mp3 players... (2 Viewers)

[jas0nt]

As requested, note the tardy file transfer speed and battery life of the iriver compared to the old ipod mini (1 st gen mini reviewed, current 2nd gen's battery life is in another universe compared to the shite iriver H10)

both are through USB 2.0/Firewire. the iRiver is a plus because it doesn't require the pos iTunes to load music into the ipod.

frankly, i prefer plugging my iRiver into my computer and dragging and dropping.

 

[aaaman]

Creative's Zen Micro would definately meet all of your requirements and is smaller than the ipod mini as well

i agree but if ur a heavy user then a Zen Touch n when i mean heavy like dropping it twice a day lol also dont 4get iPods betterys need 2 get replaced like Creative Mp3 players dont need 2

 

[supercharged]

both are through USB 2.0/Firewire.

regardless the transfer speed of the ipod is still over 2 times faster due to better design

 

[equiski]

regardless the transfer speed of the ipod is still over 2 times faster due to better design

You, my friend, are a fanboy. Give it up and go home.

 

[jas0nt]

regardless the transfer speed of the ipod is still over 2 times faster due to better design

i can't be fucked arguing with you. you lead an unpersuasive and idiotic arguement, clearly shown by the post above, which is obviously a waste of time for me responding, with a consise arguement, to your wild and fact-less allegations.

i would have been open to your opinions on the iPod and iRiver but evidently, you demonstrate you cannot discuss them in a normal manner, proving your ignorance. perhaps this justifies why you like the iPod in the first place.

 

[RUB!X]

iriver > apple
period.

 

[MedNez]

Woah slow down kids, let's not get into any Ipod vs. Iriver / Linux vs. Windows / AMD vs. Intel debates. To each, his own

 

[supercharged]

i can't be fucked arguing with you. you lead an unpersuasive and idiotic arguement, clearly shown by the post above, which is obviously a waste of time for me responding, with a consise arguement, to your wild and fact-less allegations.

i would have been open to your opinions on the iPod and iRiver but evidently, you demonstrate you cannot discuss them in a normal manner, proving your ignorance. perhaps this justifies why you like the iPod in the first place.

The ipod mini file transfer speed is 3.67mb per second, the H10 is 1.46mb, therefore the ipod transfer speed is over twice as fast...what is there to be argued about?
http://www.cnet.com.au/mp3players/harddisk/0,39029146,40004181,00.htm#

The ipod mini G2 also has twice the battery life and is $200 cheaper than the H10. So for people who buy mp3 players to listen to their mp3 collections and don't need fm radio or photo functions (buy ipod photo instead) ytf would they buy the H10 over an ipod mini?

Alot of Iriver fans seem to prefer iriver because they arent popular like ipods, they are soooo "alternative" and hence somehow 'cooler' (difference for the sake of being different)

so, If Iriver were to make a really good new player which became an instant success and swamped the mp3 player market, would you start hating Irivers and promote the new "alternative" (insert mp3 player here) instead?

 

[equiski]

Real mature.

 

[MedNez]

Woah slow down kids, let's not get into any Ipod vs. Iriver / Linux vs. Windows / AMD vs. Intel debates. To each, his own

[comment]..........[/comment]