Yes thats what I said. It wasnt meant as a flame or anything that most people just arent "performance" users. Its just that they arent, nothing wrong with that. The average iPod user simply puts mp3 files on it from iTunes and listens through headphones, perhaps through their car stereo aswell. When I say "performance" user, I mean one that does much more than that with it. The ability to use OGG, ASF, and WMA files with iRiver is important to ME, probly not you guys, thats what I meant by performance user. You guys also probly dont care about iRivers optical line inputs and outputs, again, thats why an iRiver is better for a "performance" user. For most of you iPod users, it probly does everything you would need it to and that is great, you made the right buying decision. For me, what an iPod does is not enough, thats why I choose the iRiver and it was the right buying decision for me. They are two totally different players for different purposes. I hope we can leave it at that and not resort to more childish "flaming" about which is better.

You know if any support .flac files? My AC/DC collection is in flac.

Everyone always argues over the battery.

1. iPod- 12 hours
iRiver- 16 hours

whoever is going to listen to 12 hours of music in the first place is ridiculous. 16 hours is pure insanity. Im not even up for 12 hours, so how could i listen to 12 hours of music straight?

2. Charge time. the iPod takes about an hour to fully charge from 1/2-3/4 battery life. Before you hit the sack, just plug it in or put it on the dock, easy as that. When you wake up it will be ready for at least 3 days of casual listening.

3. iPod's control is amazing, i LOVE the new scroll wheel, and its very easy to use. im sure the iRiver is easy to use, but i dont want to use a bulky joystick to control it.

4. iRiver has a controller, who the hell needs a controller? my friend says he uses it all the time, but its not needed. the cable is long as hell, he had to put a rubber band to wrap up part of the cable, and put it in his backpack.

5. iTunes is a GREAT program, whether people want to agree or not. it updates the iPod reallllly fast, and it plays music just as good as winamp or any other audio player. the ONLY downside is it converts songs like mine (incredibly long Dream Theater songs and other prog rock) somewhat slow. maybe 10 minutes to a cd, at the most. you would probably complain, but im sure you have something else reallllly important to do with your precious 10 minutes. i got a gift certificate for iTunes store, and i found stuff i could NEVER EVER find on any p2p program. i downloaded a whole Joe Satriani cd in about 1-2 minutes. all the song went right into my library and then put it on my iPod. So simple. I wouldnt want to pay for some music, but if its hard to find like Marc Johnson, then its well worth it.

My point: Stop trying to be the overwhelming underdog, the iRiver is no where near superior to Apple's iPod. I would trust Apple over iRiver America.

[quote:5aa35]Everyone always argues over the battery.

1. iPod- 12 hours
iRiver- 16 hours

whoever is going to listen to 12 hours of music in the first place is ridiculous. 16 hours is pure insanity. Im not even up for 12 hours, so how could i listen to 12 hours of music straight?[/quote:5aa35]
I agree, Apple has made improvements in their 4th gen iPods to include a comparable bettery life to iRiver, I wasnt talking about battery life per charge, I was talking about battery life in general. iPods are notorious for their batteries wearing out due to the physical type of battery it is NICD comapred to NIMH or something to that extent. IIRC, apple does now have a thing where you ship them your ipod with $100 and they will replace the battery.

[quote:5aa35]2. Charge time. the iPod takes about an hour to fully charge from 1/2-3/4 battery life. Before you hit the sack, just plug it in or put it on the dock, easy as that. When you wake up it will be ready for at least 3 days of casual listening.[/quote:5aa35]
Sure, nobody is arguing that, apple says from complete discharge, it takes 4 hours to fully charge, but that is easy to do when you sleep. Much like cornbread, there aint nothing wrong with that.

[quote:5aa35]3. iPod's control is amazing, i LOVE the new scroll wheel, and its very easy to use. im sure the iRiver is easy to use, but i dont want to use a bulky joystick to control it.[/quote:5aa35]
Some like it, some hate it. I found the wheel tough to use at first, but I'm sure with use, anybody would become good with it and love it. I personally like physically rotating wheel better than the touch sensitive wheel. At first, the iRivers joystick was tough, but like anything, it second nature now and IMO, is hardly bulky, but thats opinion.

[quote:5aa35]4. iRiver has a controller, who the hell needs a controller? my friend says he uses it all the time, but its not needed. the cable is long as hell, he had to put a rubber band to wrap up part of the cable, and put it in his backpack.[/quote:5aa35]
I agree, I odnt use my controller often, but it is nice to have when running so you can secure the heavy player away and be able to handle just the remote. Definitly not needed, but good on occasion.

[quote:5aa35][img]5.%20iTunes%20is%20a%20GREAT%20program,%20whether% 20people%20want%20to%20agree%20or%20not.%20it%20up dates%20the%20iPod%20reallllly%20fast,%20and%20it% 20plays%20music%20just%20as%20good%20as%20winamp%2 0or%20any%20other%20audio%20player.%20the%20ONLY%2 0downside%20is%20it%20converts%20songs%20like%20mi ne%20(incredibly%20long%20Dream%20Theater%20songs% 20and%20other%20prog%20rock)%20somewhat%20slow.%20 maybe%2010%20minutes%20to%20a%20cd,%20at%20the%20m ost.%20you%20would%20probably%20complain,%20but%20 im%20sure%20you%20have%20something%20else%20realll lly%20important%20to%20do%20with%20your%20precious %2010%20minutes.%20i%20got%20a%20gift%20certificat e%20for%20iTunes%20store,%20and%20i%20found%20stuf f%20i%20could%20NEVER%20EVER%20find%20on%20any%20p 2p%20program.%20i%20downloaded%20a%20whole%20Joe%2 0Satriani%20cd%20in%20about%201-2%20minutes.%20all%20the%20song%20went%20right%20i nto%20my%20library%20and%20then%20put%20it%20on%20 my%20iPod.%20So%20simple.%20I%20wouldnt%20want%20t o%20pay%20for%20some%20music,%20but%20if%20its%20h ard%20to%20find%20like%20Marc%20Johnson,%20then%20 its%20well%20worth%20it.[/img][/quote:5aa35]
I never complained about iTunes. I have it, and like it to preview new music. I've only heard good things about it though.
[quote:5aa35]My point: Stop trying to be the overwhelming underdog, the iRiver is no where near superior to Apple's iPod. I would trust Apple over iRiver America[/quote:5aa35]
Overwhelming underdog? Where does this come from? How is the iRiver an underdog? It is better for some things (mainly audiophile stuff) whice the ipod is better for other things (functionality). As you may have noticed, I am really into music and audio and as an audiophile, I can appreciate iRivers features in this area, most people wouldnt, and therfor choose the iPod. And iRiver America is a great company, I dropped my first one from like 15 feet down a stairwell (annoy:) and amazingly it still played fine but wouldnt write to the disc anymore. Called them up and got a free replacement within a week. And the iPod is also no where near superior to iRiver's iRiver. They are different players for different consumers and their features represent that.

I dont get it. you agreed with almost everything i said....so why are you fighting for the iRiver?

My question hasn't been answered. You guys suck.

[quote="The Frenchman":ce41e]You know if any support .flac files? My AC/DC collection is in flac.[/quote:ce41e]

iPod:
Audio support AAC (16 to 320 Kbps), MP3 (32 to 320 Kbps), MP3 VBR, Audible, AIFF, Apple Lossless and WAV

[url="http://www.apple.com/ipod/specs.html"]http://www.apple.com/ipod/specs.html[/url]

iRiver:

Supports MP3, WMA, ASF, WAV and OGG music files

http://www.iriveramerica.com/products/H120.aspx

So none of them do, just find a converter, iTunes might do it, doubt it though.

Shit. I dunno, the quality would be downgraded significantly. FLAC files have a bitrate in the market of 900kpbs+.

[quote="The Frenchman":20fd2]Shit. I dunno, the quality would be downgraded significantly. FLAC files have a bitrate in the market of 900kpbs+.[/quote:20fd2]
why would you ever want/need that for AC/DC? their music is beyond simple, probably even more simpler than the Beatles.

Sentimental value.

fair enough.

IPODs are gay looking, i dont like their interface, and their playlist system is fubar

plus theyre too expensive, just my opinion i really dont care about you

ive seen the iriver and its not that big, i lose small things anyway

like i said, ipod really wasnt a choice for me it was small capacity ipod or a zen

looks like ill get the 60gb zen, ive used and it is cheaper for way more storage

calmdown:

[quote=Jotun][quote="The Frenchman":02b31]You know if any support .flac files? My AC/DC collection is in flac.[/quote]

iPod:
Audio support AAC (16 to 320 Kbps), MP3 (32 to 320 Kbps), MP3 VBR, Audible, AIFF, Apple Lossless and WAV

[url="http://www.apple.com/ipod/specs.html"]http://www.apple.com/ipod/specs.html[/url]

iRiver:

Supports MP3, WMA, ASF, WAV and OGG music files

http://www.iriveramerica.com/products/H120.aspx

So none of them do, just find a converter, iTunes might do it, doubt it though.[/quote:02b31]
FLAC can be imbedded in OGG files, so iRiver can do it


Jotun: I was never really fighting for the iRiver saying it is better, like I said, they have different purposes and are both better in different areas, you cant really argue which is better IMO.

Yep, I think size is a stupid thing to argue, but the newest iPods (4th gen) have the dimensions 2.4 in x .57 in x 4.1 in
while the iRiver has dimensions of 2.4 in x 0.7 in x 4.1 in
So length and width, they are exactly the same, the ipod is .13 inches thinner, go iPod! dance:

AND WERE CHOCK FULL OF THAT