Jan 11, 2007, 11:07 AM
|
#1 of 36
|
I think it's great. I don't agree with mortis' argument. Yes, it does cost more than buying the three--but that makes sense. It's the same reason why a small cell phone costs more than a comparably featured large one. Since I keep a bunch of stuff in my pockets it's difficult to carry a cell phone and my MP3 player around--let alone a camera. It means I get less use out of them because I don't carry them around all of the time--unlike my cell phone. Having them in one thing is a good idea... although, I haven't seen cell phone camera quality for years... so I don't know if it's decent yet. If it is it would be decent to have a camera... but mostly I've been interested in _well done_ MP3/phone integration. I know it has been done before... but, I hadn't seen any that seemed great.
Thanks for the '10 thing to hate' article. The only things that really bother me are 2 and 4. I remember Engadget running a story that there was speculation of two batteries: one for the phone and the other for the MP3 player. If it's _really_ only 5 hours of phone that would be bad... especially if I can't use my phone because I've been listening to too much music. I also don't care about the internet/texting/video features since... doing them on such a small device isn't good. What I really want is just MP3/Phone... the touch screen is a bad move for that. Especially since I dial based on feeling most of the time and not looking. Also... I would never spend that much.
But, it's great news because it is such big news. Because of Apple lots of other companies started investing more into MP3 players and it helped innovation. I am usually a generation behind in technology... my first DAP was an MP3 CD player... followed by this Christmas' acquisition of my sister's old iPod mini. So, I am looking forward to be able to get an cheap MP3 player / phone whenever I need a new phone in a few years.
How ya doing, buddy?
|