<![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous - Gizmodo Comments]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous - Gizmodo Comments]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> Godawful!

The_Raven

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> IDK if anyone pointed this out but I was browsing dapreview.net a nice site that I'm not plugging, and THEY had details, specifically more photos including one that shows, lo and behold, a tiny quasi-cylindrical screen on that cylinder thingy on the back. So this thing isn't dead to me yet, so long as it has CONSIDERABLE storage, otherwise whats the point

CrashingOut

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> looking decent > thin

ContemplativeTwig

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> I don't know about you, but there comes a point where it's just too thin, and this doesn't look like it's really pleasant to walk around with and hold to control.

Kaiser-Machead's Chips Ahoy!

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> @willyboy: There's up to date news on the radio. And talk shows. And emergency broadcasts. Usually podcasts are a night stale, after all.

Ypoknons

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> @willboy - echo'ing shaq - you may not want an fm tuner (maybe you're happy with your fm-less iPod?) but I certainly like having the option, which is why I usually buy iRiver or iAudio DAPs instead of iPods. The option to play .ogg and .wmas are also an added bonus, and another reason to eschew iPods.

CoffeeGeek

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> @willyboy:
you may not, but fortunately, iriver aren't custom making it for you - they are planning on putting it out for general release, where the general public might like the option of listening to the radio.


shaq

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> For those that didn't know, there is a model with a display, hence the FM tuner and other features.

LittleBigPlaneteer

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> maybe theyre just showing how big it is and and not saying which is better. just maybe.

redkamel

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> Put a magnet on that thing and it would be tits!

willyboy

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> Though, I do like the look of the thing.

willyboy

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> Please tell me again why I need an FM tuner on an mp3 player?

willyboy

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> $@$#$!! that is a screen. iriver needs to do a better job of highlighting that. I thought it was just another screen-less DAP in the post-shuffle world.

Ypoknons

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> @ikelleigh: It's a refrence gadget that everyone knows.
There's no comparing, it's a matter of scale.

GloStix

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> need to see it next to a fatnan. nice player, not so sure about the brush metal though.

wetworker

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> But there *is* a screen. See the 4th shot in the gallery here:

[www.engadget.com]

It's small; but, it's a screen.

yadatothethirdpower

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> It's a sizemodo, folks. The features are not being compared.

Sam Glover

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> The new nano isn't the tall and slender type. Why would they compare a square with a rectangle?

I want one of those. It's so awesome!

dekigo92

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> Well, that's what was is Matt's pocket. So that's what you get. Better than nothing. Jeez. Besides. It's not like the 2G nanos are THAT old. @SportBilly: Right. Comparing a Wii to an Atari 2600 is exactly like this comparison...right.

Now if this mp3 player was compared to say an iPod video, THEN the comparison would make no sense.

We all know how thin an iPod nano is. And putting this mp3 player next to it shows it's even THINNER than a nano, as if that wasn't already thin enough.

slingblade

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> Let me get this straight... you compared it to the OLD nano, and it has no screen? Wow, a really winner!

spishack

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> almost as thin as nicole richie..

akmarksman

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> @ikelleigh: I totally agree with you. It's a useless comparison. The Arab Aquarius

Arab Aquarius

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> i'd have the nano thank you. screens are nice to have...

Akmed

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> Comparing in to a previous generation? Why?

BTW, did you guys see how cool that Wii looks next to that Atari 2600?

SportBilly

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> @Galley: More like half a wafer thin.

slingblade

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> Not sure why you would want to compare these two devices. They are completely different. It would be more sensible to compare this with a Shuffle. And a new shuffle, not something 2 years old.

ikelleigh

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> @CRazysamz: Oh, and I'd say PMP instead of DAP, but these are just DAP's (Digital Audio Players), not Personal Media players.

Crazysamz

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> No screen!!?? I hate these new screenless DAP's coming to the market, you can't put a tiny-ass lcd on there?? Or an OLED?? Stupid...

Crazysamz

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> Wafer thin, but ugly.

WalkerP

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> Ok, so how do you set the FM-tuner without a screen? That would seem like trying to select playlists on a shuffle, but with commercials screwing it up.

AndyDuncan

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> wait is there even a screen on it?
its pretty small, but the only actual player parts of it that I saw were the next/last song buttons and the headphone jack
where's the rest?

itb0112

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> It's "wafer thin".

Galley

]]> <![CDATA[Hands On iriver Aplayer vs. iPod nano: Thinner, More Gorgeous]]> How can one compare this to the sheer beau-tay of an iPod Nano?

lamanzana

]]>