Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'MacBytes.com News Discussion' started by MacBytes, May 10, 2005.
Category: 3rd Party Hardware
Link: Shuffle Versus the Rest
Posted on MacBytes.com
Approved by Mudbug
my shuffle is great thank you very much, plus i dont look at the screen of my mini except when i fire it up, but the shuffle is small enough that no screen is neccissary, and who wants an FM tuner or AA batteries to worry about?
i think the shuffle is great, but its obviously not for everyone
I got an iPod shuffle this last weekend, and I've been really enjoying it. I really don't miss the screen. I load it up with some of my favorite tracks using a smart playlist and autofill, and just put it on shuffle, and it's like a radio that plays only songs that I really like. The showstopper with some of the other flash players (that have screens) is the fact that they can't play protected AAC files. I realize that this is not the fault of the other manufacturers as Apple won't license FairPlay, but still it means that the iPod shuffle is much more appealing to me. The perfect integration with iTunes is the other thing that really gives the shuffle an edge over the competition.
yeah, i cant believe that guy didnt like the iTunes integration, and the autofill feature is one of the best aspects of the shuffle, it makes life fun and random, you dont have to fret over what you are putting on your player, just click, let it fill and go, works wonders
Eventually those AA batteries for the iRiver are going to pass up the $29. Might as well get the power adapter and let it pay for itself in no time.
I don't need a screen (better without it), and I prefer a rechargable battery to AAs. The only thing I don't really like is the slider. It needs a grip or something. I get why they did it the way they did, but sometimes it's hard to turn on if it's in your pocket. If you must have radio, but an FMXtra.
Plus it's cheaper than the 128MB model I had just a few years ago (sucked).
The shuffle isn't like any other MP3 player...
I have been waiting for a reason to get an iPod for way too long now, and having bought one for my other half (she commutes to work every day, so I could justify her needing one even if I didn't ), I got me a shuffle a few weeks ago whilst over in NYC.
Apple have a reputation for making kit that costs more, and does less. And they do. They costs more, because build quality and design costs more. They do less because bells and whistles that others put on their products are often badly implemented, badly thought out, horrible to use and, well, just plain tacky.
The Shuffle does less than other players, because it's designed to. And it could be argued that it costs more, on account of the fact that other similar priced player do more for the same money.
Want a screen, get a Mini. I'm waiting for the next generation of iPods before I get anything bigger than my little Shuffle, but it is great at what it does, and that's pick random tunes from my library, load them up and play them at random. I'm finding tunes I forgot I ever had.
I thought I was gonna make playlists, load them up and play through them sequentialy, but I really do like the random element of shuffle. Honest!
Also, it has the advantage of being the only flash based player that works with iTunes.
Surely Apple can do better than (estimated) 12 hours of battery life on the Shuffle. Some of their competitors are offering (estimated) 40 hours of battery life - more than triple what the iPod Shuffle offers. What's holding you back from doubling, tripling, or even quadrupling the battery life for the iPod Shuffle, Apple?
Ease of use and time I would imagine.
To charge a device with that much power reserves on a USB bus would take allot longer then it does with the current battery reserve on the shuffle. If you need more battery life, buy a power pack for your shuffle.
I find that twelve hours of battery life is way more than enough. I've never even seen the indicator light hit amber yet. People who use the Shuffle for working out, like me, can use it for many days without charging. Suppose you work out an hour a day, that's about two weeks before the battery runs out.
It's not like there are 20 gigs of music on this thing anyway. After 12 hours with the same set of songs, I am ready to reload.
Why? Who needs 40 freaking hours?
Convinence, particularly for people who travel a lot.
The same reason you'd want your cell phone to have a large battery life.. so you don't have to recharge it every 2 days...
( People don't seem to think much these days and consider themselves for some kind of benchmark that the rest of the world applies to..)
When you go on a trip, do you want to be forced to bring a charger along with you?
The last business trip I was on, I needed electrical outlets to plug in my laptop computer, my phone's charger and my PDA's charger. Finding three unused outlets in a hotel room isn't easy - I had to unplug a lamp and move a piece of furniture in order to let everything recharge at night.
Now throw in an iPod. Good luck finding a fourth outlet.
Since I don't relish the idea of packing a power strip when I travel, designing portable devices (including music players) with several days worth of usable charge is a very good thing.
I know you used the outlets in the bathroom right?
Ah, but there's the nice thing about the Shuffle. It's small doesn't require an outlet to charge.
If you have your laptop with you, why do you need an outlet for the iPod - don't all models come with cables that allow you to charge them through the computer?
Only if the computer is turned on and is not asleep. Otherwise, the USB/FW ports are unpowered. I turn my laptop off and put it away when I'm not using it - so I can quickly take it with me when I leave the hotel in the morning.
Ah, that's brilliant. So when I wash my hands and the water splashes onto the counter, it can damage my phone/PDA/computer?
My PowerBook charged my 3G 20 Gb iPod (I have sold it) while it was asleep. But some computers seem not to have that function. It was very convenient, I never ever used the charger.
My Powerbook still charges my iPods when it is asleep. Just not shut down. ( No D'uh )
So did my old iMac G4 (I also have a 3G 20GB iPod)... But not my new iMac G5!... Now I have to leave my iMac on during the night and program it to go to sleep 4 hours later... I wonder if it has to do with the firmware or something...
Even a flash based player with a screen is fragile. Those displays have thin sheets of glass in them. One hard drop and no more screen.
If you want a truly jogging (or other "extreme" activity") friendly player, it should not have a hard disk or LCD display.
When OLED displays come to mass market, they will be useful for such devices.
Anybody could use 40 hours. Of course, a lot of those that say they're 40+ hours usually get no where close to that number. Even at 64kbps.
Or are bricks. Even then.
If the writer and the editors don't even know that its AAC and NOT "ACC" the article and what it has to say is worthless in my view.
Perhaps he thinks that because Duke University uses iPods, there is some sort of built-in ACC compatibility in iPods.
What a moron. feh.