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.
Viable iPod alternatives that work "reasonably" well with Macs?
- Thread starter bbj4ever
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There is nothing out there as good as the iPod. Be careful, especially when you read something like "holds twice the amout of songs as the iPod". Stupid PC companies try to get people to buy their music players by advertising this, when they actually hold twice the number of songs at less than half the quality. I am naturally bias toward iPods, because I am a die-hard Mac user and I own an iPod, so I personally cannot recommend any other player. When you are shopping around, be aware of the little tricks that these people will pull trying to get sales. Unlike Apple, customer satisfaction is not high on their list.
Daniel
Daniel
once you use an ipod, you won't want anything else. i think you will be hard pressed to find anything, anyway. most of the companies don't make their players mac compatible.
I agree with the others. If it is a matter of $50 or so, the iPod is definatly worth it. Even if it's $200 more, the iPod is worth it. It's THAT much better 
The Rio flash-based players (I had a Rio 600) integrate well with Mac iTunes at least; but they only support MP3 (so no iTunes Music Store purchases), and they only hold 8-10 songs at a time. For some people this works just fine.
Personally I really like my iPod. Also remember that rumors are currently floating around about a lower-cost flash-based iPod - so if you can hold off at least a few weeks to see what comes out of Mac World San Fransisco, you should. Otherwise you risk kicking yourself if something cool gets announced.
Personally I really like my iPod. Also remember that rumors are currently floating around about a lower-cost flash-based iPod - so if you can hold off at least a few weeks to see what comes out of Mac World San Fransisco, you should. Otherwise you risk kicking yourself if something cool gets announced.
I have a Rio that I purchased before the first iPod came out. It's a flash-based 96 Mb player. Works really well with mp3 files and iTunes. Today's mp3 players allow you to use music purchased online but that music can't be purchased or played from a Mac. So basically they don't get my money and I'll stick with iPod. Hey, what comes around, goes around.
Only hard-core Windows users will buy that crap. I would rather own a player that allows me to purchase music from both PCs and Macs.
I know they don't want to develop something that supports a O/S that is less than a 2% marketshare. But I would guess that Mac users represent over 30% of all online purchased music. Pretty good for that tiny 2% marketshare.
Only hard-core Windows users will buy that crap. I would rather own a player that allows me to purchase music from both PCs and Macs.
I know they don't want to develop something that supports a O/S that is less than a 2% marketshare. But I would guess that Mac users represent over 30% of all online purchased music. Pretty good for that tiny 2% marketshare.
Creative?
Creative's player looks ok 5GB and smaller than the mini. But I don't know how compatible it is and I think it uses USB ewww.
Creative's player looks ok 5GB and smaller than the mini. But I don't know how compatible it is and I think it uses USB ewww.
iPod made me appreciate music. My whole entire collection of music is on my iPod. Thats just crrazy.
dsharits said:
Do you have any sources to back any of your claims up? The Creative Line of Hard Drive based players all have better sound quality than their ipod competitors. Most noteably the Creative Zen Micro which beats the crap out of the ipod mini in sound tests. Don't believe me? Visit Tom's Hardware.
Also the iRiver makes it so much easier to put music or anything else on your player. It's all drag and drop. It also supports MP3, OGG, WMA, and FLAC.
I have a 4G 20GB iPod, and I love it just you make it seem like the market can't compete with the ipod but they do compete on every level. The only thing the ipod has over the others is it's ease of use of it's interface.
Unluckily though, the PC's best mp3 players don't work with iTunes, but may work with your computer.
Check out the iRiver HP320 (has color picture viewer and can do videos if you use the european/korean firmware)
And the Creative Zen Touch and the Creative Zen Micro if you want a different player.
Way to show your ignorance guy.
MrJohnson said:
The "Music from my hard drive sounds better than your hard drive" argument from good old Tom.
R
raeble
Guest
I've been watching this discussion and I think you are going to be hard pressed to find much imparsial comment - it's basically like asking turkey's to vote for christmas.
There is a fight out here between the ipod and zen touch. The site also has loads of useful information and articles on mp3. You can also find reviews and articles on all mp3 players here.
Hope this helps.
There is a fight out here between the ipod and zen touch. The site also has loads of useful information and articles on mp3. You can also find reviews and articles on all mp3 players here.
Hope this helps.
Not sure, but even my phone supports AAC, so I wouldn't be surprised.
And there ARE good alternatives to the iPod out there. Some people complain because of some things they heard about Creative and Rio and such, but many of these people were disappointed with past products from years ago, or have no personal experience at all.
Judging from what I've heard in reviews of the newer competitors, a lot of players out there are just as good (minus the interface ). They're all like iPods, but shifted to the left or right a bit. So you could get a Creative player that's similar to the iPod, but it'll offer greater battery life. Yes, the player is 1-2 mm thicker, but if that's not a problem for you, then it may be worth it. Same with carrying capacity vs cost. iPod is somewhere in the middle, as everyone makes products AROUND the iPod so that they're not making the same damn thing.
I've read lots of players that are almost as good. The usual complaint is that they don't look as cool, and the controls are worse. However, I tend not to get too whiney when using something that I know is slightly harder to use. They're still decent players, but I do love my iPod.
And there ARE good alternatives to the iPod out there. Some people complain because of some things they heard about Creative and Rio and such, but many of these people were disappointed with past products from years ago, or have no personal experience at all.
Judging from what I've heard in reviews of the newer competitors, a lot of players out there are just as good (minus the interface
). They're all like iPods, but shifted to the left or right a bit. So you could get a Creative player that's similar to the iPod, but it'll offer greater battery life. Yes, the player is 1-2 mm thicker, but if that's not a problem for you, then it may be worth it. Same with carrying capacity vs cost. iPod is somewhere in the middle, as everyone makes products AROUND the iPod so that they're not making the same damn thing. I've read lots of players that are almost as good. The usual complaint is that they don't look as cool, and the controls are worse. However, I tend not to get too whiney when using something that I know is slightly harder to use. They're still decent players, but I do love my iPod.
Yeah, what I've been looking for is first hand experience from some of the more "open" Apple users. Unfortunately, most of us are loyal to a fault.
In the end I want a 60 GB hard drive on my music player, BUT I don't want to pay for the iPod photo...I want a great music player. Additionally, I'd love it if it did high quality recording (without having to hack the software). I know part of the recording issue is about copyright protection, but I'd use it either for personal material or only with bands that are okay with the whole bootlegging thing (which is covers a large amount of the music I love and the bands I'm digging these days).
I'm also not one of those size or weight nazis. I can easily handle and accept the size of the standard iPod and most of its competitors.
In the end, I'm waiting to see if there are any updates at MWSF and then waiting until my B-day in February before I make a final decision.
In the end I want a 60 GB hard drive on my music player, BUT I don't want to pay for the iPod photo...I want a great music player. Additionally, I'd love it if it did high quality recording (without having to hack the software). I know part of the recording issue is about copyright protection, but I'd use it either for personal material or only with bands that are okay with the whole bootlegging thing (which is covers a large amount of the music I love and the bands I'm digging these days).
I'm also not one of those size or weight nazis. I can easily handle and accept the size of the standard iPod and most of its competitors.
In the end, I'm waiting to see if there are any updates at MWSF and then waiting until my B-day in February before I make a final decision.
bbj4ever said:
Creative is the only other mainstream company that makes a 60gb MP3 player. It is quite a bit less expensive than the 60gb iPod photo, but it is an inferior player, and more importantly, it's not Mac compatible (According to Creative's system requirements).
Chaszmyr said:
Really? In what way is it inferior exactly?
The Zen line has longer battery life, Higher SnR, Better output quality, Louder total output, higher durability and is cheaper; remind me again how the iPod beats it?
My Zen Touch and Xtra both work with iTunes and even have a separate software to run on Macs if you prefer to not use iTunes (XNJB).
Tell me, does the iPod have the ability to allow you to stream its music on the internet when its connected to a computer? or a User replaceable battery?
Get some facts before smashing on a system, n00b.
Kreamy said:
Yes, it has a much better feature set including the user replaceable battery but when I went to Creative's website to get the facts and buy one, they tell me I have to buy a PC.
Minimum System Requirements:
- Microsoft® Windows® 98SE/Me/2000/XP
So it's basically a paper weight for Mac users because they are supporting platform that is stuck in the 90's.
Btw, Creative is among the worst pc company in term of long term support. Once a product is out for a few months and they pull a new product to replace the old one they stop updating their drivers. I know 'cause I had the worst possible time with my pc trying to update my various Creative cards, so they are totaly out for me.
As for the player being supperior I think most people buy stuff on paper without every thinking... Sound quality isnt THAT important because when you are on the go, you are in a less then perfect environnement (metro, bus, jogging) so you cant appreciate the quality of the sound. Sound quality is relative to 99% to the headphone you are using and 1% to the player decoder and unless you have a VERY good hearing, you will, like 90% of the population never notice any sound difference. Basicaly, all this mean is that if you are concerne about sound quality just listen to your music in your livin room or get better earbuds.
Finaly, Tom's Hardware should never be stated as a source of review to base comments on. Look on the net and you will see how incompetent their review are and how biased they can be to favour some manufacturers. Even worst than dpreview.com ;-)
To answer the first poster, think about how many song you need to listen to when you go out and buy a player according to this. But also think that the iPod wil probably get a lot of new features soon so you might have some 'cheap buyers remors' eventually. First of these feature that come to my mind is the home on iPod thing and I am sure they are going to add more in Tiger!
As for the player being supperior I think most people buy stuff on paper without every thinking... Sound quality isnt THAT important because when you are on the go, you are in a less then perfect environnement (metro, bus, jogging) so you cant appreciate the quality of the sound. Sound quality is relative to 99% to the headphone you are using and 1% to the player decoder and unless you have a VERY good hearing, you will, like 90% of the population never notice any sound difference. Basicaly, all this mean is that if you are concerne about sound quality just listen to your music in your livin room or get better earbuds.
Finaly, Tom's Hardware should never be stated as a source of review to base comments on. Look on the net and you will see how incompetent their review are and how biased they can be to favour some manufacturers. Even worst than dpreview.com ;-)
To answer the first poster, think about how many song you need to listen to when you go out and buy a player according to this. But also think that the iPod wil probably get a lot of new features soon so you might have some 'cheap buyers remors' eventually. First of these feature that come to my mind is the home on iPod thing and I am sure they are going to add more in Tiger!