Previous Entry Share Next Entry
(no subject)
buzzed, B&W
hairylunch
Ah, so I posted on Slashdot about how much I like the new iPod minis, and it's been my post popular comments yet. So yes, it's been modded up to "Score:5, Insightful" but that's not a big deal. I have previous posts that have been modded up to 5 before. I actually like the fact that it's started a mini-debate on whether the dimensions of the iPod mini are significant. There are 8 direct replies, and some more nested replies, which is many more than the 0 to 3 I've gotten in the past.

Anyway, the pictures on the Apple page show that the original was 4.1 x 2.4 x 0.62, while the new mini is 3.6 x 2.0 x 0.5 inches. So, as many of those who have replied to my post don't like my choice of the word "awesome" to describe my feelings about the size reduction (though my sentence structure is slightly awkward, and most have interpreted it as my saying the size reduction itself is awesome.)

The original iPod is 6.1 cubic inches, while the mini is 41% smaller volumetrically at 3.6 cubic inches.

iRiver's 512 meg solid state device, is probably about 1.95 cubic inches (I halved the volume of the rectangular prism, 3.9 cubic inches, formed by the dimensions, since it's closer to a triangular prism), or 68% smaller than the iPod.

The Rio Nitrus which is probably closest in terms of capacity, is 4.32 cubic inches, or 29% smaller than the iPod.

Surprisingly, the Rio Chiba, they're flash based 256 meg product is larger at 5.18 cubic inches, or only 15% smaller than an iPod.

Creative's got a player that's pretty comprable at 4 gigs but it's $300 and 5.4 cubic inches, or only 11% smaller than the iPod.

I could go on and on, but the point is that you're not going to get much smaller than the iPod mini for the capacity, nor the pricepoint . . . whether the extra $50 for 11 gigs is worth it is going to depend upon how you use it. Like I said earlier, for me docking and changing my playlists wouldn't be a big deal, and with 4 gigs, I imagine this wouldn't be necessary more than weekly (even at 256 kB/s, you'd have over 4 days of music). So for me, what someone else may consider a marginally smaller size, is something that I'd be much more likely to use, rather than leave on my desk because it doesn't fit in my pocket well.

  • 1
I have to agree. I've been reading a lot of online discussions about the iPod mini, and far too many people only see the "hard drive for price" value part of it. I think it's part of this pretentious geek mentality that your money is only well spent if you get the "biggest" thing you can out of your purchase (the same mentality that causes a lot of people to decry Apple products in the first place).

  • 1
?

Log in