Need help selecting portable mp3 player

[Andy]

Wow, how do you guys not understand how subscription-based music services work?

Yahoo Music:
$5 a month
Unlimited songs that all expire and have to have the liscenses renewed (even on devices) and they aren't MP3.
MP3 downloads (real, permanent MP3s) for 79 cents each.
Have to use a subscription-compatible device, like the Creative Zen Micro (on par with ipod, easily).

iTunes sucks, iPods would rule if they had a compatible subscription service.
Music piracy is like Linux, its only cheaper is your time is worthless.

Buying CDs and importing them into iTunes > subscription-based 'borrowing.'

Paying someone to let you borrow compressed versions of your music, let alone getting into the whole physical product arguement, is a much worse deal, imo. If you're not an audiophile, I guess I can understand the subscription-based idea, but to me it's kind of contradictory because if you love music enough to pay a fee for it every month, I don't understand why the audio quality wouldn't be as important to you.

Oh, and iTunes is awesome.

[Joust Williams]

1) Most people that claim to be audiophiles aren't
2) It's 60 bucks a year, the cost of 4 to 6 CDs (and I get tired of listening to CDs faster than I get tired of playing games)

[Andy]

1) Most people that claim to be audiophiles aren't

What does that have to do with anything I said?

2) It's 60 bucks a year, the cost of 4 to 6 CDs (and I get tired of listening to CDs faster than I get tired of playing games)

So then why are you even contributing to this discussion? For that matter, it's $180 for Rhapsody and Napster. Yahoo is the only service that provides it for that price, and that is because Yahoo's service is still in beta, and the price is almost guaranteed to not be staying at what it currently is.

[Joust Williams]

You're contributing what, exactly? Some opinions that not everyone holds? I'm stating factual information.

Next time, why don't you only post on issues that you know a lot about instead of telling people what they can and can't post. Well, see you later, bye bye

Instead of just saying iPod, how about EXPLAINING your position. I doubt all he wanted was a name. No crap, most people have iPods? I'm giving him reasons why he might want to look into something else. Hey look! For people who buy music instead of pirating all of it like a lamer, there's a good reason why you WOULDN'T get an iPod.

[1CCOSA]

A friend of mine got a green IPod mini which he and his wife play through their car radio. One of the best purchases he has ever made he says.

And because he was envious of me he bought a PSP the same month.

[Josh]

cry! attack! complain! vagina!

You are still the worst poster in the history of the internet. You attitude on everything sucks. Please go away.

P.S. When I met you you seemed to be a genuinely nice person. Its too bad you are such a flaming cock hole on TNL. It makes little sense. Are you trying to compensate for something? Were you mothered too much growing up?

[Andy]

You're contributing what, exactly? Some opinions that not everyone holds? I'm stating factual information.

I'm offering the opinion of someone who actually loves music and listens to music all the time. And I'm also stating factual information.

Next time, why don't you only post on issues that you know a lot about instead of telling people what they can and can't post. Well, see you later, bye bye

I am posting on an issue that I know a lot about. And, uh, see you later?

[Joust Williams]

Right, about a dozen people go on about how great their iPod is (without saying anything) and put in a nice mention of how they don't pay for music. I think MAYBE someone wants to hear the other side, you know, the side that actually PAYS for all the music they obtain? The fact that iPods don't work with any subscription service is a potentially HUGE deal. There are people who buy other players JUST for this reason.

"Buying CDs and importing them into iTunes > subscription-based 'borrowing.'
Paying someone to let you borrow compressed versions of your music, let alone getting into the whole physical product arguement, is a much worse deal, imo. If you're not an audiophile, I guess I can understand the subscription-based idea, but to me it's kind of contradictory because if you love music enough to pay a fee for it every month, I don't understand why the audio quality wouldn't be as important to you.
Oh, and iTunes is awesome."

How is ANYTHING of this factual?

[Diff-chan]

1) Most people that claim to be audiophiles aren't
2) It's 60 bucks a year, the cost of 4 to 6 CDs (and I get tired of listening to CDs faster than I get tired of playing games)

Everyone's different. Some people think those services like Yahoo and Napster are good. I think theyre crap (I recommended Napster to Swift in Music Discussion, but thats because he wants to check out a lot of new bands). For some people the iTunes model is better. For some the Napster model is. Thankfully, in our world, both exist.

I think the best way to get music is used CD stores, btw, but thats just me.

P.S. When I met you you seemed to be a genuinely nice person. Its too bad you are such a flaming cock hole on TNL. It makes little sense. Are you trying to compensate for something? Were you mothered too much growing up?

Who are you talking to?

[Joust Williams]

To me

No, I'm glad other people prefer whatever. I don't care either way. But I'm not going to just say "iPod, everyone uses them duh". Not only is that a stupid response that doesn't say anything, but it's also something I (and lots of other people) disagree with.