Cowon iAudio M3 (40GB version)

[Kent Pribbernow]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.biosmagazine.co.uk/article.php?id=1080' target='_blank'>http://www.biosmagazine.co.uk/article.php?id=1080</a><br /><br /></div><i>"Looking to steal some thunder from Apple's new iPod, Cowon has announced a super stylish portable digital audio player that boasts a claimed battery life of up to 35 hours - three times longer than the revamped iPod..."</i><br /><br />Ah yes, battery life. The third generation iPod's Achilles heal. However, with the new 4G models bumped up to 12 hours, is that enough for the average consumer? Will 35-hours of playback time entice you to buy the iAudio? Sure, it looks like a sweet MP3 player, but I don't think it quite has what it takes to challenge iPod. Even Sony has yet to pull that one off. <br /><br /><img src="http://www.digitalmediathoughts.com/images/iAudio-M3_1.jpg" />

[arebelspy]

The average consumer doesn't bother shopping around.. this doesn't have a big enough name to make it into PC magazine (the most they might check out, if it had "top 10 mp3 players reviewed" or whatever on the cover). iPod has the name, and that's what counts right now.

-arebelspy

[Jason Dunn]

Kent, what in your view will it take to challenge the iPod?

[Chris Gohlke]

I think 35 hours is just overkill, unless you are using it while camping or sometime when you are away from the grid for quite a while.

[Jason Dunn]

I think 35 hours is just overkill, unless you are using it while camping or sometime when you are away from the grid for quite a while.

Heh heh. This is the first time I've seen someone complain about too much battery life! We all complain about not having enough battery life. Think of it like a phone battery - it's not 35 hours of consecutive listening, it's more that you can use it for a week of regular listening without needing to worry about recharging it. I for one think that's great!

[Chris Gohlke]

Not that 35 hours is not cool, it is just a matter of bang for buck. Could they make the device smaller/cheaper or add other features instead at the same price point? On this particular device, I would take a shorter battery life in exchange for a screen on the main unit. I think this spec is more of a W?BIC! item and would server to differentiate them in the market.

Finally, for me at least, the usage pattern is completely different. I use the cell phone when away from the home/office. I use my MP3 player is used almost exclusively in the car/house/office.

[Felix Torres]

Do consider that batteries have finite lifetimes--they can only be recharged a certain number of times, as pod owners currently in court can attest to.
So a longer battery life means less recharges and a longer life for the player.
In the pod's case, reducing power consumption for the same battery, as Apple has done means the same number of recharge cycles will keep the pod alive longer, say 18 months instead of one year, if the plaintiffs can be believed...

The other thing about extremely long battery lives is *how* it is achieved; some outfits use bigger batteries, others use better batteries (say Li-polymer intstead of Li-ion), and some (Sony, for example) use massive flash RAM caches (256mb instead of 16 or 32Mb) so the HD only spins while filling up the cache, which serves the added benefit of avoiding skips or damage to the drive when used under severe motion scenarios.

The good thing about the flood of product coming to market is that consumers get a choice of which features matter and which combination of price and technology matters to *them*.

Different folks do have different needs and one size does not fit all.
So its a good thing we have a choice of models and technologies and aren't limited to just *one* vendor and *one* design and one set of compromised features.