I'm never buying these again.

[Podder]

IMHO, the 2 main problems with the clones is the sound quality and battery life. If the sound quality is greatly improved with new headphones (significantly, though) then that's one problem solved.

I don't recall what the battery life is (10 hrs or?) but with the current Nanos able to provide 20-24, that's hard to beat even for the price of a clone. Think of it as use time. While the guy who spent $150 on an iPod, the other guy who spent $60 on a clone is probably recharging while the iPod owner is listening to music. You get my point. The other interesting tidbit I have heard about mp4 players is that some use a cell phone battery and are easily replaced. I think if the mp4 player has removable batteries, that's a huge advantage. I could be mistaken but I thought iPods had to be sent for replacement.

With all that said, however, it is easy to suggest considering one of these clones. You are not tied to particular software and you can get one at a decent price. The iPods are overpriced, aren't they? I was thinking of getting one or a brand name mp3 player but only because I was not too happy with the sound in my mp4 player. Also, I have had to buy an adapter and I discovered the player won't play VBR files (another disadvantage).

But, I bet that these mp4 players will eventually improve, both in design and overall quality. It's just a matter of time. For now, I think they are only good for the price. However, given time and addressing the issues, that could change.

[nanocopyuser]

Nah, there are some Nice Chipod's, the touch wheel isn't the most important thing :P and mp4's has video

[e_p_a_k]

i DON'T like the fact that you can't go through your song list while playing music.

[michiganjfrog]

Originally Posted by Podder";p=&quot

IMHO, the 2 main problems with the clones is the sound quality and battery life. If the sound quality is greatly improved with new headphones (significantly, though) then that's one problem solved.

I don't recall what the battery life is (10 hrs or?) but with the current Nanos able to provide 20-24, that's hard to beat even for the price of a clone. Think of it as use time. While the guy who spent $150 on an iPod, the other guy who spent $60 on a clone is probably recharging while the iPod owner is listening to music. You get my point. The other interesting tidbit I have heard about mp4 players is that some use a cell phone battery and are easily replaced. I think if the mp4 player has removable batteries, that's a huge advantage. I could be mistaken but I thought iPods had to be sent for replacement.

With all that said, however, it is easy to suggest considering one of these clones. You are not tied to particular software and you can get one at a decent price. The iPods are overpriced, aren't they? I was thinking of getting one or a brand name mp3 player but only because I was not too happy with the sound in my mp4 player. Also, I have had to buy an adapter and I discovered the player won't play VBR files (another disadvantage).

But, I bet that these mp4 players will eventually improve, both in design and overall quality. It's just a matter of time. For now, I think they are only good for the price. However, given time and addressing the issues, that could change.

The Nano's are 20-24 hrs battery life? When did that happen? I always read they struggled between 8 and 15, depending on the generation. The Meizu's are known to have better battery life than the Nano's, and they're 20 hours.

OKAY TIME 4 SOME QUICK FAX:

You can change the battery on your Chipod. So long as you are able to snip wires if necessary, solder if necessary, it should be a fairly small easy job. And so long as you can find an iPod battery that has the same dimensions as yours or the dimensions of the opening for your battery, and the voltage rate. The voltage ratings will probably be the same and given that the players are similar in dimensions, the dimensions shouldn't be a problem either. Particularly since the Chipod is thicker than the Nano.
Now all you have to do is find a battery that can fit with a high mah. You can theoretically supercharge your Chipod with a battery that's stronger than the one coming with the iPod.

iPods do have to be sent in for replacement (it used to cost $100, now I believe its $50-60, about the price of a good chipod), but if you're halfway competent, you can do as described above and replace your ipod battery too.

Headphones: You can buy high quality earbuds or headphones with a 2.5mm plug, you just gotta know where to look. I've seen Sennheiser PX100's with the 2.5mm plug on eBay for example. Pair a chipod with one of those and you won't complain about sound quality.

IPods ARE overpriced. They cost less than $90 to make. I think advertising accounts for the rest of the price. The mp4 players will and have been improving. Apparently, so much so that Apple is getting out of the iPod business and into the highly competitive phone business, because apparently, they can't compete with the cheaper, better equivalents that are flooding the market.

I think a lot of things are missed in this discussion about comparing chipods with ipods. You are literally comparing Apples with Oranges. The differences go far beyond a click wheel and a battery. See my chipod v. ipod guide (below) for an idea.

[lattesurf]

I'll agree with michiganjfrog on this part. I guess it is very difficult to compare the nano-clones with the ipods. The very basic thing is, what you pay is what you get, well almost all the time.

But to compare an ipod with the nano-clone would be like comparing the BMW 5 or 7 series to the perhaps Hyundai or Kia or even China's own Cherry QQ (hope i got the name right).
One is an overpriced luxury, whilst the other is just a simple runabout. Both does the same thing with petrol, but the expensive one gives you additional functions.

Think of benchmarking the BMW with the Hyundai. In terms of speed, functions, comfort, the BMW wins hands down.
The same thing goes for the nano-clones vs. ipod.

As michiganjfrog mentioned, the cost of the ipods are probably at around $90, and the nano-clones might be at around $10 to $15 (i think). So with much lesser costs involved, you really can't expect much (or even the same) from the clones.

Given the choice of the latest ipod and the clones, i'll definitely chose the clones, well the Meizu or Teclast at least.
With the money left over, i'll get a very good set of earphones, get great sounding music, and a couple of bucks left in my pocket to enjoy a latte at the cafe! :lol:

[newbielives]

What I have notice that I find ironic is that my Nano clone has better sound quality then my Ipod Video.

I am using Koss Porta Pros headphones which are almost audiophile quality and OMG the Nano clone sounds so much better.

I have tried every EQ preset in the IPod, but nothing matches the sound quality of the cheapo Nano clone using the Classic EQ Preset setting.


1Up for Nano Clones

[michiganjfrog]

Originally Posted by newbielives";p=&quot

What I have notice that I find ironic is that my Nano clone has better sound quality then my Ipod Video.

I am using Koss Porta Pros headphones which are almost audiophile quality and OMG the Nano clone sounds so much better.

I have tried every EQ preset in the IPod, but nothing matches the sound quality of the cheapo Nano clone using the Classic EQ Preset setting.


1Up for Nano Clones

Hear, hear! I will second that. I took out my 1st gen Nano clone chipod for the first time today, listened for about 15 minutes on my (slightly tweaked) Koss Sportapro headphones, and while I don't know what the Apple Nano sounds like, the sound I was getting was really impressive. It even made Elton John sound good.

[.::Lain::.]

Well if you ask me... You should have taken it as a R-I-S-K buying cheap mpx player so that you have at least lessen your expectation/s for the device itself. The fact that it's CHEAP really means a lot for the device this is equals to "l-e-s-s-e-r" functionality. Have that in mind that the more expensive the gadget is the wider range of functionality it could get.... ^_^