Talk:MP4 player

message: I think this article is useful and should be kept.  I have one of these players and couldn't find much useful information in in English till I found this page.
*I revised much of the article so that it wouldn't be so derivative, and to conform more to the style of Wikipedia. I agree that the article ought to be here, regardless whether the items in question are useless, as stated below, or not. The purpose of an encyclopedia is to provide reference on things that people need information about, and documenting audio-video devices is within the scope of this one. --Aaron Walden  13:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Keep 

message: While this article summarizes the general characteristics of all portable media players worldwide, original of fake, Chinese MP4/MTV Player focuses on Chinese-made-and-designed players; many are pirated or imitations of popular brands. A "no brainer"? Go figure. Chinese MP4/MTV Player should be expanded to include information about the labour status in China, and what causes the companies there to make fakes.--Jw21/PenaltyKillah(discuss•edits) 16:02, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Replying on mergee per policy. Chris Cunningham 16:12, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Huh? I don't understand what MP4 players have anything to do with the labour status in China? Is there any encyclopedic relation? I think that'd be more revelant in articles about Nike, Nokia, Asus, Foxconn, etc. Ufopedia (talk) 03:36, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Please refrain from replying on outdated topics. --PenaltyKillahJw21 07:35, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Against Merge 

message: Didn't this page use to have some useful external links?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by AresAndEnyo (talk • contribs) 04:08, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nothing against the quanity of information, but Wikipedia does not reference other wikis as a source. A bit paradoxical, yes, but on the terms of reliance... --Jw21/PenaltyKillah 17:05, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links 

message: This article is a shame. Many MP4 are not Chinese, and MP4s from China fail miserably on notability (because it don't have much difference from non-Chinese ones). Note most of the article can be applied to most if not all media players, not only the Chinese ones. Also, there are also many cloned mp4 in other countries, not only China. SSPecter Talk|E-Mail ◆ 01:14, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you had read the article, the name doesn't mean players with the MP4 video format. Most players from China which are clones or copycats tend to advertise as "MP4 players", as in "MP3+MP1=MP4", since those players usually wouldn't be compatible with the MP4 format. And because a whole lot of players are following that trend, the content in the article is notable. There's also sources and an external article included. You are free to contact the Wikipedia:Help desk for any further inquiries. --Jw21/PenaltyKillah 02:00, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: And if you had read my post, you would notice I am not talking anything about the MP4 format. My issue is that the article is indirectly associating "China" with "cheap or cloned 'MP4' players". However, there are many original digital players from China and many cloned digital players from other countries.  SSPecter Talk|E-Mail ◆ 06:20, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

text: -Jw21: Sorry but i think you are very biased on this topic, many of the cheap players from China are clones, but there are even more that are not, just because the person who choose to put images for this article used a nano clone doesn't mean that all MP4 players are clones. You should also realize that the term 'MP4 Players' is not simply an advertisement, in China these players are always referred to MP4 Players, it is hardly a advertising gimmick but is an actual reference to hand held video players - Just because you or where you live does not see it this way does not make it a gimmick or advertisement.
You should also be aware that many MP4 players that use the newer chipsets are quite capable of playing .MP4 formats and much more.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.152.232.27 (talk) 10:47, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

text:  I apologize if I sound biased or anything, but all that I said came from the article, no matter how flawed it may be. The article isn't referencing to clones, branded or not branded. The images that are used are from China and were referred/advertised as MP4 players, and they just happen to be clones. Unless you can find an image of a Chinese MP4 player which isn't a clone, that'll be fine. I've been to China and the "MP4" reference was, in the words of alley shopkeepeers, roughly translated, "It is next generation of media player machine, from MP3 to MP4!" A few of them were aware of the MP4 video format, let alone recognizing video formats. Anyway, there are sources and an external link to back this up, and of course, recent players now have the MP4 video format, as stated in the article too. If the only issue is with the misleading clone images, then upload non-clone Chinese MP4 players. --Jw21/PenaltyKillah 17:25, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

text: That is the whole problem. The article isn't referencing to clones: it is referencing to China clones. SSPecter Talk|E-Mail ◆ 06:20, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why "MP4 CHINESE players"??? 

message: This article should be deleted, it is uninformative and the grammar is so poor that some of the sentences are almost incomprehensible.  Overall it comes across like some sort of anti-Chinese propaganda article.  It falls short of the standards people have come to expect froma resource like Wikipedia.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.205.82.51 (talk) 17:54, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please delete this article 

message: I think this article belongs to WikiProject China since it's a term most widely used, and mostly notable, in China. Ufopedia (talk) 07:59, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject China 

message: "MP4 player" is what most PMPs are called by people from China, whether those PMPs are made in China, of Chinese brands, or not. In fact a lot of the most famous MP4 player brands are foreign brands, for example Apple's video-capable iPods, Creative's Zen Vision series, Archos and Thompson from France, Maxian, iriver and iAudio from Korea, etc. 
"MP4 player" does not equal "Chinese MP4 player", and "Chinese MP4 player" does not equal "cheapo Chinese iPod clones manufactured by private underground factories and sold abroad by pirates"
And this is an encyclopedia. Ufopedia (talk) 14:53, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  MP4 player does NOT mean it's from China 

message: Updated information on this and other (malfunctioning) mp3 players can be found here. 
There is much evidence that Ebay sellers are selling many mp4 players with fraudulent capacities. If so, I think people are giving these sellers good ratings before they realize it doesn't hold as many files as they thought it would. I don't mean to imply that the faked capacity is absolutely certain or that it applies to every player/drive that claims to be 16GB or more. Maybe they are using some non-standard formatting that was screwed up when I formatted the player with Windows. But I don't think I formatted it until I couldn't copy files to it. 
:Standard formating is FAT32 reporting itself as FAT. Anything over 2 GB is faked.Hypatea (talk) 09:53, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Not really, because if anyone disputes, telling them to "go read this forum" isn't acceptable. --Crossmr (talk) 00:54, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well for what it is worth, the seller accepted it. [Update: But when I went to buy another one, this seller and some others I didn't buy from, blocked me from purchasing. Lumenos (talk) 04:08, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

text: It also speaks to the notability of the issue. If reliable tech sources aren't picking it up, it isn't really considered that big of a deal so why are we creating content on it? --Crossmr (talk) 00:54, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a good chance there is some source you would consider "reliable" among the thousands of search results, I just don't have all night to figure out which would have an acceptable publisher. This seems a rather indirect way of going about it. I mean, how do we know who the reliable publishers are if we aren't supposed to evaluate their claims? Lumenos (talk) 08:21, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

text: As for notability, if all that means is that third-party published sources refer to it, than what is your point? Are you saying it is not likely to be valuable to the readers of Wikipedia? The particular model of mp4 player that I bought, is selling at nearly one per second on Ebay. They are less expensive than nearly any mp3 player I could find on bargain hunting forums or Ebay, plus they have rechargeable batteries, charger, they play video, record voice, support folders, etc. It makes a big difference if the capacity is 4GB (as was claimed) or about 512MB (like mine actually was). Having this information allowed me to make the player stable [Update: player was not really exactly "stable". The space kept decreasing when files were removed and added and Windows wasn't displaying the correct size. I used the same procedure on another one (to make it display the correct capacity) and it stopped working completely. I'm tired of researching this but here is where I put the disorganized update for now. Lumenos (talk) 04:08, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

text: I don't know much about these products, but it appears that the claims are that the products don't have as much capacity as they are supposed to or that they don't function properly. Those are controversial claims, in the sense that if someone made false claims along those lines, the manufacturer would be justified in suing the claimant. Therefore, we should only include such statements if we can find reliable sources that have made such claims. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:32, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I worded the section so that it is not making the claim, simply stating that many have made the claim. Would Wikipedia be liable? Lumenos (talk) 08:21, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The way around committing the sin of original research is to note the players report they are using the FAT file system on the flash memory to the operating system, and that the maximum capacity for any FAT drive is 2 MB (or something like that). That way it's simply a matter of common sense, of putting 2 and 2 together to make 4.Hypatea (talk) 09:56, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Fraudulent capacity claims

message: [The following I posted to Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard (since then, it was archived):]
There are numerous self-published sources online that discuss flash drives (including mp4 players) with hacked fake capacity . Various software exists for checking and correcting this. I have one such mp4 player and I could put an article in my wiki summarizing all this evidence. I'm a little unclear as to whether any of these would meet Wikipedia criteria as reliable or notable sources or "original research". According to WP:V "Special cases may arise; and editors should be careful not to exclude a point of view merely because it lacks academic credentials. As a rule of thumb, the greater the degree of scrutiny involved in checking facts, analyzing legal issues, and scrutinizing the evidence and arguments of a particular work, the more reliable it is." While I've not been able to find a third-party published source for this information;
* there are an overwhelming number of self-published sources,
* many of these sources are in (apparently) open and disinterested forums where scrutiny is published also,
* it's not very difficult to test the drive once you are aware that the problem may exist, so these claims are not particularly extraordinary, controversial, or vulnerable to bias or mistake. 
According to WP:V "Sources should directly support the information as it is presented in an article and should be appropriate to the claims made: exceptional claims require high-quality sources." Would the inverse be true; that when there is wide consensus in disinterested self-published sources, that a third-party publication is not necessary?
Under Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Self-published_sources it states that "When removing or challenging a reference to a self-published source, it is best to explain how it is being used inappropriately, rather than simply point out that the source is self-published." but I don't see any guideline as to how a self-published source may be used "appropriately" unless the author has previously been published by a third-party.
Lumenos (talk) 16:02, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not really, because if anyone disputes, telling them to "go read this forum" isn't acceptable. --Crossmr (talk) 00:54, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well for what it is worth, the seller accepted it. [Update: But when I went to buy another one, this seller and some others I didn't buy from, blocked me from purchasing. Lumenos (talk) 04:08, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

text: It also speaks to the notability of the issue. If reliable tech sources aren't picking it up, it isn't really considered that big of a deal so why are we creating content on it? --Crossmr (talk) 00:54, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a good chance there is some source you would consider "reliable" among the thousands of search results, I just don't have all night to figure out which would have an acceptable publisher. This seems a rather indirect way of going about it. I mean, how do we know who the reliable publishers are if we aren't supposed to evaluate their claims? Lumenos (talk) 08:21, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

text: As for notability, if all that means is that third-party published sources refer to it, than what is your point? Are you saying it is not likely to be valuable to the readers of Wikipedia? The particular model of mp4 player that I bought, is selling at nearly one per second on Ebay. They are less expensive than nearly any mp3 player I could find on bargain hunting forums or Ebay, plus they have rechargeable batteries, charger, they play video, record voice, support folders, etc. It makes a big difference if the capacity is 4GB (as was claimed) or about 512MB (like mine actually was). Having this information allowed me to make the player stable [Update: player was not really exactly "stable". The space kept decreasing when files were removed and added and Windows wasn't displaying the correct size. I used the same procedure on another one (to make it display the correct capacity) and it stopped working completely. I'm tired of researching this but here is where I put the disorganized update for now. Lumenos (talk) 04:08, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

text: I don't know much about these products, but it appears that the claims are that the products don't have as much capacity as they are supposed to or that they don't function properly. Those are controversial claims, in the sense that if someone made false claims along those lines, the manufacturer would be justified in suing the claimant. Therefore, we should only include such statements if we can find reliable sources that have made such claims. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:32, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I worded the section so that it is not making the claim, simply stating that many have made the claim. Would Wikipedia be liable? Lumenos (talk) 08:21, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The way around committing the sin of original research is to note the players report they are using the FAT file system on the flash memory to the operating system, and that the maximum capacity for any FAT drive is 2 MB (or something like that). That way it's simply a matter of common sense, of putting 2 and 2 together to make 4.Hypatea (talk) 09:56, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wide consensus in self-published sources 

message: I am missing information about these players' capability of displaying e-books. I bought a model under the Concorde label in Hungary for €50 with 2 GB Flash memory, a T-Flash slot and full USB support with no software needed. I use it every day as my "book at bedtime" and for the bus, train and park benches for plain texts downloaded from Project Gutenberg etc. True, it never seems to want to play any of the videos I keep trying (seems to only take 128 kbps), but its book function has been a real revolution for me, being an ex-pat in a far away country with far too many books already, and in no need of much else in the way of entertainment. If someone could add a section on this, it might curry--or chopsuey--a little more love for the concept. The manual in Hungarian only is an absolute disaster, even, if not especially, for fluent speakers of that language.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.101.109.156 (talk) 13:59, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe all of the s1 Actions chipset ActOS players have at least the possibility of running the text reader, jpg display and telephone book programs. The text reader will display simple .txt files loaded from PC, the .jpg viewer will resize to screen and the telephone book application has a special format. Some players come with documentation and the small CD, and it's usually a case of one-size-fits-all, because the documentation and utility applications are almost never customized for different models, they are just copied and repackaged. The applications for the consumer include a program for converting .avi to the right scale .avm to play videos, and an .lrc editor. The latter is a format for a text file with the exact name of the target MP3 minus the MP3 extension plus the .LRC extension that types the lyrics of a song to screen as the song plays. Another feature on some models is the FM radio receiver with switches for the Japanese consumer broadcast band. Some models also have a built-in speaker as well as microphone, so no headphones are required. It seems like these features should be mentioned in the article because they run across different models. There are also somewhat sophisticated choices for voice recording, but the .WAV format used is not the generally defined WAV format and needs converting to use on a PC. Some of the manuals ARE available on-line (as are the bundle of utility applications), so maybe some information from the manuals should be included in the article...Hypatea (talk) 10:11, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  E-book capabilities 

message: Junk Jungle (talk) 21:22, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tagging 

message: how to write program to make my mp4 player just I like the way it open and add  other effect with it display.
I also want to know ,it possible to open it by voice.If it possible ,how I can do.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ktsan (talk • contribs) 12:44, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not a discussion forum about MP4 players. We only discuss the article here. I don't know a good place to ask this question. You can try on http://stackoverflow.com/, but I'm not sure it's the best place. --OpenFuture (talk) 15:33, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  taking advices 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on MP4 player. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080311000040/http://www.electronics.ca/reports/multimedia/mic_mp4chips_design.html to http://www.electronics.ca/reports/multimedia/mic_mp4chips_design.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:05, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified