SanDisk nano killer?

Discussion in 'iPod' started by giganten, Sep 10, 2007.

  1. giganten macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2006
    #1
    SanDisk's new mp3 have some good features and capacity.
    16GB video and music player plus compatible with MicroSD/SDHC card that will cost $199. 35h of music and 7h battery for movies.

    Read more here.
     
  2. gloss macrumors 601

    gloss

    Joined:
    May 9, 2006
    Location:
    around/about
    #2
    It lacks the Apple Sexy, but Sandisk makes pretty good players. Good show, I say.
     
  3. ndheah macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Location:
    Green Bay, WI
    #3
    Are SanDisk nice? Yes, absolutly. Can it defeat the big Apple name? No, no way! I recently purchased the new classic, and I was considering getting the Zune, but iTunes and Apple are what made me go back to apple.
     
  4. giganten thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2006
    #4
    The new nano is very cool and the design is very nice plus they have nike+.
     
  5. AdeFowler macrumors 68020

    AdeFowler

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Location:
    England
    #5
    and iTunes... a huge factor.
     
  6. giganten thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2006
    #6
    Yeah, iTunes.

    But I would like to see a nano with 16GB and support for MicroSD/SDHC card.
     
  7. sushi Moderator emeritus

    sushi

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    キャンプスワ&#
    #7
    The new Nano is very nice.

    I wonder how long it will be before we see 16GB and 32GB Nano models?

    A SDHC slot would be nice for expandability.
     
  8. mizzoucat macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    #8
    MicroSD/SDHC support would be awesome. Most other mp3 players/phones have this. Why can't Apple do it?
     
  9. gloss macrumors 601

    gloss

    Joined:
    May 9, 2006
    Location:
    around/about
    #9
    Because they'd rather you have to buy another iPod than extend the life of your old one.
     
  10. SactoGuy18 macrumors 68030

    SactoGuy18

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2006
    Location:
    Sacramento, CA USA
    #10
    Hardware wise, very interesting. But does Sandisk's software to interface with the player work as well as iTunes in integrating podcast downloads, buying music and videos, and doing file management on the player itself?

    (You know, I sometimes wonder why somebody hasn't seriously considered writing an "all in one" program for access every brand of portable media player out there. Such a program could automatically change the player management for each type of music player you plug into your USB 2.0 port; in short, you have one program that works with either Creative, Sandisk or Apple players.)
     
  11. ftaok macrumors 603

    ftaok

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2002
    Location:
    East Coast
    #11
    Well, at one point, iTunes supported many different mp3 players. This was before the iPod came onto the scene (naysayers might say that Apple used their knowledge gained to help design the iPod).

    As for the here-n-now, I would suspect that such an application should be written by Microsoft for Windows (as I doubt Apple would want this software for OS X) and that a "standard" be set for how the file structure should be, well, structured. Then, this application would be privy to the mp3 device as well as the users My Music folder. It would upload onto the mp3 player, plus it would integrate to the various WMA download sites.

    It could be part of Microsoft's plan of getting WMA/WMV turned into a de facto standard.

    But I digress.
     
  12. bloodycape macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2005
    Location:
    California
    #12
    If I am not mistaken this can be used as a UMS device so all you 10.2 and 10.3 are supported which is very nice thing. All you do it take your songs and drag it to the device like you would with an external hd and there you go, once that is done, you are all done. The price on this is actually pretty good you can get the 16gig model for let say 200(probably cheaper if you get it from Amazon a month latter), with 4gig micro-sdhc card for $50 and for 250 or so you got a 20gig flash player.
     
  13. 512ke macrumors 6502a

    512ke

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2003
  14. mrkramer macrumors 603

    mrkramer

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #14
    16GB could be any time but Apple only likes to update iPods about once a year so I would be surprised if we saw one sooner than that. Right now 32GB of Flash would make the price a lot more expensive than the current Nano, so I would guess that we would see that shortly after the prices get down low enogh that they can keep the same price.
     
  15. Schtumple macrumors 601

    Schtumple

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2007
    Location:
    benkadams.com
    #15
    Apple must be wetting themselves :rolleyes:

    Apple will probably sell more nanos in a week than san disk will in a month...
     
  16. SactoGuy18 macrumors 68030

    SactoGuy18

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2006
    Location:
    Sacramento, CA USA
    #16
    I think Apple is waiting for higher-density flash memory to be available cheaply so they could introduce a 16 GB iPod nano (3G) probably early in 2008. It'll probably sell for US$249.
     
  17. CalBoy macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #17
    This SanDisk player is the epitome of good players that will never win against an iPod. Other companies can give you more storage, more options, and even lower prices, but they'll all fail against the iPod. Why? Two reasons: design, and popularity.

    The design of the iPod is unmatchable. No one has been able to create a better interface or better exterior look. An iPod is something that has to be seen, not shoved away at the bottom of your pocket (though this is the safest place for it if you don't want to be robbed:p). Is it any wonder why people like to buy them?

    The second reason is the brand iPod has created for itself. Whenever someone says they're buying an MP3 player, the first thought that pops into most minds is "iPod." Heck, I doubt many people say "MP3" anymore; most probably just say "iPod" and then go buy one. The brand that has become iPod is selling even more of its own units. It's a juggernaut now; it's already moving, so it can't be stopped. Now this isn't entirely true. Apple still keeps their iPods fairly competitive, and keeps making their design even better than the previous incarnation. Obviously the iPod line (all of it, from Shuffle to touch) will have to remain competitive, or it will mean the end of the iPod era.

    So, to cap it all off, even if SanDisk sells a good deal of these, it probably won't put a dent in iPod sales. If anything, the two people who've bought a Zune will dump it and get this SanDisk one.
     
  18. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
  19. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #19
    A nice player, but as Eidorian mentioned, not Mac friendly.

    One downside of the iPod's success is that many manufacturers have simply abandoned OS X support in their music players. :(

    I wish iPods could take files via simple drag and drop, like many other players...iTunes is good but drag and drop is quicker for a couple files.
     
  20. balamw Moderator

    balamw

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Location:
    New England
    #20
    This is one I don't "get". Any player that really wants to take on the iPod should be able to play anything the iPod can and migrate the iTunes library for its own designs.

    Plus, AAC is a true next gen standard for MPEG-4.

    B
     
  21. marioman38 macrumors 6502a

    marioman38

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Location:
    Elk Grove, CA
    #21
    No go. Looks like dog poo. Not that i don't like sandisk. Everything "flash memory" related I own is sandisk, I just think i looks like something from 10 years ago, kinda like the Zune.
     
  22. bloodycape macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2005
    Location:
    California
    #22
    I disagree, I think one of the reasons ipod did so well was the mass marketing Apple did with it. I also disagree with the interface. The Creative Zen series of products have a very nice interface, and I personally find the Zune interface actually to be pretty nice, and I know a ipod fans that will agree with me. Also, I still use Mp3 player in person or even digital audio device/dap on the net.

    Also do the person who said no OSX support, it actually does have it. The device is UMS capable so there is support for all oses.
     
  23. mosx macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2007
    #23
    I can think of a reason Apple won't put a memory card slot into the iPod line.

    Size.

    You'd have to have the physical slot to house the memory card, and then the chips to read the data off the card.

    Have you seen the insides of the iPod? Everything is packed in there very tightly.

    http://www.ifixit.com/Guide/iPod/iPod-Nano-3rd-Generation

    http://www.ifixit.com/Parts/stream/3/large/5-1.jpg

    Do you really see a spot where you could fit the slot and the extra chipset required to read the memory card?

    Adding a memory card slot would seriously affect the design of the iPod nano, making it bigger in one way or another.

    I'd rather have the thinnest and all around smallest 8GB player out there than something I can add a memory card to.

    And then you have to think about the way the iPod syncs as well. Adding a memory card would either require the memory card to be present during syncing, or require the iPod to be able to update the database on the player itself, in real-time. That would result in lower battery life and longer boot times. Unless the iPod dropped the database and just went to a file-tree system. But then you'd lose every single benefit of iTunes by going with that route.

    Anyway, I love the current iPod nano. All they need to do to update it next year is increase the battery life and bump the capacity up to 16GB. If the nano in its current form was available at 16GB, I wouldn't need any other iPod at all.
     
  24. CalBoy macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #24
    We'll agree to disagree on the other points, but the Zune has a better interface? What?:confused:

    When I tried using the store demo, going back and forth between menus was awkward. The button to go backward isn't even on the center "wheel" layout. You have to hit the other one in the top left-hand corner. What is that? On my iPod, I never have to leave the wheel.

    Also, you mentioned the iPod as a product of good marketing. I never said Apple isn't good at marketing, or that marketing didn't help the success of the iPod. In fact, Apple is probably the best marketer in the computer business today. However, even with good marketing, you need to have a good product to back it up with. The commercials for the iPod got people into the store, and the design and look ensured that people took one home with them.
     
  25. bloodycape macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2005
    Location:
    California
    #25
    I guess I was fine with the controls since I don't use an ipod much. Yes, I thought the interface of the Zune was just as nice as the ipod in its own way. Then again i would never by either(zune or ipod) for the sheer fact that my needs are not met.

    I would also add the iriver Clix and Clix2 to that list of nice interfaces, done well. The flash interface is pretty nice.
     

Share This Page