[DigDub]

Quote:

Originally posted by 4P4me Fair enough, but that doesn't mean the problem isn't there.

that i agree. but at least it doesn't require installation of drivers like the creative nomad zen just to get the player to be 'seen' by windows, which is one of my main gripe with the zen.

 

[4P4me]

Quote:

Originally posted by DigDub if you have read my previous posts, i have praises for ipod too. and some of the features are indeed lacking on the ipod. i did not say ihp is almighty. do not put words into my mouth by reading 'selectively'. i was only comparing specs objectively, as-it-is. i can't deny the fact that ihp lacks on the fly playlist feature. but neither can you deny there is no radio and battery life is shorter on the ipod. this is not fanboyism or ihp elitism. this are very real facts. these are not things that i make up. is there something about ipod fans who just can't accept that certain things on the ipod just can't compare? i, as an ihp owner, do accept the fact that there are shortcomings on the ihp.

Again, fair enough. But have you read my posts about the IHP? I did give it a "3".

*assumes Cartman voice*

Umm, don't put words in mine either, K?

*unassumes Cartman voice*

This entire thread is because some guy couldn't really take the fact that someone was badmouthing the IHP, giving a supposed one sided account of it.

Can you understand that what you perceive as "undeniable advantages" of the IHP, as you've stated above, are not undeniable factors in someone making a decision? The battery life and radio feature do not make it better necessarily.

I understand the Ipod has shortcomings as well hell, I do own both.

 

[MadDog5145]

Quote:

Originally posted by DigDub jesus, what i was referring to was how austonia was talking about how itunes can manage id tags and i was talking about transferring music files. different tasks. apples and oranges. get it?

You just completely ignored the current discussion about transferring music and just started off blabbing off all the iHP's features.

 

[4P4me]

Quote:

Originally posted by DigDub that i agree. but at least it doesn't require installation of drivers like the creative nomad zen just to get the player to be 'seen' by windows, which is one of my main gripe with the zen.

Actually, for me (and others) it did.

The Zen was/is a great player. Fabulous sound, great menu, etc. A little software and you could drag and drop if you wish, or you could sync similarly to it as you would with Itunes.

I could see how it's not for you though.

Best player I ever owned I could say was the NJB3

 

[pomegranate]

edit: stoopid page crashed halfway thru posting...

 

[pomegranate]

Quote:

Originally posted by 4P4me This entire thread is because some guy couldn't really take the fact that someone was badmouthing the IHP, giving a supposed one sided account of it.

Well, one sided or not (and I'd say giving an entirely negative account of something is indisputably one-sided, even just as a point of logic, but that's the past now...), the reason I started this thread was at Austonia's suggestion.
And FYI I can take criticism of the iHP, I gyp about it all the time myself. What I couldn't take was a disappointingly patchy (IMO) assessment by someone who's opinion I have come to (and still do!) value. Don't try reading minds if you're not psychic, mate!
And if it means anything to you, I also had an iPod, I LOVED it (not in a physical way), it really is an achievement, but there were just a few little things that made the milk taste a tiny bit sour.
Anyhoo...I never intended this thread to be a face-off of iPod against iHP, they are both (again, IMO) at the top of the league, but for very different reasons, and I certainly never meant it to get so impassioned...I'm sorry if I've indirectly rised anyones ire.

Peace out!

 

[4P4me]

Quote:

Originally posted by pomegranate 4P4me, don't bother trying to read minds if you're not psychic.

Excuse me, invited by Austonia or not, the fact that it was one sided in your view prompted this thread, right.

Don't need to read minds laddy, you said it yourself, here and in other forums.

 

[sanity8me]

pomegranate and DigDub... i'm with you on this one and the ihp is IMO indeed "The Almighty".

let me first point out that both of these guys voted 4/5 for the ihp... both, it seems, do not refer to the ihp as "The Almighty" like me. I personally voted 4.5/5, which i had to round to 5/5

. Both see flaws and both admit that ipod is indeed a fantastic player. So why bash on them so much? All they're doing is pointing out that ihp DOES indeed have MANY advantages over the (IMO and quiete obviously) "The King" of hd mp3 players in this time period of our lives, the ipod.

IMO ipod is a 4/5. Excellent player. Beautiful. Very well built. Simple. Something I'd get my gf. The advantages have been alreadly listed and they're quiete imposing especially the playlist-on-demand and faster/simpler ways to scroll through your music aspects.

The ihp is iriver's first atempt on the hd mp3 market compared to apple's third generation ipod. There are indeed many advantages the ihp has... already listed countless times on this thread and many others... BUT i admit that i hardly take advantage of some of these advantages. Example: never use the radio or remote. Although it is probably the most functionable remote as of date for an mp3 player, I just don't need that on my player. Plus, too much wires. Actually, apple made a smart choice by making a very simple remote IMO. As for the flaws, yeah there are tons for the ihp. They are all already mentioned and don't really bother ME.

When I got my ihp, I got to borrow my friend's ipod. I'll admit that i fell in love with ipod before the ihp. It was gorgeous, sounded phenomenal, and was so damn cool. As I said before, many ipoders admited to me that the reason they bought it was because 1) looks 2) What is an ihp? (and who cares) 3) simplicity. I don't blame them... at all, but once i started fooling around with the ihp my jaw slowly began to open more and more every minute. And although I was seriously thinking of returning it for an ipod, I soon realized that the ihp, with its joystick and plethora of features won me over. What I didn't really like on the ipod I realized was the overly sensitive scroll wheel, I like the sound/feel of clicks and ipod has pracitcally none, way too short of a battery life FOR ME, way overpriced (but justifiable) price, and IMO the sound quality is a slight bit better then the ipod's.

my point... IT'S ALL ABOUT PERSONAL TASTE. love all you gadgetheads and relax... enjoy WHAT YOU BELIEVE is the best player for YOU.

 

[pomegranate]

^ what he said

 

[AGR]

Quote:

Originally posted by pomegranate ^ what he said

Exactly! Everyone; BE HAPPY!!!! Enjoy what you have!

 

[DigDub]

Quote:

Originally posted by MadDog5145 You just completely ignored the current discussion about transferring music and just started off blabbing off all the iHP's features.

what? who? me? it was austonia who started on how you could manage mp3 id tags with itunes while i was trying to bring it back to the point of transferring music. are you trying to say that my points on transferring music via windows explorer is not considered 'transferring music'. your assumption of 'completely ignored the current discussion about transferring music' is untrue? try to READ what i type. do not make half-truths and wild accusations just for the sake of bringing me down.

 

[MadDog5145]

Maybe YOU should REREAD this thread. You jump into the fray on the beginning of the second page of accusing iPod fans of down playing iHP's features and brushing off iPod's disadvantages (which is something you have done with the iHP

) and saying how using iTunes is such a pain in the arse. I, not austonia, replied how when accounting for ID3 tags that there is no difference in ease between the iRiver and iPod.

After stating that, you accuse me of being overly protective of my iPod and saying my point being rediculous. Then you go on about saying how it an iHP can take songs from another computer with out any software, which I (and austonia) then pointed out is not completely true seeing as that iPod shows up as a drive without any drivers.

Then you veer off on the bottom of page 3 (which is what I was pointing out in my post) the discussion of transferring music (Ripping songs, ID3 tag management ARE part of transferring) and again start rabbling about iHP's features and start again accusing iPod users of completely ignoring iHP's features and the iPod's disadvantages.

Again I ask you, have you used iTunes and the iPod before? IMHO, iTunes is easier than drag and drop considering that I just drag all the new music into iTunes, which then autosync takes over organizing my music for me. When compared to "simple" drag'n''drop, this process is whole lot easier and faster as you have to shift through your iHP's drive dropping files into appropriate folders, taking alot more time if you are transferring huge amount of files at a time.

Maybe you should look up the meaning of half-truth's and wild accusations because your are commiting them all over this thread.

 

[DigDub]

Quote:

Originally posted by MadDog5145 Maybe YOU should REREAD this thread. You jump into the fray on the beginning of the second page of accusing iPod fans of down playing iHP's features and brushing off iPod's disadvantages (which is something you have done with the iHP ) and saying how using iTunes is such a pain in the arse. I, not austonia, replied how when accounting for ID3 tags that there is no difference in ease between the iRiver and iPod. After stating that, you accuse me of being overly protective of my iPod and saying my point being rediculous. Then you go on about saying how it an iHP can take songs from another computer with out any software, which I (and austonia) then pointed out is not completely true seeing as that iPod shows up as a drive without any drivers. Then you veer off on the bottom of page 3 (which is what I was pointing out in my post) the discussion of transferring music (Ripping songs, ID3 tag management ARE part of transferring) and again start rabbling about iHP's features and start again accusing iPod users of completely ignoring iHP's features and the iPod's disadvantages. Again I ask you, have you used iTunes and the iPod before? IMHO, iTunes is easier than drag and drop considering that I just drag all the new music into iTunes, which then autosync takes over organizing my music for me. When compared to "simple" drag'n''drop, this process is whole lot easier and faster as you have to shift through your iHP's drive dropping files into appropriate folders, taking alot more time if you are transferring huge amount of files at a time. Maybe you should look up the meaning of half-truth's and wild accusations because your are commiting them all over this thread.

how you actually think that transferring music files has anything got to do with managing id tags and GASP! ripping cd to mp3 is beyond me. itunes has combined these features and make them easier to use due to the integration. that may be true. but not everyone do the process of rip->id tags->transfer. some people just transfer song they downloaded or from their friend's pc. in this respect, simple drag and drop might be a more desirable way to transfer music. some people even prefer to use other progs like eac to rip with LAME. if itunes float your boat, then fine. but i'm saying that the ihp do away with this drm feature and then you go all protective over itunes and how good it is and how easy it is to use. once again, apples and oranges. ihp can play back music files without using 3rd party software. ipod do not have this feature. i'm talking about haves and have-nots. not saying how itunes makes managing id tags easier and provides ripping and all that jazz.

and stop trying to give me all the bull justifying your accusations like 'you completely ignore transfer of music'. where in any of my reply did you get the idea that i 'completely' ignored that feature? this thread is not about the the music transfer only. there are other features of the ipod and ihp up for comparison here. so naturally, i can bring them up. you make it sound like it is a sin to bring up the other features. do not read selectively dude.

 

[AGR]

What the hell am I missing? Ha!

I really do not know what could be much easier than loading songs onto the iHP-120. I can take 6 CDs out of my collection, convert them to MP3 using Roxio, then bring in the titles, etc,,, using Tag&Renamce, and then load them to my iHP-120 in 15 minutes or less.

And; if the music is already converted (suppose I downloaded from eMusic); it might take 5 minutes.

If another player does it faster, who cares?

It seems everything is supposed to be rushed around here. I enjoy playing around with the player, and downloading, converting, tagging, etc...

What is everyone's big rush? Isn't this supposed to be fun and relaxing?

 

[DigDub]

i mean, i don't really know what is wrong with me pointing out the features that ipod lacks and vice versa, what the ihp lacks that the ipod has. like when i point out that the ihp do not have drm, hence the ability to bypass software for transferring music, then people starts to go on praising itunes. itunes may be good, but that does not mean that the ipod does not have drm. if the ihp does have some sort of programs that transfers music and fixes id tags, then it will be fair to compare it to itunes. that is equal comparison. but trying to justify a non-existant feature with other features that somehow makes up for the non-existant one - that is not what i'm trying, or interested in doing here. i'm not even talking about trade-offs. do you see me justifying the lack of on-the-fly playlist on the ihp with other features such as the ability to queue songs up on the ihp? no! a feature that does not exist is, well, a feature that is not there. plain and simple. i'm not even talking if that feature is useful or the lack of it is acceptable, since we are not recommending hd players to people. that is not the intent of this thread.

if some of the people here still do not get it by now, i repeat, i'm only stating the lack of features on either the ipod or ihp, nothing more, nothing less. and trying to make up for the non-existant features by pointing out other 'make-up' features does not remove the fact that the feature is not there. if you insist on comparing apples with oranges, then so be it.