YASR (Yet another shuffle ripoff): the Morestar MP270

Oh ho, so Luxpro is no longer the only game in town in the iPod shuffle knockoff department. The Morestar MP270 really just looks like a shuffle with a 7 color 128x32 screen tacked onto it, like the EZ Tangent but even more blatant. Interestingly, you can supposedly get it in capacities as low as 64MB, which seems a little ridiculous but hey, it's bound to be dirt cheap. It's doing MP3 and WMA support, comes with an FM radio and recorder, voice recorder, 12-hour battery life and transfer via USB2.0.

[Thanks, Will]

[Nathan @ Dec 19th 2005 1:24AM]

ha, that's just taking the piss...

[Jezza @ Dec 19th 2005 1:24AM]

Takes the piss big time apple should sue!!!!!

[Tom @ Dec 19th 2005 1:24AM]

And yet again its actually better than an iPod.

[Broo @ Dec 19th 2005 1:24AM]

it looks nothing like the iPod Shuffle- it has a LCD display... lol!

[Mike @ Dec 19th 2005 1:24AM]

I have an idea.. why don't these companies just save themselves a bunch of money on product development and just call Apple's legal department DEMANDING a lawsuit!

Duh!

[Austin Vaughan @ Dec 19th 2005 1:24AM]

Thanks "Will"! DAPreview dug this up yesterday. More info:

http://www.dapreview.net/comment.php?comment.news.1868

[Question Answerer @ Dec 19th 2005 1:24AM]

Why apple thought that not putting a display on it was the way to go I will never know. I'd be much more likely to buy the knockoff, as opposed to a real Shuffle, since it has a display and you could use it as a simple convenient USB mass storage device without the Shuffle DRM problems.

[Fito @ Dec 19th 2005 1:24AM]

Hey! More features than iPod suckle and probably for a better price? See ya Apple!!

[chris @ Dec 19th 2005 1:24AM]

if apple would have put an lcd on it it wouldnt have looked as sexy. plus they already have mp3 players with lcd screens, theyre called ipod minis and ipods.

[Zeek @ Dec 19th 2005 1:24AM]

This is starting to be akin to reporting the sun rose today.

[shuffle-kafuffel @ Dec 19th 2005 1:24AM]

I love the smell of pre-pubescent cranky trolls so early in the morning. I really have an urge to feed them.

[os4 @ Dec 19th 2005 1:24AM]

Comment #3: I guess it depends on what "is" means. 'Is' this thing a real product? 'Is' this something I can buy in the US, or 'is' this an asian thing that will never make it out of the country it's made in?

Comment #6: what does Apple DRM have to do with file storage? The only DRM exists as a wrapper around AAC files. In other words, the music file is protected by DRM, not the filesystem.

Comment #7: why would you think it will be better priced than the Shuffle? Apple has traditionally been a price leader in this area.

[Question Answerer @ Dec 19th 2005 1:24AM]

#12 I was thinking of DRM in that you can't simply copy an MP3 to the shuffle and expect it to play on the shuffle. The Shuffle forces you to use iTunes and also prevents you from copying MP3 files from the Shuffle to other machines, not just AAC, it seems to actually add a DRM layer to MP3.

[m @ Dec 19th 2005 1:24AM]

No AAC... useless.

I like to leave my music at cd quality on my laptop. Obviously that quality is not needed on a Shuffle. iTunes allows music to be downsampled on the fly when transferring to the Shuffle as to allow more music to fit on it.

Downsampling from 256 to 160 in AAC will produce a file that sounds the same as though encoding from CD to 160 AAC.

Doing that with an MP3 will create artifacts in the music. Not sure about WMA (but I refuse to use it as I refuse to use most other MS products/services/etc).

Point is: even if whatever software is used to transfer music to this MP270 allows downsampling on the fly (which I would assume it won't initially but if it does...), music quality will suffer unless I put in the extra time and harddrive space to store 2 versions of every song I have (~2000) and I refuse to do that.

Then again, I'm someone who likes to really enjoy music but am lazy...

[Mike @ Dec 19th 2005 1:24AM]

I am mystified why some people still can't figure out WHY Apple didn't put a display on a dinky flash player. The answer is so simple.

1) Have you SEEN these displays? They're so friggin small that you need to STOP and focus to read them. Most people I know (myself included) use the flash players as a COMPLIMENT to a regular iPod, often for working out.

2) How many songs do you have on these players? Unless it's chock full, it's not that hard to hit the track skip button to find the song you want. Heck, I do this WHILE I am running.. no need to stop and look at a dinky display.

3) Cost. Apple was gunning for the flash market and wanted to keep the player as simple and inexpensive as possible. They have HUGE margins, thanks to the lack of a display, yet they can also undercut the competition. They were able to drop the price of the 1gig Shuffle by $20 and are still turning a nice profit.

I'm not knocking players with displays.. the option is nice. An FM Tuner, in my opinion, is a no-brainer. I'll bet you money that the next revision of the shuffle is smaller, cheaper, and includes an FM Tuner.

As an aside, I really dig the new mobiBlu Cube player.. however, I would think that the width of the cube would be kind of annoying for running. I hope someome makes a nice belt clip for it. If it had PlaysForSure support (so I could load it up using my $6.99/mo Yahoo Music subscription), I would buy it in a heartbeat.

My biggest COMPLAINT about the Shuffle is the slow track-to-track skip and the "meager" 12 hour battery life for such a large player. I'm also betting that that the next revision of the shuffle will have 20+ hour battery life.

[GregGrunge @ Dec 19th 2005 1:24AM]

I think people are missing the purpose behind the shuffle... It's a portable player running on flash memory geared to primarily be used when working out, or while doing other daily tasks that wouldn't allow for you to sit there and watch your LCD 24 hours a day.

I have a 40gb 3rd generation iPod and I hardly EVER look at the LCD. Fact of the matter is that I actually like all of the music in my playlist, so it doesn't matter to me what song is coming next because I already know that I'm going to like it, so what I practically have, in essence, is a 40gb iPod Shuffle.

Also, what people fail to notice since they're too busy loathing Apple, is that Apple is the only company doing things that are innovative. They are ALWAYS first to the market with new products and peripherals that only leave the competition with something to aspire to.

MicroShaft and Winblows have never done a single thing that wasn't thought up and already done by another company (primarily Apple).

Hate on Apple all you want, it's not going to change the fact that they're the driving force in the computer/mp3 player industry.

[os4 @ Dec 19th 2005 1:24AM]

Comment #13: I don't believe Apple does anything special to MP3; there is an option to down-sample large files to be optimized for the Shuffle, but it does not add any DRM to it. None of the MP3s that I rip from CDs has any problem going onto my iPods. I use iTunes for managing my song files, but I have only bought a few songs from the Store for curiosity's sake. I can understand, though, your frustrations if you are not an iTunes fan. I agree with your criticism about Apple 'hiding' song files on the iPods. There are programs that enable you to get at them (or, if you are handy with the command line, it is not hard to get the files). I have used both to move songs from my regular iPod and my wife's Shuffle to my machine at work (which is a Linux box --fc4--, btw): XMMS plays them just fine. I am pretty sure that Apple has not licensed their DRM to anyone, let alone XMMS being able to decode Apple DRM files.

[Spicytuna @ Dec 19th 2005 1:24AM]

This is what the shuffle should've been!

[deslock @ Dec 19th 2005 1:24AM]

I think in general the iPod brand is overrated and the shuffle is obviously not for everyone (no screen, FM, voice recorder, or included AC-charger). But it has excellent sound quality, decent battery life (15-16 hours... I believe it's the only iPod that exceeds its rated battery life), is durable, has well-placed controls, is lightweight, and is very thin (this makes it completely unobtrusive when worn as a necklace under a shirt).

Many slam it for not having a screen, but I've found that I hardly used the screen on any of my players... depends on the user I guess.

So far all the shuffle knock-offs have been less-than-impressive. The LuxPro also has FM radio and voice recorder, but crappy sound quality and lasts only 6 hours (despite being rated for 12). Maybe this one will be different...

[russdogg @ Dec 19th 2005 1:24AM]

I wonder if they actually have any product shots of this; This is obviously a bad photoshopped mock-up, and it looks like they actually just cut out the nav off an image of the shuffle for this mockup. It probably doesnt even exist yet...

[JMatt @ Dec 19th 2005 1:24AM]

Bad design.

No, not the whole screen thing, it's the fact that when you wear it around your neck and you pick it up to change songs or such, the screen and controlls are upside down!