Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Portables Handhelds Hardware

Archos Releases Portable Video/Image/MP3 Player 225

Posted by simoniker from the swiss-army-knife-of-portability dept.
GregGardner writes "Archos is about to release the AV300 series, the next generation of portable video/image/MP3 player based off of the Archos Jukebox Multimedia discussed on Slashdot previously. Features include a 3.8" LCD screen for viewing movies and photos, FM tuner, MP3 playing and recording, 20GB or 40GB HD models, USB2.0 (optional Firewire) connection, TV-out, MPEG-4 encoding from a video/audio-in signal, digital photo (3.3 megapixel) and video camera, and much more. Looks like some of the features require add-on modules. I found a brief review on SF Gate which states that the 20GB model (AV320) will retail for $570."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Archos Releases Portable Video/Image/MP3 Player More

Archos Releases Portable Video/Image/MP3 Player

Comments Filter:

  • Interesting (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 02, 2003 @06:22PM (#6101173)
    Sounds great, but what kind of resolution are we talking about here? I wouldn't want to see fuzzy, pixellated video writ large on my TV screen, whether it comes from my VCR or a tiny MP3 player
    • The inbuilt LCD screen has a resolution of 320x240.
      And when you attach the device to a TV screen, you
      get "near DVD quality".

      Don't nail me down on this, but I think you get
      something like 640x480 and 25fps.

      PS: I had a chance to look at it, and the inbuilt
      screen is excellent.
  • My Ogg Vorbis collection is getting bigger as I convert all my CDs to it and I need a portable that not only plays it, but also records in it.

    Why isn't this done yet?
    • You (and I) are the minority. I too am waiting for ogg support, but oggs aren't easily available on popular P2P networks [kazaa.com] yet, so nobody is in a huge rush to make a product that there's not much demand for.
      • I get quite a few Ogg's from WINMX...I am not going to convert my mp3's but everything new I convert from CD goes to Ogg.

        After looking at the site it seems to me that ALL the adaptors mount on a parallel port ?!?! can that be true ?
      • Availability of Ogg on file sharing networks and availability of Ogg-capable players seems to be a chicken-and-ogg problem...
    • Ogg Vorbis is a niche format. It may be technically superior, but so was betamax. It's all about whether or not it gets player support. If it doesn't, all the superiority in the world won't save it.

      You may want to keep this in mind while you're busily converting all your CDs.
      • Ogg Vorbis is a niche format. It may be technically superior, but so was betamax. It's all about whether or not it gets player support. If it doesn't, all the superiority in the world won't save it.

        Wrong comparison - the difference is - MP3 is owned and patented by Fraunhofer and it is charging patents on every encoder and decoder. OGG Vorbis, on the other hand, is free for anyone to implement, sell, encode, play, etc.

        There is absolutely no similarity between Betamax and OGG Vorbis.
        • There is absolutely no similarity between Betamax and OGG Vorbis.

          The average user doesn't give a crap about decoder liceses; when was the last time you had to pay for MP3 software? The comparison is a valid one because users are presented with two choices, and are choosing what allows them to most easily enjoy their (and other's) music, not which choice makes a better political or ethical statement.
          • The average user doesn't give a crap about decoder liceses; when was the last time you had to pay for MP3 software?

            I don't disagree here - this was not my point at all.

            The comparison is a valid one because users are presented with two choices, and are choosing what allows them to most easily enjoy their (and other's) music, not which choice makes a better political or ethical statement.

            Wherever the "political" and "ethical" came from? Anyway, you are right with mostly because MP3 is already a widespre

        • if ogg is so free (Score:2, Insightful)

          by ihatewinXP ( 638000 )
          why doesnt anyone support it?

          that is why i encoded all my (500) cd's at 256k mp3. not b/c its a better format or its lining frauhofer's pockets, but because i can listen to em anywhere.

          let me see your:

          dvd player, ipod, car cd player and home component cd player play an ogg and then i still wont change because in 5 years they still wont be making ogg stuff.

          im osrry i wanted ogg to work too but its just not happening. that said apple telling me to encode my shit using AAC is about as likely as my using WM

    • Re:Ogg Vorbis support! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Pieroxy ( 222434 ) on Monday June 02, 2003 @06:35PM (#6101287) Homepage
      I'm wondering if when Ogg version 2 will be released you'll convert all your CDs into this new format or if you'll keep them on your "very old and bad" Ogg V1 format.

      Industry needs to settle itself on a media, and MP3 seems to be acceptable. In 5 years, we'll have 5TB HDDs in these little devices and my 256kb MP3 collection will fit just fine into 5% of it.
      And we'll also have Ogg V6 which will oblige yourself to re-encode for the 6th time all of your CDs (Or you'll be blamed to be such a retard for using OggV5)

      My point being, who knows if there is a need for Ogg support on these things? Certainly not a commercial need...

      • Re:Ogg Vorbis support! (Score:5, Insightful)

        by zurab ( 188064 ) on Monday June 02, 2003 @07:28PM (#6101613)
        The following may sound like a flamebait, but it's not. I am not making any statements to you in particular, or to anybody. I am just making a general observation.

        I'm wondering if when Ogg version 2 will be released you'll convert all your CDs into this new format or if you'll keep them on your "very old and bad" Ogg V1 format.

        What I am wondering instead is - when, in the future, MP3 replacement is spoonfed to you with the same or even harsher restrictions that MPEG-4 currently enjoys, will you simply bend over as usual, or will you demand and use something standard that works better and bears no cost to you, or anyone, to use in any way they please?

        And we'll also have Ogg V6 which will oblige yourself to re-encode for the 6th time all of your CDs (Or you'll be blamed to be such a retard for using OggV5)

        Actually, it is MP3 format that is fast reaching its end of lifecycle. Start off, it is inferior to other current formats, including Vorbis (which you call Ogg). It already has bunch of unclean "hacks" for variable bitrate support, as well as multiple ways and versions to store information about the audio - ID tags. Combining MP3 with another such patented "standard" - SBR - already led to a disaster - nobody actually uses it.

        Vorbis, on the other hand, has a cleaner upgrade path; starting from that the encoding algorithm may be improved in the future AND remain backwards-compatible.

        I'm not saying that Vorbis will rule the world, but discounting its capabilities is not looking at a full picture.
        • First, I just wanted to say that the AC that posted above is not me!!! (though I enjoyed reading the post, I could have modded that funny)

          Second, your speech is almost based on technical superiority of Ogg (Vorbis, OggVorbis, Ogg\Vorb, OV, OgVo... whatever, we know what we're talking about), and it seems to me that history should have taught us one lesson: Technical brilliance of a product has *nothing* to do with it's acceptance, even more to it's victory over another concurrent product.

          I'd add that in t
          • First, I just wanted to say that the AC that posted above is not me!!! (though I enjoyed reading the post, I could have modded that funny)

            Well, maybe if I look at it again it will seem funny to me too; or maybe I didn't have a good day today in general, who knows.

            Second, your speech is almost based on technical superiority of Ogg (Vorbis, OggVorbis, Ogg\Vorb, OV, OgVo... whatever, we know what we're talking about), and it seems to me that history should have taught us one lesson: Technical brilliance of

      • Re:Ogg Vorbis support! (Score:4, Insightful)

        by steveha ( 103154 ) on Monday June 02, 2003 @07:53PM (#6101762) Homepage
        Industry needs to settle itself on a media, and MP3 seems to be acceptable.

        You are thinking small.

        Why can't all the cool new devices support MP3 -- and Ogg Vorbis? Ogg is very close to free: no license fees for Ogg, free reference sources for Ogg decoders (including Tremor, the integer-math only decoder), a little bit more ROM space used on the device. There are already devices that decode both MP3 and Windows Media audio files.

        If you had a small band, and you wanted to sell compressed songs online, which would you rather use: MP3, where you will have to pay a minimum of $2000 per year [mp3licensing.com], or Ogg Vorbis, where you will have to pay a maximum of $0? (That small band may not have to pay anything this year since the MP3 licensing authority waives the royalty for "entities with an annual gross revenue less than US$ 100 000.00." But they could change the rules at any time. They own MP3 and they can charge whatever they want.)

        People had to choose between VHS and Betamax because it is not possible to make a device that can play both. (Well, you could, but it would be large and expensive so few would buy it.) Ogg Vorbis may become huge overnight, or it may be a niche product forever, but the costs of rolling it out are so small that it will happen.

        steveha
        • I am perhaps thinking small, but your argument is:

          1. Ogg is better - Argument that has proven by the past being of little if any importance in the acceptance of a product.
          2. Ogg is free. Once again, maybe the odds are changing a little, but price has very little to do with a product acceptance either.
          3. It's free of any licenses. There you get a point. But it's a double sided point: No license means no company investing in it either (at least for now)

          But I'd say with all the billions $ that MS+Apple+Real
          • your argument is:

            My argument is that Vorbis support is cheap and pretty easy to add. Someone will add it. Eventually everyone will add it.

            It's easiest on real computers. And guess what -- it's already there: WinAmp, iTunes, and XMMS can all play Vorbis-encoded files.

            It's harder on portable devices, but it will happen there too. My understanding (correct me if I'm wrong, folks) is that any device with enough computer horsepower to decode Windows Media audio has enough horsepower to decode Vorbis. Th
      • Industry needs to settle itself on a media, and MP3 seems to be acceptable.

        It is quite unacceptable when distributing an mp3 encoder requires paying patent license fees and distributing a deocoder avoids them only by the revocable policy of Thompson looking the other way.
    • My zaurus plays oggs just fine.

      Granted I got better battery life from my Archos mp3 player, but then the darned thing suffered a power-circuit meltdown during an overnight charge on a trip to Canada. I figured that $400 was too much to pay for a mere 3 months of product life, and so have avoided Archos since.

      As far as recording, my laptop works well.

    • The dynamics are different, because back in the videotape standards wars, no manufacturers had a realistic option to make a player compatible with both standards. The situation is very different for vorbis/mp3. Often, all it takes is a vorbis-friendly firmware upgrade to make an MP3 player also play .ogg music files. Because decoding vorbis takes a bit more processing power than decoding MP3, some portable devices will need slightly more powerful decoding chips. Already, the cost difference is absolutely ne

  • Uh huh... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Malfourmed ( 633699 ) on Monday June 02, 2003 @06:24PM (#6101185) Homepage
    You can store up to 50 of your favorite movies and view them on the high resolution 3.8" color LCD...
    Don't know about you but I don't want to see any of my favourite movies on a 3.8" screen.
    • Don't know about you but I don't want to see any of my favourite movies on a 3.8" screen.

      Can you imagine trying to watch a letterbox movie on this thing? No thanks. I think I will stick with my 12in Powerbook for those times on the road when I want to watch a movie.

    • Re:Uh huh... (Score:3, Funny)

      by mrseigen ( 518390 )
      I don't want to look over on the train and see someone else enjoying his favorite pr0n. Praise $DEITY the screen is small enough that my chances of doing so are minimal.

      • Re:Uh huh... (Score:5, Funny)

        by Artifex ( 18308 ) on Monday June 02, 2003 @07:01PM (#6101456) Journal
        I don't want to look over on the train and see someone else enjoying his favorite pr0n. Praise $DEITY the screen is small enough that my chances of doing so are minimal.


        Yes, but with a screen that small, he only needs one hand to hold it... I think you're more likely to see him "enjoying" it.
    • Agreed. That's why you can connect it directly to your 50" widescreen TV and you're ready to go.


      Just about the only thing this device seems to be missing is an FM transmitter like the Neuros, for playing tunes wirelessly on the car radio.

    • Re:Uh huh... (Score:2, Insightful)

      by jrm228 ( 677242 )
      Some of my coworkers' favorite movies & pictures are of their toddlers & babies. One in particular is quite happy showing his "favorite movies" on his iPaq.
    • You can connect it to your TV, and watch it on your 38" plasma screen!

      Put some divx's on there and take it to a sleep over and you can watch movies all night!
    • 3.8 inches is obviously not great, but it's actually not terrible, I've got a 3.5 on a professional movie camera and it's actually not that annoying. You wouldn't replace your tv with it obviously, but for times you're travelling without a laptop or whatever, 3.5 or 3.8 is pretty fine.
    • or any TV for that matter. Think of it as a portable Tivo.

  • Not enough features! (Score:5, Funny)

    by starlabs ( 610056 ) on Monday June 02, 2003 @06:25PM (#6101192)
    What, no cel phone?

    Plus, I want a spellchecker with that.

  • where's the beef? (Score:3, Funny)

    by sweeney37 ( 325921 ) * <.mikesweeney. .at. .gmail.com.> on Monday June 02, 2003 @06:25PM (#6101194) Homepage Journal
    Features include a 3.8" LCD screen for viewing movies and photos, FM tuner, MP3 playing and recording, 20GB or 40GB HD models, USB2.0 (optional Firewire) connection, TV-out, MPEG-4 encoding from a video/audio-in signal, digital photo (3.3 megapixel) and video camera, and much more.

    All those and it can't cook me a steak [thinkgeek.com]?

    Bah, I'm not impressed.

    Mike

  • What they left out (Score:2, Funny)

    by dlb ( 17444 )
    was the piano wire and the snakebite kit.

    Jeez, you can't buy any 'gadget' today without it having a mediocre digital camera built in.

  • To many add on's (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 02, 2003 @06:26PM (#6101200)
    The main product it self seem to be just a hub for joining together add on components. Its not really an all in one as it can only do one thing at a time dependant on what componant is attached. It seem very much like a marketing scam to me, why not put all the componants in the main product instead of selling them as extras. Without the extras it doesn't seem to do much at all.

  • As your mother would say... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Psychor ( 603391 ) on Monday June 02, 2003 @06:28PM (#6101221) Homepage
    Viewing Natalie Portman on a 3.8" screen makes you go blind!

    Seriously, this sounds like a pretty cool gadget, but I'd like to see what kind of battery life this thing has, and it doesn't look to me like it'll stand up to being bashed around particularly well. The linked review didn't seem at all comprehensive however.

  • MPEG4 Licensing (Score:5, Informative)

    by ih8apple ( 607271 ) on Monday June 02, 2003 @06:28PM (#6101223)
    This article [mp3newswire.net] came out almost exactly a year ago and has an interesting quote regarding all the devices, including this one, that license MPEG4:

    "The MPEG-4 compression has run into controversy regarding high licensing fees. So significant were the fees that Apple actually delayed the release of Quicktime 6 in protest. How this will all play out with users over time is not known yet, but unless this fee issue is addressed it may dampen adoption by users."

    Also, the link above links to this article [salon.com] regarding the entire controversy. (It's kind of funny because the first article is dated before the second one, so obviously that article was modified to include the link after being first published without the date changing.)

    I wonder if they've managed to knock down the price or if the license is a significant portion of the cost of the device?

    • Re:MPEG4 Licensing (Score:3, Informative)

      by grahams ( 5366 ) *

      (It's kind of funny because the first article is dated before the second one, so obviously that article was modified to include the link after being first published without the date changing.)

      Are you sure? I suspect that the two articles arrived on the same date, the mp3newswire article is just using the DD/MM/YYYY date format.

  • ...Used Laptop? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by TWX ( 665546 ) on Monday June 02, 2003 @06:29PM (#6101230)
    I can get a decent used laptop on eBay for less than the cost of the device, and I can also then do word processing, war driving, mild gaming, etc, and STILL do everything that this device can. Why should I buy it? Size? Size does matter, but cost matters more to me.

    The IBM Thinkpad 240 series, the tiny sharps, the tiny Sonys, all available, of decent quality, and inexpensive.

    • Re:...Used Laptop? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by zwoelfk ( 586211 ) on Monday June 02, 2003 @06:47PM (#6101359) Journal
      I would buy something like this (but not this one... not yet) for the same reason I own a portable DVD player. I spend over 20 hours a month in a plane and countless hours in trains, so I want something that is easy, small, light and has good battery life. A laptop does not cut it. I don't want to wait for it to boot and shutdown. Even the smallest laptop is much heavier than my DVD player. And I have easily 8 hours of battery life.
      I also have a PDA, 'cause it's much more convinient to pull it out, tap the screen a few times, get the map or note I need and throw it back in my pocket than a laptop would be.
      There is a market for these. But I understand that you'd rather have an all-in-one device for a lower cost. So would I - If it was easy, small, light and had a good battery life.

      Z.
      • What kind of device is your DVD player?

        In comparison, I have a PowerBook G4 that has enough battery life to play any DVD I've thrown at it at 15.2 inches, and it weighs 5.4 pounds. The smallest PowerBook weighs in at 4.6 pounds and there is a DVD capable iBook that also comes in at about 4.9 pounds both with significantly higher battery life.

        IE, I wonder what you mean by 'a laptop doesn't cut it'

        As for boot... You never turn off the system. You let it sleep.

        An iBook has, on a single charge, an estimated
      • Wouldn't you rather have something you could play Quake III on too?

    • Thinkpad 240s run on C366s. Try doing realtime MPEG-4 encoding on that.. or anything else less than 1 GHz for that matter. Any laptop that can do what this can do is going to run you 800 on eBay easily. Plus it is about 1/8 the size.

  • Finally, video! (Score:2, Informative)

    by Kelmenson ( 592104 )
    I've been waiting for these to finally get video before purchasing one. I hadn't heard about the Archos one (the one I was waiting for was the RCA Lyra [mobilemag.com]), but all the articles said many similar products will be coming in the summer.

    The big issue with this Archos will be whether its manufacturing feels as flimsy as their earlier models. Archos usually seems to be well ahead of the curve in features and price, but usually far behind in appearance, construction, and usability...

  • Now if this had a better price, I (along with most people) would buy one.

  • Great (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ehiris ( 214677 ) on Monday June 02, 2003 @06:33PM (#6101260) Homepage
    One more item to carry around and brake the screen on. I'm still waiting for the PDA that can do anything fast and store a lot.

  • if screen is bigger... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by u19925 ( 613350 ) on Monday June 02, 2003 @06:41PM (#6101323)
    now if they add 10" or bigger screen, wouldn't it be called PC?

    How about a PC with 3.8" screen, without CD/DVD, very few ports..? It should be possible to manufacture one much cheaper than USD 570 (the list price for 20 GB).

    It is a cool device but at that price point, it will compete with sub-notebook PC and people will compare with it. Other than small size and touch sensitive screen, it has nothing extra but has lot less than PC.

    • Laptop prices (Score:3, Interesting)

      by spoco2 ( 322835 )
      Hell, I bought a secondhand Compaq Armada M700... for $500US That's a PIII, with 256Meg of RAM, a DVD drive and a 20Gig Hard Drive, with all the ports you could want (Except Firewire)...

      So, cheaper, probably as good battery life, and a FAR better screen for watching movies (14.4"), and it's got TV out just like this...

      Just doesn't appeal at this pricepoint.

  • Reverse convergence? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Nexum ( 516661 ) on Monday June 02, 2003 @06:41PM (#6101328)
    Hmm... so I can spend around $550 on this thing, which, with all the extras is much mre likely to be around $700.

    OR

    I can spend a little more and get a nice iBook [or insert your favourite budget notebook here] which is a thousand times more capable.

    I don't think the features vs price really pays off to be honest. Things like the iPod/MP3 players work because they offer an awful lot your PC can't (portability, battery life, simplicity, PRICE).

    This device would be a pain in the ass to look at for 20 mins let alone an entire movie! The battery life isn't all that great, the HDD space is only acceptable - nothing stellar, and the cost is really pretty damn high.

    Can you see Joe Public or your boss ripping and encoding his own DiVX's from his DVD'a? I can't... I love DiVX but I'm a geek, this just doesn't seem to appeal to the masses.

    I think these guys are afraid that the iPod got a jump on them in the MP3 arena, and now they're trying to enter/create a product a couple of years before the stability and market is there to support it ut of fear from being left behind again.

    -Nex
    • I have to agree that I think the price is a little high, especially when compared to a laptop computer. Let's hope that you can buy this thing for quite a bit less than retail when it's in stores. But if you compare it to an IPod which retails for $399 for 15GB, $499 for 30 GB, it's not that much more for a device that superceeds the IPod with the ability to view videos and pictures (on its tiny screen AND on an external TV).

      As far as ripping to DivX, it has an add-on that will do the ripping for you basic
    • I can spend a little more and get a nice iBook [or insert your favourite budget notebook here] which is a thousand times more capable.

      Real-time video recording on an iBook (or a Windows laptop, for that matter) is a huge hassle, and it costs additional backs over the laptop itself.

      Can you see Joe Public or your boss ripping and encoding his own DiVX's from his DVD'a? I can't... I love DiVX but I'm a geek, this just doesn't seem to appeal to the masses.

      No, but I can see Joe Public copying video from is

  • Price ?? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by frodo from middle ea ( 602941 ) on Monday June 02, 2003 @06:49PM (#6101377) Homepage
    Well I was so looking forward to buying this thing.
    When i first read about it in Wired , It said, it would retail about 350-375 $. But 570$ give me a break.
    Plus add another 70-80 bucks for firewire cable and 50-70 bucks for the compact flash adapter. Thats too much price to pay.
    Besides archos JBM 20 had some serious design flaws like plastic buttons etc. And archos is not exactly known for after sales service.

    • Re:Price ?? (Score:3, Informative)

      by Soulslayer ( 21435 )
      The one linked to here is a totally different unit that looks nothing like the one in Wired. I own one of the ones advetised in Wired.

      The one you read about in Wired was the Archos Jukebox Multimedia. This unit is already out (you can find them easily at Circuit City). It has a 1.5" Active Matrix LCD screen, records and plays back MP3 audio, MPEG4 video, and can output to a TV.

      For $350 it comes with:

      A DVR module (that includes S-Video and Composite inputs) that has an IR nub on the top of it.
      A remote.

  • Will be ignored until Apple does it (Score:5, Funny)

    by harlows_monkeys ( 106428 ) on Monday June 02, 2003 @06:51PM (#6101387) Homepage
    This will go nowhere until Apple does something like this, and then everyone will say Apple has innovated yet again.

    • Re:Will be ignored until Apple does it (Score:4, Interesting)

      by jridley ( 9305 ) on Monday June 02, 2003 @07:34PM (#6101652)
      If true, that'll be because Apple will build it right. A friend at work has an Archos multimedia player (the forerunner to this model). It broke in normal use in a few days, and though they got him a replacement, their service was HORRIBLE, and the thing feels like a cheap wad of plastic. I've held $10 kid's toys that felt less likely to break. No FSCKIN' WAY am I going to give these yahoos that kind of money for the kind of stuff they've cranked out in the past, given their service history.

      If Apple builds one, it'll look great, work great, sound great, and shit, it can't cost more than this, can it?

      NOTE: I have never owned a SINGLE Apple product, been running PCs since my 286-16, but DAMN I'd love an iPod.

    • Re:Will be ignored until Apple does it (Score:5, Insightful)

      by joel8x ( 324102 ) on Monday June 02, 2003 @08:25PM (#6101935) Homepage
      Well, apparently Archos likes Apple a lot. Just look at the tag-line on their website: "Think Smaller". Sounds pretty familiar, don't you think?

      This thing will not get the mainstream success that the iPod is now seeing because its just too expensive and it does too much. As crazy as that sounds, the majority of consumers wont shell out $570 for the bottom end model when they probably only want/need a couple of its many features. The video-out is great, but for a few hundred dollars more you can buy a much more useful iBook. So you are correct, this will only be a niche product until another company can organize and package it in a reasonably priced way that will appeal to a broader audience.

      BTW, the definition of "innovate" is: To begin or introduce (something new) for or as if for the first time.

      So, if Apple takes a poorly executed and unpopular idea and packages and markets it into a success (iTunes Music Store comes to mind), then yes, it is technically innovating since it is popularizing the product/service as if for the first time. The Beatles didn't invent Rock N' Roll, but they sure innovated.

  • Never again (Score:4, Informative)

    by deanj ( 519759 ) on Monday June 02, 2003 @06:57PM (#6101431)
    I own one of their MP3 players. It worked briefly for me, and when it broke I was never able to get them to answer me, either via phone (no call back) or e-mail (and a lot of those).

    I'll never buy a product from this company again.

    • Re:Never again (Score:2, Informative)

      by ftuba ( 678357 )
      I too bought one of the origonals. It was supposed to be able to download mp3's from win 2000 machines, I tried it on 2 different machines, and was never able to make it work. I finally did get it to work with windows 98 2nd ed. I did get a reply from the tech support telling me it works with win 2000. When it worked it was great, I could use an fm transmitter from Radio Shack and tune it in on my car radio to listen to my mp3's on road trips. I also used a car power adapter since battery life was only abou

  • zerg (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Lord Omlette ( 124579 ) on Monday June 02, 2003 @06:59PM (#6101443) Homepage
    When those guys made the Rockbox for Archos Jukebox 6k, I was modded up for lambasting the poor quality of their software... And for good reason, v0.1 sucked cock, they shouldn't have released it in such a sorry state... BUT! You might want to go back and check it out again, it kicks serious butt.

    If Archos dropped the Rockbox guys a copy of their new hardware, Archos wouldn't have to invest in a software dept... ^^;;
  • These people seem to have their act together, considering that they will deliver virtually anywhere in the world. Its rare to see a startup offer its products (specially video .. as I assume they've got to make their product multi-standard) on such a wide basis.
    • Eumm... Just a small observation to your observation.
      Archos is hardly a "startup" company... I've got a harddrive interface made by archos from around 1993 - 1994.
      And one of their first mp3 players with a 6 gig harddrive, bought around 2.5 years ago. Still one of the best players I've seen. No special software to access it, just a driver to mount it as a harddrive. Great. =)
      And since they're established in both France and the US, It would be surprising if they didn't sell their products in at least Europe a

  • Firmware problems (Score:5, Informative)

    by MWoody ( 222806 ) on Monday June 02, 2003 @07:16PM (#6101517)
    Hmmm... This looks neat, but I wonder how well it'll work in action. I've got an Archos 20GB Recorder, and it kicks ass (looks cool, sturdy as hell, acts like a portable hard drive). However, when I first got it, I almost returned it due to it's horrible firmware (buggy, slow, unwieldy, hardly any useful features). I have only kept it - and grown to love it - thanks to open-source Rockbox firmware [rockbox.haxx.se], which whips the llama's ass hardcore.

    So, with the AV300, I worry whether or not we'll see a version of Rockbox or something similar, or whether the firmware that comes in box will be at least serviceable this time around. If not, at that price tag, this device will try and fail to compete with both the smaller laptops and the portable DVD players.

    • I second that. Just bought a Jukebox Recorder 20 this weekend, and the availability of Rockbox was a major selling point. More points in its favor: the use of AA NiMH batteries. Most (all?) other HD mp3 players use proprietary batteries. Archos has also followed this trend with its recent offerings.

      The combination of Rockbox and a standard battery means that my Archos player won't be burning out or going obsolete anytime soon (fingers crossed).

    • Re:Firmware problems (Score:2, Informative)

      by dhaines ( 323241 )
      Agreed...

      After two failed Archos 20GB recorders, Rockbox saved my third attempt from a one-way trip back to the factory. Their vapid tech support only offered endless cycles of defrag until I loaded Rockbox. Now it runs great and makes road trips, parties and long flights much more enjoyable. It easily stands up to running and cycling.

      But... I wouldn't want to be first on the block with any new Archos product, at least not given my previous experiences.

  • If History Is Any Indicator (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ihatewinXP ( 638000 ) on Monday June 02, 2003 @07:30PM (#6101629)
    Then Apple will wait and then deliver what we are really looking for in this package. Not to say that this AV Jukebox is a slack product, quite the contrary, its actually almost feature bloated. That and its size, weight (big weight, tiny screen),and cost are going to turn many off besdies early adopters.

    I say Apple not only because the iPod was the answer to the original Jukebox but also the Knowlege Navigator (see: http://www.billzarchy.com/clips/clips_apple_nav.ht m ). Apple has had products like this in the skunkworks for a good while, but it seems after the Newton panned and Palm took over that Apple has switched to a "wait, see, and capitalize" approach (see also flagging tablet PC sales).

  • Hdd prices (Score:3, Informative)

    by afidel ( 530433 ) on Monday June 02, 2003 @08:08PM (#6101857)
    Why is there a $40 difference between the 20 and 40GB hdd's? They're both 2.5" laptop hdd's and if you look around both those capacities sell for around $80-85 bucks, so asking an extra $40 for the larger drive (or heck even offering the lower capacity drive) is kind of nuts. These are comodity components, use whatever best fits the price point of what the consumer want to pay, not pick a bunch of cheap crap and inflate the bigger sounding unit. That's one of the reasons I loved my iPod so much, the hdd seperatly cost nearly as much as the iPod so I knew Apple wasn't trying to screw me on the componenets.

  • iPod? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by jchristopher ( 198929 )
    Most interesting technology is quickly copied by other companies. Anyone want to speculate why we haven't seen more MP3 players based on the Toshiba PC Card-size hard drives, like the Apple iPod?

    The iPod is what, 2 years old? I thought we'd have some interesting "clones" by now, but I only know of one, and it's just as expensive as the iPod.

  • I love my Recorder 20 device from Archos, but, the quality of their products is deplorable. After convincing a friend to purchase an Archos, he returned 3 20s to Fry's as they were all DOA.

    After hearing about 2 different 20 Recorders failing (on top of the three DOAs), I doubt I would trust Archos hardware any time soon.

    In addition to the hardware issues, the software is not the best either. Look at some of the threads on this topic to hear about those issues. I love the recorder, but it fails more times

  • size comparisons (Score:3, Informative)

    by Khopesh ( 112447 ) on Monday June 02, 2003 @10:51PM (#6102831) Homepage Journal
    AV320 is 4.4 x 3.2 x 1.2 inches, 12.5 ounces
    palm tungston [palm.com] is 4.8 x 3.1 x 0.7 inches, 6.3 ounces
    apple ipod [apple.com] is 4.1 x 2.4 x 0.6 inches, 5.6 ounces

    playing movies is nice, but not at twice the depth and weight.
    sorry, that's too heavy and too deep.

    all i want is a touchscreen, good sound output, and 5+gb storage.
    manage it with a real OS (like palm, linux, even winCE) and you'll have my money.
  • it's called a LAPTOP. My Sony Picturebook can do all that and more, I got it used for not much more than the Archos unit and it's MUCH more functional. I use somewhat souped-up older used or low-end laptops and PC's for everything computing-wise and can do 99% of my friends that insist on the latest and greatest over-modded bling-bling and the latest marketroid eye candy can do, for about 1/3 to 1/2 the cost. Isn't park of the hacker ethic doing more with less, nbot just throwing you're hard earned dead pre
  • As the standard issue field jukebox--except, of course, in the traditional red.

  • I've got an Archos MP3 player... (Score:3, Informative)

    by orthogonal ( 588627 ) on Monday June 02, 2003 @11:22PM (#6102964) Journal
    The hardware is ruggedly built, and I'm pleased with it.

    But the Archos firmware is wholly disappointing. Even the Archos font is lacking -- it's got no true descenders ("g", "y", "p").

    There's an excellent GLP'd replacement, Rockbox (rockbox.haxx.se) [rockbox.haxx.se]. It's literally an order of magnitude faster in displaying directories, and has a plethora of additional features [rockbox.haxx.se].

    The only "problem" with the GPL'd replacement is that, due to Archos's paranoia over its IP, the replacemnt had to be built up by labourious reverse engineering.

    I'll buy new products from Archos when they release their specifications and sample code. Not before.
    • I friend of mine just bought an Archos MP3 player (no video). He is now on his third one. The first one had a fault where sometimes it would just stop playing. Also, when you turned it off, you could still hear the hard drive trying to do something (constantly!). The only thing worse than an MP3 player that will not run is one that will not STOP!

      The second player would not read from the HD fast enough, and would cause the codec to repeat.
      It sounds like the QA on these things is a little lacking, or maybe t
  • I harddly see any enthusiasm in here. Though I think this Archos product is the greatest gadget ever made. Let me write obvious facts about the amayzing AV340:

    It playsback 640x368 resolution DivX [archos.com]. It records 320x240 video at 25 frames per second. This means you can take your 100 favourite DivX movies with you in your pocket. And watch them in your video-glasses [eye-trek.com] while you drive.

    I do have a couple concerns about this player. Though following concerns probably won't stop me from selling my Archos JBMM20 [archos.com]
  • I currently own the Multimedia 020. It's great, but you have to downconvert all your DivX files to their preferred resolution. It's a limitation of the chip they use... looks like the 340 will be better in that regard, but what's really needed is somethign where you can take any DivX file straight of Kazaa onto the JBMM and have it play correctly at the resolution they need for the their screen.

    --D

Slashdot Top Deals

Brain off-line, please wait.

Close