or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Wi-Fi seen limiting battery life on MS iPod rival
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Wi-Fi seen limiting battery life on MS iPod rival

post #1 of 102
Thread Starter 
Microsoft's plot to use Wi-Fi capabilities in order to advantage its upcoming digital media player over the iPod could have an adverse effect on the player's battery life, one Wall Street analyst says.

"We believe the biggest issue [...] is that Wi-Fi power requirements are still quite steep and so we are skeptical that battery life will be strong on these Microsoft portable media players," American Technology Research analyst Shaw Wu wrote in a note to clients on Monday.

Just before the weekend, Microsoft in a statement confirmed months of speculation by revealing that it plans a suite of hardware and software products, called "Zune," which will be positioned against Apple's iPod + iTunes franchise later this year.

While Microsoft declined to offer specifics of the products, some analysts claim to have confirmed with the company that its media player device would pack Wi-Fi capabilities, allowing it to download content wirelessly.

Similar portable devices of slightly larger proportions have recently hit the market with Wi-Fi capabilities, but at the expense of battery life. "In our analysis, a Sony PSP lasts only about 45 minutes when Wi-Fi is turned on," Wu told clients.

Wu also believes Microsoft's Zune products could tarnish its reputation amongst several partners already battling Apple's iPod dominance.

"We believe the biggest issue with Microsoft's entrance into the portable media space is that [it] puts it direct competition with its partners, all of whom support Microsoft's Windows Media format," he said. "While the focus is on Apple, we believe this move will likely have a much larger competitive impact on Creative, SanDisk, Sony, Samsung, iRiver, Archos, and others."

It also remains to be seen whether Microsoft can create a pleasant, seamless user experience like that of Apple's iPod and whether it can do so profitably. In his note to clients, Wu pointed out that while most view Microsoft's Xbox gaming effort as a success, it has been a financial failure that has cost the company and its shareholders billions in losses.

"If it were any company other than Microsoft -- who can afford to lose billions and price below cost -- we believe the Xbox would have been shuttered due to its high unprofitability," the analyst said. "We believe Microsoft's effort in portable media will likely result in similar economics."
post #2 of 102
...unless the Wi-Fi capability is for quick, lower powered tasks. Like beaming a tune to someone else's "Zune"-Pod (Lord, I hate that name)...

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #3 of 102
Wireless for portable media player file transfer doesn't really make much sense to me. As noted, there's the power issue. The thing has to be recharged somehow, and the time to exchange files is when it is docked, which also recharges. Wireless for cordless headphones does make sense to me though, that is lower power because it doesn't need to go farther than a couple meters at most, 1m or less would be typical.
post #4 of 102
Dude, Where's My Zune?
post #5 of 102
Quote:
"We believe the biggest issue [...] is that Wi-Fi power requirements are still quite steep and so we are skeptical that battery life will be strong on these Microsoft portable media players."

...

"We believe the biggest issue with Microsoft's entrance into the portable media space is that puts it direct competition with its partners, all of whom support Microsoft's Windows Media format..."

Er, just how many "biggest issues" are there? No, wait, this is the biggest issue! No, wait, this is the biggest issue!

The issues mentioned sound perfectly reasonable -- definitely MS has its work cut out for it -- but I'd prefer to hear a Zune critique from a critic who's a little... ah, less invested in Apple's success, as Wu is.
post #6 of 102
I love it when Lil' Bill tries to get his horse into the race when the trophy is already on someone else's mantel (he's done this before...remember)
OMG here we go again...
Reply
OMG here we go again...
Reply
post #7 of 102
I can't see how whatever arrangement MS and/or its partners might make with the music industry would allow for "beaming" songs between players, so I would think the functionality would be limited to downloads and PC syncing.

Which, as has been said, doesn't seem to offer much of an advantage over firewire/USB, except for the ability to purchase and download music while "on the go", in the manner of cell phones.

Trouble being, WiFi ubiquity is nothing like the cell network, so how much "cooler" would it be to be able to download songs in your house (which you can already do) and at the odd hot spot?

And how long do you think hot spots are going to tolerate massive increases in bandwidth usage if a bunch of Zune owners start hanging out and downloading music? Or, god help them all, video?

As far as some kind of scenario in which you move various content wirelessly between your various MS devices that you have-- typical MS "vaguely cool sounding while pragmatically pointless" idea.

Remember "Origami"? And that nice video with attractive young people doing "computerish" things up trees and down valleys and on the beach and over the hill? That's really set the market on fire, hasn't it?
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #8 of 102
Actually Lil'Bill is going to get the trophy. He jumps in with wireless a true competitor for the ipod bam. He can win. Wireless is meant to listen to you buddies songs right next to you. Not so much to download songs. Could be fun. Oh yeah, who actually saw the device with the wavering battery life. This articles title is a complete farce. Lack of journalistic moral.
post #9 of 102
M$ has to lots of $ I think
Wifi will soon or later also come in the iPod
it will be a concurrent for the ipod
M$ will maybe will make media-player better compatibel with Zune than an other mp3 device. Mediaplayer is still used by a lot of people. And a lot of people will use the mp3-device that works with the media-player software.
post #10 of 102
Quote:
Originally posted by addabox
I can't see how whatever arrangement MS and/or its partners might make with the music industry would allow for "beaming" songs between players, so I would think the functionality would be limited to downloads and PC syncing.

Which, as has been said, doesn't seem to offer much of an advantage over firewire/USB, except for the ability to purchase and download music while "on the go", in the manner of cell phones.

Trouble being, WiFi ubiquity is nothing like the cell network, so how much "cooler" would it be to be able to download songs in your house (which you can already do) and at the odd hot spot?

And how long do you think hot spots are going to tolerate massive increases in bandwidth usage if a bunch of Zune owners start hanging out and downloading music? Or, god help them all, video?

DIfficult to believe this functionality would be offered without an ulterior motive...

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #11 of 102
Quote:
Originally posted by addabox
I can't see how whatever arrangement MS and/or its partners might make with the music industry would allow for "beaming" songs between players, so I would think the functionality would be limited to downloads and PC syncing.

Your answer might be here: 'Off-line Economies for Digital Media'.
post #12 of 102
Quote:
Originally posted by addabox
Remember "Origami"? And that nice video with attractive young people doing "computerish" things up trees and down valleys and on the beach and over the hill? That's really set the market on fire, hasn't it?

It is way too soon to say. They aren't even "on" the market yet, that I'm aware. I think some units might be available this year, some, early next year.
post #13 of 102
Quote:
Originally posted by Hobbes
Er, just how many "biggest issues" are there? No, wait, this is the biggest issue! No, wait, this is the biggest issue!

The issues mentioned sound perfectly reasonable -- definitely MS has its work cut out for it -- but I'd prefer to hear a Zune critique from a critic who's a little... ah, less invested in Apple's success, as Wu is.

One of the reasons why I didn't buy the HTC 6700 phone was because the WiFi used up so much battery power, that reviewers, and users, said that they just kept it turned off. If you keep it turned off, what's the point? The talk battery life with it turned off is about 4+ hours. With it on, if you get one hour, good luck. I bought the Treo 700p when it came out. The other reason I didn't buy it is because windows mobile 5 still sucks power itself, and it's slow, and crashes too much.

If any of that is on this new product, they will be a problem for MS to overcome. Remembering to switch WiFi on and off again was such a problem for users of the phone to remember, that a number of people turned it in to their providers for other phones.
post #14 of 102
Quote:
Originally posted by antartican
Actually Lil'Bill is going to get the trophy. He jumps in with wireless a true competitor for the ipod bam. He can win. Wireless is meant to listen to you buddies songs right next to you. Not so much to download songs. Could be fun. Oh yeah, who actually saw the device with the wavering battery life. This articles title is a complete farce. Lack of journalistic moral.

I doubt that very much. People will want to trade songs, if possible. You know, "I'll buy these two, and give them to you, if you buy those two, and give them to me."

I just can't see the RIAA going for that. And WiFi will still suck the life out of any player.

Besides, you can do any of that sharing with Bluetooth 2. Which Apple uses extensively now.
post #15 of 102
Yeah, Bluetooth 2.0+EDR sounds much more reasonable to me in this context.
post #16 of 102
Quote:
Originally posted by mazola
Your answer might be here: 'Off-line Economies for Digital Media'.

That's all very well and good. But, how many people will be SELLING their songs to one another, as opposed to GIVING their songs to one another?

How many people will want to BUY songs from someone else rather than getting them for FREE?

This is the entire problem, isn't it?
post #17 of 102
Quote:
Originally posted by antartican
Actually Lil'Bill is going to get the trophy. He jumps in with wireless a true competitor for the ipod bam. He can win.

Why do you think Lil' Bill is in the race now? He knows damn good and well that Steve is on the verge of wi-fi with the iPod. The difference between Bill & Steve is that Steve usually keeps his mouth shut until he has it in his hand!

Once the wi-fi hurdle is leapt, it may be awhile between major innovations.

And surely no one thinks the record labels are just gonna roll over for Lil' Bill. Free songs to trade? come on, they are already P.O.'d thinking that Steve isn't paying them enough!
OMG here we go again...
Reply
OMG here we go again...
Reply
post #18 of 102
Sharing of songs wirelessly will never happen... I mean, you can't even pull songs off the iPod onto your computer without the help of 3rd party programs. There is no way the RIAA will support songs being passed around freely. Before you know it, there will be planned gatherings of hundreds of people at colleges and such where people can just connect randomly to other users and rack up thousands of songs.

They'll be called ZunePits or Zune Parties.
post #19 of 102
Quote:
Originally posted by BuzDots
Why do you think Lil' Bill is in the race now? He knows damn good and well that Steve is on the verge of wi-fi with the iPod. The difference between Bill & Steve is that Steve usually keeps his mouth shut until he has it in his hand!

Once the wi-fi hurdle is leapt, it may be awhile between major innovations.

And surely no one thinks the record labels are just gonna roll over for Lil' Bill. Free songs to trade? come on, they are already P.O.'d thinking that Steve isn't paying them enough!

You forget to refer to Gates as "Lil' Bill" in your third sentence.
post #20 of 102
Quote:
Originally posted by Chucker
Yeah, Bluetooth 2.0+EDR sounds much more reasonable to me in this context.

Bluetooth 2.0 won't be low power, if and when it ever comes out to spec.

There has been tremendous effort to get ever lower power on Wifi devices, and this usually focuses on the MAC side of things. There are some Wifi products out there that have extremely low power consumption during idle periods, but there's really no way to decrease power usage all that much when the radio needs to be on. This is common of all massively-broadband technologies, a group in which Bluetooth EDR and WirelessUSB are both members.

The best part about all this Zune business is that Apple has been smiling the whole way. It's either foolish exuberance or a sign that they're about to drop a bomb.
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #21 of 102
Quote:
Originally posted by BuzDots
Why do you think Lil' Bill is in the race now? He knows damn good and well that Steve is on the verge of wi-fi with the iPod. The difference between Bill & Steve is that Steve usually keeps his mouth shut until he has it in his hand!

Once the wi-fi hurdle is leapt, it may be awhile between major innovations.

And surely no one thinks the record labels are just gonna roll over for Lil' Bill. Free songs to trade? come on, they are already P.O.'d thinking that Steve isn't paying them enough!

In my personal opinion, the next iPod won't have WiFi. I don't think the market is ready for it yet. Maybe the other players can pave the way for it while being total flops themselves. Then the iPod can come in at the opportune time and offer an innovative solution the other's weren't offering.

But the biggest reason, is that it's NOT like the cell phone network. You need to be in a hotspot for it to work. And there's simply not a lot of those at the moment. And some, you still have to pay for. And those you DON'T have to pay for, there's a welcome screen that loads in your browser and makes you accept terms of use before giving access. Obviously meant for a computer. How do the current WiFi devices work around that? Does anyone know?
post #22 of 102
Another killer is that if you have somebody streaming songs from your player wirelessly while you're listening to your own, the hard drive will be pulling and caching twice the data, thus causing even more battery drain (on top of the added cost of the WiFi).

Without better batteries, this feature won't be worth much more than its novelty.
post #23 of 102
Quote:
Originally posted by Splinemodel
Bluetooth 2.0 won't be low power, if and when it ever comes out to spec.

You're thinking Bluetooth 3. Bluetooth 2.0 has been in Macs for well over a year.
post #24 of 102
Quote:
Originally posted by wilco
You forget to refer to Gates as "Lil' Bill" in your third sentence.

Purely an minor oversight!!
OMG here we go again...
Reply
OMG here we go again...
Reply
post #25 of 102
Quote:
Originally posted by DeaPeaJay
In my personal opinion, the next iPod won't have WiFi. I don't think the market is ready for it yet. Maybe the other players can pave the way for it while being total flops themselves. Then the iPod can come in at the opportune time and offer an innovative solution the other's weren't offering.

But the biggest reason, is that it's NOT like the cell phone network. You need to be in a hotspot for it to work. And there's simply not a lot of those at the moment. And some, you still have to pay for. And those you DON'T have to pay for, there's a welcome screen that loads in your browser and makes you accept terms of use before giving access. Obviously meant for a computer. How do the current WiFi devices work around that? Does anyone know?

Well, the PSP has a browser built-in... so that's how it connects to hotspots that require the user to agree to terms. I doubt an mp3 player will have a browser built in.
post #26 of 102
Quote:
Originally posted by Splinemodel
Bluetooth 2.0 won't be low power, if and when it ever comes out to spec.

There has been tremendous effort to get ever lower power on Wifi devices, and this usually focuses on the MAC side of things. There are some Wifi products out there that have extremely low power consumption during idle periods, but there's really no way to decrease power usage all that much when the radio needs to be on. This is common of all massively-broadband technologies, a group in which Bluetooth EDR and WirelessUSB are both members.

The best part about all this Zune business is that Apple has been smiling the whole way. It's either foolish exuberance or a sign that they're about to drop a bomb.

Bluetooth 2 has lower power requirements than WiFi does, though I don't have the numbers here right now. But, even ver. 1 is good enough to transfer music files realtime.
post #27 of 102
The only way I can see wireless being of any huge benefit is to share your currently playing tune with someone nearby, in real time. They can only hear it - it isn't saved in the eavesdropping player. No way will the labels allow copying music from one device to the other. No way in hell. This realtime sharing could be feasible if done via BT. It's fairly low power and has an acceptable range for that purpose.

As far as Wi-Fi goes, as others have said, the drawback is the scarcity of hot spots and the fact that at home you're already close to your computer so wi-fi wouldn't be such an advantage.

My 3 cents.
post #28 of 102
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
One of the reasons why I didn't buy the HTC 6700 phone was because the WiFi used up so much battery power, that reviewers, and users, said that they just kept it turned off. If you keep it turned off, what's the point? The talk battery life with it turned off is about 4+ hours. With it on, if you get one hour, good luck. I bought the Treo 700p when it came out. The other reason I didn't buy it is because windows mobile 5 still sucks power itself, and it's slow, and crashes too much.

If any of that is on this new product, they will be a problem for MS to overcome. Remembering to switch WiFi on and off again was such a problem for users of the phone to remember, that a number of people turned it in to their providers for other phones.

I don't think that's such a problem as you're only likely to switch WiFi on in a place you know there is WiFi. The problem is that people are dumb f*cks and expect to leave it on all the time. Unless you live within a permanent hotspot I don't see the point.

The Zune is supposedly coming with a 400Mhz CPU. Windows Mobile phones suck not just because of the OS but also because they require a fast CPU to get reasonable performance. Do anything and it kills battery life.

Palm is much better but it's still expensive power wise. They win mostly because they've not updated the OS since it's Dragonball 68K origins and basically even though you're running an emulator on an underclocked low speed ARM processor, the old 68K code runs quite well. That's because their phones do f*ck all and their software is 3-4 years behind the times.

Both systems rely on a discrete CPU and a separate radio stack for comms. That's at least two major chips in the phone with big power requirements. This is just not compatible with modern expectations of a phone from either consumers or manufacturers.

On the right side of the fence you've got Symbian (Nokia and Sony Ericsson mostly) running this year with very low speed, low power ARM CPUs with the comms stack built on the chip for a single chip solution with a very efficient OS. WINCE and Palm will be eaten up this year. I'm pretty sure Apple didn't enter the market with an iPhone this year because it would be absolutely pointless coming out with a smartphone which wasn't based on a single chip solution. Apple isn't stupid. They have to get it right first time.

Apple runs a dual core ARM CPU at sub 100Mhz IIRC in their iPods with a couple of ancillary chips to handle music/video codecs. It's in the same shitty position as MS and Palm for power with too many chips. It only works well in the iPod because it's not required to do anything complex and the chips are idling most of the time. They need to reduce the chip count but the overall power requirements is probably about a quarter of the Zune or any PDA (Palm or WINCE) and maybe a 20th of any Palm/WINCE phone. If they had to run a radio comms stack on the iPod hardware though they'd struggle or the battery would last 2 hours.

I've a Sony Ericsson P910i. I get about 3 days between charges. I can listen to about 6 hours of music. It has 12 hours of talk time if you reduce the screen brightness. And that's using the old dual chips. CPU + Comms stack. The HTC phones and Treos don't get anywhere close.
post #29 of 102
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
But, even ver. 1 is good enough to transfer music files realtime.

That depends. For a ~500 kbit/s ALAC, it'd get crowded.
post #30 of 102
So, a winning combination of Wi-Fi AND Microsoft's legendary security! Maybe the easy connection's required to download all those security patches.

If it could download tunes directly from a WISP hotspot...hmmm too complicated for the average punter.

So it's downloading from a home system and to save battery life would probably need to 'activated' on the occaisions you want to connect - why not just plug it in? Wasn't one of the big advantages of the original iPod over it's rivals the download speed of firewire vs USB1.1? Why go backwards?

Then again, these features don't need to have real benefits, just credibility at the Point Of Sale.
Android proves (as Windows & VHS did before it) that if you want to control people, give us choices and the belief we're capable of making them. We're all 'living' the American dream.
Reply
Android proves (as Windows & VHS did before it) that if you want to control people, give us choices and the belief we're capable of making them. We're all 'living' the American dream.
Reply
post #31 of 102
Quote:
Originally posted by aegisdesign
I don't think that's such a problem as you're only likely to switch WiFi on in a place you know there is WiFi. The problem is that people are dumb f*cks and expect to leave it on all the time. Unless you live within a permanent hotspot I don't see the point.

The Zune is supposedly coming with a 400Mhz CPU. Windows Mobile phones suck not just because of the OS but also because they require a fast CPU to get reasonable performance. Do anything and it kills battery life.

Palm is much better but it's still expensive power wise. They win mostly because they've not updated the OS since it's Dragonball 68K origins and basically even though you're running an emulator on an underclocked low speed ARM processor, the old 68K code runs quite well. That's because their phones do f*ck all and their software is 3-4 years behind the times.

Both systems rely on a discrete CPU and a separate radio stack for comms. That's at least two major chips in the phone with big power requirements. This is just not compatible with modern expectations of a phone from either consumers or manufacturers.

On the right side of the fence you've got Symbian (Nokia and Sony Ericsson mostly) running this year with very low speed, low power ARM CPUs with the comms stack built on the chip for a single chip solution with a very efficient OS. WINCE and Palm will be eaten up this year. I'm pretty sure Apple didn't enter the market with an iPhone this year because it would be absolutely pointless coming out with a smartphone which wasn't based on a single chip solution. Apple isn't stupid. They have to get it right first time.

Apple runs a dual core ARM CPU at sub 100Mhz IIRC in their iPods with a couple of ancillary chips to handle music/video codecs. It's in the same shitty position as MS and Palm for power with too many chips. It only works well in the iPod because it's not required to do anything complex and the chips are idling most of the time. They need to reduce the chip count but the overall power requirements is probably about a quarter of the Zune or any PDA (Palm or WINCE) and maybe a 20th of any Palm/WINCE phone. If they had to run a radio comms stack on the iPod hardware though they'd struggle or the battery would last 2 hours.

I've a Sony Ericsson P910i. I get about 3 days between charges. I can listen to about 6 hours of music. It has 12 hours of talk time if you reduce the screen brightness. And that's using the old dual chips. CPU + Comms stack. The HTC phones and Treos don't get anywhere close.

It's not a matter of being dumb. People know what they are told. If their manual doesn't say to keep WiFi off most of the time, they won't know that they should. Not everyone is as knowledeable as we are about these things. The phone comes with WiFi turned on as default.

If you check the spec's of both the 6700, and the 700p, or 700w, you will see that they all use pretty powerful chips. 315MHz for the Treo 700p, for example.

MS's Mobile OS is a strange one. While you can have 320 x 240, or 240 x 320, you can't have 320 x 320! So the Treo 700w has 240 x 240 instead of the 320 x 320 the 700p has. At 240 x 240, it's not easy. It requires more real estate than that to work well. The HTC has a fast cpu, but it's still a dog. It uses a 416MHz Xscale cpu from Intel. That's as good as one can get today. All of the MS mobile offerings have been slow for their generation. After a while the argument about a faster cpu just becomes meaningless. They will always need a cpu that is one generation newer, and faster, than what they have.

The 700p might have an "older" OS, but it still works better than Mobile 5. The odd thing is that Palm's systems have always synced to MS's software better than MS's own mobile offerings. This time isn't any different, for those who care. You can read the reviews on that. They all say the same thing.

The Palm also requires far fewer "clicks" to get something done then Mobile 5 does. Handwriting recognition software also works better on the Palm. I can't stand the poorly designed buttons on any of these devices, though the ones on the 6700 are better, the slide out keyboard feels too flimsy.

And, WiFi is still a bomb on these devices.

Symbian is just too primitive, and has far fewer programs than either Palm or windows. I know it's popular in Europe, but I'm not impressed.
post #32 of 102
Quote:
Originally posted by Chucker
That depends. For a ~500 kbit/s ALAC, it'd get crowded.

Sure, but almost no one uses anything but 128Kb/s files, so it doesn't really matter.
post #33 of 102
The "sharing" songs wirelessly won't be an issue for the RIAA since these devices are used with a subscription service. No one owns any of the music. Any music downloaded from URGE will be sharable, whereas those ripped from a CD or DLd from another P2P service will not*. Since the RIAA gets their money regardless of who listens to what or how much they listen to, they will have no issue. We can do this now in iTunes kind of. Any non-DRMd song can be shared with any iTunes user on the same subnet.

If this is the Zune killer feature, I'm pretty underwhelmed.


* yes, I am guessing, but it makes sense
-- Jason
Reply
-- Jason
Reply
post #34 of 102
Quote:
Originally posted by jasong
The "sharing" songs wirelessly won't be an issue for the RIAA since these devices are used with a subscription service. No one owns any of the music. Any music downloaded from URGE will be sharable, whereas those ripped from a CD or DLd from another P2P service will not*. Since the RIAA gets their money regardless of who listens to what or how much they listen to, they will have no issue.

* yes, I am guessing, but it makes sense

I am almost certain the music industry doesn't see it that way. If the track is from a subscription service, they only want want subscribers to be listeners. I don't see how they would like sharing it out to other people's players. Maybe if both users are subscribers to the same type of service, then that might be different, but that sounds like something that would be hard to implement.
post #35 of 102
well i really dislike shaw wu's babbling and i think that we should wait for these devices to come out before crying about the battery life. for all we know, zune could have very efficient wifi power management. my palm tx is very afficient about this and turns wifi off after a period of inactivity, so it can be done. wifi doesn't equal short battery life.

i am looking forward for these zune devices. i just hope it's sort of xbox cool and not pocketPC-like.

dont flame me i still own an ipod nano but i believe competition is good. fanboys are bad.
post #36 of 102
Quote:
Originally posted by monkeyastronaut
well i really dislike shaw wu's babbling and i think that we should wait for these devices to come out before crying about the battery life. for all we know, zune could have very efficient wifi power management. my palm tx is very afficient about this and turns wifi off after a period of inactivity, so it can be done. wifi doesn't equal short battery life.

i am looking forward for these zune devices. i just hope it's sort of xbox cool and not pocketPC-like.

dont flame me i still own an ipod nano but i believe competition is good. fanboys are bad.

Fanbois are bad, but knowledge is good. I don't agree with you, but not because I'm a fanboi. I don't even have an iPod yet.

But, all of what I see shows that WiFi in a handheld is not a good idea.
post #37 of 102
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
Fanbois are bad, but knowledge is good. I don't agree with you, but not because I'm a fanboi. I don't even have an iPod yet.

But, all of what I see shows that WiFi in a handheld is not a good idea.

I'm a fanPod.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #38 of 102
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
Fanbois are bad, but knowledge is good. I don't agree with you, but not because I'm a fanboi. I don't even have an iPod yet.

But, all of what I see shows that WiFi in a handheld is not a good idea.

i agree with you. knowledge is good.

i also agree with you about wifi in a handheld not being such a good idea. i thought it would absolutely kick ass to have wifi on my palm, so that's why i bought the palm tx, and while the device lets you turn it on/off pretty easily, it's not all that great. signal can fade easily, palm web browsers are not that impressive (the whole internet jr. experience) and it's not even my most sought-after feature anymore. i find bluetooth potentially more appealing.

still, it's nice to at least have wifi, but after owning the palm tx i don't think it's such an impressive feature anymore. i appreciate other features even more, like the sd card expansion slots, bluetooth, infrared, the bright large display, the vast array of applications, etc.
post #39 of 102
Does this mean we'll be constantly bombarded with "audio popups"?
post #40 of 102
Quote:
Originally posted by jenkij
Does this mean we'll be constantly bombarded with "audio popups"?

Last Zune to catch a Wi-Fi virus ("wirus"?) is a rotten egg.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Wi-Fi seen limiting battery life on MS iPod rival