Posted by NRen2k5 on 06/14/06 10:54

RichardK wrote:
> NRen2k5 wrote:
>
>>> But, you can do that in iTunes, without having to mess around, with
>>> playlists, albums and indivudual songs, to load up 3rd party MP3
>>> players, burn MP3 CDs, and load onto iPod.
>>
>>
>> But you can do that without iTunes.
>
> Not quite as easily.

No, not quite. But your tradeoff is more versatility and better quality
in the end result.

>> Only if you're some kind of idiot who doesn't have his music organized.
>
> It's perfectly organised. Unless you think doing it manually is in some
> way better than having an application do it for you at the time of
> importing...

I sort by artist\album as I rip. No further organization than that.

I can burn it all to CD/DVD or export to any device and I know it will
be sorted exactly the same as it is on the computer.

>>> My first MP3 player was a Panasonic SV-SD75, in 2001, I forget. It
>>> was... comical. It had an SD card of 64Mb capacity. Looked like a
>>> watch. Cost loads (I was given it as a present, but it was £248/$349
>>> in 2001, for an hour of playback). Had to use the AWFUL RealJukebox
>>> to load files onto it. Protected EVERY file you put on it.
>>
>> And that was Panasonic. Jesus fuck, the non sequitur is like a crutch
>> to this man.
>
> Yes. That was Panasonic - a mass market company - making an MP3 player.
> One of the first on the market, and one of the smallest, too. You don't
> seem to get this 'context' thing.

Neither do you. Your Panasonic is good example of a bad MP3 player
package, not a good representative for all non-iPod MP3 player packages.

>>> The 1st Gen iPod came out in 2001, too. 5GB storage. MP3/AAC
>>> playback. $399. iTunes (which was better and easier to use than Real
>>> Jukebox).
>>
>> Which is setting the bar very low.
>
> True, but regardless, Apple's solution was better than any solution on
> Windows.

Because nobody at the time had thought to do an all-in-one.

> And their player offered almost 100x the capacity for $50 more.

Like the Creative Nomad.

>>> Is it really that hard to grasp WHY Apple dominates this market? All
>>> the industry analysis said "iPods are too expensive", but Apple knew
>>> that music is important to people; make it easy and useful, and
>>> they'll buy it, and people did.
>>
>> Apple knew that marketing and lock-ins work.
>
> What lock-ins, you retard. This is 2001 I'm talking about. iTMS came out
> WAY after the iPod was a success.

And in 2001 iTunes was made only to work with the iPod.

--
http://pcguyelevated.ytmnd.com/

[Back to original message]