Yep, but not quite. I thought it would be interesting to have a 1GB+ player that used solid state memory (flash). A small HD still has many of the same problems as a bigger one, though with a 4GB microdrive this device would look interesting.
Ideally, the perfect MP3 solution would have:
1GB+ flash and a media slot
DAB and FM tuners
Line-in and mic recording
take STANDARD issue batteries!
Untill then, iPods are neat, but not for me.
Here you go, fine piece of equipment. Right up there with a Yugo.
None of those are what I mentioned. What I mentioned would today cost as much as a 15GB iPod, if not more. But it's getting closer all the time, in a year or two we'll see.
iPod is great but far from perfect, mainly because HDD's fail and so do batteries. We've already seen iPods sputter and die after a few months of heavy use, mainly due to battery issues. While these are not common, such a device should be able to last for at least 5 years of heavy use, and in actuality, closer to ten.
So, it's arguably the best MP3 player so far, but it isn't perfect.
Some of you act like I'm talking about your mother, jeeze...
As to lasting 10 years, I certainly hope that there is no equipment that has a usable life of 5 to 10 years; that will only mean that they haven't tried very hard to update the equipment.
As to lasting 10 years, I certainly hope that there is no equipment that has a usable life of 5 to 10 years; that will only mean that they haven't tried very hard to update the equipment.
Why would it mean that? I'm not saying newer better stuff can't come out, just that a consumer device for which you pay 300-500USD ought to last. I have a discman that still plays perfectly and it's from '95-96, iThink. And my stereo has bits that are almost ten years old now and it still works perfectly, no reason to expect less of an MP3 player.
Why would it mean that? I'm not saying newer better stuff can't come out, just that a consumer device for which you pay 300-500USD ought to last. I have a discman that still plays perfectly and it's from '95-96, iThink. And my stereo has bits that are almost ten years old now and it still works perfectly, no reason to expect less of an MP3 player.
'95-'96 discman are fine except for skip protecion.
Stereo equiptment holds it's value and work fine forever. There aren't many stereo components that fail unless you blow them. My dad has a stereo from the late 80's I think that although the speakers are giant (have 12's mids and highs in one, they aren't that huge thoug) that still sounds awesome with DVD's, just doesn't have surround.
A discman is mobile and it was no less complicated to make 10 years ago as an MP3 player is today.
Cars are more complicated today than they were in 1950, but, nostalgia aside, which is more reliable?
Perhaps we should accept a higher failure rate in today's aircraft because they're more complicated than planes from WW2?
Why should I give a shit what the manufacturing complexities are? I pay for a product and I expect a certain quality at a given price.
Consumer technology should either LAST and LAST and LAST, or be cheap enough to throw away. Since an iPod isn't cheap enough to throw away, it should be made with much greater longeevity in mind. I don't mind if toaster dies after 2 years, my toaster costs 20 bucks! That's the difference.
Edit: Not sure why I found it necessary to quote Matsu's post...silly me
I agree with you, but it all really depends on if technology. A product should last you at least as long as you use it before newer technology gives you the incentive to upgrade. You should NOT have incentive to upgrade because of a failing product.
standard issue batteries??? are you nuts? in somthing like an ipod, LiIon is perfect. who the hell wants to go spend 6$ on batteries to listen to their ipod every 10 hours? hands? anyone?......ok, asside from matsu, anyone?
standard issue batteries??? are you nuts? in somthing like an ipod, LiIon is perfect. who the hell wants to go spend 6$ on batteries to listen to their ipod every 10 hours? hands? anyone?......ok, asside from matsu, anyone?
NiNMH or whatever they are are very good at lasting a long time and recharge to almost full capacity every time. That would be ideal if the LiIon battery would last longer or be replaceable.
Perhaps we need a standard Li-ion battery format, so that we need not depend on proprietary sizes when batteries inevitably fail, or at least make the Li-ion battery itself a user accessible piece.
Ideally, we would have a Li-ion battery shaped like two AAA cells. Should the battery fail, you might drop in two alkalines and off you go, or get a replacement Li-ion cell, or NiMH. The circuitry would be a bit trickier though, but not impossible.
BTW, the latest NiMH are quite good as regards memory and re-use, and they're cheap too. YOU wouldn't want them for a proprietary laptop battery, but they're great for things like digital cameras and portable audio.
A discman is mobile and it was no less complicated to make 10 years ago as an MP3 player is today.
You were comparing your home stereo's longevity with an iPod. A portable device won't last as long as a home device.
Quote:
Originally posted by Matsu
Cars are more complicated today than they were in 1950, but, nostalgia aside, which is more reliable?
Perhaps we should accept a higher failure rate in today's aircraft because they're more complicated than planes from WW2?
The iPod of tomorrow will be better than the one of today. Comparing a discman of 10 years ago to an iPod of today is not the same thing. Completely different technologies inside.
Quote:
Originally posted by Matsu
Why should I give a shit what the manufacturing complexities are? I pay for a product and I expect a certain quality at a given price.
When your comparisons are ridiculous then I guess you shouldn't give a shit. You pay $20,000 for a car and it lasts 10 years. That's $2,000 a year. At $500, an iPod should last three months according to your comparisons.
Quote:
Originally posted by Matsu
Consumer technology should either LAST and LAST and LAST, or be cheap enough to throw away. Since an iPod isn't cheap enough to throw away, it should be made with much greater longeevity in mind. I don't mind if toaster dies after 2 years, my toaster costs 20 bucks! That's the difference.
And a toaster costs $2 to make. You want a $20 iPod. Sorry, they're too expensive to make. It comes with a year warranty. A year, if you use it, is along time. Your computer costs and lasts three times as much. Wow! That fits the mold for your comparisons. You should love the iPod.
[B]You were comparing your home stereo's longevity with an iPod. A portable device won't last as long as a home device.[b]
Go back, I compared both!
Quote:
The iPod of tomorrow will be better than the one of today. Comparing a discman of 10 years ago to an iPod of today is not the same thing. Completely different technologies inside.
Not totally different, not different at all, both were new to their time as a way of delivering portable music. Both decode a source that is a spinning disc. The formats have changed and the circuirty is different, but the priciples are the same. In fact, much of the circuitry in use today should be of a better quality than that used in the days of discmen. The issue is with design choices that build in more obsolescence than need be. Batteries fail rather quickly, having them be non replacable ia a major error (not exclusive to Apple.)
Quote:
When your comparisons are ridiculous then I guess you shouldn't give a shit. You pay $20,000 for a car and it lasts 10 years. That's $2,000 a year. At $500, an iPod should last three months according to your comparisons.
NO. I'm comparing cars to cars, not to iPods. Cars cost a lot in 1940's dollars too! It's a product that has gotten more complicated and more reliable at the same time. Complexity is not an excuse for unreliable product, as complexity increases, so too does manufacturing competence, usually, complexity can only increase as manufacturing capabilities increase. So while an iPod might bring new difficulties, it is also made by people with production advantages that didn't exist when my discman was built.
Quote:
And a toaster costs $2 to make. You want a $20 iPod. Sorry, they're too expensive to make. It comes with a year warranty. A year, if you use it, is along time. Your computer costs and lasts three times as much. Wow! That fits the mold for your comparisons. You should love the iPod.
Being especially dense today? I don't want a 20 dollar iPod. I don't mind paying for something that will last, but I won't pay (much) for something I have to throw away in a short period of time, hence the example of the toaster as disposable consumer technology. iPods are NOT disposable, I should be able to get 5-10 years use from it, just as I do any other piece of portable consumer audio. The battery issue pretty much guarantees that I won't be able to keep my iPod alive that long. Pity.
I believe I already said they're the best player going, but they do have some bad design elements from the perspective of consumer technology.
I swear, it's like I'm talking about your mother's vaginal yeasts or something -- the way some of you react to legitimate criticisms of Apple's products.
What I said, I said in the spirit of how the product could be better. Functionally, it's great. For durability, it's suspect. Why are you all so sensitive to that? Are you afraid Steve won't like you any more if you think bad thoughts about Apple?
PS. back to complexity. I tend to look at things by the jobs they do. Cars of today versus cars of yesterday, or any mechanical or electronic device vs it's forebear. Almost without fail, these devices have become both more complex and more reliable at the same time. Cars once had wooden spoke wheels and no suspensions, they were truly "horseless buggies" by your criteria they should not be compared to cars of today, since there are so many differnt technologies at work. But the principles and purpose of the device have not changed. So it is with music players: newer tech, but same principles and purpose, to read stored music from a disc media in a portable device.
$249.99 for 1.5GB. Call me crazy, but how would anyone who knows about the iPod be interested in that? Physical size? Maybe, but not for $249.99 and 1.5GB
Well whatever Apple is using now is great. My 5 gig is tank, it's been dropped twice and both bottom corners are chipped (not my fault!) It is like the Hummer of MP3 players. That reminds me...BJer that is an interesting handle.
Waterproofing or water resisting might be a feature to add to iPods.
Comments
Originally posted by Matsu
Yep, but not quite. I thought it would be interesting to have a 1GB+ player that used solid state memory (flash). A small HD still has many of the same problems as a bigger one, though with a 4GB microdrive this device would look interesting.
Ideally, the perfect MP3 solution would have:
1GB+ flash and a media slot
DAB and FM tuners
Line-in and mic recording
take STANDARD issue batteries!
Untill then, iPods are neat, but not for me.
Here you go, fine piece of equipment. Right up there with a Yugo.
iPod is great but far from perfect, mainly because HDD's fail and so do batteries. We've already seen iPods sputter and die after a few months of heavy use, mainly due to battery issues. While these are not common, such a device should be able to last for at least 5 years of heavy use, and in actuality, closer to ten.
So, it's arguably the best MP3 player so far, but it isn't perfect.
Some of you act like I'm talking about your mother, jeeze...
As to lasting 10 years, I certainly hope that there is no equipment that has a usable life of 5 to 10 years; that will only mean that they haven't tried very hard to update the equipment.
Originally posted by Bigc
Oh, sorry, I had left off the smiley in my reply.
As to lasting 10 years, I certainly hope that there is no equipment that has a usable life of 5 to 10 years; that will only mean that they haven't tried very hard to update the equipment.
Why would it mean that? I'm not saying newer better stuff can't come out, just that a consumer device for which you pay 300-500USD ought to last. I have a discman that still plays perfectly and it's from '95-96, iThink. And my stereo has bits that are almost ten years old now and it still works perfectly, no reason to expect less of an MP3 player.
Originally posted by Matsu
And my stereo has bits that are almost ten years old now and it still works perfectly, no reason to expect less of an MP3 player.
1) It's mobile.
2) It's far more complicated than a Discman.
Ehh what? It's 3" x 2.4" x 0.6" - not exactly razor-thin
Btw. the 15GB iPod is 4.1" x 2.4" x 0.62".
Originally posted by Matsu
Why would it mean that? I'm not saying newer better stuff can't come out, just that a consumer device for which you pay 300-500USD ought to last. I have a discman that still plays perfectly and it's from '95-96, iThink. And my stereo has bits that are almost ten years old now and it still works perfectly, no reason to expect less of an MP3 player.
'95-'96 discman are fine except for skip protecion.
Stereo equiptment holds it's value and work fine forever. There aren't many stereo components that fail unless you blow them. My dad has a stereo from the late 80's I think that although the speakers are giant (have 12's mids and highs in one, they aren't that huge thoug) that still sounds awesome with DVD's, just doesn't have surround.
Originally posted by bunge
1) It's mobile.
2) It's far more complicated than a Discman.
Yah, and?
A discman is mobile and it was no less complicated to make 10 years ago as an MP3 player is today.
Cars are more complicated today than they were in 1950, but, nostalgia aside, which is more reliable?
Perhaps we should accept a higher failure rate in today's aircraft because they're more complicated than planes from WW2?
Why should I give a shit what the manufacturing complexities are? I pay for a product and I expect a certain quality at a given price.
Consumer technology should either LAST and LAST and LAST, or be cheap enough to throw away. Since an iPod isn't cheap enough to throw away, it should be made with much greater longeevity in mind. I don't mind if toaster dies after 2 years, my toaster costs 20 bucks! That's the difference.
Originally posted by Matsu
Consumer technology should either LAST and LAST and LAST, or be cheap enough to throw away
Perhaps, but companies want to make money.
I agree with you, but it all really depends on if technology. A product should last you at least as long as you use it before newer technology gives you the incentive to upgrade. You should NOT have incentive to upgrade because of a failing product.
Originally posted by Matsu
take STANDARD issue batteries!
standard issue batteries??? are you nuts? in somthing like an ipod, LiIon is perfect. who the hell wants to go spend 6$ on batteries to listen to their ipod every 10 hours? hands? anyone?......ok, asside from matsu, anyone?
Originally posted by ThunderPoit
standard issue batteries??? are you nuts? in somthing like an ipod, LiIon is perfect. who the hell wants to go spend 6$ on batteries to listen to their ipod every 10 hours? hands? anyone?......ok, asside from matsu, anyone?
NiNMH or whatever they are are very good at lasting a long time and recharge to almost full capacity every time. That would be ideal if the LiIon battery would last longer or be replaceable.
Ideally, we would have a Li-ion battery shaped like two AAA cells. Should the battery fail, you might drop in two alkalines and off you go, or get a replacement Li-ion cell, or NiMH. The circuitry would be a bit trickier though, but not impossible.
BTW, the latest NiMH are quite good as regards memory and re-use, and they're cheap too. YOU wouldn't want them for a proprietary laptop battery, but they're great for things like digital cameras and portable audio.
Originally posted by Matsu
A discman is mobile and it was no less complicated to make 10 years ago as an MP3 player is today.
You were comparing your home stereo's longevity with an iPod. A portable device won't last as long as a home device.
Originally posted by Matsu
Cars are more complicated today than they were in 1950, but, nostalgia aside, which is more reliable?
Perhaps we should accept a higher failure rate in today's aircraft because they're more complicated than planes from WW2?
The iPod of tomorrow will be better than the one of today. Comparing a discman of 10 years ago to an iPod of today is not the same thing. Completely different technologies inside.
Originally posted by Matsu
Why should I give a shit what the manufacturing complexities are? I pay for a product and I expect a certain quality at a given price.
When your comparisons are ridiculous then I guess you shouldn't give a shit. You pay $20,000 for a car and it lasts 10 years. That's $2,000 a year. At $500, an iPod should last three months according to your comparisons.
Originally posted by Matsu
Consumer technology should either LAST and LAST and LAST, or be cheap enough to throw away. Since an iPod isn't cheap enough to throw away, it should be made with much greater longeevity in mind. I don't mind if toaster dies after 2 years, my toaster costs 20 bucks! That's the difference.
And a toaster costs $2 to make. You want a $20 iPod. Sorry, they're too expensive to make. It comes with a year warranty. A year, if you use it, is along time. Your computer costs and lasts three times as much. Wow! That fits the mold for your comparisons. You should love the iPod.
Originally posted by bunge
[B]You were comparing your home stereo's longevity with an iPod. A portable device won't last as long as a home device.[b]
Go back, I compared both!
The iPod of tomorrow will be better than the one of today. Comparing a discman of 10 years ago to an iPod of today is not the same thing. Completely different technologies inside.
Not totally different, not different at all, both were new to their time as a way of delivering portable music. Both decode a source that is a spinning disc. The formats have changed and the circuirty is different, but the priciples are the same. In fact, much of the circuitry in use today should be of a better quality than that used in the days of discmen. The issue is with design choices that build in more obsolescence than need be. Batteries fail rather quickly, having them be non replacable ia a major error (not exclusive to Apple.)
When your comparisons are ridiculous then I guess you shouldn't give a shit. You pay $20,000 for a car and it lasts 10 years. That's $2,000 a year. At $500, an iPod should last three months according to your comparisons.
NO. I'm comparing cars to cars, not to iPods. Cars cost a lot in 1940's dollars too! It's a product that has gotten more complicated and more reliable at the same time. Complexity is not an excuse for unreliable product, as complexity increases, so too does manufacturing competence, usually, complexity can only increase as manufacturing capabilities increase. So while an iPod might bring new difficulties, it is also made by people with production advantages that didn't exist when my discman was built.
And a toaster costs $2 to make. You want a $20 iPod. Sorry, they're too expensive to make. It comes with a year warranty. A year, if you use it, is along time. Your computer costs and lasts three times as much. Wow! That fits the mold for your comparisons. You should love the iPod.
Being especially dense today? I don't want a 20 dollar iPod. I don't mind paying for something that will last, but I won't pay (much) for something I have to throw away in a short period of time, hence the example of the toaster as disposable consumer technology. iPods are NOT disposable, I should be able to get 5-10 years use from it, just as I do any other piece of portable consumer audio. The battery issue pretty much guarantees that I won't be able to keep my iPod alive that long. Pity.
I believe I already said they're the best player going, but they do have some bad design elements from the perspective of consumer technology.
I swear, it's like I'm talking about your mother's vaginal yeasts or something -- the way some of you react to legitimate criticisms of Apple's products.
What I said, I said in the spirit of how the product could be better. Functionally, it's great. For durability, it's suspect. Why are you all so sensitive to that? Are you afraid Steve won't like you any more if you think bad thoughts about Apple?
PS. back to complexity. I tend to look at things by the jobs they do. Cars of today versus cars of yesterday, or any mechanical or electronic device vs it's forebear. Almost without fail, these devices have become both more complex and more reliable at the same time. Cars once had wooden spoke wheels and no suspensions, they were truly "horseless buggies" by your criteria they should not be compared to cars of today, since there are so many differnt technologies at work. But the principles and purpose of the device have not changed. So it is with music players: newer tech, but same principles and purpose, to read stored music from a disc media in a portable device.
I personally am going to buy a panasonic MP3 discman... 40 hours on two AAs and mp3 playback off an 700MB cd? all for $100 CAD? Not too bad...
Originally posted by BJer
check it out at http://www.circuitcity.com/detail.js...k_15&oid=75961
$249.99 for 1.5GB.
Waterproofing or water resisting might be a feature to add to iPods.