Talk:Archos Generation 5

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Archos Generation 5 article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

This article is within the scope of multiple WikiProjects. Click [show] for further details

This article is within the scope of the Technology WikiProject, a group related to the the study of Technology. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked Neutrality: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no <!-- 6. It is written from a neutral point of view. --> |B-Class-6=yes/no This article is part of WikiProject Electronics, an attempt to provide a standard approach to writing articles about electronics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. This article is within the scope of Computing WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to computers and computing. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale

Contents 1 Transcription of marketing material? 2 Info needed 3 Ordering 4 Section on criticism

[edit] Transcription of marketing material?

Is this just a transcription of marketing material?--70.231.148.239 05:08, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I cleaned it up a bit, should be good enough to take off the advert tag, agree? 69.123.69.24 01:34, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I did my part. Removed a whole load of POV, inconsistencies, spelling (It's Opera, not Oprah), structure, formatting, and so on. I mean, the 605 WiFi section used to be frustratingly tiring for us to read. Now it's good enough for the Simple English readers. Gonna start workin' on the others, and I hope this article won't be a one-man/woman show... right, TMV? --Jw21/PenaltyKillah ^{VANucks|24-14-4} 06:54, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Info needed

Suggest to add any available information on hardware specs - cpu, speed, internal memory, operating system, etc.

The Operating System is some type of Linux, they released the source code (there's info on that in the Gen 4 article), other hardware specs really isn't necessary for an MP3 Player TMV943 (talk) 05:40, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ordering

it's easy to order it numerically but shouldn't it be by rank of importance or something, assuming had the models not been so conveniently named with numbers TMV943 (talk) 06:37, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Importance = Personal opinion, right? I don't see how ordering the "flagship" product (actually, Archos has never stated the 605 WiFi being the flagship product...) first is important... --Jw21/PenaltyKillah ^{VANucks|24-16-4} 21:26, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

at least for the moment, I changed it to descending this not only shows which have more features to less but also release order TMV943 (talk) 15:16, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I think the text speaks for itself when it comes to which player has more features or not. Since the players were released roughly around the same period, I don't think that's quite efficient.--Jw21/PenaltyKillah ^{VANucks|25-17-4} 19:19, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Section on criticism

Should a section be added on criticism of the Archos? The article currently doesn't mention negative points IE the cost of optional plugins. This would also go some way to removing the criticism of the article sounding like an advertisement. I'm happy to make a start on this, if there are no objections. Aawood (talk) 12:28, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Ready, everyone? One, two, three... source? Well, criticism on consumer electronics products must be documented by a notable source first. No citation, no nothin'. You know what, just show me one first. --Jw21/PenaltyKillah ^{VANucks|24-16-4} 21:25, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, thanks, I know about getting a source/sources. If you check this article's history, I'm the one who started the reference section in the first place. Might want to ease back on the flippancy a touch there. Aawood (talk) 10:06, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

And, done. I presume 2 reviews are enough? I've also added a forum thread from ArchosFans, but feel free to remove this if it's not considered a valid source. Aawood (talk) 10:38, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I've re-written the criticism section. If anyone's got a problem with it, I ask that they discuss it here and we come to some sort of an agreement over how it should be altered, don't just revert it out of laziness. It's arguably not NPoV, with its description of Archos as 'deceptive', but if anyone has any better way of describing the marketing that tells outright fibs about the product, by all means edit away. I am, for what it's worth, an ex-605WiFi owner. Mine went back to the shop for a refund after I realised exactly how little the unit did, unless I first spent some £140 on extra hardware and software unlock codes for it, and because it had a design flaw that caused severe crackling through the headphone output when WiFi was enabled. My sister's did the same thing, and looking around Google, it seems it's not an uncommon fault. Archos suck. Unreadablecharacters (talk) 12:32, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

"How little the unit did" ? you dont need all the plugins for extra codecs - just use divx converter to convert all the video you want to put on it into divx mobile format and away you go. £20 for the browser is a little steep but its probably the only one you will need apart from the internet radio or web tv ones, if you're so inclined. Never had that headphone problem you mention, and i frequently use my 605 (30gb) to browse the web and listen to music at the same time. Machete97 (talk) 14:50, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to be cleaning it up a bit later, all you're arguments to the 2nd paragraph are ok. In the 2nd paragraph, "deceptive marketing" isn't really the same as getting a fact wrong, unless you're talking about deceptive marketing in general which can pretty much apply to many companies. Closed nature isn't much of a criticism because most manufacturers are that way with products. Archos did however comply to GPL by providing the player's source code. Proprietary USB cables are necessary (as it is for the top 3 MP3 player brands, iPod, Sansa, and Zune) to be about to work with a range of accessories through one interface and the last bit about replacement is kind of a localized complaint than a criticism. On a second note, the complaint about the "crackling" would have fit better along with a citation of what you found from Google —Preceding unsigned comment added by TMV943 (talk • contribs) 03:33, 6 April 2008 (UTC)