![]() |
|
|||||||
| General Discussion Anything Non-Gaming should be put here. NON-FLAMMABLE |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
December 5th, 2007, 12:19 AM
|
#1 |
|
Tenor
|
iPods: Touch vs. Classic
I'm getting one for Christmas, and having trouble deciding which to ask for. What I need it for is primarily listening to music, but I'm also interested in the video-playing aspect of it. My main concerns are,
Does the video playback suck on the Classic screen? How much better is it on the Touch screen? Does the Touch support S-Video out like 5th/6th gen. Classics do? Is the quality of video encoded for iPod video good enough to even bother with this? Is the Touch UI fast to use? Or is it cumbersome in exchange for its sexiness? Is the Touch Wi-Fi a compelling option outside of major cities? Does the UI make it a pain in the dick to use? I think for the purpose of comparison, the Touch is just an iPhone without the phone, e-mail, and a few other features. Also interested in any non-Apple MP3 player recommendations. Thanks! |
|
|
December 5th, 2007, 01:41 AM
|
#2 |
|
cl_utch 1
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Syracuse, NY
Posts: 2,398
Rep Power: 15 ![]() |
Re: iPods: Touch vs. Classic
i don't mean to derail the thread or any of that, but, Zune ftw.
edit: didnt see the other mp3 recommendations, i highly recommend the Zune obviously, it's got a bigger screen than iPod and it's nav is easy and its sexy :] |
|
|
December 5th, 2007, 02:34 AM
|
#3 |
|
Enemiesof Tys and Grif
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,464
Rep Power: 11 ![]() |
Re: iPods: Touch vs. Classic
the only thing that decides for me is space
16 gigs vs 160 gigs |
|
|
December 5th, 2007, 02:36 AM
|
#4 |
|
keak sneak negro
|
Re: iPods: Touch vs. Classic
Definitely. Touch is a neat concept and all but it is seriously hindered by it's low space.
![]() |
|
|
December 5th, 2007, 03:11 AM
|
#5 |
|
>:|
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 1,192
Rep Power: 18 ![]() |
Re: iPods: Touch vs. Classic
Seriously, How often do you listen to 160 gigs worth of music? My music folder on my computer vastly exceeds the capacity of my nano, but its easy enough to delete stuff I don't listen to and upload the new stuff I do listen to.
I don't see why capacity beyond a few gigs even matters unless it comes down to transferring large amounts of music or having several movies on it. ![]() |
|
|
December 5th, 2007, 04:44 AM
|
#6 |
|
sucked at tfc, quit
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Age: 28
Posts: 1,786
Rep Power: 18 ![]() |
Re: iPods: Touch vs. Classic
^ i tried telling them that in the thread a couple weeks ago but nobody cared. apparently half the cats has about 10 times the amount of music i do and wants to be able to put it all on their mp3 player at once.
i've played with the touch and found the UI very responsive and slick. if you're after the space, or just don't think the style is worth the money, then ipod classic or nano. ![]() |
|
|
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| New Apple iPod's Nano | killu` | General Discussion | 10 | September 29th, 2005 02:49 AM |
| Classic Videogame remixes | SlimBrady | The Music Box | 1 | July 5th, 2005 03:46 PM |
| The state of TFC right now | Lucky | TFC Discussion | 17 | May 9th, 2005 04:16 PM |
| Common's new album receives classic rating in XXL | YourFavoriteWeapon | The Music Box | 23 | April 13th, 2005 01:25 PM |
| $5000 Team Fortress Classic Tourney at Winter CPL | Gunslinger | TFC Discussion | 57 | October 24th, 2003 09:19 PM |