Gazoobee, thank you for responding to my post. Yes, I see that I was not clear in what I wrote. I did not take the time to re-read. I apologize. In any case, I do not wish to divert attention from my main post. I was simply having fun with Melgross by bringing up that "old chestnut," as you call it. I thought his argument regarding the Xbox's success (namely, that it was a success because MS continued to take massive losses for a period of time) was not relevant to my point and I thought I'd use a little humor (very little, I know) to make my point.
Your interpretation of the Apple/Microsoft deal is interested and may have merit. In the name of objectivity though, it would do you well not to pretend that what you are saying is indisputable [cold-hard fact]. It is easy enough to sift through the archives of various tech and news sites and see clearly that other interpretations existed then (and exist now). Objectively, no one can say whether MS "saved" Apple or not. ...
I appreciate your response and especially the polite tone, but I don't think it's fair to say the facts are in doubt on this topic. The "MS saved Apple" (with that investment) meme is popular, but it's not factual.
You only have to realise that the 150 million was a tiny drop in the bucket in terms of the money that Apple needed at the time to see how they couldn't have "saved" anything. it's also telling that the commitment to keep producing Office was much more important to Apple's comeback yet the people pushing this myth hardly ever even mention that aspect. It's likely however, that part of the reason for Microsoft's agreement to keep making Office for Mac had more to do with not attracting further lawsuits for anti-competitive behaviour.
The law suits I mentioned were quite real though, and the fact that the original Video for Windows program contained (quite literally) stolen code is well established although Microsoft has long argued it was just a mistake made by the company they hired to produce the product.
In retrospect the deal was really very similar to the way Jobs described it at the time. Kind of a "let's shake hands and move on" sort of thing. But whatever you think of it, the idea that Microsoft "saved" Apple by making that investment really is just a myth.
Guess you fall into the "mindless Apple Sheep" comment above. Keep buying something for its logo and not its features. People on this forum want me to stop buying Apple products.
He was commenting on you saying that you would lie to Apple about the Zune even if you thought it wasn't very good. He does have a point. Think about it. If you thought the Zune wasn't very good, but you told Apple that you thought it was, then what exactly would it be about the Zune that you would want them to emulate? How would that help them to improve their product?
Wouldn't it then be better to tell them what there was about the Zune you thought wasn't very good so that they WOULDN'T emulate it?
I'm not trying to be antagonistic but as a moderator you can't pound someone for calling another an ifanbot and then in the very same response call him an msbot. What gives?
I was trying to make a point. Sometimes people don't understand what they've said unless it's thrown back at them. Also I was showing him that by him saying that to someone here, over and again in one post, he was showing us that he was what he was calling that other person, who, if you had read his post, was not taking an extreme position, and didn't deserve being called that.
Does that clear it up?
I'd rather do that, and hope for some understanding, than edit posts from the very beginning of someone's tenure here, even though I get the feeling that he, along with some others here tonight, won't be staying.
How does Amazon count best sellers? Do they only count sales in the last hour, or is it some sort of cumulative total, updated hourly? If it is cumulative, the newest touch would be at a significant disadvantage as the ZuneHD has been available for quite some time.
Also, a product with multiple models for sale is also at a disadvantage. If we are counting iPod Touch sales to Zune sales then we need to add up all of them. Since the Zune loses to multiple Touchs it?s clear it?s selling as well.
On that note, Mac notebooks can often do look to do well in sales rankings on Amazon since Apple has a lot less choices as a vendor than say Dell, HP or Acer.
Why do people want this Zune device so bad? Apple's iTouch offers so much more value that I can't for the life of me see why someone is so against it. The iTunes store, 70,000+ apps, its a great iPod, plenty of memory up to 64 GB, its super thin, has bluetooth and a higher resolution screen. Do people just hate Apple that much? Seriously?
I don't think i've ever downloaded an ipod touch app that was actually worth the time. I would say that out of those 70,000 there may be 20 apps worth looking at. Most of them just tools that you don't use most of the time. All of the games are basically the same cheap pieces of garbage.
Yeah, 'cause in that time period, you got to listen to millions of tracks legitimately that you otherwise may not have had a chance to...
And here's another point - of those 120-140 songs - how many would you continue to listen to indefinitely? What's the point of buying music you will not care about in a year or more?
Yes. That's it exactly. I think the Zune Pass is great!
I appreciate your response and especially the polite tone, but I don't think it's fair to say the facts are in doubt on this topic. The "MS saved Apple" (with that investment) meme is popular, but it's not factual.
You only have to realise that the 150 million was a tiny drop in the bucket in terms of the money that Apple needed at the time to see how they couldn't have "saved" anything. it's also telling that the commitment to keep producing Office was much more important to Apple's comeback yet the people pushing this myth hardly ever even mention that aspect. It's likely however, that part of the reason for Microsoft's agreement to keep making Office for Mac had more to do with not attracting further lawsuits for anti-competitive behaviour.
The law suits I mentioned were quite real though, and the fact that the original Video for Windows program contained (quite literally) stolen code is well established although Microsoft has long argued it was just a mistake made by the company they hired to produce the product.
In retrospect the deal was really very similar to the way Jobs described it at the time. Kind of a "let's shake hands and move on" sort of thing. But whatever you think of it, the idea that Microsoft "saved" Apple by making that investment really is just a myth.
Gazoobee, it is late and I cannot go into details but to say that I do not think that those who argue that MS "saved" Apple think it was due to a simple $150 million investment (at least those with any knowledge of the situation). Those who understand the agreement and the financial situation of Apple at the time would point to the investment, shareholder confidence (and the impact such an investment would have), the MS/Apple Office agreement (and the confidence it inspired since it was a long-term agreement), and a host of other things to support their claims.
Personally, I do not care. My own view is that such language ("saved") is used to draw out emotion and is not helpful. As I said before, it cannot be proved one way or the other. I originally mentioned the investment in fun, to make a point. That is all.
Apple didnt go for OLED because they dont want to pay Samsung / LG to cut a 3.5inch 320*480 display when nobody uses that resolution/screen size for OLED making this process expensive to Cupertino and damage their profits. in short, Apple dont want to pony up the money from their pockets.
Windows Mobile and WinCE (zune OS run atop it) have been running under ARM CPU well before Apple came with that stupid mp3 named iPod.
From an owner of Radeon graphics cards, I still remember back in 2000-2002 when Nvidia GPU's were trashing the PowerVR GPUs. Mainly the Kyro graphics cards...hahaha.
Anyway....read this old article about the Tegra APX 2500
I don't think i've ever downloaded an ipod touch app that was actually worth the time. I would say that out of those 70,000 there may be 20 apps worth looking at. Most of them just tools that you don't use most of the time. All of the games are basically the same cheap pieces of garbage.
"You would say"? Based on what? Your careful analysis of 70,000 aps?
Here's the thing: those 20 useful apps are going to be different for every user. The fact that there are so many just means that it's more likely that I'll find the app that works for me, for what I want to do. Surprisingly, I don't assume that because some app isn't appealing to me it must not be appealing to anyone and is therefore useless.
Be honest: if the iPod touch revision had included an OLED screen, you'd be hyping that like it's the best thing ever. Same with Tegra and hi-def video out.
I'd buy a touch just to get the App Store, but who cares what people buy? Trashing an unreleased product while preaching to the choir is bad form, methinks.
Steve Jobs is not going to approve crap or something that may be a problem hence must be a reason for no camera on iPod Touch. Apple has work for me and everybody who still buying and supporting their products unlike Microsoft with Xbox 360 by itself I really don't care if its $299 I rather buy a 160GB AppleTV for $229.
So now Fan Bot is not allowed when you personally use FanBoy in many forum postings?
Don't make this a room of Double Standards because he/she has some great points.
Dude. You've latched onto some kind of grudge/fixation about who said what about the merits of OLED as if it were a towering moral lapse, and you are beating that horse past death into a thin red paste. It's just not..... very important.
Ok what is this. The site is APPLEinsider, it is a site for apple fans to come to and get further edified on the products (past/current/and future) that apple releases. Right now, most sites are posting tons of articles about the awesomeness of Tegra, the pure hotness of OLED and how sweet and sexy all this streaming and eventual connection with the 360 will be. Its cool, I read all these sites and I post questions asking for clarification on modern microsoft features since I've sorta fallen behind since I switched a few years back. I don't just jump on these sites and brag about how awesome my iPhones and iPod touch are (which I actually own and use everyday).
So then I'm kinda curious, why wouldn't Apple with its $1,000,000,000 of liquid cash (that number is pretty astounding written out isn't it), and its huge market grossing billions in apps decide to skip all these features. I mean, I've been told by MS fanboys for years that Apple is just a premium computer company who charges me tons of money for advanced hardware I don't need. Now all of a sudden, MS is the premium company? Something doesn't fit.
So then AI releases this article discussing some of these supposed "totally awesome, blow your socks off" features and tries to put it all in some perspective. Sure, the article is biased, DUH, do we need to mention the URL again? Prince points out some of the possible downsides to the technology and explains why Apple has so far passed on this technology. Obviously, the proof is in the pudding, and we wont know which device is better until... MS actually releases their product. However, its nice to hear the other side of the story.
Why on earth is this grounds for you to come to our house and bitch and moan about unfairly we're treating your future product? Where on earth do you get off trying to tell us that the iPod Touch isn't even a game console. I own a Wii, a PS3 (I traded in my 360 for it, because, what a surprise, it broke), a DS lite and an iPhone (2 actually, and I gave my parents my free iPod Touch), and guess what... I haven't turned on my wii or ps3 for 2 months, I haven't touched my DS lite in the 15 months owned the iPhone, and I game on my iPhone easily 2-5 hours a day. Is this true for everyone, certainly not, I just happen to like strategy games and such that work exceedingly well with the iPhone interface and I'm not really into FPSs which the PS3 handles so elegantly. Sure, basketball season will roll around and I'll boot back up my PS3 and love me some NBA 2k10, and I'll rock my RPGs when its cold out and I can't enjoy the outdoors, but don't tell me I'm not gaming on a console. Hell my parents have never played any games on any system, and suddenly my dad plays a couple hours of word games a day on his iPod Touch and my mum can't put down her iPhone.
So, basically, yes, we have actual devices in our hands that we use daily and are very, very, very pleased with (99% satisfaction rating for the iPhone 3gs according to the latest polls). Meanwhile, you have a device which isn't out yet and your talking about how much it clearly trounces on mine. Please, grow up, buy your Zune HD, and let the numbers play out.
I'm so tired of MS telling me what's going to be awesome (longhorn, vista, windows 7, xbox live, original zune, ie6, ie7, ie8.... need I continue) only to be severely dissapointed at every turn. All of these feelings are opinions, and obviously many, many people love xbox live (as an example, its a good service I just don't like little kids yellings things at me that they have no concept of what they mean), but why do you trolls feel it necessary to stuff your opinions down my throat on a site devoted to my products? If you were actually confident that the Zune HD would be so badass, you wouldn't need to say shit, because guess what, I year from now all I'd see would be the countless Zunes infiltrating my life, forcing me to recognize its superiority. The truth is, I can't got anywhere and not see an iPhone or a touch, and I've known 3 people with a Zune.
I'm actually somewhat optimistic that the Zune HD will be a very nice little unit, and might have some decent apps and games.The screen looks great in the shots and videos I've seen, though of course I'm not going to draw any conclusions either way until real reviews come out and I see it live.
I say 'optimistic' not because I am a MS fan, but because a little competition will be good for us consumers. I was disappointed in the last iPod rollout.
As someone who has actually SEEN and USED the latest generation of OLED screens, I'd love it if my iPhone had an OLED screen. The difference in image quality is remarkable. Absolutely stunning. I couldn't believe what a massive step up OLED is from LCD until I saw one for myself.
The screen life argument is pure FUD. Your battery has a far lower life expectancy.
As someone pointed out earlier, Daniel aka Prince doesn't care about the truth or about giving insight into an issue. All he cares about is trying to make Apple look like geniuses and Microsoft look like idiots. If the iPhone had an OLED screen, he would be writing an article on 'the Myths of OLED', declaring how great they are in direct sunlight. Who here thinks that Daniel has even seen the ZuneHD's display for himself?
it's updated hourly, can change anytime. besides, it iss human controlled and not based on real sells. using that as statistics on both side is a failure.
I say 'optimistic' not because I am a MS fan, but because a little competition will be good for us consumers. I was disappointed in the last iPod rollout.
I don?t see anything that would make this Zune a "must have" product in the way Apple can. Apple even came into what was considered a tough market with the iPhone and they made it the overnight gold standard. I can say that the Zune since their v2.0 OS has been quite good (especially for MS) but I see nothing compelling for the average consumer to buy a Zune or to switch to the Zune from an iPod. MS is more likely to pull consumers from the other non-iPod PMP vendors, but that market, especially for the larger devices, is already quite small.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL
As someone who has actually SEEN and USED the latest generation of OLED screens, I'd love it if my iPhone had an OLED screen. The difference in image quality is remarkable. Absolutely stunning. I couldn't believe what a massive step up OLED is from LCD until I saw one for myself.
I?ve read that OLED doesn?t need to have the same resolution as LCD to appear clearer and crisper. I can?t attest for that being a fact but from what I?ve seen in images OLED that is stated to be fairly low res looked very good.
Comments
Gazoobee, thank you for responding to my post. Yes, I see that I was not clear in what I wrote. I did not take the time to re-read. I apologize. In any case, I do not wish to divert attention from my main post. I was simply having fun with Melgross by bringing up that "old chestnut," as you call it. I thought his argument regarding the Xbox's success (namely, that it was a success because MS continued to take massive losses for a period of time) was not relevant to my point and I thought I'd use a little humor (very little, I know) to make my point.
Your interpretation of the Apple/Microsoft deal is interested and may have merit. In the name of objectivity though, it would do you well not to pretend that what you are saying is indisputable [cold-hard fact]. It is easy enough to sift through the archives of various tech and news sites and see clearly that other interpretations existed then (and exist now). Objectively, no one can say whether MS "saved" Apple or not. ...
I appreciate your response and especially the polite tone, but I don't think it's fair to say the facts are in doubt on this topic. The "MS saved Apple" (with that investment) meme is popular, but it's not factual.
You only have to realise that the 150 million was a tiny drop in the bucket in terms of the money that Apple needed at the time to see how they couldn't have "saved" anything. it's also telling that the commitment to keep producing Office was much more important to Apple's comeback yet the people pushing this myth hardly ever even mention that aspect. It's likely however, that part of the reason for Microsoft's agreement to keep making Office for Mac had more to do with not attracting further lawsuits for anti-competitive behaviour.
The law suits I mentioned were quite real though, and the fact that the original Video for Windows program contained (quite literally) stolen code is well established although Microsoft has long argued it was just a mistake made by the company they hired to produce the product.
In retrospect the deal was really very similar to the way Jobs described it at the time. Kind of a "let's shake hands and move on" sort of thing. But whatever you think of it, the idea that Microsoft "saved" Apple by making that investment really is just a myth.
Guess you fall into the "mindless Apple Sheep" comment above. Keep buying something for its logo and not its features. People on this forum want me to stop buying Apple products.
He was commenting on you saying that you would lie to Apple about the Zune even if you thought it wasn't very good. He does have a point. Think about it. If you thought the Zune wasn't very good, but you told Apple that you thought it was, then what exactly would it be about the Zune that you would want them to emulate? How would that help them to improve their product?
Wouldn't it then be better to tell them what there was about the Zune you thought wasn't very good so that they WOULDN'T emulate it?
MelGross,
I'm not trying to be antagonistic but as a moderator you can't pound someone for calling another an ifanbot and then in the very same response call him an msbot. What gives?
I was trying to make a point. Sometimes people don't understand what they've said unless it's thrown back at them. Also I was showing him that by him saying that to someone here, over and again in one post, he was showing us that he was what he was calling that other person, who, if you had read his post, was not taking an extreme position, and didn't deserve being called that.
Does that clear it up?
I'd rather do that, and hope for some understanding, than edit posts from the very beginning of someone's tenure here, even though I get the feeling that he, along with some others here tonight, won't be staying.
We STILL need an iPhone/Mac Mini car computer type device from Apple -- dash integrated...
How does Amazon count best sellers? Do they only count sales in the last hour, or is it some sort of cumulative total, updated hourly? If it is cumulative, the newest touch would be at a significant disadvantage as the ZuneHD has been available for quite some time.
Also, a product with multiple models for sale is also at a disadvantage. If we are counting iPod Touch sales to Zune sales then we need to add up all of them. Since the Zune loses to multiple Touchs it?s clear it?s selling as well.
On that note, Mac notebooks can often do look to do well in sales rankings on Amazon since Apple has a lot less choices as a vendor than say Dell, HP or Acer.
I'm just asking. Honestly...
Why do people want this Zune device so bad? Apple's iTouch offers so much more value that I can't for the life of me see why someone is so against it. The iTunes store, 70,000+ apps, its a great iPod, plenty of memory up to 64 GB, its super thin, has bluetooth and a higher resolution screen. Do people just hate Apple that much? Seriously?
I don't think i've ever downloaded an ipod touch app that was actually worth the time. I would say that out of those 70,000 there may be 20 apps worth looking at. Most of them just tools that you don't use most of the time. All of the games are basically the same cheap pieces of garbage.
Yeah, 'cause in that time period, you got to listen to millions of tracks legitimately that you otherwise may not have had a chance to...
And here's another point - of those 120-140 songs - how many would you continue to listen to indefinitely? What's the point of buying music you will not care about in a year or more?
Yes. That's it exactly. I think the Zune Pass is great!
I appreciate your response and especially the polite tone, but I don't think it's fair to say the facts are in doubt on this topic. The "MS saved Apple" (with that investment) meme is popular, but it's not factual.
You only have to realise that the 150 million was a tiny drop in the bucket in terms of the money that Apple needed at the time to see how they couldn't have "saved" anything. it's also telling that the commitment to keep producing Office was much more important to Apple's comeback yet the people pushing this myth hardly ever even mention that aspect. It's likely however, that part of the reason for Microsoft's agreement to keep making Office for Mac had more to do with not attracting further lawsuits for anti-competitive behaviour.
The law suits I mentioned were quite real though, and the fact that the original Video for Windows program contained (quite literally) stolen code is well established although Microsoft has long argued it was just a mistake made by the company they hired to produce the product.
In retrospect the deal was really very similar to the way Jobs described it at the time. Kind of a "let's shake hands and move on" sort of thing. But whatever you think of it, the idea that Microsoft "saved" Apple by making that investment really is just a myth.
Gazoobee, it is late and I cannot go into details but to say that I do not think that those who argue that MS "saved" Apple think it was due to a simple $150 million investment (at least those with any knowledge of the situation). Those who understand the agreement and the financial situation of Apple at the time would point to the investment, shareholder confidence (and the impact such an investment would have), the MS/Apple Office agreement (and the confidence it inspired since it was a long-term agreement), and a host of other things to support their claims.
Personally, I do not care. My own view is that such language ("saved") is used to draw out emotion and is not helpful. As I said before, it cannot be proved one way or the other. I originally mentioned the investment in fun, to make a point. That is all.
Okay, it is late. Take care.
agion1
A few articles and videos showing the same technologies used by Zune HD against the old display technologies of the current iPod Touch:
http://www.pocketables.net/2009/03/a...amsung-p3.html
Video showing viewing angles between OLED tech against old LCD tech:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/designf...7614734510594/
Photos of the ZuneHD under light here:
So bright and shinny display at Best Buy (look the huge metal hallide lamps on the background):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9lLl2B0uAE
Show us a 100% white webpage, ifanbot.
Apple didnt go for OLED because they dont want to pay Samsung / LG to cut a 3.5inch 320*480 display when nobody uses that resolution/screen size for OLED making this process expensive to Cupertino and damage their profits. in short, Apple dont want to pony up the money from their pockets.
Windows Mobile and WinCE (zune OS run atop it) have been running under ARM CPU well before Apple came with that stupid mp3 named iPod.
From an owner of Radeon graphics cards, I still remember back in 2000-2002 when Nvidia GPU's were trashing the PowerVR GPUs. Mainly the Kyro graphics cards...hahaha.
Anyway....read this old article about the Tegra APX 2500
http://www.beyond3d.com/content/articles/101/1
uh? The Nvidia demo (done back in 2008) is running at:
- WVGA (800x480). higher than iphone. or you gonna lie to us and tell crap that the iphone resolution is better than that ?
- AA and AF. Where is that on the iphone, ifanbot ?
Like how all the ifanbots related websites promoted and overhyped the mythical camera on the iPod Touch, right ?
Wow. Zunetards are funny when they get riled up. Obliged to fan out on the web and do the monkey dance on their master's behalf.
I don't think you are going to win this argument. Zune pass is a nice option to have. It works really well for some people.
An option proved to be a failure. The current music subscription model will not succeed.
I agree with both of you. It?s been a commercial failure but for the select few that absolutely love it, I am glad they have the option.
I don't think i've ever downloaded an ipod touch app that was actually worth the time. I would say that out of those 70,000 there may be 20 apps worth looking at. Most of them just tools that you don't use most of the time. All of the games are basically the same cheap pieces of garbage.
"You would say"? Based on what? Your careful analysis of 70,000 aps?
Here's the thing: those 20 useful apps are going to be different for every user. The fact that there are so many just means that it's more likely that I'll find the app that works for me, for what I want to do. Surprisingly, I don't assume that because some app isn't appealing to me it must not be appealing to anyone and is therefore useless.
Be honest: if the iPod touch revision had included an OLED screen, you'd be hyping that like it's the best thing ever. Same with Tegra and hi-def video out.
I'd buy a touch just to get the App Store, but who cares what people buy? Trashing an unreleased product while preaching to the choir is bad form, methinks.
Steve Jobs is not going to approve crap or something that may be a problem hence must be a reason for no camera on iPod Touch. Apple has work for me and everybody who still buying and supporting their products unlike Microsoft with Xbox 360 by itself I really don't care if its $299 I rather buy a 160GB AppleTV for $229.
So now Fan Bot is not allowed when you personally use FanBoy in many forum postings?
Don't make this a room of Double Standards because he/she has some great points.
Dude. You've latched onto some kind of grudge/fixation about who said what about the merits of OLED as if it were a towering moral lapse, and you are beating that horse past death into a thin red paste. It's just not..... very important.
[…] and you are beating that horse past death into a thin red paste. It's just not..... very important.
I just love these GIFs.
Looks more like a deer or llama to me.
So then I'm kinda curious, why wouldn't Apple with its $1,000,000,000 of liquid cash (that number is pretty astounding written out isn't it), and its huge market grossing billions in apps decide to skip all these features. I mean, I've been told by MS fanboys for years that Apple is just a premium computer company who charges me tons of money for advanced hardware I don't need. Now all of a sudden, MS is the premium company? Something doesn't fit.
So then AI releases this article discussing some of these supposed "totally awesome, blow your socks off" features and tries to put it all in some perspective. Sure, the article is biased, DUH, do we need to mention the URL again? Prince points out some of the possible downsides to the technology and explains why Apple has so far passed on this technology. Obviously, the proof is in the pudding, and we wont know which device is better until... MS actually releases their product. However, its nice to hear the other side of the story.
Why on earth is this grounds for you to come to our house and bitch and moan about unfairly we're treating your future product? Where on earth do you get off trying to tell us that the iPod Touch isn't even a game console. I own a Wii, a PS3 (I traded in my 360 for it, because, what a surprise, it broke), a DS lite and an iPhone (2 actually, and I gave my parents my free iPod Touch), and guess what... I haven't turned on my wii or ps3 for 2 months, I haven't touched my DS lite in the 15 months owned the iPhone, and I game on my iPhone easily 2-5 hours a day. Is this true for everyone, certainly not, I just happen to like strategy games and such that work exceedingly well with the iPhone interface and I'm not really into FPSs which the PS3 handles so elegantly. Sure, basketball season will roll around and I'll boot back up my PS3 and love me some NBA 2k10, and I'll rock my RPGs when its cold out and I can't enjoy the outdoors, but don't tell me I'm not gaming on a console. Hell my parents have never played any games on any system, and suddenly my dad plays a couple hours of word games a day on his iPod Touch and my mum can't put down her iPhone.
So, basically, yes, we have actual devices in our hands that we use daily and are very, very, very pleased with (99% satisfaction rating for the iPhone 3gs according to the latest polls). Meanwhile, you have a device which isn't out yet and your talking about how much it clearly trounces on mine. Please, grow up, buy your Zune HD, and let the numbers play out.
I'm so tired of MS telling me what's going to be awesome (longhorn, vista, windows 7, xbox live, original zune, ie6, ie7, ie8.... need I continue) only to be severely dissapointed at every turn. All of these feelings are opinions, and obviously many, many people love xbox live (as an example, its a good service I just don't like little kids yellings things at me that they have no concept of what they mean), but why do you trolls feel it necessary to stuff your opinions down my throat on a site devoted to my products? If you were actually confident that the Zune HD would be so badass, you wouldn't need to say shit, because guess what, I year from now all I'd see would be the countless Zunes infiltrating my life, forcing me to recognize its superiority. The truth is, I can't got anywhere and not see an iPhone or a touch, and I've known 3 people with a Zune.
GO AWAY!!!
I say 'optimistic' not because I am a MS fan, but because a little competition will be good for us consumers. I was disappointed in the last iPod rollout.
The screen life argument is pure FUD. Your battery has a far lower life expectancy.
As someone pointed out earlier, Daniel aka Prince doesn't care about the truth or about giving insight into an issue. All he cares about is trying to make Apple look like geniuses and Microsoft look like idiots. If the iPhone had an OLED screen, he would be writing an article on 'the Myths of OLED', declaring how great they are in direct sunlight. Who here thinks that Daniel has even seen the ZuneHD's display for himself?
You realize, you kinda kill the rest of your argument when anyone who can browse Amazon can prove you wrong on the first one.
http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/m...4at75137PM.png
it's updated hourly, can change anytime. besides, it iss human controlled and not based on real sells. using that as statistics on both side is a failure.
I say 'optimistic' not because I am a MS fan, but because a little competition will be good for us consumers. I was disappointed in the last iPod rollout.
I don?t see anything that would make this Zune a "must have" product in the way Apple can. Apple even came into what was considered a tough market with the iPhone and they made it the overnight gold standard. I can say that the Zune since their v2.0 OS has been quite good (especially for MS) but I see nothing compelling for the average consumer to buy a Zune or to switch to the Zune from an iPod. MS is more likely to pull consumers from the other non-iPod PMP vendors, but that market, especially for the larger devices, is already quite small.
As someone who has actually SEEN and USED the latest generation of OLED screens, I'd love it if my iPhone had an OLED screen. The difference in image quality is remarkable. Absolutely stunning. I couldn't believe what a massive step up OLED is from LCD until I saw one for myself.
I?ve read that OLED doesn?t need to have the same resolution as LCD to appear clearer and crisper. I can?t attest for that being a fact but from what I?ve seen in images OLED that is stated to be fairly low res looked very good.