toggle

AAPL Stock: 103.49 ( + 0.99 )

Printed from http://www.macnn.com

Gateway\'s MP3 player lacks iPod\'s fame, little else

updated 12:00 pm EST, Sun January 16, 2005

Player: Gateway vs. Apple

The Chicago Tribune's technology James Coates has posted a , which he says is a worthy competitor to Apple's iPod mini. The Gateway player, according to the review, offers many features not found Apple's iPod, including a color screen, a replaceable lithium-on battery, and more: "There are things that the iPod can't handle, such as plugging the connector cord from a digital camera directly into it and storing pictures on the hard drive. This means that photo hobbyists can use the Gateway MP3 Photo Jukebox as a 4 gb picture storage vault about the size and thickness of a deck of cards. Of course there are things that iPods have that Gateway lacks."




by MacNN Staff

POST TOOLS:

TAGS :

toggle

Comments

  1. MichaelNH

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    umm

    Hmm well I have an old 3G iPod that allows me to drop my photos from my 8MP camera directly into the iPod... would I want to view them on the screen... no... that's what they camera LCD screen was for when I took the pictures.. crack for breakfast isn't recommended...

  1. slugslugslug

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    re: umm

    okay, look, I'd rather use an iPod than anything else for listening to music but.

    You had to spend extra money for an additional bulky accessory to get pictures onto your iPod.

    And if you're gonna transfer pics onto a player "in the field," a color screen is good, not for showing off the pictures, but for making sure they transferred okay so you can wipe your full memory card and start shooting again.

    So those are some valid pluses about the gateway device. On the other hand, 4 Gb is just not really sufficient storage for a combo digital wallet and music player.

  1. MichaelNH

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    re: re: ummmm

    Bulky device? it was about the same size as the iPod... and if you don't have faith in a product, then why buy it.. I tested out the card reader at home... and it worked fine... I understood how it worked.. if I was THAT worried about possibly losing my photos in a transfer to an ipod, I'd just buy more memory sticks or even just bring my laptop.... but h*** even then you can still drop/lose your laptop...or ipod... or any other device that can accept photos.... I am just saying, don't generalize the "can't get photo's into the iphoto for storage".... do some research... I have had mine for over a year now... took it to many countries with me, and not once did I have a problem or doubt that it copied my photos off my camera... and why would I buy a 4GB iPod for transferring photos.. I have compact flash cards the same size as that.. I have a mini for music, and that's all that will ever go on it... to each their own, just need to check their facts in the article.. Belkin has some cool adapters for getting photos directly into the ipod... now they even had a cable that will do it, you don't need the external reader..

  1. ff11

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    Correct me if I'm wrong

    But can't you get an iPod with a color screen?
    And the iPod has a replacable battery as well, although not one that is easily replaced by the user. you can always send it in if it wears out after 3 or so years (mine is going quite strong after 2+ years, as is my wife's), or if you are more ambitious, you can replace it yourself.

    So if you can transfer your photos directly to the iPod as MichaelNH suggests and you can look at them to make sure they transferred well, and you can replace the battery or at least have it replaced, what advantage does the Gateway unit have?

  1. MichaelNH

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    can't view them..

    I can't view them on my iPod after I transfer them.. I would have no need to do that.. the confirmation that the photos were transferred is reliable.. I have never ever had a problem.. I use my iPod as a photo storage dumping ground when I travel.. works perfect.. I view all the photos on camera before I transfer them, and trash the ones I don't like.. works for me.

  1. just a poster

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    It may have more features

    than the iPod...

    But does it do *music* as well as the iPod? Does it work with itunes? Does it have easy navigation?

    So many tech industry "journalists" are keen to knock down the iPod and hand another industry to the Microsoft monopolists, but in reality they are only glamorizing inferior products to the detriment of their readers and consumers.

  1. LordJohnWhorfin

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    Worthless column

    It's one of those retarded columns where he helps PC users do stuff on windoze (poorly) that could be accomplished more quickly and painlessly on a Mac.
    Dude, a 1GB memory card for a camera costs $50. There may still be some justification for storing pictures on a 40 or 60GB device, but it makes ZERO sense doing that on a 4GB drive, especially if the pictures have to compete with music for room on this already small drive.
    And then, it's a GATEWAY. Would you want to buy a product from a BELEAGUERED manufacturer? How do you like them Apples? :)

  1. ApeInTheShell

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    *cough*

    iPod Photo

  1. adamschneider

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    iPod photo is expensive

    The author acknowledges the iPod photo; he also points out, rightly so, that it costs twice as much as the Gateway device.

    He has some good points, actually, but unfortunately the article is very poorly organized/edited.

  1. cmoney

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    price is great but

    i too question the usefulness of using a 4gb player for a photo storage device. the only time i'm gonna need to download pics off a digital camera is a long trip where i don't have my laptop. and on that same trip, i'm gonna wanna use the entire 4gb for music anyway! even a 10gb model would've made more sense.

    still, the fact that gateway did all those features for $249 is great and speaks volumes about what apple could have done with the ipod photo for $599. maybe explains the ipod photo's supposed lackluster sales.

    as for the people saying they don't need the feature to directly connect ipods to cameras: if apple just threw that feature in, you wouldn't have to use it, but there are lots of people who would have. i would've bought the ipod photo the day it came out. it's useless to me as it is though.

Login Here

Not a member of the MacNN forums? Register now for free.

toggle

Network Headlines

toggle

Most Popular

MacNN Sponsor

Recent Reviews

Kanex KTU10 Thunderbolt to USB 3.0 and eSATA

Apple has never been shy about funky ports -- first it was Apple Desktop Bus, and its own DIN-8 serial port. Following that came FireW ...

Logitech Hyperion Fury mouse

Selecting the correct gaming mouse comes down to finding a device that balances the needs of a user with a price they can afford. Ofte ...

Life n Soul BM211 Bluetooth speaker

Bluetooth speakers aren't only for listening to some music at the park or on a long bus ride, but can also be built with tablets in m ...

toggle

Most Commented