# iPod shuffle is now only $49



## aryayush (Feb 19, 2008)

*iPod shuffle is now only $49
Posted on Feb. 19, ’08, 3:47 AM PT by Aayush Arya*

It wouldn’t be a Tuesday if Apple didn’t give us something to talk about. So, naturally, we have some news from Apple today too. The iPod shuffle, which was $79 just an hour ago, is now selling for just $49 on the Apple Store.

*www.macuser.com/2008/02/19/iPod%20shuffle%20%2449.jpg

The store homepage hasn’t yet been updated to reflect the change yet (which is very uncharacteristic for Apple) but if you click on the tiny little iPod, it leads you to the iPod shuffle page on the Store which gleefully displays the new price. Read more...

[Via MacUser]


OK, this is awesome news! You can have an iPod for less than Rs. 3,000! Crazy! 
___________________________________________________________________________________

*Apple announces the 2GB shuffle; coming soon
Posted Feb. 19, ’08, 5:58 AM PT by Aayush Arya*

*www.macuser.com/2008/02/19/iPod%20shuffle%202GB.jpg

Apple today announced that the iPod shuffle will soon be available with double the storage capacity of the current unit. The new shuffle will sell for $69, alongside the 1GB model which has been reduced to $49. All other specifications are exactly the same and the new shuffle will also be available in the (PRODUCT) RED edition.

45 weeks to go…

[Via MacUser]


----------



## New (Feb 19, 2008)

Thanks for the news...It's time to buy ipod*gigasmilies.googlepages.com/36.gif


----------



## drgrudge (Feb 19, 2008)

Less than Rs 2k only? Wow! Seems an iPhone and an iPod is beaconing me this summer.


----------



## aryayush (Feb 19, 2008)

That's 2K + tax, even in the U.S.. In India, expect it to be around Rs. 3,000 or more.


----------



## iMav (Feb 19, 2008)

well i think the update to the apple wasnt made coz they were adding the 2GB shuffle model for $69

source: _[ur the macboy get urself 1 ]_


----------



## gxsaurav (Feb 19, 2008)

Hmm...better late then never. Creative Zen Stone has been denting the Shuffle's market already


----------



## Voldy (Feb 19, 2008)

Awesome news!!


----------



## drgrudge (Feb 19, 2008)

aryayush said:


> That's 2K + tax, even in the U.S.. In India, expect it to be around Rs. 3,000 or more.


Rs 2k + taxes but not in all state taxes are there.  My MBP ($2k) taxes came to $170 but we shipped to Delaware where there's no tax.  If you know where to buy, you can avoid taxes in the USA too.


----------



## aryayush (Feb 19, 2008)

But now that there is a 2GB variant, why would you want to buy the 1GB?

I think it's stupid to still offer the 1GB version. Hardly anyone is gonna buy it when you can have the 2GB version for $20 more.


----------



## goobimama (Feb 19, 2008)

I would/will buy the 1GB version. I want the shuffle to be a simple player, sort of a one-playlist type of thing. 

Personally we (me+bro) have never filled up the 1G shuffle (bro's) to it's brim (512MB). Unfortunately, I don't have access to that anymore


----------



## Stuge (Feb 19, 2008)

I hope they very small screen and improves its SQ


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (Feb 19, 2008)

goobimama said:


> I would/will buy the 1GB version. I want the shuffle to be a simple player, sort of a one-playlist type of thing.
> 
> Personally we (me+bro) have never filled up the 1G shuffle (bro's) to it's brim (512MB). Unfortunately, I don't have access to that anymore


I've run out of space on my 2GB 1'st Gen Nano . Now i have to carefully select which songs to put at what time 

I'm gonna buy an 80 or 160 Gig iPod Classis soon .


----------



## goobimama (Feb 19, 2008)

Well my 8GB iPhone should take care of my music collection (5GB or so). It's just that since you can't really select/find a track, playlist, it becomes really difficult when there are 500 tracks and you need to find one. With the nano on the other hand you have the interface where you can select tracks. 

And having a a one line display makes no sense on the shuffle. You can only see the current track which is sort of useless since I already know all the tracks that I have.


----------



## aryayush (Feb 19, 2008)

Zeeshan Quireshi said:


> I've run out of space on my 2GB 1'st Gen Nano . Now i have to carefully select which songs to put at what time
> 
> I'm gonna buy an 80 or 160 Gig iPod Classis soon .


Why not the 32GB iPod touch? Price?


----------



## drgrudge (Feb 19, 2008)

aryayush said:


> But now that there is a 2GB variant, why would you want to buy the 1GB?
> 
> I think it's stupid to still offer the 1GB version. Hardly anyone is gonna buy it when you can have the 2GB version for $20 more.


Well, it's $30 difference. In all probability I'll get the 4 GB (8 GB if I can afford) iPhone, this is just for my brother.  


And Milind made an excellent point. You've a gb (say 150-200 songs) and I'll select the best tracks, but in the 2 GB you'll carry your collection around but it's difficult to select one particular song in a Shuffle.


----------



## goobimama (Feb 19, 2008)

> Well, it's $30 difference.


Uh.... 1GB: $50, 2GB: $70. That's a $20 difference.

And as for your dreams of buying a 4GB iPhone, it has been discontinued since September last year. It's only 8GB or 16GB now.


----------



## a_k_s_h_a_y (Feb 19, 2008)

what's the effective india price ...?? 

50$ + 20$ = 70$ only
sucks for 3k .. u get better ones only


US PRICE + Lots of $$ = INDIA Price


----------



## iMav (Feb 19, 2008)

its US price + 12.5% VAT


----------



## drgrudge (Feb 19, 2008)

goobimama said:


> Uh.... 1GB: $50, 2GB: $70. That's a $20 difference.
> 
> And as for your dreams of buying a 4GB iPhone, it has been discontinued since September last year. It's only 8GB or 16GB now.


Ahh... I meant 8 GB (16 GB if I can afford). If it's only $20 difference, then I'll go for the 2 GB version only.


----------



## aryayush (Feb 19, 2008)

iMav said:


> its US price + 12.5% VAT


Oh, I wish it was that simple. The MacBook Air's price in the States is $1,700 and in India, it retails for Rs. 91,500. That's more than Rs. 10,000 more than the US price + 12.5% tax. 



drgrudge said:


> it's difficult to select one particular song in a Shuffle


Oh, when will people get it! You're not supposed to select a particular track on a shuffle.

You're supposed to connect it to your computer once every fortnight, hit 'Autofill' in iTunes and then carry it along. Whenever you want to hear songs, you just hit Play. If you don't like some track (why won't you though; it's from your library), just skip to the next one. Increase and decrease the volume as required.

Generally, all you need on a shuffle is the Play/Pause button. And that, my dear friend, is the beauty of it.


----------



## iMav (Feb 19, 2008)

aryayush said:


> Oh, I wish it was that simple. The MacBook Air's price in the States is $1,700 and in India, it retails for Rs. 91,500. That's more than Rs. 10,000 more than the US price + 12.5% tax.


i had asked one of the re-sellers here as to why the price difference he said its normally 12.5% and some extra charges that make the price difference and at that time i asked with regards to the ipod which was costing at 14,500/- at duty free shops and was around 16k with the re-seller


----------



## Gigacore (Feb 19, 2008)

apple had plans to cut the price of iPhone and iPod Touch. So I think they wont


----------



## drgrudge (Feb 19, 2008)

Why are you forgetting that even in the USA, you need to pay in some states (It's highest in Texas, I'm told). 

So USA Price is 
$49 + Maybe tax (depending on your state) 

In India 
$49 + customs duty + 12.4% Tax/VAT (+ local dealer's margin) = Rs ~3k


*They don't the inclusive of all taxes price in the USA because the tax is not uniform. Even in the state where there are taxes, the amount varies.*


----------



## iMav (Feb 19, 2008)

^^ ah yes the customs who couldv forgotten them


----------



## goobimama (Feb 19, 2008)

1) It's $1800 for the Macbook Air. Stop falling that that 99 gimmick of those americans.
2) It is difficult to select tracks in the Shuffle. So 2GB would be a lot to manage, especially if you suddenly want to hear a particular track. 
3) Got to get these things from the States . Even UK is more expensive than India.


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (Feb 19, 2008)

Yeah 2GB is quite a lot of Place consideirng how many songs you can store on it .

Although not much if you use Apple Lossless Format for some songs then 2GB == 512 Drive with 128 kbps songs .

Shuffle is beter suited for the Lossless Part.

BTW: is there playlist support in shuffle , if yes then we can atleast remember the playlist n find a particular song.


----------



## goobimama (Feb 20, 2008)

Yeah there's playlist support (Shuffle 2G)


----------



## aryayush (Feb 20, 2008)

goobimama said:


> 1) It's $1800 for the Macbook Air. Stop falling that that 99 gimmick of those americans.


Oh, I don't. When I'd calculated it, I'd entered 1800 in the conversion widget. It was a typo here.


----------



## bigdaddy486 (Feb 20, 2008)

I already have one shuffle............

It has a music quality and sound you can't imagine for its size................. But price is a little high........


----------



## ThinkFree (Feb 20, 2008)

Thanks for the good news


----------



## ashok jain (Feb 20, 2008)

i prefer nano over shuffle.


----------



## aryayush (Feb 20, 2008)

bigdaddy486 said:


> But price is a little high.


Not anymore.


----------



## gowtham (Feb 21, 2008)

hey all cheout this ebay link, somone has a NEW & GENUINE 1GB shuffle for RS 799!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
*cgi.ebay.in/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=160209133881&ov=004XL
PLUS, HE BUNDLES A WALL CHARGER FOR FREE!!!!!!!
WTH?? can anyone clarify if this is true or jus another scam??????


----------



## ring_wraith (Feb 21, 2008)

Can anyone vouch for the shuffles music quality? Most people say it is really bad and the zen stone beats it by a mile.

Gowtham, that's a chinese rip-off of the shuffle.


----------



## gowtham (Feb 21, 2008)

^^ r u sure?? coz the person has posted that it is genuine and he even has the pics of an original shuffle!!
And, the music quality on the shuffle is very good(i heard my frnds shuffle). if ur not satisified, jus get urself better earphones!


----------



## kumarmohit (Feb 21, 2008)

Zeeshan Quireshi said:


> I've run out of space on my 2GB 1'st Gen Nano . Now i have to carefully select which songs to put at what time
> 
> I'm gonna buy an 80 or 160 Gig iPod Classis soon .


 I am running out of space on my 160Gb classic, Now where do I go?


----------



## aryayush (Feb 21, 2008)

gowtham said:


> hey all cheout this ebay link, somone has a NEW & GENUINE 1GB shuffle for RS 799!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> *cgi.ebay.in/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=160209133881&ov=004XL
> PLUS, HE BUNDLES A WALL CHARGER FOR FREE!!!!!!!
> WTH?? can anyone clarify if this is true or jus another scam??????





gowtham said:


> the person has posted that it is genuine and he even has the pics of an original shuffle!!


Dude, where does he say that it is a genuine Apple iPod shuffle?

He even goes so far as to state that "this is not an Apple product, this is the generic version".

The Apple iPod shuffle does not come in black anyway and there is no way someone can give you an original shuffle for that price.

I'm curious to know though. The poor seller could not have been more explicitly clear that it is not an Apple product, unless he posted a picture of a huge yellow board with red lettering on it that said "THIS IS A DUPLICATE PRODUCT." It is not a scam.

How did you manage to read that page and miss that it is duplicate? 



kumarmohit said:


> I am running out of space on my 160Gb classic, Now where do I go?


WTF! You're converted more than 100GB worth of videos for the iPod format?


----------



## ring_wraith (Feb 21, 2008)

kumarmohit said:


> I am running out of space on my 160Gb classic, Now where do I go?




Holy S@#! are you serious man??? How much Music do you have????


----------



## drgrudge (Feb 21, 2008)

I'm buying an Apple iPod Shuffle.  One of my friend is leaving Atlanta on Feb 28th and coming to Chennai. 

$49 + $3.92 (tax) = $52.92 (~Rs 2,100)


----------



## gxsaurav (Feb 21, 2008)

*Zen stone Plus with speakers* still kicks the arse of iPod shuffle. For $60 which is $10 more then iPod Shuffle, U get a speaker, ability to use this on any operating system, ability to use any software to sync & transfer with a screen......well...Zen looks like a better deal to me.


----------



## ring_wraith (Feb 21, 2008)

gx_saurav said:


> *Zen stone Plus with speakers* still kicks the arse of iPod shuffle. For $60 which is $10 more then iPod Shuffle, U get a speaker, ability to use this on any operating system, ability to use any software to sync & transfer with a screen......well...Zen looks like a better deal to me.




Don't forget better sound quality.


----------



## krazzy (Feb 21, 2008)

I'll prefer to get a Zen Stone instead. That way I can just copy-paste music with Windows Explorer. But Shuffle has a very useful clip though. Both have equally good sound quality.

The 2gb version is an overkill. 2gb of music is too much for a screenless player. Thats why Creative added a display for their 2gb Zen Stone.

We should also consider the price of a decent pair of earphones for these players. Both Creative and Apple bundle pathetic earphones with their players.


----------



## goobimama (Feb 21, 2008)

You forgot to mention: No clip. Low battery life. Bigger (if ever so slightly) than the Shuffle, No sync with iTunes (for those who manage with iTunes).



> Thats why Creative added a display for their 2gb Zen Stone.


There's no point in a 1 line display. It simply uses up battery life. You can't select the track you want to, you already know which track is playing, and stuff like battery life and such is already featured in the Shuffle. The only way a screen is useful is if you can see album art, select the track you want, manage playlists and such.

Though of course, for those who like the drag and drop explorer support, nothing like the Zen stone


----------



## krazzy (Feb 21, 2008)

Its not just a one line display. See for yourself. Also checkout its other feature like FM radio, voice recording, etc. which Shuffle lacks.


----------



## goobimama (Feb 21, 2008)

I meant 1 line for displaying the song. You can't display a list of songs in there can you? I admit the voice recording and FM radio (for those who use that) are compelling features, but I'd still stick with the shuffle.


----------



## drgrudge (Feb 21, 2008)

When someone wants to listen in Hostel or while traveling, 1 GB is enough. The songs in the iPod is hand picked and the 'best' songs you like to listen again and again. 

I myself a Radio gaga but what's the point if you're not a city where there's no FM? Ideally I'll to listen with speakers when I'm home..for which I've my Nokia 6030. 

Voice recording and line display (I know my fav. songs and it's not a 8 GB collection, I'm carrying around) is useless for me. 

Did I tell iPod looks beautiful? I've an iPod Nano already and I like the sound quality .. I like the way my iPod + iTunes is setup. It's iPod only for me.


----------



## aryayush (Feb 21, 2008)

I just saw the Stone. Apart from the other obvious disadvantages, it looks cheap and ugly. Sorry!

The shuffle is just too classy and now that it only costs $49, the Stone or any other competing player simply has no chance. Remember that, in the U.S., people buy things that cost under fifty bucks on a whim. Those shuffles are, quite literally, going to sell like potato chips.

You'll see.


----------



## kumarmohit (Feb 21, 2008)

aryayush said:


> WTF! You're converted more than 100GB worth of videos for the iPod format?





ring_wraith said:


> Holy S@#! are you serious man??? How much Music do you have????



And to the rest

Music is rather less (Tis mix stuff CDs, some legit mp3s of old songs from t series and  well some...)

The rest is movies, Here is a list, all converted from  DVDs or VCDs The main reason is quality:
Matrix (all 3)
James Bond (all 21) (The space killers)
LOTR (all 3)
Star Wars (all 6)
Fantastic Four 1,2
Spider Man (all 3)
HarryPotter 1-5
Terminator (1-3)

TV serials include:
Card Captor Sakura (Anime 70 episodes)
Noir (Anime 26 episodes)
Remington Steele Season 1 and 2 (around 23 episodes each)


In Hindi:
Style 
XCuse ME
Garam masala
hungama
and some more comedy movies


If I calculate the value of DVDs of the content it ends up being way more than iPod itself. And yep they are all original. Some of the things I have purchased. Most of these my niece in US buys them there, brings them here and I buy it from her here in India for 1/10 of the current India mkt price of the title.

O h iforgot

10 GB is claimed by only photos. Yep thse photos are just 350 MB when on computer. Sending them to iPod means that iTunes 'optimizes' images and bloats the size to 10 Gb (Grr)


----------



## iamtheone (Feb 21, 2008)

aryayush said:


> I just saw the Stone. Apart from the other obvious disadvantages, it looks cheap and ugly. Sorry!





yea sure it doesn't have an i on it....ryt???....man r u seriously so obstinate???...or u just pretend to be so....saurav din say anything bad bout the shuffle so why the **** did u start ranting??....IMO zen is a much better than ipod and just for 10$ more u can get 1 gb extra memory and speakers.....those who think 2gb are too much for music can use the extra gigs to store other data and use the zen as a thumb drive too


----------



## aryayush (Feb 21, 2008)

iamtheone said:


> saurav din say anything bad bout the shuffle so why the **** did u start ranting??


LOL! Neither the Stone is Saurav's brother and nor is the shuffle mine. These things don't have feelings and I couldn't care less even if Saurav abused the shuffle's parents. Why are you acting all weird about it, as if that Stone thingy is your girlfriend or something! 

As for why I don't like it, well, apart from the crappy looks, it won't synchronize with iTunes. Not it's fault, I know, but all my media is there since it is the best media management tool in the business and I need a player that plays nice with it.


----------



## infra_red_dude (Feb 22, 2008)

aryayush said:


> I just saw the Stone. Apart from the other obvious disadvantages, it looks cheap and ugly. Sorry!


Adding the phrase, 'IMO' would've been better here!

IMO the Zen looks smoother and definitely NOT cheap. But $49 for the shuffle would surely make it a hot seller! Use and throw kinda item in the US.


----------



## krazzy (Feb 22, 2008)

Mohit you have a fantastic collection there. If I had the dough right now, i'd have bought that iPod of yours for the same price that you bought it (or maybe even more) just for the movies in it.


----------



## aryayush (Feb 22, 2008)

infra_red_dude said:


> Adding the phrase, 'IMO' would've been better here!


Everything I post here is _my_ opinion unless I'm quoting someone or explicitly state otherwise.


----------



## infra_red_dude (Feb 22, 2008)

^^^ Haha... Thanks for the "disclaimer"!!


----------



## aryayush (Feb 22, 2008)

LOL! You're welcome.


----------



## gxsaurav (Feb 22, 2008)

krazyfrog. said:


> But Shuffle has a very useful clip though.


 
Zen stone skin with clip.



> You forgot to mention: No clip. Low battery life. Bigger (if ever so slightly) than the Shuffle, No sync with iTunes (for those who manage with iTunes


 
Let's say the same thing for shuffle...shell we, why only look at one side of mirror.

No screen, low battery life, no sync with WMP11, Amarok, <insert favorite media player here>



> You can't select the track you want to


 
You can switch to other track using the screen & buttons.



> I just saw the Stone. Apart from the other obvious disadvantages, it looks cheap and ugly. Sorry!


 
Ya, true words from an Apple Fanboy who is comparing a non-Apple device to Apple iPod. Obviously Zen stone sux in this case 



> As for why I don't like it, well, apart from the crappy looks, it won't synchronize with iTunes.


 
Let's talk about Shuffle here again. 

I don't like it, apart from lack of screen, speaker & voice recording it doesn't sync with WMP11/Amarok. Not it's fault, I know, but all my media is there since it is the best media management tool in the business and I need a player that plays nice with it. It can play songs purchased from iTunes only & no other online store. It needs to be used with iTunes only else it will not work properly.


----------



## aryayush (Feb 22, 2008)

Cut the crap. Everyone here except you knows that iPods play songs bought from anywhere and aren't tied to the iTunes Store in any way.


----------



## gxsaurav (Feb 22, 2008)

aryayush said:


> Cut the crap. Everyone here except you knows that iPods play songs bought from anywhere and aren't tied to the iTunes Store in any way.


 
Lolz....You call yourself a Mac Genius but don't know that Songs bought from other Music stores like nepstar etc which have Playforsure DRM don't play on iPod.

And a song purchased from iTunes music store with Fairplay doesn't play in any PMP other then iPod.

Non-DRM files play anywhere, but majority of songs on iTunes music store are still DRM based.


----------



## aryayush (Feb 22, 2008)

But the majority of songs outside the iTunes Store are DRM free and they all play on the iPod. You can strip the DRM off iTunes purchases as easily as you can tie your shoelaces (which, come to think of it, might not be all that easy for _you_).

In any case, DRM is not Apple's requirement, it's the music labels'.

And you're one to talk. Microsoft's own Zune does not play Microsoft's own PlaysForSure DRMed media. Ha! Ha! That's good customer service right there. 


Like I said, cut the crap.


----------



## gxsaurav (Feb 22, 2008)

aryayush said:


> But the majority of songs outside the iTunes Store are DRM free and they all play on the iPod. You can strip the DRM off iTunes purchases as easily as you can tie your shoelaces


 
Which is illegal, isn't it.?



> In any case, DRM is not Apple's requirement, it's the music labels'.


 
Ya, it's just that Apple used iTunes + DRM + iPod to gain the market.


----------



## aryayush (Feb 22, 2008)

gx_saurav said:


> Which is illegal, isn't it.?


(1) CDs are not illegal but are DRM free;
(2) eMusic, Amazon MP3, iTunes Plus and several other online stores sell DRM free music; and
(3) All the music you or I or almost everyone in India owns is DRM free and, yes, mostly illegal.

The point is – they all play on the iPod shuffle.

So yeah, cut the crap.



gx_saurav said:


> Ya, it's just that Apple used iTunes + DRM + iPod to gain the market.


Yeah, sure. Microsoft is using the exact same business model with the Zune. I don't see them gaining any ground.

The iPod caught on because:
(a) It has always had an edge in having the largest storage capacity;
(b) The whole iTunes + iPod combination works like a charm;
(c) It is brain dead simple to use;
(d) The user interface is the best in class;
(e) It has all the important features that actually matter and they all work, for a change;
(f) Excellent battery life;
(g) It's sexy and cool; and
(h) Excellent marketing.


----------



## kumarmohit (Feb 22, 2008)

Ok cut it you too, both of yoiu have points which are valid and invalid in Indian context.

GX: All ther DRM stores you mentioned do not work in India.
arya: in Indian contrext you should also leave out the iTMS part

^^^apart from that:
(a) agree
(b) + (c) Not exactly I have seen three people copy paste dat files from vcd expecting the iPod to play vidz. They had no idea dat has to be transcoded. One moron spent 350 bucks to get a *pirated full version* of Itunes to get it working.
(d) agree but sometimes i find it over simplistic.
(e) nope not exactly, I never got the notes thing working and do not get me started about images
(f) well for a music player, yes, for video needs, no
(g) please, cool is fine but sexy is a bit too much, i mean its a really lousy lay, compared to a hydrocarbon form of life
(h) where, in India, the only iPod advertising i saw is the mail Apple sent in my mailbox


----------



## ring_wraith (Feb 22, 2008)

Okay, I've heard weird stuff, but some of the stuff here tops it. 

No screen is a feaure??!! How?????? Having an airtight setup with iTunes is not a fllaw??? Oh come on ayush, admit some stuff once in a while. The only reason the shuffle sells over the creative zen is because with the shuffle you get _some _flaunt value, unlike the creative, whose MP3 players are relatively unknown in India. I went through hell and back trying, and failing, to find a leather cover for my Zen in Gandhi Bazaar. Every second idiot had iPod covers though.

So it's just brand-name and the niche that sells iPods. Honestly answer this, if Apple was a brand you had never heard of, and creative was what apple was today, would you still be rooting for the shuffle??


----------



## napster007 (Feb 22, 2008)

aryayush said:


> (a) It has always had an edge in having the largest storage capacity;



agree



> (b) The whole iTunes + iPod combination works like a charm;


evr heard of a company called "CREATIVE" its got its own store + drag and drop. it'll take a poop on ur "*iTunes + iPod combination*"



> (c) It is brain dead simple to use;



     again DUDE check out the brand called "CREATIVE" and then talk. (ZEN)



> (d) The user interface is the best in class;



     Bullshi* ...........how many damn times do i have to tell you.....go check out CREATIVE



> (f) Excellent battery life;



     again dude........Creative. 



> (h) Excellent marketing.



all the time ur were saying......"cut the crap". Well DUDE.....u just wrote a whole buch of crap


Let me give you a link to show you how ur ipod SUC*S in comparison to the creative zen vision m


----------



## goobimama (Feb 22, 2008)

No screen is not a feature by itself. But if by not having a screen the device can be made smaller and be given more battery life, then yes, it is a feature. Cause a display on such a device is totally useless. 

Airtight setup with iTunes, agreed, they should allow drag and drop support. But that does confuse users. Give people too much choice and they are hesitant to go forward. The iTunes interface is a killer one, and if one is sort of forced to use it, it turns out to be a beneficial in the end. As always, you can use third party iPod managers to do whatever it is you want to. 

Now as for brand names, let's just say Apple is today because of what it has done. So there's no question about "What if creative was apple of today" and all that. Cause if Creative was the Apple of today, it would only because it had produced some great products that became very popular with people.


----------



## aryayush (Feb 23, 2008)

ring_wraith said:


> No screen is a feaure??!! How??????


This is the problem with the Internet. Sometimes you just cannot get your point across effectively.

This is just like the previous scenario when I'd once said that "more features != better". Both statements sound stupid when taken at face value. _Of course_ more features are better and a screen is a great feature to have in a music player.

But not on players with the memory capacity and the size of the shuffle and the Stone. The shuffle is so well designed. You just plug it in, hit Autofill and then hit Play. Sync it once every fortnight and it will keep serving you random songs from your music collection.

Why do you need the a screen? Sure, it would be awesome if you could navigate through your collection like on the other iPods, but is is simply not possible on a screen that size. Look at the screen on the Stone. Is it really that useful? I don't think it is.

The lack of the screen on the shuffle _is_ a feature because it simplifies the whole experience and saves battery life.

It's not a feature _per se_. 



ring_wraith said:


> Having an airtight setup with iTunes is not a fllaw???


No, absolutely not. I, for one, am dying to buy an iPhone so that I can blissfully tie myself into the iPod+iTunes system. It's much better than all the other methods I've used so far to keep my media and devices in sync. I know a lot of people will disagree, but nothing can make me budge on this one. iTunes is a Godsend, absolutely the best media management application in the business. Right now, all my videos are being converted in anticipation for the iPhone, whenever it comes.

Say what you will, the iTunes+iPod combination rocks. 



ring_wraith said:


> Oh come on ayush, admit some stuff once in a while.


Check out these links:
Early Adopter Tax Resurfaces with the iPod Touch January Software Upgrade
Opinion column: Why doth thou ignore Asia, O mighty Apple?
AirPort Extreme users aren't too happy about Time Capsule

They are all authored by yours truly. If Apple does something that deserves critcism, I don't blindly vouch for it.

But I won't be "admitting" that their products are inferior just to show that I'm objective. If they deserve praise, I'm going to praise them. Label me a fanboy, burn my effigies, do whatever you want. 



ring_wraith said:


> Honestly answer this, if Apple was a brand you had never heard of, and creative was what apple was today, would you still be rooting for the shuffle??


If I hadn't even heard of Apple, how would I have even known the shuffle and why would I be in favour of it? I'm praising it because it a good product at a very competitive price. The fact that it is from Apple tips the scales in its favour, sure, but that is not the primary factor.

Having said that, my general opinion is that Apple products are very good, generally the best in the industry. This opinion has been formed after having used and seen a lot of their products. I don't think there is anything wrong with forming an opinion about someone/something based on your past experience dealing with them.


My name is spelt A*a*yush, by the way. 



napster007 said:


> agree
> 
> 
> evr heard of a company called "CREATIVE" its got its own store + drag and drop. it'll take a poop on ur "*iTunes + iPod combination*"
> ...


Best reply ever! LOL! 

I was asked why the shuffle is better than the Stone and I gave my reasons. Your counterpoint for each of my points was basically one word: "Creative".

Cool! Logic, reasoning and intelligence rolled into one hell of an extremely informative post. Congrats, man! You've pwned everyone out here. Like I said – best reply ever!


----------



## kalpik (Feb 23, 2008)

Last time i checked, the thread title said "iPod shuffle is now only $49", not "Apple vs Creative". I don't mind a healthy discussion on the iPod's feature set, but the all important word here is "healthy". So lets keep it clean people


----------



## aryayush (Feb 23, 2008)

Has kalpik always been in bold green?


----------



## napster007 (Feb 23, 2008)

goobimama said:


> But that does confuse users. Give people too much choice and they are hesitant to go forward.



PLAESE SHED SOME LIGHT ON ME AND GIVE AN *EXAMPLE*



goobimama said:


> The iTunes interface is a killer one



i was not talking about the *itunes* but the *ipod*



> Now as for brand names, let's just say Apple is today because of what it has done. So there's no question about "What if creative was apple of today" and all that. Cause if Creative was the Apple of today, it would only because it had produced some great products that became very popular with people.



1.)Apple invents.....i agree dude
2.)their hardware is top notch........i agree dude
but....don't even get me started on their software.

anyways let me tell you what creatie is doing....... Giving more features than the apple and not charging a *PREMIUM* for it or for its brand name.

so u tell me is it wrong?



aryayush said:


> Your counterpoint for each of my points was basically one word: "Creative".


this type of defence shows exactly y u have a brain in the size of a peanut and can't think beyond ur rotten apple!!



> Cool! Logic, reasoning and intelligence rolled into one hell of an extremely informative post.


THANK YOU!!


----------



## goobimama (Feb 23, 2008)

> i was not talking about the itunes but the ipod


iTunes goes with iPod dude. Haven't you heard?



> PLEASE SHED SOME LIGHT ON ME AND GIVE AN EXAMPLE


Geeks aside, most people prefer to be taught to use one way. They have no preffered way of doing things. So once you show them how easy it is to import music into iTunes, rip CDs, burn them, sync your iPod, it all becomes really simple. 
Now if you offer them choice, that is, you can either use Windows media player, or some Creative media player, or use Windows explorer, they will have to make that choice. And given their understanding of computers, that choice will not always been the most efficient one. It will be the most familiar one. Wouldnt you say using Windows Media Player to manage your entire music library is better than using Windows Explorer? You know, all those folders, and files and then do all that dragging and dropping? If you present a Zen Stone, Windows explorer is the first thing that the folks are going to hit. And that's not an efficient way. 

And Apple is anything, if at all, because of their software. 

@aayush: Kalpik has just been made a mod.


----------



## kalpik (Feb 23, 2008)

napster007 said:


> this type of defence shows exactly y u have a brain in the size of a peanut and can't think beyond ur rotten apple!!



That was uncalled-for.. Consider this as a warning.


----------



## gxsaurav (Feb 23, 2008)

Calm down kalpik, let them talk, it's not going below the belt yet.

I don't want to reply here anymore as what kalpik mentioned stands true. This isn't a creative or Apple thread. If it comes to that.....Creative got 10000 points to prove ipod naive in front of it.


----------



## napster007 (Feb 23, 2008)

^^out of curiosity.....don't you think all so called "non geeks" will know how to use the Windows Explorer better than the itunes??????


----------



## aryayush (Feb 23, 2008)

@kalpik,
Congratulations, man! 



gx_saurav said:


> Calm down kalpik, let them talk, it's not going below the belt yet.


Yeah, thy majesty gx_saurav hath spoken. All inferior beings like kalpik are to bow their heads and nod their willingness to listen to the great lord of wisdom.


----------



## kalpik (Feb 23, 2008)

^^ Assuming that "Congratulations" was directed at me, thanks


----------



## gxsaurav (Feb 23, 2008)

napster007 said:


> ^^out of curiosity.....don't you think all so called "non geeks" will know how to use the Windows Explorer better than the itunes??????


 
Nope, Mac users don't use file manager. Copy pasting is more confusing, then opening iTunes, finding the sync button, dragging & dropping songs & then syncing


----------



## aryayush (Feb 23, 2008)

Actually, it involves only one step.

Step 1: Plug in your iPod.

That's it. Everything else is automagically handled. Sounds darned simple to me.


----------



## goobimama (Feb 23, 2008)

napster007 said:


> ^^out of curiosity.....don't you think all so called "non geeks" will know how to use the Windows Explorer better than the itunes??????


Ah well here lies the debate. Which is a better way to manage your music? A dedicated music library or a File management utility? Just because Windows Explorer is more familiar, doesn't mean it is a better way to function. It that was the way that the iPod had to manage music, then it would in no way become as popular as it is today. It is only because of the flawless integration of iPod with iTunes that it has become the most popular device. 

This is not a debate as to whether iTunes is better than WMP or something else. I prefer iTunes, someone else might prefer WMP, but giving choice is not always a good thing, as in this case it will end up being some built in software that 'just about works'.


----------



## napster007 (Feb 23, 2008)

^^dude u have to agree here that
1.) the "non geeks" really don't know the way to manage a music library or even use it unless they are showed. 

question :   For a "non geek" how is itunes any more better than any other music lib be it WMP or anything else?


----------



## goobimama (Feb 23, 2008)

> question : For a "non geek" how is itunes any more better than any other music lib be it WMP or anything else?


Let's consider WMP and iTunes to be equal in all respects (although I personally think iTunes kicks WMP in the rear end, still, for this debate). 

At least in the US, Apple has an online store. For that the need to use their own software is a must cause of the way the store is. Right? Now why would Apple want to have half their iPod base get used to WMP, and then when they purchase a track they have to shift to using iTunes? Doesn't this create confusion? If they are used to using iTunes from the start, everything else falls into place. 

What if the iPod gets a new feature, but WMP can't support it due to MS lagging in development (and vice versa). What if there's a bug in WMP that causes some problems with the iPod but MS is refusing to fix it so that at least someone might buy a Zune? And many more. 

Keeping a one application philosophy clearly works best here. The iPod knows iTunes and vice versa. 

Now you might say India doesn't have an iTunes store. So what? The iPod has already proven to be working with iTunes. The software is tightly integrated, and is dead simple (especially for Indian non-techie users).


----------



## aryayush (Feb 23, 2008)

Could some moderator please change the poll to include the five colours – Gray, Blue, Green, Purple and Red?

I submitted it by mistake before I'd typed in all the options.

Thanks in advance!


----------



## kalpik (Feb 23, 2008)

Done


----------



## kumarmohit (Feb 23, 2008)

Hey congrats Kalpik, good to c u in green.

Anyway back to the topic.

Guyz you would have to accept one thing. There is no perfect PMP (even cellphone) in the market. The reason - simple, the moment they take out the perfect gadget they would not be able to sell other stuff.

Take my iPod for example, Apple could have easily ported something like VLC to make it possible to play any possible format (or most of them). No, they do not do it, reason is simple. no one would bother about their codec, resulting in declining sales of QTPro.  The thing is it is all a chain af marketing and we are burning our time defending those moves by companies which 1 lousy and 2 plain uncompetetive.


----------



## preshit.net (Feb 23, 2008)

Debates aside, syncing the iPod is as simple as plugging it in, and waiting. It syncs almost instantaneously.
I'm not sure how this is considered harder than copy-pasting tracks ?
Ofcourse, having a copy-paste interface would be great, but syncing is really easy for those lazy asses who just want to enjoy their music.


----------



## aryayush (Feb 23, 2008)

Why do you guys keep saying that? Why would having a copy-paste interface be great?


----------



## sakumar79 (Feb 23, 2008)

Not owning an iPod, so asking out of curiosity, 
1. If you have a 2 GB collection of songs, and you try to sync a 1GB Shuffle, what is synced? Do you not have to choose the files?
2. If your friend brings his iPod over, is syncing automatic or can you cancel it?

Arun


----------



## napster007 (Feb 23, 2008)

goobimama said:


> although I personally think iTunes kicks WMP in the rear end, still, for this debate



although i'm not aware of the full features of the itunes... the interface of WMP is far better than itunes. 


[qoute]At least in the US, Apple has an online store.[/quote]

wake up!! this is india



> What if the iPod gets a new feature, but WMP can't support it



Why the hell do you guys think that the whole world owns the ipod!!!



> due to MS lagging in development (and vice versa)



really man!!! well atleast MS can copy files b/w drives....  i mean what kinda development is that? right?



> *What if* there's a bug in WMP



really man!!! ur best defence is "what if"?? i may ask the same question WHAT IF ITUNES HAS A BUG????????????????????????



> Keeping a one application philosophy clearly works best here.



That is if the whole world had on the ipod!!



> Now you might say India doesn't have an iTunes store. So what? The iPod has already proven to be working with iTunes.



The store and the ipod working on itunes have nothing to do with each other.the fact that the store is not in india is just a feature which is faded.


----------



## gxsaurav (Feb 23, 2008)

> The iPod caught on because:
> (a) It has always had an edge in having the largest storage capacity;
> (b) The whole iTunes + iPod combination works like a charm;
> (c) It is brain dead simple to use;
> ...


 
a) No, Creative Zen etc always had more storage then iPods.

b) Ever tried WMP11 with any mp3 player out there? It works no matter which mp3 player u got be it the cheap chienese ones, Creative Zen Stone or Even Nokia 5700/SE K850i. The combination of any such mp3 player with WMP11 works like a charm. Just connect the mp3 player, start WMP, go to sync tab & drag & drop whatever u want to sync. If u r connected to net then WMP11 will download hardware information automatically & sync/convert songs as required. It's just a matter of drag & drop in WMP11

C) So is WMP11 + Any mp3 player or Winamp + any mp3 player

d) Subjective, I find iTunes's UI quite wrong & bad.

5) Tell me a feature in WMP11 which doesn't work

6) Battery life & Sexy & cool....yup.

7) That's the only thing Apple does.



> You just plug it in, hit Autofill and then hit Play.


 
Same happens with K850i/Nokia 5700/ Zen Stone/ Sandisk Sansa/...etc etc



> Geeks aside, most people prefer to be taught to use one way. They have no preffered way of doing things. So once you show them how easy it is to import music into iTunes, rip CDs, burn them, sync your iPod, it all becomes really simple


 
Isn't that easily possible in WMP11 too


----------



## napster007 (Feb 23, 2008)

^+1


----------



## aryayush (Feb 23, 2008)

sakumar79 said:


> Not owning an iPod, so asking out of curiosity,
> 1. If you have a 2 GB collection of songs, and you try to sync a 1GB Shuffle, what is synced? Do you not have to choose the files?


When you plug in a shuffle (but not the other iPods), a new button appears in iTunes labeled 'Autofill'. Just hit it and it randomly fills your shuffle up to the maximum capacity from your iTunes library.

This is optional, of course. You can also choose to go the drag and drop way. 



sakumar79 said:


> 2. If your friend brings his iPod over, is syncing automatic or can you cancel it?


The syncing happens automatically only if you configure it that way. So, if you own an iPod, you can have it configured to sync automatically whenever you connect it. But when a friend comes over and plugs in his iPod, you'll have to sync manually.

In any case, the process of syncing can be interrupted anytime you want.


----------



## ring_wraith (Feb 23, 2008)

Ok, after a lot of intraspection, I am actually convinced that you are indeed right aayush. 

I have to hand it to you, it really does not make sense to have a screen on a player the size of the shuffle, and creative is stupid for having done so. On the surface, the shuffle looks easy to use, friendly and warm, while the stone looks like just that, a glorified stone. The shuffle's clip is another genius idea, i won't even bother arguing there. Also, the one thing that really would sell the shuffle for me would be durability. I know i can toss it around, have it fall down a few times, put it in my pocket with my pins (No i don't really carry pins around) and still have not a scratch on it. I have to admit, if I had to buy a secondary MP3 player, it would be the shuffle. 

But I stand by what I said about iTunes. It is too airtight for it's own good. Also, I don't agree with you on the iPod interface. It's not simple, it's simplistic. There aren't enough features to cramp up the UI. The Nokia 1100's interface is dead simple, but only because it doesn't do much.

But one thing has always pissed me off about iPods. The sound quality is nowhere close to the best. To be completely honest, the only reason I chose my Creative Zen over the nano is because the SQ is significantly better. Otherwise, i would have bought the nano in a heart beat.


----------



## Head Banger (Feb 23, 2008)

if the sq is same old $hit,then this is not my cup of tea.Screw coolness factor and interface.Zen and most cellphones deliver awesome sonic experience.


----------



## ring_wraith (Feb 23, 2008)

^^ my point exactly.


----------



## goobimama (Feb 23, 2008)

> Why the hell do you guys think that the whole world owns the ipod!!!


Aside for the market share, I'm not really talking about the whole world owning an iPod. I'm talking about all those who own iPods. So if Apple wants to implement a feature into their iPods, WMP will not support it. *So Apple makes their own software. *



> really man!!! well atleast MS can copy files b/w drives....  i mean what kinda development is that? right?


Not really sure what you mean by copy files between drives, cause macs can do that. And note that I mentioned Vice versa. Say there's an awesome feature in WMP that has also been implemented in the Zune. iPod users would want that as well but since Apple has lagged in development, the users are left in the lurch leaving a bitter after taste. *So Apple makes their own software.*



> really man!!! ur best defence is "what if"?? i may ask the same question WHAT IF ITUNES HAS A BUG????????????????????????


What if iTunes has a bug that doesn't go well with the iPod? Apple will quickly fix it of course cause they are obliged to. MS on the other hand is no in any way obliged to fix a bug. *So Apple makes their own software.

*


> That is if the whole world had on the ipod!!


Please don't play stupid. I meant one application for the iPod. I didn't mean every music player user out there should use iTunes for their players (and it's not possible in any case).


----------



## gxsaurav (Feb 23, 2008)

goobimama said:


> So if Apple wants to implement a feature into their iPods, WMP will not support it. *So Apple makes their own software. *




*I hope u know that u can even use WMP11 to sync non-DRM mp3 & mp4 with iPod with some additional plugins available.*



> MS on the other hand is no in any way obliged to fix a bug.


 

Lolz...I hope u know MS has the best after market supprt,


----------



## napster007 (Feb 23, 2008)

goobimama said:


> Please don't play stupid.



you make me laugh



> I meant one application for the iPod. I didn't mean every music player user out there should use iTunes for their players



well if that happened .......it would suck so bad


----------



## aryayush (Feb 23, 2008)

ring_wraith said:


> Ok, after a lot of intraspection, I am actually convinced that you are indeed right aayush.
> 
> I have to hand it to you, it really does not make sense to have a screen on a player the size of the shuffle, and creative is stupid for having done so. On the surface, the shuffle looks easy to use, friendly and warm, while the stone looks like just that, a glorified stone. The shuffle's clip is another genius idea, i won't even bother arguing there. Also, the one thing that really would sell the shuffle for me would be durability. I know i can toss it around, have it fall down a few times, put it in my pocket with my pins (No i don't really carry pins around) and still have not a scratch on it. I have to admit, if I had to buy a secondary MP3 player, it would be the shuffle.


Thanks for acknowledging that! It's good to know that there are some people around here who actually read what others are posting, understand English and, when they change their minds about something, are willing to acknowledge it publicly. The other ongoing conversation between goobimama and those two dullards really makes one want to tear one's hair off. This response offers some respite. 



ring_wraith said:


> But I stand by what I said about iTunes. It is too airtight for it's own good.


It is. There is no doubt about that. The point is that some people find that to be a positive quality, while others don't, much in the same vein as I love the integration between Mac OS X and Macs and you or someone else might say it is too restrictive and monopolistic. Opinions are bound to differ. What matters is that you should be able to find a common ground even while you hold conflicting opinions.  



ring_wraith said:


> Also, I don't agree with you on the iPod interface. It's not simple, it's simplistic. There aren't enough features to cramp up the UI. The Nokia 1100's interface is dead simple, but only because it doesn't do much.


But if you want your phone to be just that, a phone, it is perfect, isn't it? I mean, as close to perfection as Nokia can get anyway.

Similarly, the iPod is meant to play your media and it does that well. I, for one, am not a big fan of Apple's decision to include all those other calendars and notes and what not on the device. It has a simple interface and it allows you to play your media without any hassles. Best of all, it has the clickwheel and, in case of the iPod touch, the multi-touch screen. IMHO, iPods have the best user interface among personal media players.

In fact, all Apple products have the best user interfaces compared to their peers.



ring_wraith said:


> But one thing has always pissed me off about iPods. The sound quality is nowhere close to the best. To be completely honest, the only reason I chose my Creative Zen over the nano is because the SQ is significantly better. Otherwise, i would have bought the nano in a heart beat.


I won't comment on that because:
(1) I don't and have never owned an iPod;
(2) I cannot discern between good and bad audio quality unless there's a major difference and I'm sure that, even if the iPod has poorer audio quality, it's not that major; and
(3) Most iPod owners and reviewers I know have always been very appreciative of the sound quality, but it is a subjective issue, so there's no point banking on other people's opinions.


----------



## krazzy (Feb 23, 2008)

I don't like the fact that Apple restricts their iPod users to use iTunes only. Other manufacturers give the option of using their own software (which they provide with the player on a CD unlike Apple which forces people to download it from their site), use some other software like WMP or Winamp or use Windows Explorer. And I don't agree with goobi that choices would confuse a noob. Anybody who can use a pc will be able to use the windows explorer. In that case filling up the player would be just as easy as filling up your pen drive, which IMO easier than downloading an app from the net, starting it, update your library in it and then syncing your player with it. 

Also for Windows users iTunes is only used for their iPods. I'm sure no Windows user uses iTunes to play their music. So you end up having two players, one for playing music and one for your iPod. So the iTunes just sits there using space until you connect your iPod to it. Plus using iTunes on Windows isn't very nice too as it takes ages to start and close. This isn't the situation on Macs and I agree that using the iTunes+iPod combo would work marvellously on Macs.

Aayush said something about Apple marketing. Well to be honest I haven't seen a single ad for Apple products all my life. And thats all 21 years of it.

About the user friendliness, I agree with ring_wraith. Apple have stripped iPod of so many important features (which are standard among its competitors) that what is left can be managed with ones eyes closed. I don't think it is right in calling an interface with so little features user friendly. If Apple had put all the features that its competitors have and still managed to make the player user friendly, then I'd respected them. If you pick up a Creative Zen, you'll see that its interface is well designed and easy to use but the player still has all the features. Now thats what I like.

One weird thing is Apple puts all stupid things like calendar and notes on the iPod (which actually deviates from their ideology of staying focused on the prime function i.e. playing music) but they ignore music related features like FM radio, manual equalisers, etc. Strange.


----------



## aryayush (Feb 23, 2008)

krazyfrog. said:


> Other manufacturers give the option of using their own software (which they provide with the player on a CD unlike Apple which forces people to download it from their site)


Keeps the packaging trim and is more environment friendly. In this day and age of cheap and all pervasive high speed broadband access, that's hardly an issue. If anything, it's better.



krazyfrog. said:


> Anybody who can use a pc will be able to use the windows explorer. In that case filling up the player would be just as easy as filling up your pen drive, which IMO easier than downloading an app from the net, starting it, update your library in it and then syncing your player with it.


Yes, but using the Windows Explorer is absolutely the worst way to manage your music. Suppose you have five thousand songs in your library and you copy them all onto your music player. It takes several hours and it's done. Great. No iTunes required, simply copy-paste. You're very happy.

One month from now, you want to update your music player but you realise that you've deleted several songs from your player that you want again and you've added or deleted several songs from your computer too and basically, you want your music player to have all the same songs as your computer.

What do you do now, dude? Sort out all the different songs and copy them over and delete all the ones that you've deleted from your computer? It can take ages and can be very frustrating, specially given the fact that since you don't use any media management application, your collection is probably full of songs named "Track 01" and "Track 02", etc. and don't have the proper ID3 tags.

Or you'll just have to empty the whole player and copy the whole collection again, which again takes several hours. And what if those songs are spread all over the drive?

You see what I'm getting at? You see how a mediator like iTunes helps?

Now you will say that Apple should make it optional, like all the other also rans in the media player market. No, they shouldn't. I don't know how many great quotes I've read which all basically say that people don't really know what's best for them. When given a choice between the better and the easy, most people would choose the easy and in this case, the explorer method looks easy on the surface, so most people would choose that and keep suffering every time they want to change the songs on the device. They would never bother with ID3 tagging unless you force them to use an application that makes ID3 tagging easy and obvious. For example, all my songs have artwork associated with them, only because iTunes has Cover Flow. Why would I bother with it if I didn't have any incentive to?

Another example would by how your parents force you to do so many things in your life that you don't want to but are for your own benefit.

iTunes is what makes the whole iPod universe tick. The fact that it is all organised and controlled by one company, a company that excels at designing usable user interfaces, is what makes it the best in the industry. 



krazyfrog. said:


> I'm sure no Windows user uses iTunes to play their music.


LOL! Are you sure you don't want to take that back? You actually think that no one uses iTunes to play music? LOL! Any proofs to back that ludicrous statement?



krazyfrog. said:


> Aayush said something about Apple marketing. Well to be honest I haven't seen a single ad for Apple products all my life. And thats all 21 years of it.


I was talking about their marketing in general, i.e. the countries that they do advertise in, not specifically about India. It was one of the reasons for why the iPod is successful globally.



krazyfrog. said:


> One weird thing is Apple puts all stupid things like calendar and notes on the iPod (which actually deviates from their ideology of staying focused on the prime function i.e. playing music) but they ignore music related features like FM radio, manual equalisers, etc. Strange.


I agree. I don't care about radios and eqalisers, but I would rather not have he calendars and notes on an iPod, the iPod touch being the only exception.


Let me know if the iTunes explanation made some sense to you.


----------



## gxsaurav (Feb 23, 2008)

aryayush said:


> Suppose you have five thousand songs in your library and you copy them all onto your music player. It takes several hours and it's done. Great. No iTunes required, simply copy-paste. You're very happy.
> 
> One month from now, you want to update your music player but you realise that you've deleted several songs from your player that you want again and you've added or deleted several songs from your computer too and basically, you want your music player to have all the same songs as your computer.
> 
> ...


 
Winamp, WMP11, J River media center, Amarok all do it too. iTunes isn't the only one which can do this.



> For example, all my songs have artwork associated with them, only because iTunes has Cover Flow. Why would I bother with it if I didn't have any incentive to?


 
WMP11 has no cover flow, still all my songs are 100% tagged. What's your point here, can only iTunes tag properly ???/


----------



## krazzy (Feb 23, 2008)

I completely understood what you were saying. But thing is, I usually don't transfer music the way you explained. If I had a player, i'd first transfer all the songs I have (if it can hold them all). Then later on if a new song comes, i'd just connect the player again and copy the song again. If I had to remove a song, I'll delete. If I want it back i'll copy it back again. I don't prefer to maintain a library or sync the player with it or anything. I just prefer simple copy-paste. Thats it.

About iTunes in Windows, then i'm sure you'll find very few people here who actually use iTunes for music playback. A windows user mostly has iTunes on his pc only because he has an iPod. For playback people mostly prefer Winamp, WMP, etc. You can have a poll if you like. For playback on a Windows pc I find Winamp to be miles better than the Windows version of iTunes.


----------



## ring_wraith (Feb 24, 2008)

> I won't comment on that because:
> (1) I don't and have never owned an iPod;
> (2) I cannot discern between good and bad audio quality unless there's a major difference and I'm sure that, even if the iPod has poorer audio quality, it's not that major; and
> (3) Most iPod owners and reviewers I know have always been very appreciative of the sound quality, but it is a subjective issue, so there's no point banking on other people's opinions.



It feels kind of nice to see the fanboyism ecking away!  

Agreed SQ is purely subjective, but I do have rather sensitive ears, and the iPod's SQ is muddy and lacks detail, which is not really subjective and is a definite negative.


----------



## aryayush (Feb 24, 2008)

ring_wraith said:


> It feels kind of nice to see the fanboyism ecking away!


Well, it wasn't ever there in the first place. If you ask me the same questions, I'll give the same answers that I used to a year ago. If you ask me which one is the best operating system, I'll still say that it is Mac OS X and by a margin as wide as the river Nile. Apple still makes the best products in the industry. You will still say that those are fanboyish opinions, no matter how logical my justifications are. Nothing has changed; it's just that we're having a peaceful conversation today as opposed to the heated exchanges that generally happen around these parts. 

And for what it's worth, there's no such word as "ecking". 



krazyfrog. said:


> About iTunes in Windows, then i'm sure you'll find *very few* people here who actually use iTunes for music playback. A windows user *mostly* has iTunes on his pc only because he has an iPod. For playback people *mostly* prefer Winamp, WMP, etc.


Now you're talking sense. Compare this to your previous statements:





krazyfrog. said:


> Also for Windows users iTunes is *only* used for their iPods. I'm sure *no Windows user uses iTunes* to play their music.


You see the difference?


----------



## goobimama (Feb 24, 2008)

> I hope u know that u can even use WMP11 to sync non-DRM mp3 & mp4 with iPod with some additional plugins available.


You can also use third party iPod softwares like Senuti, Yamipod and whatnot. So why the cribbing?



> Lolz...I hope u know MS has the best after market supprt,


Sure it has. But why would MS want to fix a bug relating to the iPod? That bug might not be affecting Zune users in the least. (All these are hypothetical scenarios of course)


> WMP11 has no cover flow, still all my songs are 100% tagged. What's your point here, can only iTunes tag properly ???


I think his point is that you need a good media management application to keep your library organised. WMP could be a good management app. Winamp could be a good management app. But Apple has chosen iTunes as their mangement app.


----------



## aryayush (Feb 24, 2008)

Exactly.



gx_saurav said:


> WMP11 has no cover flow, still all my songs are 100% tagged.


They may be but I credited my having the artwork for each album to Cover Flow in iTunes. I can bet you thousand bucks right here that you don't have the artwork for all your albums. Prove it and the money is yours.

The point being that people only take the effort to do something when they're offered an incentive to do so. Have iTunes and the iPod/iPhone not had Cover Flow, most people in the world would never have bothered with the artwork.


----------



## napster007 (Feb 24, 2008)

^^y do u want to loose 1k??


----------



## gxsaurav (Feb 24, 2008)

aryayush said:


> I can bet you thousand bucks right here that you don't have the artwork for all your albums. Prove it and the money is yours.


 
Windows Media Player Library.

*img253.imageshack.us/img253/9069/coverartph2.th.jpg

Windows Media Center Library.

*img253.imageshack.us/img253/9348/wmcwe3.th.jpg

Oh & I m writing an article about WMC right now, something front row of Mac was ripped from. 

Yah...it's very bad to extort money from an Apple fanboy, which account do u require??? SBI or PnB or ICICI . It should be transfered by evening, I got a dinner date tonight 

What makes u think only iTunes can get the cover art automatically when connected online? WMP has this since WMP8 (2001). All you have to do is to right click on the song & Select "Get album info". My Library is all tagged & managed & this when I m a certified non-Audiophile.

The other day my friend bought his new SE K850i to my home to copy my songs as I have the most managed Library. I plugged the Phone via USB, started Media transfer mode in the phone & then WMP11. WMP Automatically gave me the option to sync with the phone, yes a freakin phone....I just dragged & dropped WMA files to the sync section & WMP automatically converted them & copied to the Phone will all tags & album art intact.

Tell me if iTunes can do anything other then being an iPod management app. Now don't say this is what it is made for, I don't want 5 media players for 5 devices. In Windows, WMP11 is all you need for anything related to your media management.

Apple has restricted ipod to itunes due to which they were able to market iTMS. How many users were using iPod before iTunes came for Windows arya??? Go read some history.



> Have iTunes and the iPod/iPhone not had Cover Flow, most people in the world would never have bothered with the artwork.


 
Means Cover art is requied only if u have Cover flow....what a gr8 twisted logic.



> ^^y do u want to loose 1k??


 
Because he is a Macboy.

Arya, I hope u remember the comparison of WMP11 vs iTunes in which u yourself accepted that WMP11 is better then iTunes


----------



## krazzy (Feb 24, 2008)

aryayush said:


> Now you're talking sense.


So atleast you agree with me that for most Windows users iTunes is an unnecessary extra that they've to put up with only because they've bought the iPod.


----------



## gxsaurav (Feb 24, 2008)

Yup, while in case of Mac, iTunes is a necessary evil as there is nothing as good as Winamp, Media JukeBox, J River media center on Mac.

Mac users r restricted to using mp3 & mp4 only becaue Apple wants them to. They cannot use FLAC/OGG cos it plays in VLC but VLC has no library management. WMA, again...no good media player. Windows is better option to manage media, cos you can manage any number of dive with any number of format. Doesn't matter which PMP U got, you can manage it's library with Windows easily using WMP, winamp or whatever.


----------



## aryayush (Feb 24, 2008)

krazyfrog. said:


> So atleast you agree with me that for most Windows users iTunes is an *unnecessary extra* that they've to put up with only because they've bought the iPod.


I agree that a lot of Windows users have to "put up" with it because from what I hear, it is quite slow on Windows.

However, it is a necessary and valuable addition, not an unnecessary extra. If it was as good on Windows as it is on Mac OS X (and it absolute _rocks_ on this side of the fence), there would be no reason to not use it.

@gx_saurav,
There are probably two Mac users in this world who own a media player that is not an iPod and I'm sure they've figured out ways to manage it.

Send me your bank account details via PM.


----------



## gxsaurav (Feb 24, 2008)

> However, it is a necessary and valuable addition, not an unnecessary extra.


 
Why???? We already have WMP11 as a gr8 media player & manager in Windows. iPod works fine with WMP11 too as far as library management is considered, just that iTunes music store doesn't work. WMA & Playforsure can also work in iPod, just that Apple disabled this in hardware, so yeah...Apple is restricting iTunes to iPod only & vice versa

Bank account Details sent, thanx for paying for my Date


----------



## krazzy (Feb 24, 2008)

No way! You really gonna pay him 1000 bucks?!


----------



## aryayush (Feb 24, 2008)

gx_saurav said:


> Why???? We already have WMP11 as a gr8 media player & manager in Windows. iPod works fine with WMP11 too as far as library management is considered, just that iTunes music store doesn't work.


Yeah, so use it. Apple isn't forcing iTunes down your throat. It's the best option. If you choose to use WMP11 instead, nothing's stopping you.



gx_saurav said:


> WMA & Playforsure can also work in iPod, just that Apple disabled this in hardware, so yeah...Apple is restricting iTunes to iPod only & vice versa


"Apple Lossless & FairPlay can also work in Zune, just that Microsoft disabled this in hardware, so yeah...Microsoft is restricting Zune to WMP11 only."

I've never seen a person more clueless about technology in general and DRM in particular (at least in this case) than you. Congratulations!



krazyfrog. said:


> No way! You really gonna pay him 1000 bucks?!


Well, if he expects me to and accepts it...


----------



## gxsaurav (Feb 24, 2008)

^^^^ Why not, I wouldn't mind Rs 1,000 won by a bet 

Check your PM Arya


----------



## goobimama (Feb 24, 2008)

I did the Windows "Get Album Info" thing. It checks out awright. And you don't need an iTunes account to do so. Still, the interface is way too cluttered for my liking.

It is much faster than iTunes on Windows though.


----------



## gxsaurav (Feb 24, 2008)

aryayush said:


> Yeah, so use it. Apple isn't forcing iTunes down your throat. It's the best option. If you choose to use WMP11 instead, nothing's stopping you.


 
The point is that WMP 11 is a better option.


> "Apple Lossless & FairPlay can also work in Zune, just that Microsoft disabled this in hardware, so yeah...Microsoft is restricting Zune to WMP11 only."


 
*Apple loseless, non-DRM works in Zune.* Just that if MS starts supporting Fairplay in Zune, Apple will sue them & neither Apple will give anyone else the license to play Fairplay content. Again, Apple's fault.

This just in, Arya has said he will transfer me the money by March 15. I m waiting....was expecting it to spend on my dinner date tonight


----------



## ring_wraith (Feb 24, 2008)

^^hmm... thought this was an iPod shuffle thread 

So to that effect, I need to buy a basic MP3 player for a complete techno-phobe. Obviously, the shuffle comes to mind. Any better option? Not that particluar about SQ or features, just simplicity.


----------



## gxsaurav (Feb 24, 2008)

Zen stone, Zen V etc


----------



## iamtheone (Feb 24, 2008)

hey saurav if arya pays u that money....don't forget ur fellow lkoyte brother


----------



## krazzy (Feb 24, 2008)

I should get some share too for helping to continue the discussion to the point where you said those things which got you the money.


----------



## gxsaurav (Feb 24, 2008)

iamtheone said:


> hey saurav if arya pays u that money....don't forget ur fellow lkoyte brother


 
Sure bhai....kabab parthe in Tunday classic in aminabad is sure fixed 

@ krazyfrog...

If I ask him for money on bets, then he will have to Pay me more then Rs 10,000. I have proved him wrong about Windows & Mac OS so many times....that I can even write a book


----------



## hahahari (Feb 24, 2008)

Hey guys if someone wants to checkout mp3 players use Mp3 Players Here


----------



## iMav (Feb 25, 2008)

what rubbish this topic is filled with; i was banned for the past week but i was following this thread coz arya & goobi made sure that even though i was banned my tiring days got refreshed 

@ani: now i understand the kind of fun u guys must have reading the discussions 

@arya: no offense but dude u dont own an ipod so please dont talk as if u designed the damn thing, makes u look a little less smarter (ur a reputed blogger with referneces from daring fireball live upto it, avoid making stupid statements and claims)


----------



## hullap (Feb 26, 2008)

krazyfrog. said:


> . A windows user mostly has iTunes on his pc only because he has an iPod.


wrong i own an ipod but use YAMIPOD.
iTunes SUX


----------



## napster007 (Feb 27, 2008)

@saurav : Superb man.... i really din't expect araya to pay up but.....it seems that mac users are turning trust worthy.


----------



## aryayush (Feb 27, 2008)

I, at least, never wasn't.


----------



## gxsaurav (Mar 15, 2008)

Well, one month is over. I asked arya to pay & he said he will pay me via paypal so I made an account on paypal too...but today he has refused to pay me the money lost in the bet he himself placed to me 

Oh! Well, I had a better idea, pay choto Rs 1,000 for my SMPS...but I bought it today myself from here.

*img174.imageshack.us/img174/8858/snag0000sq1.jpg


----------



## rosemolr (Mar 16, 2008)

i bought one apple ipod shuffle last week from imagine..


----------



## kumarmohit (Mar 16, 2008)

> Yeah, so use it. Apple* isn't forcing i*Tunes down your throat. It's the best option. If you choose to use WMP11 instead, nothing's stopping you.



Actually Apple is, in case yoiu have the 6G iPod classic like Me. Reason:
1 - No hardware documentation to make other solutions work
2 - A crazy new database encryption algorithm.

I am not left with any option but iTunes.

And my personal opinion is that the best tagging app on Windows is -- surprise surprise - RealPlayer.

Its one big piece of crap in every single way except that it is the best software I found if you want to add tags to your audio files.


----------



## goobimama (Mar 17, 2008)

Well in iPod's case you can't use any other media management software. It says so in the requirements of the iPod. There are of course those like Senuti and Yamipod, but they are far from perfect.

RealPlayer good for tagging? I found Tag&Rename to be quite good back in the days. Of course now I usually don't have any tagging issues since they are either ripped from CDs (CDDB) or the tags are already there....


----------



## kumarmohit (Mar 17, 2008)

^^^ On Windows
Man it allows to add hell lot of data.


----------



## krazzy (Mar 17, 2008)

Even Winamp is nice. It also allows adding lots of info in the tags, or it can automatically get it from the net and it even manages iPods.


----------



## napster007 (Mar 17, 2008)

gx_saurav said:


> Well, one month is over. I asked arya to pay & he said he will pay me via paypal so I made an account on paypal too...but today he has refused to pay me the money lost in the bet he himself placed to me
> 
> Oh! Well, I had a better idea, pay choto Rs 1,000 for my SMPS...but I bought it today myself from here.



what can i say about apple fanboy's??......they are just as must trustworthy as the rotten apple itself


----------

