Came across this review and comparison of Rapsody N35 and Mvix MX-760HD by tomshardware.com.

http://www.geardigest.com/2007/04/20/two_networked_hd_media_players_compared/index.html

Well, it seems to me that Rapsody N35 is a much better player.

Came across this review and comparison of Rapsody N35 and Mvix MX-760HD by tomshardware.com.

http://www.geardigest.com/2007/04/20/two_networked_hd_media_players_compared/index.html

Well, it seems to me that Rapsody N35 is a much better player.

I thought the reviewer opinion indicated that there is a relatively minor difference in the usability and function of the units. I thought one had a nicer GUI but also noted the problems with the touch panel controls of one of the two.

Still, I would be happy with either.

Marcus

The article seems a little unfair. They basically say they prefer the Rhapsody N35 because the Mvix can't wirelessly stream HD reliably. The N35 can't wirelessly stream HD or SD (if I'm reading the specs right). How does their conclusion make any sense? It's like saying I'd prefer to buy a competitor's 2 seater car because the back seat of your 4 seater is not big enough.

At the end of the day, however, they play media files in the same way using the same core technology. If you're in the market, their ease of setup makes both the Mvix and the Rapsody attractive options. Since HD playback turned out to be less then stellar over a wireless connection, the NDAS on the Rapsody is a much more attractive option for those of us who ache for the day when we won't have to hunt for an HD fix.
The way I read the article, all he was comparing were the HD capabilities. The Mvix doesn't do reliable HD wirelessly so that POTENTIAL plus is not a plus for HD. Also, the way the Mvix allows you to access the internal hard drive is not as "good" as the N35 NDAS.