Would you NOT buy an iPod because of what they stand for?

[oicdn]

Lets face it, the only reason everybody hates on the iPod is that fact you're locked into certain formats and you can't drag and drop. Either through firmware or file transfer.

Other than that, the GUI is better than every DAP out there. iTunes is better for organizing music than most everything out there. It just sucks you're locked into iTunes,a nd that in itself is enough to deter alot of people away, besides the fact you can't use whatever file you want.

If the iPod were so bad, it wouldn't be the most copied DAP, nor would it be the most popular (not only through ease of use). The SQ isn't bad, and because of the user interface AND popularity, it's the reason Vinnie uses it for the iMod.

Point black, the reason most people don't use it aside from the afore mentioned, is to go against the grain.

 

[blessingx]

Quote:

Originally Posted by thread /img/forum/go_quote.gif I've never bought an iPod because they don't play open formats. (ogg, flac) That's why.

I know what you mean, but just to be clear they do support 'open standards' (AAC, MP3, MPEG-4, H.264, etc.), just not 'open source'. Because the use of a codec/wrapper doesn't make the content 'open,' I've never really understood the fanaticism (not from you) of Ogg Vorbis and FLAC supporters (though both have some technical advantages) of copyrighted material. I will say it's been refreshing over the last two years to hear less and less people refer to AAC as 'Apples' or 'Apples WMA.'

 

[SR-71Panorama]

I would argue that when it comes to audio codecs, Apple Lossless is or will soon be the defacto standard lossless compression method, open source or no. Windows is widely recognized as the defacto standard for PCs, especially for buisness, and many people use them for that one reason. Its the devil you know. If ipods are the biggest DAP, then it would make some sence that AAC of all forms would become the new standard. I use Apple Lossless instead of FLAC, and Im on a PC. If I didnt have an ipod, I still may use it, for the ability to use iTunes.

-----------------------------

I woudnt get caught up in the Apple is now successful so I hate them mentality. Its so pointless and stupid. Hate them for making a fauly product, if thats your experience. Don't hate them because they are on the cover of Time magazine.

 

[Wmcmanus]

On the contrary, I buy iPods precisely for what they stand for: good value for the money, highly functional, well integrated with my Macbook Pro, and nice looking eye candy to boot. I've bought 3 for myself (160 gb classic, 60 gb video, and 4 gb nano) and 4 more as gifts (two 30 gb video, and two 1 gb shuffle). Not one ounce of regret; I've never felt "stupid" for having bought any of these iPods despite what the nasty know-it-all naysayers might think of me and my ilk.

 

[Zanth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GAD /img/forum/go_quote.gif Your question is formed as a negative, so we must be careful of our answers. I don't care what the masses think - I buy what I want. GAD

This is how I feel. If a product meets my needs then I will buy it so long as other products which closely match are either much more expensive or if closely priced, sorely lacking in features.

In terms of the iPod, when I first purchased a DAP, I went with something else, a unit that will likely be regarded as the be all and end all of DAPs for audiophiles in the golden age...the Rio Karma. Too bad that little unit was plagued with hardware failures and the company eventually went under.

I then went for an iPod because at the time no other company could touch it (particularly in capacity which was and still is very important to me).

After owning the iPod iPhoto (and a few others since) I have come to depend on LARGE capacity but I really would like native FLAC support. For the iPhoto I can have this with Rockbox, but I don't get a really nice db unless I use iTunes or something similar. My iPhoto will soon be exiting my house and I will likely bet getting a Classic at a wonderful 160 GB. The hassle of iTunes and the lack of FLAC is outweighed by the grand capacity once again.

Do I care that so many love the iPod? No. Do I care that so many hate it? No. Do I care that other companies offer wonderful products with optical outs, FLAC support, DnD etc? Yes I do care, but they aren't offering 160 GB HD's and sadly they offer units at say...60 GB for the same price as the 160.

I don't know "what" the iPod is supposed to stand for outside of a sleek functional DAP that just works. And for most anyone it really does just work. Plug it into just about any computer and along with iTunes one has an overall lovely system to get music and now photos and vids to most units, pretty easily manage the files etc. It is a bother-free system.

I'm a poweruser, like most here it seems, this definitely poses problems when searching out the ultimate anything. I'm not a target demographic. I know that. I'm willing to hack my systems to get them to work the way I want (hence Rockbox). Until companies are able to cater to me, I'll suffer through with the latest tech from a company that does it well.

 

[AlanY]

Buying or not buying gadgets for "political" reasons seems silly to me... particularly reasons that are tantamount to little more than emotion. I do understand genuine political concerns such as not buying goods from companies that produce land mines for example.

Buy what device meets your needs best. iPods have historically represented a good intersection of usability, design, compatibility (Mac, PC, Linux), sound quality (some misses there, but most use high quality Wolfson DACs and the original Shuffle was a killer hit), features, and value. The value angle is especially true now that Apple is by far the largest purchaser of flash memory in the world. They don't win on any one factor, but no device does... it's the sweet spot that they hit.

iPods are not popular just because of advertising or hype; they're popular because they hit that sweet spot. Microsoft's advertising budget for Vista is larger than Apple's budget for advertising iPods by quite a margin, and yet word of mouth on Vista is bad and public word of mouth on iPods is generally good. Consumers aren't stupid. They can sift out the wheat from the chaff.

 

[LFC_SL]

I personally judge a product on its own merits

If I must waste my student loan, it must be worthy

atm I am close to buying a Touch (as a PDA more than anything, but browser, vids and music as a package is enticing... I'll stop rambling)

If I'm going to hate a brand, it will be because of my high sense of morality (

) because they have done some unspeakable evil (

), not because of some insecurities about supposedly giving in to advertising or joining the "sheep"

P.S. Still dapless since the (then) puppy set herself upon my Archos XS202s last year

 

[RubenNYC]

Quote:

Originally Posted by oicdn /img/forum/go_quote.gif Lets face it, the only reason everybody hates on the iPod is that fact you're locked into certain formats and you can't drag and drop. Either through firmware or file transfer. {snip} Point black, the reason most people don't use it aside from the afore mentioned, is to go against the grain.

Personally, I think statements like this are about as valid and constructive as saying most iPod owners are sheep.

When I was shopping for my first ever HDD DAP, I spent weeks comparing various players. My top two choices were the iPod and the Rio Karma. Strictly based on features and factors that I valued, I went with the Karma and never regretted it for a second. In fact, the power, SQ and feature-set of the Karma are the very reasons why I dislike the iPod and currently have no plans to buy one.

 

[kpeezy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RubenNYC /img/forum/go_quote.gif Personally, I think statements like this are about as valid and constructive as saying most iPod owners are sheep. When I was shopping for my first ever HDD DAP, I spent weeks comparing various players. My top two choices were the iPod and the Rio Karma. Strictly based on features and factors that I valued, I went with the Karma and never regretted it for a second. In fact, the power, SQ and feature-set of the Karma are the very reasons why I dislike the iPod and currently have no plans to buy one.

He's not generalizing every ipod owner. I think it's fair to say that the biggest negative to the ipod is the lock down you're under when using it (unless you rockbox it).

 

[RubenNYC]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kpeezy /img/forum/go_quote.gif He's not generalizing every ipod owner. I think it's fair to say that the biggest negative to the ipod is the lock down you're under when using it (unless you rockbox it).

You may have misunderstood what I meant. I took his post to be an unfair generalization of non-iPod owners, similar to how some still generalize iPod owners as sheep.

I used to be one of those, but iPod has since earned my respect with the addition of gaplessness and search. Still, I'll take my vibez or my dearly departed Karma over anything else on the market any day.

 

[Quaddy]

i dont usually cut my nose off to spite my face, so i would always let the product win out over other peoples opinions.

 

[TheBends]

Quote:

Originally Posted by oicdn /img/forum/go_quote.gif Other than that, the GUI is better than every DAP out there. iTunes is better for organizing music than most everything out there.

Simplest and Easiest yes, but better, i will have to politely but firmly disagree sir. I bought a creative zen simply because i love the creative gui and find it to be far more capable and featured than the ipod's, (this statement excludes the touch which is a whole different subject.

The same holds for itunes, it's the simplest, easiest, and most attractive way to organize your music but i have more needs and choose media monkey and winamp instead because it has more features, more codec support, and doesn't have massive memory and hardware leaks that eat up memory and processor load.

That being said, my position on apple in general has and will continue to be this: it's good at what it does, but if you want more it's usually unavailable, particularly along the lines of third party software development, gaming

and most importantly for me, choice in how something looks.

So that comes back to the OP, yes i would NOT buy an ipod or an apple product for what it stands for, everything looking the same and working so smoothly. But, ipods are good for what they do, and this is why they sell so well, people don't know or simply don't care about other "features" that are available, because frankly they don't count for the average consumer. That's fine with me, I don't look down on ipod owners, i just have other requirements. And i have been thinking about getting a mac mini just as a basic secondary computer.... it would look so nice with a 26" display.....

Bottom line, yes i'm concerned about how it looks, how i look with it and it just so happens that i can "battle against the conforming mainstream" for reasons other than hipster exclusivity.

 

[z3000w]

I never thought I'd buy one but the gapless playback really sold me on the gadget...just for that I find myself using the nano more often than my d2. As for it being "eye candy"...meh I don't really care what it looks like my dap's spend 99% of their operational time in my pocket.
And itunes really isn't necessary, winamp works great.

 

[yangster]

I don't look for looks when I'm looking for a DAP, the ones I choose always look good anyways.

I would consider getting the iPod classic 160 GB player if I even need that much storage. I don't need all of that storage so I go for flash based players. Before the Touch came out, iPods(flash based) were over priced compared to the other players out there feature-wise. The nanos just sucked, imo, compared to the others like the Sansa e250 or Clix, expanded memory is always a plus. Now, I still wouldn't consider getting the nanos or the Touch, because of what I'm looking for.

 

[mrdeadfolx]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HIFIdmac /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you are inclined to answer "yes" to that statement, I think it has more to do with you wanting to go against the grain, rather than Apple being "mass produced eye candy". Their intuitive design and interface is what brought them success with the iPod. Their mass-production is only a result of inginuity and resulting mass acceptance. While I'm not sold on the iPod touch yet, I've owned 3 iPods and while not one has lasted more than 2 years, I have always been pleased with them. So no, I would continue to buy them, although they are eye candy, they are also easy to use and have become second nature to me.

And THAT my friends is how you end a thread early.