Our daughter would like an Ipod for Christmas and ditch her Walkman CD player. Question. What model Ipod? Or would just an MP3 player be better? Either way better? Worse? Does one have better music selections? Besides "normal" music she also wants to start downloading classical music, specifically French horn and piano stuff (dual performance major in college). Either one better for that? I am clueless as I am the proud owner of thousands of LPs. Thanks. Any advice will help this old fart.
Originally posted by DrDirtOr would just an MP3 player be better? Either way better? Worse?
I have never encountered an MP3 player anywhere near as easy and convenient to use as the iPod. Everything else pales in comparison. I am an admitted Apple fanboy, but I think the opinion I express here is pretty near universal. The iPod dominates the MP3 market for good reasons.
Does one have better music selections? Besides "normal" music she also wants to start downloading classical music, specifically French horn and piano stuff (dual performance major in college). Either one better for that? I am clueless as I am the proud owner of thousands of LPs. Thanks. Any advice will help this old fart.
The device you buy has little to nothing to do with what music it can hold. Go with the iPod. The only question would be iPod touch or classic iPod, with the wheel, and I think it's largely a personal preference thing.
You'd probably want to narrow it down to either the iPod Classic (160GB @ $249) or the larger iPod Nano (16GB @ $179).Putting it in perspective - 16GB is a little over 2000 normal length songs. Since classical music tends to be a bit longer, you could justify a larger hard drive if you want to drop the coin - but she can also load/unload songs as needed.
I'd also check the prices at your/her college bookstore before purchasing. The bookstore here at UCSB has a deal with Apple, so students, staff, and faculty can purchase Apple products for a slightly discounted price. It's not much, but I've definitely saved a few bucks.
I'd say stick to the IPod line and I agree with BucsFan. I'm sure someone will come on here and try to make an argument for some other player, but really, this shopping excursion gets very easy if you just stick to the IPods.
After that the question is what are you looking to get for her? Just want something where she'll be able to carry a few hundred songs around and have it be incredibly small and portable. Go for the Nano? Want to be able to use all the nifty apps that Apple advertises all the time? Get an IPod Touch. Just want her to be able to carry tens of thousands of songs with her at all times? Go for the traditional IPod with I think 30 or 60GB of space.
Originally posted by spfGo for the traditional IPod with I think 30 or 60GB of space.
Looking at the Apple site quickly, it looks like they ar currently only selling the iPod Classic with 160 GB of space for $249 US. I don't see the 30, 60, or 80 GB models there. Haven't looked that closely, though.
For what it's worth, I have an 80 GB iPod Classic and I think it's pretty great. I have no interest in video on my iPod, though; if I did, I'd think about getting an iPod Touch (or an iPhone, if I could get one with my carrier).
One important thing to figure out is what storage capacity the device should have. That's the biggest factor when it comes to price. For me, 1GB is fine because I load 4 to 5 albums at a time and listen to a lot of podcasts.
Re: 'Just go with Apple' I will vouch for any and all Sansa products as being just as simple to use as iPods and much more affordable. My Sansa Clip, for example, was $30 and I've been using it without a single problem for almost 2 years.
But, if style factors in at all, then iPods probably are the way to go. I still get a lot of weird looks when people see that I'm using something different.
Lloyd: When I met Mary, I got that old fashioned romantic feeling, where I'd do anything to bone her. Harry: That's a special feeling.
Don't go Apple. I have issues with the entire "you need our proprietary software to put music on our players" idea. I'm not sure how that's easier than simply drag/drop into an E drive (or whatever the MP3 player is called when hooked up to a computer).
I find Apple products to be of high build quality, but overly expensive. Thanks but no thanks.
I use my cellphone for my MP3 player - it works really well and has great form factor. And it's a phone!
I'm also an avowed Apple-hater for similar reasons. Also because the iPod neither comes with a mains charger and because it needs its own special lead rather than the standard USB adapter, so if you lose it it's much more effort to replace. However I would (and did) still give in and get an iPod Classic because when my trusty old Zen Touch finally died they were much cheaper for the amount of memory compared to anything else I could find (this was about a year and a half ago, and in the UK, so I don't know if it still holds up). And while the need for the software is mildly annoying, at least iTunes is some of the best music software out there. Except for the fact it puts numbers at the end of the alphabet instead of the beginning, which is just ridiculous.
Originally posted by OliverDon't go Apple. I have issues with the entire "you need our proprietary software to put music on our players" idea.
To your average, everyday consumer, this is pretty irrelevant, and, for a major corporation, potentially disastrous. Consumers want something that works well, and they want something that is intuitive - and, in those circumstances, proprietary software that is well written is far better than having a dozen different ways to access your hardware.
I would agree that Apple occasionally takes this a bit too far (i.e. bricking jailbroken iPhones was a pretty low blow - although, after those iPhone viruses started going around, I can kind of understand it). But they also don't want to provide support for software they don't endorse - and, given the quality of their products, I kind of understand it.
I hate to say it, but I'd add LeBron debuting and take out the Kobe case. Part of LeBron is hype; but I think he's stood up to it. To me, depending on AP's deadlines, I'd throw in Priest Holmes and/or Jamal Lewis' rushing efforts.