[br--]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumley garbage

Austonia had posted this thread well before the 4G came out. Look at the date.

 

[chumley]

Quote:

Originally Posted by br-- Austonia had posted this thread well before the 4G came out. Look at the date.

Um, ok... so, it's 'garbage'? Some of what I posted still applies, lo these many months later, so back off the post 'quality-labelling', please. My post was well-intentioned and I clearly didn't note the older date of Austonia's post. Is that alright with you?

BTW, why does Austonia's thread come to the Forum's 'page 1', along with an iPod thread from 2001? It's a little confusing, since they LOOK current because of their forum position. Obviously, I'll look carefully at the thread/post dates from now on. Thanks for the 'tip'. Maybe next time you can delete the attitude; it'd be much appreciated.

 

[AuroraProject]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumley BTW, why does Austonia's thread come to the Forum's 'page 1', along with an iPod thread from 2001? It's a little confusing, since they LOOK current because of their forum position. Obviously, I'll look carefully at the thread/post dates from now on. Thanks for the 'tip'. Maybe next time you can delete the attitude; it'd be much appreciated.

Because people are replying to the threads, the top thread has had the most recent response.

 

[chumley]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AuroraProject Because people are replying to the threads, the top thread has had the most recent response.

Yeah, I get that, and thanks for the response, AuroraProject, but... these threads, like Austonia's now out-of-date iPod thread and the 2001-era iPod thread just * appeared *, as if they were 'active' threads, BEFORE I posted to them.

I'll just be careful to look at the dates from now on... * slaps forhead, rolls eyes * ...

 

[GSTom1]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumley Yeah, I get that, and thanks for the response, AuroraProject, but... these threads, like Austonia's now out-of-date iPod thread and the 2001-era iPod thread just * appeared *, as if they were 'active' threads, BEFORE I posted to them. I'll just be careful to look at the dates from now on... * slaps forhead, rolls eyes * ...

If you notice the posts dates, no one has posted to this thread since the end of April. Then a user by the name of ixeo posted something today so this thread jumped to the top of the queue. You then saw this thread, scaned the posts quickly (probably too many for you to read carrefully) and thought it was recent material and replied to it.

As for the post from 2001, someone revived to to demonstrate how far the iPods have come since their release 3 years ago.

 

[ixeo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GSTom1 If you notice the posts dates, no one has posted to this thread since the end of April. Then a user by the name of ixeo posted something today so this thread jumped to the top of the queue. You then saw this thread, scaned the posts quickly (probably too many for you to read carrefully) and thought it was recent material and replied to it. As for the post from 2001, someone revived to to demonstrate how far the iPods have come since their release 3 years ago.

well i see no need to create another similar thread, so i just asked the question here. so anybody mind answering the Q? not my bad they didnt read the dates

 

[The_X]

Regarding gapless playback, for some reason this seems to be a problem for other companies as well. iRiver, for example, despite its great firmware support, is still unable to get gapless playback on its iMP series. I don't think the iHP's have it, either. Someone correct me if I'm wrong (I'm pretty ignorant on these matters...), but it seems like gapless playback algorithms might be harder than it seems?

[edit] Oh.. and sorry for bumping an old thread :-/ Didn't realize it was this old until 5 minutes later.

 

[kunwar]

The only thing that stopped me from buying the IPOD was the crapola battery life and the need to charge it every freakin' day.
I can't stand that.
Frankly Ipos has to work with Sony or someone else who has mastered long battery life on devices.
For eg. Erricson had some of the worst battery lifes of any mobile phones, all they did was have a tie up with Sony and look at the phones now. They rock.

Another thing Ipod could do is use the brushed aluminium look cos' let's face it it looks as sexy or cool as the shiny one.


BTW can someone answer this question of mine about databases on the Ipod.

Can itunes only be used to load songs which are ripped directly from CD's or can one use MP3's ripped previously as well by adding them to the Itunes DB somehow?
I can't be bothered copying all my cd's just for the sake of adding them to the itunes database.
That is one thing I liked about the IHP-140.

If ipod can solve battery and HDD issues, it will please a lot of pissed off souls.

Kunwar

 

[rextrade]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kunwar BTW can someone answer this question of mine about databases on the Ipod. Can itunes only be used to load songs which are ripped directly from CD's or can one use MP3's ripped previously as well by adding them to the Itunes DB somehow? I can't be bothered copying all my cd's just for the sake of adding them to the itunes database. That is one thing I liked about the IHP-140. If ipod can solve battery and HDD issues, it will please a lot of pissed off souls. Kunwar

You can just drag and drop the files into itunes (at least on a Mac this works).