[bookcourier] Re: e: Re: BOOKCOURIER UPDATE
- From: Kris Van Hees <aedil@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: bookcourier@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 02:40:01 -0400
Well,
The use of a hard drive based player vs compact flash (or other non-moving
storage media) is largely a personal choice. Given that the BookCourier
supports up to 4GB cards, you usually have enough storage on a single card
for a reasonable collection of files at a given time. By keeping your entire
collection available on a computer, using the transfer tool to load what
you want when you want it, the 4GB storage limit isn't eally a limitation.
On the other hand, it may be more convenient for you to have more files
available at a given time.
My personal preference for players that do not use hard drives is really the
fact that they are a lot more robust. Not having movable parts in the player
really makes it a lot more resistant to minor accidents like dropping it, or
bumping it into something. Hard drives are notoriously bad at the kind of
accidents you run into with portable players.
Kris
On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 07:34:02AM +0100, will wrote:
> hi all
>
> wouldn't a hard disk based book port be more benificial?
> to keep buying CF cards will cost a lot more in the long runJust an idea
> regards, will
Other related posts:
