Geeks.com sent us over for a whirl the highest capacity available iPod mp3 player, the 120 GB version of the iPod Classic. In the era of the touchscreen iPods and smartphones, how is the Classic design holding up?
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2009-08-22
I was lucky enough to be given a 160 gig classic when I retired recently (with a nice engraved message on the back) and I absolutely love it. I have a 32 gig iPhone3GS which is also very good but whats great about the classic is that i can literally take my whole music collection with me wherever I go, I use it for hiking and with a tiny FM transmitter attached I can play any of my music whilst driving.
Once I had the iPod classic I ditched all my CDs and plugged it into a Bowers and Wilkins Zeppelin speaker dock (tremendous sound by the way) in my living room as a replacement for my stereo system.
I honestly can't see why anyone would choose a niche product like the Zune which has such poor third party support.
Member since:2005-06-29
Member since:2005-06-28
You obviously did not read the article, the article does mention the Zune. And the reason why not much more is said, is because we DID review the Zune a few weeks back on its own article, check our archives.
As for the Zune, the iPod Classic is a much better device in terms of usability. And I find the tremble filters that Apple applying by default more pleasing to the ears than the stall Zune sound.
And this article was not an advert. You have some nerve to tell me that. I don't write adverts. I simply prefer the iPod WAY better than the Zune, and I do have both products to compare. DO YOU?
My husband is being using another 120 GB Classic iPod too, as his main mp3 player, and he loves it too. He has no problems with it whatsoever. So if user satisfaction comes out as "an advert", then let it be one. Props to Apple in that case.
Member since:2006-01-25
I personally think the point of the article was to go over the device and determine whether it made sense anymore in comparison to the iPhone/iPod Touch. The review did not compare it to any non-Apple MP3 players, because that simply wasn't the objective.
As far as this statement:
First, it says right there is very plain language that it is nothing more than an opinion - I don't see the point in arguing against it. Second, I don't think Eugenia meant that this particular model was the biggest innovation - she meant that the original iPod itself was. That seems very self evident to me, but whatever. The point is that sure, to some people Zunes or Sansas may be better NOW - but neither even existed when the original iPod was released. Frankly I doubt either WOULD exist if the original iPod was never released...
ps. When this site publishes anything that cast Apple in a bad light the author gets attacked for it. Now someone posts an article that _doesn't_ cast Apple in a bad light and the author is getting attacked for it. I frankly wish everyone who is posting this bias/anti-bias/whatever crap on the forums would just cut it out. I have no beef either way - its simply getting old and tired...
Member since:2005-07-06
ZOMG!!! Product is good, reviewer likes it, therefore IT MUST BE A SCAM!!
Seriously, the reviewer liked the iPod Classic, therefore gave it a positive review. I don't see the hidden agenda.
If every other site on the planet said the iPod Classic was atrocious, but OSNews said it was fantastic, then you'd have something to worry about.
That's simply not the case.
Member since:
2008-01-20
Yeah.. I'd have to agree. There are a lot of strange things here though, that make me wonder about this article.
Firstly, a Zune 120GB is also available: http://www.zune.net/en-us/products/mp3players/zune120/specs.htm . Strangely enough whilst the article has a photo comparing the Zune 120 and iPod classic, not once does it mention the Zune.
Then he starts talking about how its the "biggest innovations of this decade", but the Zune's have radio tuners and wifi built in, and more features. It also starts spitting out all the audio formats (or lack thereof), without mentioning players such as the Sansa Clip, that support FLAC and Ogg. Why no comparisons? How many "audiophiles" store their music in Apple Lossless (a format, which is only compatible with one player, and has little industry support).
I haven't used a zune, but this was clearly written with a very pro-Apple attitude. No comparisons are made between anything other then iPod's, which makes me wonder if the photo was stolen! Please, submit articles like this to Apple news sites. I'd rather see articles comparing what is being reviewed with the competition, and what its advantages or disadvantages are.
Was this written by an Apple employee perhaps, or was the reviewer bribed by Geeks.com to turn it into an advert? All I know, is that this is a strange review, although, calling it a review would be pushing it, because no reviewer is 100% happy with his product, any review will draw comparisons with other products, and finally, the mention of ITMS sounds suspiciously like something one would hear from Apple Sales Training.