I have been a Nap to go customer for about 3 years which equals to about $540 for all the music I want old and new. I have no issues with DRM as it gives me unlimited music for a very low price.
As I say, if it rocks your boat... as long as it doesn't threat mine. Which it does, but that's more a philosophical point than should be dealt here.
Quote:
So itunes is fast on Mac but slow on PC? Strange that they will do that because Mac has a very weak market share so all those Ipod users have to settle for a slow blaothed software to sync their music. Like I said the thing can't even monitor a folder like it's 1989.
It's not a matter of "doing" that, it's more about flexibility between builds on mac and pc. Apple thinks that fast porting of builds is more important than making a non-bloated version from the ground up in the PC, and spend a lot of time and money syncing its evolution with the mac's version. About the monitoring of folders, I never ran up with that issue. But then again, I rarely use iTunes in my PC.
I have been a Nap to go customer for about 3 years which equals to about $540 for all the music I want old and new. I have no issues with DRM as it gives me unlimited music for a very low price.
And what happens if you stop paying.... ?
Quote:
So itunes is fast on Mac but slow on PC? Strange that they will do that because Mac has a very weak market share so all those Ipod users have to settle for a slow blaothed software to sync their music.
All those (PC) Ipod users were free to buy any one of dozens of competing products. Perhaps they should have bought a Zune!
All those (PC) Ipod users were free to buy any one of dozens of competing products. Perhaps they should have bought a Zune!
The world is filled with mindless sheep that follow trends. When Ipod launched there were much better mp3 players on the market with more features but because of the clever marketing people soon associated mp3 with ipod. That's why it became so successful.
If you stop paying you obviously lose the license to play the tracks unless you remove the DRM which equals to stealing. Still works out a lot cheaper for me to have unlimited access to all the music I want rather than paying 1.29 a track or having to go through the headache of file sharing.
The world is filled with mindless sheep that follow trends. When Ipod launched there were much better mp3 players on the market with more features but because of the clever marketing people soon associated mp3 with ipod. That's why it became so successful.
I'm really tired of this shitty argument. Listen, pal, calling people mindless sheep is hardly an "argument", bokay? If Apple was able to market a product like no one else did or was able to do, that's hardly Apple's fault, now is it? I fail to see where Apple made a deal with the devil where they were able to hypnotize so many people around them.
The question you should ask yourself is, how did Apple do it? How do they still do it? Clinging in anger denial of Apple's success and insulting other people won't get you far at all.
Quote:
If you stop paying you obviously lose the license to play the tracks unless you remove the DRM which equals to stealing. Still works out a lot cheaper for me to have unlimited access to all the music I want rather than paying 1.29 a track or having to go through the headache of file sharing.
What headache you are talking about? And no, I don't appreciate the "obligation" to buy songs every month, nor to pay a monthly fee. I also do not think the majority of people like that. But as I've said, whatever rocks your boat. If it suits you, fine by me. If, otherwise, what's in discussion is the future of music market, and where "the puck is", so to speak, I wouldn't bet on Rhapsody or any other similar attempt. They all failed the past decade, despite having all the Majors behind them. They will continue to fail the next decade. Only a handful of rich teenagers will enjoy it.
The world is filled with mindless sheep that follow trends. When Ipod launched there were much better mp3 players on the market with more features but because of the clever marketing people soon associated mp3 with ipod. That's why it became so successful.
You mention marketing and features, but adding features that don’t work well and/or are hard to access is done for marketing when your focus is just adding bullet points to spec sheets. The reason the iPod won is because Apple didn’t focus on the marketing of the device for some silly spec sheet, they focused on the consumer. They didn’t have the user drag and drop audio files into a mounted drive to load music, they used a robust app call iTunes to organize and assist you in ways that Finder or Explorer can’t.
Quote:
If you stop paying you obviously lose the license to play the tracks unless you remove the DRM which equals to stealing. Still works out a lot cheaper for me to have unlimited access to all the music I want rather than paying 1.29 a track or having to go through the headache of file sharing.
That is fine for you, but you must see that it’s far from an ideal for most people. I don’t want to listen to millions of different songs a month. I barely listen to a handful of new songs a month and know which ones I want to buy before I buy them. Getting 10 free songs a month for $15 while having access to millions of exploding audio that requires me to fork-up $15/month to prevent it from going away does me no good. For me and most people the benefit is nil. The reason that you now get 10 free songs a month is because the concept is failing. I hope that you and others like you get to maintain your accounts but you should at least admit that it’s not right for most people, so why push it as the only right solution?
I don?t see anything that would make this Zune a "must have" product in the way Apple can. Apple even came into what was considered a tough market with the iPhone and they made it the overnight gold standard. I can say that the Zune since their v2.0 OS has been quite good (especially for MS) but I see nothing compelling for the average consumer to buy a Zune or to switch to the Zune from an iPod. MS is more likely to pull consumers from the other non-iPod PMP vendors, but that market, especially for the larger devices, is already quite small.
I?ve read that OLED doesn?t need to have the same resolution as LCD to appear clearer and crisper. I can?t attest for that being a fact but from what I?ve seen in images OLED that is stated to be fairly low res looked very good.
I don't disagree with you- from the get-go this was basically Microsoft's version of an iPod Touch. OTOH Apple's iPod was not the first mp3 player either. But Apple entered the market with the first good product, whereas the iPod Touch (and iPhone) were great products, absolute home runs- as soon as I saw the interface I thought to myself 'This is it!'
Whether the Zune HD will succeed in the marketplace, we will see. I do like the design and the hardware personally, I think they did a good job differentiating their glass slab from Apple's.
I guess my thing is that I'm not particularly rooting for the Zune HD to succeed or fail. If it were really a great, great product I would even consider buying one. But it would have to be truly magnificent, since I would have to sync via Boot Camp on my MBP. In all likelihood I will pick up a used 2nd Gen iPod Touch at some point.
You mention marketing and features, but adding features that don’t work well and/or are hard to access is done for marketing when your focus is just adding bullet points to spec sheets. The reason the iPod won is because Apple didn’t focus on the marketing of the device for some silly spec sheet, they focused on the consumer. They didn’t have the user drag and drop audio files into a mounted drive to load music, they used a robust app call iTunes to organize and assist you in ways that Finder or Explorer can’t.
That is fine for you, but you must see that it’s far from an ideal for most people. I don’t want to listen to millions of different songs a month. I barely listen to a handful of new songs a month and know which ones I want to buy before I buy them. Getting 10 free songs a month for $15 while having access to millions of exploding audio that requires me to $15/month to prevent it from exploding does me no good. For me and most people the benefit is nil. The reason that you now get 10 free songs a month is because the concept is failing. I hope that you and others like you get to maintain your accounts but you should at least admit that it’s not right for most people, so why push it as the only right solution?
Other MP3 players always had software to sync and they all work with WMP to sync also. Itunes is slow and extremely laggy on my 4GB quad core PC so the point of them focusing on the consumer seems false. Maybe they focus on their Mac consumers but that's it. I just got a Palm Pre and for some strange reason they decided to make it work with Itunes and I just don't see what people see in that slow program. If I switch to another PC it asks me to format the player....WTF. Thank God it syncs with Winamp which works much better.
I do not have a Zune pass I use napster to go with a creative MP3 player. Napster also has another price plan of 5 bucks a month for unlimited streaming and you get to keep 5 tracks a month. If I feel like it I can remove the DRM but since I continue ot pay there is no point.
Perhaps it's because Apple sells millions of devices a year, and current production lines can't handle that load. Whereas MS, which sells perhaps 1/20th the number, doesn't present any particular strain.
Your knowledge of the OLED market appears as limited as your knowledge of its technology.
Maury
I think that's a great point, OLED is newer and isn't up to scale yet from a production standpoint.
A few years back, one of Sony's last CLIE PDA's used an OLED screen and it was said to be stunning.
Other MP3 players always had software to sync and they all work with WMP to sync also. [?] and I just don't see what people see in that slow program.
You aren?t looking at the convenience that most people look for, myself included. iTunes is quite bloated and can be quite slow, but it has features that the others can?t possibly match. The Zune PC software is the closest thing we have to a comparable app to iTunes and it still fails in many ways. That said, I think the Zune?s OS has been pretty good since v2.0 and if I had to choose a non-iPod PMP I?d go for the Zune.
I think that's a great point, OLED is newer and isn't up to scale yet from a production standpoint.
That is something rarely considered on these forums. Apple will have access to the same new tech that MS and others do, but there is no way that Apple can buy certain tech with the scale they sell on. I doubt very much that Apple could get 40M(?) OLED screens for their iPhone and iPod Touches for this year. How many Zune HD will MS end up selling in comparison? Heck, we are even having NAND shortages that are blamed on Apple?s iDevice dominance.
I thought apps were planned for the Zune--it seems not! Microsoft admittedly is "considering" it, but is focusing on Windows Mobile apps instead for now.
So that kills it right there. iPod + apps = a pocket computer. At the same price, a Zune makes little sense. It's more like it's trying to compete with the iPod Touch from 2007.
The Wikipedia article on AMOLEDs does not seem to support this articles attack on OLED.
I have recently been researching what phone I would get and settled on a Samsung S8000 Jet which has an AMOLED screen, hopefuly arriving shortly.
During that research I noticed that every user and reviewer commented that the screen was very, very impressive.
Don't believe me, try it yourself. Cut and paste this phrase, including quotes into Google - sumsung jet "amazing screen"
I get 437 hits. 168 hits for 'fantastic screen', 129 hits for 'stunning', 601 hits for 'brilliant' and, get this, 1009 hits for 'gorgeous'.
I give far greater credibility to the large number of actual users and reviewers than this article by AI, which I think is an absolute disgrace, BTW.
I also found many comments suggesting the screen was reasonably legible in direct sunlight. That would be better than all the LED screen phones I have used which have been useless in direct sunlight.
Another thing I came upon in user reviews were several comparisons to the Touch, by users who had one and had acquired a Jet. They all said the Samsung AMOLED screen was far superior to the screen on the Touch.
erm, all very interesting but the iPhone used LED backlighting for the LCD not CCFL just like the majority of mobiles and smartphones have for the past 5+ years.
But of course you knew this seeing as you know a 'little' something about this.
This doesn't negate everything else said by Maury does it, or was that your attempt to discredit him irnchriz? You should of pointed out the error only, but since your good at locating mistakes, why not enlighten us on what was right and wrong with the article "From OLED to Tegra: Five Myths of the Zune HD".
I thought apps were planned for the Zune--it seems not! Microsoft admittedly is "considering" it, but is focusing on Windows Mobile apps instead for now.
So that kills it right there. iPod + apps = a pocket computer. At the same price, a Zune makes little sense. It's more like it's trying to compete with the iPod Touch from 2007.
The way it read on the ArsTechnia article is that the Zune PC software will have a section for apps, but there are no 3rd-party apps and that all apps will be free. While I think it?s nice that they aren?t charging and aren?t cluttering up your device with a bunch of apps you?ll never use, it seems more of a marketing tactic to show that they also have an app store, like the iPod Touch and iPhone.
PS: I wish Apple would let me remove apps that I won?t ever use, like the stand alone Address Book or their weather app that won?t even use the GPS to find my location.
And yet AI posts this lame article slamming the Zune HD. It's pathetic. I mean, really, how many people on this forum were even vaguely considering the Zune HD? Two, three, maybe. Why the need to write a 3-page article for all the fanboys?
Oh right, its another Princess article. All he's good as is slamming Microsoft. Apple can do no wrong in his fanboy eyes. Lame. Lame. Lame.
The only place where he's partly wrong is about the OLED screen.
Otherwise you will find just about the same information elsewhere.
I know that's it's also politically correct to slam his articles because they often contain some errors, but mostly, they are correct.
We're going to see overly optimistic reviews on a number of other sites, that like a few earlier Zune reviews give opinions that most people after using the device and its software for a while won't agree with, so perhaps we should slam those articles as well.
"However, Tegra isn't a scaled down version of NVIDIA's PC graphics GPUs. Instead, it's based on technology NVIDIA acquired in its purchase of fabless chip designer PortalPlayer in 2007."
Got any source info on this?
I can see NVidia using PortalPlayer tech for fixed function codec acceleration, but NVidia using PortalPlayer tech as a base for OpenGL ES 2.0 doesn't sound right.
I want to break my Macbook and burn my iPhone after reading this article. Its reasons why I'm sometimes ashamed to use Apple products and be in any form associated with Apple fanbois.
This article is complete lies. This just proves how scared you really are of the Zune.
First Internet Explorer 6 Mobile is not the same as Internet Explorer 6. You have no idea what IE6 Mobile is based on and in fact CNET reviewed it quite well.
Second if Windows CE is so horrible and everyone hates it... why is it used everywhere. Why did Apple choose Windows CE over developing in house (until now) or using Linux or Palm for their solutions. They had a much more cozy relationship with Palm (until now).
Tegra will be tested in time, but I know with the older Zunes the WiFi is on consistently and as such you would assume it would be on in the Video test which show longer battery. I'm sure actually that OLED also helps to get to the standard. But I see that you are the idiots the support LCD over Plasma which I use because in my house I can see a clear difference watching a black and white movie on Plasma against LCDs. When did we decide that ONE lightbulb was good enough. Tube TVs would light each pixel, Plasma & OLED do the same. Its reality. In real life you don't have a giant lightbult filtering thru everything. Even if OLED isn't perfect (and people going to BestBuy and CNET confirm otherwise) its still a step in the right direction of technological evolution and Apple WILL evolve to OLED and you will look like the idiots that you are in your OLED accusations.
Regarding HD Content... It will play HD Content on the device in the NATIVE widescreen aspect. Unlike the iPhone or iPod Touch that is not native 16:9 widescreen. That maybe more suited to a phone, but for portal movies I don't want black bars or distortion of the movie. In addition the Zune HD will play 720p content on the device, so I don't need to transcode just sync and play. In addition HD Radio is not a brand decision of Microsoft or Zune and its amazing that you deride radio so much when even Apple has eventually added FM radio and MARK MY WORDS that the iPod Touch will have FM Radio eventually.
All in all I welcome the competition and the Zune HD does so much right. All this proves is you are scared and the Zune HD will sell very well. If you thought Microsoft would keep the '1 %' of the market, you would not have wasted your time making up lies.
Like others here who are slamming the article, you haven't bothered to go to the other sites that have discussed the particular areas which Prince commented on. his facts are pretty close for most of the article. His description of the Tegra, for example, is spot on.
His biggest error is in failing to provide links to other places where his info would be confirmed, so you could all easily go there yourselves rather than having to do the work of searching.
So? The Zune is ONLY sold in the US. iPods are sold everywhere. Ever thought about that?
When Ballmer was asked, in a Tv interview, about 18 months ago why they weren't bringing the Zune to international sales, his response was that if they did, they would lose more money.
That's a pretty good answer for him, even though he likely didn't realize the implications of it.
MS is likely losing money on every Zune sold. Why distribute a device internationally that isn't selling well in its home market?
Apple sold over 50 million iPods last year, certainly no more than half were sold abroad, the rest in the US. That compares to under one million Zunes in the US.
You can't use the lack of international sales to cover for the amazingly poor sales of the device here, in their home market.
And with 90% of people using Windows, you would think that many of them aren't persuaded by Apple's supposed "hype".
Meanwhile, Sandisk is also outselling the Zunes by 7 to 1. That's without both Apple and MS's huge Ad budgets. And SanDisk gets no hype at all.
Comments
I have been a Nap to go customer for about 3 years which equals to about $540 for all the music I want old and new. I have no issues with DRM as it gives me unlimited music for a very low price.
As I say, if it rocks your boat... as long as it doesn't threat mine. Which it does, but that's more a philosophical point than should be dealt here.
So itunes is fast on Mac but slow on PC? Strange that they will do that because Mac has a very weak market share so all those Ipod users have to settle for a slow blaothed software to sync their music. Like I said the thing can't even monitor a folder like it's 1989.
It's not a matter of "doing" that, it's more about flexibility between builds on mac and pc. Apple thinks that fast porting of builds is more important than making a non-bloated version from the ground up in the PC, and spend a lot of time and money syncing its evolution with the mac's version. About the monitoring of folders, I never ran up with that issue. But then again, I rarely use iTunes in my PC.
I have been a Nap to go customer for about 3 years which equals to about $540 for all the music I want old and new. I have no issues with DRM as it gives me unlimited music for a very low price.
And what happens if you stop paying.... ?
So itunes is fast on Mac but slow on PC? Strange that they will do that because Mac has a very weak market share so all those Ipod users have to settle for a slow blaothed software to sync their music.
All those (PC) Ipod users were free to buy any one of dozens of competing products. Perhaps they should have bought a Zune!
And what happens if you stop paying.... ?
All those (PC) Ipod users were free to buy any one of dozens of competing products. Perhaps they should have bought a Zune!
The world is filled with mindless sheep that follow trends. When Ipod launched there were much better mp3 players on the market with more features but because of the clever marketing people soon associated mp3 with ipod. That's why it became so successful.
If you stop paying you obviously lose the license to play the tracks unless you remove the DRM which equals to stealing. Still works out a lot cheaper for me to have unlimited access to all the music I want rather than paying 1.29 a track or having to go through the headache of file sharing.
The world is filled with mindless sheep that follow trends. When Ipod launched there were much better mp3 players on the market with more features but because of the clever marketing people soon associated mp3 with ipod. That's why it became so successful.
I'm really tired of this shitty argument. Listen, pal, calling people mindless sheep is hardly an "argument", bokay? If Apple was able to market a product like no one else did or was able to do, that's hardly Apple's fault, now is it? I fail to see where Apple made a deal with the devil where they were able to hypnotize so many people around them.
The question you should ask yourself is, how did Apple do it? How do they still do it? Clinging in anger denial of Apple's success and insulting other people won't get you far at all.
If you stop paying you obviously lose the license to play the tracks unless you remove the DRM which equals to stealing. Still works out a lot cheaper for me to have unlimited access to all the music I want rather than paying 1.29 a track or having to go through the headache of file sharing.
What headache you are talking about? And no, I don't appreciate the "obligation" to buy songs every month, nor to pay a monthly fee. I also do not think the majority of people like that. But as I've said, whatever rocks your boat. If it suits you, fine by me. If, otherwise, what's in discussion is the future of music market, and where "the puck is", so to speak, I wouldn't bet on Rhapsody or any other similar attempt. They all failed the past decade, despite having all the Majors behind them. They will continue to fail the next decade. Only a handful of rich teenagers will enjoy it.
The world is filled with mindless sheep that follow trends. When Ipod launched there were much better mp3 players on the market with more features but because of the clever marketing people soon associated mp3 with ipod. That's why it became so successful.
You mention marketing and features, but adding features that don’t work well and/or are hard to access is done for marketing when your focus is just adding bullet points to spec sheets. The reason the iPod won is because Apple didn’t focus on the marketing of the device for some silly spec sheet, they focused on the consumer. They didn’t have the user drag and drop audio files into a mounted drive to load music, they used a robust app call iTunes to organize and assist you in ways that Finder or Explorer can’t.
If you stop paying you obviously lose the license to play the tracks unless you remove the DRM which equals to stealing. Still works out a lot cheaper for me to have unlimited access to all the music I want rather than paying 1.29 a track or having to go through the headache of file sharing.
That is fine for you, but you must see that it’s far from an ideal for most people. I don’t want to listen to millions of different songs a month. I barely listen to a handful of new songs a month and know which ones I want to buy before I buy them. Getting 10 free songs a month for $15 while having access to millions of exploding audio that requires me to fork-up $15/month to prevent it from going away does me no good. For me and most people the benefit is nil. The reason that you now get 10 free songs a month is because the concept is failing. I hope that you and others like you get to maintain your accounts but you should at least admit that it’s not right for most people, so why push it as the only right solution?
I don?t see anything that would make this Zune a "must have" product in the way Apple can. Apple even came into what was considered a tough market with the iPhone and they made it the overnight gold standard. I can say that the Zune since their v2.0 OS has been quite good (especially for MS) but I see nothing compelling for the average consumer to buy a Zune or to switch to the Zune from an iPod. MS is more likely to pull consumers from the other non-iPod PMP vendors, but that market, especially for the larger devices, is already quite small.
I?ve read that OLED doesn?t need to have the same resolution as LCD to appear clearer and crisper. I can?t attest for that being a fact but from what I?ve seen in images OLED that is stated to be fairly low res looked very good.
I don't disagree with you- from the get-go this was basically Microsoft's version of an iPod Touch. OTOH Apple's iPod was not the first mp3 player either. But Apple entered the market with the first good product, whereas the iPod Touch (and iPhone) were great products, absolute home runs- as soon as I saw the interface I thought to myself 'This is it!'
Whether the Zune HD will succeed in the marketplace, we will see. I do like the design and the hardware personally, I think they did a good job differentiating their glass slab from Apple's.
I guess my thing is that I'm not particularly rooting for the Zune HD to succeed or fail. If it were really a great, great product I would even consider buying one. But it would have to be truly magnificent, since I would have to sync via Boot Camp on my MBP. In all likelihood I will pick up a used 2nd Gen iPod Touch at some point.
You mention marketing and features, but adding features that don’t work well and/or are hard to access is done for marketing when your focus is just adding bullet points to spec sheets. The reason the iPod won is because Apple didn’t focus on the marketing of the device for some silly spec sheet, they focused on the consumer. They didn’t have the user drag and drop audio files into a mounted drive to load music, they used a robust app call iTunes to organize and assist you in ways that Finder or Explorer can’t.
That is fine for you, but you must see that it’s far from an ideal for most people. I don’t want to listen to millions of different songs a month. I barely listen to a handful of new songs a month and know which ones I want to buy before I buy them. Getting 10 free songs a month for $15 while having access to millions of exploding audio that requires me to $15/month to prevent it from exploding does me no good. For me and most people the benefit is nil. The reason that you now get 10 free songs a month is because the concept is failing. I hope that you and others like you get to maintain your accounts but you should at least admit that it’s not right for most people, so why push it as the only right solution?
Other MP3 players always had software to sync and they all work with WMP to sync also. Itunes is slow and extremely laggy on my 4GB quad core PC so the point of them focusing on the consumer seems false. Maybe they focus on their Mac consumers but that's it. I just got a Palm Pre and for some strange reason they decided to make it work with Itunes and I just don't see what people see in that slow program. If I switch to another PC it asks me to format the player....WTF. Thank God it syncs with Winamp which works much better.
I do not have a Zune pass I use napster to go with a creative MP3 player. Napster also has another price plan of 5 bucks a month for unlimited streaming and you get to keep 5 tracks a month. If I feel like it I can remove the DRM but since I continue ot pay there is no point.
The lady doth protest too much, methinks.
Yeah... those pesky 'facts' thingies really get in the way.
Perhaps it's because Apple sells millions of devices a year, and current production lines can't handle that load. Whereas MS, which sells perhaps 1/20th the number, doesn't present any particular strain.
Your knowledge of the OLED market appears as limited as your knowledge of its technology.
Maury
I think that's a great point, OLED is newer and isn't up to scale yet from a production standpoint.
A few years back, one of Sony's last CLIE PDA's used an OLED screen and it was said to be stunning.
Other MP3 players always had software to sync and they all work with WMP to sync also. [?] and I just don't see what people see in that slow program.
You aren?t looking at the convenience that most people look for, myself included. iTunes is quite bloated and can be quite slow, but it has features that the others can?t possibly match. The Zune PC software is the closest thing we have to a comparable app to iTunes and it still fails in many ways. That said, I think the Zune?s OS has been pretty good since v2.0 and if I had to choose a non-iPod PMP I?d go for the Zune.
I think that's a great point, OLED is newer and isn't up to scale yet from a production standpoint.
That is something rarely considered on these forums. Apple will have access to the same new tech that MS and others do, but there is no way that Apple can buy certain tech with the scale they sell on. I doubt very much that Apple could get 40M(?) OLED screens for their iPhone and iPod Touches for this year. How many Zune HD will MS end up selling in comparison? Heck, we are even having NAND shortages that are blamed on Apple?s iDevice dominance.
http://daringfireball.net/linked/200...ne-translation
So that kills it right there. iPod + apps = a pocket computer. At the same price, a Zune makes little sense. It's more like it's trying to compete with the iPod Touch from 2007.
I have recently been researching what phone I would get and settled on a Samsung S8000 Jet which has an AMOLED screen, hopefuly arriving shortly.
During that research I noticed that every user and reviewer commented that the screen was very, very impressive.
Don't believe me, try it yourself. Cut and paste this phrase, including quotes into Google - sumsung jet "amazing screen"
I get 437 hits. 168 hits for 'fantastic screen', 129 hits for 'stunning', 601 hits for 'brilliant' and, get this, 1009 hits for 'gorgeous'.
I give far greater credibility to the large number of actual users and reviewers than this article by AI, which I think is an absolute disgrace, BTW.
I also found many comments suggesting the screen was reasonably legible in direct sunlight. That would be better than all the LED screen phones I have used which have been useless in direct sunlight.
Another thing I came upon in user reviews were several comparisons to the Touch, by users who had one and had acquired a Jet. They all said the Samsung AMOLED screen was far superior to the screen on the Touch.
erm, all very interesting but the iPhone used LED backlighting for the LCD not CCFL just like the majority of mobiles and smartphones have for the past 5+ years.
But of course you knew this seeing as you know a 'little' something about this.
This doesn't negate everything else said by Maury does it, or was that your attempt to discredit him irnchriz? You should of pointed out the error only, but since your good at locating mistakes, why not enlighten us on what was right and wrong with the article "From OLED to Tegra: Five Myths of the Zune HD".
Thanks.
I thought apps were planned for the Zune--it seems not! Microsoft admittedly is "considering" it, but is focusing on Windows Mobile apps instead for now.
http://daringfireball.net/linked/200...ne-translation
So that kills it right there. iPod + apps = a pocket computer. At the same price, a Zune makes little sense. It's more like it's trying to compete with the iPod Touch from 2007.
The way it read on the ArsTechnia article is that the Zune PC software will have a section for apps, but there are no 3rd-party apps and that all apps will be free. While I think it?s nice that they aren?t charging and aren?t cluttering up your device with a bunch of apps you?ll never use, it seems more of a marketing tactic to show that they also have an app store, like the iPod Touch and iPhone.
PS: I wish Apple would let me remove apps that I won?t ever use, like the stand alone Address Book or their weather app that won?t even use the GPS to find my location.
And yet AI posts this lame article slamming the Zune HD. It's pathetic. I mean, really, how many people on this forum were even vaguely considering the Zune HD? Two, three, maybe. Why the need to write a 3-page article for all the fanboys?
Oh right, its another Princess article. All he's good as is slamming Microsoft. Apple can do no wrong in his fanboy eyes. Lame. Lame. Lame.
The only place where he's partly wrong is about the OLED screen.
Otherwise you will find just about the same information elsewhere.
I know that's it's also politically correct to slam his articles because they often contain some errors, but mostly, they are correct.
We're going to see overly optimistic reviews on a number of other sites, that like a few earlier Zune reviews give opinions that most people after using the device and its software for a while won't agree with, so perhaps we should slam those articles as well.
Got any source info on this?
I can see NVidia using PortalPlayer tech for fixed function codec acceleration, but NVidia using PortalPlayer tech as a base for OpenGL ES 2.0 doesn't sound right.
I want to break my Macbook and burn my iPhone after reading this article. Its reasons why I'm sometimes ashamed to use Apple products and be in any form associated with Apple fanbois.
This article is complete lies. This just proves how scared you really are of the Zune.
First Internet Explorer 6 Mobile is not the same as Internet Explorer 6. You have no idea what IE6 Mobile is based on and in fact CNET reviewed it quite well.
Second if Windows CE is so horrible and everyone hates it... why is it used everywhere. Why did Apple choose Windows CE over developing in house (until now) or using Linux or Palm for their solutions. They had a much more cozy relationship with Palm (until now).
Tegra will be tested in time, but I know with the older Zunes the WiFi is on consistently and as such you would assume it would be on in the Video test which show longer battery. I'm sure actually that OLED also helps to get to the standard. But I see that you are the idiots the support LCD over Plasma which I use because in my house I can see a clear difference watching a black and white movie on Plasma against LCDs. When did we decide that ONE lightbulb was good enough. Tube TVs would light each pixel, Plasma & OLED do the same. Its reality. In real life you don't have a giant lightbult filtering thru everything. Even if OLED isn't perfect (and people going to BestBuy and CNET confirm otherwise) its still a step in the right direction of technological evolution and Apple WILL evolve to OLED and you will look like the idiots that you are in your OLED accusations.
Regarding HD Content... It will play HD Content on the device in the NATIVE widescreen aspect. Unlike the iPhone or iPod Touch that is not native 16:9 widescreen. That maybe more suited to a phone, but for portal movies I don't want black bars or distortion of the movie. In addition the Zune HD will play 720p content on the device, so I don't need to transcode just sync and play. In addition HD Radio is not a brand decision of Microsoft or Zune and its amazing that you deride radio so much when even Apple has eventually added FM radio and MARK MY WORDS that the iPod Touch will have FM Radio eventually.
All in all I welcome the competition and the Zune HD does so much right. All this proves is you are scared and the Zune HD will sell very well. If you thought Microsoft would keep the '1 %' of the market, you would not have wasted your time making up lies.
Like others here who are slamming the article, you haven't bothered to go to the other sites that have discussed the particular areas which Prince commented on. his facts are pretty close for most of the article. His description of the Tegra, for example, is spot on.
His biggest error is in failing to provide links to other places where his info would be confirmed, so you could all easily go there yourselves rather than having to do the work of searching.
So? The Zune is ONLY sold in the US. iPods are sold everywhere. Ever thought about that?
When Ballmer was asked, in a Tv interview, about 18 months ago why they weren't bringing the Zune to international sales, his response was that if they did, they would lose more money.
That's a pretty good answer for him, even though he likely didn't realize the implications of it.
MS is likely losing money on every Zune sold. Why distribute a device internationally that isn't selling well in its home market?
Apple sold over 50 million iPods last year, certainly no more than half were sold abroad, the rest in the US. That compares to under one million Zunes in the US.
You can't use the lack of international sales to cover for the amazingly poor sales of the device here, in their home market.
And with 90% of people using Windows, you would think that many of them aren't persuaded by Apple's supposed "hype".
Meanwhile, Sandisk is also outselling the Zunes by 7 to 1. That's without both Apple and MS's huge Ad budgets. And SanDisk gets no hype at all.