I've installed every PC OS going back to PCDOS 1. How about you? I've also installed OS's for Digital Equipment VAX's. How about you? I learned my first computer language, Fortran IV, in 1966 while in HS. How about you?
If you want to get into that kind of contest, you'll lose.
And you couldn't get Vista installed?
(footnote, Alpha deserved a better destiny)
Never done fortran, I did Cobol, assembly (motorola 68000), Turbo Pascal, Borland Delphi, C, C++, and now mostly c#. I know a few things about a computer. The "I know more than you contest" seems somewhat immature.
Quote:
Very few people owning PC's have ever installed their OS, and when they do, it's often not that easy. But if you've ever done so, you would know. Try installing Win 7 on an XP machine. Have fun saving all your info first. I've had the pleasure of doing it on four machines now. Can't wait until the public gets its hands on it.
That duration of that process is dependant on how much data you have. Most people recommend a clean install which takes about 15-30 minutes. All your old files will be dumbed into windows.old so you can always copy them over.
How long did it take to upgrade from Mac OS 9 to OSX?
Quote:
I don't particularly believe what you say about them.
So, you don't believe that OLED is more vibrant in colors?
Why you say that, I don't know. That assumes everyone that uses Windows has installed it for themselves, which isn't true. You don't need to install Windows in order to be able to use it, you just buy the computer and Windows is usually already installed. That said, I don't think Windows is that hard to install, it's a bit much to presume most computer users have done it for themselves.
Not only that, there are estimated to be just over a billion computers in use and over a six billion people, I doubt more than 25% of the world's population has used a computer.
Yeah, my argument there was referring to the households with a computer, not the general population. I'm pretty sure most people can figure out how to insert a CD/DVD and answer yes a few times and type their name.
Quote:
I don't understand how you could have confused PCIx with PCIe if you really knew computers as well as you say. You can't just blindly throw out acronyms, they mean something, and they aren't hard to get right in the first place, especially if it's your passion.
Did I say anywhere that I couldn't install Vista? No, I didn't. What I said, as we know very well from the fiasco from when Vista first came out, was that it couldn't install on many machines that were one year old, and that only the cheapest Home version could install on many newer machines. You just might remember the problems both MS and Intel had over that. With MS certifying machines that couldn't run a version with Aero Glass as being able to run the "full Vista Experience" because Intel asked them to.
Quote:
Never done fortran, I did Cobol, assembly (motorola 68000), Turbo Pascal, Borland Delphi, C, C++, and now mostly c#. I know a few things about a computer. The "I know more than you contest" seems somewhat immature.
I didn't start it. You did.
Quote:
That duration of that process is dependant on how much data you have. Most people recommend a clean install which takes about 15-30 minutes. All your old files will be dumbed into windows.old so you can always copy them over.
The average person will get stuck at the warning that their data will be overwritten. It won't get done at all.
Quote:
How long did it take to upgrade from Mac OS 9 to OSX?
About 45 minutes, without having to move and reinstall programs and data, which will be required at least in part, going from XP to 7.
Quote:
So, you don't believe that OLED is more vibrant in colors?
/twospoons.
OLDs have advantages, and disadvanteges right now. In a year or so, they will be much better.
Right now, their advantages are better blacks most of the time. Much better view-ability at angles from the center.
More vibrant colors? Well, I've seen a bunch of OLED screens, and it depends. What I've noticed is that the darker blacks make the colors seem to be brighter on graphics. But in videos, maybe, maybe not.
I've noticed in videos that shadows can be more blocked up than with LCDs. Not the fault of the OLED per se, but because they're encoded using standards that don't expect dead black.
Highlights can also end up washing out more.
What I've seen, which is why I have some problems believing some of what you say, is that my iPhone outdoors, can, as long as the day is cloudy, look almost as good as it does indoors. On very bright days, it's almost washed out, but I can still read it if I use my hand to shield it. The OLEDS I've seen are washed out even under clouds. I would rate my phone as being noticeably better.
Unless the Zune has an OLED that is much better than those, and all of the reviews are wrong, can't perform as well outdoors as my phone.
As I say, in a year or so, they will be much better.
Did I say anywhere that I couldn't install Vista? No, I didn't. What I said, as we know very well from the fiasco from when Vista first came out, was that it couldn't install on many machines that were one year old, and that only the cheapest Home version could install on many newer machines. You just might remember the problems both MS and Intel had over that. With MS certifying machines that couldn't run a version with Aero Glass as being able to run the "full Vista Experience" because Intel asked them to.
I've never run into that issue. The Aero Glass you can disable in Vista anyways..
The mac upgrade story from PPC to Intel wasn't exactly perfect either.
Quote:
I didn't start it. You did.
Let me quote you; "I don't believe a word you have to say. I'll match my knowledge against yours any day, and we'll check your Wiki abilities. I don't need them."
Quote:
The average person will get stuck at the warning that their data will be overwritten. It won't get done at all.
Agree, they need to change the wording on that screen, it looks like it's about to wipe all your data, when infact it doesn't.
Quote:
OLDs have advantages, and disadvanteges right now. In a year or so, they will be much better.
Right now, their advantages are better blacks most of the time. Much better view-ability at angles from the center.
More vibrant colors? Well, I've seen a bunch of OLED screens, and it depends. What I've noticed is that the darker blacks make the colors seem to be brighter on graphics. But in videos, maybe, maybe not.
I've noticed in videos that shadows can be more blocked up than with LCDs. Not the fault of the OLED per se, but because they're encoded using standards that don't expect dead black.
Highlights can also end up washing out more.
What I've seen, which is why I have some problems believing some of what you say, is that my iPhone outdoors, can, as long as the day is cloudy, look almost as good as it does indoors. On very bright days, it's almost washed out, but I can still read it if I use my hand to shield it. The OLEDS I've seen are washed out even under clouds. I would rate my phone as being noticeably better.
Unless the Zune has an OLED that is much better than those, and all of the reviews are wrong, can't perform as well outdoors as my phone.
As I say, in a year or so, they will be much better.
Let me quote you again "Personally, I'd LOVE to get an AMOLED display. I'm all in favor of it. All we're disagreeing about is the cost and the efficiency, not the concept."
I do agree that it is not as bright as the iPhone outside, but it doesn't prevent you from being able to use it.
I've never run into that issue. The Aero Glass you can disable in Vista anyways..
The mac upgrade story from PPC to Intel wasn't exactly perfect either.
It was Aero Glass that people wanted. It was what Ms was showing off as their biggest improvement after all the things they dropped from it when they were calling it Longhorn.
So yes, people were ticked they couldn't run it.
Nothing is totally perfect. But going from 9 to OS X wasn't difficult.
Quote:
Let me quote you; "I don't believe a word you have to say. I'll match my knowledge against yours any day, and we'll check your Wiki abilities. I don't need them."
As I said, you started this, a quote from you:
"I know the standard wikipedia stuff anyone can look up, but what's different from me and you, is that I actually have both devices and speak from experience. I guess hearsay and guessing is better."
Quote:
Agree, they need to change the wording on that screen, it looks like it's about to wipe all your data, when infact it doesn't.
That's one of the difficulties. You still have to reinstall much of it, and put your data back.
Quote:
Let me quote you again "Personally, I'd LOVE to get an AMOLED display. I'm all in favor of it. All we're disagreeing about is the cost and the efficiency, not the concept."
I do agree that it is not as bright as the iPhone outside, but it doesn't prevent you from being able to use it.
/twospoons.
I am in favor of it. I should have added that I hoped it would be ready now.
OLEDs are the future of mobile devices, at least. I'm not arguing that.
Same problem I had at the fotball field with my iPhone today. None of these devices are great in direct sunlight.
/twospoons
Quite True...
I'm standing outside, in the intensely bright Las Vegas afternoon sun, holding my ZUNE HD in one hand and my (3rd Gen) iPod Touch in the other, and though the Touch is more visible in direct sunlight (though pixelated), when I step into the shade, the ZUNE HD is easily the more legible due to it's much better pixel density.
Personally, this is the condition under which I would have need to look at the screen of my DAP/PMP 99.9% of the time, not with the sun beaming directly on its surface.
When indoors, the overwhelming superiority of the OLED display relegates the LCD/LED -BL display of the Touch completely uncompetitive. It's looks washed-out, faded, dim, pixelated, and like the older technology is obviously is.
Additionally: Apps are all good and well, and it you're fortunate enough to find a few providing a modicum of productivity for the Ipod-line, then I'm happy for you, but for what a media player should do, which is to provide a throughly immersive audio/video experience, the ZUNE HD is vastly superior to the iPod Touch (3rd Generation) in both sound and video reproduction.
Make no mistake, the iPod Touch is a very nice multi-purpose toy for the masses, but the ZUNE HD is much more the specialized/precision personal media device for the more discerning consumer.
Hmm...that works out to be more expensive per song that you actually keep.
To the cost of about 21 cents to 51 cents a song, yes, you are right. But that is just the breakdown on those 10 songs. Anything else you buy matches Apple's prices.
More importantly, if you spend $15.00 a month at the iTunes Store you get about 13 songs you can keep and listen to. On the Zune marketplace you get to keep 10 songs and listen to any of their other songs, which is numbered around 3 million.
Not a fair contest. And when Apple finally implements this option on the iTunes store, Apple folks will cheer and state it is a Godsend. Yes, yes, folks will say this won't happen because Apple says so. Just remember Apple also said (3 examples):
To the cost of about 21 cents to 51 cents a song, yes, you are right. But that is just the breakdown on those 10 songs. Anything else you buy matches Apple's prices.
More importantly, if you spend $15.00 a month at the iTunes Store you get about 13 songs you can keep and listen to. On the Zune marketplace you get to keep 10 songs and listen to any of their other songs, which is numbered around 3 million.
Not a fair contest. And when Apple finally implements this option on the iTunes store, Apple folks will cheer and state it is a Godsend. Yes, yes, folks will say this won't happen because Apple says so. Just remember Apple also said (3 examples):
1. No video on iPods.
2. No radio on iPods (not needed)
3. No raising of prices on iTunes music.
It will happen. The question is simply when.
I was talking about this on another thread, but it's a good example:
The Post Hoc fallacy seems to be a real favorite when discussing possible moves in the tech industry (Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc, "after this, therefore this"). The fallacy lies in making causal connections between unrelated phenomena, claiming that merely because one thing happens after another that the first thing caused the subsequent thing.
The fact that Apple has not done some things, then subsequently done them, is in no way whatsoever an argument for the likelihood that they will presently do something else.
If it were, I could use the same list of things that Apple didn't do and then did do as "evidence" that Apple will presently release a vacuum cleaner.
I was talking about this on another thread, but it's a good example:
The Post Hoc fallacy seems to be a real favorite when discussing possible moves in the tech industry (Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc, "after this, therefore this"). The fallacy lies in making causal connections between unrelated phenomena, claiming that merely because one thing happens after another that the first thing caused the subsequent thing.
The fact that Apple has not done some things, then subsequently done them, is in no way whatsoever an argument for the likelihood that they will presently do something else.
If it were, I could use the same list of things that Apple didn't do and then did do as "evidence" that Apple will presently release a vacuum cleaner.
To the cost of about 21 cents to 51 cents a song, yes, you are right. But that is just the breakdown on those 10 songs. Anything else you buy matches Apple's prices.
More importantly, if you spend $15.00 a month at the iTunes Store you get about 13 songs you can keep and listen to. On the Zune marketplace you get to keep 10 songs and listen to any of their other songs, which is numbered around 3 million.
Not a fair contest. And when Apple finally implements this option on the iTunes store, Apple folks will cheer and state it is a Godsend. Yes, yes, folks will say this won't happen because Apple says so. Just remember Apple also said (3 examples):
1. No video on iPods.
2. No radio on iPods (not needed)
3. No raising of prices on iTunes music.
It will happen. The question is simply when.
Most of us don't care if Apple introduces this or not, even if we don't want it for ourselves. The fact that it's unpopular is a good reason why Apple hasn't done it.
But if Apple decides that they want to offer it so as to undermine the rest of what's left of the subscription service market, then that's their decision.
I do think that if Apple did do it, many people who like the idea will move to Apple.
But I won't cheer, because it's not a big deal to me.
I will say in threads about it that I'm happy that those who want it can now get it here.
Most of us have been giving reasons why Apple hasn't done it, but conditions change.
Like the tuner in the Nano. Almost no one buys a different player from someone else because of the lack of a tuner, but Apple has found a way to monetize it, so they've included it. If they think they will find a way to make money on subscriptions, they will include that too. But as no one else has, it may be difficult. This is what Jobs said years ago about it.
Same problem I had at the fotball field with my iPhone today. None of these devices are great in direct sunlight.
/twospoons
The iPhone is great under direct sunlight. Use an OLED screen and see what happens. Your arguments are completely senseless. You're just flogging a dead horse.
The iPhone is great under direct sunlight. Use an OLED screen and see what happens. Your arguments are completely senseless. You're just flogging a dead horse.
iPhone great under direct sunlight? It is useable enough to control it, but frankly, it's not great. For looking at pictures, taking a picture, anything where image quality is desired, it's not very useful.
Quote:
Use an OLED screen and see what happens.
Is this your personal experience, or are you repeating someone else's impression?
The iPhone is great under direct sunlight. Use an OLED screen and see what happens. Your arguments are completely senseless. You're just flogging a dead horse.
Great? Maybe we have different definitions of the word 'great'. Mine is just a giant mirror if I ever try to use it outside in the sun.
The iPhone is great under direct sunlight. Use an OLED screen and see what happens. Your arguments are completely senseless. You're just flogging a dead horse.
No it's not great under direct sunlight. None of the small LCDs are.
The Zune HD is okay in direct sunlight. Someone posted the Sun Times article which seems to me to have the Zune HD set on the "low" setting for brightness based on personal experience. I do think the iPod Touch does slightly better in direct sunlight, but the Zune HD does better in all other situations. It is crisper, more vivid, and brighter outside of direct sunlight even on the low setting. I only go to the "high" setting when I'm in direct sunlight, which is not often.
The Zune HD has many other advantages. The UI, surprisingly, is far better than the iPod Touch. The Smart DJ feature, Zune Pass, the HD radio, etc are also great added features. Only thing missing is greater app support which isn't a big deal for me but is for others. Yet I think MS is playing a wait and see game here.
The Zune HD is very likely to surpass all previous Zune sales quickly. It will not come close to the Touch just yet, but it will be the most viable alternative and when MS sees more sales they will invest more in the apps, etc. That will likely cause an increase in sales.
Right now it's funny how the roles are reversed. Apple is playing MS in the PMP market. They are dominate and were innovative to start out but have stagnated a bit. Their UI is stale and they have an enormous marketshare. Microsoft is Apple with a tiny marketshare but the Zune HD has shown the most innovation in the market over the past few years. I don't expect MS to get iPod numbers, but there are enough people dissatisfied with Apple (iTunes is terrible on the PC, which is still dominate) that several million will move to the Zune. A couple million Zune HDs sold by Christmas and MS will be feeling pretty good. That's tiny compared to the hundreds of millions Apple has sold, but Apple is the Goliath here, not Microsoft.
Of course, Apple is getting a lot of negative press lately. They are acting far worse than MS ever did with their monopolistic tendencies. MS has really opened things up while Apple is more controlling than ever. That's why I ditched them. So few choices. You're stuck with whatever Steve Jobs wants to throw you. That grew tiring, especially at the crazy prices.
Of course, Apple is getting a lot of negative press lately. They are acting far worse than MS ever did with their monopolistic tendencies. MS has really opened things up while Apple is more controlling than ever. That's why I ditched them. So few choices. You're stuck with whatever Steve Jobs wants to throw you. That grew tiring, especially at the crazy prices.
While I agree that Apple is getting a lot of negative press recently and some portion of it is deserved, the vast majority of it is not. And saying that they are acting "far worse" than MS ever did with their monopolistic tendencies is simply embarrassing. You clearly do not posses an accurate historical perspective of the technology industry or a deep knowledge of exactly how Microsoft acted throughout their history.
Even saying that Microsoft is opening up now is a huge fallacy.
Microsoft is still trying to get the web under their thumb with Silverlight, and non standards compliant Internet Explorer. They are still pushing their home brewed audio and video formats, which are strictly tied to Windows at least on the DRM side. They have tried to shut down open standards through threats of lawsuits, even recently. They really aren't open at all, while Apple has promoted dozens of open source projects, from the core of their OS, to Webkit and Bonjour to name just a few.
In short the end of your post is pure drek, and lacks even an element of truth.
EDIT: Okay, perhaps the part about you ditching Apple is true. I wouldn't claim to know about that.
Comments
I've installed every PC OS going back to PCDOS 1. How about you? I've also installed OS's for Digital Equipment VAX's. How about you? I learned my first computer language, Fortran IV, in 1966 while in HS. How about you?
If you want to get into that kind of contest, you'll lose.
And you couldn't get Vista installed?
(footnote, Alpha deserved a better destiny)
Never done fortran, I did Cobol, assembly (motorola 68000), Turbo Pascal, Borland Delphi, C, C++, and now mostly c#. I know a few things about a computer. The "I know more than you contest" seems somewhat immature.
Very few people owning PC's have ever installed their OS, and when they do, it's often not that easy. But if you've ever done so, you would know. Try installing Win 7 on an XP machine. Have fun saving all your info first. I've had the pleasure of doing it on four machines now. Can't wait until the public gets its hands on it.
That duration of that process is dependant on how much data you have. Most people recommend a clean install which takes about 15-30 minutes. All your old files will be dumbed into windows.old so you can always copy them over.
How long did it take to upgrade from Mac OS 9 to OSX?
I don't particularly believe what you say about them.
So, you don't believe that OLED is more vibrant in colors?
/twospoons.
Why you say that, I don't know. That assumes everyone that uses Windows has installed it for themselves, which isn't true. You don't need to install Windows in order to be able to use it, you just buy the computer and Windows is usually already installed. That said, I don't think Windows is that hard to install, it's a bit much to presume most computer users have done it for themselves.
Not only that, there are estimated to be just over a billion computers in use and over a six billion people, I doubt more than 25% of the world's population has used a computer.
Yeah, my argument there was referring to the households with a computer, not the general population. I'm pretty sure most people can figure out how to insert a CD/DVD and answer yes a few times and type their name.
I don't understand how you could have confused PCIx with PCIe if you really knew computers as well as you say. You can't just blindly throw out acronyms, they mean something, and they aren't hard to get right in the first place, especially if it's your passion.
I made a mistake, I'm only human.
/twospoons.
And you couldn't get Vista installed?
(footnote, Alpha deserved a better destiny)
Did I say anywhere that I couldn't install Vista? No, I didn't. What I said, as we know very well from the fiasco from when Vista first came out, was that it couldn't install on many machines that were one year old, and that only the cheapest Home version could install on many newer machines. You just might remember the problems both MS and Intel had over that. With MS certifying machines that couldn't run a version with Aero Glass as being able to run the "full Vista Experience" because Intel asked them to.
Never done fortran, I did Cobol, assembly (motorola 68000), Turbo Pascal, Borland Delphi, C, C++, and now mostly c#. I know a few things about a computer. The "I know more than you contest" seems somewhat immature.
I didn't start it. You did.
That duration of that process is dependant on how much data you have. Most people recommend a clean install which takes about 15-30 minutes. All your old files will be dumbed into windows.old so you can always copy them over.
The average person will get stuck at the warning that their data will be overwritten. It won't get done at all.
How long did it take to upgrade from Mac OS 9 to OSX?
About 45 minutes, without having to move and reinstall programs and data, which will be required at least in part, going from XP to 7.
So, you don't believe that OLED is more vibrant in colors?
/twospoons.
OLDs have advantages, and disadvanteges right now. In a year or so, they will be much better.
Right now, their advantages are better blacks most of the time. Much better view-ability at angles from the center.
More vibrant colors? Well, I've seen a bunch of OLED screens, and it depends. What I've noticed is that the darker blacks make the colors seem to be brighter on graphics. But in videos, maybe, maybe not.
I've noticed in videos that shadows can be more blocked up than with LCDs. Not the fault of the OLED per se, but because they're encoded using standards that don't expect dead black.
Highlights can also end up washing out more.
What I've seen, which is why I have some problems believing some of what you say, is that my iPhone outdoors, can, as long as the day is cloudy, look almost as good as it does indoors. On very bright days, it's almost washed out, but I can still read it if I use my hand to shield it. The OLEDS I've seen are washed out even under clouds. I would rate my phone as being noticeably better.
Unless the Zune has an OLED that is much better than those, and all of the reviews are wrong, can't perform as well outdoors as my phone.
As I say, in a year or so, they will be much better.
Did I say anywhere that I couldn't install Vista? No, I didn't. What I said, as we know very well from the fiasco from when Vista first came out, was that it couldn't install on many machines that were one year old, and that only the cheapest Home version could install on many newer machines. You just might remember the problems both MS and Intel had over that. With MS certifying machines that couldn't run a version with Aero Glass as being able to run the "full Vista Experience" because Intel asked them to.
I've never run into that issue. The Aero Glass you can disable in Vista anyways..
The mac upgrade story from PPC to Intel wasn't exactly perfect either.
I didn't start it. You did.
Let me quote you; "I don't believe a word you have to say. I'll match my knowledge against yours any day, and we'll check your Wiki abilities. I don't need them."
The average person will get stuck at the warning that their data will be overwritten. It won't get done at all.
Agree, they need to change the wording on that screen, it looks like it's about to wipe all your data, when infact it doesn't.
OLDs have advantages, and disadvanteges right now. In a year or so, they will be much better.
Right now, their advantages are better blacks most of the time. Much better view-ability at angles from the center.
More vibrant colors? Well, I've seen a bunch of OLED screens, and it depends. What I've noticed is that the darker blacks make the colors seem to be brighter on graphics. But in videos, maybe, maybe not.
I've noticed in videos that shadows can be more blocked up than with LCDs. Not the fault of the OLED per se, but because they're encoded using standards that don't expect dead black.
Highlights can also end up washing out more.
What I've seen, which is why I have some problems believing some of what you say, is that my iPhone outdoors, can, as long as the day is cloudy, look almost as good as it does indoors. On very bright days, it's almost washed out, but I can still read it if I use my hand to shield it. The OLEDS I've seen are washed out even under clouds. I would rate my phone as being noticeably better.
Unless the Zune has an OLED that is much better than those, and all of the reviews are wrong, can't perform as well outdoors as my phone.
As I say, in a year or so, they will be much better.
Let me quote you again "Personally, I'd LOVE to get an AMOLED display. I'm all in favor of it. All we're disagreeing about is the cost and the efficiency, not the concept."
I do agree that it is not as bright as the iPhone outside, but it doesn't prevent you from being able to use it.
/twospoons.
I've never run into that issue. The Aero Glass you can disable in Vista anyways..
The mac upgrade story from PPC to Intel wasn't exactly perfect either.
It was Aero Glass that people wanted. It was what Ms was showing off as their biggest improvement after all the things they dropped from it when they were calling it Longhorn.
So yes, people were ticked they couldn't run it.
Nothing is totally perfect. But going from 9 to OS X wasn't difficult.
Let me quote you; "I don't believe a word you have to say. I'll match my knowledge against yours any day, and we'll check your Wiki abilities. I don't need them."
As I said, you started this, a quote from you:
"I know the standard wikipedia stuff anyone can look up, but what's different from me and you, is that I actually have both devices and speak from experience. I guess hearsay and guessing is better."
Agree, they need to change the wording on that screen, it looks like it's about to wipe all your data, when infact it doesn't.
That's one of the difficulties. You still have to reinstall much of it, and put your data back.
Let me quote you again "Personally, I'd LOVE to get an AMOLED display. I'm all in favor of it. All we're disagreeing about is the cost and the efficiency, not the concept."
I do agree that it is not as bright as the iPhone outside, but it doesn't prevent you from being able to use it.
/twospoons.
I am in favor of it. I should have added that I hoped it would be ready now.
OLEDs are the future of mobile devices, at least. I'm not arguing that.
Same problem I had at the fotball field with my iPhone today. None of these devices are great in direct sunlight.
/twospoons
Quite True...
I'm standing outside, in the intensely bright Las Vegas afternoon sun, holding my ZUNE HD in one hand and my (3rd Gen) iPod Touch in the other, and though the Touch is more visible in direct sunlight (though pixelated), when I step into the shade, the ZUNE HD is easily the more legible due to it's much better pixel density.
Personally, this is the condition under which I would have need to look at the screen of my DAP/PMP 99.9% of the time, not with the sun beaming directly on its surface.
When indoors, the overwhelming superiority of the OLED display relegates the LCD/LED -BL display of the Touch completely uncompetitive. It's looks washed-out, faded, dim, pixelated, and like the older technology is obviously is.
Additionally: Apps are all good and well, and it you're fortunate enough to find a few providing a modicum of productivity for the Ipod-line, then I'm happy for you, but for what a media player should do, which is to provide a throughly immersive audio/video experience, the ZUNE HD is vastly superior to the iPod Touch (3rd Generation) in both sound and video reproduction.
Make no mistake, the iPod Touch is a very nice multi-purpose toy for the masses, but the ZUNE HD is much more the specialized/precision personal media device for the more discerning consumer.
There's room for both in today's marketplace...
Hmm...that works out to be more expensive per song that you actually keep.
To the cost of about 21 cents to 51 cents a song, yes, you are right. But that is just the breakdown on those 10 songs. Anything else you buy matches Apple's prices.
More importantly, if you spend $15.00 a month at the iTunes Store you get about 13 songs you can keep and listen to. On the Zune marketplace you get to keep 10 songs and listen to any of their other songs, which is numbered around 3 million.
Not a fair contest. And when Apple finally implements this option on the iTunes store, Apple folks will cheer and state it is a Godsend. Yes, yes, folks will say this won't happen because Apple says so. Just remember Apple also said (3 examples):
1. No video on iPods.
2. No radio on iPods (not needed)
3. No raising of prices on iTunes music.
It will happen. The question is simply when.
To the cost of about 21 cents to 51 cents a song, yes, you are right. But that is just the breakdown on those 10 songs. Anything else you buy matches Apple's prices.
More importantly, if you spend $15.00 a month at the iTunes Store you get about 13 songs you can keep and listen to. On the Zune marketplace you get to keep 10 songs and listen to any of their other songs, which is numbered around 3 million.
Not a fair contest. And when Apple finally implements this option on the iTunes store, Apple folks will cheer and state it is a Godsend. Yes, yes, folks will say this won't happen because Apple says so. Just remember Apple also said (3 examples):
1. No video on iPods.
2. No radio on iPods (not needed)
3. No raising of prices on iTunes music.
It will happen. The question is simply when.
I was talking about this on another thread, but it's a good example:
The Post Hoc fallacy seems to be a real favorite when discussing possible moves in the tech industry (Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc, "after this, therefore this"). The fallacy lies in making causal connections between unrelated phenomena, claiming that merely because one thing happens after another that the first thing caused the subsequent thing.
The fact that Apple has not done some things, then subsequently done them, is in no way whatsoever an argument for the likelihood that they will presently do something else.
If it were, I could use the same list of things that Apple didn't do and then did do as "evidence" that Apple will presently release a vacuum cleaner.
I was talking about this on another thread, but it's a good example:
The Post Hoc fallacy seems to be a real favorite when discussing possible moves in the tech industry (Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc, "after this, therefore this"). The fallacy lies in making causal connections between unrelated phenomena, claiming that merely because one thing happens after another that the first thing caused the subsequent thing.
The fact that Apple has not done some things, then subsequently done them, is in no way whatsoever an argument for the likelihood that they will presently do something else.
If it were, I could use the same list of things that Apple didn't do and then did do as "evidence" that Apple will presently release a vacuum cleaner.
Oy Vey!
To the cost of about 21 cents to 51 cents a song, yes, you are right. But that is just the breakdown on those 10 songs. Anything else you buy matches Apple's prices.
More importantly, if you spend $15.00 a month at the iTunes Store you get about 13 songs you can keep and listen to. On the Zune marketplace you get to keep 10 songs and listen to any of their other songs, which is numbered around 3 million.
Not a fair contest. And when Apple finally implements this option on the iTunes store, Apple folks will cheer and state it is a Godsend. Yes, yes, folks will say this won't happen because Apple says so. Just remember Apple also said (3 examples):
1. No video on iPods.
2. No radio on iPods (not needed)
3. No raising of prices on iTunes music.
It will happen. The question is simply when.
Most of us don't care if Apple introduces this or not, even if we don't want it for ourselves. The fact that it's unpopular is a good reason why Apple hasn't done it.
But if Apple decides that they want to offer it so as to undermine the rest of what's left of the subscription service market, then that's their decision.
I do think that if Apple did do it, many people who like the idea will move to Apple.
But I won't cheer, because it's not a big deal to me.
I will say in threads about it that I'm happy that those who want it can now get it here.
Most of us have been giving reasons why Apple hasn't done it, but conditions change.
Like the tuner in the Nano. Almost no one buys a different player from someone else because of the lack of a tuner, but Apple has found a way to monetize it, so they've included it. If they think they will find a way to make money on subscriptions, they will include that too. But as no one else has, it may be difficult. This is what Jobs said years ago about it.
Same problem I had at the fotball field with my iPhone today. None of these devices are great in direct sunlight.
/twospoons
The iPhone is great under direct sunlight. Use an OLED screen and see what happens. Your arguments are completely senseless. You're just flogging a dead horse.
oy vey!
o rly? :d
The iPhone is great under direct sunlight. Use an OLED screen and see what happens. Your arguments are completely senseless. You're just flogging a dead horse.
... and how does that make YOU feel?
Embittered from the pain, you say?
The iPhone is great under direct sunlight.
iPhone great under direct sunlight? It is useable enough to control it, but frankly, it's not great. For looking at pictures, taking a picture, anything where image quality is desired, it's not very useful.
Use an OLED screen and see what happens.
Is this your personal experience, or are you repeating someone else's impression?
The iPhone is great under direct sunlight. Use an OLED screen and see what happens. Your arguments are completely senseless. You're just flogging a dead horse.
Great? Maybe we have different definitions of the word 'great'. Mine is just a giant mirror if I ever try to use it outside in the sun.
I think I'll go and read a short story now, like the Lord of the Rings trilogy.
I think I should get a medal or some sort of prize for reading through this enormous thread!
I think I'll go and read a short story now, like the Lord of the Rings trilogy.
One thread to bind them all.
One thread to bind them all.
That would have been really funny if you'd got the reference right! lol.. cry..
It's:
One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Ring
The iPhone is great under direct sunlight. Use an OLED screen and see what happens. Your arguments are completely senseless. You're just flogging a dead horse.
No it's not great under direct sunlight. None of the small LCDs are.
The Zune HD is okay in direct sunlight. Someone posted the Sun Times article which seems to me to have the Zune HD set on the "low" setting for brightness based on personal experience. I do think the iPod Touch does slightly better in direct sunlight, but the Zune HD does better in all other situations. It is crisper, more vivid, and brighter outside of direct sunlight even on the low setting. I only go to the "high" setting when I'm in direct sunlight, which is not often.
The Zune HD has many other advantages. The UI, surprisingly, is far better than the iPod Touch. The Smart DJ feature, Zune Pass, the HD radio, etc are also great added features. Only thing missing is greater app support which isn't a big deal for me but is for others. Yet I think MS is playing a wait and see game here.
The Zune HD is very likely to surpass all previous Zune sales quickly. It will not come close to the Touch just yet, but it will be the most viable alternative and when MS sees more sales they will invest more in the apps, etc. That will likely cause an increase in sales.
Right now it's funny how the roles are reversed. Apple is playing MS in the PMP market. They are dominate and were innovative to start out but have stagnated a bit. Their UI is stale and they have an enormous marketshare. Microsoft is Apple with a tiny marketshare but the Zune HD has shown the most innovation in the market over the past few years. I don't expect MS to get iPod numbers, but there are enough people dissatisfied with Apple (iTunes is terrible on the PC, which is still dominate) that several million will move to the Zune. A couple million Zune HDs sold by Christmas and MS will be feeling pretty good. That's tiny compared to the hundreds of millions Apple has sold, but Apple is the Goliath here, not Microsoft.
Of course, Apple is getting a lot of negative press lately. They are acting far worse than MS ever did with their monopolistic tendencies. MS has really opened things up while Apple is more controlling than ever. That's why I ditched them. So few choices. You're stuck with whatever Steve Jobs wants to throw you. That grew tiring, especially at the crazy prices.
Of course, Apple is getting a lot of negative press lately. They are acting far worse than MS ever did with their monopolistic tendencies. MS has really opened things up while Apple is more controlling than ever. That's why I ditched them. So few choices. You're stuck with whatever Steve Jobs wants to throw you. That grew tiring, especially at the crazy prices.
While I agree that Apple is getting a lot of negative press recently and some portion of it is deserved, the vast majority of it is not. And saying that they are acting "far worse" than MS ever did with their monopolistic tendencies is simply embarrassing. You clearly do not posses an accurate historical perspective of the technology industry or a deep knowledge of exactly how Microsoft acted throughout their history.
Even saying that Microsoft is opening up now is a huge fallacy.
Microsoft is still trying to get the web under their thumb with Silverlight, and non standards compliant Internet Explorer. They are still pushing their home brewed audio and video formats, which are strictly tied to Windows at least on the DRM side. They have tried to shut down open standards through threats of lawsuits, even recently. They really aren't open at all, while Apple has promoted dozens of open source projects, from the core of their OS, to Webkit and Bonjour to name just a few.
In short the end of your post is pure drek, and lacks even an element of truth.
EDIT: Okay, perhaps the part about you ditching Apple is true. I wouldn't claim to know about that.