iPod has the best UI, period. Features don't matter to me on an MP3 player beyond what formats it can play and the battery life. UI is everything.
Finish this sentence: The next Ipod will...
- Thread starter PARANOiA
- Start date
UI, for me. starts already when copying music from the computer to the mp3 player. A player that can do this without the need of any additional software already has a great advantage in my book. Having to use iTunes ultimately kills the iPod for me...
I'm also not sure what's so better about the UI on the iPod...
*puts flamesuit on*
I'm also not sure what's so better about the UI on the iPod...
*puts flamesuit on*
Last edited by a moderator:
UI, for me. starts already when copying music from the computer to the mp3 player. A player that can do this without the need of any additional software already has a great advantage in my book. Having to use iTunes ultimately kills the iPod for me...
I'm also not sure what's so better about the UI on the iPod...
*puts flamesuit on*
You can rip to mp3 with Itunes. Not sure if your first two sentences are connected with the third one. I really like ITunes and it's one of the reasons I went with the iPod. I haven't investigated other software in a while.
UI (or ideally the lack of such, just the minimal controls like on your CD player will do) and the size for me. Size DOES matter
UI, for me. starts already when copying music from the computer to the mp3 player. A player that can do this without the need of any additional software already has a great advantage in my book. Having to use iTunes ultimately kills the iPod for me...
I'm also not sure what's so better about the UI on the iPod...
*puts flamesuit on*
Agreed. Personally I find iTunes a horrible program and while there are other options out there its just more of a pain... I also personally don't find the iPod UI to be that great anymore, its "simplicity" has long since been mimicked and therefore its not much of an advantage. Price, features, and size matter to me. The iPod hangs in only one area there and therefore loses.
DuckThor Evil
Legend
I wonder whether you have made that wonderful discovery with somewhat limited experience? I'm personally inclined to think so... Itunes pretty much works like a charm, only thing that really sucks with it, is that you can't transfer songs from Ipod back to Itunes, meaning that if you have to reinstall Windows (which can happen
) you have to clear your Ipod's memory.
I wonder whether you have made that wonderful discovery with somewhat limited experience? I'm personally inclined to think so... Itunes pretty much works like a charm, only thing that really sucks with it, is that you can't transfer songs from Ipod back to Itunes, meaning that if you have to reinstall Windows (which can happen
No, I've had to install it on many many computers due to popular demand. I wouldn't let it near my own music collection.
This fails miserably when you have 30 gigs of music on your player.UI (or ideally the lack of such, just the minimal controls like on your CD player will do) and the size for me. Size DOES matter
iTunes isn't that bad, either. Sure, it's big and kind of slow, but you only need to use it when you're copying music to the player in the first place (and even then you can use any number of other programs to manage the iPod as well). And copying files manually is a piss-poor option again when you have 30 gigs of music. Have fun organizing that...
A bazillion features on a mobile device ends up being stupid for the same reason that Microsoft Office is terrible, but even more so. The vast majority of people will never touch the features, and the more features you have buried in the device, the more complicated the UI is to access them.
If I go out and pick 100 off the street, I bet 95% of them have never even gone to the Settings menu of their mobile phones, and played around with all the features. It is for this very reason that over-the-air provisioning was invented because most people are either unable, or unwilling, to mess around with setting up advanced features in their phone.
the iPod and iPhone are popular because of the UI. The reality is, many of the copycats who copy Apple's UI concepts end up copying them piecemeal and end up with something less coherent.
It's not the shear number of features that matter, it's how well they are implemented. For example, I used WiFi capable smartphones for years (PPC phone, various Nokia smartphones. I worked for a mobile software company, so I had access to practically every phone in every market, usually before consumers could buy them), and none of them seemlessly switched back and forth between Mobile/WiFi, or joined networks and let you manage them as easily and seemlessly as the iPhone does.
Mobile phone UIs have been an complete exercise in frustration for me over the years, and the iPhone for example, was a pleasure to use in comparison. And this has nothing to do with cognitive dissonance either, since I've bought and threw away more expensive phones than the iPhone (hell, I paid $600 for the very first Smart PDA phone, the Kyocera PalmPhone, which only had a 25Mhz Dragonball processor, and 9600bps data) And no, I've used the N95, and the iPhone still blows it away, even though the N95 has more 'features'
If I go out and pick 100 off the street, I bet 95% of them have never even gone to the Settings menu of their mobile phones, and played around with all the features. It is for this very reason that over-the-air provisioning was invented because most people are either unable, or unwilling, to mess around with setting up advanced features in their phone.
the iPod and iPhone are popular because of the UI. The reality is, many of the copycats who copy Apple's UI concepts end up copying them piecemeal and end up with something less coherent.
It's not the shear number of features that matter, it's how well they are implemented. For example, I used WiFi capable smartphones for years (PPC phone, various Nokia smartphones. I worked for a mobile software company, so I had access to practically every phone in every market, usually before consumers could buy them), and none of them seemlessly switched back and forth between Mobile/WiFi, or joined networks and let you manage them as easily and seemlessly as the iPhone does.
Mobile phone UIs have been an complete exercise in frustration for me over the years, and the iPhone for example, was a pleasure to use in comparison. And this has nothing to do with cognitive dissonance either, since I've bought and threw away more expensive phones than the iPhone (hell, I paid $600 for the very first Smart PDA phone, the Kyocera PalmPhone, which only had a 25Mhz Dragonball processor, and 9600bps data) And no, I've used the N95, and the iPhone still blows it away, even though the N95 has more 'features'
When I design a piece of software, I first start with interviewing users, and making a long list of everything they want from it. Then, I think about it, try to "normalize" the demands, and come up with something basic that might work.
After that, I start scrapping everything that is not essential, and I group things to function. I think about it some more, revise my initial specs and rebuild my initial model, and try to come up with something that does most of what remains as simple and as minimalistic as I can think of.
I build a demo, add some eye-candy, take it to the customers and have them play with it. And they like it. If they ask about their list of essentials, I tell them that I will add whatever they need when they encounter it. They very rarely do.
After that, I start scrapping everything that is not essential, and I group things to function. I think about it some more, revise my initial specs and rebuild my initial model, and try to come up with something that does most of what remains as simple and as minimalistic as I can think of.
I build a demo, add some eye-candy, take it to the customers and have them play with it. And they like it. If they ask about their list of essentials, I tell them that I will add whatever they need when they encounter it. They very rarely do.
Freak'n Big Panda
Regular
wow I want one. It's unfortunate that even though this player is probably better than the ipod by any objective measure it wont sell anywhere close to as well.
As for the next ipod, I hope it'll have wifi and or bluetooth, just something to facilitate wireless transfers between ipods but I wouldn't be surprised if that didn't pan out.
I can't come to a decision on if the ipod is actually a good product or not, I've never owned one and I've never owned a high end flash player so I can't really take any stance on the matter. However I can say that from the surface the ipod doesn't seem to offer anything the competition does not.
The UI of that Samsung player looks worse than the iPhone's, the 'flick' motion to advance photos looked annoying without smooth visual feedback, there didn't appear to be any 'quick' jump if you have like thousands of songs, the ebook reader looked *really* lame, as instead of scaling the fonts, it simply word-wrapped the text, which already included hard breaks. Basically, an incomplete ripoff. I also don't see anything this device has over an iPhone, which also has bluetooth, wifi, and edge, plus HW wise, its got a PVR MBX.
The history of Samsung's forays into operating systems for mobile devices has been, shall we say, spotty at best. Apple will kill this thing easily by releasing an iPhone, rip out the phone, rip out the flash, add in 30gb-80gb hd, for something like $250 (the iPhone cost of manufacturing is currently estimated at $300, so Apple makes $300 off of each one). Apple is also likely to release a flash nano version, and an iPhone nano to go after the RAZR market.
The history of Samsung's forays into operating systems for mobile devices has been, shall we say, spotty at best. Apple will kill this thing easily by releasing an iPhone, rip out the phone, rip out the flash, add in 30gb-80gb hd, for something like $250 (the iPhone cost of manufacturing is currently estimated at $300, so Apple makes $300 off of each one). Apple is also likely to release a flash nano version, and an iPhone nano to go after the RAZR market.
Well, I have half a tera-byte worth of music on my server (I ripped my entire CD collection and manage all my music via linux and my hifi over a network) and have never had a problem to manage or organzize the music that goes onto my little 30 gigs mp3 player.
There's nothing easier than to plug my little iRiver into my Windows PC and a little harddrive appears that all my manually selected files (or album-folders) can be copied to. Copying is at least quicker since it doesn't have to run through a program and organizing starts (IMO) on the server, so finding the music I want isn't a big deal either.
Best thing is: Even my little iRiver can read into as many folders as you want, so basically, finding the music on the player isn't a problem either, if you copy them somewhat transparent and in some hierarchy.
And then you get much better sound-quality, a nicer display, it can read all formats from mp3 to OGG and others without a hassle. The only thing it doesn't have, is the nice stylish shell and size of an iPod and perhaps the image of having a geeky mp3 player rather than something that's "in". I really could care less.
iTunes gets the job done, but compared to the benefit of not having to use any software at all beats it. It's the same reason why I would never buy a Sony product either: SonicStage is a bloddy pain to use and their policy on DRM ensures I won't even consider them in the future.
Needs and priorities are different though, so I guess to each their own. Just never understood the praise around the iPods and iTunes beyond anyone that simply doesn't know "better".
Blazkowicz
Legend
itunes is tied to quicktime nowadays, I don't want to deal with anything that forces me to have quicktime or realplayer installed on my PC. Imagine if digital cameras, scanners, printers etc. could be only used if you install the associated tray craplets you find by default on Acer, Dell and other big OEM.
I did not fairly try itunes maybe but saw it was fairly bloated and slow, which I don't like. I prefer media players that load instantly, and whatever the specs of the particular PC. such as winamp with 2.x interface, foobar and media player classic, for instance
I did not fairly try itunes maybe but saw it was fairly bloated and slow, which I don't like. I prefer media players that load instantly, and whatever the specs of the particular PC. such as winamp with 2.x interface, foobar and media player classic, for instance
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.
Legend
New Ipods are here.
Better screen on the Nano, increased battery life and disc capacity on the Ipod Classic, and a Wifi/Safari/Iphone interface/bigger screen for the new Ipod Touch.
Although the Touch has the nice GUI touch interface and WiFi, the serious listener will go for the much higher capacity Classic just because it can carry so much more data and go so much longer between battery charges. For movies, the Touch has a bigger screen, but I don't think the 8/16 GB is enough compared to the 80/160 Classic.
Better screen on the Nano, increased battery life and disc capacity on the Ipod Classic, and a Wifi/Safari/Iphone interface/bigger screen for the new Ipod Touch.
Although the Touch has the nice GUI touch interface and WiFi, the serious listener will go for the much higher capacity Classic just because it can carry so much more data and go so much longer between battery charges. For movies, the Touch has a bigger screen, but I don't think the 8/16 GB is enough compared to the 80/160 Classic.
I was reading about the Touch earlier today, but seeing it makes me really excited for it. Unfortunately I won't be buying one anytime soon until they've either reached or exceeded the capacity of my 60 gb iPod. It's a lot of flair, though. iPhone buyers must be tearing their hair out. Virtually everything that made the iPhone glamorous is now available on something more practical for those secure with their current cell phone.
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.
Legend
Yeah, the Touch gives you lots of nice geeky stuff to play with, but if you're more interested in playing media/music, the Touch gives you lots of stuff that's not core for that function with only 16GB of storage and a front end that will drain your battery fast. The bigger screen is the only plus for media playback (if you watch movies).
In contrast, the Classic gives a big boost to battery life and storage capacity, which improves the core functionality of playing back media. Even more so if you listen to music on the go rather than watch movies, so the Touch's bigger screen is moot.
Similar threads
- Deleted member 86764
- Games Industry
