DAP history so short. Why are people getting it wrong?

[blessingx]

It's been strange to me to watch how politicized peoples memory has become over technology of all things. How can that happen in just a few years? Sure people forget Diamond Rio went to court to defend DAPs (and maybe more important MP3 generally) in probably the most important moment in DAP history. That was ten years ago and people weren't much into players then.

Since that time though I don't know how you argue any company besides Apple has been more responsible for DAPs standing, and it seems here the anti-iPod crowd (such for a variety of reasons) are strangely unhistorical. You regularly hear that Apple is nothing but a marketing company. That the iPod was a sales failure until the third generation. That its brought no new features to the market. That it ripped off its GUI from Creative. And most strangely today (and why I'm typing this) someone commented on a WSJ piece that the touch interface is the only thing Apple has ever done and the sole reason the iPod is popular. I mean forget your love or hate for the iPod or the irritation of people thinking iPod=DAP... it created this marketplace. Even many that acknowledge this seem to discuss it as an accident. Buyers were fooled into buying!

I'm not saying the iPod is the best player out there in sound quality or that its success doesn't benefit from advertising, but why isn't true lossless codec support ever mentioned (or even advanced lossy in the form of AAC)? Or that the iPod was one the first with a true line-out on the player? Why not talk about the shift from the marketplace (though very small in sales numbers, but big in size) leader - the Nomad Jukebox - to the iPod and how dramatic that change was for a portable (I was one that switched) not to mention the sales jump for the Mac only generation one (and giving some Pixo love here too)? That that first generation, as expensive as it was (and criticized as such), was the same price as the retail of the 1.8" drive inside (so it wasn't an issue so much of a greatly inflated price, but one of marketplace acceptance - quickly answered)? Most importantly how iTunes (purchased and adapted I know) was usable for the general public (and used by many non-iPod owners as a player) for the first time? iTunes even more than the iPod was likely why the combo was such a hit (this is repeatedly confused and is possibly the largest Apple indicator of genius in combining). Why not discuss the details of the "Zen patent" (yes, I know Apple can be just as ridiculous with patents) and Apple basically got caught using 'folders' on a music player (and no one else sued because the settlement allowed Apple to lower payment if others were). Why not talk about various copied aspects by others since? Why not give Apple a little credit at least in software and hardware design even if others in the gen public give them too much thinking they invented everything?

And I'm not even going to get into indirect advantages of fighting with labels over pricing and calling for DRM-free tracks (no, I don't think Apple was altruistic here).

This doesn't mean other companies haven't made advances, and even unfairly squeezed out of the marketplace, but why not give Apple its credit, than attack it for legitimate problems and issues (which there are more than a few)? Sony at least gets love for the Walkman and its influence, while still getting slammed for SonicStage.

 

[vranswer]

Not sure what the bottom line of your rant is, but I'm happy to give the iPod and iTunes lots of love (and 'credit'). I've owned nearly every iteration of iPod since 3rd Gen, including full-size, minis, nanos and shuffles and still believe them to be elegant and practical.

The inclusion of lossless compression and gapless playback were both huge for me, as my music extensively benefits from the latter (mostly prog), and my SQ paranoia demands the former.

As to the touch interface, it's cool and all but hardly break-through. Using my Touch as a DAP the touch screen is actually a PIA, as I can't operate the player blindly while it's attached to my belt. But the device represents the envelope being pushed again by Apple (to your original point) and I certainly give credit and observe with some amazement the phenomenon of the iPod.

 

[Uncle Erik]

I don't know why the iPod takes such a beating. It does what it does extremely well.

Strangely, I use mine as it was intended. My digital library is ripped in AAC and I like it. Honestly. I use it for portable use and my car stereo has an iPod jack and integration with the head unit. Turns out that AAC is just fine with the middling-fi car system. And when I travel, the AAC is fine with the e3cs I use.

It seems like everyone wants to make the iPod into something it isn't. Tearing the insides out to bypass stuff, all sorts of docks and mods to hook it to other things, and so on.

It wasn't designed for that. The iPod is a convenient little portable music player with zero audiophile pretensions. Taken and used as such, it does exactly what it is supposed to do. And I love mine.

If someone wants great sound quality, then buy something that has it. Don't try to beat it out of something that wasn't designed that way.

 

[LostPhil]

Well I guess I'm one of the "haters". I'd happily recommend them to people if they take my advice and look around first though and I agree that it does what it does very well. Actually, I don't think I've made a negative post about the iPod on any forum (just tease my Bose owning dad - also, nothing to do with the fact he paid too much but more to the point that he never looked around first).

Thing is, people give credit to the iPod as if it's the ONLY thing about and nothing ever preceded it. Apple have a good product but it's never just recognised as such, rather it's the "must have" - any other player is inferior by default in many people's eyes even if it is technically better.

Personal preference here as I hate the click wheel but I can't see anything else innovative about the designs. Making things smaller/slimmer doesn't make them geniuses, it's the way technology goes. Yes, they do tick some right boxes - gapless playback being the biggy for me, which is nice. But then the Karma had that how many years ago?

I wont comment on sound quality, never heard one so I'm not really qualified to say. But I'll also say that I don't like iTunes (windows user here), it's one of those pieces of software that I get irritated with too easily.

It's a nice package, but not for me. This place is one of those forums that you'll get a lot of different products being used just because by being here you look into different options, be it headphones or sources. So it's no surprise that there isn't a lot of love solely for the iPod but then without taking things out of context, things seem evenly spaced between different camps.

I'd be surprised if I don't get a heap of replies picking holes in any of my opinions but they are just that, opinions.

And by the looks of things people aren't getting the history wrong, just not focusing on the bits you want them to

 

[Night Surfer]

Somebody needs a cranialrectumjobsectomy.

 

[Oya?]

Recommend another player that has native gapless, native lossless support, large capacity, good headphone-out and some form of line-out, simple interface, good software (yes, I'm a fan of iTunes), and I might be tempted to switch. If only out of boredom. Unless that happens though, I do see myself eagerly waiting for new iPod models and using them in the future.

Some people feel the needs to voice their disapproval of iPods (usually due to personal taste and needs) as fuel to suggest that iPods are just bad. If my iPod fits my needs and requirements, why do I need to bother myself with that sort of debate?

 

[Grahame]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oya? /img/forum/go_quote.gif Recommend another player that has native gapless, native lossless support, large capacity, good headphone-out and some form of line-out, simple interface, good software (yes, I'm a fan of iTunes)

How about the Rio Karma. Oh Wait, that was 5 years ago. Sniff

 

[Oya?]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grahame /img/forum/go_quote.gif How about the Rio Karma. Oh Wait, that was 5 years ago. Sniff

Yeah, seems like a dinosaur by DAP standards lol. On a related note, I haven't seen anyone use the Vibez, was wondering how it held up.

 

[nsx_23]

I think the nano is a great player for most people since its easy to use, sounds alright and is very trendy. Whilst I'm not a big iPod fan in general (long time iRiver user here), my 3rd gen nano was a great and convenient little device for day-to-day use.

 

[james.miller]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif It wasn't designed for that. The iPod is a convenient little portable music player with zero audiophile pretensions. Taken and used as such, it does exactly what it is supposed to do. And I love mine. If someone wants great sound quality, then buy something that has it. Don't try to beat it out of something that wasn't designed that way.

what an odd thing to say lol. why shouldnt people want a dap that does everything? why shouldnt they want to improve their ipod if they want to? it seems in this day and age i can understand why people are frustrated with apple. they can get the ui right, they can get teh build quality right. but for some reason they cant get the software (itunes? i like drag and drop thanks) and the sound quality right.

now why can apple not get sound quality right? here i have in front of me a fantastically tactile touchscreen phone with wifi, 8gb of memory and the best UI of any phone and mp3 player i have ever used. so why cant they give it some decent sound quality as a finishing touch?

"if you want decent sound quality buy something else". right, so i should have to buy two different mp3 players? what a crazy notion!

 

[shigzeo]

i find the ipod touch and iphone to sound very good indeed. i suppose if you are interested in a mid oriented sounding player ipod are not the players to get but i fyou like all around: good bass and still detailed, ipod are the great choice among players.

you want boucy bass? samsung. you want good SQ (meaning it holds up very well - more than most players in machine tests?) ipod.

it is just how it is. they have especially here a bad rep for sound for no reason at all. but then we are what? derisive of something that is big.

 

[synaesthetic]

The advantages of the iPod far outweigh its shortcomings, even iTunes and its terrible ID3 tag handling.

Personally I was never a fan of the "do everything" players that have cropped up. If I'm looking for a portable music player, I want it to play music portably with acceptable sound quality. I don't want it to do my taxes, clean my apartment, cook my meals and record high-definition TV.

My 3-gen Nano's sound quality is acceptable, though it doesn't really drive my ER-4P with authority. The portable amp I bought does a far better job, but I still need to make a line-out cable.

 

[blessingx]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LostPhil /img/forum/go_quote.gif And by the looks of things people aren't getting the history wrong, just not focusing on the bits you want them to

Maybe, but the following, which I cited, are all incorrect.

Quote:

You regularly hear that Apple is nothing but a marketing company. That the iPod was a sales failure until the third generation. That its brought no new features to the market. That it ripped off its GUI from Creative. And most strangely today (and why I'm typing this) someone commented on a WSJ piece that the touch interface is the only thing Apple has ever done and the sole reason the iPod is popular.

 

[LostPhil]

If people bring those up in a recommendations thread then I completely ignore the post as being a fan boy rant anyway. The only thing I've seen repeatedly mentioned is the sound quality or the tie-in with iTunes, only one of which I can empathise with.

 

[Podster]

Great post BlessingX, Phil, great avatar as you are lost You can't be all that bad since you do listen to PX-100's:-0 LOL

Pretty good chance this site might not even exist had it not been for the infamous iPods. Sure the software sux especially for we windows users but people far over think this device. Lossless rips, quality LOD's, good amps and phones(IEM's) will get the iPod at the level it would stomp 80% of the home stereos out there.

Blessing is just letting everyone know that Apple did the initial leg work and fought the battles so you could have the veriety you have on these boards today but so many are so quick and easy to diss. I like to call it a lack of knowledge or for an easier term ignorant (that's where you actually learn about something before inserting ones foot)

iPod 4GB Nano $149.00 (Lossless rips)
C&C Box+ $109.00
ZY LOD $29.00
Ety 6i's $149.00

Total: $436.00

I'm not sure just what kind of SQ you are searching for but for $436.00 the SQ of the above rig is incredible for someone just walking around and yes to a large degree thanx should be to Apple and the venerable iPod!

It's all about the file, if using a LOD you get out what you put in (providing your EQ is set to off) and if all the DAP builders would create docking solutions for LOD's all players could bbe as good as the iPod and personally I would love it