Napster's Portable Music Player [Archive]

MacRumors

Oct 20, 2003, 01:10 AM

KnoxNews (http://www.knoxnews.com/kns/tech/article/0,1406,KNS_8976_2358757,00.html) provides a preview of Samsung's Napster-branded portable music player (photo in article) that will be co-marketed with Napster's upcoming music service. Napster 2.0 will be launching officially on October 29th and Samsung's new Napster player will be priced comparably to the iPod at $399 for a 20GB model.

The article details that the Samsung player will be roughly the same dimensions and weight as the iPod, and also provide line-in audio, a limited FM-transmitter, 10 hour battery life, and integration with Napster 2.0 jukebox software.

Early limitations noted by the reviewer include limited functionality of the FM transmitter, more complicated controls than the iPod, bugs with transferring songs and playback.

Napster is considered by some (http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/business/7045151.htm) to be Apple's biggest competition in the music download arena.

edesignuk

Oct 20, 2003, 01:14 AM

http://mas.scripps.com/KNS/2003/10/19/1020biztechtest_e.jpg

Hmmm...it's ok...but looks a little cluttered. Yup, I'll keep hold of my iPod thanku :D

arn

Oct 20, 2003, 01:19 AM

yeah... doesn't look quite like the iPod killer as it could be considering the lead time between the iPod's introduction and this device.

The line-in is nice... but the iPod seems a much more appealing device -- even without the audio recording. And the iPod is comparably priced.

I think the Dell DJ may be more competitive. It's still unclear who Dell is partnering with for their Dell Music Store.

arn

LFrascogna

Oct 20, 2003, 01:20 AM

Bring 'em on. That thing looks like everything else in the pc world. Why can't they do something other than black and gray. There are a whole lot of good unemployed product designers. C'mon, if you are going to attempt to bring in something to the iPod's house, you better be able to beat it off the shelf on looks alone. Average user cares about looks and storage, not recording, broadcasting, and what not.

LimeLite

Oct 20, 2003, 01:24 AM

Can it be used as an external hard drive? A bootable one, none the less? And does it store calender and contact info? And does it have connectors that lend itself to special peripherals? (like a card reader) Whenever anyone says the iPod is over priced, I say yes, if all it did was play Mp3's, it would be. But it does much more, and can be used for backup and storage. Without all the features I just mentioned, this Samsung-Napster creation is quite overpriced.

davester

Oct 20, 2003, 01:26 AM

It looks like a radio-equipped breathalyser.

csimmons

Oct 20, 2003, 01:30 AM

Am i the only one here who seems to think that Napster will not do as well as many people seem to think?

the Napster "name" is strong, sure, but it's a name recognized for (illegal) file swapping, not purchased music, whereas iTMS is widely recognized for legal downloads that work. As soon as people see that they can't download stuff from Napster for free anymore, they'll think twice about it.

Napster better be as simple to use, if not simpler, as iTMS, or they will have a very rough time (BuyMusic.com, anyone?). I've already heard from many of my PC-hugging colleagues who have iTMS for Windows and LOVE IT. Ease of use is a much bigger factor than brand recognition, and iTMS has that nailed.

theipodgod16

Oct 20, 2003, 01:31 AM

what so many of these "analysts" dont seem to realize is that the only similarity between the New Napster and Napster circa 1999 is the name. There is nothing remotely similar except the name. And yet they think that just because roxio bought the name up, it will be sucessful. I swear, these "analysts" are spewing the most illogical garbage i have heard all week.

BTW, once people realize that under the $10 per month subscription mode, it will cost them $1 per song to transfer to that ipod ripoff up there, i do not think that people will be flocking to the store

edit: sorry csimmons, u must have posted just before i did, but hey, nice to know im not the only person who feels this way.:mad:

Sayhey

Oct 20, 2003, 01:45 AM

I think it's great. Great that they are trying a strategy that is in the same price range as the iPod. My worry was they would undercut the price by a lot and along with a lot of FUD from Microsoft they would have a big effect on the market. The first part of that scenario at least won't come true.

crap freakboy

Oct 20, 2003, 01:55 AM

-quote from article-
"It can tune into and record FM radio stations. And, with an included antenna, it can transmit FM signals, allowing its music to be picked up by any nearby radio, such as a car stereo. "

and thats a feature that wont be allowed in the UK considering the iTrip is banned here due to some victorian radio licencing law from 1856. Overall doesnt look like an iPod killer to me, though the line in is nice. Hope the extra features give Apple a 'rocket up the backside' to add a line in and a decent remote. Thats the only thing I really dislike about the iPod at the moment, that damn minimal design remote with its silly little clip...stops mid rant.

mproud

Oct 20, 2003, 02:07 AM

The rating system is useless. I always get confused on how to rate this kind of article.

Yes, any positive news from a competitor may spell bad news for Apple, iTunes, and the iPod.

How on earth can you either say "negative" or "positive"? It can certainly be both, and often times, a post on MacRumors will contain information from two different sources!

Napster creates a portable device - bad for iPod, good for competition.

It has bugs. Bad for Napster and consumers - good for iPod.Maybe good... maybe not...

Positive? Negative? It's really quite ridiculous.

reyesmac

Oct 20, 2003, 02:20 AM

If it doesnt say Apple all over it and is as compatible with the Mac as the iPod, why would any Mac user buy this thing? And why would a PC user buy it if it costs the same as Apples iPod?

Anywho I hope one of these new gadgets gives Apple a run for their money. Apple will have the iPod around for a long time to come but if nobody competes with them they will be super slow at making the thing better every year.

All they did this year is include a different adapter on the bottom to allow other companies to build devices for it. Apple just sits back and will eventually incorporate the popular hacks/devices into new iPods. They could have saved us a year by just adding the stuff people have been asking to be on the iPod since day one. The sooner other companies add better features to their players the faster Apple will have to add new ones to the iPod, which is always a good thing for the customer.

shangodee

Oct 20, 2003, 02:20 AM

This is prcisely what we need -- something in the same price range with a similar feature set to the iPod to keep Apple innovating. I know plenty of people who will buy this product just for the line-in so they can drop their MD recorders. Maybe the next iPod revision will finally bring similar functionality (and no, the memo / note taker iPod add-on is not comparable).

MDA

Oct 20, 2003, 02:23 AM

Given the tone of this review I see no reason to be concerned about Napster's player as a serious threat to the iPod. While it may offer a couple of more features, the reviewer seems more impressed with the iPod.

MDA

jholzner

Oct 20, 2003, 02:29 AM

I was really hoping that all those rumors about apple buying Roxio were true...to elimate the competition in this area. Turns out that they were false. Lets hope people see that the iPod/iTunes solution is a better one.

shadowfax

Oct 20, 2003, 02:31 AM

it's not such a bad design overall, though the interface looks pretty crummy. it needs an explicit play/pause button, if you ask me. is that on the sides or something, or what?

Stike

Oct 20, 2003, 02:37 AM

Gymnut

Oct 20, 2003, 04:13 AM

Wouldn't mind seeing Apple drop the price of the 10GB ipod to $199.99. That'll give any mp3 out on the market a run for its money.

Belly-laughs

Oct 20, 2003, 05:15 AM

This thing´s just tacky. It re-defines the word.

Kermit

Oct 20, 2003, 06:09 AM

Pardon my french, but it looks ********** horrible. :D

eddyg

Oct 20, 2003, 06:28 AM

Originally posted by Stike
This feature will also be banned in Germany, since those broadcasting abilities are supposed to interrupt/disturb some machines´operations. Here we go. Next.

It will probably also be banned on aircraft at all times unless you want the control surfaces bouncing along to the latest rap songs :D

macphoria

Oct 20, 2003, 06:32 AM

They should market this device at lower price. That would make it more competitive.

Stella

Oct 20, 2003, 06:34 AM

This player only relies on the napster name.

At the same cost as the iPod, and this device looking very ugly, sorry, the Napster device isn't going to sell to the majority, only to the Napster faithful.

The mp3 (wma, aac etc) market is getting very full, just how many devices can be in the market at one time? I hope Apple can reduce the prices because as the competition becomes even more cutthroat, prices are going to come down. iPod will look very expensive, yes, they have done well so far, but they can't rely on past history to ensure continued #1 position.

It won't do Apple any good with a market like the Mac / PC suitation where they hold a small percentage of sales in both Music Store and digital music devices. Remember, iTunes can only be used with iPod. It won't do them any good, they need a large market share especially for the muc store (otherwise their ability to keep getting new music will be reduced.)

Originally posted by Kermit
Pardon my french, but it looks ********** horrible. :D

macMaestro

Oct 20, 2003, 06:36 AM

I totally agree. Who on Earth would buy a thing that ugly???

Oh, yeah. The same people who buy Dell.

telos

Oct 20, 2003, 06:47 AM

we all agree the iPod looks great and does what it does magnificently. but the napster line-in option is one big plus on its side. you can directly record sounds from any source! whether a mic, vinyl, MD....

if apple sticks a line/mic-in jack in the iPod and keep it competitively priced - it's guaranteed to remain the indisputably best mp3 player (etc..) in the consumer market.

ReelFocused

Oct 20, 2003, 07:05 AM

16 bit 44.1khz stereo would be something. If its anything less, its really just for dictation/voice. It's not like you can record music of any quality this way unless you like AM. The record feature on the iPod seems like a tacked on/hobbled feature at this point for Apple. Line in is a GREAT idea though.

Jerry Spoon

Oct 20, 2003, 07:07 AM

Agree with most here that Napster's new service is going on little but an old name that doesn't hold the same meaning that it did a few years ago. Still, I'm glad this product came out b/c now Apple will hopefully be forced to include some features in the iPod that might actually make me want to buy one.

The Shadow

Oct 20, 2003, 07:08 AM

There, in a single stroke of marketing genious, I have created a name for this little beastie. :D

"What's that?"

"Oh, haven't you seen one before? I'm not surprised, not many people have them."

"What's it called?"

"It's a BUGLY!":p

"True. But, why didn't you buy an iPod? They're beautiful, easier to use and they're the same price."

"What's an iPod?"

"Oh you poor b*****d! You don't want to know!":D

hokka

Oct 20, 2003, 07:20 AM

Being a designer myself the question I've been pondering with...

Is it form follow function, or function follow form?

Oh, that's right, it's neither... if you look at say Sony's products, at least they seem to know how to give a product sexiness and balance, this "thing" give you nothing and I can tell the quality of the make is ****e just from the photo (a second year industral design student could do a better job than that!)

AND really! the Napster logo is too comical for anyone over 30 to be carrying around evrywhere, and for anyone to pull out a "toy" with this stupid cat all over the thing - everyone's gonna laugh at him/her... the more I look at it, the more this player looks like a Walkie Talkie for the Boy Scouts to carry around when they go camping in the back yard.

This will definitely not capture the imaginations of it's potential buyers (if they have SOME taste)

Chupa Chupa

Oct 20, 2003, 07:38 AM

The Best Buy in Bailey's Crossroads VA is already selling these. I noticed them this weekend. At $400 its no iPod killer I can say for sure. Maybe at $200 it would compete with some of the other GB jukebox players, but I think at that price point the iPod is still the best for the $.

MattG

Oct 20, 2003, 07:55 AM

Originally posted by The Shadow
There, in a single stroke of marketing genious, I have created a name for this little beastie. :D

"What's that?"

"Oh, haven't you seen one before? I'm not surprised, not many people have them."

"What's it called?"

"It's a BUGLY!":p

"True. But, why didn't you buy an iPod? They're beautiful, easier to use and they're the same price."

"What's an iPod?"

"Oh you poor b*****d! You don't want to know!":D

I prefer "fugly," as in ********** ugly.

jcshas

Oct 20, 2003, 08:35 AM

Quote - "The iPod, by comparison, is much simpler: All the important buttons are conveniently - and intuitively - placed around the jog dial on the front of the unit."

Add this to the list of reasons why the iPod is a far superior product.

gwuMACaddict

Oct 20, 2003, 08:42 AM

yes, it's ugly... but oh how i LOVE the name... YP-910GS... so elegant.

yes santa, i'd like a YP-910GS for Christmas

wtf...

Jeff Harrell

Oct 20, 2003, 08:43 AM

Originally posted by Gymnut
Wouldn't mind seeing Apple drop the price of the 10GB ipod to $199.99. That'll give any mp3 out on the market a run for its money. I don't know for sure, but I would strongly suspect that Apple is at the mercy of the hard drive manufacturer. (I forget who makes the 1.8" drive Apple uses.)

I have an old-school 5 GB iPod, and I love it to pieces. It's not big enough to hold all my music, not by a long shot, but it's so easy to get music onto and off of it with iTunes that I don't mind choosing which songs and albums I want to carry with me.

I think a 5 GB iPod for $99 would be fantastic.

Problem is, if the 1.8" drives are priced like full-size general-purpose drives, you just can't get a 5 GB model any more at any price, and the 30 GB model is now selling for the price that the 5 GB model originally sold for.

It's not like smaller, slower drives get cheaper. It's just that smaller, slower drives disappear from the market altogether, replaced by bigger, faster drives at the same price point.

Have you ever heard the old saying that the computer you want always costs about $3,000? It's been true for me since the mid-1980's, and it's showing no sign of stopping any time soon. The same seems to be true of the iPod. The iPod you want is always $299.

justytylor

Oct 20, 2003, 08:46 AM

Originally posted by jcshas
Quote - "The iPod, by comparison, is much simpler: All the important buttons are conveniently - and intuitively - placed around the jog dial on the front of the unit."

Add this to the list of reasons why the iPod is a far superior product.

Yes, but this is not true anymore, as the control buttons on the current gen of iPods are all placed in a row above the jog dial/enter button. Not that I mind that design either, but the reviewer is talking about first and second gen iPods in this quote.

hobbes3113

Oct 20, 2003, 08:56 AM

One word: UGLY!!!

filmamigo

Oct 20, 2003, 09:18 AM

I have run across this cheaper iPod-like option. I am assuming that it is PC-only :( but it definitely proves you can sell a 10gb MP3 device for under around $100 USD. The price for this device is $134.99 Canadian.

http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=621985&Sku=C332-1000

KBFinFan

Oct 20, 2003, 09:19 AM

The headphones look nice...

But other than that there is nothing good about it. I really like the huge antenna on top of it, it better get wifi access with something that big.

Yes, I am also shocked at how no one can make anything look 'cool.' What are these people thinking? Don't they test product designs before releasing something like this? Who knows.. who cares.. long live the iPod.

vanillamike

Oct 20, 2003, 09:20 AM

For some reason i don't find it all that ugly, and I own a 30GB iPod. I like the silver looking Toshiba offering only avaialble in China or Japan. I like the metal look, I love my white iPod, but this player isn't as bad looking as some of the others that I have seen. The RCA I saw the the other day was much worse and clunky. If it is the same size as the iPod and the napster music service takes off I can see this being a very sucessfull launch to put Samsung amongst the top players in the market. Line in and built on FM transmitter is pretty nice, but only if the FM transmitter works perfectly (which the article says it doesn't).

Mike

P.S. every time I hear Napster it reminds me of the Italian Job, call me "The Napster" lol

xtekdiver

Oct 20, 2003, 09:43 AM

It looks sort of demonic! Somehow I don't think this one is going to be quite the hit with the ladies that the iPod is. Not exactly what you would call a fashion statement.

eric_n_dfw

Oct 20, 2003, 09:57 AM

I love how the article is titled, Samsung's Napster-branded player offers more than iPod, but the review says very little nice about it. The beta software is buggy and crashes while transfering files, the controls are not as good as the iPod, the FM transmitting feature sounds like bad AM radio and the FM receiver has problems. Yeah, that sounds like it offers "more than iPod" -- I think buyers will get more "wishing I had bought an iPod" thoughts thatn anything else! :rolleyes:

macnews

Oct 20, 2003, 10:04 AM

A cheap knock off. I have to question the line in recording abilities if you can't even create play lists with out the computer. You might be able to record but can you control (i.e. sample rate, stereo/mono, etc.) if you can't even do something as simple as create playlists? If that is the case, well, I can do recording on my imac. Yes, I have to buy another device but is doesn't cost $400 and does an excellent job.

FM transmitter - obviously ripping off the idea of the iTrip and others. I just bought the new iTrip for my third gen iPod. But before I did, I check the available frequencies in my small market. Now, I live in the most populated place in Idaho but it is a mid-size market when talking bout radio air play. The bottom range of frequencies which this iPod wanna-be operates in will not work in the Treasure Valley very well as the air waves in that range are crowded. If it won't work in a mid-size market, how the hell do they think it will work in the major US metro areas?

FM reciever - now this is one feature I wish was built in to the iPod. Matter of fact would like AM as well. But it is not the "killer" feature that would make me want the Napster version over the iPod.

I agree with the others on here who have said competition is good. This is good because it will cause Apple to create more, keep prices low and innovate more frequently. It is nice the iPod is the unquestioned leader in the MP3 market. Oh, one last thing to think about. Add on devices and compatibility will be important for any future MP3 player. The great thing about being the market leader is companies will want to develop for you product because they can sell more than going with something that only hold a smaller percentage of the market. Other players might be able to do more but if you can get add ons for the iPod that do the same thing better - which one would you go with? Un-informed people would go with the all in ones until the realized it didn't really work as advertized which I think this Napester version will turn out to be.

reedm007

Oct 20, 2003, 10:06 AM

For anyone interested, here is the Samsung Information page:

http://www.samsung.com/Products/DigitalAudioPlayer/yepp/DigitalAudioPlayer_yepp_YP_910GS.htm

It's not the best looking thing in the world (yuck), and the name is horrible "YP-910GS", but it does have a couple of cool features:

- Direct Line-In Audio Recording
- FM Tuner to MP3 Recording
- FM transmitter built-in

Now personally, building in an FM transmitter seems kind of silly to me, and it adds that butt-ugly antenna on the top. ..

And yes, the device can be used as an external storage device, although it doesn't look liek it's got calendar, contacts, etc.

Steamboatwillie

Oct 20, 2003, 10:12 AM

Ever been to Times Square in NYC? They have a slew of electronics shops that sells "Name Brand" products there. The hitch is the "name" is bogus. Example "Panasoanic" not "Panasonic" These are cheap knock offs of the real thing. The Napster iPud will be perfect product to sell there.

Who would ever want that nasty looking thing???

:confused:

LagunaSol

Oct 20, 2003, 10:26 AM

One thing Samsung is doing that Apple should take a cue from; including 20 free song downloads from Napster with the purchase of the player. Apple should do the same. Draw people into the iTunes Music Store, let them download their 20 free songs, and subsequently get hooked on the service.

Other than that, this thing sux compared to the iPod. Who wants to record fuzzy FM radio anyway? And is it really a huge draw to be able to patch in your old 8-track deck and record all your Bay City Rollers tapes to MP3?

iPod + iTrip + iTunes Music Store puts Samsung + Napster to shame.

toontra

Oct 20, 2003, 11:06 AM

Looking at this thread to date, about 70% of the posts are saying how "ugly" this this is. Is this how superficial debate here has become. How about the features! I for one would love a proper line-in, and a radio receiver - heck, these are both really usefull.

I hope this gives Apple the motivation it needs to move on from the Belkin and give us the choice of input devices, and I would love to be able to tune into radio. Makes a great deal of sense to me to combine these.

Potus

Oct 20, 2003, 11:08 AM

Originally posted by Belly-laughs
This thing´s just tacky. It re-defines the word.

da thing is clunky

Look at the iPod: kaching!
Look at this piece of demon spawn: kerthunk.

Potus

Oct 20, 2003, 11:13 AM

Originally posted by LagunaSol
...Who wants to record fuzzy FM radio anyway?...
iPod + iTrip + iTunes Music Store puts Samsung + Napster to shame.

There are non-music programs that I would be interested in recording. I use Audible.com to download Terri Gross' Fresh Air so I could see some use for it. But not enough for me to turn my back on my beautiful iPod.

Bengt77

Oct 20, 2003, 11:20 AM

Originally posted by hokka
a second year industral design student could do a better job than that!

I can surely second that, as an industrial designer to be (I'm in my last year)! It really does look quite unattractive, compared to (especially) the iPod. But, then again, anything pales (design-wise) compared to the iPod, even most of Sony's (personal) music hardware.

Wouldn't it be a cool idea to search for a way to store data (especially music) on cheese? Then, a cheese-grate (G5 style) iPod would rock. Just grate some more cheese (that's stored in the iPod itself, of course) and off you go, another 5GB of storage is available! Why hasn't any company (Apple, are you listening?!) come up with an idea like that? Or is Apple investigating already?

:p

Belly-laughs

Oct 20, 2003, 11:20 AM

Originally posted by KBFinFan
The headphones look nice...

They look like leeches! :p

MarcL

Oct 20, 2003, 11:31 AM

...as in "piece of $4!+."

Potus

Oct 20, 2003, 11:35 AM

Originally posted by hokka
Being a designer myself the question I've been pondering with...

Is it form follow function, or function follow form?

Oh, that's right, it's neither... if you look at say Sony's products, at least they seem to know how to give a product sexiness and balance, this "thing" give you nothing and I can tell the quality of the make is ****e just from the photo (a second year industral design student could do a better job than that!)

AND really! the Napster logo is too comical for anyone over 30 to be carrying around evrywhere, and for anyone to pull out a "toy" with this stupid cat all over the thing - everyone's gonna laugh at him/her... the more I look at it, the more this player looks like a Walkie Talkie for the Boy Scouts to carry around when they go camping in the back yard.

This will definitely not capture the imaginations of it's potential buyers (if they have SOME taste)

Your post is so right on! Why, oh why, has the American consumer allowed himself to be sold the notion that good design is a frill? Good design can make your life so much better. After years of buying vegetable brushes (lived with some vegetarians for a while) which were cheap, and useless (after several uses the bristles would start to smash down), I plunked down good cash for a well-designed brush. Yup, it cost more than twice as much. Nope haven't had to replace therefore I've actually saved money. Plus rather than a skimpy little handle that never felt comfortable, it's got a grip that feels good and secure in my hand. The bristles have not matted down in several years of use. And it looks good.

I use this simple example to show that good design, which is one of Apple's strong points, increases utility. Beautiful stuff can make your life better. It's true.

Belly-laughs

Oct 20, 2003, 11:41 AM

Originally posted by Potus
Beautiful stuff can make your life better. It's true.

Amen, brother!

reedm007

Oct 20, 2003, 11:52 AM

Originally posted by Potus
Your post is so right on! Why, oh why, has the American consumer allowed himself to be sold the notion that good design is a frill?

Why oh why is the American consumer male? ;)

Java

Oct 20, 2003, 11:53 AM

Originally posted by reedm007
- FM Tuner to MP3 Recording Oh, just what I have always wanted to do. Record the radio. "Oh, that Rush Limbaugh talk was so inspiring, if only I could have recorded it." :p

zync

Oct 20, 2003, 11:55 AM

Originally posted by theipodgod16
what so many of these "analysts" dont seem to realize is that the only similarity between the New Napster and Napster circa 1999 is the name. There is nothing remotely similar except the name. And yet they think that just because roxio bought the name up, it will be sucessful. I swear, these "analysts" are spewing the most illogical garbage i have heard all week.

BTW, once people realize that under the $10 per month subscription mode, it will cost them $1 per song to transfer to that ipod ripoff up there, i do not think that people will be flocking to the store

edit: sorry csimmons, u must have posted just before i did, but hey, nice to know im not the only person who feels this way.:mad:

I agree....I used to love Napster, when it was NAPSTER and now that it's not, it sucks. It's incredibly of these people to think that the current Napster "brand" will be able to seel more than iPod. It's ugly compared to the iPod, though not too bad in itself and the top of the PC offerings. (I think it's funny we use PC - personal computer - to refer to x86 based machines.....I'm on a PC but mine's a PowerBook G4 :) ) Anyway, the people who remember the real Napster and loved it can see the difference and the people that hated it because of it's legality issues will still hate it because people are inherently ignorant and tend to not notice obvious changes because they're stuck in their previous notions of the way things were. Apple, on the other hand, has good "brand" and has the best non-subscription legal music download service and the best MP3 player. The other thing we're obviously forgetting, though I remember because I switched with the last PowerBook update, Apple has an obvious finess with products and software and especially INTEGRATION....no matter what features the YP-whatever has over the iPod it will never have the ease of use that the iPod basks in. It will never work well enough to not throw it at a wall or jump on it or hit it with a bat.

On the other hand he mentions this:
"Like the iPod, the Napster player can be upgraded via downloads from the company's Web site. Apple addressed similar early iPod complaints and added countless features through its many free firmware upgrades - so much so it's like getting a new machine for nothing. Hopefully, Samsung will follow the same path."

Hopefully they will NOT follow the same path because as I can recall I, and all the others that purchased iPods within a few months of the 3rd Gen update (I didn't read macrumors then or thinksecret so don't give me your "you should have known being a reader of these sites"), got SCREWED in terms of firmware upgrades, which were an advertised feature of the iPod. When they stop developing firmware for it and don't publish source so that the open source community can develop for it on their own, they revoke a feature they explicitly claimed the iPod had. So, no, let's hope that they don't follow in Apple's footsteps in this issue! (http://helios.acomp.usf.edu/~clay4/iPod/ )

Sorry for the length of this post, I'm happy :) and pissed :mad: all at the same time!

zync

Oct 20, 2003, 11:59 AM

Originally posted by Potus
Beautiful stuff can make your life better. It's true.

I wholeheartedly agree. Ever since I got my iPod and my Canon S400 ELPH and my PowerBook G4, life has certainly gotten better, not to mention easier having switched :D...

shadowfax

Oct 20, 2003, 12:01 PM

Originally posted by Potus
Your post is so right on! Why, oh why, has the American consumer allowed himself to be sold the notion that good design is a frill? Good design can make your life so much better. After years of buying vegetable brushes (lived with some vegetarians for a while) which were cheap, and useless (after several uses the bristles would start to smash down), I plunked down good cash for a well-designed brush. Yup, it cost more than twice as much. Nope haven't had to replace therefore I've actually saved money. Plus rather than a skimpy little handle that never felt comfortable, it's got a grip that feels good and secure in my hand. The bristles have not matted down in several years of use. And it looks good.

I use this simple example to show that good design, which is one of Apple's strong points, increases utility. Beautiful stuff can make your life better. It's true. while i totally agree with you, it's not the aesthetic design of your vegetable brush that made it last for years. it's the brute functionality of the design. they used better materials and put them together better. it may or may not look pretty, or useful. my old dell computer isn't pretty, but that thing took a beating, and took it well.

still, having classy design is certainly worth paying extra for. i hate cheesy logos, like tommy hilfiger and stuff. ralph lauren ruins it on some of their clothes too. but the polo shirts they make are great in terms of the logo: the little, barely recognizable but clearly there horseback rider raising his club in silhouette. much nicer than having "TOMMY" written across your chest.

i don't understand how stuff like that appeals to people.

zync

Oct 20, 2003, 12:06 PM

BTW I've dabbled in some design and the only thing I really find fault with it's design it's it's non-intuitive interface (like the fwb/back buttons being vertical instead of horizontal as they should be). This is what Apple excels at, making things work and making them intuitive.

helmsc

Oct 20, 2003, 12:08 PM

It looks ok, but I'll stick to the iPod lineup. btw, go KnoxNews (I live in east TN if you cannot guess).:)

Orome

Oct 20, 2003, 12:30 PM

Anyone giving any thought to this matter agrees that competition is good for consumers. I think it's a safe assumption to say that everyone here is a consumer and not a producer, so increased competition should be good for all of us. I understand that sometimes being a fan of something gets in the way of rational thinking. Everybody gets a little crazy over something that they are a big fan of every now and then. I'm not saying that the Napster player is a better player than the iPod, because, quite frankly, nobody really knows. I would really like to see somebody actually OWN both of these players and do a full compare/contrast of the two.

I think it's a safe bet that most people would think the Napster player is unattractive at best, but I have to agree with whoever said that looks are only worth so much. How the product looks is secondary to what the product does, in my mind. The biggest question on my mind right now is how well does the Napster player do what it's supposed to do. From what I've read, it does not perform well. Those are just product reviews, so they have be read with the understanding that they were written by a biased human being. I pay more attention to actual product specs than a review bvy someone who gets paid to review products.

So is it going to steal iPod's thunder? Initially following the Napster 2.0 launch, yes, I think it might take SOME sales from iPod, but nothing serious. I think that it COULD become serious, depending on how well it works with Napster 2.0. A completely different angle no one seems to have mentioned is the fact that we know little, if anything about Napster 2.0. For all we know, it could shake up the iTMS. I don't think any of us BELIEVE that it will, but the prospect is there.

Hopefully Apple will step up to the plate for us and do 1 of 2 things: make the iPod better (line-in, built-in FM transmitter, maybe even a color screen and built-in MPEG-4/DivX player?), or make the current models cheaper. Personally, I would expect to see a price drop or another bundle deal to pop up around the Christmas season, or maybe even as early as the beginning of November (so as to possibly take some buyers away from the Napster 2.0 launch.). I get the picture that Steve and Co. are just sitting back and watching what happens. If Napster 2.0 and it's accompanying hardware flops, they won't have to do anything. If it does really well, all they have to do is lop about $50 off the price of the iPods and bingo: instant price advantage for the consumer. This could get interesting, and if Apple DOES come through for us, there just might be a nice new 20 Gig iPod in my future...

gerardrj

Oct 20, 2003, 12:32 PM

I own an iPod, one of the first actually still at 5G and still about 1/2 full with 620+ songs on it. I love it, but would like an new model for the smaller size and new features (I WANNA PLAY PARACHUTE)

I don't find the napster player ugly unlike most here, It's certainly not elegant and trendy like the iPod, but it's not ugly.

Reading the comments, many seem to think the two "killer" features on the napster unit are line in and FM reciever. I offer that these are rather trivial to add to the iPod.

Line in: We all know that Apple now officially supports recording via a microphone from Belkin that plugs in to the headphone jack and perhaps the remote connector. This means the iPod as either a line in or a mic in port up there. It is rather trivial to convert between the two with a small adapter cable. It's just a matter of finding out where the pins are in the iPod. Apple's most recent iPod update enabled recording from thus input.

FM recieve: Griffin produces a wonderful product called "iTrip" which is a programmable FM transmitter for the iPod. If the iPod can power a transmitter I see no reason it can't power an FM reciever. You would use the same station playlist to select the station to recieve. Using the audio-in feature of the recording add-on, you could have an FM reciever. All we need is a software update from Apple that allows you to send the line-in directly to the headphones instead of to the compressor/HD.

On a side note: I'm really sorry to see Belkin being the premier supplier for the new iPod accessories, Belkin just doesn't get it design wise. Compare Belkin's FM transmitters for the iPod with the iTrip, there's no comparison, the Belkin models look like a cludge and the iTrip looks sleek and elegant.
Personally, if I had a new iPod and needed voice recording, I'd wait for Griffin to make a unit. I can guarantee that it'll be better looking. I imagine an iTrip with microphones on the round sides.

Potus

Oct 20, 2003, 12:43 PM

Originally posted by reedm007
Why oh why is the American consumer male? ;)

Because sometimes it's a pain to write he/she, himself/herself or him/or herself, etc. But of course the American consumer includes all genders.

rueyeet

Oct 20, 2003, 01:04 PM

I just don't get the whole "Napster 2.0" thing. Usually the reason one buys up a well-known brand name is to trade off of the good will and recognition that name carries. But Napster, as a brand, was about sharing music, for free, and sticking it to the overpriced arrogant pop-hit manufacturing houses that the recording industry had become--and all with a dot-com startup run by a college boy who'd chanced to write the right program at the right time. First and foremost, it was about wanting the music without marketing gatekeepers to tell you what to love: just music fans sharing their music without corporate interference (and, unfortunately, also without artist compensation).

Having that brand used to peddle RIAA-sanctioned, DRM-restricted, paid downloads, much less paid music subscriptions, from only what the labels are willing to make available is a total reversal of everything Napster was about. It makes it into a symbol of the defeat of the upstart by the establishment, the substitution of hype for substance, the triumph of marketing over reality. How Roxio thinks that this will help them sell music, or this player, is beyond me.

As to the looks of the thing, it wouldn't be so bad if they designed something that didn't look so much like an iPod. It's not that ugly, especially compared to some of the other players out there, but does it have to look so much like it's trying to yell "iPod Killer"?

Without the brand issues, and the iPod-but-not-an-iPod look, it's probably a fair enough product. But selling a player with your music service's logo on it isn't enough: The service will have to be of comparable quality to iTunes, the player will have to be comparable to the iPod, and the integration between should approach that of the iTunes/iPod combination.

lewdvig

Oct 20, 2003, 01:19 PM

I think the 20 free songs offer with the Napster player is a good idea. A nice little bonus.

lewdvig

Oct 20, 2003, 01:23 PM

Originally posted by filmamigo
I have run across this cheaper iPod-like option. I am assuming that it is PC-only :( but it definitely proves you can sell a 10gb MP3 device for under around $100 USD. The price for this device is $134.99 Canadian.

http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=621985&Sku=C332-1000

JUNK!

1.2 inches think! This is a re-packaged archos. Wait a few weeks, save some more money, and get an iPod.

lewdvig

Oct 20, 2003, 01:25 PM

Originally posted by vanillamike
For some reason i don't find it all that ugly, and I own a 30GB iPod. I like the silver looking Toshiba offering only avaialble in China or Japan. I like the metal look, I love my white iPod, but this player isn't as bad looking as some of the others that I have seen. The RCA I saw the the other day was much worse and clunky. If it is the same size as the iPod and the napster music service takes off I can see this being a very sucessfull launch to put Samsung amongst the top players in the market. Line in and built on FM transmitter is pretty nice, but only if the FM transmitter works perfectly (which the article says it doesn't).

Mike

P.S. every time I hear Napster it reminds me of the Italian Job, call me "The Napster" lol

The black Phillips iPod knock-off looks OK. It got a good review in the UK.

orb

Oct 20, 2003, 01:52 PM

I guess I'm outside of the main demongraphic for these devices, but I'd be tempted by a device that did AM recording. I always seem to miss the few talk radio shows I listen to. Unfortunately, this just claims FM.

I don't see FM recording as being a big deal. Just listen for 10 minutes and your FM station will replay the 5 songs on their playlist. Oh joy!

Machead III

Oct 20, 2003, 02:31 PM

Originally posted by crap freakboy
-quote from article-
"It can tune into and record FM radio stations. And, with an included antenna, it can transmit FM signals, allowing its music to be picked up by any nearby radio, such as a car stereo. "

and thats a feature that wont be allowed in the UK considering the iTrip is banned here due to some victorian radio licencing law from 1856. Overall doesnt look like an iPod killer to me, though the line in is nice. Hope the extra features give Apple a 'rocket up the backside' to add a line in and a decent remote. Thats the only thing I really dislike about the iPod at the moment, that damn minimal design remote with its silly little clip...stops mid rant.

Haha! Oh man, it's so true, we have so many messed up ye olde laws it's unbelievable.

the_dalex

Oct 20, 2003, 02:35 PM

I hope Apple doesn't try to build too much into the iPod... some people still just want it to play music, and other "features" would just add bulk and cost, as well as getting in the way of ease-of-use.

Plus, adding a built-in FM transmitter seems like it will make this product illegal in some countries.

Don't forget, the iPod as-is has become the number one selling MP3 player in the world by a large margin. Adding in extra features (and cost/bulk) in order to appeal to a niche (really, most of those owners just want music and they want it all to work easily and correctly the first time and every time) is NOT the path to success in the iPod's case. You may win one customer, but is it worth losing five because suddenly the product is too complicated for them?

Trust me, the market for divx video playback/FM recording/44Khz line-in is a LOT smaller than you think. I can't say this enough, the vast majority of consumers just want to play music.

Heck, there's a reason Apple has I/O for the iPod, so those people who really want a feature can turn to a third-party manufacturer. If there is a big enough market, it will be produced.

plastree

Oct 20, 2003, 03:06 PM

Originally posted by gerardrj
Line in: We all know that Apple now officially supports recording via a microphone from Belkin that plugs in to the headphone jack and perhaps the remote connector. This means the iPod as either a line in or a mic in port up there. It is rather trivial to convert between the two with a small adapter cable. It's just a matter of finding out where the pins are in the iPod. Apple's most recent iPod update enabled recording from thus input.

You're probably correct, but I'm hoping this is not the case. I hope that the A/D conversion takes place in the Belkin device and then somehow gets transferred to the iPod digitally.

Can anyone confirm this?

If the conversion occurs in the iPod, then we're limited to whatever specs Apple's engineers decided was good enough, which are likely not adequate for me. I need a stereo line-in, with at least 16bit/44.1khz fidelity.

LagunaSol

Oct 20, 2003, 03:14 PM

I agree that Griffin could do a much better job on these accessories. How about incorporating a microphone into the iTrip? That would be sweet. And that photo card reader by Belkin is awfully clunky. How about a nice little module with a mini USB plug for the camera? I could upload my photos to my iPod directly from the camera, rather than pulling out the memory card and inserting it in that big brick.

the_dalex

Oct 20, 2003, 04:02 PM

If you wanted to transfer files from the camera to an iPod device directly, you would run into the problem of different interfaces, and the device would have to be a lot smarter and more expensive. A standard card reader is a lot cheaper and easier, because cameras store pictures pretty much the same way but they do communicate differently via usb.

Jookbox

Oct 20, 2003, 04:06 PM

the vast majority of you voted 'negative' but the more competition for the ipod the better.

LimeLite

Oct 20, 2003, 05:04 PM

The iPod will never have an FM tuner built in. Why not? Because, as anyone will tell you, they're crap. A cassette adapter is really the best way to go to get the best quality music in your car. I only recommend FM tuners to people who's cars don't have a tape deck.

MikeL

Oct 20, 2003, 06:23 PM

Originally posted by orb
I guess I'm outside of the main demongraphic for these devices, but I'd be tempted by a device that did AM recording. I always seem to miss the few talk radio shows I listen to.

There's a handy dandy piece of shareware out there that'll record Shoutcast streams in an MP3 format. I've got it scheduled to record some of my favorite talk radio programs. All you've got to do is find a station that streams and you're set.

MikeL

Oct 20, 2003, 06:24 PM

Some of you are acting as though this thing is new. Samsung announced it (without the Napster name) and all of the features nearly a year ago.

Phil Of Mac

Oct 20, 2003, 07:12 PM

Originally posted by theipodgod16
I swear, these "analysts" are spewing the most illogical garbage i have heard all week.

That's the "analyst paradox"--if analysts were knowledgeable about the market that they analyzed, they'd be making fortunes in that market.

Originally posted by reedm007
Why oh why is the American consumer male? ;)

A linguistic quirk that people like to complain about, but when someone invents gender-neutral singular personal pronouns, they don't catch on.

Originally posted by Orome
Any giving any thought to this matter agrees that competition is good for consumers. I think it's a safe assumption to say that everyone here is a consumer and not a producer, so increased competition should be good for all of us.

Actually, most of us are actually both. We have jobs (i.e. we produce or supply labor) and we buy stuff (i.e. we consume or demand other things). It's the fact that most people are producers and not just consumers that allows the economy to continue without totally collapsing.

Apple is also a consumer because they buy things like aluminum and advertising space on TV.

So, strictly speaking, every person, corporation, or other entity except for children and welfare recipients are both consumers and producers :)

MM2270

Oct 20, 2003, 07:21 PM

Originally posted by zync
BTW I've dabbled in some design and the only thing I really find fault with it's design it's it's non-intuitive interface (like the fwb/back buttons being vertical instead of horizontal as they should be). This is what Apple excels at, making things work and making them intuitive.

I may get flamed for saying this, as it may sound prejudice at first, but it really isn't- truly.
In many asian cultures, it's common for the language to be written and read in a top to bottom, or up/down fashion. Chinese is a perfect example of this. In the Western part of the world, Roman based languages go left/right, which is why it makes sense for us to think of backward/forward as, logically, left/right. Samsung is, if memory serves, a Korean company, yes? Then it's not wholly surprising that the design for back/forward for this device is up/down. Now, you may argue that this way of designing is just plain silly because of the target market, but I imagine the Samsung YP-whatever will also be sold overseas in asian countries.
Still, it appears Samsung needed to give a little more fore-thought to the design and who their largest market would be, namely the USA.

Again, I'm not intending to cause any offense with my remark, as I happen to have a strong liking of asian culture and languages, which is why I even thought of this in the first place.

Potus

Oct 20, 2003, 07:38 PM

MegaSignal

Oct 20, 2003, 08:10 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by hokka
[B]

"AND really! the Napster logo is too comical for anyone over 30 to be carrying around evrywhere, and for anyone to pull out a "toy" with this stupid cat all over the thing - everyone's gonna laugh at him/her... the more I look at it, the more this player looks like a Walkie Talkie for the Boy Scouts to carry around when they go camping in the back yard."

I could not agree more on this! As someone well above 30 who has just purchased an iPod two days ago, it is important that since I will be using this device in public that it looks professional, has the look (and feel) of precision electronics, and yes, has that all-too-elusive "cool factor". The last thing I need is that ridiculous "katt" logo and the appearance of impropriety, as the Napster lawsuit of many years ago still probably lingers in the minds of many people. (BTW - the sound of my iPod is great!)

Nothing's better than downloading music with iTunes and enjoying them on my iPod; no fuss, no muss; yes, IT JUST WORKS.

scem0

Oct 20, 2003, 08:15 PM

not bad looking....

the iPod still looks better though.

scem0

iPC

Oct 20, 2003, 08:29 PM

Originally posted by macMaestro
I totally agree. Who on Earth would buy a thing that ugly???

Oh, yeah. The same people who buy Dell.
Some of us do buy based on performance capabilities, not just gloss.

MegaSignal

Oct 20, 2003, 08:30 PM

Potus

Oct 20, 2003, 08:51 PM

Originally posted by iPC
Some of us do buy based on performance capabilities, not just gloss.

Apple's products combine both. Dell? Do you remember the iMac rip off ad? As shown it was ugly and as shown it did not match the iMac for features. oh. well.

zync

Oct 20, 2003, 09:48 PM

Originally posted by MM2270
I may get flamed for saying this, as it may sound prejudice at first, but it really isn't- truly.
In many asian cultures, it's common for the language to be written and read in a top to bottom, or up/down fashion. Chinese is a perfect example of this. In the Western part of the world, Roman based languages go left/right, which is why it makes sense for us to think of backward/forward as, logically, left/right. Samsung is, if memory serves, a Korean company, yes? Then it's not wholly surprising that the design for back/forward for this device is up/down. Now, you may argue that this way of designing is just plain silly because of the target market, but I imagine the Samsung YP-whatever will also be sold overseas in asian countries.
Still, it appears Samsung needed to give a little more fore-thought to the design and who their largest market would be, namely the USA.

Again, I'm not intending to cause any offense with my remark, as I happen to have a strong liking of asian culture and languages, which is why I even thought of this in the first place.

While this is true, it's not because of the language that my claim was based. Besides what would the device look like in Arabic cultures, back would be foward and foward would be back :) Intuitive design is cross-cultural. This quandary is known as mapping and it refers to the UI of the device and how the controls correlate to what they do. Skipping songs is thought of in a previous/next manner which is related as a button layout that is horizontal to represent back and foward, I supposed to some this can be thought of as up being foward and down being backward but we tend to think of music being play linearly one after the other, which would prefer a horizontal arrangement. Conversely, we would think of volume as higher and lower which is why volume controls tend to be (nowadays anyway) in some sort of vertical arrangement. You do have a valid point though.

zync

Oct 20, 2003, 09:51 PM

Oh and I didn't find your post offensive. I hope you take mine with the same regard :) I do find this an interesting discussion as a class I just finished (it was a switch class where two professors switch classes at the midpoint of the semester) dealt with this topic.

rdowns

Oct 21, 2003, 05:49 AM

Originally posted by LimeLite
The iPod will never have an FM tuner built in. Why not? Because, as anyone will tell you, they're crap. A cassette adapter is really the best way to go to get the best quality music in your car. I only recommend FM tuners to people who's cars don't have a tape deck.

The current MacAddict has an article on various iPod output devices and they concur, cassette adapters are the way to go. After reading it, I cancelled my iTrip order and spent the next hour trying to find a casette adapter in stock. I found them backordered everywhere except for the Sony model at the Apple Store.

MM2270

Oct 21, 2003, 07:17 AM

Originally posted by zync
While this is true, it's not because of the language that my claim was based. Besides what would the device look like in Arabic cultures, back would be foward and foward would be back :) Intuitive design is cross-cultural. This quandary is known as mapping and it refers to the UI of the device and how the controls correlate to what they do. Skipping songs is thought of in a previous/next manner which is related as a button layout that is horizontal to represent back and foward, I supposed to some this can be thought of as up being foward and down being backward but we tend to think of music being play linearly one after the other, which would prefer a horizontal arrangement. Conversely, we would think of volume as higher and lower which is why volume controls tend to be (nowadays anyway) in some sort of vertical arrangement. You do have a valid point though.

You make some very good points yourself. In fact, that's pretty much what i was trying to get at toward the end of my post. I think the left to right arrangement of controls, in particular for music, is somewhat universal. Hence, Samsung did not do enough research in this area to make something that will be logical to all users of the device. Your point about the volume being up/down is also dead on. That's a universally accepted notion. :)

Blaaze

Oct 21, 2003, 05:12 PM

looks like crap

Orome

Oct 21, 2003, 11:07 PM

Originally posted by Phil Of Mac

Actually, most of us are actually both. We have jobs (i.e. we produce or supply labor) and we buy stuff (i.e. we consume or demand other things). It's the fact that most people are producers and not just consumers that allows the economy to continue without totally collapsing.

Apple is also a consumer because they buy things like aluminum and advertising space on TV.

So, strictly speaking, every person, corporation, or other entity except for children and welfare recipients are both consumers and producers :) [/B]

OK, let me clarify: how many people here are producers of digital music players? I would think not many, but judging from the price of an iPod and by reviews/comments across the board, there is a considerably high demand for iPods and the like. This means that there are a lot of consumers looking to buy these things, a lot of whom are reading sites like this one on a daily basis. If we are consumers of iPods, then any added competition on the supply side of the market for digital music players is good for us.

I suppose that you are right though: pretty much across the board, we are all a mix of producer/consumer to some degree. Without producers there can be no consumption and without consumption, there would be no producing. Take an Economics history class and you will find out fairly quickly that anytime one of these has been missing from the economy, the other soon follows and recessions (and sometimes depressions) soon after.