Which is worthless without those other 2 products you mention
(you're kidding, aren't you?)
You mean the two that are included?
Which is worthless without those other 2 products you mention
(you're kidding, aren't you?)
It's different, and doesn't conveniently fit in to some people's tiny little worlds.
Specifically:
- The controls are on the headphone wire, so you can't just use any headphones with it
- The controls are very minimal
- It uses voice synthesis to tell you what song/playlist you're hearing/choosing
- It is unconventional in several ways
Which ignores the facts:
- Other compatible headphones are available, adapters will soon be available, and if you want to use really good headphones you probably don't want a Shuffle
- Single/double/triple-clicking the few buttons does what you want, and you're smart enough to figure it out
- The prior Shuffles had no display nor voice
- Apple frequently introduces unconventional products
Basically it's a whine-fest, piling on a new product that's being innovative and cutting the anchors of backward compatability. If you don't like the new Shuffle, the 2nd Gen model is still available, and if you're that whiny you probably don't really want a Shuffle at all. Some of us DO want this new model.
Because its not generating the voice in the iPod. Rather its just generating all names/artists in iTunes and then copying them over as separate files. And since they can't be bothered porting the VoiceOver tech to Windows, they just use the built in one.
Putting the controls on the headphones for an MP3 product has been done already.. it's not cutting edge... maybe the voice thing is new. Could have been a cool gimmik on the older style ishuf but I don't care... and yes it is unconventional.. an unconventional piece of crap.. the Iphone was unconventional but it was cool... see the diff?
apple is really making a (new) name for themselves as of late.
not only is the new shuffle $10 more than the previous version, but now customers are locked in to use those terrible white ear buds.
but at least it's smaller! because the last one was SO HUGE it gave me a hernia carrying it![]()
Hmmm 1/2 the reasons have to do with appearence......
Apple Earphones with Remote: $29.
iPod shuffle USB cable: $19.
iPod Shuffle itself: $29[/CENTER]
The only controls on the device itself are the on/off switch and the shuffle/llnear switch, Joswiak said. Apple will ship its own in-ear headphones with the Shuffle, but third-parties will be able to make their own headphones that have the controls, and they'll also make adapters that will let you use the controls with existing headphones, he said.
You mean the two that are included?
... which is why we're always stressing first impressions... I only mentioned one thing as far as appearance.. the other 3 where functionality unless you meant the 4th thing I said.. but that's a functionality issue cause I will have to reach behind my head to get to the buttons and that will be cumbersome during a run..
so 1/4 of the reasons was appearance
And yet that "unconventional piece of crap" will sell more units that any product you could ever put together in your dreams.
Just because it's not FOR you doesn't mean it's a piece of crap.
If it breaks down regularly, then it's a piece of crap. This product is just going for the mass market and trying something new. When the 1st gen shuffle came out, tons of people on here were bashing it. Seemed to sell ok.
Yes, those two you also have to pay for, those two!
That's the silliest logic ever. Just because Apple charges us WAY TOO MUCH for the Proprietary USB cable and headphones does NOT mean it's a good deal that we get them "free with any purchase" of an iPod shuffle.
They probably make $17 profit on that $19 cable, including packaging, shipping, and everything else. Apple accessories are more profitable than the iPods themselves!
If you give me $5, a soldering iron, and 10 minutes inside a fry's electronics, I can probably build a compatible USB cable--and I'm not mass-producing them by the [tens of] thousands using chinese labor and machines, either.
(Don't know if anyone mentioned it)
Like Apple has said there will be an adapter for 3rd party headphones.
You don't think that they are dumb enough to do that are you?
With a $29 pair of earphones in the box, you're getting the 4GB iPod for $50. I know that quite a few people here don't like the earbuds (I never liked the OLD bigger earbuds, but personally find these just fine) -- but I remember when the original 1,000-songs-in-your-pocket iPod came out in 2001 and cost me $399. True you're getting 1 less GB and no screen, but -- wow... $50 for 1000 songs!The earphones are $29.
http://store.apple.com/us/product/MB770
and does the voice over even work with tracktitels and artists in other languages, say, dutch, or german or something like that?
I've wanted something like Voiceover for my car stereo. Hopefully they bring this tech to the iPhone.
*2GB, 500 songs, fantastic. other than the fact most of my songs are in 320 kbps format therefore i get more towards 300 than 500, then take into account most of my songs are over 4 mins, so lets say 250 songs MAX. 4GB surely would give me more variety.
I personally hate listening to the same set of songs every time I work out, sometimes your in that super pumped up mood, sometimes its the "i gotta work out today i guess" mood. Its nice to have a decent sized collection.I do 320 as well. That's about 2MB a minute, right?
1500MB after formatting, divided by 2MB/min = 750min
750 minutes is over 12 hours. So I just have to ask: How much do you run!?!? Are you Forest Gump or something!?!?