|
I think to call the M3 (or any mp3 player) an "iPod killer" is pretty lame. It has some advantages over the iPod and some disadvantages, whether the M3 is better than the iPod depends on the needs of the individual.
I think that it's essentially pretty similar to the iHPs, the main difference obviously being the screen.
I think that an on-wire screen is always useful, but I don't think this is the way to do it. I really don't like the way either iHP or Cowon have done their remote screens - I find the iHP hard to look at and control at the same time, because of the way the buttons are laid out, and the "landscape" format of the screen and whole remote. The M3 looks like it would be the same. I think navigation is too complicated a task to bother trying to do it "portably" i.e. not on the main unit - so I think it's best to restrict remote display functions to playback controls and volume. I don't really see any advantage of not having a display on the main unit.
In comparision to the iHP, what I'd like to know is what the on-screen interface and software is like for the iAudio, because these are the two main aspects that disappointed me about the iHP. Going by the CNET review the bundled software isn't much to shout about for managing the player. I've used it just for playing music and I don't like it, it's not intuitive at all and doesn't maintain a proper music database, which is a shame as it has some great functions.
So basically it the interface doesn't seem to be much different to the iHP. It seems to have most of the same functions, plus record-from radio, which could be pretty cool. Battery life appears to be a bit lower than the iHP but still quite reasonable. I don't think "10% thinner" than the iPod is much of a selling point. I'd say the M3 is a lot nicer looking than the iHP.
Overall, if I could try out the remote to see how it feels, and if I liked it, I would probably choose the M3 over the iHP if I didn't already have the iHP.
|