Page 6 of 8
Posted: Mon Sep 12, 2005 9:07 pm
by +JuggerNaut+
Iccy (temp) wrote:+JuggerNaut+ wrote:4gb is quite a bit of music
I do more then just listen to music with it. A self powered, 20 gb usb HD is a dream for on site data recovery or just sharing movies and shit with people.
yeah, i can understand that. what makes me laff are the bozos that say "hey, i can't fit my entire library on a 4GB DAP."
what makes them think a year from now they'll be able to fit their entire library on a 20 or 40GB?
Posted: Mon Sep 12, 2005 9:15 pm
by Geebs
Even WAVs and AIFFs have the same problem; even professional sequencers/audio programs get round this by crossfading when you glue two bits of audio together. You can sometimes still get the Digital Audio Pop just by screwing that up. It's a bit of a pain in the arse to have silence, but it's better than getting your eardrums buggered.
Posted: Tue Sep 13, 2005 1:15 am
by hate
only newbs use mp3
sorry
Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2005 10:43 am
by mjrpes
So I got a nano ipod. It still doesn't support "gapless playback." But in pretty much every other way it rocks the shit out of the fuck, so I ain't be no hatin' fool.
Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2005 10:54 am
by raw
I just picked up a 1GB iShuffle to accompany my 20GB iPod.
Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2005 11:01 am
by o'dium
I just bought me one of these, Fuck ya's all:
Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2005 2:44 pm
by andyman
OMGASH IS THAT A MEGAGIGABYTE TAPE DRIVE IN THAR? cool
Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2005 5:12 pm
by +JuggerNaut+
hate wrote:only newbs use mp3
sorry
interesting.
Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2005 10:20 pm
by werldhed
Hmmm... I guess I'd have to admit that a nano is tempting... but I've tried the "completely intuitive" and "simple" interface everyone is always banging on about and I thought it was quite poorly designed crap.
Unfortunately, everyone seems to think it's the best, so I don't know what my options are, now that Foo has ill-advised buying a Creative.
Ah well... I'll keep waiting for something different, I guess...
Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 2:36 am
by +JuggerNaut+
werldhed wrote:Hmmm... I guess I'd have to admit that a nano is tempting... but I've tried the "completely intuitive" and "simple" interface everyone is always banging on about and I thought it was quite poorly designed crap.
Unfortunately, everyone seems to think it's the best, so I don't know what my options are, now that Foo has ill-advised buying a Creative.
Ah well... I'll keep waiting for something different, I guess...
i used a Creative Zen for over two weeks. I didn't care for the interface as much as the ipods', but not sure what problems Foo was having/has heard. the Zen actually sounded a little better through the headphone jack than the ipod, but it's pretty known that the ipod's jack is a little underpowered.
Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 2:37 am
by +JuggerNaut+
riddla wrote:so far I'm diggin it. I managed to get just around 600 tunes on the 4GB because they're mostly VBR0. The new iTunes is cool too.
been awhile since using iTunes i take it.
Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 4:02 am
by werldhed
+JuggerNaut+ wrote:werldhed wrote:Hmmm... I guess I'd have to admit that a nano is tempting... but I've tried the "completely intuitive" and "simple" interface everyone is always banging on about and I thought it was quite poorly designed crap.
Unfortunately, everyone seems to think it's the best, so I don't know what my options are, now that Foo has ill-advised buying a Creative.
Ah well... I'll keep waiting for something different, I guess...
i used a Creative Zen for over two weeks. I didn't care for the interface as much as the ipods', but not sure what problems Foo was having/has heard. the Zen actually sounded a little better through the headphone jack than the ipod, but it's pretty known that the ipod's jack is a little underpowered.
The Creative Zen Touch was one I had been considering for a while, but I haven't been able to locate any places that have a display model I can test out, so I wasn't ever able to make a comparison between interfaces. I just know I don't like the iPod's much; I can't say if it's better or worse than any others, though.
Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:27 am
by +JuggerNaut+
well, you said "new" iTunes. did you just mean the newest look of 5.0?
Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:54 am
by mjrpes
After a few days of using it.... it continues to fucking rock. It's so thin that I'm using my wallet as a protective case.
Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 7:04 am
by mjrpes
The first day after I made sure the thing was fully charged, I listened to it nonstop. I got a little over 12 hours out of it. Since I was also playing around with the features, it think that might have lowered battery life a bit.
Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 7:22 am
by +JuggerNaut+
riddla wrote:5.0.1 is out
duh. but the look changed with 5.0. 5.0.1 took care of some stability issues along with some Airport additions.
Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 7:28 am
by +JuggerNaut+
riddla wrote:now I'm really looking forward to the camping trip coming up soon. 14 hrs of battery life will truly be put to the test.
actually, 14 hours is pretty paltry for a flash based player. Apple didn't do so well in this regard.
Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 4:20 pm
by +JuggerNaut+
riddla wrote:oh please, its the size of a small stack of business cards. You really should start trying to get back on the positive side of life and stop trying to sound the expert critic of everything.
i love how you care, riddla. really. not everything is perfect with Apple i'm afraid. does that hurt?
Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 1:09 am
by mjrpes
+JuggerNaut+ wrote:riddla wrote:now I'm really looking forward to the camping trip coming up soon. 14 hrs of battery life will truly be put to the test.
actually, 14 hours is pretty paltry for a flash based player. Apple didn't do so well in this regard.
You're stating that as if Apple could have done better in this regard, given the large, bright screen and slim profile. I don't see how you are justified in saying this.
Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 1:15 am
by saturn
+JuggerNaut+ wrote:riddla wrote:now I'm really looking forward to the camping trip coming up soon. 14 hrs of battery life will truly be put to the test.
actually, 14 hours is pretty paltry for a flash based player. Apple didn't do so well in this regard.
oh please
Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 2:30 am
by +JuggerNaut+
of course the guys that have them are going to go after me. i love it. bring it on.
Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 3:21 am
by +JuggerNaut+
riddla wrote:its mainly because you're talking completely out of your ass and you got called on it.
how's that? i don't think the battery life is very good, that's it. i love everything else about the ipods, i even have one you retarded ape. but, they're not perfect.
you're so predictable. you're really missing Test aren't you?
Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 3:56 am
by +JuggerNaut+
Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 3:58 am
by mjrpes
mjrpes wrote:+JuggerNaut+ wrote:riddla wrote:now I'm really looking forward to the camping trip coming up soon. 14 hrs of battery life will truly be put to the test.
actually, 14 hours is pretty paltry for a flash based player. Apple didn't do so well in this regard.
You're stating that as if Apple could have done better in this regard, given the large, bright screen and slim profile. I don't see how you are justified in saying this.
Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 4:00 am
by +JuggerNaut+
mjrpes wrote:mjrpes wrote:+JuggerNaut+ wrote:
actually, 14 hours is pretty paltry for a flash based player. Apple didn't do so well in this regard.
You're stating that as if Apple could have done better in this regard, given the large, bright screen and slim profile. I don't see how you are justified in saying this.
it's flash based, the battery life should be longer. 8GB HDD players have as much or longer battery life. the screen's no more impressive than competitors' OLED or color offerings.
