The new Walkman is out

L11

Active Member
We got the 6gb one at currys on saturday.. i've never seen anything like it.. Nicest mp3 player ever.. I want to throw my HD5 away
 

robby***

Standard Member
L11 said:
We got the 6gb one at currys on saturday.. i've never seen anything like it.. Nicest mp3 player ever.. I want to throw my HD5 away
Whats the build quality like, do you think it will scratch easily.
The photos I've seen look like its made out of a fairly strong plastic.
 
C

cryocon

Guest
L11 said:
We got the 6gb one at currys on saturday.. i've never seen anything like it.. Nicest mp3 player ever.. I want to throw my HD5 away
Slightly off topic here, but i had a look at the 6gb one also in Currys on Saturday and noticed that the info they had printed about said it has a 50 hour battery life. It says on the Sony site that it is 20 hours for 6gb and 35 hours for 20gb. Is this one of Currys sales techniques to get people to buy things, blatent lying? :(
 
S

shadowritten

Guest
cryocon said:
Slightly off topic here, but i had a look at the 6gb one also in Currys on Saturday and noticed that the info they had printed about said it has a 50 hour battery life. It says on the Sony site that it is 20 hours for 6gb and 35 hours for 20gb. Is this one of Currys sales techniques to get people to buy things, blatent lying? :(
PC World did something similar once, claiming (in one of their stores) that a Creative Zen Touch - renowned for its 24-hr battery, among other things - could go for 34 hrs. Could've been a typo, I suppose?
 

scottydog

Standard Member
Saw it on Saturday in my local Sony shop. Its a very sexy looking player. I didn't like the look of it from the photo's I saw but the real thing is very very nice. I love my HD3 and had no wish to have an HD5 but i would love this one. Not going to get it though. It will be interesting to see how long this model survives. I'm also beginning to wonder how long Atrac will survive. It suits me as I can get a lot of stuff onto a small player with a good battery but I also don't want to be stuck with a format I can't use in the future.
 
S

shyam_m

Guest
the 20 gig model is HUGE!! saw it yesterday in the sony center. the 6 gig 1 looks nice though, hoping to pick 1 up this week
 

L11

Active Member
cryocon said:
Slightly off topic here, but i had a look at the 6gb one also in Currys on Saturday and noticed that the info they had printed about said it has a 50 hour battery life. It says on the Sony site that it is 20 hours for 6gb and 35 hours for 20gb. Is this one of Currys sales techniques to get people to buy things, blatent lying? :(
people make mistakes.. They'll realise the mistake and probably reprint the ticket the next day..
 

daveande

Standard Member
Yes, at 65.2mm x 104.2 x 21.4, the NW-A3000 a quite a bit bigger than a 30GB iPod. The 55mm x 88.1 x 18.7 NW-A1000, on the other hand, is pretty comparable in size to the iPod nano.

The cheapest A1000 (price depends on colour) is just shy of £150 (plus P&P). However, none of the online retailers appear to have any stock at present.
 

Cloysterpeteuk

Well-known Member
dave I can tell you've never held or seen a nano and a NW-A1000 (catchy name lol) side by side. Nano weights 42g compared to 109g that nearly triple the weight. If it was comparable then it would be 50g wouldn't it. It's also nigh on three times as thick 6.9mm nano compared to a comparitively chunky 18.7mm. Also, one of the biggest plus point Sony players have over the pods is there tremenduos battery life but with this model they are starting to slip, why has the playback time gone down to 20hr?, that's with Atrac 3 so how many hours do you have to knock off for the filesharers format of choice mp3?.

I would say the vast majority of people buying for style would immediately go for the nano if they saw them both in the shop, especially if they whacked the screens on and saw the nano running with some nice album art or whatever. I doubt they would before looking at what guts the Sony player has, they would more than likely buy the nano straight away if they had the cash. Guess Sony better try again because these juggernauts aint gonna damage Apple a bit.
 

Kaledii

Active Member
Cloysterpeteuk said:
dave I can tell you've never held or seen a nano and a NW-A1000 (catchy name lol) side by side. Nano weights 42g compared to 109g that nearly triple the weight. If it was comparable then it would be 50g wouldn't it. It's also nigh on three times as thick 6.9mm nano compared to a comparitively chunky 18.7mm. Also, one of the biggest plus point Sony players have over the pods is there tremenduos battery life but with this model they are starting to slip, why has the playback time gone down to 20hr?, that's with Atrac 3 so how many hours do you have to knock off for the filesharers format of choice mp3?.

I would say the vast majority of people buying for style would immediately go for the nano if they saw them both in the shop, especially if they whacked the screens on and saw the nano running with some nice album art or whatever. I doubt they would before looking at what guts the Sony player has, they would more than likely buy the nano straight away if they had the cash. Guess Sony better try again because these juggernauts aint gonna damage Apple a bit.
With due respect if you have not even held a nano let alone side by side with a A1000 I find it difficult to take on board your views.
I did happen to see these two models side by side over the weekend and was pleasantly surprised by the dimensions of the A1000 - it is far more diminutive than the specs suggest. I was with 2 friends and they both were impressed with what the Sony had to offer - not everyone is interested in colour screens or even whether it is an iPod
 

Cloysterpeteuk

Well-known Member
The views are facts (at least they will be after Sony's player has been out a while) so they really can't be disputed, everything I said will be borne out, plus the figures I quoted are from the manufacturers website. Saying it's far smaller than the specs suggest is also a daft thing to say, unless it uses some Sony variant on the Tardis technology. If something is nearly three times as thick it's gonna look three times as thick, there is no way to mask that extra fattness, and guess what, something that is nearly three times heavier is gonna feel it too.

A very important factor in buying a DAP for a huge amount of people is the size of the device so don't try and convince me that's it's not an important factor because you must know that simply isn't true.
 
B

Beethovenian

Guest
I agree with you on many things, Cloysterpeteuk, but saying that the players are smaller than the specs suggest makes perfect sense if you consider their shape. The specs reflect only the widest, longest and thickest points, but since it's curvy, most of the player is indeed smaller than that. That said, it's certainly bigger than the iPod nano, especially regarding thickness, and as you say I doubt it will help Sony do any significant damage to Apple. It's only advantage now seems to be the fact it's cheaper (at Amazon, at least) than a smaller capacity iPod nano, as it should be. But if it is indeed as nice looking in person as some people say, and it gets wide distribution, that price difference may be enough to sway some consumers.
 

daveande

Standard Member
Cloysterpeteuk. The iPod is indisputedly a masterpiece of design and an icon of modern-day consumer electronics. I accept that "comparable" is perhaps a bit of a stretch :rolleyes:

The point I was trying to make is that while the size of the NW-A3000 compared with it's iPod equivalent can only be described as plain "big", the differential between the NW-A1000 and iPod nano is considerably less. OK, it's considerably thicker and heavier, but Sony fans would probably characterise this as making it "more substantial" than it's Apple rival. ;)
 

dups45

Standard Member
your forgetting complety that the dimensions we are given are the maximum for each dimension. If you remeber, they A3000 is curved!! therefore it might not be as big as you all think
 

joora

Standard Member
daveande said:
Cloysterpeteuk. The iPod is indisputedly a masterpiece of design and an icon of modern-day consumer electronics.
I would rather say 'was'. iPod's general design hasn't changed in years, and it's getting old and repetative pretty fast. Just my 2 cents
 

scottydog

Standard Member
I've seen the Nano and the new Sony side by side. The Nano is a nice looking player but for me the Sony is much more interesting. Size does matter to me and the smaller Sony's proportions would fit my pocket perfectly. Weight is of no interest. Its hardly going to make my knees bend. Best of all ITS NOT A BLOODY iPOD
 
C

ChunkyMunkyLuva

Guest
can i ask, what is the main difference between the 20gb version of this and the hd5? from what i read the hd5 has longer battery life and is smaller, so why discontinue it and replace it with this? i was tempted to change my hd5 for this but from what i hear its not really worth it
 
E

eighty4

Guest
i work at currys and i was playin with one the other day, i have the sony hd5 so at 1st i was kinda annoyed they'd brought out a new one since ive only had my hd5 about 2 months. But after lookin at the new model im happy with my hd5, the screen on the new sony looks like it would be nice for about 2 minutes then it would be covered in scratches and a lot of the features on it look a bit gimiky i dont think they are that usefull. On the upside it's supposed to have an improved software for track management, but lets be honest sonicstage is terrible anyway, its about the only thing ipod has over sony
 
Top Bottom