| Author |
Walkman Phones v/s iPod Video |
steele
Joined: Dec 27, 2003
Posts: 329
PM |
Storage is for storing stuff. Sowhen you need them, you get to retrieve it right away. But 6000 songs???!! I mean i can't even name 2000 songs right now without having a headache.
[addsig] | |
|
Bandit
Joined: Oct 06, 2006
Posts: 129
From: Toronto
PM |
Quote:
|
Now you are talking portability. In this case the iPod (or any other dedicated music device) wins hands down. I have about 60 audio books that I use as reference material or as entertainment. The thing about your argument is that you claim to speak for the masses while I speak for the people such as myself that are quite comfortbable with both devices. In my opinion you are willing to settle for less while I am not. A 3.2 megapixel camera is not my idea of adequate. It is something to use in a pinch. Comparable to the fat girl at closing time. Not your first choice but better than nothing when nothing else is available. I like having my entire music library with me as I travel from country to country. Try traveling with 3000 CD's.
At the end of the day it all comes down to choices. People choose what works for them.
|
|
I think that everyone is vying for different points. Everyone has their own needs and reasons for that need. You have your audiobooks you need for reference so an iPod (something with large storage) is useful too you.
My line of work requires me to run around a lot. I ended up buying a P990i, because I was tired of running around carrying a mobile, a PDA, a camera, AND an mp3 player (was actually using CD player). I don't have that many pockets dagnagit! Not only that, I have to bring 4 chargers for all their different batteries! so when I finally decided I wanted an mp3 player, I opted against an iPod, and went for an all-in-one phone.
I also rollerblade / skate quite a bit. I like to listen to music while I do it. If my phone rings, it means that I have to stop skating and pull over somewhere, stop the mp3 player, take out my mobile, then listen to it. Then when the conversation is finished, put my phone away, plug myself back into the mp3 player, and push off again. Now I can do everything at the push of a button.
So it depends on whom you're speaking with. If you're talking to a commuter who spends an hour to and from work daily, then they probably want an iPod w/ video. For yourself, someone who needs to use audio books for referencing, something w/ large storage space is necessary. For someone like me, I need convenience.
~LB |
marktang
Joined: Dec 05, 2005
Posts: 196
From: toronto canada
PM |
well if u know how to use the k800's camera properly than it can be as good as a normal 5mp camera. unless u like carrying a professional camera and then a professional audio device with you everywhere. that's y they make all in one devices. so that you dont have to carry so much stuff with you around. if u want the best than u might as well carry a hifi system with you cuz ipod's sound quality is definately not the best. |
sapporobaby
Joined: Sep 14, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Finland. Kuwait maybe :)
PM |
Quote:
|
On 2006-10-18 23:40:37, marktang wrote:
well if u know how to use the k800's camera properly than it can be as good as a normal 5mp camera. unless u like carrying a professional camera and then a professional audio device with you everywhere. that's y they make all in one devices. so that you dont have to carry so much stuff with you around. if u want the best than u might as well carry a hifi system with you cuz ipod's sound quality is definately not the best.
|
|
Dude,
Go back and read what you said. A 3.2 megapixel camera can function as good as a 5 megapixel camera. Do you really believe that? If so, please enroll in some logic courses and I am not trying to put you down but this has got to be the most non-sensical statement I have ever heard. Hell, what did I buy my Nikon D80 for when I can go buy a regular 6 megapixel camera. It's the same.
If you have read anything I have posted, I stated several times that I have a k800i (sound quality no where near as good as my iPod and my Etymotic or Ultimate Ears Headphones), just for the few, times when I do not have my camera with me. I go through new phones no less than 5 or 6 times a year so it is not a matter of money to me, but a matter of quality. Maybe you have never heard good sound because you use the stock headphones or something but your statement about 3.2 being as good as a 5 megapixel camera is nothing short of laughable.
*edited on a Mac of course. Mac: There is no substitute*
N82(YES), iPhone 3G, Shure es530, Nikon D300, more stuff. No more SE stuff, why am I still here? |
marktang
Joined: Dec 05, 2005
Posts: 196
From: toronto canada
PM |
hey i dont care how much money u have u dont have to rub it in my face on how much money u dont. and how do u know i dont have money. im just saying the pictures quality on the k800 if u know how to use it. of course it cant replace a professional digi cam. if u know how to use the k800's camera then the pictures will come out really well. |
sapporobaby
Joined: Sep 14, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Finland. Kuwait maybe :)
PM |
Quote:
|
On 2006-10-19 03:21:07, marktang wrote:
hey i dont care how much money u have u dont have to rub it in my face on how much money u dont. and how do u know i dont have money. im just saying the pictures quality on the k800 if u know how to use it. of course it cant replace a professional digi cam. if u know how to use the k800's camera then the pictures will come out really well.
|
|
Mark, I assume your name is Mark. You misunderstood. Hell, I have a friend that replaces computers every 3 months, so I just sit there and wish. Money is not the issue. The issue is that there is NO WAY, a 3.2 megapixel camera will EVER out perform a 5 megapixel camera. If all things being equal (the default settings) the 5'er will beat the 3.2 everyday. Can you not see that? My comment only pertains to the 3.2 is better than 5, and this is not possible.
_________________
*edited on a Mac of course. Mac: There is no substitute*
-/..../../...//.../../-/.//../...//--./---/../-./--.//-/---//-/...././/-../-
[ This Message was edited by: sapporobaby on 2006-10-19 02:28 ] |
marktang
Joined: Dec 05, 2005
Posts: 196
From: toronto canada
PM |
Quote:
|
On 2006-10-19 02:19:23, sapporobaby wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2006-10-18 23:40:37, marktang wrote:
well if u know how to use the k800's camera properly than it can be as good as a normal 5mp camera. unless u like carrying a professional camera and then a professional audio device with you everywhere. that's y they make all in one devices. so that you dont have to carry so much stuff with you around. if u want the best than u might as well carry a hifi system with you cuz ipod's sound quality is definately not the best.
|
|
Dude,
Go back and read what you said. A 3.2 megapixel camera can function as good as a 5 megapixel camera. Do you really believe that? If so, please enroll in some logic courses and I am not trying to put you down but this has got to be the most non-sensical statement I have ever heard. Hell, what did I buy my Nikon D80 for when I can go buy a regular 6 megapixel camera. It's the same.
If you have read anything I have posted, I stated several times that I have a k800i (sound quality no where near as good as my iPod and my Etymotic or Ultimate Ears Headphones), just for the few, times when I do not have my camera with me. I go through new phones no less than 5 or 6 times a year so it is not a matter of money to me, but a matter of quality. Maybe you have never heard good sound because you use the stock headphones or something but your statement about 3.2 being as good as a 5 megapixel camera is nothing short of laughable.
|
|
and i just guess u havent seen people take some amaze pictures with their k800 have u. im not saying it can replace a professional camera. im saying it can take really good pictures. and for sound quality of course im talking bout comparing stock headphones. anyone can buy couple hundred dollars headphones and make the sound better. and u dont have to say oh how many phones i change and stuff cuz i really dont care what u do with your money.
my whole point is that they make an all in one device for a reason. i think ive dont enough annoying people here hahaha. so i'll leave now. this post is getting pointless. |
marktang
Joined: Dec 05, 2005
Posts: 196
From: toronto canada
PM |
ok i'll let u guess what kinda of camera took this picture |
sapporobaby
Joined: Sep 14, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Finland. Kuwait maybe :)
PM |
@marktang,
If I just agree with you, can we close this issue? You have your opinion and I have mine and neither one of us is going to change. iPods, and dedicated DSLR's will always out perform compromise all in one phones. Hell the CCD in my camera is almost as large as a phone thus enabling it to take MUCH better pictures.
Anyway, you are correct, correct, correct. A k800i in the hands of Ansel Adams can out perform my 10.2 megapixel camera in my incapable hands. You are correct in your postulation.
*edited on a Mac of course. Mac: There is no substitute*
N82(YES), iPhone 3G, Shure es530, Nikon D300, more stuff. No more SE stuff, why am I still here? |
marktang
Joined: Dec 05, 2005
Posts: 196
From: toronto canada
PM |
hahhaa i know we have different opinions. its alright. you're right too i was just trying to piss you off. hahhaa. im done now. |
nalbagli
Joined: Jul 09, 2006
Posts: 302
PM |
Nice thread jeje...
Well I had my w800 and was really satisfied with music but iThink (jaja) that the iPod quality is better (I dont really care so much) but is very comfortable to have all my music in the iPod video (just 30 gigs) but is more great to see all family guy seasons that consume most of my memory just 11 GB in music and the rest in family guy
SO iPods and Walkman Phones rock |
egrus
Joined: Aug 21, 2006
Posts: 27
From: New York City
PM |
Doods! Relax! Sound quality is very comparable between the walkman phones and the iPod. Hardware-wise they do produce the full audio spectrum of 20-20.000 Hz (the digital miracle age). It all depends on your mp3 or m4a encoder (lame being the best so far). The right headphones are important too but don't forget that nobody I know can hear anything above 16 khz, those frequencies work for cats and dogs! We tend to start losing our hearing of any frequencies above 16khz when we get exposed to loud sounds (clubs, motorcycles, loud volume on the headphones etc) and everything above that is just air! If you are an audiophile you better get sound isolating earphones and lock yourself in a closet, but that's not the case. The case, as I posted earlier, is having fun and getting away from the gloomy trends i.e. iPods, trillion gigapixel cameras and so on except if you are a pro and are totally obsessed with style and function. The walkman phones hands down are the future of portability with high quality. Nothing like the dedicated individual gadgets but nevertheless really worthy! If I were a photographer walking around and something was happening at a specific moment do you think that I would be as fast to capture a sudden moment with my pro camera? No way! I would have to open my bag and get it out and turn the power on. The walkman phone is instant! Instant gratification and who cares about the quality if you capture the moment!!!! Also with the music thing, they sound great even better with dedicated earphones (etymotic, shure, sony to name a few) but at this point and time you can find very descent earphones for much less than those giants. Just take a pick at forums like Mistic River and you'll see. Again, everybody will have ideas about iPods and iPhones and iRivers and Sansas and Dell but the bottom line is the fun that you get, when you want to get it and the walkman phones are faster than anything I know. Again, there's no comparison, I just find the walkman phones VERY smart  |
sapporobaby
Joined: Sep 14, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Finland. Kuwait maybe :)
PM |
@ergus,
Apples and oranges.
iPods and camera phones will continue to exist with many people owning both. While cameraphones are fun, they are not for serious applications.
*edited on a Mac of course. Mac: There is no substitute*
N82(YES), iPhone 3G, Shure es530, Nikon D300, more stuff. No more SE stuff, why am I still here? |
frequency8
Joined: Sep 18, 2006
Posts: 21
PM |
yet i prefer sony walkman handphone for its quality.... |
Bandit
Joined: Oct 06, 2006
Posts: 129
From: Toronto
PM |
@marktang and sapporobaby
Re: megapixels....
Actually you're both right.
How many megapixels you have in a camera is somewhat of a moot point if you don't have the software to back it up. The software in the k800 is actually pretty good (which is why it has the 'cybershot' badge). Hence, the 3.2 megapixel camera will likely outperform a crappy 5.0 megapixel camera. That being said, all else equal, and you're JUST comparing megapixels? Well, obviously the 5.0 megapixel camera will outperform the 3.2 megapixel cam.
So....now y'all can stop bickering, hug, and make up ok? PUWHAHAHHAHA =)~ (yes, i HAAAAVE to add snide comments. it's what i do. heehee).....and @marktang....nice pic.
~LB
[ This Message was edited by: Bandit on 2006-10-19 15:16 ] | |
|
Access the forum with a mobile phone via esato.mobi
|
Posted: 2006-10-18 15:11
