[tvhead]

I guess there is no difference besides the looks. And the archos has a bigger hard drive. It's a no brainer.

 

[Russ Arcuri]

A few comments.

1. I got the information about the iTunes EQ settings transferring to the iPod from two different reviews when it first came out. The reviewers complained that there were no EQ settings on the iPod itself; the response from Apple was that you could set the EQ in iTunes, and it would play that way from the iPod.

2. It looks (now) like maybe that feature is broken. It may or may not be fixed in the 1.0.3 firmware update. I'm sorry I had you on a wild goose chase -- I saw no mention of the problem before today.

3. What separates the iPod from the Archos is that it's so much smaller, and has a better interface. The archos uses a 2.5 inch mini hard drive. The iPod uses an even smaller drive made by Toshiba. If you wanted to buy the bare drive right now, without an iPod wrapped around it, it would cost you about $400. So the price of the iPod, while expensive, is actually pretty good, considering it costs the same as the drive inside it would cost you if you wanted to buy one separately. Obviously Apple gets a better price on them than we can.

 

[lextek]

"no-brainer" good choice of words.

Lextek

 

[tvhead]

The iPod is also a firewire drive. The iPod syncs up seamlessly with iTunes like it was made for each other. Oh yeah, because it was.

Because of the size, I look at it as a flash card mp3 player with a 5 gig flash card. I've carried the iPod in my pants pocket everyday since I got it back in late November.

I just don't think I could do that with the Archos. Actually, I can see one more positives for the Archos if I can manage to wedge it into my jeans. The women would be impressed by the huge bulge in my pants.

 

[MacDEF]

Quote:

Originally posted by tvhead As far as I know, eq settings do not transfer over from itunes to the iPod yet. Well, the settings may transfer over as part of the tags, but the iPod will not translate it yet.

According to Apple and the various Mac sites, the EQ settings are supposed to transfer over, and, in fact, they did on a couple friends' models. Perhaps, as Russ suggested, a recent update broke the feature? I'm sure it will be back soon, if that's the case.


Quote:

Originally posted by Tony De Luca I compared the origional CD on my $600.00 Nakamichi CD player with the 256 bit version on the iPod and there is definately something going on in the high end region. My Sony's sound extemely smooth on the Nak very faithful to the origional sound. When we switched over to the iPod the high end is suddenly brightend considerably.

After spending about 1/2 hour with an iPod today, I can tell you that the problem is not iPods in general. I tested it out with Etys, and there is absolutely no problems with the highs. Perhaps your friend's has a problem? Dunno, but it's definitely not a problem with all iPods. Plus there are a number of Head-Fi members who own them, and this is the first we've heard such a complaint.

The only other solution is that your Nakamichi is dark, and in comparison the iPod sounds bright. I find the 888s to be too bright (actually, I think their treble isn't that great). So maybe your Nakamichi is reigning in the treble, and the iPod isn't.


Quote:

Originally posted by citroeniste What exactly does the iPod do that the Archos 6000 doesn't, anyway?

Better design, better battery life and better battery technology, FireWire (a HUGE bonus), better integration with the desktop, bootable hard drive mode, smaller size, much better interface, etc., etc., etc....

Plus it will do a *lot* more than just play MP3s pretty soon

Heck, you can already plug a transmitter into the headphone jack and use it as a universal remote!

 

[Tony De Luca]

Well, I conducted a very controlled A/B test on my audio system which is very high end, and came to the conclusion that either my friends iPod is defective, or the other people on this board have been very lucky! I played the original Sheffield lab Missing Link CD on my Nakamichi MB-10 player that feeds into a super clean Crown IC-150 pre-amp which feeds a Crown Studio Reference-2 360watt per channel power amp. The Crown powers a pair of Mirage Omnipolar OM-7 speaker systems. This setup is very close to state of the art and believe me the Nakamichi is not dull on the high end! This system will bring out every nuance the iPod can deliver and it did! Immediately one can hear the harsh high end of the iPod when switched in an A/B comparison with the CD on my Nak. The Nakamichi sounds absolutely pristine with silky smooth highs, warm full midrange and solid tight clean lows. The iPod delivered a screechy brighter high end in comparison with the mids and lows holding there own. My conclusion has to be that either my friend's Pod is not operating correctly which I doubt since both channels exhibit the same sound, or the Pod has very mediocre amp circuitry inside. Those are my findings so for now I think I'll have to find some other way to listen to music on the go. I am a very critical listener and I guess I expected more from this player. That's not to say that it is a poor performer at all, just not what I expected! Very good looking though. As for my Sony e888lp's they are not the best headphones by far that honor goes to the Stax SR-007 (OMEGA II) headphones hands down the best headphone in the world, but they do produce a very satisfying midrange acceptable high end, and and adequate low end for portable use.

 

[Joe Bloggs]

Tony, everybody:

How the [size=medium]HECK[/size] can you be comparing the 256kbps mp3 file on the iPod with the original CD??

If you want to do a comparison between the line out / headphone out on your stereo with the headphone out on the iPod you should at least burn a CD using a wav file decoded from the 256kbps mp3 file.

While the comparison won't be perfect (different decoders, different DACs, for example) at least you won't be introducing the artifacts of the 256kbps mp3 as an additional factor.

It is a well known fact that mp3 encoding can change the perceived frequency response of the output. Usually the effect is a rolled-off treble, but if your iTunes has the equivalent of athtypes and your friend had messed with those settings (even setting --noath, maybe--what a mess that would be!) the encoder would try extra hard to encode the especially hard-to-encode HF info, ending up with a lot of garbage HF sounds, giving the *perception* of a hyped treble response.

 

[citroeniste]

I'll spot you the size and better industrial design, even though in other ways the design is completely bone-headed, such as, for example, not working with the majority of computers out there out of the box. That precludes better integration with the desktop, except for Mac users. (For the record, I wouldn't have this complaint if a Powerbook had two mouse buttons, because that Titanium looks great....)

Furthermore, the battery life is rated about the same as the Archos (mine, as noted, took me non-stop from Atlanta to Frankfurt on its second day in my possession), and I really dont' care about the underlying technology of the batteries as long as they work well.

And how useful is Firewire, anyway? It may be faster, but how many Windows laptops (of which there are many more out there than Macs of all stripes) have a firewire port? (In fact, that's the main reason I DIDN'T need it, because it won't work with my laptop without yet another add-on.)

As for the interface, I don't think there CAN be a good interface for a thing with maybe ten buttons total that can have thousands of songs on it. It's more a matter of self-imposed organisation, and all things considered I've been happy with the Archos in that regard. (Then again, I usually just put all of my MP3's in one folder and tell the machine to shuffle-play them, very occasionally hitting the "forward" button.)

As for the "Plus it will do a *lot* more than just play MP3s pretty soon", my question is, like what? The Archos (and Neo Jukebox and basically all of the other HDD MP3 players except for the Nomad) already works as a portable HDD. A universal remote isn't going to be a killer ap for an MP3 player. Besides, I already carry a universal remote in my briefcase. It's called a Palm Vx with Omniremote software. Are they going to put a bigger screen on the iPod and rename it Newton? Will it be a cellphone?

In short, I think a lot of people are bowled over by the cool looking design, and not realising that depending on one's own needs, it just may not be the best MP3 player out there, or even a GOOD MP3 player.

 

[lextek]

It's a portable MP3 player. Not a replacement for your home "reference"CD player. I saw the Archos at Circuity City. Looks and feels like a cheap toy. I can't see why the batter can't be replaced. There is a connector on it. I can't believe it is a diposable player. As far as a personal, HD base,portable and quality MP3 player. The iPod is hard to beat. Xpod software will be out for Windows users soon also.
If you don't like it don't buy it.

Lextek

 

[Tony De Luca]

If you can't believe it's disposable after 90 days call Apple yourself. Has anybody actually read my post!! As I said even an Apple product specialist called me and verified the same thing. I'm not lying, i"m just telling what I've been told. Believe me I couldn't understand it either! Which is the main reason I won't buy one!

 

[Russ Arcuri]

Quote:

Originally posted by Tony De Luca If you can't believe it's disposable after 90 days call Apple yourself. Has anybody actually read my post!! As I said even an Apple product specialist called me and verified the same thing. I'm not lying, i"m just telling what I've been told. Believe me I couldn't understand it either! Which is the main reason I won't buy one!

2 comments:

1. It makes no difference what some uninformed rep told you. You can buy a 2 or 3 year full replacement contract on it from CompUSA, even if you didn't buy the iPod from them.

2. Apple today posted iPod updater 1.0.4 to their website. No word about the EQ settings issue.

 

[MacDEF]

Quote:

Originally posted by citroeniste I'll spot you the size and better industrial design, even though in other ways the design is completely bone-headed, such as, for example, not working with the majority of computers out there out of the box. That precludes better integration with the desktop, except for Mac users. (For the record, I wouldn't have this complaint if a Powerbook had two mouse buttons, because that Titanium looks great....)

It was a conscious decision by Apple to make the iPod not work for Windows users right now -- not a "bone-headed" move by any means. The iPod was not designed to sell iPods. It was designed to make Macs more attractive to consumers. And it's worked pretty well -- I've heard lots of stories of people who bought Macs just to use iPods. So the criticism -- oft repeated -- that a "drawback" of the iPod is that it won't work on Windows only holds water for one group of people: Windows users

It's not an inherent design flaw of the product.

In fact, Apple already couldn't make enough of them -- they sold 125,000 of them in the first 60 days. I can't imagine all the complaints they would get about availability if all the Windows users lusting after them tried to buy them, too

Second, I would add that there are already hacks to allow you to use it with Windows.

Finally, the "two-mouse" criticism is also an empty one. The Mac OS fully supports two-button mice. Studies have shown that most uses, even Windows users, never use the right mouse button, and in fact find it confusing. This is especially true for newer users. So Apple ships one button, but includes multi-button and scroll wheel support in the OS. If you want to right-click, simply plug in a multi-button mouse.


Quote:

Furthermore, the battery life is rated about the same as the Archos (mine, as noted, took me on-stop from Atlanta to Frankfurt on its second day in my possession), and I really dont' care about the underlying technology of the batteries as long as they work well.

The battery life of the iPod is OVER 10 hours. Some reviewers reported regularly getting 13-14 hours. The Archos's battery life isn't really comparable. As for the battery technology, it should be important to you, because how long your batteries last (both on a charge and before you have to replace them) matters. The iPod uses a Lithium Ion Polymer battery. Not only do these batteries not have the "memory effect," they also last FAR longer than other batteries, including standard Lithium Ion models. Many Lithium Ion batteries have to be replaced after a few years; the iPods battery won't.

Quote:

And how useful is Firewire, anyway? It may be faster, but how many Windows laptops (of which there are many more out there than Macs of all stripes) have a firewire port? (In fact, that's the main reason I DIDN'T need it, because it won't work with my laptop without yet another add-on.)

Only someone who has never actually used FireWire would ask that

FireWire is by far the best wired connection protocol on the market today. Your criticism is really more a criticism of Windows laptops than of FireWire. Try this on a Windows laptop: hook a FireWire cable up from your laptop's FW port to your desktop's. Restart your laptop, and hold down the T button. The laptop instantly shows up as another hard drive on your desktop machine. No ID problems, no configuration -- it just works. You can even boot from it without any hassle. FireWire has speeds that surpass all but the fastest SCSI, it's hot-swappable, can carry power along with data, and requires no host controller.

The fact that the iPod uses FireWire means that you can fill 6GB with music in around 10 minutes. Adding a few songs takes seconds. And during the time it's connected to your computer, it's being recharged. Plus you can use the iPod as a high-speed, bootable hard drive.


Quote:

As for the interface, I don't think there CAN be a good interface for a thing with maybe ten buttons total that can have thousands of songs on it. It's more a matter of self-imposed organisation, and all things considered I've been happy with the Archos in that regard. (Then again, I usually just put all of my MP3's in one folder and tell the machine to shuffle-play them, very occasionally hitting the "forward" button.)

You have never seen or used one, you simply have a general doubt about whether or not it "CAN" have a good interface? Kind of a weak statement, don't you think? Well, take it from those of us who have actually used one. The Archos, Nomad, PJB, and every other hard-drive based MP3 player I have used have simply horrible interfaces. Finding a song is a pain. Arranging music is a pain. With the iPod, finding a single song out of 1000 takes a matter of seconds. The interface and the controls work together amazingly well. I don't even *like* MP3 players that much (I'm a MiniDisc fan, especially after trying the other models mentioned) -- however, when I picked up an iPod, the first thing I said was "wow, you can acuatlly USE this thing."

Quote:

As for the "Plus it will do a *lot* more than just play MP3s pretty soon", my question is, like what? The Archos (and Neo Jukebox and basically all of the other HDD MP3 players except for the Nomad) already works as a portable HDD. A universal remote isn't going to be a killer ap for an MP3 player. Besides, I already carry a universal remote in my briefcase. It's called a Palm Vx with Omniremote software. Are they going to put a bigger screen on the iPod and rename it Newton? Will it be a cellphone?

1) The possibilities of "what else" are pretty much endless. I used the remote example because I found it funny -- of course no one is going to buy one to use it as that. But the iPod has two RISC processors built in, as well as a complete operating system. The other HD-based players have a single, simple processor and only play MP3s The iPod will be doing a lot more than play MP3s in the near future.

2) In terms of being able to use the other HD-based players as hard drives, let's talk about real-world use. USB hard drives are a joke. Transfer speed is horrible, reliability is horrible, and they hog CPU time during extensive data transfer. Plus booting from them is not something you want to try. With the iPod, you get a high-speed, *useable* drive that not only lets you store and transfer data, but also lets you use it as a startup/boot drive on any computer.


Quote:

In short, I think a lot of people are bowled over by the cool looking design

No, we've just done our homework a bit better

In this entire post, I didn't even mention its cool-looking design. Everything I wrote was based on what it actually does. Oh, and another reason we're bowled over is that we've actually used one...

Quote:

and not realising that depending on one's own needs, it just may not be the best MP3 player out there, or even a GOOD MP3 player.

It's definitely a good -- no, great -- MP3 player. It's won more awards and "best product" recs in the last two months than most of the products you mentioned have in their entire product life. In terms of the HD-based MP3 market, about the only "need" that it doesn't fill better than any other product is hard drive capacity, and that's a limitation of the hard drive technology used in the iPod (Toshiba ultra-slim, low-power -- they aren't made any bigger yet), rather than a design limitation.

 

[coolvij]

MacDEF: I liked your response - in classic MacDEF style, lol...very thoughtful and to the point.

However, I have one question concerning this statement:

Quote:

In terms of the HD-based MP3 market, about the only "need" that it doesn't fill better than any other product is hard drive capacity, and that's a limitation of the hard drive technology used in the iPod (Toshiba ultra-slim, low-power -- they aren't made any bigger yet), rather than a design limitation.

Wouldn't you consider Apple's choice of the Toshiba drive to be, at least initially, also a fault of the iPod? I can see where your coming from...but I would also think that, until drive technology progresses just a lil more, your argument here isn't very strong..

 

[Russ Arcuri]

Quote:

Originally posted by coolvij Wouldn't you consider Apple's choice of the Toshiba drive to be, at least initially, also a fault of the iPod? I can see where your coming from...but I would also think that, until drive technology progresses just a lil more, your argument here isn't very strong..

I don't mean to speak for MacDEF, but I have an opinion on this too...

They picked that drive because they wanted it to be the smallest 5 GB player available -- and it is. I don't think it's a fault if ultimate portability is one of the key design factors. Do you really think that 1000 songs on a device that size is unimpressive?

 

[citroeniste]

Quoth MacDEF

Actually, before I quote MacDEF, some initial comments. I may have sounded like I was down on the iPod. I'm not, I think it looks cool and hope it brings people closer to the music. However, like anything else, make sure it works better for you and your situation before you drop your hard-earned cash on it. I did (try it out, not buy it) and found that the iPod had very little to nothing to offer me. By the same token, the MP3 player that I've quite enjoyed since the 7th of January (an Archos 6000) may not be the best one for you. Particularly if you have a Mac.

"In fact, Apple already couldn't make enough of them -- they sold 125,000 of them in the first 60 days. I can't imagine all the complaints they would get about availability if all the Windows users lusting after them tried to buy them, too"

Fair enough, although a lot of those 125,000 must be sitting in their distribution channels, because every store I went to that carries 'em had a bunch in stock.

"Second, I would add that there are already hacks to allow you to use it with Windows."

Which, I'm sure you'll allow, is very different from support out of the box.

"Finally, the "two-mouse" criticism is also an empty one. The Mac OS fully supports two-button mice."

OK, but what's the point of a laptop if you have to plug in things just to get it to do the most basic things, like open a web-page in a new window?

(I don't care about iMacs or Cubes or whatever, because I don't see myself ever owning or wanting to own a stationary computer. I'm not a stationary person, after all.)

"Studies have shown that most uses, even Windows users, never use the right mouse button, and in fact find it confusing."

I didn't believe it needed to be established that most people are stupid.

"The battery life of the iPod is OVER 10 hours. Some reviewers reported regularly getting 13-14 hours."

"The Archos's battery life isn't really comparable."

Actually, at least when new, it is. I can't vouch for anything over five days old, though

"Only someone who has never actually used FireWire would ask that <snip>"

Thanks for the info. I appreciate you taking the time out to walk me through it. I had no idea that it was so versitile. Although I wouldn't expect ANYTHING to be that easy with Windows...

Do you happen to know if any makers of laptops with 2 mouse buttons install FW ports? I'll probably be putting my ca. 1997 Dell Inspiron out to pasture in six to eight months.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"As for the interface, I don't think there CAN
be a good interface for a thing with maybe ten buttons total....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You have never seen or used one, you simply have a general doubt about whether or not it "CAN" have a good interface?

Actually, that's wrong. I have used it. I'm not going to dismiss something as unsuitable for my needs (or comment upon it otherwise, generally speaking) without firsthand knowledge of it. And I stand by my statement, restated thusly: it is impossible to have a really usable interface for scrolling through thousands of songs using just six to ten buttons.
quote:

"1) The possibilities of "what else" are pretty much endless."

But the only really useful ones, as far as I could see, would be to turn it into PDA or cell phone. The idea is to let people carry fewer silicon wafers and glass screens on their body.

"It's definitely a good -- no, great -- MP3 player."

Unless you have a Windows laptop, in which case it's not even a good MP3 player. Superlatives are situational.

"It's won more awards and "best product" recs in the last two months

What's printed in magazines really doesn't impact me. Hobbyist magazines exist in order to get magazine writers the newest toys cheaply or for for free (which also has the useful function of telling other people about said new toys), and the flip side is that they're going to write glowing reviews of products whose creators smile at them and remember their writers' names. That goes for computer magazines, audio magazines, car mags, fashion mags, etc.

"than most of the products you mentioned have in their entire product life."

Which has been about six months, right?

"In terms of the HD-based MP3 market, about the only "need" that it doesn't fill better than any other product is hard drive capacity,"

Unless all of your MP3's are on a Windows laptop. Then it doesn't fill any needs at all.

Peace,

Jay