iPod v the World thread (cont.)

2009-02-08 17:59:22

#51

max: Vela Incident; +1,652|6831|NYC / Hamburg

Overdose wrote:
max wrote:
80GB Gen5.5

I hate the damn thing but it was the only player with loads of space at the time

I want drag & drop and loads of codec support
i have the 30GB gen5.5 and i got rockbox. Its awsome it plays all my flac files for me, but it doesn't have good video support.
rockbox.org

I've dicked around with rockbox but don't really like the UI. Maybe I need to spend more time customizing it

_{once upon a midnight dreary, while i pron surfed, weak and weary, over many a strange and spurious site of ' hot xxx galore'. While i clicked my fav'rite bookmark, suddenly there came a warning, and my heart was filled with mourning, mourning for my dear amour, " 'Tis not possible!", i muttered, " give me back my free hardcore!"..... quoth the server, 404.}

2009-02-08 18:10:52

#52

Defiance: Member; +438|6934

This is a stupid thread that isn't based with any solid argument, logic and has no purpose but to promote one stupid fucking flame war.

Edit: If what I'm saying isn't clear, you want some debate thread over what didn't work out in another, but you start with mere fanboy bullshit and ask for the same from the other side. Make an argument or fuck off.

Last edited by Defiance (2009-02-08 18:12:08)

2009-02-08 18:12:49

#53

Brasso: member; +1,549|6894

Defiance wrote:
This is a stupid thread that isn't based with any solid argument, logic and has no purpose but to promote one stupid fucking flame war.

Edit: If what I'm saying isn't clear, you want some debate thread over what didn't work out in another, but you start with mere fanboy bullshit and ask for the same from the other side. Make an argument or fuck off.

i'm just glad it's not in "what tech did you buy today?" anymore.

"people in ny have a general idea of how to drive. one of the pedals goes forward the other one prevents you from dying"

2009-02-08 18:14:44

#54

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6734

How can a consumer really posit an argument based on their own brand loyalties or product preferences? Are those choices even wholly rational, quantifiable or qualifiable? Of course not. I see this this thread more as a discussion/debunking of the anti-iPod bandwagon more than anything else: I look forward to some of these elitist snobs coming forward and actually changing my mind by presenting me with some genuinely superior players. So far all I've seen is arguing about how 'x' player comes with Google Earth and 'y' mp3 device also acts as a rape-alarm emitter. Yawn. As I said in the first place, this argument is clearly over if someone can find me a 250-500Gb mp3 player that stores that much media at premium audio quality.

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2009-02-08 18:21:03

#55

Defiance: Member; +438|6934

Uzique wrote:
As I said in the first place, this argument is clearly over if someone can find me a 250-500Gb mp3 player that stores that much media at premium audio quality.

Then make a thread, if you want advice. Last I checked, the OP wasn't by you or any mention of it being for you. Clearly, it's not remotely that.

The OP, clearly, doesn't know much about PMP's, or how to post intelligently, and is proving it ad nauseam. If someone wants to somehow construct a thread that compares the iPod vs everything else (in defense of the iPod), I invite you to try. Just make it better then this crap.

2009-02-08 18:22:31

#56

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|6970|67.222.138.85

Uzique wrote:
Are those choices even wholly rational? Of course not.

Consumer decisions in the market are by definition rational.

2009-02-08 18:26:33

#57

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6416|what

Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Uzique wrote:
Are those choices even wholly rational? Of course not.
Consumer decisions in the market are by definition rational.

No, consumer decision in the market are irrational but have been defined. Like impulse buying.

2009-02-08 18:26:34

#58

bugz: Fission Mailed; +3,311|6575

Defiance wrote:
Uzique wrote:
As I said in the first place, this argument is clearly over if someone can find me a 250-500Gb mp3 player that stores that much media at premium audio quality.
Then make a thread, if you want advice. Last I checked, the OP wasn't by you or any mention of it being for you. Clearly, it's not remotely that.

The OP, clearly, doesn't know much about PMP's, or how to post intelligently, and is proving it ad nauseam. If someone wants to somehow construct a thread that compares the iPod vs everything else (in defense of the iPod), I invite you to try. Just make it better then this crap.

I agree we need a thread like Zimmer posted (The definitive guide to MUSIC players) except for MP3 players. Let everybody contribute their own positive opinion about 1 or more mp3 players that they've had the chance to experience.

Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/ebug122

2009-02-08 18:26:47

#59

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6734

Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Uzique wrote:
Are those choices even wholly rational? Of course not.
Consumer decisions in the market are by definition rational.

In general/theoretical terms, yes. However you cannot rationalize a phenomenon like brand loyalty, or the psychology of buying the 'in thing'. Slightly different matter- a matter of social interest, not market economics or consumer buying.

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2009-02-08 18:27:06

#60

CammRobb: Banned; +1,510|6394|Carnoustie MASSIF

4Gb nano. 2 years old. Dropped down the pan. Still works.

2009-02-08 18:27:45

#61

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|6970|67.222.138.85

Uzique wrote:
Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Uzique wrote:
Are those choices even wholly rational? Of course not.
Consumer decisions in the market are by definition rational.
In general/theoretical terms, yes. However you cannot rationalize a phenomenon like brand loyalty, or the psychology of buying the 'in thing'. Slightly different matter- a matter of social interest, not market economics or consumer buying.

You can exactly rationalize it, you just can't quantify it. Two very different things.

2009-02-08 18:29:09

#62

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6864|132 and Bush

Uzique wrote:
Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Uzique wrote:
Are those choices even wholly rational? Of course not.
Consumer decisions in the market are by definition rational.
In general/theoretical terms, yes. However you cannot rationalize a phenomenon like brand loyalty, or the psychology of buying the 'in thing'. Slightly different matter- a matter of social interest, not market economics or consumer buying.

Identity issues and superior marketing.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2009-02-08 18:29:32

#63

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6416|what

Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Uzique wrote:
Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Consumer decisions in the market are by definition rational.
In general/theoretical terms, yes. However you cannot rationalize a phenomenon like brand loyalty, or the psychology of buying the 'in thing'. Slightly different matter- a matter of social interest, not market economics or consumer buying.
You can exactly rationalize it, you just can't quantify it. Two very different things.

You can't rationalise impulse buying. You can quantify it.

Anyone who's studied economics and buyers markets would recognise this graph:

https://www.ericlynchcopywriter.com/images/TechAdoptionLifecycle.gif

Last edited by TheAussieReaper (2009-02-08 18:34:28)

2009-02-08 18:31:20

#64

Defiance: Member; +438|6934

Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Uzique wrote:
Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Consumer decisions in the market are by definition rational.
In general/theoretical terms, yes. However you cannot rationalize a phenomenon like brand loyalty, or the psychology of buying the 'in thing'. Slightly different matter- a matter of social interest, not market economics or consumer buying.
You can exactly rationalize it, you just can't quantify it. Two very different things.

Oo, an interesting topic.

How are they different? If you can't quantify the rationalization, then the decision (based on the rationality) isn't rational itself. It's the difference between buying something "because it's cool" or "because it's $50 less." The former is not a rational reason thus any decision acted on by it is not rational.

2009-02-08 18:37:24

#65

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|6970|67.222.138.85

u guys r dum lolz

From an econ 101 book:

Economics is grounded on the assumption of "rational self-interest." Individuals pursue actions that will enable them to achieve their greatest satisfaction. Rational behavior means that individuals will make different choices under different circumstances.

Rational means logical, not correct. So long as their is a coherent line of thinking towards making a decision, it is rational. That line of thinking could be I want to see unicorns riding on rainbows, so I will take this LSD. That line of thinking could be a subconscious desire to look fucking cool, and to buy a product accordingly.

A definition of rational can't be defined for a group of people, because it's different for every single person.

2009-02-08 18:48:58

#66

Defiance: Member; +438|6934

Flaming_Maniac wrote:
So long as their is a coherent line of thinking towards making a decision, it is rational.

To me, any decision based on emotion, especially desire, is neither logical, coherent or rational. They're synonyms.

A definition of rational can't be defined for a group of people, because it's different for every single person.

Well, that works out.

2009-02-08 18:51:35

#67

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|6970|67.222.138.85

Defiance wrote:
Flaming_Maniac wrote:
So long as their is a coherent line of thinking towards making a decision, it is rational.
To me, any decision based on emotion, especially desire, is neither logical, coherent or rational. They're synonyms.

Well that's not the definition everyone else uses.

2009-02-08 19:03:27

#68

Defiance: Member; +438|6934

Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Defiance wrote:
Flaming_Maniac wrote:
So long as their is a coherent line of thinking towards making a decision, it is rational.
To me, any decision based on emotion, especially desire, is neither logical, coherent or rational. They're synonyms.
Well that's not the definition everyone else uses.

Commercials work so, apparently not. I'm cynical enough to recognize that the popular decision is rarely right. Comparing the polar opposite types of decision making:

1: Everyone has one.
2: It has features that are useful to me for it's cost and other similar products are not worth the difference in features or cost to me.

I dare someone to call the first one correct.

2009-02-08 19:06:07

#69

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|6970|67.222.138.85

The point is that logical decisions are not necessarily rational, and vice versa. If someone cares about flash more than substance, buying Apple products is a rational decision. That's just all there is to it.

2009-02-08 19:08:46

#70

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6864|132 and Bush

M A R K E T I N G .. it's what Apple does best.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2009-02-08 19:18:54

#71

Defiance: Member; +438|6934

Flaming_Maniac wrote:
The point is that logical decisions are not necessarily rational, and vice versa. If someone cares about flash more than substance, buying Apple products is a rational decision. That's just all there is to it.

I see what you mean, though I would word it differently. Try looking at it this way: Emotional vs logical. Caring about flash = emotional. Substance = logical. Any decision must be based on one or the other. If you say that rational means there is simply a reason, all decisions are rational. However, not all rational decisions are logical. They could be emotional.

Personally, I get more joy from buying a product worth it's cost rather then being able to show that I have the same thing as everyone else. I don't understand how you can get joy from that, everyone has the same thing, what's so special about you?

In a slight irony, I don't know any Apple products that are flashy. All their products are aesthetically clean and simple which I like a lot.

2009-02-08 19:50:28

#72

Miggle: FUCK UBISOFT; +1,411|7005|FUCK UBISOFT

buying apple products is illogical

https://llamabutchers.mu.nu/archives/evil%20spock.jpg

2009-02-08 20:39:58

#73

FatherTed: xD; +3,936|6764|so randum

ipods are fit.

Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella

2009-02-08 20:41:05

#74

CammRobb: Banned; +1,510|6394|Carnoustie MASSIF

FatherTed wrote:
ipods are fit.

So is JoshP's Mum.

2009-02-08 20:44:24

#75

FatherTed: xD; +3,936|6764|so randum

SirSchloppy wrote:
FatherTed wrote:
ipods are fit.
So is JoshP's Mum.

pics?

Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella

BF2S Forums iPod v the World thread (cont.)

Overdose wrote:

max wrote:

Defiance wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Defiance wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Defiance wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Defiance wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

FatherTed wrote:

SirSchloppy wrote:

FatherTed wrote:

Board footer