Five reasons not to buy an iPod [Archive]

mrsebastian

Nov 7, 2003, 02:40 PM

cnet sucks and so do their reviews/articles. this article really proves why ipod is the best and why none of the other players will be ipod killers.

dell dj has a better battery life, so you won't run out of music on the plane. you know they have power adapters you can use on an airplane, right? the price is the only reason why dell has a shot with this player. apple needs to start lowering prices on their ipods soon.

iriver for jogging. uh, what? i've never had my ipod skip, not once, no matter how much it was being bounced around. flash cards suck with such limited storage.

mp3 cd players with a cd wallet of 20 cds, does this not defeat the purpose of having a compact, portable player?

samsung and iriver ihp for high quality digital recording. ok you got ipod there. however, with voice recording on the ipod, i'd assume if someone hasn't already done it, there'll be a hack or update from apple for high quality recording. that said, all the cons of these players greatly outway the recording feature.

lastly, music store options. there is only one option for quality, quantity, price, and ease of use -- itms.

so thanks eliot for writing an article that supports the ipod. you tried so hard to be negative about the ipod, but it wouldn't work. did you read the end of your own article? "While not ideal for some niche activities, it's still hands down the best-designed MP3 player in the world. "

redAPPLE

Nov 7, 2003, 02:43 PM

d'oh.

i bought an iPod. and i am loving my iPod.

that author is surely a pc user. :D

ALoLA

Nov 7, 2003, 03:04 PM

What's with all the recent Apple bashing by CNet?
:confused:

skymaXimus

Nov 7, 2003, 03:11 PM

Yah, for real. CNet has been all over apples case lately. Blowing any little issue into a huge deal.

Lancetx

Nov 7, 2003, 03:26 PM

Apple must be doing something right, because the Apple bashing FUD coming from CNET/ZDNET has been relentless lately. There is a new "story" like this coming out now at least daily from these guys. It certainly sounds like somebody there (or the someone that is lining their pockets) is getting a little scared of the success Apple has been having lately and is doing all they can to rain on the parade. All I know is obviously the FUD machine is cranking into overdrive over there.

1macker1

Nov 7, 2003, 03:52 PM

I think this article is a good one. Much better than the "all praise apple" articles. It seems to point out some of the bad things some people might not like about the iPOD. This is the type of article that is needed. A non bias one. He complains about all the things he dislike without bashing. And in the end he still goes to say that the iPod is still by far the best MP3 player out there.

SumDumGuy

Nov 7, 2003, 04:04 PM

Jeez...

Sounds like more "It's Apple so let's bash it" to me

LINK (http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6450_7-5102324-1.html)

applemacdude

Nov 7, 2003, 04:07 PM

Eliot Van Buskirk is a bitch

jelloshotsrule

Nov 7, 2003, 04:12 PM

you'll notice they say it's the best overall, but may not fit into certain niche markets...

eyelikeart

Nov 7, 2003, 04:16 PM

ha...how refined an article... :rolleyes:

now that there's a device where a person can dump their digital photos onto an iPod...it just may be within my soon to be reach... :D

Giaguara

Nov 7, 2003, 04:24 PM

i dont bother to read further. 6 hours of battery life? i get 10. on my 2st gen. :o

rainman::|:|

Nov 7, 2003, 04:25 PM

Since each MP3 CD holds about 10 hours of music, you could carry 20 CD-Rs in a CD wallet and have about the same amount of music that fits on the 15GB iPod.

i think someone is missing the point... who would rather dig through 20 CD-Rs with tens or hundreds of MP3s on 'em, rather than simply scrolling to a song? anyone that has an iPod knows why the above is inane.

and yes, i realize he was giving alternatives for niche markets. but i simply don't think you can compare an MP3-CD player to an iPod... especially for cost purposes. they're entirely different devices and are in entirely different classes.

pnw

Bunzi2k4

Nov 7, 2003, 04:28 PM

the article should have been a pro's and con's article, not just all cons, and the article doesn't make sence. i love my ipod, but here are 5 reasons why you shouldn't?! wtf? where did you learn to write persuasive articles?

srobert

Nov 7, 2003, 04:36 PM

Ok, the iPod might not be perfect... but to me, it seems that it would be much easier to write an article titled "10 reasons not to buy anything BUT the iPod" than this guy's "5 reasons not to buy an iPod"

pyrotoaster

Nov 7, 2003, 04:50 PM

So Panther sucks because the "Favorites" folder is gone, and the iPod sucks because it's hard drive based.

Wow, I'm so glad CNet's around to inform us of why Apple's products are so good (the iPod still got a glowing review), but suck at the same time.

rueyeet

Nov 7, 2003, 05:11 PM

Actually, the article is correct--if you are one of the people to whom these five specific complaints about the iPod are important, then you have other choices.

Thankfully, I "[am not] fond of jogging, have ample disposable income, don't need to record/encode music portably, and want to purchase music downloads only from the iTunes Music Store", so me and my iPod are good to go! (I won't address the claim of low battery life, because I get a consistent 8-10 hours from my iPod, and time has yet to tell whether Dell's DJ will live up to its stated battery life in regular use.)

Java

Nov 7, 2003, 05:13 PM

Originally posted by ALoLA
What's with all the recent Apple bashing by CNet?
:confused: I think some of their CEO's invested in other online music companies. :p

(for the record, I have no idea what the CEO's invest in)

Apmonia

Nov 7, 2003, 05:17 PM

Unfortunately, many of the comments he makes about the iPod are correct and, although I love my 15GB 3g iPod, they aren't for everyone. He doesn't really bash Apple or the iPod, just tells us what its weaknesses are, which is what those reviewer sites should do.

There is a niche market that Apple may be missing though, and that is the small player market. For those who workout or just simply don't have three hundred bucks to drop on an MP3 player. Apple should look into at least making a small MP3 player, much like the iRiver (interesting product name though, eh?) that will play AAC files and is highly portable. I don't take my iPod to the gym because it's a little too big and costly to sweat on. Just my 2 cents, whatever they are worth.
-Apmonia

dieselg4

Nov 7, 2003, 06:27 PM

Thi article should really be called "4 reasons not o buy. . . " becasue carrying a bundle of CDR's and a CD player defeats the point of portable music. I can't even picture doing this in day-2-day activities. Its ubsurd. Period.

But I ahev to agree about Jogging and the gym. I admit i don't have a new one, but my 20G ipod is cumbersome in its beltclip, and to use the remote with the headphones gives me enough wireing to jump rope with.

He kinda fails to point out thoguh, that although he makes specifc suggestions for each problem, there is still no one player he can reccommend.

5300cs

Nov 7, 2003, 06:36 PM

The last part:

Of course, if you don't care about low battery life, aren't fond of jogging, have ample disposable income, don't need to record/encode music portably, and want to purchase music downloads only from the iTunes Music Store, then the iPod is the best the way to go.

I think that's pretty harsh. To me it's kind of like, "if you're dumb, go out and buy one."

Here's another good one:

File transfers were 0.86MB per second over USB 1.1 and, as one would expect, a speedier 2.4MB per second over USB 2.0. This means you can fill the player's 15GB capacity (about 280 hours of music at 128Kps) in approximately 5 hours over USB 1.1, or in about 1.75 hours if your computer has USB 2.0.

5 HOURS? In that time I can hit my local Apple store and get an iPod, thanks :p

mymemory

Nov 7, 2003, 06:55 PM

Originally posted by 1macker1
I think this article is a good one. Much better than the "all praise apple" articles. It seems to point out some of the bad things some people might not like about the iPOD. This is the type of article that is needed. A non bias one. He complains about all the things he dislike without bashing. And in the end he still goes to say that the iPod is still by far the best MP3 player out there.

I'm totally agree, I was aboput to get an iPod for a trip I was planing to do but I had my doubs, specially for the cost and specially because the iPod technology is not the best yet. I mean:

1. I can not record in stereo.
2. I do not have an LCD that let me watch Quict Time movies.
3. Is very expensive for the ammount of technology, for the double you can get an iMac.
4. Bateries doesn't last that long neither and I need expensive accesories to plug it to the car.

Definitly I'm going with the CD MP3 player.

I love Apple but when Apple loves me as a smart costumer.

crookedcharlie

Nov 7, 2003, 06:59 PM

Here's what I wrote to him:While I understand the idea behind your article, I wonder, what exactly the purpose it. Why are you trying to convince people NOT to buy an excellent MP3 player, not to mention the best one on the market? What service are you performing? You're not enlightening people on a better product, nor are you suggesting things Apple should do to improve an already great product. No, what you're doing is giving people excuses to NOT buy a really great product, and at the same time, promoting the inferior alternatives, citing what little advantages they do have over it. "Dell DJ has better battery life, so don't buy an iPod, buy a Dell DJ!" Unless, of course, you want a new, untested product with so-so reviews and barely any support from a company notorious for grotesque customer service practices...

You've already reviewed the iPod against the others, and it won. I don't understand why you feel the need to "re-review" the products, but now only review other products strengths against the iPod's few weaknesses. It reeks of an agenda of some sort, but for the life of me I can't figure out what you're trying to gain. Your last paragraph is particularly ridiculous:

"Of course, if you don't care about low battery life, aren't fond of jogging, have ample disposable income, don't need to record/encode music portably, and want to purchase music downloads only from the iTunes Music Store, then the iPod is the best the way to go. "

Translation: you'd be an idiot to buy the ipod, the best MP3 player in the world, because it's not perfect. Not that any of these others are even half as good, but still, you're a jackass.

Keep looking for iPod killers! I'm sure you'll find one eventually. I myself am constantly on the lookout for DVD killers, beacuse DVD's don't fit in the cigar box I've decided to keep my movies in...

mymemory

Nov 7, 2003, 07:08 PM

Originally posted by paulwhannel
i think someone is missing the point... who would rather dig through 20 CD-Rs with tens or hundreds of MP3s on 'em, rather than simply scrolling to a song? anyone that has an iPod knows why the above is inane.

and yes, i realize he was giving alternatives for niche markets. but i simply don't think you can compare an MP3-CD player to an iPod... especially for cost purposes. they're entirely different devices and are in entirely different classes.

pnw

Man, you do not listen to all your CDs even in a year! I have a DVD-Rom with all my music in MP3. I spent one weekend transfering and burning it in to one DVD. 4.5GB of music and I have it ther for storage only, I just transfer maybe 80MB back to my computer and still there are music that I do not listen to.

When I was a kid I could take all my 40 CDs collection of Depeche Mode with me... to listen one to 1 or 2 CD's?

Get real, you are using 15GB of music that you will not listen in a year, I'm a musician, I have CDs and I listen to everything and I know what I'm talking about.

Besides, I rather carry with 10 CDs with MP3 in my car rather than a $500 device that can be damage from the heat if I live it inside the car.

I had learned not to be obsesive about things specially with money.

Even, if I had the millions of Dollars I would wait for a better version of the iPod, I'm not the kind of person who like to add more trash to this world.

Many of you have their iPod now, but when the new 80GB, color LCD, QuickTime compatible with stereo audio in comes out, then I'm gonna feel like a winner, then is when I'm gonna feel my money is worth it. Just like the Pismos I have now, a 3 years old computer that still rocks.

swahilibill

Nov 7, 2003, 07:09 PM

that elliot guy is a douce bag, and I do not see how he comes to his conclusions. He knows nothing about true DAPs and if he did, he would realize that promoting that napster branded piece of **** is the lamest thing i have ever heard. Keep 'em coming elliot, and eventually people will realize you are payed off by creative and such...

crazytom

Nov 7, 2003, 07:17 PM

While I don't agree with everything in the article, it got me thinking: What will happen when my iPod battery finally craps out? Will Apple service it for the low, low price of $199.00? or will they force me to buy a shiny new one? :confused:

ALoLA

Nov 7, 2003, 07:31 PM

Umm... I don't know about you, but I bought my iPod to listen to music. For my needs, the iPod is still the best.

Battery life. I get nearly 8 hours easily. More than enough for my typical listening sessions. I'd be curious to see if that 20 hours for the Dell DJ was for typical use.

Recording. I don't need, or want, to record onto my iPod. I have my desktop for converting my CDs. Why would I record from radio? Lectures, perhaps, if I were a student, but I didn't that much even with my old Walkman recorder.

Jogging. I jog. When I'm on the treadmill, I don't have the iPod on me, so the skipping problem is irrelevant. Besides, I'd like to have more than a few songs at my fingertips, without having to stop and change CDs or memory cards. Also, I've left my iPod in my car's glove compartment with no problem, although I don't recommend it. I bet if you leave those CDs and player on your seat, in the sun, you'll have nice curly pieces of plastic in no time. :)

As for buying music online and transferring/syncing with the iPod (or any other player), is there anything better than iTMS? Find one if you can. :)

mymemory

Nov 7, 2003, 08:46 PM

Originally posted by ALoLA
I bet if you leave those CDs and player on your seat, in the sun, you'll have nice curly pieces of plastic in no time.

Yes, but it would be a cheap piece of plastic, no an expensive one:D

rainman::|:|

Nov 7, 2003, 08:51 PM

mymemory: i may not listen to every single song often, but i assure you i do hit almost every artist at least once a week, and it's sooo nice to be discussing an obscure song, then whip out your iPod and iTrip and play it for everyone... i've settled some arguements this way. by your logic, we should stick with CDs, and we should know ahead of time what music we'll want. the point of the iPod is all of your music with you, all of the time. unless you have too much music for the iPod, in which case i think carrying around CDs is *certainly* out of the question...

for me, there's no point to MP3 (or aac) players if you can't carry a LOT of music with you all at once. you're just getting lower quality music. i will never understand these people that buy 60 minute MP3 players...

pnw

redAPPLE

Nov 8, 2003, 04:29 AM

Originally posted by crazytom
While I don't agree with everything in the article, it got me thinking: What will happen when my iPod battery finally craps out? Will Apple service it for the low, low price of $199.00? or will they force me to buy a shiny new one? :confused:

there might be 5 gb iPod users out there who could answer this very question.

i would think, once that happens, it would be cheaper to get a new one... considering more product innovations...

Sayhey

Nov 8, 2003, 01:33 PM

Why is it impossible for CNET to write an article about Apple or Apple products without some type of slam involved? Even with a product like the iPod, which the author of the article acknowledges is the best on the market, it must be done in the context of what is wrong with Apple. If it was an isolated story or it was the same bias relative to other companies it would be one thing, but this is ridiculous. Do these guys all get Microsoft stock as part of their pay?

leet1

Nov 8, 2003, 01:44 PM

Originally posted by Sayhey
Do these guys all get Microsoft stock as part of their pay?

Blah blah blah, microsoft this, microsoft that. You do know they don't always give microsoft software good reviews right? :rolleyes:

Sayhey

Nov 8, 2003, 02:02 PM

Originally posted by leet1
Blah blah blah, microsoft this, microsoft that. You do know they don't always give microsoft software good reviews right? :rolleyes:

I do understand that. My point is still valid. Check out the last two weeks of CNET stories on Apple. I don't really think these guys are in Microsoft's pocket (at least not that directly.) I think there is a culture of dismissal of everything Apple at CNET and a few other places on the web. With iTunes, iTMS, iTunes for Windows, the G5, Panther, etc. Apple has been putting out some amazing products at an incredible clip, but to read what CNET says about it one would conclude it all is irrelevant.

Independence

Nov 8, 2003, 02:06 PM

some people on these forums are so blinded by their own fanaticism that they fail to see all the good things CNet has said about Apple in the past. :rolleyes:

Sayhey

Nov 8, 2003, 02:11 PM

Originally posted by Independence
some people on these forums are so blinded by their own fanaticism that they fail to see all the good things CNet has said about Apple in the past. :rolleyes:

"some people" should actually read the stories involved and respond to the points others make before calling others names. :rolleyes:

leet1

Nov 8, 2003, 02:14 PM

Originally posted by Sayhey
I do understand that. My point is still valid. Check out the last two weeks of CNET stories on Apple. I don't really think these guys are in Microsoft's pocket (at least not that directly.) I think there is a culture of dismissal of everything Apple at CNET and a few other places on the web. With iTunes, iTMS, iTunes for Windows, the G5, Panther, etc. Apple has been putting out some amazing products at an incredible clip, but to read what CNET says about it one would conclude it all is irrelevant.

Your point is not valid. Things have been coming out by Apple and they have not liked some of them, so then you think that they hate Apple in some way or are being paid off. :rolleyes:

some people on these forums are so blinded by their own fanaticism that they fail to see all the good things CNet has said about Apple in the past.

Think you hit this one right on the head.

Independence

Nov 8, 2003, 02:14 PM

Originally posted by Sayhey
"some people" should actually read the stories involved and respond to the points others make before calling others names. :rolleyes:
i didn't do any name-calling. get your facts straight. or would you happen to fit into the "fanatics" catagory? if i offend you with the term "fanatic," then perhaps i'll refer to you as a zealot instead. either way, the shoe fits.

Rower_CPU

Nov 8, 2003, 02:20 PM

Chill folks.

Sayhey

Nov 8, 2003, 02:40 PM

Originally posted by Independence
i didn't do any name-calling. get your facts straight. or would you happen to fit into the "fanatics" catagory? if i offend you with the term "fanatic," then perhaps i'll refer to you as a zealot instead. either way, the shoe fits.

I am neither a "fanatic" or a "zealot," both of which I think qualify as name-calling. If you actually want to discuss CNet and its coverage of Apple, I'd be happy to oblige. If your intention is to start a "flame war" then I think I'll take Rower's advice and just "chill."

Flowbee

Nov 8, 2003, 02:59 PM

It amazes me that people come to a Mac forum and are surprised to find Mac "fanatics" or "zealots" here (or even people who defend Apple from time to time). Then they proceed to use the majority of their posts to complain about it.

It's like going to a Star Trek forum and criticizing everyone for liking Star Trek. What's the point?

FelixDerKater

Nov 8, 2003, 03:23 PM

So they suggest a different player or set of players to cambat each of the problems, but no one player for all of the problems. That doesn't help, because then you still have other problems with the replacement players. No logic.

LethalWolfe

Nov 8, 2003, 03:30 PM

C|net's reviews of Apple products have almost always been glowing, but some of the editorials on C|net have been very negative. Maybe these people never liked Apple to begin with? Maybe w/all the good stuff Apple has put out lately they are sick of hearing how great Apple is (a backlash if you will)? I dunno.

But the iPod article, while bringing up true short comings of the iPod, is presented in a very beligerant fashion which is why it has rubbed some people the wrong way. The writer seems almost mad that the iPod is so that even when he says something good about it it is a left handed compliment, "Of course, if you don't care about low battery life, aren't fond of jogging, have ample disposable income, don't need to record/encode music portably, and want to purchase music downloads only from the iTunes Music Store, then the iPod is the best the way to go."

Of course you can also look at that article in a positive light, it takes at least 5 other devices = 1 iPod. ;)

Lethal

Independence

Nov 8, 2003, 03:32 PM

Originally posted by Sayhey
If your intention is to start a "flame war" then I think I'll take Rower's advice and just "chill."
it's not my intention to start a flamewar. all i was saying is a lot of people here lash out at anyone who even has the slightest anti-Apple remark. frankly, i'm quite surprised you seem to think my comment was aimed solely at you. my comment was aimed at anyone who looks at any non-Apple oriented website with an extremely negative mindset. like i said, people are ignoring the good Apple coverage that's come out of CNet and only looking at the bad.