A2Dp Headset

[Tuxedomask29]

Those look of very cheap quality. I don't think they would sound good at all. For my choice I'd rather pay a little bit more and get either this headset or this headset from Amazon.

just cause its cheap on woot doesnt mean its a cheap product, its MSRP is $79.99

I didn't say anything about it being cheap money wise, I said it looked of very cheap quality.

 

[ThaDSman]

Those look of very cheap quality. I don't think they would sound good at all. For my choice I'd rather pay a little bit more and get either this headset or this headset from Amazon.

I had the Motorola S805's, they were cheaply built and the audio was god-awful. Sure they came with a plug to use them as normal headphones, which i did until the jack broke too. Bluetooth audio is completely not worth any money, even the 'higher quality' sets are crap. The headphones themselves won't make a difference, the bottleneck is bluetooth itself.

Hey...that's not true! I had the Motorola S9's and they were pretty damn decent. I plan on getting the S9HD's,S7HD, and S805 when I get a few dollars. Newegg has some nice prices right now.

 

[WizardStan]

I didn't say anything about it being cheap money wise, I said it looked of very cheap quality.

You claim it looks cheap, and somehow use that to imply that it is an inferior product?
Need I remind you of the number of people that have criticized the Pandora as "looking cheap"?

 

[spud42]

I got a pair of Nokia BT-501's from ebay 2 years ago and they sound great . i use them with my ipaq Hx4700 updated to WM6.1. listening to mp3. or watching movies through core player...

 

[Tuxedomask29]

I didn't say anything about it being cheap money wise, I said it looked of very cheap quality.

You claim it looks cheap, and somehow use that to imply that it is an inferior product?
Need I remind you of the number of people that have criticized the Pandora as "looking cheap"?

Wasn't trying to imply anything. Was just stating how it looked to me. When I buy something I don't want something that I'm going to be wearing to look cheaply made is all. Someone else might come along and think it's the most beautiful thing they ever saw. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. So, please don't put words in my mouth because I have no idea of what kind of a product it is, just it's appearance to me. And as for the statement regarding I don't think it would sound good, well that is my opinion due to the size of speakers in the picture and the way they attach. Also, notice I said "I think", once again not trying to imply anything just my thoughts based on the data I could see. I also suggested some other ones that I thought looked good appearance wise to me. Once again, these may look like pure junk to other people, which is fine. That is why we are all different. And I for one have never thought the Pandora looked cheap. I think it is a thing of beauty!

 

[WizardStan]

Wasn't trying to imply anything.

Ok, I shouldn't have used the word "imply". I should have said "explicitly stated" instead.

Once again, these may look like pure junk to other people, which is fine.

But you said, and I quote again

Those look of very cheap quality. I don't think they would sound good at all.

Prefacing it with "think" makes it your opinion, but it still means you're making an opinion on how something sounds based on how it looks. You could be right and they do sound terrible, but that would have nothing to do with how they look, and I can't in good form defend the Pandora when people form baseless opinions and then let someone interested in the Pandora make a similar baseless opinion on a different product.

 

[Dead1nside]

I'm waiting for a good pair of bluetooth earphones as opposed to headphones.

Pandora is Bluetooth 2.0 + EDR, not 2.1 if I remember correctly.

Bluetooth puzzles me slightly, people used to talk about it like it was the thing. But whenever I use it for say, sending an image, all I think is "I wish it was a bit faster". Bluetooth 3 sounds like it'll solve this by utilising the WiFi chip to increase bandwidth to 480Mbps theoretically.

 

[Aninhumer]

Bluetooth puzzles me slightly, people used to talk about it like it was the thing. But whenever I use it for say, sending an image, all I think is "I wish it was a bit faster". Bluetooth 3 sounds like it'll solve this by utilising the WiFi chip to increase bandwidth to 480Mbps theoretically.

I think you mean 54Mbps, 480Mbps is the theoretical speed of USB not WiFi.

 

[Kramy]

I think you need to first post a link to Woot! and mention that it is only for US and Canada. I'm pretty sure the shipping will be more than $5 outside of the US and Canada.

This is incorrect. If I could be buying stuff off Woot, I assure you I would be.

 

[Dead1nside]

Bluetooth puzzles me slightly, people used to talk about it like it was the thing. But whenever I use it for say, sending an image, all I think is "I wish it was a bit faster". Bluetooth 3 sounds like it'll solve this by utilising the WiFi chip to increase bandwidth to 480Mbps theoretically.

I think you mean 54Mbps, 480Mbps is the theoretical speed of USB not WiFi.

I did get muddled up in that I was implying that 802.11g is 480Mbps theoretically. Bluetooth 3 will utilise the wifi chip and it'll run at 24Mb/s.

Edit: I got muddled up again.

 

[WizardStan]

I think you need to first post a link to Woot! and mention that it is only for US and Canada. I'm pretty sure the shipping will be more than $5 outside of the US and Canada.

This is incorrect. If I could be buying stuff off Woot, I assure you I would be.

You need some friends down in the US. I order stuff and have it shipped to them all the time, and then go visit every couple months.
"Why no mister boarder guard, I don't have anything to declare. I always carry stuff in shipping boxes."

 

[DaMummy]

for anyone looking for a nice 16gb sdhc
http://www.adorama.com/ILXSD16GBP2.html
(and yeah i prolly will continue to post random deals usable for pandora until theres an actual vital for something like this)

 

[cbox]

We do not ship to Canada, Mexico, Alaska, Hawaii, nor to Maggie's Nipples, Wyoming or Assinippi, Massachusetts at this time.

Lol, I guess Wyoming is no long in the continental United States. I live there and have ordered a few things from them, everyone always picking on Wyoming. . .

They don't ship to just that one city in Wyoming. Maybe because it has Nipples in the name...

 

[WizardStan]

We do not ship to Canada, Mexico, Alaska, Hawaii, nor to Maggie's Nipples, Wyoming or Assinippi, Massachusetts at this time.

Lol, I guess Wyoming is no long in the continental United States. I live there and have ordered a few things from them, everyone always picking on Wyoming. . .

They don't ship to just that one city in Wyoming. Maybe because it has Nipples in the name...

or possibly because it doesn't actually exist, and is just a joke that gets passed around the internet way too often.

 

[Kramy]

You need some friends down in the US.

Got some - but Texas is a bit far away.

or possibly because it doesn't actually exist, and is just a joke that gets passed around the internet way too often.

Woot does however ship to zipcode 12345 - Schenectady, New York