The Samsung Galaxy Player 50 webpage http://www.samsung.com/galaxyplayer50/ has NOTHING to do with the new "Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0" and "Samsung Galaxy Player 5.0" released in the US on Oct/16/2011.
Granted, Samsung's naming convention, "50" vs. "5.0", is confusing because the "5.0" is the newer and more advanced product. Granted, Samsung should have caught the mistake back in 2008... 2008 folks. This is really old news. The new Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0 (http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/mp3...1CWY/XAA-specs) and 5.0 (http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/mp3...0CWY/XAA-specs) both have hardware features that trump the iPod Touch 4th Gen . Compare those specs to the iPod Touch's and see for yourself (http://www.apple.com/ipodtouch/specs.html). Not even an old "scandal" can hide that fact.
People do not buy Apple products because of the specs. There are other reasons why iPods used to be big sellers.
Same goes for my home country, the UK. The anti-american shit that I hear disgusts me. The people here are brainwashed by a socialist propaganda station called the BBC who pump out a contiguous stream of reasons why socialism works and capitalism does not. It's all self serving, as they are publicly funded, their citizens are forced to pay for the vile programming even if (like me) they despise it and ban it from their homes. They fear a more capitalist UK would reduce funding, so they try and keep the country as brain dead as they possibly can
So they take aim at the prime example of capitalism, the US. Creating nonsense anti US memes whose spread is accelerated by jealousy (ironically because UK standard of living is lower due to increased socialism!).
Jealousy? Maybe the US just... you know... fucked up the world economy some years ago ... Nah, probably unrelated
That's what people are on about when they talk about "having a choice."
Many people would rather leave these sorts of choices up to Apple. In their view, a user might dislike one of Apple's choices at first, but everybody always comes around to realizing that Apple's choice is always the best.
Thank you for your well-phrased rebuttals. You made a firm case for why someone should avoid buying both the iPod Touch and the Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0/5.0 based on their inherent WiFi-only limitations.
My last post's goal was to emphasize what the Galaxy Player 4.0/50 can do that the iPod Touch cannot. For the extra $30, the added features list of the Galaxy Player 4.0/5.0 is attractive when compared to those of the stock $200 8GB iPod Touch 4th Gen. As an owner of an iPod Touch 4th Gen, it is my fervent hope that Apple pay more attention to iPod Touch development, which has fallen well behind the iPhone's, thus calling into question that old adage that "the iPod Touch is an iPhone without the phone." I don't think that comparison is as true as it once was. A comparison of specs need not be adversarial or denigrating. How can a product improve without an honest assessment of shortcomings?
Regarding sales. The Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0/5.0 just released (officially)
in the US on Oct/17/2011. Given the intervening time and the iPod line's dominance, I daresay the iPod Touch's sales figures are greater and will continue to be for some time.
Enjoy your bindle of microSD cards. I'll take a device that doesn't have to rely on cards the size of my pinky fingernail to have a large capacity.
I envy your ability to both foresee usage needs and afford the maximum amount of device storage possible for your iPod Touch. For those without such preternatural skill and monetary reservoirs, I appreciate the option to expand storage as needed without having to buy an entirely new device. Also, if storage requirements exceeded the iPod's maximum 64GB limits (recording LOTs of movies on holiday, for example), then multiple 32GB microSD cards would serve well in the absence of a laptop to download to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Who would freely choose to have Flash? Serious question.
Seriously, those who are trying to load a web page requiring Adobe Flash.
The Galaxy Players' browser can render both HTML5 and Adobe Flash.
I never claimed that Adobe Flash was superior or even desirable. My fervent
belief in the merits of HTML5 will not help the iPod Touch's browser render
Adobe Flash on web pages that require it. Macintosh desktops/laptops support Adobe Flash for those very reasons. I don't see why this should be different for mobile devices.
Many people would rather leave these sorts of choices up to Apple. In their view, a user might dislike one of Apple's choices at first, but everybody always comes around to realizing that Apple's choice is always the best.
Some might disagree. But they think different.
Here's what really going to throw you.
Given that "Apple's choice is always the best" and that you currently own an Apple product,
did you really choose Apple, or did Apple choose you?
Many people would rather leave these sorts of choices up to Apple. In their view, a user might dislike one of Apple's choices at first, but everybody always comes around to realizing that Apple's choice is always the best.
Some might disagree. But they think different.
Quote:
Originally Posted by equalunderthelaw
Here's what really going to throw you.
Given that "Apple's choice is always the best" and that you currently own an Apple product,
did you really choose Apple, or did Apple choose you?
I'm not getting into a mudslinging contest on this matter, but Apple/Jobs has/had a fairly good history of ripping people's ideas off. Remember Watson/Sherlock? Fax as a printer (that one goes back to the NeXT era), etc.
That may be so, but Patents and similar IP issues do not apply here.
This was theft by Samsung of a copyrighted image.
Copyright theft cases are very much clearcut. Their very slight manipulations don't even put it anywhere close to "Fair Use", particularly since it was used for advertising.
This one by Samsung was criminally stupid as well as criminal. Throw the book at 'em.
This "Samsung shill" owns and loves his iPod Touch 4th Gen., but my love is not blind to the things that
it cannot do.
Nice try. But the rhetoric employed in the totality of your posts is well in line with the typical troll masquerading as an Apple fan "who just wants more."
Many of us here have been at it a long time and can see this coming a mile away.
I have. I miss NOTHING. There is NOTHING Flash-based without a standards alternative
I was convinced at his first post. Don't ignore, report.
He seems civil and logical - let's string him up to the highest tree because he might be a paid shill. Last time i checked that wasn't against the rules on this forum as long as you weren't advertising in a spammy post. Flash has many attributes and HTML5 is also a pain in the ass to work with from a developer perspective. I can totally see why people love it and hate it but there is no reason to be a zealot for either side. As always, if you don't like, don't buy it. Live and let live.
Nice try. But the rhetoric employed in the totality of your posts is well in line with the typical troll masquerading as an Apple fan "who just wants more."
Many of us here have been at it a long time and can see this coming a mile away.
Ah, you have hit upon the very crux of the disagreement.
I am not an Apple fan, but I do own and love an
iPod Touch 4th Gen 8GB (Model MC540LL) now running
IOS Version 5.0 (9A334). Personally, I reserve fan
allegiance for watching sports, not making technology
purchasing decisions. If others are Apple fans, in every
sense of the word, then that's fine by me. I understand the
appeal, but I do not personally subscribe to it.
If you are saying that the iPod Touch has no room for improvement,
e.g. moving close to the iPhone 4/4s in non-cellular functionality and
processing power, then we shall have to agree to disagree.
Comments
The Samsung Galaxy Player 50 webpage http://www.samsung.com/galaxyplayer50/ has NOTHING to do with the new "Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0" and "Samsung Galaxy Player 5.0" released in the US on Oct/16/2011.
Granted, Samsung's naming convention, "50" vs. "5.0", is confusing because the "5.0" is the newer and more advanced product. Granted, Samsung should have caught the mistake back in 2008... 2008 folks. This is really old news. The new Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0 (http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/mp3...1CWY/XAA-specs) and 5.0 (http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/mp3...0CWY/XAA-specs) both have hardware features that trump the iPod Touch 4th Gen . Compare those specs to the iPod Touch's and see for yourself (http://www.apple.com/ipodtouch/specs.html). Not even an old "scandal" can hide that fact.
People do not buy Apple products because of the specs. There are other reasons why iPods used to be big sellers.
Same goes for my home country, the UK. The anti-american shit that I hear disgusts me. The people here are brainwashed by a socialist propaganda station called the BBC who pump out a contiguous stream of reasons why socialism works and capitalism does not. It's all self serving, as they are publicly funded, their citizens are forced to pay for the vile programming even if (like me) they despise it and ban it from their homes. They fear a more capitalist UK would reduce funding, so they try and keep the country as brain dead as they possibly can
So they take aim at the prime example of capitalism, the US. Creating nonsense anti US memes whose spread is accelerated by jealousy (ironically because UK standard of living is lower due to increased socialism!).
Jealousy? Maybe the US just... you know... fucked up the world economy some years ago
Jealousy? Maybe the US just... you know... fucked up the world economy some years ago
I'm curious
1. Why you think that's the truth.
2. What any of this nonsense has to do with the thread and would you kindly not do it anymore.
The new Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0 and 5.0 are basically WiFi-only versions of the popular Samsung Galaxy S smartphone,
If that were true, Apple would try to ban them. Apple is litigation crazy when it comes to Samsung.
It's a shame, then, that the guy with the iPod touch has a 64GB model, larger than the Samsung device could ever be.
Removable storage == no limits > 64 GB
The iPod touch owner laughs as he isn't forced to look at ads and kill his battery life while experiencing slowdown of his device.
Seriously, you troll? You think Flash is a SELLING point? It's a selling point NOT to have Flash.
That's what people are on about when they talk about "having a choice."
Removable storage == no limits > 64 GB
Enjoy your bindle of microSD cards. I'll take a device that doesn't have to rely on cards the size of my pinky fingernail to have a large capacity.
That's what people are on about when they talk about "having a choice."
Who would freely choose to have Flash? Serious question.
Removable storage == no limits > 64 GB
That's what people are on about when they talk about "having a choice."
Many people would rather leave these sorts of choices up to Apple. In their view, a user might dislike one of Apple's choices at first, but everybody always comes around to realizing that Apple's choice is always the best.
Some might disagree. But they think different.
My last post's goal was to emphasize what the Galaxy Player 4.0/50 can do that the iPod Touch cannot. For the extra $30, the added features list of the Galaxy Player 4.0/5.0 is attractive when compared to those of the stock $200 8GB iPod Touch 4th Gen. As an owner of an iPod Touch 4th Gen, it is my fervent hope that Apple pay more attention to iPod Touch development, which has fallen well behind the iPhone's, thus calling into question that old adage that "the iPod Touch is an iPhone without the phone." I don't think that comparison is as true as it once was. A comparison of specs need not be adversarial or denigrating. How can a product improve without an honest assessment of shortcomings?
Regarding sales. The Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0/5.0 just released (officially)
in the US on Oct/17/2011. Given the intervening time and the iPod line's dominance, I daresay the iPod Touch's sales figures are greater and will continue to be for some time.
Time will tell.
Enjoy your bindle of microSD cards. I'll take a device that doesn't have to rely on cards the size of my pinky fingernail to have a large capacity.
I envy your ability to both foresee usage needs and afford the maximum amount of device storage possible for your iPod Touch. For those without such preternatural skill and monetary reservoirs, I appreciate the option to expand storage as needed without having to buy an entirely new device. Also, if storage requirements exceeded the iPod's maximum 64GB limits (recording LOTs of movies on holiday, for example), then multiple 32GB microSD cards would serve well in the absence of a laptop to download to.
Who would freely choose to have Flash? Serious question.
Seriously, those who are trying to load a web page requiring Adobe Flash.
The Galaxy Players' browser can render both HTML5 and Adobe Flash.
I never claimed that Adobe Flash was superior or even desirable. My fervent
belief in the merits of HTML5 will not help the iPod Touch's browser render
Adobe Flash on web pages that require it. Macintosh desktops/laptops support Adobe Flash for those very reasons. I don't see why this should be different for mobile devices.
Many people would rather leave these sorts of choices up to Apple. In their view, a user might dislike one of Apple's choices at first, but everybody always comes around to realizing that Apple's choice is always the best.
Some might disagree. But they think different.
Here's what really going to throw you.
Given that "Apple's choice is always the best" and that you currently own an Apple product,
did you really choose Apple, or did Apple choose you?
Think about that while you re-watch "The Matrix".
I don't see why this should be different for mobile devices.
Because Adobe refuses to make good software for desktop, laptop, and mobile devices?
Because after four years of Flash updates, it still sucks eggs?
Because Adobe refuses to make good software for desktop, laptop, and mobile devices?
Because after four years of Flash updates, it still sucks eggs?
You have convinced me.
I recommend that you:
1. Uninstall/disable Adobe Flash on all of your computers and mobile devices (no cheating)
2. Avoid bad web sites using Adobe Flash.
3. If you do encounter a website requiring Adobe Flash,
run away and tell a grownup you can trust.
Together we can make our community safe from Adobe Flash.
You have convinced me.
I am convinced:
Samsung shill and/or troll alert. Please ignore so that it will go away.
Many people would rather leave these sorts of choices up to Apple. In their view, a user might dislike one of Apple's choices at first, but everybody always comes around to realizing that Apple's choice is always the best.
Some might disagree. But they think different.
Here's what really going to throw you.
Given that "Apple's choice is always the best" and that you currently own an Apple product,
did you really choose Apple, or did Apple choose you?
Think about that while you re-watch "The Matrix".
I'm quite sure you missed ConradJoe's point.
I recommend that you:
I have. I miss NOTHING. There is NOTHING Flash-based without a standards alternative.
I am convinced:
I was convinced at his first post. Don't ignore, report.
I'm not getting into a mudslinging contest on this matter, but Apple/Jobs has/had a fairly good history of ripping people's ideas off. Remember Watson/Sherlock? Fax as a printer (that one goes back to the NeXT era), etc.
That may be so, but Patents and similar IP issues do not apply here.
This was theft by Samsung of a copyrighted image.
Copyright theft cases are very much clearcut. Their very slight manipulations don't even put it anywhere close to "Fair Use", particularly since it was used for advertising.
This one by Samsung was criminally stupid as well as criminal. Throw the book at 'em.
-hh
and Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0/5.0 specs, I think our discussion has strayed to far afield of the the
original focus of this thread.
I reiterate that the 2008 link http://www.samsung.com/galaxyplayer50 (Likely dug up by
an unconstrained Google search and now redirected by Samsung) making the rounds has nothing to
do with the current Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0 and 5.0 released in the US on Oct/16/2011.
This "Samsung shill" owns and loves his iPod Touch 4th Gen., but my love is not blind to the things that
it cannot do. The Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0 & 5.0 happen to have some of the features I crave.
I hope that this modest competition inspires Apple to improve the iPod Touch in a manner that brings
it more in line with the full non-phone features of the iPhone 4/4s. If it is wrong to want more from
my iPod Touch, then I am wrong.
This "Samsung shill" owns and loves his iPod Touch 4th Gen., but my love is not blind to the things that
it cannot do.
Nice try. But the rhetoric employed in the totality of your posts is well in line with the typical troll masquerading as an Apple fan "who just wants more."
Many of us here have been at it a long time and can see this coming a mile away.
I have. I miss NOTHING. There is NOTHING Flash-based without a standards alternative
I was convinced at his first post. Don't ignore, report.
He seems civil and logical - let's string him up to the highest tree because he might be a paid shill. Last time i checked that wasn't against the rules on this forum as long as you weren't advertising in a spammy post. Flash has many attributes and HTML5 is also a pain in the ass to work with from a developer perspective. I can totally see why people love it and hate it but there is no reason to be a zealot for either side. As always, if you don't like, don't buy it. Live and let live.
Nice try. But the rhetoric employed in the totality of your posts is well in line with the typical troll masquerading as an Apple fan "who just wants more."
Many of us here have been at it a long time and can see this coming a mile away.
Ah, you have hit upon the very crux of the disagreement.
I am not an Apple fan, but I do own and love an
iPod Touch 4th Gen 8GB (Model MC540LL) now running
IOS Version 5.0 (9A334). Personally, I reserve fan
allegiance for watching sports, not making technology
purchasing decisions. If others are Apple fans, in every
sense of the word, then that's fine by me. I understand the
appeal, but I do not personally subscribe to it.
If you are saying that the iPod Touch has no room for improvement,
e.g. moving close to the iPhone 4/4s in non-cellular functionality and
processing power, then we shall have to agree to disagree.