Samsung YP-Z5 iPod nano Competitor

Discussion in 'MacBytes.com News Discussion' started by MacBytes, Feb 21, 2006.

  1. macrumors bot

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2003
    #1
  2. macrumors 68000

    Silencio

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    NYC
    #2
    Yawn.

    Another boring MP3 player that will quickly be forgotten.
     
  3. macrumors 68000

    atari1356

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2004
    #3
    35 hour battery life is nice... it looks clunky compared to an iPod Nano though.
     
  4. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2005
    Location:
    Salt Lake City, Ut
    #4
    Who needs 35 hour battery life? Charge it every night and it will be fine, my ipod has 20 hours how am i going to listen to 20 hours in a day? Ok so 3 hours of movies but i have never killed the battery except once a month to keep the battery fresh. That thing is also really big to be a nano competitor.
     
  5. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2005
    Location:
    On an island in Maine
    #5
    It's not going to be an iPod competitor until it has a decent design. It's going to be just another stepping stone in the iPod's success story. When are these other companies going to make real competitors for the iPod? They moan about Apple having such a high percentage of the market share and they come out with ugly stuff like that? Who wants to be caught dead carrying one of those around?
     
  6. macrumors G5

    nagromme

    Joined:
    May 2, 2002
    #6
    You say most people plug their iPod into charge every night, not once a week?

    You're forgetting the joys of putting your iPod someplace DIFFERENT every night. Is it in the kitchen? The car? Under the sofa? In the toilet tank? Trying to remember is half the fun! You lose that if you connect your iPod to charge every night. Putting your iPod in the SAME place each night? So much for consumer choice.

    ;)
     
  7. macrumors 6502a

    funkychunkz

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2005
    Location:
    Ottawa, Canada
    #7
    Less of a competitor, and more of a rip-off. I'm a little dissapointed with this product: there's no video for it's obviously larger screen. Looks ugly, controls are bad (and overly large). Wallpapers are a good idea though. Not bad for a first shot, but with any luck, apple will update the nano promptly. What would be really cool, is to see an mp3 player that somehow uses it's casing as a speaker, or that can play stream music from an online database (like itunes) or play preselected music shows that are brodcasted globally. Anything THAT cool, could rival the Nano.

    Or, since were already talking crazy, make the back side a bullet proof solar panel. Keep it in your shirt pocket, and feel smug at having an inconspicuous heart protector.
     
  8. macrumors 65816

    plinkoman

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2003
    Location:
    New York
    #8
    what is wrong with other companies in naming things?

    yp-z5... really catchy name there :rolleyes:
     
  9. macrumors 6502a

    Marky_Mark

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #9
    I agree with the point about wallpaper - I'd like to see an update which allows you to choose a wallpaper from your photo library - I have a 5G iPod and frankly, all that white space seems such a waste... You can have wallpaper on the crappiest phone, it can't be beyond the wit of man to provide the capability on an iPod :)
     
  10. macrumors 68040

    ezekielrage_99

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    #10
    I thought they said this about the Sony MP3 player, the Diamond Rio, the Creative MP3 players (all of them), the LG, ok all of the MP3 players that have gone up against the iPod and failed.
     
  11. macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #11
    I'll bet it's much less in real world tests. 35 is optimal and usually means small 48kbps WMAs with continuous play and no backlight. Whereas the iPod is usually actually somewhere around where they say it is. Not to mention it looks like ****. But hey, at least they didn't say iPod killer this time. :p
     
  12. macrumors 68000

    Deepdale

    Joined:
    May 4, 2005
    Location:
    New York
    #12
    Far from the type of design that will turn heads.
     
  13. macrumors 6502a

    Shamus

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2006
    #13
    no mp3 player is going to replace the ipod. the ipod is here to stay...and apple knows it
     
  14. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    #14
    Keep in mind the interface will be very similar if not easier to use than the iPod Nano. Samsung hired the third party engineer that developed the Nano interface to develop the YP-Z5 interface.

    "Who needs 35hour batter life?" That's just funny.

    Another HUGE draw for the YP-Z5 is the ability to play more popular formats than the Nano. The YP-Z5 supports MP3, WMA, WMA-DRM10 (PlaysForSure) and Ogg. For those that think iTunes is a joke (like myself), the YP-Z5 is a God-send.

    If you love iTunes then stick with your Nano. Those that are looking for another solution should investigate the YP-Z5
     
  15. macrumors 68000

    MacSA

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2003
    Location:
    UK
    #15
    Apple really need to do something about the battery life in the iPods. Its not too bad in the 60gb model, but in the rest it's just poor.
     
  16. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2008
    Location:
    Iowa
    #16
    I read that they designed it to be big like it is so that people with big hands can hold it better too bad it doesn't play videos I have one better than shuffles (way better) just doesn't sync with itunes
     

Share This Page