[Slimm]

Digdub, just a question? What makes you think the IHP series is more "compatible" with the future, when iRiver is introducing a whole new line of HD players to replace the IHP's?

And I was unaware that you can utilize the "file tree" system on the Zen. This is possible?

 

[DigDub]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slimm Digdub, just a question? What makes you think the IHP series is more "compatible" with the future, when iRiver is introducing a whole new line of HD players to replace the IHP's? And I was unaware that you can utilize the "file tree" system on the Zen. This is possible?

more 'compatible' in a sense that the ihp is a ums device that lets you transfer music and play them using the native file explorer, much like your thumb drives and external hardisks. so you are safe as long as that OS has a file explorer (which all does) and can see external storage devices via USB, without ever worrying if ephpod (or other 3rd party transfer apps) will work on it or not.

using third party apps to transfer music files and make them playable on the ipod (e.g. phpod), there is:
1) a risk of development being stopped and ephpod cannot be used because some newer OS versions may require a different version of ephpod all together.
2) not all OSes support ephpod. when a new OS comes up, one would have to wait for the ephpod that is OS-compatible to be released.

the argument maybe that ums support and USB would be taken away away. but that is not likely going to happen in the near future since external storage devices are getting popular. whereas, ephpod is a third party app supporting a single particular product. ipods are not here to stay forever. if apple decides to introduce a new mp3 player that is not ephpod compatible, what then? apple is not stupid. they will not stay stagnant. however, iriver's implementation (if they stay true to it) will ensure that no 3rd party apps is needed to transfer music files and make them playable at the same time, even for future releases of audio players. it is truly 'drag and drop' inside the native file explorer, therefore, you can be sure that your music files will play without worrying about 3rd party apps as long as the file explorer can see your device.

as for the filetree question, similar to what austonia was trying to say about the ipod, go Browse > Albums. but on the zen, its Music Library -> Albums. Similar operation to filetree method on the ihp.

 

[Slimm]

No offense, but you're WAY OFF BASE if you think there's a risk that the iPods won't be around, and if you think they'll stop development for it, I believe you to be wrong there too?

Plus there's no guarentee that future codecs will replace MP3, OGG, and what we know today, and that iRiver will backtrack and develop compatability for the IHP series, especially if they don't sell it anymore.

To me, it's a moot point. The life of each player we own will probably give out before compatibility issues come into play. It another mountain out of a mohill to me.

I don't understand the focus on Ephpod as well, Itunes will be around as long as the iPod, and will continue to evlove as OS's advance.

And just because the IHP now works the way it does does not insure at all that with future versions you won't need software. Right now, to my knowledge, isn't the IHP the only product iRiver produces now that's "drag and drop"? There's already a product line about to be released to replace the IHP's. There is no guarantee that as it loads now will stay the same. There's no pattern to predict this with.

Can you use the IHP on Linux?

What's the difference between "Browse->Albums" and "Music Library->Albums"? You're not trying to say the Creative's are "more" like a file tree system than the iPod, are you?

 

[Slimm]

And who says USB WILL be around forever. Storage devices? USB2 and firewire made all the USB storage devices extinct, as did support for them.. Once they went, you almost had to get a USB2 or Firewire external drive.

To say the IHP, iPod or any other player is immune to "extinction", or "more immune than another" is really misguided in my view. If all goes well for iRiver (and I have no reason to believe it won't), They'll develop and evolve their players with the times, like apple or anyone else will.

I don't know man, it just seems like you're grasping for straws here as far as differentiation.

 

[DigDub]

hmmm...slimm, maybe you did not get what i'm trying to say. i'm talking about the way of transferring files to a music playing devices, in this case, the ihp and the ipod, and the software that is required to transfer them. you asked me how is it more compatible, so i inferred as in how compatible is it with other systems in transferring music and how the approaches taken by apple and iriver will have an impact on their future products in the area of music transferring. what i'm referring to is the ephpod not being able to work on newer OSes or becoming obsolete, not the ipod itself.

the general trend taken by apple is the drm way, as oppossed to iriver's no drm way. therefore, it is MORE likely that each companies will stay that way and no dramatic changes is expected. that is based on patterns, because no company changes their policies overnight. whether they will really remain that way remains to be seen. but according to current trends, it will stay that way.

also, i did not say that hardware was not prone to extinction. they are. but its the philosophy of how each company wants their products to be used and operated that i'm talking about.

our discussions are centered around the use of ephpod vs native file explorer (ums support and play), but you spun it way out of topic (extinction of hardware, codecs??). sure, hardware will become extinct. but what drives it (firmware and softwares) is more important. and iriver seems like a less restricted company than apple. apple are promoting their own codecs (AAC, AAC Loseless) while iriver (and rio) seems more willing to try out what's available (FLAC, OGG). looks like you have seriously misunderstood my post.

"What's the difference between "Browse->Albums" and "Music Library->Albums"? You're not trying to say the Creative's are "more" like a file tree system than the iPod, are you?"

they are the same i believe. same in a sense you can go inside folders and choose songs.

 

[BigFil]

"and iriver seems like a less restricted company than apple. apple are promoting their own codecs (AAC, AAC Loseless) while iriver (and rio) seems more willing to try out what's available (FLAC, OGG). "

More willing to try out what's available because they don't have the R&D resources to come up with their own codecs. Don't think they wouldn't if they could.

1. AAC is not apple's codec, they are just the biggest user of MP4. If your talking itms downloads then yes it's protected by their DRM scheme. iRiver would have to do the same thing if they were providing music downloads otherwise they would be sued out of business.

2. AL is not AAC Loseless.

3. Apple uses gives the choice of AL, AAC, MP3, WAV and AiFF, and now has some support for upprotected WMA.

Why is it that iRiver fanboys can't get it through their heads that iPod users don't need to use AAC if they don't choose.

 

[austonia]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DigDub i don't know what is wrong with you austonia, but you seem to use your 'experience' and 'authority' to put down and belittle those who think different and have different experiences from you. its always about ME, ME, ME. your reluctance to accept the obvious facts and constraints of the ipod is deplorable for a guy who owns an 'definitive URL' such as 'www.dapreview.com' and gives 'authorative' review on this forum. sorry, but i'm not a big fan or believer of your so-called 'authorative' comments and reviews.

lol

I actually have both the iPod v.2 and iHP-140. I also have the NJB3, Muvo2, Nitrus, & Dell DJ. In the past I've owned the Gateway DMP-X20, original Zen, iPod v.3, e.dig O1000, and a dozen flash-based players. With Rob at my house, I also have the Xclef HD500, HD800, Godot 7170, iPod v.1, iHP-100, Phillips HDD100, Zen Xtra, MPIO HD100, and Rio Karma.

if you don't agree with one of my opinions, more power to ya. But I've built my opinions based on a lot of research with the above players. What's your record?

as far as ease-of-use goes, with the iPod vs. iHP debate, I challenge you illustrate some situations where the iHP is more "compatable" and "easier to load" and "easier to manage" than iPod. If your situations affect less than 1% of the population, I don't care. Pony up, boy.

 

[JiPi]

Ouh ! You can feel the tension.

By the way, austonia, nice site you have there

I would really like to see an iPod v.2 review, if that was possible. Maybe some time in the coming months, unless you're working on that super huge review of all these players like you had said somewhere, someday, earlier... That'd be cool too!

 

[austonia]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JiPi Ouh ! You can feel the tension. By the way, austonia, nice site you have there I would really like to see an iPod v.2 review, if that was possible. Maybe some time in the coming months, unless you're working on that super huge review of all these players like you had said somewhere, someday, earlier... That'd be cool too!

jipi, I would like to write long reviews of all the players I have. But I have a problem with formal writing, some issues; it's difficult. But you can ask me any question about a DAP and I will answer as best I can.

 

[JiPi]

It's not really questions I have about it, I actually have a 2G iPod myself (just got it last week! But I don't have a Firewire card.. bummer! Eh

).

I would just really want to see how you percieve its weaknesses or how it would 'rank' in a top 10 of DAPs and why. I also would like to know if there are any tips you would give to users to get the best out of their players (I thought I had read something about creating an extra folder in it to actually 'shut it down', maybe you could clarify about that?)..

See what I mean?

 

[austonia]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JiPi It's not really questions I have about it, I actually have a 2G iPod myself (just got it last week! But I don't have a Firewire card.. bummer! Eh ). I would just really want to see how you percieve its weaknesses or how it would 'rank' in a top 10 of DAPs and why. I also would like to know if there are any tips you would give to users to get the best out of their players (I thought I had read something about creating an extra folder in it to actually 'shut it down', maybe you could clarify about that?).. See what I mean?

sure, here are the impressions I had when I first got the v.2 iPod:

http://www.austinv.com/content.php?review.86

mostly, it is positive.

I like it a lot for the SQ, strong output, and GUI, but I don't like the:
1) battery life is substandard even today but 10hrs is OK
2) never shuts off, always battery drain << big problem!
3) no looping lists (can't go from A to Z or vice-versa)
4) no scrolling text (for stuff that's too long to fit on the screen)
5) not enough characters per line (needs smaller font option)
6) no custom EQ, and presets are suck

edit: needs on-the-fly playlisting. and that apple isn't supporting thier older players with new firmware, like Creative does.

 

[br--]

Quote:

the general trend taken by apple is the drm way, as oppossed to iriver's no drm way. therefore, it is MORE likely that each companies will stay that way and no dramatic changes is expected. that is based on patterns, because no company changes their policies overnight. whether they will really remain that way remains to be seen. but according to current trends, it will stay that way.

I initally wasn't going to reply, but this is too easy. I'll make it simple for you:

APPLE: SELLS MUSIC
IRIVER: DOESNT SELL MUSIC

For Apple to sell music on the iTunes music store, the labels required them to implement a DRM system for copy protection. This is completely unrelated to the iPod. Apple isn't doing this because they are an evil company wishing world dominance, but rather it was a requirement for them to get the sort of deal with the labels that they ended up getting.

iRiver. They manufacture audio players. They have no music store. Hence no need for DRM.

 

[Slimm]

Digdub, I respect your opinion, but you really need to reread your posts. Your saying that I "spun it way out of topic (extinction of hardware, codecs??)", yet in your previous post, you said "ipods are not here to stay forever", as though the IHP's are.

Just a few points:

AAC is not Apple's codec. It's not their property, any company can use it.

ID3 tags are not like "opening folders" to get songs. They allow you to browse your music by album, song, artist, etc. If your saying the file organization of the IHP is similar to the Creative, but not the iPod, you're mistaken.

And you're just a little too narrow minded as far as your "future compatibility with software" opinion. If you think there won't be other software out there to "pick up the ball where Ephpod left off", for the best selling, most popular MP3 player out there (for better or worse), I think your view is really jaded.

 

[DigDub]

the fact is you need ephpod (or other 3rd party apps), even to load mp3, not only aac files, to play music files.

vs

ihp that can drop and play inside any OSes that can see the external drive via the native explorer.

yes, the iriver fanboys do get the idea that the ipod can be used as an external harddrive, can load ephpod through it and can play mp3 files. that, has been shoved into our heads by the ipod fanboys.

how about the ipod fanboys looking at what ihp can do, instead of always denying the constraints on the ipod? is it that difficult for ephpod/ipod fanboys to see that the probability of ephpod not running on Longhorn is greater than Longhorn not supporting ums devices? (therefore the 'not compatible' arguments). that may not be so apparent now, but chances of the future version of OSes not supporting ums devices is far smaller than ephpod not working on those OSes. that is what i like and feel assured about the 'transfer and play features via ums' of the ihp. and my point here is only about the transferring the music and playing it, not managing, which the ipod wins.

also, not only apple, creative and rio also do not allow downloading and uploading of music files via the native file explorer. that, i believe, is to comply with SDMI. and the iriver is one of the few major manufacturers that do not subscribe to the SDMI crap. that alone, gets my respect for iriver.

your argument of 'apple not wanting world dominance' is incorrect, my dear. that would means that apple is pushing people to use its itunes software, and eventually, the itunes store, which they hope will become dominant in the business of music downloads. i'm pretty sure that was part of the agenda when they came up with itunes. apple runs a business, not some 'hippie open-source freeware' company. it would be naive to think that they do not want a foothold of some sort in other areas, which they have done with the dominant ipods.

so what, are we advocating SDMI and becoming RIAA-believers now? looks like apple has done a pretty good job of bringing across the message of 'SDMI good, consumer rights bad'.

 

[DigDub]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slimm Digdub, I respect your opinion, but you really need to reread your posts. Your saying that I "spun it way out of topic (extinction of hardware, codecs??)", yet in your previous post, you said "ipods are not here to stay forever", as though the IHP's are. Just a few points: AAC is not Apple's codec. It's not their property, any company can use it. ID3 tags are not like "opening folders" to get songs. They allow you to browse your music by album, song, artist, etc. If your saying the file organization of the IHP is similar to the Creative, but not the iPod, you're mistaken. And you're just a little too narrow minded as far as your "future compatibility with software" opinion. If you think there won't be other software out there to "pick up the ball where Ephpod left off", for the best selling, most popular MP3 player out there (for better or worse), I think your view is really jaded.

hmm...my point was geared towards more ephpod on ipod. if apple comes up with another player, we can almost be certain that it will have SDMI. and ephpod might not work with that new player, hence the compatibilty views. whereas for iriver, if they stay true to being SDMI-free, then we can expect not to use any 3rd party apps to transfer and play music.

i know aac is not propietary to apple. but apple is tied down by their business needs, therefore the need for aac, which has drm capabilities.

i was telling aust about how i prefer filetree view, then he replied by saying that apple also has a similar structure by using Browse -> Albums. so i replied by saying that nomad zen also has similar features too and i pretty much preferred that method of browsing instead of using db mode.

that does not remove the fact that you would need to:
1) determine if that 3rd party apps will work on the platform or not.
2) create an additional point of failure through the use of add-on apps that are not native to the system.

but the chances of future OSes not supporting ums is pretty small vs having to wait for a 3rd party apps to be developed to work on that OS. if iriver starts to implement some sort of sdmi, then ipod will certainly be in my list of next purchase, because ephpod, in all honesty, does its jobs pretty well. but what made me choose the iriver over the ipod in the first place is the lack of sdmi.