Napster isn't so shy about
their new DAPs after all. We just got to spend a little time with Napster's new 1GB PlaysForSure promotional player, and we liked what we saw for the most part. The tiny device probably won't be seen outside of its current role of attracting 1-year subscriptions, but it manages a nice look, decent user interface and a commendable 40 hour battery life -- not bad for $50. Of course, the player's first role is to support DRM10 PlaysForSure files from Napster To Go, but regular old WMA files and MP3s are supported as well, and it doesn't seem that Napster has made an effort to lock down the player from other services. You can also play back MPEG-4 video on the tiny, but nice, 128 x 160 LCD, but you'll be on your own for content since Napster doesn't currently offer any vids. There's also JPEG and FM playback, and everything is accessible via a convenient and fast iPod-like menu system. We'd estimate the player is 10-12mm thick, but while it's shorter than the
iPod nano, the player felt comfortable in our large hands, and the buttons were plenty easy to use. It might all come down to your preference of music service, but we can't see this little OEM player standing in your way. Keep reading for some more pics.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Bobo @ Jun 29th 2006 10:09PM
Now if only someone would use their service...
oh right.. Napster blows!
A Sta @ Jun 29th 2006 10:23PM
hey i reckon it looks better than that ipod neno thingy what that crap is called. but the thing says napster on it so i dont know people. i dont knoe. only time will tell.
Morton Salty @ Jun 29th 2006 10:27PM
That is the ugliest piece of stink I have ever seen. Pure FUGLY
jorge @ Jun 29th 2006 10:34PM
so wait, when it says that it supports mp3 files and whatnot, does that mean i can put my own music in it without buying music from napster???
Rage @ Jun 29th 2006 10:45PM
Just get the one year subscription, get the player, never use their service. 1gb player for $50. Not bad.
MindSmack.com @ Jun 29th 2006 10:51PM
I just ordered this. Will advise :)
MindSmack.com
Tricky @ Jun 29th 2006 11:04PM
That's an awesome player! By the way I read the article, however, it seemed like you'd have to pay for the one-year subscription or it'd lock itself down. Is that correct?
Shaun B @ Jun 29th 2006 11:11PM
they should of made it with more memory......
mynameisohyeah @ Jun 29th 2006 11:21PM
Bobo- Dude have you tried Napster?
No? Because I have.
It's way better than iTunes and here's why.
No matter what online music store you flock to, the audio will never be "your's" no matter if you buy it or have it temporarily downloaded through a subscription. All DRM files suck especially if you can only play them on one brand of DAP. I would much rather have temporary DRM files. The thought of keeping any files that aren't fully mine to do what I please just gets me mad as hell. I'd rather just accept that in five years, I still would have way more songs than the subscription fees equal out to. And who knows, by then maybe a service will be available where you have a subscription and at the end of the subscription you'll be able to have full rights to as many songs as you would have had if you'd bought them originally. I think this is a feasible idea because that service would instantly become the most popular and they wouldn't really be losing any money at all...
I am much happier with Napster than any other service I've tried (Rhapsody-too many bugs, Yahoo-crappy looking, too small a library, iTunes-too small library, no subscription). It's like Kazaa except you pay a monthly fee, have a clean conscience, and don't have to spend hours of your life correcting some jackass's bad spelling of "Nervana." Not to mention the radio service that you can navigate through, playlists on the go, etc. The rest of my family has ipods and it's no contest as to who's DAP/music service combo owns more.
tom @ Jun 29th 2006 11:51PM
I have had napster for about six months and love it...can't imagine using anything else. some of my friends have ipods but i they don't measure up as far as i'm concerned. pod batteries eventually go dead and then what? you have to buy the music (or steal it) to listen. with naps i listen to all kinds of new stuff every night and don't have to pay extra. if i want i can download songs i like and create playlists that i use on my player at the gym. they have preprogrammed radio stations based on more genres than i can imagine and a customized radio station of tracks napster's computers assemble for me based on my listening habits...these are always real interesting. i don't understand why everyone doesn't subscribe...at 192kbs it's higher fidelity than itunes, but do pod people even know this? seems like pod people just think their pod is cool or something...like their hardware statement is more important than the music experience...makes no sense to me.
Damage @ Jun 29th 2006 11:55PM
Hmm, that's not the free one that Napster's shilling. The one shown requires not only 12 payments of 14.95 but also an initial payment of $50.
Hell, I can get a 1GB MP3 player at Fry's for less than $50 (Shuffle Clone), so why bother with a player that's $230? Sure, you get a fill of music, but most of us would likely to have enough content to fill the thing 40 times over.
It's a decent starter's kit for those that are just getting into the day, but nothing more.
Bobo @ Jun 30th 2006 12:21AM
mynameisohyeah.
Yes. I tried Napsturd.
If your idea of enjoying music is simply based on attrition, the any subscription model will look appealing. Heck, I have Netflix. but Netflix has the EXPECTATION that you'll watch the movie only once. However, music is not about attrition to most, it's about what speaks to them on a personal level and listening over and over.
If you believe DRM is a bad thing, how about a company that erases your files once you stop subscribing to them. Now THAT'S restriction!
G-Unit @ Jun 30th 2006 12:24AM
I don't see why I would get this player...and the music service. I would spend the $200 odd dollars (for the player and years worth of music service) for like a 20-40 GB player, and then download pirated music!!!! like who doesn't use pirated music??
sputnik @ Jun 30th 2006 12:24AM
Napster is awesome. But I recently tried Urge and I must say that Urge with WMP11 kicks ass. URGE downloads a new catalog update everyday or everytime you login, so it makes searching really fast. As you type each letter the search narrows. Also Urge lets you drag and drop album art onto your album and it instantly makes that picture the album art. I did this with Films About Ghosts album picture in IE. I just found a picture online and clicked and dragged the picture right from the browser over to WMP11 and whallah. So many cool features to mention. Check out C-nets review of WMP11.
I recently left yahoo. Even though Yahoo is the cheapest subscription service, I found it to be buggy. After several occasions of having to re-download my music for it to work, I ditched the service for URGE. I would recommend Napster or URGE and if you haven't tried WMP11 you should download it and check it out. It's a huge improvement over WMP10 and blows away everything else out there including Itunes.
narcszm @ Jun 30th 2006 1:04AM
Yahoo's library is actually bigger than Napster's. Not Smaller. So is URGE. And Virgin Digital and Rhapsody. Napster has one of the smallest, but it's still better than iTunes because its a subscription service.
k @ Jun 30th 2006 3:09AM
just to clarify yahoo's library is 1.5 million strong while napsters is over 2 million strong. Napster is tied with only itunes in have the largest online library. http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-11297_7-6518467-2.html?tag=arw . You can check the facts on cnet, paste and copy the link then click on compare all services.
TZK @ Jun 30th 2006 6:06AM
First of all, there is no such thing as a "new 1GB player" when it comes to trying to get in on the competition - which is what the game is now.
The 1GB player was gone a year ago. Smarten up jackasses. :)
zip22 @ Jun 30th 2006 7:17AM
k, i'm afraid thats outdated
"Featuring more than 3 million songs"
http://www.apple.com/itunes/music/
itunes has the biggest library.
tom,
"pod batteries eventually go dead and then what? you have to buy the music (or steal it) to listen."
I'm not sure what you are saying. that doesn't really make any sense.
Jeffler @ Jun 30th 2006 7:18AM
@Rage
"Just get the one year subscription, get the player, never use their service. 1gb player for $50. Not bad."
You do know napster is subscription based, meaning at the end of the year, you'll probably have paid for a Nano alone?
Its nice, but lets see it without a subscription.
Oddmanout @ Jun 30th 2006 7:46AM
@Jeffler
"You do know napster is subscription based, meaning at the end of the year, you'll probably have paid for a Nano alone?"
Well, actually I'd say it sounds like at the end of one year you will have paid the price of a Nano with no music, and gotten an equivalent player and access to 2million+ songs. That's gotta appeal to some people.
As for which service is better...bah...most mainstream music sucks these days anyway. I buy the odd CD here and there when I find something I like, rip it myself, play it through winamp and upload it onto my iRiver.
Well...maybe I make with the 'Yo-ho-ho' every now and again, but if any of these services ever offer such eclectic music as that of 'Wolfstone', I just might be willing to bite the bullet and go legit...
After all, I can easily strip the DRM off in a number of ways anyway...
It's too bad Napster didn't come out with this bundle earlier in the game. While the iPod is probably a good product (never used one...wouldn't really know) it was the Apple name that really fueld it's success such that the Apple name now has a permanent connection to online/digital music. In fact, I can only think of one other name that ever had THAT strong a connection in peoples minds to downloadable music...NAPSTER.
Of course that was actually evil, deviant, red headed misfit step child, pirate Napster of old. Not the DOT .COM has been run subscription service of today. But the name HAD power. But I think THAT power is largely spent.
'Right place, right time' really can make all the difference...
Jules Procter @ Jun 30th 2006 7:47AM
What would be really nice, would be a 1Gb MP3 recorder.
The Napster looks the business, but I'll be sticking with my Archos Av340 for the time being.
web design uk @ Jun 30th 2006 8:05AM
Wow thats looking great. I can't wait to get my hands on one
Kashmunygofer @ Jun 30th 2006 8:44AM
Well one advantage Napster has is that they let you listen to any one of the 2 million songs, in full length, they have up to 5 times for free. This is much better than the iTunes 30 second preview where you really don't even here the main crux of the song. Plus need I mention the line-in record capabilities? hahah. I still would not subscribe just to get this player. Can get a much higher capacity flash player for a decent price, not too much more.
K @ Jun 30th 2006 9:02AM
not gonna read all of this, but i have to admit, napster is pretty good. i actually DO like it. I had it for a year when they were giving away a free 5gb iriver H10...
alienshards @ Jun 30th 2006 10:17AM
napster doesn't delete the music after you stop subscribing. it just doesn't play. if you resubscribe they'll work again.
napster is great for new songs and such. the numa numa song? i didn't have to buy that for 99 cents. i got it off napster, no additional cost, and was able to play it the few times i wanted it.
napster's pretty good. Most people don't listen to songs forever and ever. tastes change.
if you're going to subscribe, might as well get the player anyways. for 50 bucks, it looks pretty good.
OMAC @ Jun 30th 2006 10:22AM
I have Napster and it's pretty good. I can't speak for everyone, but it does what I want it to do. For those of you that want a little more 'freedom' with your subscription services, might I suggest Replay Music?
http://www.applian.com/replay-music/index.php?src=RMsite
mynameisohyeah @ Jun 30th 2006 10:40AM
@Bobo
I don't know where you got the idea that you can't listen to Napster songs over and over again. I know I sure do. With a passion my friend. In fact, about %80 of what I listen to is DLed from subscription services. I can finally download all the 90s alternative rock that I couldn't get when I was a kid because I didn't have a job. And it's all the sweeter knowing I didn't have to pay a boatload for them.
And I don't know where people got the idea that Napster "erases you're files." They simply don't restore the rights to the files you already have downloaded, rendering them temporarily useless. So, if you want to switch music services you won't even have to redownload all your songs. Once you add them to the new service's library and play them, the rights will be restored (I pulled this maneuver when switching from Rhapsody to Napster).
The only two means of buying music that I consider worthwhile are either getting the CD that has no DRM (utter freedom) or a subscription service that let's me listen to every song I can imagine while introducing me to new artists while I wait to buy the CD.
dave @ Jun 30th 2006 11:01AM
i'll say the same thing i always say. forget the drm... the default for itunes is the open source & free aac/mp4. none of these challengers add support for that. i'd consider switching, but my entire library is aac now. it would be so easy for them to support it. none of them do.
Hexx @ Jun 30th 2006 12:46PM
Umm... that music you download from itunes... yes it's aac, but guess what they added Apple DRM to it, which isn't open source.
ocelot67 @ Jun 30th 2006 1:10PM
Um...my phone is a 1 Gb mp3 player...next!
Ryan @ Jun 30th 2006 1:57PM
Check out rhapsody. Way better than anything else. Over 2 million songs and great service. Lots of indie stuff.
Alan @ Jun 30th 2006 5:04PM
I usually don't toss my $0.02 down on a post with this many trolls, but I just wanted to say, as a Napster subscriber, I think their service is wonderful.
I like the client better than Yahoo! and I don't trust RealPlayer further than I can spit, but really, any subscription service is worth the price. If I had to BUY every single track I listened to (or already have on MP3), I think I'd be out about $20,000.
It's definitely true that you don't own the music, but you don't need to own it. All you want to do is listen to it. I see Napster as a music player with the music built in, and all subscription services are fundamentally the same.
Also, for the record, I'm a digital music producer and a webdeveloper, so this is hardly an unqualified opinion.
Cheers,
-Alan
k @ Jun 30th 2006 8:10PM
Sorry, zip22 you're right. I didn't even know that they are that big now. Napster is one of the second largest online catalogs. I was just trying to point out that napster is one of the largest not smallest. I use napster and to date I have downloaded over 130 gigabytes worth of music, I won't live long enough for my monthly subscription fee to pay for that. I am very pleased with the service. If I hear a song, I go to a computer with napster and download it without paying any extra. If I want to own it i will buy it from the record store so I don't have any of that "you can only burn it 3 times, can only put it on 3 computers..." crap. I don't call that ownership when the online music sites tell you what you can do with it after you have bought it.
Also why are people saying you can not replay songs or you can only a limited amount of times. I'm listening to Axel F right now on repeat and have listened to it 8 times (man that song gets me pumped up).
Can someone who says that napster sucks explain why they think that? What is it about Napster that makes it suck? I here people say this but I never hear any reasons, it makes me not respect their opinion.
alienshards @ Jun 30th 2006 9:31PM
i believe the RIAA's opinion of you having a CD or downloading a song off of itunes is that you don't own it either.
hacker not cracker @ Jul 1st 2006 11:33PM
Rhapsody is sooooo much better!
fatedgod @ Jul 5th 2006 11:07PM
I agree with alienshards. As a long time subscriber, I feel Napster is very good (when you don't have to spend 3 days on tech support calls to fix a DRM issue). I just picked up the 50 dollar player for my girlfriend who is playerless, and since Napster supports 3 devices now (not sure, but w/e) I figured I could give her the gift of music for 50 bucks. And best of all, since I wasn't planning on changing services (unless they start giving music away for free) there were no additional strings attatched. Not to bad IMHO.
Gary @ Aug 11th 2006 10:27PM
Someone who has the 1 GB player, does this unit play live FM signal or is it one of those that downloads radio programs and plays them back? Thanks.
Sonan @ Aug 19th 2006 11:44PM
Gary, the player does receive live FM signals. You can't setup preset stations, but you can scan forward and backwards for stations. Definitely bare bones support.
My wife already had the subscription, so I got the player to replace an old iRiver 128mb. It's nice, but I can't get any video converted to the right format for it. The user's guide says what format you need your video in and then says "There are video conversion programs that can be found online if your video content is not in this format." I found one review that said ImTOO MPEG Encoder would produce the right format, but when I tried it the video was garbled on the device and it eventually locked up while trying to play it.
Also, it won't connect up to Napster's software on my PC. Aparently, you need SP2 installed even though it doesn't say so anywhere. I have an e-mail outstanding with Napster about this. It connects fine to my wife's PC, which does have SP2. And I can copy ripped CD tracks and other songs from my PC as a mass storage device.
Bottom line, you get what you pay for, and I'm fine with that.
T-hunterman @ Jan 31st 2007 9:01PM
It looks great.I can't wait to get one. I hope it will be very soon.It will be very handy to have around. I think that it looks a lot better than one of those i-pods. I would never get one of those things.