Which brings up a point I've been making since the release of the original iPhone: Apple created a version of OS X that can run on mobile devices. Given the pace of hardware improvements, there's nothing but upside for Apple as their mobile offerings come to be able to handle more and more functionality. It's not like a phone is going to be able to outstrip what OS X can do any time soon, and moreover they can offer the user a smooth continuum from their tiniest palmtops right up to the workstation class pro machines.
Whereas the people dragging forward their legacy operating systems, designed back when to run on constrained hardware, are obliged to try and figure out how to bolt on new stuff to take advantage of new hardware and new competitors, and will be stuck with a built-in divide between such devices and more capable machines running desktop class software.
It's funny, too, because the folks on the tech sites are fixated on how the Tegra chipset is so badass it surely yield awesomeness, apparently unaware that all the silicon grunt in the world is useless without good software. You get the impression that they think "Tegra" magically makes software happen.
I've seen so many reviews of phones over the years that were given good reviews for the hardware, but then said that the thing holding it back was the terrible Win Mobile OS. We still see that.
I think for most of the users here, this "Zune vs iPod War" doesn't matter. MS refuses to make the Zune compatible with OSX, so every Mac user is already set on the iPod or maybe something like the Archos.
It's only potential sales lost, because there's no way any Mac user is going to go back to Windows just for a Zune, even with bootcamp, I would bet.
That's true.
But, in all honesty, Mac users are only about 8.7% of all users in the US, and 3.8% over the world.
If we take business and government machines out of the mix, we likely double those percentages.
But even with that, it can be seen that selling to Mac users isn't going to do much for the Zune. How many Mac users would buy one?
The large majority of buyers are using PC's. So while we Mac users get ticked whenever a company doesn't let us use their product, we do have to understand that most sales are to PC users.
But the thing with Zune sales is that they are so small that they could increase them by four times and not have much of an impact on Apple's sales, and that's without selling it to Mac users.
I've seen so many reviews of phones over the years that were given good reviews for the hardware, but then said that the thing holding it back was the terrible Win Mobile OS. We still see that.
Yeah, to the point that various handset manufacturers are reduced to making their own shells to conceal the dreadfulness, which of course means you find yourself abruptly coming up against 1995 once you get past the home screen and a few widgets.
Really, I don't think anything speaks to the drift that has overtaken MS more than their utter failure to address the mobile space. Sure, WinMob 7 might be a big improvement-- it could hardly fail in that regard-- but here we are, well into what pretty much everyone agrees is the next big computing paradigm, a competitive environment resembling the early days of the desktop wars, and MS is all like "whatever, when we get around to it." And then apparently puts resources into an iPod Touch competitor with none of what makes the Touch such a significant device for Apple.
Yeah, to the point that various handset manufacturers are reduced to making their own shells to conceal the dreadfulness, which of course means you find yourself abruptly coming up against 1995 once you get past the home screen and a few widgets.
Really, I don't think anything speaks to the drift that has overtaken MS more than their utter failure to address the mobile space. Sure, WinMob 7 might be a big improvement-- it could hardly fail in that regard-- but here we are, well into what pretty much everyone agrees is the next big computing paradigm, a competitive environment resembling the early days of the desktop wars, and MS is all like "whatever, when we get around to it." And then apparently puts resources into an iPod Touch competitor with none of what makes the Touch such a significant device for Apple.
Let's face it, MS has a problem. It takes a lot of time and resources to build an OS from scratch.
Nokia can't do it, so they keep recycling the old Symbian and loading it up with bolted on (an English expression some here will be familiar with in the phone industry) "features" which slow the whole thing down, and make it even clumsier to use.
Google seems to be the first in a long time, along with Palm, to come up with something different.
But even there, both OS's are based on Linux. So neither company really came up with a new OS from scratch. Most of the work was done for them.
Chrome? Vaporware so far. Who knows how useful it will be, and I think it's also based on linux.
Can MS use Linux as a base? Wow! Just the thought!
I think they would have a hard time of it politically if they did.
So I think they're stuck for the next couple of years anyway. Behind the scenes, possibly they're working furiously on something entirely new. But it takes years.
Do they have that time?
I'd love to know what this years license sales are. Last year it was under projections, which were already below earlier projections. I don't remember if they hit 20 million, or if it was 18 million. I do remember that at the beginning of the year, Ballmer predicted over 20 million.
They will likely keep business customers as their main base as consumers desert the platform, but even that's down. Last year they had 22% of business, and the latest numbers say 14%.
I think it's kind of funny how the only two things that Zune has over iPod that could be considered iPod "missing features" (things that Apple's customers would actually like to see), are not being touted at all in the marketing of the Zune HD so far. By this I'm referring to the built in "social" and the OLED screen.
The secret of good competitive marketing is to either ignore or lie about the things your product is missing and focus on the few things that yours has that the other one doesn't. The OLED screen is massive but I haven't heard it even mentioned in any of the product demos you can find online.
The fact that Apple products mostly appeal to lonely friendless elitists who don't socialise much is also a massive point against the Apple ecosystem that should be exploited, but no one seems to bother about Zune's "social" anymore either.
Microsoft may be a "business giant" but they've always been dumb as a puppy and twice as clumsy when it comes to marketing.
I'd like to see a radio tuner built into the iPod touch. It's really not such a complicated thing to expect. It would also alleviate "song burnout" from listening to one's library of songs too often.
The fact that Apple products mostly appeal to lonely friendless elitists who don't socialise much is also a massive point against the Apple ecosystem that should be exploited
so apple meets the price of the 32gb, hopefully they are able to get an fm radio, oled screen, and a nice updated look to go with it.
While Microsoft might well hype the Zune?s radio, any iPhone or iPod touch can be turned into a short-wave radio, via the WunderRadio app, bringing in stations from all over the world -- 30,000 according to iTunes.
The fact that Apple products mostly appeal to lonely friendless elitists who don't socialise much is also a massive point against the Apple ecosystem that should be exploited, but no one seems to bother about Zune's "social" anymore either.
hmm. it's difficult to quantify that statement. but apple is a pretty social thing for many of my friends.
While Microsoft might well hype the Zune’s radio, any iPhone or iPod touch can be turned into a short-wave radio, via the WunderRadio app, bringing in stations from all over the world -- 30,000 according to iTunes.
Including a radio isn't going to do jack for MS. MS needs to start from scratch, and start REDEFINING markets and/or CREATING NEW ONES.
Me-too attempts three years later with a couple of different features (while upgraded iPod Touches are waiting in the wings with new surprises) won't cut it.
As long as Apple is in the game and MS keeps its current management, with its current mindset and attitude about how people should interact with technology, nothing will change in Redmond. You can only put so much lipstick on a pig.
Want to know the future of MS? Listen Ballmer. It starts at the top. THERE is the future of MS.
[QUOTE=melgross;1463437]Let's face it, MS has a problem. It takes a lot of time and resources to build an OS from scratch.
Nokia can't do it, so they keep recycling the old Symbian and loading it up with bolted on (an English expression some here will be familiar with in the phone industry) "features" which slow the whole thing down, and make it even clumsier to use.
Google seems to be the first in a long time, along with Palm, to come up with something different.
Quote:
But even there, both OS's are based on Linux. So neither company really came up with a new OS from scratch. Most of the work was done for them.
Like it was done for Apple, and a smart move at that. A lot of effort was directed to the UI but the underpinnings of OS X have a similar genesis.
Quote:
Can MS use Linux as a base? Wow! Just the thought!
Perhaps BSD instead . They could build a compatibility layer - a large part of that has already been done in WINE for the corporate space at least, and start to move on. An added bonus in that space would be that few games would run on Windows X at first.
Yep - I'm taking the piss a little but compatibility with previous software is holding MS back. I did read a little about a new kernel that was skunkworks stuff at MS but little came of it. They really need to cut the cord - like Apple did - but they've got so much market share (including corporates) that they've got no choice but to get it right. Apple's risk on that point was far smaller. Then again, if they were to switch to a Linux/BSD base - why wouldn't corporates simply look at alternatives such as RHEL in the server space?
For those talking about POS operating systems, from the UI point of view Windows 7 is not really one of those. So far there are a few things that I would love to see built into OS X such as window snapping, full screen toggle, the taskbar is better than the dock, IMO (thumbs improve the dock paradigm immensely), and software/driver installation is really good (at any rate you only have to install drivers etc once) - but I digress.
I don't think I've ever even seen a Zune in Australia. I don't think it's offered locally. SO it will make SFA difference here.
Microsoft can price it at $0.99, it does not matter much. No serious iPod user will switch to Zune. Price alone will accomplish nothing. iPod rules the market and competition will only come from serious companies, other than Microsoft. Microsoft has never made a product that is better than anything Apple makes. And it always copy a product after Apple has made billions of dollars from selling it. Original idea always beats the copycats!
Software is the key. And perhaps this Zune HD looks so ugly compared to iPod Touch that it will become "Dune" before Christmas. No kid wants to be seen with this crap. It looks ugly.
Like it was done for Apple, and a smart move at that. A lot of effort was directed to the UI but the underpinnings of OS X have a similar genesis.
Perhaps BSD instead . They could build a compatibility layer - a large part of that has already been done in WINE for the corporate space at least, and start to move on. An added bonus in that space would be that few games would run on Windows X at first.
Yep - I'm taking the piss a little but compatibility with previous software is holding MS back. I did read a little about a new kernel that was skunkworks stuff at MS but little came of it. They really need to cut the cord - like Apple did - but they've got so much market share (including corporates) that they've got no choice but to get it right. Apple's risk on that point was far smaller. Then again, if they were to switch to a Linux/BSD base - why wouldn't corporates simply look at alternatives such as RHEL in the server space?
For those talking about POS operating systems, from the UI point of view Windows 7 is not really one of those. So far there are a few things that I would love to see built into OS X such as window snapping, full screen toggle, the taskbar is better than the dock, IMO (thumbs improve the dock paradigm immensely), and software/driver installation is really good (at any rate you only have to install drivers etc once) - but I digress.
I don't think I've ever even seen a Zune in Australia. I don't think it's offered locally. SO it will make SFA difference here.
Apple and MS had the same problem with backwards compatibility. Apple with Copeland, which led to NEXT, and MS with Longhorn, which led to Vista.
But Apple had the Classic OS to work for them, so that smoothed the way.
Yep - I'm taking the piss a little but compatibility with previous software is holding MS back. I did read a little about a new kernel that was skunkworks stuff at MS but little came of it. They really need to cut the cord - like Apple did - but they've got so much market share (including corporates) that they've got no choice but to get it right. Apple's risk on that point was far smaller. Then again, if they were to switch to a Linux/BSD base - why wouldn't corporates simply look at alternatives such as RHEL in the server space?
For those talking about POS operating systems, from the UI point of view Windows 7 is not really one of those. So far there are a few things that I would love to see built into OS X such as window snapping, full screen toggle, the taskbar is better than the dock, IMO (thumbs improve the dock paradigm immensely), and software/driver installation is really good (at any rate you only have to install drivers etc once) - but I digress.
I don't think I've ever even seen a Zune in Australia. I don't think it's offered locally. SO it will make SFA difference here.
All true, but it doesn't explain what's happening with WinMo/WinCE. MS has nothing like the dominance in the mobile space that would preclude starting over-- after all, they didn't let all the "plays for sure" devices on the market hold them back when they decided to release the Zune. And if Apple can shoehorn a variant of OS X onto a phone you would think MS could start with the NT code base and figure something out.
The iPhone was in development for how long? And MS has had how long since the primacy of the mobile space has been evident to one and all, and how long before that when it should have been evident to people paid to pay attention?
And Apple did it with far fewer resources. If MS hasn't been able to produce a credible mobile OS by now there is simply something deeply wrong with the corporate culture in Redmond. Either they think that they can take their sweet time and easily dominate once they get around to releasing something, or they simply can't figure out how to do it. Enough time has passed, even just since the release of the iPhone, that they should have had something on the market that could stand as their response to Apple.
If MS hasn't been able to produce a credible mobile OS by now there is simply something deeply wrong with the corporate culture in Redmond.
You nailed it: "culture." It all comes down to beliefs and attitudes - about the user, about how users should interact with technology. It's all about taste. People think that "taste" is some shadowy, abstract, elitist buzzword. It isn't. Taste means you care. It meqns you give a damn about the person who is standing at the cash, ready to fork over their money for your product. Do your products have that special kind of gestalt, or don't they? Are you making life more difficult for the consumer, or aren't you? Is it your stated goal to perfect design and usability, or isn't it? Microsoft has no mission statement. Zero. You ask anyone what MS is all about, you won't get a clear answer. Apple . . . easy. Right away: usability and design. Their products all scream these two principles. "Cool" stuff. It's "cool" because it looks good, is easy and fun to use, and it works like it should. There's some effort being put in to coming up with a better or more original implementation. It's just that simple. When Apple announces a product, you know, at the very least, that it'll look great - hardware and software, and be easy to use. Power wrapped in a great interface that is meant to make life easier, backed up by solid support should you need it. Done. Is that so hard to pull off? Apple has about half of MS' manpower and resources, and they are redefining industries and markets constantly - from notebooks to operating systems to handhelds. The iPhone happened almost overnight. And now even Nokia is trembling.
Where's all the MS R&D money going? Look at Apple from 2001 to the present. Now look at MS. Anything truly compelling or noteworthy from MS in around nine years? XP (nothing to be proud of), and xbox. And more versions of Office bloatware.
MS is essentially a corporate/enterprise software vendor masquerading as a home/consumer vendor.
Simply put, Microsoft products, in light of what could be accomplished with today's technology (what Apple is doing), are unfit for average home/consumer use. Absolutely unfit. Way below what's expected in 2009.
When, as a CEO (Ballmer) you spend half your time defending yourself and your operation against questions about why you're being upstaged, year after year, by a much smaller, nimbler, more focused competitor with half your resources, half your manpower, and half your global reach, something is horribly, horribly wrong.
I think for most of the users here, this "Zune vs iPod War" doesn't matter. MS refuses to make the Zune compatible with OSX, so every Mac user is already set on the iPod or maybe something like the Archos.
It's only potential sales lost, because there's no way any Mac user is going to go back to Windows just for a Zune, even with bootcamp, I would bet.
You really think Mac users would purchase Zune anyway, with all that devoted brand loyality on their shoulders?
I think no matter how successful, number of Zunes sold to Mac users would be so insignificant that it just doesn't matter. Not to mention that Mac users are 5% of global computer population, so that is kind of low number to start with.
The fact that Apple products mostly appeal to lonely friendless elitists who don't socialise much is also a massive point against the Apple ecosystem that should be exploited, but no one seems to bother about Zune's "social" anymore either.
This is one of the most generalize ignorant statement i have read. As bad as some of the polarize political demonizing rants in the last 10 years.
MS just WANTS to hurt Apple, and is willing to break even or LOSE money to do so.
That's possible, but I think this is more of a case of Microsoft tyring to muscle into the party when it's basically over.
The personal media player market is already saturated and iPod sales are even seen to be declining. Will Microsoft be able to buoy this mature but declining market with their second attempt? I'm thinking no.
OK, so Gizmodo has what purports to be leaked images of the Zune HD packaging, and it seems to confirm what many of us has suspected: the Zune HD is in no way a competitor to the Touch. Not even playing in the same league.
What it is is a fairly nice media player with a browser. The package mentions "games", but it doesn't seem likely that there will be that many available at launch, or that developers will rush to create more.
So, like I said, it's a kick-ass Nano that Apple will never make. If all you need is a portable device for playing back movies, listening to tunes and surfing, the Zune HD is fine, but why would you pick that when you're likely to be able to get a Touch for about the same price, and the Touch gives you the functionality of a small computer as well as everything the Zune can do? Ok, so it doesn't have an FM radio and can't play back 720p, but for forgoing those few things, the Touch gives you a galaxy of apps and a for real OS. Email. Contacts and calender, global search, cut and paste, data detectors, document viewers, etc. I really can't see where most folks are going to be swayed by the value proposition of paring all that down to just a few basic functions in exchange for an OLED screen and a radio.
OK, so Gizmodo has what purports to be leaked images of the Zune HD packaging, and it seems to confirm what many of us has suspected: the Zune HD is in no way a competitor to the Touch. Not even playing in the same league.
What it is is a fairly nice media player with a browser. The package mentions "games", but it doesn't seem likely that there will be that many available at launch, or that developers will rush to create more.
So, like I said, it's a kick-ass Nano that Apple will never make. If all you need is a portable device for playing back movies, listening to tunes and surfing, the Zune HD is fine, but why would you pick that when you're likely to be able to get a Touch for about the same price, and the Touch gives you the functionality of a small computer as well as everything the Zune can do? Ok, so it doesn't have an FM radio and can't play back 720p, but for forgoing those few things, the Touch gives you a galaxy of apps and a for real OS. Email. Contacts and calender, global search, cut and paste, data detectors, document viewers, etc. I really can't see where most folks are going to be swayed by the value proposition of paring all that down to just a few basic functions in exchange for an OLED screen and a radio.
It doesn't play 720p either. It needs the special dock for that. and from what I've been reading, there's a lot of resentment over that.
Comments
Which brings up a point I've been making since the release of the original iPhone: Apple created a version of OS X that can run on mobile devices. Given the pace of hardware improvements, there's nothing but upside for Apple as their mobile offerings come to be able to handle more and more functionality. It's not like a phone is going to be able to outstrip what OS X can do any time soon, and moreover they can offer the user a smooth continuum from their tiniest palmtops right up to the workstation class pro machines.
Whereas the people dragging forward their legacy operating systems, designed back when to run on constrained hardware, are obliged to try and figure out how to bolt on new stuff to take advantage of new hardware and new competitors, and will be stuck with a built-in divide between such devices and more capable machines running desktop class software.
It's funny, too, because the folks on the tech sites are fixated on how the Tegra chipset is so badass it surely yield awesomeness, apparently unaware that all the silicon grunt in the world is useless without good software. You get the impression that they think "Tegra" magically makes software happen.
I've seen so many reviews of phones over the years that were given good reviews for the hardware, but then said that the thing holding it back was the terrible Win Mobile OS. We still see that.
I think for most of the users here, this "Zune vs iPod War" doesn't matter. MS refuses to make the Zune compatible with OSX, so every Mac user is already set on the iPod or maybe something like the Archos.
It's only potential sales lost, because there's no way any Mac user is going to go back to Windows just for a Zune, even with bootcamp, I would bet.
That's true.
But, in all honesty, Mac users are only about 8.7% of all users in the US, and 3.8% over the world.
If we take business and government machines out of the mix, we likely double those percentages.
But even with that, it can be seen that selling to Mac users isn't going to do much for the Zune. How many Mac users would buy one?
The large majority of buyers are using PC's. So while we Mac users get ticked whenever a company doesn't let us use their product, we do have to understand that most sales are to PC users.
But the thing with Zune sales is that they are so small that they could increase them by four times and not have much of an impact on Apple's sales, and that's without selling it to Mac users.
I've seen so many reviews of phones over the years that were given good reviews for the hardware, but then said that the thing holding it back was the terrible Win Mobile OS. We still see that.
Yeah, to the point that various handset manufacturers are reduced to making their own shells to conceal the dreadfulness, which of course means you find yourself abruptly coming up against 1995 once you get past the home screen and a few widgets.
Really, I don't think anything speaks to the drift that has overtaken MS more than their utter failure to address the mobile space. Sure, WinMob 7 might be a big improvement-- it could hardly fail in that regard-- but here we are, well into what pretty much everyone agrees is the next big computing paradigm, a competitive environment resembling the early days of the desktop wars, and MS is all like "whatever, when we get around to it." And then apparently puts resources into an iPod Touch competitor with none of what makes the Touch such a significant device for Apple.
Yeah, to the point that various handset manufacturers are reduced to making their own shells to conceal the dreadfulness, which of course means you find yourself abruptly coming up against 1995 once you get past the home screen and a few widgets.
Really, I don't think anything speaks to the drift that has overtaken MS more than their utter failure to address the mobile space. Sure, WinMob 7 might be a big improvement-- it could hardly fail in that regard-- but here we are, well into what pretty much everyone agrees is the next big computing paradigm, a competitive environment resembling the early days of the desktop wars, and MS is all like "whatever, when we get around to it." And then apparently puts resources into an iPod Touch competitor with none of what makes the Touch such a significant device for Apple.
Let's face it, MS has a problem. It takes a lot of time and resources to build an OS from scratch.
Nokia can't do it, so they keep recycling the old Symbian and loading it up with bolted on (an English expression some here will be familiar with in the phone industry) "features" which slow the whole thing down, and make it even clumsier to use.
Google seems to be the first in a long time, along with Palm, to come up with something different.
But even there, both OS's are based on Linux. So neither company really came up with a new OS from scratch. Most of the work was done for them.
Chrome? Vaporware so far. Who knows how useful it will be, and I think it's also based on linux.
Can MS use Linux as a base? Wow! Just the thought!
I think they would have a hard time of it politically if they did.
So I think they're stuck for the next couple of years anyway. Behind the scenes, possibly they're working furiously on something entirely new. But it takes years.
Do they have that time?
I'd love to know what this years license sales are. Last year it was under projections, which were already below earlier projections. I don't remember if they hit 20 million, or if it was 18 million. I do remember that at the beginning of the year, Ballmer predicted over 20 million.
They will likely keep business customers as their main base as consumers desert the platform, but even that's down. Last year they had 22% of business, and the latest numbers say 14%.
I think it's kind of funny how the only two things that Zune has over iPod that could be considered iPod "missing features" (things that Apple's customers would actually like to see), are not being touted at all in the marketing of the Zune HD so far. By this I'm referring to the built in "social" and the OLED screen.
The secret of good competitive marketing is to either ignore or lie about the things your product is missing and focus on the few things that yours has that the other one doesn't. The OLED screen is massive but I haven't heard it even mentioned in any of the product demos you can find online.
The fact that Apple products mostly appeal to lonely friendless elitists who don't socialise much is also a massive point against the Apple ecosystem that should be exploited, but no one seems to bother about Zune's "social" anymore either.
Microsoft may be a "business giant" but they've always been dumb as a puppy and twice as clumsy when it comes to marketing.
I'd like to see a radio tuner built into the iPod touch. It's really not such a complicated thing to expect. It would also alleviate "song burnout" from listening to one's library of songs too often.
The fact that Apple products mostly appeal to lonely friendless elitists who don't socialise much is also a massive point against the Apple ecosystem that should be exploited
Where did you get this assumption?
so apple meets the price of the 32gb, hopefully they are able to get an fm radio, oled screen, and a nice updated look to go with it.
While Microsoft might well hype the Zune?s radio, any iPhone or iPod touch can be turned into a short-wave radio, via the WunderRadio app, bringing in stations from all over the world -- 30,000 according to iTunes.
The fact that Apple products mostly appeal to lonely friendless elitists who don't socialise much is also a massive point against the Apple ecosystem that should be exploited, but no one seems to bother about Zune's "social" anymore either.
hmm. it's difficult to quantify that statement. but apple is a pretty social thing for many of my friends.
hmm. it's difficult to quantify that statement. but apple is a pretty social thing for many of my friends.
LOL. Of course you can't quantify that statement. You can't quantify it because it's total BS.
While Microsoft might well hype the Zune’s radio, any iPhone or iPod touch can be turned into a short-wave radio, via the WunderRadio app, bringing in stations from all over the world -- 30,000 according to iTunes.
Including a radio isn't going to do jack for MS. MS needs to start from scratch, and start REDEFINING markets and/or CREATING NEW ONES.
Me-too attempts three years later with a couple of different features (while upgraded iPod Touches are waiting in the wings with new surprises) won't cut it.
As long as Apple is in the game and MS keeps its current management, with its current mindset and attitude about how people should interact with technology, nothing will change in Redmond. You can only put so much lipstick on a pig.
Want to know the future of MS? Listen Ballmer. It starts at the top. THERE is the future of MS.
Nokia can't do it, so they keep recycling the old Symbian and loading it up with bolted on (an English expression some here will be familiar with in the phone industry) "features" which slow the whole thing down, and make it even clumsier to use.
Google seems to be the first in a long time, along with Palm, to come up with something different.
But even there, both OS's are based on Linux. So neither company really came up with a new OS from scratch. Most of the work was done for them.
Like it was done for Apple, and a smart move at that. A lot of effort was directed to the UI but the underpinnings of OS X have a similar genesis.
Can MS use Linux as a base? Wow! Just the thought!
Perhaps BSD instead
Yep - I'm taking the piss a little but compatibility with previous software is holding MS back. I did read a little about a new kernel that was skunkworks stuff at MS but little came of it. They really need to cut the cord - like Apple did - but they've got so much market share (including corporates) that they've got no choice but to get it right. Apple's risk on that point was far smaller. Then again, if they were to switch to a Linux/BSD base - why wouldn't corporates simply look at alternatives such as RHEL in the server space?
For those talking about POS operating systems, from the UI point of view Windows 7 is not really one of those. So far there are a few things that I would love to see built into OS X such as window snapping, full screen toggle, the taskbar is better than the dock, IMO (thumbs improve the dock paradigm immensely), and software/driver installation is really good (at any rate you only have to install drivers etc once) - but I digress.
I don't think I've ever even seen a Zune in Australia. I don't think it's offered locally. SO it will make SFA difference here.
Software is the key. And perhaps this Zune HD looks so ugly compared to iPod Touch that it will become "Dune" before Christmas. No kid wants to be seen with this crap. It looks ugly.
Like it was done for Apple, and a smart move at that. A lot of effort was directed to the UI but the underpinnings of OS X have a similar genesis.
Perhaps BSD instead
Yep - I'm taking the piss a little but compatibility with previous software is holding MS back. I did read a little about a new kernel that was skunkworks stuff at MS but little came of it. They really need to cut the cord - like Apple did - but they've got so much market share (including corporates) that they've got no choice but to get it right. Apple's risk on that point was far smaller. Then again, if they were to switch to a Linux/BSD base - why wouldn't corporates simply look at alternatives such as RHEL in the server space?
For those talking about POS operating systems, from the UI point of view Windows 7 is not really one of those. So far there are a few things that I would love to see built into OS X such as window snapping, full screen toggle, the taskbar is better than the dock, IMO (thumbs improve the dock paradigm immensely), and software/driver installation is really good (at any rate you only have to install drivers etc once) - but I digress.
I don't think I've ever even seen a Zune in Australia. I don't think it's offered locally. SO it will make SFA difference here.
Apple and MS had the same problem with backwards compatibility. Apple with Copeland, which led to NEXT, and MS with Longhorn, which led to Vista.
But Apple had the Classic OS to work for them, so that smoothed the way.
Zunes are just available in the USA.
Yep - I'm taking the piss a little but compatibility with previous software is holding MS back. I did read a little about a new kernel that was skunkworks stuff at MS but little came of it. They really need to cut the cord - like Apple did - but they've got so much market share (including corporates) that they've got no choice but to get it right. Apple's risk on that point was far smaller. Then again, if they were to switch to a Linux/BSD base - why wouldn't corporates simply look at alternatives such as RHEL in the server space?
For those talking about POS operating systems, from the UI point of view Windows 7 is not really one of those. So far there are a few things that I would love to see built into OS X such as window snapping, full screen toggle, the taskbar is better than the dock, IMO (thumbs improve the dock paradigm immensely), and software/driver installation is really good (at any rate you only have to install drivers etc once) - but I digress.
I don't think I've ever even seen a Zune in Australia. I don't think it's offered locally. SO it will make SFA difference here.
All true, but it doesn't explain what's happening with WinMo/WinCE. MS has nothing like the dominance in the mobile space that would preclude starting over-- after all, they didn't let all the "plays for sure" devices on the market hold them back when they decided to release the Zune. And if Apple can shoehorn a variant of OS X onto a phone you would think MS could start with the NT code base and figure something out.
The iPhone was in development for how long? And MS has had how long since the primacy of the mobile space has been evident to one and all, and how long before that when it should have been evident to people paid to pay attention?
And Apple did it with far fewer resources. If MS hasn't been able to produce a credible mobile OS by now there is simply something deeply wrong with the corporate culture in Redmond. Either they think that they can take their sweet time and easily dominate once they get around to releasing something, or they simply can't figure out how to do it. Enough time has passed, even just since the release of the iPhone, that they should have had something on the market that could stand as their response to Apple.
If MS hasn't been able to produce a credible mobile OS by now there is simply something deeply wrong with the corporate culture in Redmond.
You nailed it: "culture." It all comes down to beliefs and attitudes - about the user, about how users should interact with technology. It's all about taste. People think that "taste" is some shadowy, abstract, elitist buzzword. It isn't. Taste means you care. It meqns you give a damn about the person who is standing at the cash, ready to fork over their money for your product. Do your products have that special kind of gestalt, or don't they? Are you making life more difficult for the consumer, or aren't you? Is it your stated goal to perfect design and usability, or isn't it? Microsoft has no mission statement. Zero. You ask anyone what MS is all about, you won't get a clear answer. Apple . . . easy. Right away: usability and design. Their products all scream these two principles. "Cool" stuff. It's "cool" because it looks good, is easy and fun to use, and it works like it should. There's some effort being put in to coming up with a better or more original implementation. It's just that simple. When Apple announces a product, you know, at the very least, that it'll look great - hardware and software, and be easy to use. Power wrapped in a great interface that is meant to make life easier, backed up by solid support should you need it. Done. Is that so hard to pull off? Apple has about half of MS' manpower and resources, and they are redefining industries and markets constantly - from notebooks to operating systems to handhelds. The iPhone happened almost overnight. And now even Nokia is trembling.
Where's all the MS R&D money going? Look at Apple from 2001 to the present. Now look at MS. Anything truly compelling or noteworthy from MS in around nine years? XP (nothing to be proud of), and xbox. And more versions of Office bloatware.
MS is essentially a corporate/enterprise software vendor masquerading as a home/consumer vendor.
Simply put, Microsoft products, in light of what could be accomplished with today's technology (what Apple is doing), are unfit for average home/consumer use. Absolutely unfit. Way below what's expected in 2009.
When, as a CEO (Ballmer) you spend half your time defending yourself and your operation against questions about why you're being upstaged, year after year, by a much smaller, nimbler, more focused competitor with half your resources, half your manpower, and half your global reach, something is horribly, horribly wrong.
I think for most of the users here, this "Zune vs iPod War" doesn't matter. MS refuses to make the Zune compatible with OSX, so every Mac user is already set on the iPod or maybe something like the Archos.
It's only potential sales lost, because there's no way any Mac user is going to go back to Windows just for a Zune, even with bootcamp, I would bet.
You really think Mac users would purchase Zune anyway, with all that devoted brand loyality on their shoulders?
I think no matter how successful, number of Zunes sold to Mac users would be so insignificant that it just doesn't matter. Not to mention that Mac users are 5% of global computer population, so that is kind of low number to start with.
The fact that Apple products mostly appeal to lonely friendless elitists who don't socialise much is also a massive point against the Apple ecosystem that should be exploited, but no one seems to bother about Zune's "social" anymore either.
This is one of the most generalize ignorant statement i have read. As bad as some of the polarize political demonizing rants in the last 10 years.
MS just WANTS to hurt Apple, and is willing to break even or LOSE money to do so.
That's possible, but I think this is more of a case of Microsoft tyring to muscle into the party when it's basically over.
The personal media player market is already saturated and iPod sales are even seen to be declining. Will Microsoft be able to buoy this mature but declining market with their second attempt? I'm thinking no.
What it is is a fairly nice media player with a browser. The package mentions "games", but it doesn't seem likely that there will be that many available at launch, or that developers will rush to create more.
So, like I said, it's a kick-ass Nano that Apple will never make. If all you need is a portable device for playing back movies, listening to tunes and surfing, the Zune HD is fine, but why would you pick that when you're likely to be able to get a Touch for about the same price, and the Touch gives you the functionality of a small computer as well as everything the Zune can do? Ok, so it doesn't have an FM radio and can't play back 720p, but for forgoing those few things, the Touch gives you a galaxy of apps and a for real OS. Email. Contacts and calender, global search, cut and paste, data detectors, document viewers, etc. I really can't see where most folks are going to be swayed by the value proposition of paring all that down to just a few basic functions in exchange for an OLED screen and a radio.
OK, so Gizmodo has what purports to be leaked images of the Zune HD packaging, and it seems to confirm what many of us has suspected: the Zune HD is in no way a competitor to the Touch. Not even playing in the same league.
What it is is a fairly nice media player with a browser. The package mentions "games", but it doesn't seem likely that there will be that many available at launch, or that developers will rush to create more.
So, like I said, it's a kick-ass Nano that Apple will never make. If all you need is a portable device for playing back movies, listening to tunes and surfing, the Zune HD is fine, but why would you pick that when you're likely to be able to get a Touch for about the same price, and the Touch gives you the functionality of a small computer as well as everything the Zune can do? Ok, so it doesn't have an FM radio and can't play back 720p, but for forgoing those few things, the Touch gives you a galaxy of apps and a for real OS. Email. Contacts and calender, global search, cut and paste, data detectors, document viewers, etc. I really can't see where most folks are going to be swayed by the value proposition of paring all that down to just a few basic functions in exchange for an OLED screen and a radio.
It doesn't play 720p either. It needs the special dock for that. and from what I've been reading, there's a lot of resentment over that.