If this had been the same price (£129) or cheaper than the iPod Nano then it might have stood a chance. As it is, a memory card slot and a radio aren't enough to justify the extra price.
I've just been looking at the new Nano in the Apple store, and I have to say I was impressed with both the size/shape of the device and the quality of the screen/interface (not so much with the iPod Classic though, the interface lag makes it basically unusable).
I bought a Sandisk Sansa earlier this year I prefer it over a nano, but I don't really see why Sandisk brought this new one out when they already had a Sansa out.
Hmm, the Sansa View has a 25% bigger screen and longer battery life than the new iPod Nano (7hrs vs 5hrs of video playback could be handy though do you really need more than 24hrs audio playback?) but at the cost of being 35% thicker and 67% heavier. Considering this is a market segment particularly sensitive to size and weight, these are fairly big disadvantages.
The Sansa has an FM radio and voice recorder (both optional add-ons for the Nano) but has no games, calendar and contact synching, notes or an online store with 6 million songs, hundreds of TV shows, movies, or hundreds of thousands of free video and audio podcasts.
The Sansa with it’s proprietary 30-pin connector also lacks the huge 3rd party ecosystem of 3,000 speaker systems, clock radios, arm bands, cases and other peripherals or the dock-connector integration (often with steering wheel controls) in the majority of new cars on the market today or aircraft dock integration etc.
And it comes priced from 16% to 55% more expensive than the 8GB iPod Nano. They may be gunning for the Nano, but their attempt probably falls short in too many areas.
SanDisk guns for iPod Nano with slim video viewer
Michael Sheils
hmm, #
Posted Monday 10th September 2007 12:16 GMT
I actually thought that looked like a decent player, until I saw the UK pricing.
Chris Wood
Not a Nano beater then #
Posted Monday 10th September 2007 14:25 GMT
If this had been the same price (£129) or cheaper than the iPod Nano then it might have stood a chance. As it is, a memory card slot and a radio aren't enough to justify the extra price.
I've just been looking at the new Nano in the Apple store, and I have to say I was impressed with both the size/shape of the device and the quality of the screen/interface (not so much with the iPod Classic though, the interface lag makes it basically unusable).
MattW
Non starter #
Posted Monday 10th September 2007 14:25 GMT
I know it's a flash device, but you'd have to be mad to pay their uk prices when £160 buys you an 80gb iPod classic....
Edward Pearson
Insane pricing. #
Posted Monday 10th September 2007 14:25 GMT
It's as if they didn't realize that an outfit like El Reg would expose this scandalous trans Atlantic pricing snafu.
I LOVE the look of the product, and I make a point of not owning an iPod (no reason except that everybody has one and its kind of cliche)
I'm just gonna get on the net and order one of these from an American retailer, I'll get a bloody good mp3 player for just under £100.
Stick that in your pipe and smoke it Sandisk.
Luke
"BANG! #
Posted Monday 10th September 2007 14:25 GMT
Ow, my foot!" - Mr Sandisk UK as everyone goes off to get a iPod Nano
Why do these idiots presist with 1:1 pricing? It's all made in China (distribution, marketing costs etc - yes I know but 1:1? Seriously?
Looks like a really nice device, buy 200 squids is just too much for 16 Gb...
N1AK
UK conversion #
Posted Monday 10th September 2007 14:25 GMT
Now if only their was a way to show people how much of a rip off the UK price is for these things!
I'll be getting a Creative Zen as they appear to have at least some ability to convert currencies.
philip jeffery
Try the Sansa it is better than a nano #
Posted Monday 10th September 2007 21:44 GMT
I bought a Sandisk Sansa earlier this year I prefer it over a nano, but I don't really see why Sandisk brought this new one out when they already had a Sansa out.
Martin Hill
Specs comparison #
Posted Tuesday 11th September 2007 04:18 GMT
Hmm, the Sansa View has a 25% bigger screen and longer battery life than the new iPod Nano (7hrs vs 5hrs of video playback could be handy though do you really need more than 24hrs audio playback?) but at the cost of being 35% thicker and 67% heavier. Considering this is a market segment particularly sensitive to size and weight, these are fairly big disadvantages.
The Sansa has an FM radio and voice recorder (both optional add-ons for the Nano) but has no games, calendar and contact synching, notes or an online store with 6 million songs, hundreds of TV shows, movies, or hundreds of thousands of free video and audio podcasts.
The Sansa with it’s proprietary 30-pin connector also lacks the huge 3rd party ecosystem of 3,000 speaker systems, clock radios, arm bands, cases and other peripherals or the dock-connector integration (often with steering wheel controls) in the majority of new cars on the market today or aircraft dock integration etc.
And it comes priced from 16% to 55% more expensive than the 8GB iPod Nano. They may be gunning for the Nano, but their attempt probably falls short in too many areas.
-Mart
Chris Morrison
@Martin Hill #
Posted Tuesday 11th September 2007 11:14 GMT
Do you work for apple?
Or just another fanboy?
Martin Hill
Not very nice #
Posted Tuesday 11th September 2007 17:25 GMT
So Chris Morrison, do you have anything constructive to say on the topic or will you just stick to personal attacks?
-Mart
Anonymous
8.8 mm thick & Press Release Link #
Posted Wednesday 12th September 2007 04:19 GMT
Here is the press release link:
http://www.sandisk.com/Corporate/PressRoom/PressReleases/PressRelease.aspx?ID=3959
Which states that it is 8.8 mm at its thinnest point.
Kind of sad that an article emphasizing the new, thin media player doesn't list the thickness.
Matthew Brown
Riddle me this... #
Posted Thursday 13th September 2007 12:45 GMT
Why do they think we're daft enough to pay 1:1 pricing? I like the look of the View, but there's no way I'll buy it at those prices.
They're just lucky I'm even less likely to buy an iPod. X)