Samsung Set To Introduce Android-Based iPod Touch Competitor 221
blixtech writes "Virtually unchallenged in the portable media player market, Apple's iPod Touch is set to receive a pretty strong competitor at CES 2011. Samsung has just announced they will showcase an Android-powered PMP called the Galaxy Player, featuring almost the same hardware as the Galaxy S smartphone."
Virtually unchallenged? (Score:4, Interesting)
It had beter be able to runs apps. (Score:2, Interesting)
What is behind Apple's success?
Its that, after an initial period of letting people rip, mix and burn their existing content for their iPods, they were able to launch the iTunes Music Store (iTMS) which now serves up music, movies, TV shows, books, apps and podcasts and do it for cheap or for free.
Apple is just grafting other software services onto the iTMS and they're keeping iron clad control over the user experience on the hardware.
Will anyone else?
Year of the Android (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Virtually unchallenged? (Score:3, Interesting)
The Archos devices have several limitations that put them at a clear disadvantage compared to the iPod Touch. First of all, they do not have access to the Android Market. Sure there are other, smaller, markets and I'm sure those are great, but most people are going to want to run the same Android "Apps" on a PMP and a Phone. Much like the iOS devices. Archos also chose to go with a resistive screen instead of capacitive screen that makes a fairly big difference in usage. Go to a BestBuy and play with the an Archos, if they have one set up near you, and then an iPod Touch and you should see the difference.
So yes the moniker is warranted because there hasn't been something that can stand up to the iPod Touch and seem even somewhat impressive. Hopefully this will bring some competition to the market.
Re:About Time (Score:2, Interesting)
As far as I can tell the only thing they did right was make it idiot proof with the lack of software to put music on and a huge marketing campaign.
DLNA could be the killer app? (Score:2, Interesting)
Seeing that my Samsung TV can do lots of stuff through a cat 5. It would make sense if their Android tablet had a tuned dlna server installed so things like internet tv, youtube, jpegs, m4v, vobs, mp3s and radio could stream from the tablet. I have some features working with mediatomb and twonky (non-free) does some other things like youtube. There is no reason why the Android OS could not do streaming internet over wifi, it would even be possible to make it work with other DLNA compliant devices. If this is not a feature then the release will just sit there and do squat in the market place like Archos. Would be nice if I could take a tablet to other peoples houses and use dlna to show pictures or whatever.
However I just cannot see the manufactures taking advantage of the saleability of cross platform dlna. As it is they are doing the old trick of changing standards so that the consumer gets screwed into using compatible devices of their choosing. When will they learn.
Re:Year of the Android (Score:5, Interesting)
The cell modem hardware isn't free; but the overwhelming majority of phone hardware is picked up, mildly subsidized, as the hook to get somebody onto a contract(or at least our month-to-month plan, rather than somebody else's).
There is a good sized market that doesn't really want to pay $80 a month for two years; but has frequent wifi access(most homes, many businesses and places of public congregation, many schools and most college campuses). Loads of kids who have occasional bursts of spending money(their own or holiday/relative); but basically no steady month-to-month income to maintain a full data plan. Plenty of students whose, again, aren't made of money; but whose entire campus is blanketed with wifi.
Were the US cellular market more accessible and dynamic, with doing things like "getting a spartan voice only plan for a bells and whistles smartphone" easy, rather than possible but obscure, it would be much harder to make the case for something that includes everything but the cell modem: the option to drop in a SIM at some point and do some calling would likely be worth the cost. As it is, though, while that isn't actually impossible in the US, it is so far from being the default that it is fairly rarely considered. Thus, selling a pure "PMP", at a price point available because you ditched that extra radio(and either slimmed the device or added more battery...), has a potential to be reasonably attractive.
I know that I would strongly consider one: My home has wifi, my workplace has wifi, if I need wifi on the go there are always coffee shops and snack places willing to oblige me for as long as it takes to nurse my cup of coffee(particularly if, unlike That Laptop Guy, I'm just using something indistinguishable from a phone, and not taking up a multi-person table doing it). I don't make that many phone calls or texts, so I have a dirt-cheap prepaid plan. Now, in an ideal world, I'd carry one less device and(as noted above) use my prepaid SIM in a full phone. That isn't supported, so I suck it up and carry a $20 Motorola dumbphone when I need it. I have virtually no need, and no desire to pay for, particularly on a long term contract, cellular data when I'm within wifi range during virtually all the times that I would want internet access...
A WiFi Skype Phone (Score:4, Interesting)
What's the point (Score:2, Interesting)
You're obviously not a CONSUMER, you're a TECHIE. (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't begrudge you your Achos stuff, or whatever you're using, but its not quite as seamless as using Apple OS X 10.6.5 stuff.
It definitely does NOT take me 20 minutes to spend my money at the iTMS. (The downloads come in at about 20mb/s in NYC. May I suggest you get a better performing ISP. :-)
I use VLC, QuickTime, WindowsMedia, whatever, and my old 2.66 Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro is quite capable of keeping up with whatever I throw at it, even in 1080p.
Apple is definitely a maker of good CONSUMER grade stuff.
Its a question of the choices one makes.
Re:Virtually unchallenged? (Score:4, Interesting)
The only way Samsung can stay compliant with the CDD is if a) Google change the CDD in Android 3.0 to specify a range of device profiles (a way overdue change) or b) Samsung bloat the price of their device by packing it with superfluous features.
a) is obviously the most preferable option. The CDD really should be specifying basic and extended profiles for tablets, media players, ereaders etc. Expecting tablets to be glorified giant phones is just going to stymie the Android tablet market and confuse everyone.
Re:About Time (Score:2, Interesting)
It's funny really; the Slashdot crowd has been predicting for years that $COMPANY will challenge Apple's dominance in their various markets. Google (with Nexus, and their various software) looked good, but didn't happen. MS with WinMo7, the Kin, the Zune, etc., looked like a fair bet too. Talk of a Dell phone and Dell tablets put them in the picture too, but no.
Who'd have thought it'd be Samsung, in the end, to release the best iPad competitor, some of the top-selling Android phones, and now a iPod Touch competitor? Not me, anyway.