Seems like a good alternative. But the only time I've ever used Android was on an HTC Eris and it frustrated me to bits.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iPod touch Samsung Galaxy Player: An iPod Touch threat?
- Thread starter IJBrekke
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I doubt this will truly get friction due to how obscure it is I NEVER heard of this until today when I read this thread. While the iPod Touch is KNOWN EVERYWHERE product placement is EVERYTHING plus might even be more.
The archos 43it would be a good alternative to the Touch if they could keep them in stock. I've had both for awhile now, and just finished a feature-by-feature showdown for my blog. Specs on the 43 are better than the Galaxy player, and it will pair with bluetooth GPS devices if you want to use it for navigation or location services.
Showdown: iPod Touch vs Archos 43
The 43 is also running android 2.21. Feel free to trash or praise. All feedback welcome.
4D
Showdown: iPod Touch vs Archos 43
The 43 is also running android 2.21. Feel free to trash or praise. All feedback welcome.
4D
It's a competitor, but I don't think it will screw over Apple.
Like someone said earlier, everyone knows what an iPod is and its "just a way of life".
I've always wanted an Android phone but I'm sure as hell that I'd buy an iPod Touch over that.
Like someone said earlier, everyone knows what an iPod is and its "just a way of life".
I've always wanted an Android phone but I'm sure as hell that I'd buy an iPod Touch over that.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.2; en-gb; GT-P1000 Build/FROYO) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)
Looks like Samsung may be competing on price more than anything looking at the Amazon preorder pages.
8GB £149.99
16 GB £179.99
The 8GB iPod touch is £189.99 from Apple's UK store.
Considering what you are getting with either player, they aren't bad prices at all (if true). They'll never compete with iPod but as an alternative they'll be good enough.
Looks like Samsung may be competing on price more than anything looking at the Amazon preorder pages.
8GB £149.99
16 GB £179.99
The 8GB iPod touch is £189.99 from Apple's UK store.
Considering what you are getting with either player, they aren't bad prices at all (if true). They'll never compete with iPod but as an alternative they'll be good enough.
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
That's the 3.2 inch version. The on that's being talked about in this thread is 4 inches.
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.1; en-gb; Nexus One Build/GINGERBREAD) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)
I had no idea there were 2 different versions of the thing! Perhaps those prices aren't so competitive afterall...
aNYthing24 said:
I had no idea there were 2 different versions of the thing! Perhaps those prices aren't so competitive afterall...
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Galaxy Player Prices
Although still not official-official the prices are rumored to be: (in Korean currency)
W399,000 (8gig)
W459,000 (16gig)
W559,000 (32gig)
For a point of reference, here are the prices of iPod Touch in Korea
W319,000 (8gig)
W429,000 (32gig)
W569,000 (64gig)
That's right. A 16gig Galaxy Player costs MORE than the 32gig iPod Touch does and the 32gig one costs almost as much as the 64gig iPod Touch does. I suppose Samsung is trying to go upscale and establish their products as a legitimate alternative to the iPod that can compete toe-to-toe. However I wonder if it's a bit too early for that, assuming the prices aren't discounted quickly, which I suspect will happen if those are indeed the real prices.
Now the internet forums will be full of Apple haters who will get all defensive: "the Galaxy Players are definitely not overpriced because it has more RAM and a faster GPU! We don't need more flash memory, we'll just use microSD cards!" Then again, the same guys vocally claimed the iPads were overpriced yet never complain about smartphone prices despite their BoM.
Although still not official-official the prices are rumored to be: (in Korean currency)
W399,000 (8gig)
W459,000 (16gig)
W559,000 (32gig)
For a point of reference, here are the prices of iPod Touch in Korea
W319,000 (8gig)
W429,000 (32gig)
W569,000 (64gig)
That's right. A 16gig Galaxy Player costs MORE than the 32gig iPod Touch does and the 32gig one costs almost as much as the 64gig iPod Touch does. I suppose Samsung is trying to go upscale and establish their products as a legitimate alternative to the iPod that can compete toe-to-toe. However I wonder if it's a bit too early for that, assuming the prices aren't discounted quickly, which I suspect will happen if those are indeed the real prices.
Now the internet forums will be full of Apple haters who will get all defensive: "the Galaxy Players are definitely not overpriced because it has more RAM and a faster GPU! We don't need more flash memory, we'll just use microSD cards!" Then again, the same guys vocally claimed the iPads were overpriced yet never complain about smartphone prices despite their BoM.
Wow, the iPod touch is about $100 expensive than in north America but galaxy player is still more expensive than the iPod touch
The Galaxy Player sounds like a good idea (pun intended!) until you realize you don't have a neat integration with a computer-based program like iTunes on a PC or Mac.
Despite the fact everyone complains that we need to drastically overhaul the interface for iTunes, the fact you can do "all in one" management of the media data (and now apps on the iPod touch, iPhone, and iPad) from inside iTunes and purchase music and videos for the devices I mentioned is a huge plus.
Despite the fact everyone complains that we need to drastically overhaul the interface for iTunes, the fact you can do "all in one" management of the media data (and now apps on the iPod touch, iPhone, and iPad) from inside iTunes and purchase music and videos for the devices I mentioned is a huge plus.
Samsung does give you a management suite called Kies. I don't find it that great to use but it's something. Beside iTunes really needs to lose some fat on its Windows incarnation.
Actually the competition does get it. Outside of display resolution, this device offers more than the iPod touch. The first Android music player. Other music players didn't have software that competed with IOS. Android does compete. With Android's adoption rate, eventually IOS will be the underdog. Adoption rate is much higher as the availability of the Android platform is on every carrier on multiple devices. I love Apple, but drop the fanboy tude. It's simple math. What can IOS do that Android can't do? (And sadly, Android is enabled to offer more features and more customized user experience.) Zune failed because the user experience was no where near close to IOS, even if Zune had some features that were stand out like song swapping. Android Marketplace mathematically will rival the ap store in time in regards to content. A developer would be foolish not to develop for Android seeing the growth and adoption rates. Zune didn't offer anything. I think MP3 players as a category are an endangered species. Even Apple is seeing yearly sales declines as people move towards smart phones, but there will always be kids without cellphones or with parents who won't get them a smartphone that need a music player. I bet this thing does 5 times the sales of the Zune in it's first year. I wonder if the radio is also an HD radio though? Price will decide ultimately, but hey if you get a unit with smaller storage, unlike the iPod touch, it has expandable memory.
Last edited:
No it's not the first one. There have been other Android-based music players, most notably the Archos ones. This one gets attention because Samsung is a big name.
It's simply math, yes. In the mobile sector, phones are sold mainly through carriers with subsidy at a discounted rate with contracts of varying options. It's a vastly different market from MP3 players you can't compare the adoption rate of the mobile sector to MP3 players at all.
Ah I love these arguments being repeated time after time despite the historical evidence. What could iPod do that iRiver/Creative/Cowon/Samsung MP3 players couldn't do? The competition all offered more features and more customized user experience. Oh and many of iRiver/Creative/Cowon/Samsung players all had expandable memory. Worse, if rumors are true, Samsung will try to sell this at a higher price than the iPod Touch.