Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew H.
Back in 2003 or 2004, when the iPod was just becoming the dominant mp3 player, there were dozens of posts to usenet newsgroups (which still had some residual utility at that time) arguing that some other mp3 player was better than the iPod because it had more features, such as line-in recording or an FM radio...as if you could determine the best player by listing all of their features and the one with the longest list was the best. Ignoring the fact that: (1) virtually no one wanting an mp3 player had any use for line-in recording; (2) FM radios on MP3 players were horrible (I had one on my old Nomad II); and (3) for most people, iTunes (at that time a much tighter program) was vastly superior to the drag-and-drop software solutions other mp3 manufacturers offered almost as an afterthought with their players. And of course this was of much more fundamental importance to the actual experience with the player than the specs hyped by the manufacturers.
So, yeah, I'm interested in specs. But I also know that they can be very misleading when it comes to the actual use of a device.
|
They were right. I never understood what was so special about the ipod. I never liked it as an mp3 player, and I never liked itunes - I think the interface sucks and the organization is terrible - it's terrible for anyone that knows what they are doing at all IMO.
The ONLY good ipod in my book was the ipod touch (which I did use my wife's hand me down for a year or so).