When Apple entered the market with Macintosh computers, noone prior had brought out an affordable consumer computer with a GUI. It was a completely new paradigm compared to DOS-based and BASIC-based CLI-driven computers. So while it was groundbreaking, it was almost alarmingly so, and it was actually in many ways before it's financially feasible time.
Flash forward...
The iPod came out long after portable MP3 products were on the market, and were on the market for an affordable sum. None of the product out was compelling, many of the products were unreliable, and the interfaces and storage capabilities were abysmally low and in many ways... they were a product ahead of it's time.
Sound familiar?
Key being "Ahead of it's time."
In the first instance, Microsoft and Intel and the clone vendors were opportunistic. They downplayed the importance of a GUI-based system for awhile until they had a suitable GUI system and then, to their masses, showed them a GUI-based system that was backwards compatible with existing formats while bringing in their own. That being the fact that you could run DOS and Windows on the same machine, later on DOS within a window as you can still today in XP. They ran the old DOS compatible apps. for a lonnnnng time, and eventually we began seeing custom API's within Windows that created software apps. that were Windows dependant more and more 'til DOS was being phased away.
Apple, in this case, is the Microsoft/Intel of the modern portable audio market that started eons ago with transistor radios and the Walkman. As time went on and a format burst onto the scene, other companies produced product forecasting a market. Apple built software for the Mac that worked as a conduit for the products that were out there, and then in analysis began to realize how craptacular much of what was out there was.
They produced their own player that worked with existing formats. They then leveraged their investment into video to take the next wave, MPEG 4, and generate a higher quality, smaller file size audio format that allowed greater song capacity for their players. They gave people a unit based on a readily available and cheap compared to it's capacity hard disk inside a very compact enclosure. They used their expertise in user interfaces to produce a GUI for the devices that worked and worked well.
Moral of the story... Apple didn't start out as an early adopter in this sense and get caught like a deer in the headlights when the ensuing freight train of competition came sailing through. Contrary... they saw deficiencies and leveraged their creative thought process to take what was out there and one-up it.
Apple has in many instances been a first or near-first to market over the course, only to get beaten down. A case in point was taking Xerox's considerable efforts and bringing it to market with the Apple Lisa first (even bigger failure) and then the Mac (which we can call a success but I feel moreso in it's third generation with OS X considering what it started out with at the previous OS's end). They were closer to the bar than Xerox was, but they were still expensive and the hardware just wasn't there to build Macs affordably early-on. After a sustained hit and lower than demand initial sales, the next few waves of Macintosh had to attempt to recoup some of the initial hits taken by the less than successful early models that had a miniscule amount of usable software available.
The iPod:
Used an existing large base of software as it's foundation, the MP3.
Apple also was the first into the PDA market, and they were almost the first out. If you count that Apple also helped develop the GUI for what became the Sony Magic Cap, you could say they fell out of the market first too. They also were ahead of their time as the initial handwriting recognition wasn't anywhere near as good as it was by the end of the Newton's lifetime. In fact, many today believe the Newton's handwriting recognition is still superior to PocketPC and Palm-based systems.
The iPod:
Came later, built on the other players weaknesses, increased capacities and provided an improved user interface, and eventually added new higher quality file formats, the iTunes Music store, video playback, yada, yada, yada.
Now... I agree with the others. What Apple has done is markedly different than what they did back in the Mac era, and what Microsoft did to them. Microsoft never had to compete with 80%+ market penetration and attempt to defeat a juggernaut that is compatible with most of the important formats, and has an entrenched media system (iTunes iTMS) to provide source for the product. When Microsoft slaughtered Apple's early marketshare... Apple had a slim lead, was struggling to get quality apps., was selling overpriced hardware to try to recoup early losses, had no entrenched business applications, and had a miniscule amount of software in comparison to the already entrenched PC market.
But...
Apple can not become complacent. They have an impeccable track record thus far with the iPod. The few hiccups along the way have been handled typically in a rather respectable fashion, with replaced units and/or batteries. The "scratch" issue is going to be the case with any electronics device. In the 1980's if you dropped a Walkman or any knock-off cassette player... if it shattered or broke, you typically had to "just deal". In today's society if you drop a unit and it scratches, that's fodder for a civil suit. I had pals with GE and Sony portable cassette players that were held together with duct tape and had the batteries held in with tape too. I never once heard them calling up either company demanding a fix.
It is imperative that Apple continues to produce good product, innovative "needed" features, with elegant design, and continues to provide an awesome and compelling integration with the computer with the right amount of available product and the right amount of flexibility as needed. Where Microsoft keeps slipping in areas because of public perception, whether it be virus problems, security issues/loopholes, falling behind on delivering product to market in a timely fashion, not seeing demands forecasted for certain features and implementing compelling ways to using them in their own products, etc. Apple *MUST* see these elements and must avoid failing where other's have. While Apple's marketshare is healthy, robust, and considerable... not even Microsoft is guaranteed to hold the desktop market forever. Apple should heed that bit of wisdom in the portable media market as well. Even Sony, with the ubiquitous Walkman, knows that all too well. That argument alone would be far more compelling and corresponding than Apple's past computer circumstances when compared to the iPod.
oh please, and it isn't on the iPod? Everyone I know, me included, who has an ipod has had some trouble with at some point along the way (you seem to also be forgetting 2 class action suits specifically complaining about poor build quality for the ipod? How many class action suits have been brought against creative?). Im not against Ipod, I own one and love it, but lets be honest, assuming these specs live up to what they claim, Creative has a better product out there on the market. It doesn't have the syncability that Apple does but then again its not up against the mac market, its mainly for windows users who dont give a rats a*s about iTunes and are willing to take on other syncability options.
Stop blindly sticking up for a company with equal amounts of faults as the next guy. And to answer your question, you can't go just by price, they are the same price but Creative offers more with their product then iPod does (or at least more to certain people who deem it to be more).
I have to say straight out you are incorrect on the build quality issue. The iPod is an amazingly tough & durable piece of tech, and one of those suits you mentioned was about scratching, not durability. Unless you put it in your pocket with your car-keys, it's not easy to scratch. My 4G iPod is now over a year old, and I don't have a single scratch on it.
If people are going to sue for their own negligence then so be it, but don't complain over spilt milk..
Also please check out this article on iPod durability testing. Yes it's the nano, but add 2cm each side and you have your iPod.
Now that's tough.. Durability? I think so. (Poor thing..)
Finally,
We aren't 'blindly' sticking up for Apple. Please remember you're commenting at an Apple news and fansite. Of course people are going to support Apple, but we have good reason to. Sure, there are problems now and then, my G5 has locked up once, and Mail has crashed before, but I could say a hell of a lot more about the PC I used to own. Apple's product quality control is outstanding in most cases, iPod included, and I think they deserve some credit.
Creative's iPod.. sorry.. Zen, is basically a product that people will buy because of one of 3 reasons.
1) iPods were all sold out.
2) They are Windows zealots.
3) Mum got confused.
If you want to compete in the market place, don't throw out products that are the same, then complain about your competitor.
Invent something.. Be 'Creative'. Simply put, stop complaining and make your products stand out, make them better or different to what's already there.
if you think this i a 5G ipod rip off, then uve no idea what the engineering design process takes. this player would have been in the works for atleast (at the VERY least) 6months to a years worth of time before the 5G ipod was released.
the creative player is nice, and cud have competed well with the 4G ipod lineup, but they clearly did not anticipate the slim design of the 5G. thats the only great pitfall of the player - its almost twice the thickness of the 5G ipod.
still, creative seems to make decent players, and at this point, they are the only other recognizable company churning more mainstream competetive products
the only other company i see with the potential, power and resources to compete with apple is sony, but clearly sonys walkman division is highly restricted by the content side of sony management...its hard to believe that a company that makes a well organized and thought out product like the PSP can churn out crap like the A3000 that moves backwards in prgress from its previous player (which i quite liked, the HD5, but returned for lil nitpicky reasons).
in the end, i love my 5G 30gb ipod, but would like it back from apple now (i sent it back to them on 11/15/05, and opted to keep the engraving - its been 4 weeks, and no update on when ill get it back (they say another week or two))
if you think this i a 5G ipod rip off, then uve no idea what the engineering design process takes. this player would have been in the works for atleast (at the VERY least) 6months to a years worth of time before the 5G ipod was released.
the creative player is nice, and cud have competed well with the 4G ipod lineup, but they clearly did not anticipate the slim design of the 5G. thats the only great pitfall of the player - its almost twice the thickness of the 5G ipod.
still, creative seems to make decent players, and at this point, they are the only other recognizable company churning more mainstream competetive products
the only other company i see with the potential, power and resources to compete with apple is sony, but clearly sonys walkman division is highly restricted by the content side of sony management...its hard to believe that a company that makes a well organized and thought out product like the PSP can churn out crap like the A3000 that moves backwards in prgress from its previous player (which i quite liked, the HD5, but returned for lil nitpicky reasons).
in the end, i love my 5G 30gb ipod, but would like it back from apple now (i sent it back to them on 11/15/05, and opted to keep the engraving - its been 4 weeks, and no update on when ill get it back (they say another week or two))
It doesn't take very long for a case design to be realised. I doubt very much if Creative isn't deliberately trying to confuse the customer. This has happened before to Apple. You might remember several copies of the first iMacs. Apple took them all to court, or threatened to. They stopped production.
No doubt Creative intended to come out with a player with a bigger screen. But the overall look and finish is far too similar to be a coincidence.
what about the look is so similar tho? the buttons are completely different, their navigation system is different.
the only similarity i see is the fact that there is a screen...if that constitutes as an iPod rip off, then most players on teh market are (if u think they are, ur not too bright...tho ther are lots of rip offs, apple didnt invent the harddrive mp3 player or the interface for it (Creative did bother before apple, tho i dunno who did em first)...
what about the look is so similar tho? the buttons are completely different, their navigation system is different.
the only similarity i see is the fact that there is a screen...if that constitutes as an iPod rip off, then most players on teh market are (if u think they are, ur not too bright...tho ther are lots of rip offs, apple didnt invent the harddrive mp3 player or the interface for it (Creative did bother before apple, tho i dunno who did em first)...
what else?
If the navigation system is so different (which it's not), then why is Creative threatening to sue Apple over patents it says Apple has violated? Patents, by the way, that are thought to have less than a 50% chance of holding up.
They have no choice about the terrible controller they use. The scrollwheels are patented devices. That's why no other player on the market can duplicate them. But, if you notice the four small indicators aranged in a square, it gives the player the look of a scrollwhell upon first glance. It's clever.
But if you can't see the amazing similarities between them, then that in itself is also amazing.
touch strip is actually a decent alternative to the click wheel, and ofcourse they dont use the PATENTED clickwheel, the way apple is using their PATENTED menu system
by navigation, i meant the buttons and touch strip
i just dont see why people insist every new player is an iPod rip off...
if they ripped off they ipod, they wudnt have expanded codec suppor for both audio and video, as well as high quality video output, FM radio, and voice recording.
i have a 5G ipod and love it, and wudnt use have the extra stuff creative packs in there (espcially cuz its twice the thickness) but i dont think its so much of a rip off...
was every portable cassette player after the walkman called a rip off? probably, but was it really? i dunno
touch strip is actually a decent alternative to the click wheel, and ofcourse they dont use the PATENTED clickwheel, the way apple is using their PATENTED menu system
by navigation, i meant the buttons and touch strip
i just dont see why people insist every new player is an iPod rip off...
if they ripped off they ipod, they wudnt have expanded codec suppor for both audio and video, as well as high quality video output, FM radio, and voice recording.
i have a 5G ipod and love it, and wudnt use have the extra stuff creative packs in there (espcially cuz its twice the thickness) but i dont think its so much of a rip off...
was every portable cassette player after the walkman called a rip off? probably, but was it really? i dunno
What is interesting about Creative's "patent", is that Apple actually used their menuing system far earlier than Creative did. When Creative came out with their new system, it looked like the one Apple came up with. This has been used for five years now, and Creative hadn't made a peep. While the patent has been pending for several years, it was granted in September. They only started to use it two years after Apple did. It's considered to be very possible that Apple was working on this before Creative. Also, various patent attorneys have said that there doesn't seem to be anything in it that wasn't done before. Numerous other companies have copied it as well.
Every new player isn't considered to be a knock-off. Only the ones that are. Like this one.
Sony's new line of players isn't a knock-off. It's completely different. The same thing with Samsungs, and for that matter, most of Creatives.
You're confusing the idea of a specific catagory with a specific "trade dress", which is considered to be a no no.
Okay.. please don't throw stones at me for asking this but I finally converted a friend of mine from PC to a Nice PowerBook G4!!!! He LOVES his computer of course... He hasn't bought an ipod yet and wants one but it will come later. The problem is he has a Creative Zen player and I was wondering if He can use it with the Mac??? I've never tried to hook one of those up to mine before but I'm assuming it will mount like a drive. From there you drag MP3 files to it correct???? Anyone have any experience with these??? Thanks
Okay.. please don't throw stones at me for asking this but I finally converted a friend of mine from PC to a Nice PowerBook G4!!!! He LOVES his computer of course... He hasn't bought an ipod yet and wants one but it will come later. The problem is he has a Creative Zen player and I was wondering if He can use it with the Mac??? I've never tried to hook one of those up to mine before but I'm assuming it will mount like a drive. From there you drag MP3 files to it correct???? Anyone have any experience with these??? Thanks
As far as I know, Creatives players have no Mac software.
Why don't you go to their site? They probably have an FAQ that will have that info. If not, you can likely e-mail them, or failing that, get a contact number there and call them.
Salespeople, in stores, might give you the wrong info.
As far as I know, Creatives players have no Mac software.
Why don't you go to their site? They probably have an FAQ that will have that info. If not, you can likely e-mail them, or failing that, get a contact number there and call them.
Creative doesn't need Mac software, nor do they really need special Windows or Linux software to support their portable media player products. I thought their players support drag and drop audio files as if it were a standard hard drive volume, all you need is the USB mass storage driver. The player can directly play those files without the retarded file name obfuscation and database. The "Apple Way" has been criticized, rightly IMO, because their products don't support adding music that way.
Creative doesn't need Mac software, nor do they really need Windows or Linux software to support their portable media player products. I thought their players support drag and drop audio files as if it were a standard hard drive volume, all you need is the USB mass storage driver. The player can directly play those files without the retarded file name obfuscation and database. The "Apple Way" has been criticized, rightly IMO, because their products don't support adding music that way.
I'm not sure. I read somewhere that their products were not Mac compatable.
I just went to their site. They DO have drivers for their players. I went to download a driver update, chose Mac OS X, and got this (I hope this link will work):
I'm not sure. I read somewhere that their products were not Mac compatable..
...
So, it looks like no Mac support. Their music site doesn't support the Mac either, as far as I know.
At first, I assumed drivers were just for DRM'ed files, but now I am not so sure about their more recent models. Now my official answer is I don't know either. I didn't consider DRMed files because I really don't care to touch them.
I once emailed Creative's support about their video device a while before the iPod 5G came out. Their response was simple: they do not support Macintosh and do not intend to.
Who really cares about FM radio? The Windows zealots jump all over this feature whenever the next iPod "killer" emerges. There's a reason pay radio exists now: FM sux!! Clear channel, etc. ruined it. Really, does anyone actually listen to the radio? (The most compelling reason I have heard so far are gyms playing TV over FM - I'd venture this is still a minority of users) Oh, I forgot about NPR but then there are always podcasts.
Who really cares about FM radio? The Windows zealots jump all over this feature whenever the next iPod "killer" emerges. There's a reason pay radio exists now: FM sux!! Clear channel, etc. ruined it. Really, does anyone actually listen to the radio? (The most compelling reason I have heard so far are gyms playing TV over FM - I'd venture this is still a minority of users) Oh, I forgot about NPR but then there are always podcasts.
When I bought my Creative Nomad II at a Macworld a while ago, it was the latest thing. Quite attractive, used Smartmedia, and had an FM tuner. (I still have it, though I haven't used it for years.)
What has to be understood about that history, and why it's different today, is really very simple. But some don't seem to get it.
The biggest Smartmedia card was 64MB. I could get ONE album ripped to that card. The card was also $100, on sale at the show.
How many times are you going to listen to that album during the course of the day before you begin to hate it?
Ripping a new album every night was fun - for about a week! It took time, back then.
So, the FM tuner (which was very good, by the way) was required.
But today, it is rarely needed. Even 100 songs can last many people through a couple of weeks, or more.
It just isn't a major selling point.
But Apple, and others, understand that some people do want one, and so they are made. Even Apple got into the act.
But why include one if most people don't seem to care?
right now the only thing stopping me buying the creative zen vision:m is the cost. As it stands, it is £30 more expensive than the 30g iPod (not including student discount apple gives).
However, all the pros of the zen appeal to me:
longer battery life, more supported video formats, easier to use (i.e. with a creative you can look at it on ur computer as if it were a harddrive and just copy/paste ANY file back and forth. ipods are nowhere near this easy) and finally the FM tuner.
My only problem, are these worth £30+? In the end, i think so.
right now the only thing stopping me buying the creative zen vision:m is the cost. As it stands, it is £30 more expensive than the 30g iPod (not including student discount apple gives).
However, all the pros of the zen appeal to me:
longer battery life, more supported video formats, easier to use (i.e. with a creative you can look at it on ur computer as if it were a harddrive and just copy/paste ANY file back and forth. ipods are nowhere near this easy)
But then you have to worry about where your files are located, and not copying duplicates; and then you have to use the filesystem to navigate everything. Whereas with the iPod you just plug it in iTunes takes care of it.
right now the only thing stopping me buying the creative zen vision:m is the cost. As it stands, it is £30 more expensive than the 30g iPod (not including student discount apple gives).
However, all the pros of the zen appeal to me:
longer battery life, more supported video formats, easier to use (i.e. with a creative you can look at it on ur computer as if it were a harddrive and just copy/paste ANY file back and forth. ipods are nowhere near this easy) and finally the FM tuner.
My only problem, are these worth £30+? In the end, i think so.
Comments
When Apple entered the market with Macintosh computers, noone prior had brought out an affordable consumer computer with a GUI. It was a completely new paradigm compared to DOS-based and BASIC-based CLI-driven computers. So while it was groundbreaking, it was almost alarmingly so, and it was actually in many ways before it's financially feasible time.
Flash forward...
The iPod came out long after portable MP3 products were on the market, and were on the market for an affordable sum. None of the product out was compelling, many of the products were unreliable, and the interfaces and storage capabilities were abysmally low and in many ways... they were a product ahead of it's time.
Sound familiar?
Key being "Ahead of it's time."
In the first instance, Microsoft and Intel and the clone vendors were opportunistic. They downplayed the importance of a GUI-based system for awhile until they had a suitable GUI system and then, to their masses, showed them a GUI-based system that was backwards compatible with existing formats while bringing in their own. That being the fact that you could run DOS and Windows on the same machine, later on DOS within a window as you can still today in XP. They ran the old DOS compatible apps. for a lonnnnng time, and eventually we began seeing custom API's within Windows that created software apps. that were Windows dependant more and more 'til DOS was being phased away.
Apple, in this case, is the Microsoft/Intel of the modern portable audio market that started eons ago with transistor radios and the Walkman. As time went on and a format burst onto the scene, other companies produced product forecasting a market. Apple built software for the Mac that worked as a conduit for the products that were out there, and then in analysis began to realize how craptacular much of what was out there was.
They produced their own player that worked with existing formats. They then leveraged their investment into video to take the next wave, MPEG 4, and generate a higher quality, smaller file size audio format that allowed greater song capacity for their players. They gave people a unit based on a readily available and cheap compared to it's capacity hard disk inside a very compact enclosure. They used their expertise in user interfaces to produce a GUI for the devices that worked and worked well.
Moral of the story... Apple didn't start out as an early adopter in this sense and get caught like a deer in the headlights when the ensuing freight train of competition came sailing through. Contrary... they saw deficiencies and leveraged their creative thought process to take what was out there and one-up it.
Apple has in many instances been a first or near-first to market over the course, only to get beaten down. A case in point was taking Xerox's considerable efforts and bringing it to market with the Apple Lisa first (even bigger failure) and then the Mac (which we can call a success but I feel moreso in it's third generation with OS X considering what it started out with at the previous OS's end). They were closer to the bar than Xerox was, but they were still expensive and the hardware just wasn't there to build Macs affordably early-on. After a sustained hit and lower than demand initial sales, the next few waves of Macintosh had to attempt to recoup some of the initial hits taken by the less than successful early models that had a miniscule amount of usable software available.
The iPod:
Used an existing large base of software as it's foundation, the MP3.
Apple also was the first into the PDA market, and they were almost the first out. If you count that Apple also helped develop the GUI for what became the Sony Magic Cap, you could say they fell out of the market first too. They also were ahead of their time as the initial handwriting recognition wasn't anywhere near as good as it was by the end of the Newton's lifetime. In fact, many today believe the Newton's handwriting recognition is still superior to PocketPC and Palm-based systems.
The iPod:
Came later, built on the other players weaknesses, increased capacities and provided an improved user interface, and eventually added new higher quality file formats, the iTunes Music store, video playback, yada, yada, yada.
Now... I agree with the others. What Apple has done is markedly different than what they did back in the Mac era, and what Microsoft did to them. Microsoft never had to compete with 80%+ market penetration and attempt to defeat a juggernaut that is compatible with most of the important formats, and has an entrenched media system (iTunes iTMS) to provide source for the product. When Microsoft slaughtered Apple's early marketshare... Apple had a slim lead, was struggling to get quality apps., was selling overpriced hardware to try to recoup early losses, had no entrenched business applications, and had a miniscule amount of software in comparison to the already entrenched PC market.
But...
Apple can not become complacent. They have an impeccable track record thus far with the iPod. The few hiccups along the way have been handled typically in a rather respectable fashion, with replaced units and/or batteries. The "scratch" issue is going to be the case with any electronics device. In the 1980's if you dropped a Walkman or any knock-off cassette player... if it shattered or broke, you typically had to "just deal". In today's society if you drop a unit and it scratches, that's fodder for a civil suit. I had pals with GE and Sony portable cassette players that were held together with duct tape and had the batteries held in with tape too. I never once heard them calling up either company demanding a fix.
It is imperative that Apple continues to produce good product, innovative "needed" features, with elegant design, and continues to provide an awesome and compelling integration with the computer with the right amount of available product and the right amount of flexibility as needed. Where Microsoft keeps slipping in areas because of public perception, whether it be virus problems, security issues/loopholes, falling behind on delivering product to market in a timely fashion, not seeing demands forecasted for certain features and implementing compelling ways to using them in their own products, etc. Apple *MUST* see these elements and must avoid failing where other's have. While Apple's marketshare is healthy, robust, and considerable... not even Microsoft is guaranteed to hold the desktop market forever. Apple should heed that bit of wisdom in the portable media market as well. Even Sony, with the ubiquitous Walkman, knows that all too well. That argument alone would be far more compelling and corresponding than Apple's past computer circumstances when compared to the iPod.
Originally posted by reykjavik
oh please, and it isn't on the iPod? Everyone I know, me included, who has an ipod has had some trouble with at some point along the way (you seem to also be forgetting 2 class action suits specifically complaining about poor build quality for the ipod? How many class action suits have been brought against creative?). Im not against Ipod, I own one and love it, but lets be honest, assuming these specs live up to what they claim, Creative has a better product out there on the market. It doesn't have the syncability that Apple does but then again its not up against the mac market, its mainly for windows users who dont give a rats a*s about iTunes and are willing to take on other syncability options.
Stop blindly sticking up for a company with equal amounts of faults as the next guy. And to answer your question, you can't go just by price, they are the same price but Creative offers more with their product then iPod does (or at least more to certain people who deem it to be more).
I have to say straight out you are incorrect on the build quality issue. The iPod is an amazingly tough & durable piece of tech, and one of those suits you mentioned was about scratching, not durability. Unless you put it in your pocket with your car-keys, it's not easy to scratch. My 4G iPod is now over a year old, and I don't have a single scratch on it.
If people are going to sue for their own negligence then so be it, but don't complain over spilt milk..
Also please check out this article on iPod durability testing. Yes it's the nano, but add 2cm each side and you have your iPod.
http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardware/nano.ars/3
Now that's tough.. Durability? I think so. (Poor thing..)
Finally,
We aren't 'blindly' sticking up for Apple. Please remember you're commenting at an Apple news and fansite. Of course people are going to support Apple, but we have good reason to. Sure, there are problems now and then, my G5 has locked up once, and Mail has crashed before, but I could say a hell of a lot more about the PC I used to own. Apple's product quality control is outstanding in most cases, iPod included, and I think they deserve some credit.
Creative's iPod.. sorry.. Zen, is basically a product that people will buy because of one of 3 reasons.
1) iPods were all sold out.
2) They are Windows zealots.
3) Mum got confused.
If you want to compete in the market place, don't throw out products that are the same, then complain about your competitor.
Invent something.. Be 'Creative'. Simply put, stop complaining and make your products stand out, make them better or different to what's already there.
Just my 4 cents.
Jimzip
the creative player is nice, and cud have competed well with the 4G ipod lineup, but they clearly did not anticipate the slim design of the 5G. thats the only great pitfall of the player - its almost twice the thickness of the 5G ipod.
still, creative seems to make decent players, and at this point, they are the only other recognizable company churning more mainstream competetive products
the only other company i see with the potential, power and resources to compete with apple is sony, but clearly sonys walkman division is highly restricted by the content side of sony management...its hard to believe that a company that makes a well organized and thought out product like the PSP can churn out crap like the A3000 that moves backwards in prgress from its previous player (which i quite liked, the HD5, but returned for lil nitpicky reasons).
in the end, i love my 5G 30gb ipod, but would like it back from apple now (i sent it back to them on 11/15/05, and opted to keep the engraving - its been 4 weeks, and no update on when ill get it back (they say another week or two))
Originally posted by szsiddiq
if you think this i a 5G ipod rip off, then uve no idea what the engineering design process takes. this player would have been in the works for atleast (at the VERY least) 6months to a years worth of time before the 5G ipod was released.
the creative player is nice, and cud have competed well with the 4G ipod lineup, but they clearly did not anticipate the slim design of the 5G. thats the only great pitfall of the player - its almost twice the thickness of the 5G ipod.
still, creative seems to make decent players, and at this point, they are the only other recognizable company churning more mainstream competetive products
the only other company i see with the potential, power and resources to compete with apple is sony, but clearly sonys walkman division is highly restricted by the content side of sony management...its hard to believe that a company that makes a well organized and thought out product like the PSP can churn out crap like the A3000 that moves backwards in prgress from its previous player (which i quite liked, the HD5, but returned for lil nitpicky reasons).
in the end, i love my 5G 30gb ipod, but would like it back from apple now (i sent it back to them on 11/15/05, and opted to keep the engraving - its been 4 weeks, and no update on when ill get it back (they say another week or two))
It doesn't take very long for a case design to be realised. I doubt very much if Creative isn't deliberately trying to confuse the customer. This has happened before to Apple. You might remember several copies of the first iMacs. Apple took them all to court, or threatened to. They stopped production.
No doubt Creative intended to come out with a player with a bigger screen. But the overall look and finish is far too similar to be a coincidence.
the only similarity i see is the fact that there is a screen...if that constitutes as an iPod rip off, then most players on teh market are (if u think they are, ur not too bright...tho ther are lots of rip offs, apple didnt invent the harddrive mp3 player or the interface for it (Creative did bother before apple, tho i dunno who did em first)...
what else?
Originally posted by szsiddiq
what about the look is so similar tho? the buttons are completely different, their navigation system is different.
the only similarity i see is the fact that there is a screen...if that constitutes as an iPod rip off, then most players on teh market are (if u think they are, ur not too bright...tho ther are lots of rip offs, apple didnt invent the harddrive mp3 player or the interface for it (Creative did bother before apple, tho i dunno who did em first)...
what else?
If the navigation system is so different (which it's not), then why is Creative threatening to sue Apple over patents it says Apple has violated? Patents, by the way, that are thought to have less than a 50% chance of holding up.
They have no choice about the terrible controller they use. The scrollwheels are patented devices. That's why no other player on the market can duplicate them. But, if you notice the four small indicators aranged in a square, it gives the player the look of a scrollwhell upon first glance. It's clever.
But if you can't see the amazing similarities between them, then that in itself is also amazing.
by navigation, i meant the buttons and touch strip
i just dont see why people insist every new player is an iPod rip off...
if they ripped off they ipod, they wudnt have expanded codec suppor for both audio and video, as well as high quality video output, FM radio, and voice recording.
i have a 5G ipod and love it, and wudnt use have the extra stuff creative packs in there (espcially cuz its twice the thickness) but i dont think its so much of a rip off...
was every portable cassette player after the walkman called a rip off? probably, but was it really? i dunno
Originally posted by szsiddiq
touch strip is actually a decent alternative to the click wheel, and ofcourse they dont use the PATENTED clickwheel, the way apple is using their PATENTED menu system
by navigation, i meant the buttons and touch strip
i just dont see why people insist every new player is an iPod rip off...
if they ripped off they ipod, they wudnt have expanded codec suppor for both audio and video, as well as high quality video output, FM radio, and voice recording.
i have a 5G ipod and love it, and wudnt use have the extra stuff creative packs in there (espcially cuz its twice the thickness) but i dont think its so much of a rip off...
was every portable cassette player after the walkman called a rip off? probably, but was it really? i dunno
What is interesting about Creative's "patent", is that Apple actually used their menuing system far earlier than Creative did. When Creative came out with their new system, it looked like the one Apple came up with. This has been used for five years now, and Creative hadn't made a peep. While the patent has been pending for several years, it was granted in September. They only started to use it two years after Apple did. It's considered to be very possible that Apple was working on this before Creative. Also, various patent attorneys have said that there doesn't seem to be anything in it that wasn't done before. Numerous other companies have copied it as well.
Every new player isn't considered to be a knock-off. Only the ones that are. Like this one.
Sony's new line of players isn't a knock-off. It's completely different. The same thing with Samsungs, and for that matter, most of Creatives.
You're confusing the idea of a specific catagory with a specific "trade dress", which is considered to be a no no.
Originally posted by webraider
Okay.. please don't throw stones at me for asking this but I finally converted a friend of mine from PC to a Nice PowerBook G4!!!! He LOVES his computer of course... He hasn't bought an ipod yet and wants one but it will come later. The problem is he has a Creative Zen player and I was wondering if He can use it with the Mac??? I've never tried to hook one of those up to mine before but I'm assuming it will mount like a drive. From there you drag MP3 files to it correct???? Anyone have any experience with these??? Thanks
As far as I know, Creatives players have no Mac software.
Why don't you go to their site? They probably have an FAQ that will have that info. If not, you can likely e-mail them, or failing that, get a contact number there and call them.
Salespeople, in stores, might give you the wrong info.
Originally posted by melgross
As far as I know, Creatives players have no Mac software.
Why don't you go to their site? They probably have an FAQ that will have that info. If not, you can likely e-mail them, or failing that, get a contact number there and call them.
Creative doesn't need Mac software, nor do they really need special Windows or Linux software to support their portable media player products. I thought their players support drag and drop audio files as if it were a standard hard drive volume, all you need is the USB mass storage driver. The player can directly play those files without the retarded file name obfuscation and database. The "Apple Way" has been criticized, rightly IMO, because their products don't support adding music that way.
Originally posted by JeffDM
Creative doesn't need Mac software, nor do they really need Windows or Linux software to support their portable media player products. I thought their players support drag and drop audio files as if it were a standard hard drive volume, all you need is the USB mass storage driver. The player can directly play those files without the retarded file name obfuscation and database. The "Apple Way" has been criticized, rightly IMO, because their products don't support adding music that way.
I'm not sure. I read somewhere that their products were not Mac compatable.
I just went to their site. They DO have drivers for their players. I went to download a driver update, chose Mac OS X, and got this (I hope this link will work):
http://us.creative.com/support/downl...23&Image4.y=13
I then tried the same thing, except put in XP, and got:
http://us.creative.com/support/downl...=23&Image4.y=8
So, it looks like no Mac support. Their music site doesn't support the Mac either, as far as I know.
Originally posted by melgross
I'm not sure. I read somewhere that their products were not Mac compatable..
...
So, it looks like no Mac support. Their music site doesn't support the Mac either, as far as I know.
At first, I assumed drivers were just for DRM'ed files, but now I am not so sure about their more recent models. Now my official answer is I don't know either. I didn't consider DRMed files because I really don't care to touch them.
Originally posted by bluebox
Who really cares about FM radio? The Windows zealots jump all over this feature whenever the next iPod "killer" emerges. There's a reason pay radio exists now: FM sux!! Clear channel, etc. ruined it. Really, does anyone actually listen to the radio? (The most compelling reason I have heard so far are gyms playing TV over FM - I'd venture this is still a minority of users) Oh, I forgot about NPR but then there are always podcasts.
When I bought my Creative Nomad II at a Macworld a while ago, it was the latest thing. Quite attractive, used Smartmedia, and had an FM tuner. (I still have it, though I haven't used it for years.)
What has to be understood about that history, and why it's different today, is really very simple. But some don't seem to get it.
The biggest Smartmedia card was 64MB. I could get ONE album ripped to that card. The card was also $100, on sale at the show.
How many times are you going to listen to that album during the course of the day before you begin to hate it?
Ripping a new album every night was fun - for about a week! It took time, back then.
So, the FM tuner (which was very good, by the way) was required.
But today, it is rarely needed. Even 100 songs can last many people through a couple of weeks, or more.
It just isn't a major selling point.
But Apple, and others, understand that some people do want one, and so they are made. Even Apple got into the act.
But why include one if most people don't seem to care?
However, all the pros of the zen appeal to me:
longer battery life, more supported video formats, easier to use (i.e. with a creative you can look at it on ur computer as if it were a harddrive and just copy/paste ANY file back and forth. ipods are nowhere near this easy) and finally the FM tuner.
My only problem, are these worth £30+? In the end, i think so.
Originally posted by chirho
right now the only thing stopping me buying the creative zen vision:m is the cost. As it stands, it is £30 more expensive than the 30g iPod (not including student discount apple gives).
However, all the pros of the zen appeal to me:
longer battery life, more supported video formats, easier to use (i.e. with a creative you can look at it on ur computer as if it were a harddrive and just copy/paste ANY file back and forth. ipods are nowhere near this easy)
But then you have to worry about where your files are located, and not copying duplicates; and then you have to use the filesystem to navigate everything. Whereas with the iPod you just plug it in iTunes takes care of it.
Originally posted by chirho
right now the only thing stopping me buying the creative zen vision:m is the cost. As it stands, it is £30 more expensive than the 30g iPod (not including student discount apple gives).
However, all the pros of the zen appeal to me:
longer battery life, more supported video formats, easier to use (i.e. with a creative you can look at it on ur computer as if it were a harddrive and just copy/paste ANY file back and forth. ipods are nowhere near this easy) and finally the FM tuner.
My only problem, are these worth £30+? In the end, i think so.
Ah, spoken like a true Scotsman!