Quantcast
Subscribe to magazine
You are not logged in, click here to log in.
Up to Discussions in Portable Macs
35 Replies Last post: Jan 11, 2004 11:15 PM by SeaFox   Go to original post 1 2 3 Previous Next
Click to view BigFatDuck's profile Member
BigFatDuck
775 posts since
Sep 12, 2002
15. Jan 8, 2004 11:16 AM in response to: SeaFox
Re: Sony's iPod killer (next gen Minidisc)
sure if the disc is bad you can replace it, but apples to apples if the ipod breaks then the minidisc player breaks. i'm willing to bet iPod is sturdier and less likely to break having no moving parts. and it's just as easy to import your library to the new ipod as it is to pop in one of your existing minidiscs to the replacement player. this new minidisc is projected to be almost as expensive as an ipod, so the initial cost savings (buy your storage capacity later) isn't really there is it? the only reason i ever considered getting a minidisc player was because they were smaller than a cd player and didn't skip. with mp3 players (especially ipod with it's massive storage capacity and small size) i don't think i'll ever be interested in anything similar to minidisc again. i do appreciate the record function, but i think that apple could easily add that functionality to ipod. ipod makes it easy to manage your library. you add 1 song or 100 songs to your library in one day it's there on your ipod in less than a minute. i can't imagine going through my 15gig music library seperating all my songs into 1gig playlists and making sure i have every song accounted for. and then i got 5 more songs, what do i do now? put 5 songs on a new 1gig disc? try to find a disc with enough extra space for 5 songs on it? crap, the disc with that artist's songs is full.....

so my opinion is that they aren't worthless, but i honestly can't think of any reason to buy one unless it's significantly cheaper than an ipod. and another thing, how much do you think these 1gig discs are going to cost?? 15 gig library right off the bat that's 15 discs i'll have to buy in addition to the player. for that price i probably could have bought the 40 gig ipod and been straight for another few years!
Reply
Click to view itou's profile Member
itou
746 posts since
Sep 30, 2002
16. Jan 8, 2004 12:22 PM in response to: BigFatDuck
Re: Sony's iPod killer (next gen Minidisc)
In reply to:<hr />
i'm willing to bet iPod is sturdier and less likely to break having no moving parts.

<hr />


on the contrary.. the iPod is based on an internal HDD which ain't exactly tolerant to shocks.. only Flash memory devices have no moving parts.

In reply to:<hr />
this new minidisc is projected to be almost as expensive as an ipod, so the initial cost savings (buy your storage capacity later) isn't really there is it?

<hr />


imagine your internal HDD on the iPod is now defective and you have to buy another one. that will cost u a few hundred dollars. replacing a MD will cost $7. sounds appealing now, doesn't it?

In reply to:<hr />
i do appreciate the record function, but i think that apple could easily add that functionality to ipod.

<hr />


yes.. but at an extra cost. mind you, the MD does this built in.

In reply to:<hr />
pod makes it easy to manage your library. you add 1 song or 100 songs to your library in one day it's there on your ipod in less than a minute. i can't imagine going through my 15gig music library seperating all my songs into 1gig playlists and making sure i have every song accounted for.

<hr />


that all depends on which software you use. the NetMD software bundled with SONY NetMD's are actually quite good.

In reply to:<hr />
and another thing, how much do you think these 1gig discs are going to cost?? 15 gig library right off the bat that's 15 discs i'll have to buy in addition to the player.

<hr />


that's assuming of course, you load your 15GB iPod to its peak. Do you?

I don't know if this has been discussed or not, but I see the main benefit for the iPod is as a backup drive. But then again, I can easily just get an enclosure for that.

MD's are rock solid discs.... They're more durable than cassette tapes!! Dip it in water, step on it, drop it, toss it.... the media is still there. Now... do that with the iPod, let's hope you got AppleCare.
Reply
Click to view d00d's profile Macworld Editorial
d00d
12,136 posts since
Apr 24, 2001
17. Jan 8, 2004 12:38 PM in response to: itou
Re: Sony's iPod killer (next gen Minidisc)
howing are you taking about the media or the unit itself? Let's compare the failure of the hard drive to it's true equivalent on the MD. The laser head that reads the discs. Should that fail, you have the same exact problem. I'd say nearly all of the time, when a hard drive fails, it's not the platters, it's the moving parts. If you want to talk about the minidisc's themselves, we might as well start talking about the platters in the hard drive.

As for dropping the iPod in water, how about we try that same feat with the entire minidisc player?

Apples and oranges man.
Reply
Click to view SeaFox's profile Member
SeaFox
956 posts since
Apr 28, 2001
18. Jan 8, 2004 4:26 PM in response to: BigFatDuck
Re: Sony's iPod killer (next gen Minidisc)
In reply to:<hr />
sure if the disc is bad you can replace it, but apples to apples if the ipod breaks then the minidisc player breaks.

<hr />


True. Many Minidisc users have more than one player a nice one and a previous cheaper/older one they can use as a backup. I could buy a cheapo Ne-410 ($99) and play all the music I've already recorded onto Minidisc on it, as well as transfer more over computer. I just couldn't make NEW live recordings until I ponied up another $250 or whatever.

Could you buy a used 5GB on eBay and stick your 40 Gig library on it?

In reply to:<hr />
i'm willing to bet iPod is sturdier and less likely to break having no moving parts.

<hr />


Execpt that hard drive you mean? :rolleyes:

In reply to:<hr />
and it's just as easy to import your library to the new ipod as it is to pop in one of your existing minidiscs to the replacement player.

<hr />


See first rebuttal.

In reply to:<hr />
this new minidisc is projected to be almost as expensive as an ipod, so the initial cost savings (buy your storage capacity later) isn't really there is it?

<hr />


iPod: $299-$499, Hi-MD projected prices: $200-$400. Seems the minidisc player has a slightly lower starting price. So I can get 40 gigs of play+storage for as little as $480 ($200 player and $280 for Hi-MD blanks).That would be more than a 40 gig iPod. But you're not considering the types of player we're comparing.

The iPod is made to carry all you music all the time. Minidisc (NetMD that is) is made to work on a check in-out model like a flash based player. There are two reasons why this makes more sense than the iPod use method.

1) Nobody would want to listen to 40 gigs of music in one sitting and
2) even if you did, you couldn't. The iPod's battery only lasts 8hrs.

In reply to:<hr />
i do appreciate the record function, but i think that apple could easily add that functionality to ipod.

<hr />


They could but they haven't. Same as Sony didn't add uploading from Minidisc until now. One thing about the prices similarities you mentioned is that's going by Sony's prices. Sony may own the NetMD format, but they don't maintain sole use of it. Sharp and Aiwa are two other manufactures who make Minidisc players, and there are some el cheapo non-name brand companies (like Coby) who do as well.

In reply to:<hr />
and another thing, how much do you think these 1gig discs are going to cost??

<hr />


In my last post: $7. And it is backwards compatable with the existing (original capacity) $2 discs.
Reply
Click to view SeaFox's profile Member
SeaFox
956 posts since
Apr 28, 2001
19. Jan 8, 2004 4:49 PM in response to: yodaphile
Re: Sony's iPod killer (next gen Minidisc)
In reply to:<hr />
Sure, mini-disc has become popular and de rigur in certain geographies and professional situations, but it's far from the global standard like the media it initially tried to replace.


<hr />


Certainly. The consumer market can only stand format changes so close apart. Minidisc debuted a couple years after Compact Disc. CD had higher quality and was taking off and Tape was still firmly entrenched in the market then. So despite Minidiscs obvious usefulness as a replacement for the tape (ruggedness like a tape but digital sound quality like a CD), it didn't fly.

In reply to:<hr />
I can't say I totally understand why you're so defensive about the mini-disc, but your subject line labels Sony's new technology as an 'iPod killer'.

<hr />


Because that's who Sony is going to compete against with it. Old MD format beat flash-based players simply because of the capacity at the price. Buying just one minidisc more than the one included with the player makes it a better value than a Rio.

But when you take the advantages Minidisc has over the IPod, the file storage Windows users don't get with the iPod and Sony's new music service the pattern has "instead of an Apple iPod" all over it. The ease of use for Mac iPod users and the perks (plus the lack of Mac NetMD software) will make the iPod a bigger value for Mac users than Minidisc. But the comparison isn't so easy for over 90% of computer user out there.

In reply to:<hr />
Surely you can't believe that 1gb removable media will overwhelm the advantages and benefits of a 40gb pocket-size device.


<hr />


No, but built-in recording straight to native format on the removable media and ten times the battery life might.

The portability is what the players are all about. I appreciate not having to plug in my player every other day to keep it from going dead mid-jog. Of corse, if it did I can just buy a pack of AA batteries at any store. I wouldn't have to wait three hours for it to recharge, after I reach an electrical outlet or a computer.
Reply
Click to view BigFatDuck's profile Member
BigFatDuck
775 posts since
Sep 12, 2002
20. Jan 8, 2004 4:53 PM in response to: SeaFox
Re: Sony's iPod killer (next gen Minidisc)
lol. i don't need a back-up ipod, i've dropped it from the kitchen counter to the tile floor and it didn't miss a beat. do you have a spare tv in case yours breaks? computer? dvd player? even still, my original point stands, i can almost garauntee the ipod is sturdier than the minidisc player, even if it isn't 100% indestructable.

so your reasoning for thinking minidisc is better is that no one can listen to 40gig of music in one sitting (so therefore it's unnecessary), you can have a cheap backup when it breaks (whereas i don't worry about that with my ipod), and that it's roughly $20 cheaper for the minidisc player having the same 40gig storage capacity as the ipod. i'll have to take your word for it that these are positive points.

oh there is that recording feature. i did say i appreciate the record feature, but it isn't so good that i need to find a place to somehow neatly organize 40 minidiscs. and then of course there's that small little inconvenience of having to move and maintain your music collection on a bunch of seperate discs. :\ try listening to your entire music library on random with the minidisc. maybe next sony can come out with it's next cutting edge gadget, a 40 minidisc changer that fits neatly in your backpack.

again, i don't think minidisc is worthless. until ipod includes a recording feature there are still situations where i would find a minidisc player (especially the 1gig discs, this certainly isn't insignificant) useful. but it definately wouldn't replace my ipod or even be seriously considered as an alternative.

Reply
Click to view SeaFox's profile Member
SeaFox
956 posts since
Apr 28, 2001
21. Jan 8, 2004 5:01 PM in response to: d00d
Re: Sony's iPod killer (next gen Minidisc)
In reply to:<hr />
Let's compare the failure of the hard drive to it's true equivalent on the MD. The laser head that reads the discs. Should that fail, you have the same exact problem. I'd say nearly all of the time, when a hard drive fails, it's not the platters, it's the moving parts.

<hr />


Correct. But replacing a bad head on an MD unit would not cost as much as the entire player. The MD is repairable. And they don't fail the same ways. I've had a couple discs go bad. But the player has been fine. In the iPod, since the drive isn't swappable the media is part of the player. So if either goes south you're sunk.

I don't see how it matter whether the iPod's hard drive fails because of moving parts or the platters themselves. You can't fix the moving parts and keep the rest. It's a sealed unit so you have to throw out the whole drive either way.
Reply
Click to view SeaFox's profile Member
SeaFox
956 posts since
Apr 28, 2001
22. Jan 8, 2004 5:15 PM in response to: BigFatDuck
Re: Sony's iPod killer (next gen Minidisc)
In reply to:<hr />
i can almost garauntee the ipod is sturdier than the minidisc player, even if it isn't 100% indestructable.

<hr />


Do you have some stress test figures you base that opinion on?
High-end Miniidisc player have all metal cases.

I would assume the iPod had much better battery life since it only spins up once every eight minutes instead of constantly spinning like a mInidisc.

In reply to:<hr />
so your reasoning for thinking minidisc is better is that no one can listen to 40gig of music in one sitting (so therefore it's unnecessary),

<hr />


Not necessary, but convienant I agree. A convienence I can choose not to pay for if I wish. I can trade/loan discs with friends too without being deprived of my own music collection while they have it. Which would you rather have you friend lose accidently: a $2-7 disc or your $400 iPod. Yeah, you wouldn't loan out an item that expensive to begin with I know.

In reply to:<hr />
again, i don't think minidisc is worthless. until ipod includes a recording feature there are still situations where i would find a minidisc player (especially the 1gig discs, this certainly isn't insignificant) useful. but it definately wouldn't replace my ipod or even be seriously considered as an alternative.

<hr />


That's fine. I respect your opinion in this. I would consider an iPod if I could record with it and get at least 20hrs playback battery life with it.
Reply
Click to view Duke_Thomas's profile Member
Duke_Thomas
757 posts since
May 25, 2001
23. Jan 8, 2004 5:59 PM in response to: SeaFox
Re: Sony's iPod killer (next gen Minidisc)
This is really going on for too long...

In reply to:<hr />
I appreciate not having to plug in my player every other day to keep it from going dead mid-jog.

<hr />


Great. You trade plugging it in once every other day to the hassle of swapping discs every time you decide you want a track not on the current disc. Smart.

You can make a hundred posts in this thread shouting down everyone that disagrees with you. You can contrive a hundred situations NOT related to actually listening to music where the MD is the preferable solution to the iPod. You can respond to every advantage of the iPod saying "I don't want that, I don't need that!" (Incidentally, endlessly repeating that you don't want the iPod's advantages does not really help convince us that MD is better than an iPod -- we already know you don't want an iPod, because you're getting an MD player.) MDs will remain a relatively crummy way to listen to one's music collection, and the iPod will continue to outsell it.

The situation is very simple. In general, people care about simplicity, not flexibility. That's why the iPod remains the most sold and desirable music player while the dozens of vaunted "iPod killers" introduced over the years have slipped quietly into obscurity the week after they were announced. Can people take their MD players, plug them into their computers, and within a few seconds (without them having to do anything, mind you) walk out the door knowing that their entire music library is conveniently at their disposal? No? Then no one will care.
Reply
Click to view SeaFox's profile Member
SeaFox
956 posts since
Apr 28, 2001
24. Jan 8, 2004 9:00 PM in response to: Duke_Thomas
Re: Sony's iPod killer (next gen Minidisc)
In reply to:<hr />
You can make a hundred posts in this thread shouting down everyone that disagrees with you.

<hr />


I'm not "shouting down" anyone. What irks you is I have rebuttals for many arguements made.

In reply to:<hr />
You can contrive a hundred situations NOT related to actually listening to music where the MD is the preferable solution to the iPod.

<hr />


You mean like my mention of the poor battery life of an iPod? Yeah, that doesn't relate to playing music at all. Meanwhile, asserting the iPod is great because it functions as an external hard drive is totally relevant when I want to hear Led Zeppelin downtown.

In reply to:<hr />
Incidentally, endlessly repeating that you don't want the iPod's advantages does not really help convince us that MD is better than an iPod -- we already know you don't want an iPod,

<hr />


In case you haven't been reading this thread carefully (and you obviously haven't) this isn't an iPod vs. Minidisc thread (I think I stated that). I don't see the iPod as the perfect portable music player like many do, but I certainly dont think Minidisc is, either. Each has its strengths. It depends on what your use is. People who want ultimate ease of use will prefer the iPod, those who want maximum portable functionality will choose Minidisc or an iPod wannabe. My last posts states I would like an iPod, if it had a couple improvements. Both of which are ones many people want, even happy iPod owners. I have agreed with many ponts brought up against Minidisc.

Despite what howing says, I will state that Sony's NetMD software is horrible, and I'm annoyed at having to convert formats to get digital files onto my minidiscs in faster than real time. Many MD audiopahiles do Nero CD images that transfer with a seperate Sony app to avoid the NetMD DRM. Sony has taken a good step in making Hi-MD a data format that uses FAT. But Sony Music needs to let them take the last step and support playing MP3 files natively instead of trying to save their old business model with proprietary ATRAC3.

Zealots can ignore the shortcomings of the iPod but in the marketplace these are exactly the issues the iPods' competitors will use against it. I don't mean competitors with obvious flaws like Minidisc, I mean the competitors who are hard disk based, have all the computer-free flexibility of the Minidisc and cost less than the iPod to boot.

The iPod is physically more attractive, easier to use, and interfaces autmatically with a great MP3 player. But unless you buy lots and lots of music or download illegally, you wont be having to resync any digital player often. How your device looks is your own tastes and wont matter much when it's in your pocket. The usability is important but keep in mind the majority of computer users don't make their choices based on aesthetics and ease of use. But functionality and price.
Reply
Click to view Duke_Thomas's profile Member
Duke_Thomas
757 posts since
May 25, 2001
25. Jan 8, 2004 11:16 PM in response to: SeaFox
Re: Sony's iPod killer (next gen Minidisc)
What "irks" me is that you are hiding behind rather dull statements, while condemning all writing that addresses your only controversial point as invalid so far as the discussion is concerned.

In reply to:<hr />
In case you haven't been reading this thread carefully (and you obviously haven't) this isn't an iPod vs. Minidisc thread (I think I stated that). I don't see the iPod as the perfect portable music player like many do,but I certainly dont think Minidisc is, either. Each has its strengths.

<hr />


If you didn't want it to be iPod vs. MD, your choice of title was very stupid. Eleven of your own thirteen posts have compared the iPod to MD. Indeed, people's first exposure to this thread is your flamebait "iPod killer." When people confront you about it, after a few barbs have been thrown, you wail about how you are merely observing that each product "has its strengths," and you ask them to please stop -- while simultaneously the majority of your posts address iPod vs MD. I'm also so glad we managed to wedge "zealots" in there. All very cowardly.

Let's make this very simple. You wrote Sony's iPod killer. Do you stand behind that? Could you at least acknowledge that you wrote it?
Reply
Click to view SeaFox's profile Member
SeaFox
956 posts since
Apr 28, 2001
26. Jan 9, 2004 4:56 PM in response to: Duke_Thomas
Re: Sony's iPod killer (next gen Minidisc)
In reply to:<hr />
What "irks" me is that you are hiding behind rather dull statements, while condemning all writing that addresses your only controversial point as invalid so far as the discussion is concerned.


<hr />


What would that single point be? This discussion has many points from what I see.

In reply to:<hr />
If you didn't want it to be iPod vs. MD, your choice of title was very stupid. Eleven of your own thirteen posts have compared the iPod to MD. Indeed, people's first exposure to this thread is your flamebait "iPod killer." When people confront you about it, after a few barbs have been thrown,

<hr />


Nope, read the first post again. Cover the title with your hand if you need too. There is nothing in the first post which is derogatory towards the iPod. Except that I say the iPod is Sony's competition with the new format, and that's not opinion, that's a fact. Sony will be marketing this in response to the iPod. Apple stole the personal music player market from Sony's Walkman. Sony wants it back.

Now read the first wave of responses. Every one say "iPod is better" and every one uses the same one prong attack "it can hold 40GB and Hi-MD can only hold one!" That's not a well thought out attack. Its blanket-excuse and completely ignores that MD isn't supposed to carry all your music on one disc, its use model is completely different.

I do admit this thread has recieved a disporportionate number of views and the headline is contributing to this.

And obviously the majority of my posts in this thread will compare iPod to MD when they are all responses to iPod vs. MD posts. <rolleyes> I didn't create the thread I'm just replying to what's said (some of which is generalities like "removable media is dead" and false information).

I was thinking about this thread while I was in the shower earlier (we'll ignore the dorkiness of that for now), and occured to me I had left out accessories in the price comparison earlier. My player came with one disc and headphones for $229, but it also included an inline remote, leather case, charging cradle, rechargaable battery, and AC adapter (like mid and high end iPods) but it also came with a cassette adapter and cigarette lighter adapter one would have to pay separately for with the iPod. Higher end MD's come with remotes with LCD displays and backlighting and have all on-unit buttons on them. Can't get that with iPod. Also, sine they have recording capabilities to be fair the iPod should have the cost of a Beljkin voice recorder added to it. That wouldn't be entirely even though because the Sony doesn't come with a mike and the Belkin can't record stereo line in (optical or analog). This would make the Minidisc cheaper even after adding the 39 extra discs to equal the iPod's capacity.

In reply to:<hr />
I'm also so glad we managed to wedge "zealots" in there. All very cowardly.

<hr />


Acknowledging the existance of zealots is cowardly now is it? Nobody here is a zealot I must say (zealots have no arguments at all). But I note nobody has a rebuttal to the Minidisc players battery life except to restate the higher iPod capacity. If me and someone with an iPod were to go out, them with a freshly charged (hey, I'll impose a handicapp) First Generation 40GB iPod if such a unit had existed and me with a current Minidisc player and a travel pack of five disks (plus one in player). The iPod user would be needing a recharge while I would run out of music (all 30 hrs of it) with more than half the battery left.

With a built-in battery the iPod user would have to potentially wait until they went home that evening to recharge. That partially undoes the storage advantage since if I was allowed to return home I could swap for six other discs.

In reply to:<hr />
Let's make this very simple. You wrote Sony's iPod killer. Do you stand behind that? Could you at least acknowledge that you wrote it?

<hr />


Of corse I admit it. If I hadn't made it entirely clear what the purpose of the new Hi-MD format was people would have been asking "What does this have to do with Apple or Macs?" and said it was off topic.

whistling, waiting for thread to lock
Reply
Click to view Duke_Thomas's profile Member
Duke_Thomas
757 posts since
May 25, 2001
27. Jan 9, 2004 7:03 PM in response to: SeaFox
Re: Sony's iPod killer (next gen Minidisc)
In reply to:<hr />
And obviously the majority of my posts in this thread will compare iPod to MD when they are all responses to iPod vs. MD posts.

<hr />


...which were initially in response to your title, and later for your encouragment of the discussion. If you're going to whine about it being an iPod vs miniDisc thread, realize your behavior and writing is the only reason for it.

Lastly, the notion that you can declare that people are unable to comment on any one aspect of your post is ridiculous. You wrote it, I can respond. Cover the title with my hand indeed.

In reply to:<hr />
I was thinking about this thread while I was in the .... can't record stereo line in (optical or analog). This would make the Minidisc cheaper even after adding the 39 extra discs to equal the iPod's capacity.

<hr />


All true. Let's go the other way now. How much extra do I have to pay to make your MD player even approach the ease of use and convenience of the iPod w.r.t. its primary function of listening to my library of music? Exactly the price of an iPod.

In reply to:<hr />
With a built-in battery the iPod user would have to potentially wait until they went home that evening to recharge. That partially undoes the storage advantage since if I was allowed to return home I could swap for six other discs.

<hr />


Sure. If you listen to music at 8 hours a stretch with an iPod in a situation where external power is unavailable you are indeed SooL.

Once again, let's go the other way, and envison a far more believable variation of your scenario. Both of these hypothetical characters decide they are in the mood for a certain song. If you have an iPod, you select it. With a MD player, if the song isn't among your current six discs, you must go home and swap the discs, or, far more likely, select another track and have an inferior experience with a song you don't really want.

People don't listen to their music in a linear fashion. If they are the type that doesn't care what music they listen to, they could just buy a cheap 90s tech discman, insert a single disc, set the play to "repeat", and be done with it ... and of course some people do this.
Reply
Click to view SeaFox's profile Member
SeaFox
956 posts since
Apr 28, 2001
28. Jan 9, 2004 9:11 PM in response to: Duke_Thomas
Re: Sony's iPod killer (next gen Minidisc)
In reply to:<hr />

...which were initially in response to your title, and later for your encouragment of the discussion.

<hr />


Well, I'm not responsible if people judge a book by its--- er a thread by its title. Once again, the post itself is neutral and the title is based on Sony's opinion, more a question than a statement really. I guess I should have written it like this:

Sony's iPod killer: Next Generation Minidisc?

In reply to:<hr />
Lastly, the notion that you can declare that people are unable to comment on any one aspect of your post is ridiculous. You wrote it, I can respond. Cover the title with my hand indeed.

<hr />


I never said you couldn't comment on any one aspect. But I reply to only that one aspect really isn't a reply to a post. Its like having a quote taken out of context.

In reply to:<hr />
All true. Let's go the other way now. How much extra do I have to pay to make your MD player even approach the ease of use and convenience of the iPod w.r.t. its primary function of listening to my library of music? Exactly the price of an iPod.

<hr />


That goes back to the earlier posts. Ease of use is sacrificed in the Minidisc format for more portable functionality. You're using the space arguement again, too. Higher capacity isn't the answer for everything. And the measure of functionality isn't mearly the playback side of the issue. Honestly, how many people listen to all 40 gigs of music on their iPod on a regular basis? Few I'm sure. They could easily take just the top 500 tracks and wouldn't miss anything for quite awhile.

In reply to:<hr />
Once again, let's go the other way, and envison a far more believable variation of your scenario. Both of these hypothetical characters decide they are in the mood for a certain song. If you have an iPod, you select it. With a MD player, if the song isn't among your current six discs, you must go home and swap the discs, or, far more likely, select another track and have an inferior experience with a song you don't really want.

<hr />


True, but when you can't take your entire music collection with you , like any Rio user you plan out what you want to take before you leave. Except, unlike a Rio user, the Minidisc people have much more capacity and its not critical you get exactly the perfect playlist.

Also, I should note in the last post I was using current Minidisc format for those figures. If it was a Hi-MD player battery life would be closer the iPod I believe (like 30hrs I think I heard, but since the disc is the same I don't know why the battery life would fall that much). Meanwhile the maximum total music I was carrying would increase from 30 hrs to 270 hrs.

So, no I couldn't carry every track in the world, but calculating the chance the one song I wanted being with me (in that first six Hi-MD's) would not be as simple as deviding 6GB by 40GB.

In reply to:<hr />
People don't listen to their music in a linear fashion.

<hr />


Agreed. I can rearrange a Minidisc group on the fly or do program play on some units. But then again, a playlist or a group is just a list you're playing through. If we don't define the list beforehand and play through it in a linear fashion, the playback charge of both units will suffer. Something the iPod doesn't have much of to spare

In reply to:<hr />
If they are the type that doesn't care what music they listen to, they could just buy a cheap 90s tech discman, insert a single disc, set the play to "repeat", and be done with it ... and of course some people do this.

<hr />


Yes, but people with iPods and Minidisc players aren't held to what the stupid album has on it. We both take what we want and ignore the rest. We also use another media to save our albums. The main reasons I went to Minidisc was the better anti-skip over my CD player, smaller media that were easier to handle than full CD's in jewel cases, and it stopped all the expensive CD's being scratched because they were played in a discman in physical motion. Same reasons people chose the iPod (well except they have no media to handle).
Reply
Click to view Duke_Thomas's profile Member
Duke_Thomas
757 posts since
May 25, 2001
29. Jan 9, 2004 11:11 PM in response to: SeaFox
Re: Sony's iPod killer (next gen Minidisc)
Being explicit or at least clarifying when people first commented on the title would have been a very good idea.

In reply to:<hr />
True, but when you can't take your entire music collection with you , like any Rio user you plan out what you want to take before you leave. Except, unlike a Rio user, the Minidisc people have much more capacity and its not critical you get exactly the perfect playlist.

<hr />


Again, iPod owners avoid those steps entirely. The iPod reached its ubiquity through the essential ingredient of extreme convenience. I believe that a real iPod killer, when it comes, must have that ingredient or it will fail. My reason for believing that is that many players that have sacrificed, as you say, easy of use for portable functionality has not matched the iPod, though of course each good player has its fans.

We're starting to repeat ourselves here. Perhaps we differ w.r.t. how we listen to music. I don't know what I'm going to want to listen to, and when I want to listen to something I want to listen to something rather specific. Given that, the technology that presents the least impediment to that style is preferable. If I were less, eh, I don't know what the word is, but at any rate less that way, the inconveniences associated with swapping discs would be less of an issue for me. On the other hand you seem concerned with listening to a block of music for over eight hours at a stretch and the HiMD's other features, which to me is as incomprehensible as you find my own style. For your needs the HiMD is a preferable solution. How about we leave it at that?
Reply
Go to original post