Beyond sound quality, which is of course subjective, and battery life, the reviewer also failed to mention anything about file format acceptance of the player. One of the main things that might draw me toward the Zen and away from the iPod is the iPod's lack of WMA compatibility.
As a Windows guy who has done his research on file formats with their inherent strengths/weaknesses, I'm going with WMA for my digital music needs. The Zen can handle WMA - the iPod can't.
It wasn't a bad review but it wouldn't have taken much to have some size (photo) comparisons between this and it's competitors - least of all, the original Zen. A lot of reviews fail to do this and when I am getting an MP3 player this is a big concern for me - size IS an issue, I don't want to end up with something oversized, as I may as well keep my Creative DAP Jukebox instead which also won't fit in my pockets...
Hmm, like I said on the previous 'masterpiece'... (review of creative's muvo tx) when are you guys going to get serious about sound hardware reviews ?
Just about any of us could have 'tested' the hardware this way. It is useless and sounds more like a commercial to me than a true desire to keep us informed about what's going on in the market at the moment.
I examine mp3 for a living, I've seen seriously hundreds of the damn things. The best hard-drive based unit on the market is the iRiver iHP-140 by a very long way indeed - unless you want something very small and sexy, in which case it's an Cowon iAudio M3.
Anyway, how can you continue to do mp3 player reviews with no comparison of sound quality or battery life? It seems to me that these two would be FAR more important than something like file transfer speed. These aren't meant to be portable HD (although they can serve as them in a fix). If you want your mp3 player reviews to be taken seriously, you need to include battery life benchmarks and sound quality benchmarks.
I mentioned this in my comments on the Dell DJ review: If you're going to compare size to the iPod, you should show a picture showing that comparison. The side-by-side with the DJ is fine, but there really should be one with the iPod since it is the icon of this class.
This is the MOST USELESS review I have ever read about the Zen Xtra!
What kind of a reviewer writes a review like this and the only "test" he focuses on is the transfer speed from to the Zen?! I think the transfer speed from a PC to a Zen is the last thing one someone's mind when they're looking for an MP3 player....geez.
The reviewer forgot to mention two VERY important things like :
- sound quality (a world apart from an iPod) - battery life (average of 10-12h)
I'm not really fussed how long it takes to transfer a few MP3s, and if I am then I'll use Notmad Explorer (from Redchair software - also left out by the reviewer) which is much faster than Creative's bundled software, not to mention stable.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
14 Comments
Back to Article
stephenc - Saturday, February 26, 2005 - link
I'm keen to try to find a music player for my wife with at least 10GB memory which she can -1 Play in the car and tune it to a radio FM station to play through the car
2 Play it at the gym whilst joging, etc
Hope you can help and advise
Stephen
Snacko - Sunday, July 4, 2004 - link
Beyond sound quality, which is of course subjective, and battery life, the reviewer also failed to mention anything about file format acceptance of the player. One of the main things that might draw me toward the Zen and away from the iPod is the iPod's lack of WMA compatibility.As a Windows guy who has done his research on file formats with their inherent strengths/weaknesses, I'm going with WMA for my digital music needs. The Zen can handle WMA - the iPod can't.
plewis00 - Sunday, July 4, 2004 - link
It wasn't a bad review but it wouldn't have taken much to have some size (photo) comparisons between this and it's competitors - least of all, the original Zen. A lot of reviews fail to do this and when I am getting an MP3 player this is a big concern for me - size IS an issue, I don't want to end up with something oversized, as I may as well keep my Creative DAP Jukebox instead which also won't fit in my pockets...WizzBall - Sunday, July 4, 2004 - link
Hmm, like I said on the previous 'masterpiece'... (review of creative's muvo tx) when are you guys going to get serious about sound hardware reviews ?Just about any of us could have 'tested' the hardware this way. It is useless and sounds more like a commercial to me than a true desire to keep us informed about what's going on in the market at the moment.
webchimp - Sunday, July 4, 2004 - link
A review of an audio device without a single mention of how it sounds - bizarre.Lurks - Sunday, July 4, 2004 - link
I examine mp3 for a living, I've seen seriously hundreds of the damn things. The best hard-drive based unit on the market is the iRiver iHP-140 by a very long way indeed - unless you want something very small and sexy, in which case it's an Cowon iAudio M3.This Creative wouldn't even be on in my top 20.
opposable - Saturday, July 3, 2004 - link
Sorry for the blank post.Anyway, how can you continue to do mp3 player reviews with no comparison of sound quality or battery life? It seems to me that these two would be FAR more important than something like file transfer speed. These aren't meant to be portable HD (although they can serve as them in a fix). If you want your mp3 player reviews to be taken seriously, you need to include battery life benchmarks and sound quality benchmarks.
opposable - Saturday, July 3, 2004 - link
cobalt - Saturday, July 3, 2004 - link
Review the iriver h series :\Oxonium - Saturday, July 3, 2004 - link
I mentioned this in my comments on the Dell DJ review: If you're going to compare size to the iPod, you should show a picture showing that comparison. The side-by-side with the DJ is fine, but there really should be one with the iPod since it is the icon of this class.jdmf13 - Saturday, July 3, 2004 - link
This is the MOST USELESS review I have ever read about the Zen Xtra!What kind of a reviewer writes a review like this and the only "test" he focuses on is the transfer speed from to the Zen?! I think the transfer speed from a PC to a Zen is the last thing one someone's mind when they're looking for an MP3 player....geez.
The reviewer forgot to mention two VERY important things like :
- sound quality (a world apart from an iPod)
- battery life (average of 10-12h)
I'm not really fussed how long it takes to transfer a few MP3s, and if I am then I'll use Notmad Explorer (from Redchair software - also left out by the reviewer) which is much faster than Creative's bundled software, not to mention stable.
To also answer a previous question in these comments, there is limited Mac support via a plugin for iTunes : http://www.nomadness.net/modules.php?name=Forums&a...
For USEFUL information on the Zen Xtra range, take a look at Nomadness : http://www.nomadness.net/
Quiksel - Saturday, July 3, 2004 - link
yikes, i'm glad i never bought one of those... gosh, doesn't look very good in any category, especially when you're comparing it to the iPod...Andrew, you mentioned the Windows support, but I guess there is no Mac support? Just curious.
Thanks for the review, but like #2, where's iRiver?
~q
EdvardGrieg - Saturday, July 3, 2004 - link
yay for once again failing to mention either Rio or iRiver....Souka - Saturday, July 3, 2004 - link
Yeah, but it can't be integrated into my BMW 3 series...unlike my iPod...which works great! :)