I think the whole term "ipod killer" is a bit of a misnomer, yeah they can be a technically more advanced bit of hardware but have awful brand strenght. Ipods may not always be front runners in the terms hardware but they are one of the worlds most known PMP's, give an average joe the choice between a creative zen, a Zune and an ipod and majority of the time people will go with the ipod. These kind of PMP's are all competeing for second place.
Unlikely that Creative can compete in the handheld computing realm when they aren't a computing company...slapping Android or their own linux on there isn't going to compete much.
Unlikely that Creative can compete in the handheld computing realm when they aren't a computing company...slapping Android or their own linux on there isn't going to compete much.
Another "me too" attempt from a company that used to be relevant.
Another "me too" attempt from a company that used to be relevant.
Maybe you should change your signature's " Microsoft " to "Creative" . I personally feel that this product MAY take off like the Palm Pre, only to go nowhere.
On the surface, this looks like a winning device, and it could be, but it has a lot of unanswered questions right now, so it is wayyy too early to judge.
I think a lot of people on these tech sites do not think as a normal non-tech user. A lot users do not know of and have no idea what Android is, and most don't care. When you add in different OS options and developers possibly needing to create different versions of apps for each OS - confusing to users.
How will this thing sync, are they going to go the Pre route and piggyback off iTunes? How will people sync calendars, contacts, bookmarks, email, etc. Is video chat only usable with WiFi, if so how useful is that? Will it link/sync to some music/video store, if so which one?
Why force developers to pay $400 for the device when it's not even proven or guaranteed it will be a big seller. Wouldn't developers be worried about wasting $400 and wasting their time developing for an unproven device with no user base as of yet?
As I said, on surface - 32x2 storage, HD, 1080p, 2 cams, etc... sounds great, but too early to tell.
Lastly, it would be nice if companies actually used their own ingenuity & developed their own new devices and stopped waiting for Apple to do the thinking & developing - then just copy them. That is very lazy, using Apple for R&D.
If Apple does release their tablet soon and it is successful, guaranteed Dell, HP, MSFT & others will copy it in 6-12 months.
R&D of the tech companies -- watch Apple's keynotes + product releases + website = copy.
Apple is the one of the few companies I have seen that are creative and take a different step in innovation. The others are copycats. Look at the iPod. There're so many fakes and "iPod killers " but they go nowhere. just like the "iPhone killers". When will the copycats learn?
Personally, I hope one of these Android non-phones materializes sooner, rather than later. There's a market for non-phone devices and it'll be better off for having competition.
Is that why Palm no longer sells PDAs, and PocketPCs are becoming extremely rare?
The iPodTouch succeeds because it's a mix of two very popular products - an iPod and an iPhone. Most customers of the iPod Touch are buying it because it's a cool iPod, it plays games, and they can't afford an iPhone data plan.
The Zii has no advantage here. This only has a market of the anti-Apple crowd and the few geeks that want to play with developing stuff without going through Apple.
There's a market for non-phone devices and it'll be better off for having competition.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gustav
Is that why Palm no longer sells PDAs, and PocketPCs are becoming extremely rare?
The iPodTouch succeeds because it's a mix of two very popular products - an iPod and an iPhone. Most customers of the iPod Touch are buying it because it's a cool iPod, it plays games, and they can't afford an iPhone data plan.
Why are you ragging on Roc when you say that iPod Touch is a non-phone device.
From reading a bit on their site, Zii/Creative is targeting not so much the consumer, but other companies, with the Egg. They're going for a Verizon Egg or some such - let their partners worry about all the software and user experience stuff that's been pointed out as Apple's big strength.
They are positioning the Egg as a first platform for their ZMS-05 & StemCell system intending to get other companies interested in using the chip in their own devices. i.e. The Egg is a "reference" device to show what can be done with their new CPU & System on a Chip. The real goal is to sell a bunch of chips to other device manufacturers.
Why are you ragging on Roc when you say that iPod Touch is a non-phone device.
I think his point is that the Touch can feed off the iPhone market. In other words, as he mentioned, those who might want an iPhone, but can't, or won't pay for the plan would get one. The Touch has all of the advantages of the iPhone except for the ability to make calls. That gives it the App Store.
Of course, the new Touch seems to be getting a mic and a camera as well, narrowing the differences still further.
The Creative has no such advantages to feed from. No ZiiPhone, no App Store. All it has is the front facing camera, which I would like to see on the iPhone and Touch. Oh yeah, it does LOOK amazingly like an Apple device.
But then, so did their later series of music players, but they went nowhere.
You might even include me there, though I wouldn't call myself a developer yet -- I will be buying an Android phone soon though, and I will be taking more than a peek at its SDK.
Here's the deal - if you want a hobby, Android is a perfectly fine alternative.
If you want to make money, the iPhone is where it's at.
There is every indication that the App Store doesn't contribute very much to the bottom line of many developers, either. If there are 65,000 apps and 1.5 billion downloads, the average number of downloads is about 23,000. If you subtract some of the irresistible free applications like Facebook and Yelp that are just fancy Web pages, it becomes clear that selling even 1,000 copies of your application is a pretty big accomplishment.
I don't think there's very good app platforms for Android devices either, but yeah... and I don't intend on forcing payment for anything I create anyways. Donations if anything (and I wouldn't expect much, or anything).
Comments
It's Android. You can yank out Opera. And Flash.
I didn't say you couldn't yank them, I asked what's up with them being bundled in? MobileOpera and Flash lite blow. Where's the reasoning behind it?
Someone enjoying their Constitutional rights is funny! Generalizing is too!
Gold star for you.
Which came first...Zii chicken or Zii egg?
Unlikely that Creative can compete in the handheld computing realm when they aren't a computing company...slapping Android or their own linux on there isn't going to compete much.
Another "me too" attempt from a company that used to be relevant.
Another "me too" attempt from a company that used to be relevant.
Maybe you should change your signature's " Microsoft " to "Creative" .
...Zii chicken or Zii egg?
Neither nor. The farmer , Mr Apple, threw them both out of the farm.
On the surface, this looks like a winning device, and it could be, but it has a lot of unanswered questions right now, so it is wayyy too early to judge.
I think a lot of people on these tech sites do not think as a normal non-tech user. A lot users do not know of and have no idea what Android is, and most don't care. When you add in different OS options and developers possibly needing to create different versions of apps for each OS - confusing to users.
How will this thing sync, are they going to go the Pre route and piggyback off iTunes? How will people sync calendars, contacts, bookmarks, email, etc. Is video chat only usable with WiFi, if so how useful is that? Will it link/sync to some music/video store, if so which one?
Why force developers to pay $400 for the device when it's not even proven or guaranteed it will be a big seller. Wouldn't developers be worried about wasting $400 and wasting their time developing for an unproven device with no user base as of yet?
As I said, on surface - 32x2 storage, HD, 1080p, 2 cams, etc... sounds great, but too early to tell.
Lastly, it would be nice if companies actually used their own ingenuity & developed their own new devices and stopped waiting for Apple to do the thinking & developing - then just copy them. That is very lazy, using Apple for R&D.
If Apple does release their tablet soon and it is successful, guaranteed Dell, HP, MSFT & others will copy it in 6-12 months.
R&D of the tech companies -- watch Apple's keynotes + product releases + website = copy.
Apple is the one of the few companies I have seen that are creative and take a different step in innovation. The others are copycats. Look at the iPod. There're so many fakes and "iPod killers " but they go nowhere. just like the "iPhone killers". When will the copycats learn?
Like the MS store will, what?
Innovate?
The MS Store is a place to store cats and shit. ( Copycats and bullshit ). Maybe Ballmer might want to live in there too..
It's Android. You can yank out Opera. And Flash.
Personally, I hope one of these Android non-phones materializes sooner, rather than later. There's a market for non-phone devices and it'll be better off for having competition.
Is that why Palm no longer sells PDAs, and PocketPCs are becoming extremely rare?
The iPodTouch succeeds because it's a mix of two very popular products - an iPod and an iPhone. Most customers of the iPod Touch are buying it because it's a cool iPod, it plays games, and they can't afford an iPhone data plan.
The Zii has no advantage here. This only has a market of the anti-Apple crowd and the few geeks that want to play with developing stuff without going through Apple.
There's a market for non-phone devices and it'll be better off for having competition.
Is that why Palm no longer sells PDAs, and PocketPCs are becoming extremely rare?
The iPodTouch succeeds because it's a mix of two very popular products - an iPod and an iPhone. Most customers of the iPod Touch are buying it because it's a cool iPod, it plays games, and they can't afford an iPhone data plan.
Why are you ragging on Roc when you say that iPod Touch is a non-phone device.
They are positioning the Egg as a first platform for their ZMS-05 & StemCell system intending to get other companies interested in using the chip in their own devices. i.e. The Egg is a "reference" device to show what can be done with their new CPU & System on a Chip. The real goal is to sell a bunch of chips to other device manufacturers.
- Jasen.
Why are you ragging on Roc when you say that iPod Touch is a non-phone device.
I think his point is that the Touch can feed off the iPhone market. In other words, as he mentioned, those who might want an iPhone, but can't, or won't pay for the plan would get one. The Touch has all of the advantages of the iPhone except for the ability to make calls. That gives it the App Store.
Of course, the new Touch seems to be getting a mic and a camera as well, narrowing the differences still further.
The Creative has no such advantages to feed from. No ZiiPhone, no App Store. All it has is the front facing camera, which I would like to see on the iPhone and Touch. Oh yeah, it does LOOK amazingly like an Apple device.
But then, so did their later series of music players, but they went nowhere.
You might even include me there, though I wouldn't call myself a developer yet -- I will be buying an Android phone soon though, and I will be taking more than a peek at its SDK.
Here's the deal - if you want a hobby, Android is a perfectly fine alternative.
If you want to make money, the iPhone is where it's at.
Here's the deal - if you want a hobby, Android is a perfectly fine alternative.
If you want to make money, the iPhone is where it's at.
There is every indication that the App Store doesn't contribute very much to the bottom line of many developers, either. If there are 65,000 apps and 1.5 billion downloads, the average number of downloads is about 23,000. If you subtract some of the irresistible free applications like Facebook and Yelp that are just fancy Web pages, it becomes clear that selling even 1,000 copies of your application is a pretty big accomplishment.
I don't think there's very good app platforms for Android devices either, but yeah... and I don't intend on forcing payment for anything I create anyways. Donations if anything (and I wouldn't expect much, or anything).