Philips releases three yawn-inducing GoGear MP3 players
By Joshua Topolsky 
posted Jun 18th 2008 11:45AM
posted Jun 18th 2008 11:45AM
Please note: If you're a current Engadget commenter, you do not need to re-register. Simply login and you will be prompted to select a username.
You bash on these this little MP3 player but for some its a great fit who dont want the locked down Ipod's.
This looks very similar, in form and function, to my beloved iriver S10.
4GB is a little to close a "fit" for my taste. Then again, 16GB is too. Philips USED to understand this and USED to have expandable memory slots, but the past couple years its been nothing but nice slick mp3 players with good battery life and zero expandability. I dont know what they are so afraid of; making an mp3 player thats not crippled by this easily amenable but hideous flaw.
Quite ironic that ipod is tied to itunes is both part of what appeals to people (easy to use for people even not that used to computers), and what turns other on that prefer to feed the device they use directly.
This isn't an iPod killer
Nope... it's an mp3 player... it plays music.
i think it looks kinda cool.
What is it with these a$$holes that immediately have to make a comment that such and such 'isn't an iPod killer'.
By the look of it, this actually $hits all over the Shuffle, whereby you can acutally read what is going, FM tuner and all.
Endgadget - No wonder you are looking for new writers. The totally bisaed $hit you guys have dishing up lately...
Ok, rant is now finished...
BigBloke, if you read the post, you'll see that the Engadget writer didn't once mention Apple, iPod, "iPod killer," or anything that sounded biased. All he said was that it looks like a boring device. Opinion? Yes. Biased? It doesn't sound like it. $70 for a 4 GB music player with nothing we haven't seen before? I tend to agree with him.
@MEAT!
If you read BigBloke's post, you'll see that the he didn't once mention the Engadget writer. In fact, he was talking about the guy he replied to.
Opinion? No explanation, just an adjective based on nothing. Just "boring". Do you call that an "opinion"?
Biased? Yes, if anything that does not come from Apple is "boring" by default.
@giuliop
"If you read BigBloke's post, you'll see that the he didn't once mention the Engadget writer. In fact, he was talking about the guy he replied to."
Read this line, written by BigBloke:
"Endgadget - No wonder you are looking for new writers. The totally bisaed $hit you guys have dishing up lately..."
He is referring to this post on Engadget and thus this post's author, and accusing him of being biased.
@giuliop
"Biased? Yes, if anything that does not come from Apple is "boring" by default."
I agree. You will see, however, that this post's author, Joshua, does not once negatively compare the device to an iPod or even mention Apple. How can we conclude that he is biased against anything that is non-Apple?
There's a bit of confusion here. You mentioned "Apple, iPod, iPod killer" in conjunction with the author's biased opinion, while BigBloke was criticising the guy above, which in fact said something about "iPod killer". So yes, he was accusing the author of being biased, but not because he said something about Apple. In fact, he (and we) can conclude that Engadget is biased simply by looking at all the other posts: there is no need to mention Apple if you bash everything that isn't Apple - although they have other random preferences, just look at the other MP3 player by Samsung in a later post.
It has to be $300 to be an ipod killer. What good is it without video playback on a tiny screen and a word processor?
The Zune 80 is only $250 and seems to be doing a good job taking on the iPod. Seeing as Cnet rated it the best mp3 player above the iTouch I feel pretty good about owning one.
If by doing a good job you mean not taking any of the iPods marketshare whilst itself only having a 5% slice then yeah...
I'm not an apple fanboy, but despite good try's and trying to rid the "DRM lock-down of the iPod" it fails, because of lack of users, microsoft branding and the iTunes store "Lock-down" works incredable well for the non-technologically clued-in people.
Even still the allegged lock-down does not exist as you can import music from anywhere onto your iPod via iTunes (see *) except Protected WMA's which are becoming even less of an abundance.
*iTunes is another complaint, people say they prefer file management. This is not the case, you usually end up with "Track1" and awkward filenames this way, for the casual user, iTunes works brilliantly, automatically and feature-filled-edly, with CD ripping, auto-sync, and automatic album art and track identification retrieval.
It works great. There is no denying it. Apple sells *systems*. they are tied together, and work beautifully. iPod+iTunes, Mac+OS X, iPhone+at&...scratch that last one...
I have never owned a mac, I'm not a fanboy, but you can't argue that they're stategy is ingenious.
Derry, dude... the term iPod Killer is meant in terms of whether the device outperforms the iPod with which it competes. You don't need to tell us that Apple is going to sell more iPods than Phillips will of these things... that's obvious.
In N Out burger (those are good burgers Walter) makes way better hamburgers than McDonald's, but they aren't going to outsell McDonald's EVER.
This device is specifically priced and designed to compete with the iPod shuffle, and it seems to be way better than that piece of crap.
Purported Shuffle killer. It wins hands down since it has triple the features of a Shuffle. Winner and still champion of low-end throwaway mp3 players....Philips.
Of course Apple probably sells more Shuffles in a week then this will sell in a year. No matter. Alternative players are always welcome for the non-Apple crowd.
Well, for me it's a Shuffle killer. Bought the 4GB version already a few months ago - needed a cheap, small and light player for sports (MTB).
My Classic's too big and heavy for that ...
this is a ridiculous article. What exactly is wrong with these MP3 players? What do they not provide in an MP3 player that would take them from "boring" to "exciting".
Last time I checked, an MP3 player is for storing and playing back music and there are hundreds of options out there now. So, yes... they may be boring.. but so is every other MP3 player there is. Boring is good because that means they are doing their job without any unwanted surprises.
I think this MP3 player is actually fairly good looking, the OLED display is nice... and it will *gasp* PLAY MP3s!
If you want a hand held pocket MP3 player that teleports celebrities to your parties, can perform jedi mind tricks on your enemies and draft 200 page legal documents in nanoseconds then go talk to Apple I suppose.... if you are a freaking millionaire.
The iPod shuffle is the only Apple offering that is in this product's price range and that thing won't even let you see the title of the song you are playing.
Engadget, when reporting new product... do so in a neutral manner. If you want to review it, then that's a different story.
well said Chase, truly well said!
Yeah I'm not usually one to comment on fanboyism but this is a bit excessively negative, especially considering the price and the fact that it has a fairly decent screen. Compare this with the glowing iPod Shuffle review from 2006:
http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/12/hands-on-with-the-2g-ipod-shuffle/
Sure, it was 2 years ago, but Apple's still selling the shuffle (screenless) at roughly the same price. I personally think its a really dumb concept altogether; buy a freaking portable radio for $10 and you'll get roughly the same thing without Apple somehow convincing you that not having a screen is a "feature".
Kudos Chase!
i cant help but feel that engadget personally dislikes Philips as a brand...
http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/06/philips-new-lcd-lineup-continues-to-not-impress/
http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/08/philips-busts-out-a-couple-yawner-voip-phones/
It looks pretty damn uninteresting to me despite what it does.
@ Chase / other commenters. I don't mention any Apple products in this post, nor do I compare the DAPs to other players. I simply don't find the specs or design of this particular MP3 player very interesting -- in fact, I find them to be just the opposite. If you want straight press releases and mindless pleasantries about each new product that's released, I'm afraid Engadget isn't the right gadget site for you.
@ Josh / Engadget
If you don't like the OPINION of your readers, perhaps writing for Engadget isn't the right gadget writing site for you.
I'm not quite sure that Weblogs, Inc. would much appreciate it's writers telling it's readers to go read elsewhere.
This isn't an argument of artistic freedom. This is capitalism. If you don't play by the rules you get weeded out.
My suggestion to you is to start reporting in a manner consistent with the industry.
Joshua, I have to admit, I respect that you responded to criticism. That's pretty rare on here!
Could you elaborate on the specs and what part of the design you find uninteresting?
I think 20 hours of playback is pretty sweet, and it supports (other than .aac, i know, shocking!) the main codecs. And you don't need a great screen resolution to browse ID3 tags... and i love the ability to drag-and-drop.
As far as the design, do you not like the rounded edges or something?
I don't think its that people don't like your reporting in general (in general I like the reporting on this site), but in this particular article, i think the backlash has to do with the lack of explanation of your harsh criticism. It'd be a different story if we knew you were a fan of FLAC or OGG and felt it was completely ridiculous not to support that these days... but there was no explanation! heh
Oh snap, customizable EQ too! hehe
Sorry, I'd still like to hear your response.
I agree mostly with Anonymouspimp. What's so uninteresting about the features? It's pretty fully featured. Was such a small player supposed to do something new for us?
Did you mean maybe a stopwatch feature for working out? Maybe more CODEC support? What?
@ Chase / anonymouspimp. I don't really need to justify my opinion, but I will. First off, I find the iPod shuffle yawn inducing as well, so let's get that out of the way. As for the Philips'? Lack of AAC support, uninspired design, and no larger storage options are what turn me off. The market is flooded with small, low capacity MP3 players -- they need to step up their game.
OK Mr. Topolsky, fair enough.
But how much can you really do with a small player design-wise, honestly? Unless you decide to go for unusual shapes or something. But I'm happy that this one has a screen. And a readable screen probably does fit best on a square or rectangular player. You may be able to get away with a circular screen too, though it's a bit cramped on the Zen Stone Plus.
And the small players are popular likely for 2 main reasons. They are usually under $100, and great for physical activity.
Higher capacity in flash often means much more money at this time. I sure wouldn't want to fall down and break a $179+ player while working out!! Not to mention fear of a more expensive player being stolen. I think this could be great as a second MP3 player. OK so it's not revolutionary, but it's useful for what it is.
@ Joshua
True enough, you didn't "need" to justify your opinion. But I appreciate that you did. XD (I still mostly disagree, although SD expansion would have been awesome lol)
I suppose its not your job to make everyone happy on here. Again, I just thought this particular article (iventhe lack of explanation) was harsh.
Regardless, thanks for responding!
The MP3 player induces three yawns?
The player or the picture didn't make me yawn, it was the writing below it.
Burn
gizmodo good review engadget bad.... woop the bit*h fight continues
I dont see how these are yawn inducing, considering the fact that they 1up the shuffle in EVERY WAY POSSIBLE.
The original GoGear line was pretty interesting, like the GoGear Key019 Camcorder.
I can't see why anyone buying their first mp3 player would choose an iPod shuffle over this. And I only make this comparison because I assume the author thinks this is "yawn-inducing" compared to a shuffle.
(Also, I say "first" mp3 player because if they already own an iPod and use iTunes, they are pretty much stuck with iPod if they've invested any reasonable amount of money on iTunes music and don't know how to convert it...)
Personally I think this mp3 player looks sharp. And is (surprisingly) well priced.
i have a stake of wood and some $4/gallon gasoline with Joshua Topolsky's name on it lol
I used to own a Creative 4gig little cube that looked very similar to this. I've since owned 2 iPods but since I only use them for music anyway I'm tempted to go back to that smart small design.
I just wanted to say this: As soon as i read the title i actually yawned.
If it had an Micro SD Card expansion slot, this little guy would own.
It's very 2003-era...like those little RCA mp3 players...
Those things were awesome. They could hold like 30 songs.
This is noticably bigger then the ipod shuffle and slightly bigger then the Sansa Clip. I've seen it in real life and its pretty small but still bigger then the other two. I guess about twice the size of a shuffle. And if you picture the clip infront of you then make a square of it by extending the short sides of this unit. Thats roughly how big it is.
You can do whatever you want with this information. I just want apple to shrink the ipod nano to shuffle size. I've got an ipod nano and once you get used to the clickwheel you'll never want anything else. I know I'm basicly getting ripped off but apple just have a monopoly on this one.
What do you mean by boring? The design? Cause the specs sure aren't!! If reviews say these sound good as well, I just may try one! I also don't think the design is necessarily boring either, since a screen on a small player is a GOOD thing!
Engadget should actually get some writers that aren't totally bored and pissed off with the whole "gadget" thing. And if something that is actually totally yawn worthy comes along, please feel free to not share it with everybody.
BTW, no, I do not think I could do a better job ;)
Why are we yawning? It has a voice recorder so I can "jot down notes" while I'm jogging. It has an FM tuner so I can hear the audio on the TVs at the gym. I'm not tied to iTunes with this device.
While this doesn't trump what the Sansa Rhapsody players do, it still is a lot more versatile for those of us who don't care about video than an iPod Nano or Shuffle. Plus, it doesn't create a hole in my pocket (am I the only one who is convinced that Apple users love to waste gobs of money?)
I would agree with others on this post. I don't think these are boring players...just goes to show that engadget favours Apple too much and if doesn't come close to that then it's not worth looking at....
i think its only boring if your choice of music are boring, its what you put inside your DAP that makes it exciting
Wow, I didn't even know that Phillips fanboys existed. This sub-species of the internet should be preserved for examination by future generations.
if those devices arrive here in Brazil, sure their ad agency will give them a craptastic name, like "Ripa FM" ("rips FM") or "Ripa Tudo" ("rips it all"), already used for GoGear PMPs and Philips stereos.
I wonder if it sounds better than the Clip? The Clip's SQ is stellar. The EQ presets are lametastic but you can customize it to your liking. The clip sounds sweet. Line-in and an SD card slot would be win on this or a new Clip.