Reasons not to buy an ipod

The General

f®eak s&#169 wrote: »

How the hell can a handbag be a suitable analogy for a music player? Wha, where are the handles? Can I put my purse in there!?

He means the ipod is like a fashion excessory to most people who buy them

The General

monkeyfudge wrote:

I think that's your answer right there. Sticking FM radios into things looks cheap and tacky because of years of free giveaways and sticking them into pens and such.

Well thats just stupid, go back to sleep

monkeyfudge

The General wrote:

Well thats just stupid, go back to sleep

What can I say... I just don't see the point in putting a cheap and outdated peice of technology into a modern peice of equipment. I'd have absolutely no need for a radio in a portable music player.

I use podcasting to download some interesting radio conent and listen to it when I want, and I'd much rather read a newspaper or use the web than get my news off a radio station.

And I work with a radio station...

TheStrandRoads

The iRiver is more functional for me as it has a remote control, so I don't need to take the player out everytime I want to change a song.

That would simply annoy me.

I purchased the iRiver H120 over the iPod because;

* It was cheaper
* It was a multi-codec player (including wma's)
* It had a Remote Control
* I didn't need any software whatsoever to make it work (drag n' drop)

But I suppose the majority of us feel the iPods are slicker looking. It's just unfortunate that looks can sway people's decisions over functionality. It guess it goes to show how well marketed they are.

John

honru

whiskeyman wrote:

Quite simple really.
The iPod has gained a reputation of being a fashion accessory - similar to a top brand handbag.
Just look at the reviews and you'll see designers harping on about the sleek design of player and headphones. And just look at the range of colours.

Most MP3 players are pretty sleek in their own right, look at what Creative have been pushing out recently. Surely they're following Apple's lead and releasing "fashion accessories"?

The whole stigma that the general public laud it for its looks rather than the actual player is something that I can wholeheartedly acknoledge, yet that doesn't automatically make it a bad machine. And it's a stupid reason to immeadiatly disqualify it.

whiskeyman wrote:

There's also the uniqueness of having white cord / ear plugs. It is synonymous with the iPod.
People go around wearing the headphone outside their jackets / tops and try to have the iPod itself in full view to others.
It's a statement "hey, look at me! I'm cool because I got me an iPod".

Who says everyone has to enter the iPod club?

Throw those earphones away, get a pair of decent ones.

Dead Ed wrote:

I was comparing the ipod to a generic fashion accessory, a comparison (I believe I stated previously) made on numerous occasions by numerous sections of the press.

Slave to the press.

Dead Ed wrote:

Personally I think stating the names of numerous players that are both superior in features, sound quality and, in some cases, price, is quite a good reason thank you very much.

I have no problem with you suggesting alternatives. Hey, we're all trying to help people out here. Yet negating the player for its looks and stigma is just irrevelent. I'm sure there's plenty of people reading this who own or are interested in getting an iPod that don't give a shít what other people think of them.

conzy

A friend of mine recently bought an ipod shuffle and i have to say it is ****e its a piece of white pvc with tiny controls on the front and a "button" (well its more of a handle) on the back to change between shuffle and standard modes, the battery lasts around 4 hours and you have to charge it with a pc this is crazy, what if you want to enjoy some music while on holiday you will have to find a pc every couple of hours to charge your player Plus it has no screen and if your on song number 1 its a long way to song number 250. It cost her €130.

I on the other hand bought a creative muvo n200 for €100 and i have
Wma, mp3, wav format support
Fm radio ( with fm radio recording to mp3 )
In-line recording
Drag and Drop
Built in Mic for use a dictiphone
Backlit screen
Graphic Eq
Protective Case
Armband
Warranty
And one AAA battery last around 15 hours ( and its alot easier caryy a few of these than a pc:D )

rubadub

conzymaher wrote:

Backlit screen

What can I say... I just don't see the point in putting a cheap and outdated peice of technology into a modern peice of equipment. Sure Thomas Edison invented that crap years back, you can pick them up for 30c in tescos. I'd have absolutely no need for a light in a portable music player. :rolleyes:

Edwardius

Slave to the press.

Nope, I quoted them. I believe the two aren't inextricably linked and any attempt to do so is idiotic. I don't really feel we're adding anything to the conversation at present. This is a discussion, and instead of discussing the topic at hand it's resorted to doing a fine tooth comb windup job.

have no problem with you suggesting alternatives. Hey, we're all trying to help people out here. Yet negating the player for its looks and stigma is just irrevelent. I'm sure there's plenty of people reading this who own or are interested in getting an iPod that don't give a shít what other people think of them.

I negated it for more reasons than that. would you please read the posts and stop wasting space? I STATED that it has become a fashion accessory and in my eyes that's not a reason to buy something (as opposed to a reason for not buying something. I thought I cleared it up earlier, obviously not enough for some). The other key reasons I mentioned were from an objective point of view based on numerous sources which poses the question; Are you wearing blinkers? Or are you just too lazy to bother reading anything other than that connected to your standard response?

fade

f®eak s&#169 wrote: »

The whole stigma that the general public laud it for its looks rather than the actual player is something that I can wholeheartedly acknoledge, yet that doesn't automatically make it a bad machine. And it's a stupid reason to immeadiatly disqualify it.

no one was disqualifying it for looking good! but i think its perfectly safe to dismiss it when the looks are about the best thing going for it!just becasue it looks good doesnt automatically make it a good machine either, does it?

f®eak s&#169 wrote: »

Slave to the press.

wtf does that mean? cmon, are you really trying to deny the fact that ipods are more famous for being a fashion accesory than because of their specifications. most people i know who actually know what they are talking about, who bought an ipod, has said that they wished they had waited for th iriver or another superior machine.

f®eak s&#169 wrote: »

I have no problem with you suggesting alternatives. Hey, we're all trying to help people out here. Yet negating the player for its looks and stigma is just irrevelent. I'm sure there's plenty of people reading this who own or are interested in getting an iPod that don't give a shít what other people think of them.

he is not negating them because of its looks or its stigma, he is negating them becasue they are, techincally, not as superior as other mp3 players.

Cake Fiend

Hunter S

I bought my ipod because generaly its lighter than its nearest competitors, and it has a grand battery life for me walking to and from college everyday up to three days without charging, its sound quality is just fine, i dont need studio perfection recording, the sound on Ipods sounds just fine to me and i assume most other people, if they thought the sound was bad they wouldnt buy them.

I understand that you think that people buy them cause its cool but you guys get caught up in specifications as well. Most people just want something to play music on and thats it, they dont need to have the most up to date modern sound specifiactions, they generaly wouldnt be able to tell the dfference.

And i love the anti female comments, very mature!!!

Bard

I bought my IAudio X5L because it's better than your MP3 player.

The end.

monkeyfudge

rubadub wrote:

What can I say... I just don't see the point in putting a cheap and outdated peice of technology into a modern peice of equipment. Sure Thomas Edison invented that crap years back, you can pick them up for 30c in tescos. I'd have absolutely no need for a light in a portable music player. :rolleyes:

I'm pretty sure my iPod hasn't got lightbulb inside it.

It uses LEDs...

LEDs are a better way of producing Light for a digital display than light bulb.

FM radio is an inferior way of producing sound for an digital audio player.

Creamy Goodness

monkeyfudge wrote:

I'm pretty sure my iPod hasn't got lightbulb inside it.

It uses LEDs...

LEDs are a better way of producing Light for a digital display than light bulb.

FM radio is an inferior way of producing sound for an digital audio player.

it might use a light bulb to light the screen, maybe that's why the battery life is dire.

Sam Vimes

rubadub wrote:

What can I say... I just don't see the point in putting a cheap and outdated peice of technology into a modern peice of equipment. Sure Thomas Edison invented that crap years back, you can pick them up for 30c in tescos. I'd have absolutely no need for a light in a portable music player. :rolleyes:

you realise he's talking about the backlight on the display that allows you to see the screen in the dark right? ever try to look at the display on your phone without the backlight in a room with no lights on?

i want your eyes if you can see that

philologos

so you are saying that I shouldnt buy an iPod video then?

dudara

I think that you should buy whatever you like.

I really am surprised by the anti-iPod brigade. I own a 20Gb iPod, which I bought when working for apple, so I got 30% off. I love it. It's simple to use, has clean graphics on the screen. It's very slickly designed. And despite that, I keep it in a holster in my handbag the whole time.

It has disadvantages too. Short battery life, ability to only play certain codecs. But I accept them. They don't overly worry me just like they don't worry the millions of people who have bought one.

I won't knock your Zen, iRiver, Muvo etc, don't knock mine.

Edwardius

...all carry negative connotations that are just pathetic.

We've been over this already.

In your social circle/life maybe. But what about other people? It's hardly a reason not to buy something if a person wasn't so inclined to being fashionable.

Yet again, I stated that these were my reasons for not buying one. I don't see the point in covering this again.

If the iAudio/Creative series were moreso fashion accessories/popular than the iPod, would they automatically drop off the list of good mp3 players? It's just so irrelevent.

Nope, they deserve to be and are popular, possibly more through merit than hearsay/brand recognition..

Oh I can see. My CD player has a backlight.

Blinkers don't stop people seeing. They do, however, restrict your vision to a very small angle.

Creamy Goodness

the anti ipod brigade do serve a good purpose though.

now they shouldn't be like don't buy an ipod full stop.

they should be like look you have €300+ euros you should realise that, that amount of money is a lot and you should consider your options wisely before blowing that amount of cash.

the anti ipod brigade are just trying to make sure someone doesn't goes and buys an ipod without thinking that there may be (and in my opinion there is) a better - or more suited to their lifestyle - player out there.

so in short, don't buy an ipod until you check all your options.

Sangre

Oh my God the fanbois in here is just so head-wrecking...stop it all of you.
The anti-ipod brigade are so bad for it!

Have an Iriver h140 myself
Pros;
Drop n Drag
Price vs 40gb
Radio
Remote
Rockbox
Supports wma,oggs etc

Cons;
Headphone lead is too short
Scrolling is SOOO slow with id3 tags (hence rockbox)
I can hear my HD whir
Doesn't look as nice

Although you should really compare h340.

Edwardius

Leave it up to the people who are considering an iPod purchase to make their decision. But when writing up your next review on something, remember to think of the full spectrum rather than solely yourself (facts > opinions), as it is much more specific and revelent to the reader and will avoid critism.

This thread is for people to state reasons why they wouldn't buy an ipod. Not a nonbiased review site.

Deserve... to be fashion accessories?

No, read it again and try to process it. I said they're POPULAR because they deserve to be.

Is this your last-ditch attempt to outsmart me?

Go away.

I made a series of statements at the start of this thread and have defended them in a way in which I see fit. If that meant rigourous explanation of even the simplest sentences (see above), then I could tolerate it to a point. Not to the extent where I had to explain the same thing on numerous occasions. If you want to reply to something, read the post first, think about it, and THEN reply. Don't regurgitate the same thing over and over again. The end of your reply confirmed what I'd already begun to suspect; You sir, are an idiot.

rubadub

Cremo wrote:

it might use a light bulb to light the screen, maybe that's why the battery life is dire.

I was merely taking the piss after the bizarre answer as to why somebody actually prefers/defends that their ipod does not have a radio, calling the radio

"a cheap and outdated peice of technology into a modern peice of equipment. I'd have absolutely no need for a radio in a portable music player.

I use podcasting to download some interesting radio conent and listen to it when I want, and I'd much rather read a newspaper or use the web than get my news off a radio station."

Many people listen to radio shows on the way to work, or the news, rather than having to go to the shop and fork out for a paper. Or use it as well as the paper. The H3x series can record radio to listen to it when you want, without having to actually download radio shows, and load them on using itunes. I use it most when the battery is low as it uses very little power. I know many who listen to the few decent radio music shows that are out there.

Some crazy monitor manufacturers are putting TV tuners on their monitors these days. Pure madness sticking that outdated technology on a modern piece of equipment

air_vent

To sum this up a little here lads..

Ipod =overpriced underequipped nice looking well marketed bit of kit

Iriver Archos etc = Well equipped excellently priced for the kit but not well marketed pieces of kit. Better than Ipods for value for money and equipment

MiCr0

i'm going to start deleting all comments that don't add anything to this thread

IceHawk

The only reason not to buy an iPod is that there are better players out there, cheaper. There's nothing wrong with wanting one because it will be more fashionable than others, or because of the size, but everyone should be aware when buying it that it, for example, doesn't play wma, and doesn't have a radio. In terms of features, you're always going to get a trade off between ease of use and number of additional features. Most people who buy iPods are simply unaware of the numerous alternatives.

air_vent

I have my iriver H120 bought it a while back, had the whole shebang

20GIG
MP3 WMA OGG etc
Radio
Text ( read 1984 off it amazing book!!!)
Plug and Play no excuse for any device not to have it !!!!!!!
Inline remote with screen
2 mics one internal and 1 external
optical out and a line in
protective case in box
excellent sound quality
cheaper than an Ipod
and I think it looks dam cool!!!

I bought it because it was cheaper than the ipod and I didnt have to fork out for expensive add ons which came standard on mine. also plug and play is a major issue for me, any MP3 player worth its salt has to have it1!!!

I also despise the whole just having it just to say Ive an Ipod, the're just the same as the louis vitton bags, oh oh look at me im a stuck up rich head( ipod is not as bad as this not by a long shot but the whole thought processes is similar).

Maybe its just me and im wrong but hey Ive got a better player.....

honru

When deciding on a new MP3 player, I think the most important thing is to know what your priorities are.

For example, if you must have the ability to play WMAs and other file types, aswell as FM radio, then the iPod obviously isn't for you. However, if you need heavy file space (40/60GBs) and like a simple intuitive interface, then an iPod is a good option. Same goes for battery life; Sony's NW-HD5 is a very good choice in this area, and if your a videophile, then get a fully-fledged PMP like Cowon's A2 (when it's finally released in the West).

So if you're thinking of getting a new player, write down what you want in one and become familiar with what's available on the market. Make a checklist and cross off the players that ultimately don't fit the requirements. This will lead to a more comfortable and easier decision on your part, as well as a player that is ultimately more compatible with your lifestyle.

melekalikimaka

f®eak s&#169 wrote: »

When deciding on a new MP3 player, I think the most important thing is to know what your priorities are.

For example, if you must have the ability to play WMAs and other file types, aswell as FM radio, then the iPod obviously isn't for you. However, if you need heavy file space (40/60GBs) and like a simple intuitive interface, then an iPod is a good option. Same goes for battery life; Sony's NW-HD5 is a very good choice in this area, and if your a videophile, then get a fully-fledged PMP like Cowon's A2 (when it's finally released in the West).

So if you're thinking of getting a new player, write down what you want in one and become familiar with what's available on the market. Make a checklist and cross off the players that ultimately don't fit the requirements. This will lead to a more comfortable and easier decision on your part, as well as a player that is ultimately more compatible with your lifestyle.

well said

Oriel

Heh, I don't see the "Reasons to buy an iPod" thread anymore. Oh dear...