MD vs iPod
[639 byte] By [natericho] at [2007-11-9 15:00:39] 
My friend recently bought a 3G ipod and when i saw it i was blown away by eveything about it. Being an MD faithful for a very long time i seriously considered geting it as a replacement to my net md. however before my purchase i did some research, and to my dissapointment found that the i pod only had an 8 hour battery life. this got me thinking. if you can only listen to 8 hours of music before you have to go and recharge the battery, doesnt that defeat the purpose of having the huge capacity. why not go for better sound quality and a 60 hour battery life with the netmd and just carry around one disc, 5 hours of music for the day.
# 1 Re: MD vs iPod
If you only need 5 hours of music a day then the iPod is just right for you. I used to be a hardcore MD user and I found that it just wasn't what I was looking for. I thought it was proprietary Sony crappola. I then tired an Archos Jukebox, a Creative Nomad and finally the iPod. My iPod wins hands down!ToddW at 2007-11-15 18:08:41 >
# 2 Re: MD vs iPod
Originally posted by natericho ... the i pod only had an 8 hour battery life. this got me thinking. if you can only listen to 8 hours of music...
...5 hours of music for the day.
Seems like it is just the thing for you!!!
And you get an extra 3 hours, hopefully!
Bob at 2007-11-15 18:09:41 >
# 3 Re: MD vs iPod
But see 8 hours is the suggested battery length..I think its more 5-6 hours max, which reminds me, does anyone no if there any ways to atleast try and keep the battery going, like any little tricks?
Bobos
Bobos at 2007-11-15 18:10:40 >
# 4 Re: MD vs iPod
Lowering the volume keeps the battery going a lot longer, and turn off the backlight ;)There is a 16 hour battery that you can install yourself, some users on this forum have bought them and should post how well they work soon.
sailgreg at 2007-11-15 18:11:34 >
# 5 Re: MD vs iPod
the trick is set up a playlist and don't skip around...if you set it up in a playlist, the iPod will fill up the 32mb buffer only when needed instead of constantly accessing the HDIlIlIlIlIl at 2007-11-15 18:12:44 >
# 6 Re: MD vs iPod
I still have a couple of MD recorders, they are smaller and lighter than the iPod and used to be louder too.Now with v1.3 of the firmware the volume problem has gone (was a European restriction because the French have fragile ears)
You get a far better choice of music, upload and download is faster. No messing about with discs, writing on them and write protecting them, avoiding dirt, losing them, dropping them etc.
The battery life isn't too much of a problem if you don't skip through the tracks. I've had just over 9 hours from my 2G 20Gb iPod.
The other mega benefit is copying files from one computer to another, just drag and drop, say, a game demo a much sought after demo at the moment is 766Mb and it's over in under a minute.
The choice of music storage format on the iPod is quite good, you get WAV to 44.1, AAC to 48kHz, M-PEG 3 to 320kbps and some miscellaneous formats. So you get to choose how much space a song takes, if it's something you really like why not rip it at 192kbps MP3, recorded "Essential Mix on Radio 1" why not use 128kbps...
Apart from some terrible PC software and a few minor iPod glitches I have been thoroughly impressed with the product.
The new 3G iPod is better again with USB support (1.1 and 2.0) and has loads of extras available like sound recording and multimedia card memory dumping etc.
whiteblonde at 2007-11-15 18:13:43 >
# 7 Re: MD vs iPod
I, like others, used to be a MD diehard. I still have my Sharp 702, Sony E55 and a Sharp bookshelf w/integrated MD deck. I used to loathe portable mp3 players until the iPod came out. I still didn't jump in though until the 3G units arrived. Battery life is not an issue whatsoever. Seriously, how much music will you listen to in one day? I don't know about anyone else, but my ears can't take 5-6 hrs with headphones on.clintb at 2007-11-15 18:14:46 >
[an error occurred while processing this directive]