Recommended Posts

Okay, I have been an iPod owner for the last year. Everyone loves the iPod, right? Wrong, As much as I like the interface and controls of the iPod, the battery and lack of software transfer choices had me looking to the side of iRiver.

Note: I think iRiver renamed iHP-120 to the H120.

Pictures's are below

Basic Specifications

-20Gb hard disk (Really 19GB)

-Supports MP3, WMA, ASF, WAV and OGG Vorbis

-USB 2.0 transfers

-Integrated FM tuner

-Backlit remote control with 4-line display

-Built-in voice recorder

-Real-time MP3 encoding

-Store or transfer files of any type

-Optical input and output

-Upgradeable to future formats and features

Comparison between iPod 15GB and iRiver 20GB

Note: 15Gb iPod is $299.99 ? 20GB H120 is $329.99What you getb>The H120 includes the following:i>

-The H120

-USB 2.0 cable

-Earphones

-Wired Remote w/ Display

-External Mic

-Power Adapter

-and MoreThe iPod (15GB) includes the following:i>

-The iPod

-Earphones

-Power Adapter

-Firewire Cable

-Not much moreFeelb>

The first thing you notice about the iRiver is that it ?seems? bigger then the iPod. Now, it?s really nearly the same size, (H120 is a bit thicker) but the iPod definitely ?feels? much smaller. Now the old had the iRiver ?seems? much lighter then the iPod did. So that?s an even mControls.

Controls

The interface and the controls of the iPod are still an overall winner. I don?t think anything can beat them. But iRiver made a great attempt! The H120 has the same number of buttons as the iPod does. It consists of 4 buttons, and the jog-dial. The iPod also has 4 buttons and the the wheel. With the iPod all of the controls and basically self-explanatory, yet with the H120 taking a look at the manual does indeed get you going. I never looked at the manual for the iPod. The iRiver relies on quick taps or the buttons and longer holds to control and get to the different features. One thing to remember is the H120 offers a Voice Recorder, MP3 or WAV encoding from different sources, FM Tuner, and then the basic MP3 player. So, having the extra functions iRiver had to do it this way, or have 8 or so buttTransferring Filesansferring Files

Choices!!! I had purchased Anapod for my iPod. Its works great, adds some cool features, but it costs money! To ad to that it?s a program running in the background if you wish to take full use of it. iTunes, I?m not a fan. You have the iPod Service and iTunes Helper running all of the time. Each one takes generally over 10MB of RAM each! Then throw iTunes into the mix at its 25-30MB of RAM. Nearly 50MB of RAM! Not Cool! Now with the H120 all you do is plug it in, Windows XP found it and within 10 seconds I could drag and drop folders and files directly to the device. It supports WinaFormat Support.

iRiver H120

iRiver H120

-MP3

-MP3 VBR

-WMA (DRM Enabled Too)

Apple iPod-ASF

Apple iPod

-MP3

-MP3 VBR

-AAC

-Audible

-WAV

-AIFF (Mac)

Bottom Line: File format support means nothing unless you really use the formats! But purchase the iRiver based on the fact that it plays OGG unless you have encoded or plan to encode your tracks with OGG. But purchase the Apple based on the fact that it plays AAC unless you have encoded or plan to encode your tracks with AAC. iTMS lovers, the iPod is for you. Napster users, H120 is for you.

If you are just listening to the players through earphones the truth is its very doubtful you will hear a difference in AAC vs. OGG or AAC vs. MP3 (I based that on MP3 at 160kbps of greater). If you plan to spend $300 on a nice set of earphones/headphones or you are hooking a device up to your HT then you should worry about AAC vs. MP3 (Or whatever)

I personally use these devices to (1) Go running (2) Use on trips, when you are on a plane sound quality becomes the least of your worries (3) Sit around the house and listen. If you are running and noticing difference in AAC vs. MP3 you need to start thinking about running and notBatteryhearing.

Battery

I was getting really ****** at the crappy battery life of the iPod. It claims 8 hours, I was getting more like 6. 6 hours and that?s with the backlight turned off. If you are say, getting ready to take a nice trip 6 hours is not enough. You got 1-2 hours in the Airport, and then at least 3 hours on a plan. That?s around 5 hours of battery life, what if I would like the backlight on while on the plane? That just kills the iPod. With the H120 I?m getting 12+ hours with the backlight on (3 seconds). For me, thFinal Wordsing point.

Final Words

I?m happier with the iRiver H120. You make your own choice on which on:yes:or might be right for you. :yes:

post-104-1086372407.jpg

Edited by cal2002
Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/174276-review-iriver-h120/
Share on other sites

I don't like the screen text anywhere near as much as the iPod... also, the joystick has no grip and I know someone that put superglue on the stick to give it grip (they found out about the superglue thing on the web - it just dries slightly rough and gives it some grip). The iPod has plenty of problems but I don't think the H120 is better - it has better battery life and so is a lot more practical but saying it is better purely on battery life is a mistake.

I bought a 40Gb iPod but ending up selling it - it would skip occasionally, the back would come off and it just wasn't a good as I expected it to be. Still, it looks better, has a better screen and a better navigation system than the H120. I love the H120's remote (changing files and seeing what you are changing to... and being backlit) and it looks quite nice (not iPod nice, but nice). This generation of MP3 players is just slightly lacking - a mix of the iPod with the H120 battery life, remote and file support would be a good step.

So to summarize - the iPod and the H120 are nice... but this generation of MP3 players is merely a step in the right direction for better players to come along.

Just days after buying my iHP-120 in Dec. of last year, I had to fly to North Dakota for a funeral. Leaving the iHP-120 strapped on my belt, and being able to control everything from the remote is great when you're strapped into an airliner seat.

Red Cahir Software makes an iRiver version of Anapod, iRivium Explorer. It makes copying songs to the iHP-120, syncing and creating playlists a breeze. One feature I like is that it will filter out data files. You can copy any folder of files, and it will skip over Folder.jpg and Thumbs.db data files. It will even sync Outlook contacts; wacky!

http://www.redchairsoftware.com/irivium/

well that's what i meant:huh:h:

i got a chance to test them both.. and imo the iriver has a better sound..:yes:s:

oh, i htought you said that the ipod was ugly but sounded better. i actually prefer this thoguh, too many people have an ipod and this is packed with features. its a more geeky mp3 player i guess.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      579
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      74
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      71
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!