swilling coffee at my lab bench
Posts: 9,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by angrynorth
Well for a start 300,000 legal downloads were made over the last 2 weeks, more than physical single sales.
That will be 300,000 less than would have been downloaded illegally.
That will be 300,000 less than would have been downloaded illegally.
Those 300,000 songs might have been downloaded illegally, or they might have been purchased on CD. And how many more legal downloads might have been made if people knew they were buying a file that they could use on all their equipment without technical restriction?
I agree with you about the quality nothing sounds like a decent hi-fi, but nothing sounds like vinyl either and that is left to the hardcore these days.
The sound I get through my £60 JBL creatures and iPod is more than enough quality I need for most of the time. If I need to spruce it up a bit I use my DVD surround system via Airport Express from my G5 upstairs. All optical only one wire sounds great and is way more than I need.
The masses, myself included just want to listen to music, most wouldn't know the difference.
The sound I get through my £60 JBL creatures and iPod is more than enough quality I need for most of the time. If I need to spruce it up a bit I use my DVD surround system via Airport Express from my G5 upstairs. All optical only one wire
sounds great and is way more than I need.The masses, myself included just want to listen to music, most wouldn't know the difference.
Oddly enough, I almost bought a Squeezebox yesterday, so I could stream my music collection off the PC upstairs over the wireless LAN and into the stereo. Then it occurred to me that I don't need to fiddle around navigating through menus in order to listen to music that's compromised in quality - I have shelves full of CDs in the same room. Insert disc, press play, enjoy
14 January 2005, 06:39 PM
#60
Basically though it goes... iPod or iRiver, the Sony sucks *****.
Must say I haven't found that bit in my user's maual yetSeriously, I'm absolutely certain I don't need 20Gb either, but wifey bought it for Christmas, and just asked for the best one the store had!
Alcazar