That Ars review seems pretty good, if a bit cursory. Salient points:
-- OLED screen has nice, poppy contrast, hard to read in direct sunlight
-- Browser sucks (sorry, Gizmodo, I'll take the word of Ars writers over your adolescent excitability any day).
-- The interface is fast and fluid, but non-intuitive at times (four different ways to back out of a screen, small finger targets, clipped text). No hardware volume control, and the button that brings up the volume/transport controls system-wide is difficult to press.
-- Excellent music discoverability services, with excellent integration of the streaming subscription service and HD radio with artist info and extras. However, these services are all predicated on having the Zune Pass, so unless you're willing to shell out a monthly fee, you don't get a lot of the stuff where the Zune actually excels.
--Accelerometer is very responsive and beats the iPhone/Touch for fast and accurate screen rotation.
So all in all sounds like an MS product, with real attention given to a couple of marquee features meant to differentiate, and which will no doubt be heavily advertised, while blowing off some basic UI/functionality issues.
More generally, the Ars review really drives home the point that this is a PMP, and it still seems to me that if you're going to release a device that focuses on music and video playback at the expense of general functionality ala the Touch, at the same price points, you had better make sure that it does music and video a whole lot better than the Touch, if you expect to be competitive. That doesn't seem to be the case, so the market for the Zune HD would appear to be the usual "anybody but Apple" crowd, people for whom better contrast on a tiny screen is really important for their movie enjoyment and folks that just have to have a music subscription service.
And even there, the music subscription carrot isn't as compelling as it once was, as web based services become available for devices like the Touch.
So..... I think the HD will do better than previous Zunes, for a while, then taper back off to irrelevance.
...going to an OLED screen is a proposition that manufacturers must consider in light of how their product is used.
For example;
If a product is mostly a phone, it's likely that even with some multimedia features, the phone won't have the screen on for too long during the day. So lifetime, and battery consumption aren't much of an issue.
But if the phone (or player) is going to be heavily used for browsing, games, books, programs, then it might be on for several hours each day. That's different.
Also, if it will be used for high quality video games etc, that must be taken into account as well.
If used in quick spurts, an OLED screen is dandy. but if used for long times, and with bright images, the screen heats up more, and lifetime is shortened. It gets dimmer over time.
Heat and lifetime are proportionally related. (O)LEDs can be run much brighter than they are, but their lifetime drops significantly, so max brightness is limited to a fraction of where it can go.
The way LED and OLED life is measured is different from the way it's measured with other displays (except for plasma, which is sorta rated a similar way). most displays are rated until dead. But (O)LEDs are rated for either a 25% drop in brightness, or a 50% drop in brightness. Without knowing which is being used for a particular screen, we can't tell how it rates against another screen, no matter what it is.
So if an (O)LED screen is rated for 15,000 use, what does that mean? If it's for 25% drop, it could have a 25,000 life at 50% drop. but if it's rated for a 50% drop at 15,000 hours, then it might actually be 9,000 at 25%. There are standards, but they aren't equally applied.
but these ratings are at some specific temperature, which has to be known, because the life ratings change as we change the test temps.
That's why I, and others, wonder about some of the numbers we see for these screens.
And has been mentioned the colors age differently. Right now, it's the green that ages the quickest, followed by the blue. So how is the screen rated? Is it an average of the colors, or is it the shortest lived, or the longest lived?
Confusing, eh?
Confusing yes, and trade-offs between choosing emerging and maturing technologies, always. But since you seem to know a lot about this, how about AMOLED. My new camera (Samsung TL320) has one - it won't be on every day or for hours - and it's really, really sweet, even in direct sun and way off axis. People notice the difference right away, even with no other cameras around to compare to.
Is this a fundamentally different tech from "regular" OLED in any way? More expensive? Different lifetime and power consumption characteristics? A viable future choice for Apple's iDevice family?
I thought this was funny... not that I necessarily agree with all of his viewpoints. I guess you can call it Apple Fanboy Site vs Microsoft Fanboy Site.
AppleInsider jumps the shark, declares Zune HD 'failed'
While I wait for what I just know will be hugely positive reviews of the Zune HD from Walter Mossberg and David Pogue (after all, these guys treat Apple product launches like just-discovered new books of the Bible), I can at least point to some of the crazy silliness coming out of the Apple fan base. AppleInsider--which, by the way, I actually like quite a bit normally since they're not usually this partisan--has written an absolutely insane and uncalled-for anti-Zune HD article. I've gotten a lot of email about it, and while I'd like to just ignore it, I am afraid that people will assume it's all true. What they're presenting are five myths of the Zune HD. Actually, it's four non-myths and one completely made up issue, but whatever. Let's waste just a little bit of time on this stupidity. (And you have to think that if Apple had adopted any of the stuff they're complaining about, AppleInsider would have been tripping all over itself congratulating the company.)
Myth 1: OLED is a great display technology for mobile devices
Not a myth. The OLED display on the Zune HD blows away the screen on any iPod or iPhone, sorry. Looked at side by side, inside or out, there is no comparison. This is especially true if you view the screen off-center. The OLED screen looks good at all angles. With the iPod touch, you find yourself fidgeting with it to get the screen to look better. (You can't tilt the Zune HD away from you enough to make it look bad. With the iPod touch, it's only OK when perfectly on center, and even then it's not nearly as good as the Zune HD.)
And while these shots don't do the real-world differences proud, they're at least representative.
Put simple, OLED isn't just "great" display technology for mobile devices. It's the superior technology, period.
Myth 2: NVIDIA's Tegra processor leapfrogs existing mobile processors
Again, not a myth. Both devices utilize an ARM processor at the core, but the NVIDIA design builds off of that with supporting chipsets for storage and video that improve performance and battery life. It can drive HD displays up to 1280 x 1050, unlike the iPod touch. But the real proof is in the using. And unlike AppleInsider, I've used the new iPod touch and Zune HD side-by-side. Zune HD performance is excellent, sorry. The iPod touch is no slouch. But to call these two devices anything but competitive is disingenuous.
Myth 3: Zune HD is mobile HD
No one claimed Zune HD was "mobile HD." The Zune HD supports HD output at 720p and includes an HD radio receiver, and Microsoft is very clear about that. The iPod touch does neither, with a dock or otherwise. Neither does any other portable Apple device.
Myth 4: Zune HD delivers high definition radio
Not a myth. I was just using this feature a few minutes ago. It does indeed deliver HD radio. And as AppleInsider notes, "Analog radio isn't going away." Good thing Microsoft realizes this. Because the iPod touch includes a standard FM radio tuner too. Unlike the iPod touch. And like every other Zune before it.
Myth 5: Zune HD games and software will wow you
This is the one actual myth, but it's also one of AppleInsider's creation, as no one ever claimed that. What Microsoft is doing is providing a number of small applications and games to Zune HD customers, for free, as a benefit of buying into their platform. Over time, they can and will open up the so-called Zune apps store to outside developers. (Witness yesterday's release of the Zune HD-compatible developer tools.) But this is just the first step in what is essentially a new platform. And remember that the Zune is really about entertainment, pure and simple. The Zune HD delivers on its core functionality quite nicely. No one questions that Apple has created a tremendous Apps platform, exclusionary as it may be.
Despite the hype, the Zune HD appears to have failed before even hitting the market.
Sure. And despite the hype, AppleInsider has absolutely failed to give the Zune HD a fair chance. We get it, Apple doesn't make it, so it must suck. But we also get that if Apple had released this product, it would have gotten a hugely favorable review. From you. From the Wall Street Journal. And from the New York Times. But thanks for trying.
There are a number of other inaccuracies in this poorly researched blog post around "Microsoft's standard operating procedure" (actually, Apple's, as it turns out), and the supposedly poor quality of mobile IE on the Zune. (Surprise! It's shockingly good.) But what can you expect from someone who wrote a post about a product that a) competes with the company they love, and b) they've never even seen let alone used?
OLEDs are nice, and all, but the viewing angle thing is a bit oversold when it comes to a handheld device, which after all is going to be spending most of its time in the hand of a person looking directly at it. That first shot would interest me if I planned to view my Touch by placing it on a desk and then getting on my knees.
I don't see anything in that article which contradicts anything I said about Zune being more than a product line of MS-branded and marketed devices going forward, but rather a general software platform migrating to X-Box, Windows, Win Mobile phones and other devices and software - even if I was out on a limb about a possible "Zune app" for the iPhone (see below). He was just focusing on the new device itself.
MS has deep pockets and patience. And they finally seem to be getting a little less dweeby and dorky (geeky they remain, which in and of itself is neither good nor bad). Search was a hopeless also ran area for them until they launched the Bing platform. And "platform" fits - it's not just a search engine, it's now the back end of Yahoo Search and has other potential.
It looks good, actually has some cool factor going on, works great and has become my default on FireFox.
So if Zune software is approached in the same way, MS may create its own media ecosystem with some unique features and start creeping back into the media market. They've done it before.
Another example is the "Live" stable of cloud products, which have been somewhat underwhelming, and certainly not creating any buzz for all the effort MS has put into them, but that may change with "Office Live" which could bring 10's of millions of business users into LiveLand where they may start to partake of other offerings the way I have with the convenience of one sign in for all of Google's services which I can access from my GMail inbox - Google Docs, Calendar YouTube, Picasa (instead of Flickr which I would have otherwise used 'cos it's bigger, more popular), etc.
Whatever, I was starting to check out Carbonite and Mozy for backup piece of mind - since a fire or theft could take out twenty years of my accumulated work and memories (docs, pix, media) even with multiple backup devices - and decided to look at SkyDrive - and was surprised to see MS has given me 25 GB of online storage simply by virtue of having an old Hotmail account I use for long-standing subscriptions, biz correspondence, etc.
SkyD at this point also has rudimentary but useful artificial intelligence features, recognizing the original folder of a file you download to your downloads folder, edit and then re-upload from that location. No backup program - no automatic deleting and updating of files by monitoring your computer - no automatic upload of new ones, only six uploads at a clip, but hey, with a burgeoning collection of huge HD vid files, 25 GB is a lot of free offsite storage to have accessible from all my computers.
I'll probably still settle on a service that provides real, automatic backup, but the point is that they're not just sitting around up there pinning all their hopes on Win 7 and the latest Zune device by any means.
So anyone who scornfully writes off MS in general as a "pitful, helpless, fading giant," and the Zune set of products and intiatives in particular - as so many are here whether for religious or secular reasons, is engaged in wishful thinking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
I don't see that [a Zune app to give Zune Pass subscibers access to their Libraries] as being possible. A subscription requires DRM. Apple has never had MS DRM on their machines, and I don't see that happening now. This seems like pie in the sky.
I believe Thurrot's idea was not to down the DRM'd library, but stream from it.
But in retrospect I have not the faintest idea if this makes a bit of sense. Also, AT&T might not let the traffic over their network, restricting it to Wi-Fi hotspots, which would make it even more unpractical. So whatever passing that on says about my posting, just have to live with it! \
In the words of the Emily Latella character, on the original SNL: "Nevermind."
her final comment can be my opinion of safari on my touch. Hell, if the microsoft browser doesnt crash constantly, it would be an improvement.
That's an interesting note. I've had a 1G iPod touch and a 2G iPod touch and BOTH mobile Safari crashed CONSTANTLY on those devices.
However, with my iPhone 3G S, I have not had nearly as many crashes (and the crashes I have had, I could probably count on one hand) since I got the device on launch day. Maybe it's because of the increased memory available?
her final comment can be my opinion of safari on my touch. Hell, if the microsoft browser doesnt crash constantly, it would be an improvement.
If Safari is "crashing constantly", you need to do a software update or reset.
At any rate, you are in the minority in your opinion of Mobile Safari, which is widely regarded as one of the best, if not the best, mobile browser on the market.
I thought this was funny... not that I necessarily agree with all of his viewpoints. I guess you can call it Apple Fanboy Site vs Microsoft Fanboy Site.
Melgross and others.... This thread has grown quite a bit since I first posted. I do not have time at the moment to post extensive objective reflections on the devices (I have a 3G iPhobe and the HD), but I did want to follow up on my speculation about the Zune and games from the night this thread started.... and say that MS has now added support for XNA developers to develop for the HD (I think Prince said MS abandoned XNA):
So far my initial opinion (will explain in detail later) of the devices:
iPhone 3G offers a better browser experience, though the HD is not bad
HD screen is brighter than iPhone 3G--colors more saturated--sometimes this good, sometimes not
Apps loaded much slower on the HD
HD is way quicker in terms of response (menu navigation, auto rotation of screen, etc.)
Zune software is by far (obviously my opinion and most here will disagree, though most have not used the Zune software--I use both) superior. To be honest I abhor iTunes. I imagine the experience is better on a Mac, but I cannot see how it can be that much better. Did I mention I do not like iTunes. It is way too bloated and the UI is terrible. At least it can now monitor a folder (iTunes 9).
HD UI is easier to navigate (more intuitive)
iPhone has a lot more going for it in terms of its [broad] function. It is more of a mobile computer (which I need). The HD is a media player. As a media player, in my view, it is a much better than the iPhone. I will still be using my iPhone, as I need something a little more broad-reaching and the iPhone delivers.
.
Again, the views of someone who owns both devices and likes them both. Take it for what it is worth. I reserve the right to change my mind as I continue to use the device. So far, it is pretty good (oh, it is smaller than I imagined, which I did not like).
If Safari is "crashing constantly", you need to do a software update or reset.
At any rate, you are in the minority in your opinion of Mobile Safari, which is widely regarded as one of the best, if not the best, mobile browser on the market.
I have noticed the browser has improved ten-fold since the 3G first came out. When the 3G was new I could expect at least one crash every day, but now it is surprising to see one in a week.
I had a windows phone once.... and I never want to see that browser again. Safari is definitely the best mobile browser right now, but I can see that changing if google incorporates chrome into android. Mac users, wait a month or so and you should be able to see what i mean when a chrome beta is released for mac.
I have noticed the browser has improved ten-fold since the 3G first came out. When the 3G was new I could expect at least one crash every day, but now it is surprising to see one in a week.
I had a windows phone once.... and I never want to see that browser again. Safari is definitely the best mobile browser right now, but I can see that changing if google incorporates chrome into android. Mac users, wait a month or so and you should be able to see what i mean when a chrome beta is released for mac.
Definitely improved with software updates, although I agree with a previous poster that the 3Gs's increased memory space really helps out as well.
I wonder if Chrome is amenable to a mobile handset, or Android? For instance, is the separate processes per tab thing achievable within the constrained processor environment of a phone? Will be interesting to see what Google does here.
I don't see anything in that article which contradicts anything I said about Zune being more than a product line of MS-branded and marketed devices going forward, but rather a general software platform migrating to X-Box, Windows, Win Mobile phones and other devices and software - even if I was out on a limb about a possible "Zune app" for the iPhone (see below). He was just focusing on the new device itself.
MS has deep pockets and patience. And they finally seem to be getting a little less dweeby and dorky (geeky they remain, which in and of itself is neither good nor bad). Search was a hopeless also ran area for them until they launched the Bing platform. And "platform" fits - it's not just a search engine, it's now the back end of Yahoo Search and has other potential.
It looks good, actually has some cool factor going on, works great and has become my default on FireFox.
So if Zune software is approached in the same way, MS may create its own media ecosystem with some unique features and start creeping back into the media market. They've done it before.
Point taken, but you really, I think the pertinent comparison is to Apple and the iPhone OS. A subset of OS X and leveraged across multiple products.
MS has different teams working on different products that may or may not play nice at some point. And none of them have anything to do with Windows, beyond some cosmetic niceties.
I can't see where "Perhaps at some point WinMo 7 will incorporate some aspects of what we're seeing now in the Zune OS" is much of a plan, and I certainly can't see where it puts MS in a good competitive position vs. the iPhone/Touch juggernaut, with who knows what hardware variants to come (although we know for sure that whatever they are they'll run a version of OS X that almost certainly will have most if not all UI conventions in common with either the iPhone OS or desktop OS X).
The fact that the Zune OS is entirely separate from WinMo and the sales guy is publicly talking about how "those guys" have their own thing, leaving the Zune folks to concentrate with "laser" focus on media playback is just ridiculous. If you leave your fans having to claim that "no one wants to playback media on their phones, thank God I can buy a dedicated device for that", something has gone pretty wrong.
1) Podcasts have been supported for 2 generations.
2) 3.3 vs 3.5" comes from the fact that the Zune is 16:9, not 4:3. Ya know, like most movies and modern TV shows.
3) Zune has Smart DJ, which is Genius on steroids. Actually works, unlike Genius, and also inserts songs from the marketplace which stream straight off it if you have the subscription.
4) I like how the optional dock is red for a built-in Zune feature, but the addon for the radio for the iPod is a nice black. Double standard.
5) ARM revisions are essentially irrelevant when the Tegra system is more capable by offloading tasks to the other on-chip processors, though that is one of your few valid points.
6) 9 apps, all free.
7) All WiFi abilities mentioned on the iPod are late-comers. The Zune, Gen 1, auto-logged onto your WiFi network to sync when charging, and it would auto-log on when you browsed the marketplace from Gen 2 on.
8) Zune does support rentals; furthermore, their video downloads and rentals are optionally HD or SD.
Probably already been mentioned, but that was so egregiously wrong, I had to comment (and register!)
1) Podcasts have been supported for 2 generations.
2) 3.3 vs 3.5" comes from the fact that the Zune is 16:9, not 4:3. Ya know, like most movies and modern TV shows.
3) Zune has Smart DJ, which is Genius on steroids. Actually works, unlike Genius, and also inserts songs from the marketplace which stream straight off it if you have the subscription.
4) I like how the optional dock is red for a built-in Zune feature, but the addon for the radio for the iPod is a nice black. Double standard.
5) ARM revisions are essentially irrelevant when the Tegra system is more capable by offloading tasks to the other on-chip processors, though that is one of your few valid points.
6) 9 apps, all free.
7) All WiFi abilities mentioned on the iPod are late-comers. The Zune, Gen 1, auto-logged onto your WiFi network to sync when charging, and it would auto-log on when you browsed the marketplace from Gen 2 on.
8) Zune does support rentals; furthermore, their video downloads and rentals are optionally HD or SD.
Probably already been mentioned, but that was so egregiously wrong, I had to comment (and register!)
But the main point is Microsoft needs to get their head out of their asses and stop internet explorer. with all of that money they have, they should just buy mozilla and let it be a separate company, but reap the benefits. I don't see a downside to that scenario, unless they f***ed up Firefox too.
Melgross and others.... This thread has grown quite a bit since I first posted. I do not have time at the moment to post extensive objective reflections on the devices (I have a 3G iPhobe and the HD), but I did want to follow up on my speculation about the Zune and games from the night this thread started.... and say that MS has now added support for XNA developers to develop for the HD (I think Prince said MS abandoned XNA):
So far my initial opinion (will explain in detail later) of the devices:
iPhone 3G offers a better browser experience, though the HD is not bad
HD screen is brighter than iPhone 3G--colors more saturated--sometimes this good, sometimes not
Apps loaded much slower on the HD
HD is way quicker in terms of response (menu navigation, auto rotation of screen, etc.)
Zune software is by far (obviously my opinion and most here will disagree, though most have not used the Zune software--I use both) superior. To be honest I abhor iTunes. I imagine the experience is better on a Mac, but I cannot see how it can be that much better. Did I mention I do not like iTunes. It is way too bloated and the UI is terrible. At least it can now monitor a folder (iTunes 9).
HD UI is easier to navigate (more intuitive)
iPhone has a lot more going for it in terms of its [broad] function. It is more of a mobile computer (which I need). The HD is a media player. As a media player, in my view, it is a much better than the iPhone. I will still be using my iPhone, as I need something a little more broad-reaching and the iPhone delivers.
.
Again, the views of someone who owns both devices and likes them both. Take it for what it is worth. I reserve the right to change my mind as I continue to use the device. So far, it is pretty good (oh, it is smaller than I imagined, which I did not like).
agion1
Itunes 9 CANNOT monitor any folders like it's 1989. And they this the best music management software? I think not. SLow bloatware is what I call it.
So why is the technologically superior Zune so slow?
From Ars:
Quote:
Or, rather, they're "free," since Microsoft has apparently decided to sell ads against them. The ads show up during app launch, which takes an astonishingly long time. Booting Chess took 30 seconds, though I suppose one could be grateful for the Kia Soul video that gives the eyes something to do.
Launching the weather app takes about 8 seconds, the calculator about 9. Goo Splat, which has been showing a static ad this morning for the Soul, launches in about 17 seconds.
and
Also, while the UI is pretty... How effective is displaying three apps at a time if you want to make a big push into apps? My guess is that Microsoft doesn't plan on a big push into apps.
All in all the Zune HD appears to be a great PMP, in many ways better than an iPod Touch, but it seems like Microsoft is not interested in turning it into a mobile computing platform like the touch is.
I thought this was funny... not that I necessarily agree with all of his viewpoints. I guess you can call it Apple Fanboy Site vs Microsoft Fanboy Site.
Comments
That view of the browser isn't universal:
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/...d-review.ars/3
That Ars review seems pretty good, if a bit cursory. Salient points:
-- OLED screen has nice, poppy contrast, hard to read in direct sunlight
-- Browser sucks (sorry, Gizmodo, I'll take the word of Ars writers over your adolescent excitability any day).
-- The interface is fast and fluid, but non-intuitive at times (four different ways to back out of a screen, small finger targets, clipped text). No hardware volume control, and the button that brings up the volume/transport controls system-wide is difficult to press.
-- Excellent music discoverability services, with excellent integration of the streaming subscription service and HD radio with artist info and extras. However, these services are all predicated on having the Zune Pass, so unless you're willing to shell out a monthly fee, you don't get a lot of the stuff where the Zune actually excels.
--Accelerometer is very responsive and beats the iPhone/Touch for fast and accurate screen rotation.
So all in all sounds like an MS product, with real attention given to a couple of marquee features meant to differentiate, and which will no doubt be heavily advertised, while blowing off some basic UI/functionality issues.
More generally, the Ars review really drives home the point that this is a PMP, and it still seems to me that if you're going to release a device that focuses on music and video playback at the expense of general functionality ala the Touch, at the same price points, you had better make sure that it does music and video a whole lot better than the Touch, if you expect to be competitive. That doesn't seem to be the case, so the market for the Zune HD would appear to be the usual "anybody but Apple" crowd, people for whom better contrast on a tiny screen is really important for their movie enjoyment and folks that just have to have a music subscription service.
And even there, the music subscription carrot isn't as compelling as it once was, as web based services become available for devices like the Touch.
So..... I think the HD will do better than previous Zunes, for a while, then taper back off to irrelevance.
...going to an OLED screen is a proposition that manufacturers must consider in light of how their product is used.
For example;
If a product is mostly a phone, it's likely that even with some multimedia features, the phone won't have the screen on for too long during the day. So lifetime, and battery consumption aren't much of an issue.
But if the phone (or player) is going to be heavily used for browsing, games, books, programs, then it might be on for several hours each day. That's different.
Also, if it will be used for high quality video games etc, that must be taken into account as well.
If used in quick spurts, an OLED screen is dandy. but if used for long times, and with bright images, the screen heats up more, and lifetime is shortened. It gets dimmer over time.
Heat and lifetime are proportionally related. (O)LEDs can be run much brighter than they are, but their lifetime drops significantly, so max brightness is limited to a fraction of where it can go.
The way LED and OLED life is measured is different from the way it's measured with other displays (except for plasma, which is sorta rated a similar way). most displays are rated until dead. But (O)LEDs are rated for either a 25% drop in brightness, or a 50% drop in brightness. Without knowing which is being used for a particular screen, we can't tell how it rates against another screen, no matter what it is.
So if an (O)LED screen is rated for 15,000 use, what does that mean? If it's for 25% drop, it could have a 25,000 life at 50% drop. but if it's rated for a 50% drop at 15,000 hours, then it might actually be 9,000 at 25%. There are standards, but they aren't equally applied.
but these ratings are at some specific temperature, which has to be known, because the life ratings change as we change the test temps.
That's why I, and others, wonder about some of the numbers we see for these screens.
And has been mentioned the colors age differently. Right now, it's the green that ages the quickest, followed by the blue. So how is the screen rated? Is it an average of the colors, or is it the shortest lived, or the longest lived?
Confusing, eh?
Confusing yes, and trade-offs between choosing emerging and maturing technologies, always. But since you seem to know a lot about this, how about AMOLED. My new camera (Samsung TL320) has one - it won't be on every day or for hours - and it's really, really sweet, even in direct sun and way off axis. People notice the difference right away, even with no other cameras around to compare to.
Is this a fundamentally different tech from "regular" OLED in any way? More expensive? Different lifetime and power consumption characteristics? A viable future choice for Apple's iDevice family?
http://community.winsupersite.com/bl...hd-failed.aspx
AppleInsider jumps the shark, declares Zune HD 'failed'
While I wait for what I just know will be hugely positive reviews of the Zune HD from Walter Mossberg and David Pogue (after all, these guys treat Apple product launches like just-discovered new books of the Bible), I can at least point to some of the crazy silliness coming out of the Apple fan base. AppleInsider--which, by the way, I actually like quite a bit normally since they're not usually this partisan--has written an absolutely insane and uncalled-for anti-Zune HD article. I've gotten a lot of email about it, and while I'd like to just ignore it, I am afraid that people will assume it's all true. What they're presenting are five myths of the Zune HD. Actually, it's four non-myths and one completely made up issue, but whatever. Let's waste just a little bit of time on this stupidity. (And you have to think that if Apple had adopted any of the stuff they're complaining about, AppleInsider would have been tripping all over itself congratulating the company.)Not a myth. The OLED display on the Zune HD blows away the screen on any iPod or iPhone, sorry. Looked at side by side, inside or out, there is no comparison. This is especially true if you view the screen off-center. The OLED screen looks good at all angles. With the iPod touch, you find yourself fidgeting with it to get the screen to look better. (You can't tilt the Zune HD away from you enough to make it look bad. With the iPod touch, it's only OK when perfectly on center, and even then it's not nearly as good as the Zune HD.)
And while these shots don't do the real-world differences proud, they're at least representative.
Put simple, OLED isn't just "great" display technology for mobile devices. It's the superior technology, period.Again, not a myth. Both devices utilize an ARM processor at the core, but the NVIDIA design builds off of that with supporting chipsets for storage and video that improve performance and battery life. It can drive HD displays up to 1280 x 1050, unlike the iPod touch. But the real proof is in the using. And unlike AppleInsider, I've used the new iPod touch and Zune HD side-by-side. Zune HD performance is excellent, sorry. The iPod touch is no slouch. But to call these two devices anything but competitive is disingenuous.No one claimed Zune HD was "mobile HD." The Zune HD supports HD output at 720p and includes an HD radio receiver, and Microsoft is very clear about that. The iPod touch does neither, with a dock or otherwise. Neither does any other portable Apple device.Not a myth. I was just using this feature a few minutes ago. It does indeed deliver HD radio. And as AppleInsider notes, "Analog radio isn't going away." Good thing Microsoft realizes this. Because the iPod touch includes a standard FM radio tuner too. Unlike the iPod touch. And like every other Zune before it.This is the one actual myth, but it's also one of AppleInsider's creation, as no one ever claimed that. What Microsoft is doing is providing a number of small applications and games to Zune HD customers, for free, as a benefit of buying into their platform. Over time, they can and will open up the so-called Zune apps store to outside developers. (Witness yesterday's release of the Zune HD-compatible developer tools.) But this is just the first step in what is essentially a new platform. And remember that the Zune is really about entertainment, pure and simple. The Zune HD delivers on its core functionality quite nicely. No one questions that Apple has created a tremendous Apps platform, exclusionary as it may be.Sure. And despite the hype, AppleInsider has absolutely failed to give the Zune HD a fair chance. We get it, Apple doesn't make it, so it must suck. But we also get that if Apple had released this product, it would have gotten a hugely favorable review. From you. From the Wall Street Journal. And from the New York Times. But thanks for trying.
There are a number of other inaccuracies in this poorly researched blog post around "Microsoft's standard operating procedure" (actually, Apple's, as it turns out), and the supposedly poor quality of mobile IE on the Zune. (Surprise! It's shockingly good.) But what can you expect from someone who wrote a post about a product that a) competes with the company they love, and b) they've never even seen let alone used?
I'm calling BS on this one, sorry.
Hmmmm......
Or, you could listen to Zune's marketing manager:
I don't see anything in that article which contradicts anything I said about Zune being more than a product line of MS-branded and marketed devices going forward, but rather a general software platform migrating to X-Box, Windows, Win Mobile phones and other devices and software - even if I was out on a limb about a possible "Zune app" for the iPhone (see below). He was just focusing on the new device itself.
MS has deep pockets and patience. And they finally seem to be getting a little less dweeby and dorky (geeky they remain, which in and of itself is neither good nor bad). Search was a hopeless also ran area for them until they launched the Bing platform. And "platform" fits - it's not just a search engine, it's now the back end of Yahoo Search and has other potential.
It looks good, actually has some cool factor going on, works great and has become my default on FireFox.
So if Zune software is approached in the same way, MS may create its own media ecosystem with some unique features and start creeping back into the media market. They've done it before.
Another example is the "Live" stable of cloud products, which have been somewhat underwhelming, and certainly not creating any buzz for all the effort MS has put into them, but that may change with "Office Live" which could bring 10's of millions of business users into LiveLand where they may start to partake of other offerings the way I have with the convenience of one sign in for all of Google's services which I can access from my GMail inbox - Google Docs, Calendar YouTube, Picasa (instead of Flickr which I would have otherwise used 'cos it's bigger, more popular), etc.
Whatever, I was starting to check out Carbonite and Mozy for backup piece of mind - since a fire or theft could take out twenty years of my accumulated work and memories (docs, pix, media) even with multiple backup devices - and decided to look at SkyDrive - and was surprised to see MS has given me 25 GB of online storage simply by virtue of having an old Hotmail account I use for long-standing subscriptions, biz correspondence, etc.
SkyD at this point also has rudimentary but useful artificial intelligence features, recognizing the original folder of a file you download to your downloads folder, edit and then re-upload from that location. No backup program - no automatic deleting and updating of files by monitoring your computer - no automatic upload of new ones, only six uploads at a clip, but hey, with a burgeoning collection of huge HD vid files, 25 GB is a lot of free offsite storage to have accessible from all my computers.
I'll probably still settle on a service that provides real, automatic backup, but the point is that they're not just sitting around up there pinning all their hopes on Win 7 and the latest Zune device by any means.
So anyone who scornfully writes off MS in general as a "pitful, helpless, fading giant," and the Zune set of products and intiatives in particular - as so many are here whether for religious or secular reasons, is engaged in wishful thinking.
I don't see that [a Zune app to give Zune Pass subscibers access to their Libraries] as being possible. A subscription requires DRM. Apple has never had MS DRM on their machines, and I don't see that happening now. This seems like pie in the sky.
I believe Thurrot's idea was not to down the DRM'd library, but stream from it.
But in retrospect I have not the faintest idea if this makes a bit of sense. Also, AT&T might not let the traffic over their network, restricting it to Wi-Fi hotspots, which would make it even more unpractical. So whatever passing that on says about my posting, just have to live with it!
In the words of the Emily Latella character, on the original SNL: "Nevermind."
Another thumbs down for the browser.
her final comment can be my opinion of safari on my touch. Hell, if the microsoft browser doesnt crash constantly, it would be an improvement.
her final comment can be my opinion of safari on my touch. Hell, if the microsoft browser doesnt crash constantly, it would be an improvement.
That's an interesting note. I've had a 1G iPod touch and a 2G iPod touch and BOTH mobile Safari crashed CONSTANTLY on those devices.
However, with my iPhone 3G S, I have not had nearly as many crashes (and the crashes I have had, I could probably count on one hand) since I got the device on launch day. Maybe it's because of the increased memory available?
her final comment can be my opinion of safari on my touch. Hell, if the microsoft browser doesnt crash constantly, it would be an improvement.
If Safari is "crashing constantly", you need to do a software update or reset.
At any rate, you are in the minority in your opinion of Mobile Safari, which is widely regarded as one of the best, if not the best, mobile browser on the market.
I thought this was funny... not that I necessarily agree with all of his viewpoints. I guess you can call it Apple Fanboy Site vs Microsoft Fanboy Site.
http://community.winsupersite.com/bl...hd-failed.aspx
It seems equally biased and at times doesn't even address the main points AI introduced (no comment on OLED effects on battery life?).
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...displaylang=en
So far my initial opinion (will explain in detail later) of the devices:
- iPhone 3G offers a better browser experience, though the HD is not bad
- HD screen is brighter than iPhone 3G--colors more saturated--sometimes this good, sometimes not
- Apps loaded much slower on the HD
- HD is way quicker in terms of response (menu navigation, auto rotation of screen, etc.)
- Zune software is by far (obviously my opinion and most here will disagree, though most have not used the Zune software--I use both) superior. To be honest I abhor iTunes. I imagine the experience is better on a Mac, but I cannot see how it can be that much better. Did I mention I do not like iTunes. It is way too bloated and the UI is terrible. At least it can now monitor a folder (iTunes 9).
- HD UI is easier to navigate (more intuitive)
- iPhone has a lot more going for it in terms of its [broad] function. It is more of a mobile computer (which I need). The HD is a media player. As a media player, in my view, it is a much better than the iPhone. I will still be using my iPhone, as I need something a little more broad-reaching and the iPhone delivers.
.Again, the views of someone who owns both devices and likes them both. Take it for what it is worth. I reserve the right to change my mind as I continue to use the device. So far, it is pretty good (oh, it is smaller than I imagined, which I did not like).
agion1
If Safari is "crashing constantly", you need to do a software update or reset.
At any rate, you are in the minority in your opinion of Mobile Safari, which is widely regarded as one of the best, if not the best, mobile browser on the market.
I have noticed the browser has improved ten-fold since the 3G first came out. When the 3G was new I could expect at least one crash every day, but now it is surprising to see one in a week.
I had a windows phone once.... and I never want to see that browser again. Safari is definitely the best mobile browser right now, but I can see that changing if google incorporates chrome into android. Mac users, wait a month or so and you should be able to see what i mean when a chrome beta is released for mac.
I have noticed the browser has improved ten-fold since the 3G first came out. When the 3G was new I could expect at least one crash every day, but now it is surprising to see one in a week.
I had a windows phone once.... and I never want to see that browser again. Safari is definitely the best mobile browser right now, but I can see that changing if google incorporates chrome into android. Mac users, wait a month or so and you should be able to see what i mean when a chrome beta is released for mac.
Definitely improved with software updates, although I agree with a previous poster that the 3Gs's increased memory space really helps out as well.
I wonder if Chrome is amenable to a mobile handset, or Android? For instance, is the separate processes per tab thing achievable within the constrained processor environment of a phone? Will be interesting to see what Google does here.
I don't see anything in that article which contradicts anything I said about Zune being more than a product line of MS-branded and marketed devices going forward, but rather a general software platform migrating to X-Box, Windows, Win Mobile phones and other devices and software - even if I was out on a limb about a possible "Zune app" for the iPhone (see below). He was just focusing on the new device itself.
MS has deep pockets and patience. And they finally seem to be getting a little less dweeby and dorky (geeky they remain, which in and of itself is neither good nor bad). Search was a hopeless also ran area for them until they launched the Bing platform. And "platform" fits - it's not just a search engine, it's now the back end of Yahoo Search and has other potential.
It looks good, actually has some cool factor going on, works great and has become my default on FireFox.
So if Zune software is approached in the same way, MS may create its own media ecosystem with some unique features and start creeping back into the media market. They've done it before.
Point taken, but you really, I think the pertinent comparison is to Apple and the iPhone OS. A subset of OS X and leveraged across multiple products.
MS has different teams working on different products that may or may not play nice at some point. And none of them have anything to do with Windows, beyond some cosmetic niceties.
I can't see where "Perhaps at some point WinMo 7 will incorporate some aspects of what we're seeing now in the Zune OS" is much of a plan, and I certainly can't see where it puts MS in a good competitive position vs. the iPhone/Touch juggernaut, with who knows what hardware variants to come (although we know for sure that whatever they are they'll run a version of OS X that almost certainly will have most if not all UI conventions in common with either the iPhone OS or desktop OS X).
The fact that the Zune OS is entirely separate from WinMo and the sales guy is publicly talking about how "those guys" have their own thing, leaving the Zune folks to concentrate with "laser" focus on media playback is just ridiculous. If you leave your fans having to claim that "no one wants to playback media on their phones, thank God I can buy a dedicated device for that", something has gone pretty wrong.
A few corrections:
Quick debunking here:
1) Podcasts have been supported for 2 generations.
2) 3.3 vs 3.5" comes from the fact that the Zune is 16:9, not 4:3. Ya know, like most movies and modern TV shows.
3) Zune has Smart DJ, which is Genius on steroids. Actually works, unlike Genius, and also inserts songs from the marketplace which stream straight off it if you have the subscription.
4) I like how the optional dock is red for a built-in Zune feature, but the addon for the radio for the iPod is a nice black. Double standard.
5) ARM revisions are essentially irrelevant when the Tegra system is more capable by offloading tasks to the other on-chip processors, though that is one of your few valid points.
6) 9 apps, all free.
7) All WiFi abilities mentioned on the iPod are late-comers. The Zune, Gen 1, auto-logged onto your WiFi network to sync when charging, and it would auto-log on when you browsed the marketplace from Gen 2 on.
8) Zune does support rentals; furthermore, their video downloads and rentals are optionally HD or SD.
Probably already been mentioned, but that was so egregiously wrong, I had to comment (and register!)
Quick debunking here:
1) Podcasts have been supported for 2 generations.
2) 3.3 vs 3.5" comes from the fact that the Zune is 16:9, not 4:3. Ya know, like most movies and modern TV shows.
3) Zune has Smart DJ, which is Genius on steroids. Actually works, unlike Genius, and also inserts songs from the marketplace which stream straight off it if you have the subscription.
4) I like how the optional dock is red for a built-in Zune feature, but the addon for the radio for the iPod is a nice black. Double standard.
5) ARM revisions are essentially irrelevant when the Tegra system is more capable by offloading tasks to the other on-chip processors, though that is one of your few valid points.
6) 9 apps, all free.
7) All WiFi abilities mentioned on the iPod are late-comers. The Zune, Gen 1, auto-logged onto your WiFi network to sync when charging, and it would auto-log on when you browsed the marketplace from Gen 2 on.
8) Zune does support rentals; furthermore, their video downloads and rentals are optionally HD or SD.
Probably already been mentioned, but that was so egregiously wrong, I had to comment (and register!)
But the main point is Microsoft needs to get their head out of their asses and stop internet explorer. with all of that money they have, they should just buy mozilla and let it be a separate company, but reap the benefits. I don't see a downside to that scenario, unless they f***ed up Firefox too.
Melgross and others.... This thread has grown quite a bit since I first posted. I do not have time at the moment to post extensive objective reflections on the devices (I have a 3G iPhobe and the HD), but I did want to follow up on my speculation about the Zune and games from the night this thread started.... and say that MS has now added support for XNA developers to develop for the HD (I think Prince said MS abandoned XNA):
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...displaylang=en
So far my initial opinion (will explain in detail later) of the devices:
- iPhone 3G offers a better browser experience, though the HD is not bad
- HD screen is brighter than iPhone 3G--colors more saturated--sometimes this good, sometimes not
- Apps loaded much slower on the HD
- HD is way quicker in terms of response (menu navigation, auto rotation of screen, etc.)
- Zune software is by far (obviously my opinion and most here will disagree, though most have not used the Zune software--I use both) superior. To be honest I abhor iTunes. I imagine the experience is better on a Mac, but I cannot see how it can be that much better. Did I mention I do not like iTunes. It is way too bloated and the UI is terrible. At least it can now monitor a folder (iTunes 9).
- HD UI is easier to navigate (more intuitive)
- iPhone has a lot more going for it in terms of its [broad] function. It is more of a mobile computer (which I need). The HD is a media player. As a media player, in my view, it is a much better than the iPhone. I will still be using my iPhone, as I need something a little more broad-reaching and the iPhone delivers.
.Again, the views of someone who owns both devices and likes them both. Take it for what it is worth. I reserve the right to change my mind as I continue to use the device. So far, it is pretty good (oh, it is smaller than I imagined, which I did not like).
agion1
Itunes 9 CANNOT monitor any folders like it's 1989. And they this the best music management software? I think not. SLow bloatware is what I call it.
6) 9 apps, all free with ads during loading which takes a long time.
http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/new...e-roll-ads.ars
To be fair, it appears only the games have ads
So why is the technologically superior Zune so slow?
From Ars:
Or, rather, they're "free," since Microsoft has apparently decided to sell ads against them. The ads show up during app launch, which takes an astonishingly long time. Booting Chess took 30 seconds, though I suppose one could be grateful for the Kia Soul video that gives the eyes something to do.
Launching the weather app takes about 8 seconds, the calculator about 9. Goo Splat, which has been showing a static ad this morning for the Soul, launches in about 17 seconds.
and
Also, while the UI is pretty... How effective is displaying three apps at a time if you want to make a big push into apps? My guess is that Microsoft doesn't plan on a big push into apps.
All in all the Zune HD appears to be a great PMP, in many ways better than an iPod Touch, but it seems like Microsoft is not interested in turning it into a mobile computing platform like the touch is.
I thought this was funny... not that I necessarily agree with all of his viewpoints. I guess you can call it Apple Fanboy Site vs Microsoft Fanboy Site.
http://community.winsupersite.com/bl...hd-failed.aspx
I don't think the iPod Touch is as bad as the second photo shows, it looks overlighted (the photo).
Probably the backlit/screen was brighter then the one from the zune when the picture was taken. (I've studied photografie)
Anyway my iPod Touch's screen doesn't look in anyway like the one on the photo.
I can make a photo wich will show a much better display and colors.