New Zunes

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 3, 2007, 3:39 am

http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/02/micr ... 4gb-sizes/

Here's some of the details:

# New Zunes ship in November, date not yet announced.

# All Zunes (including the Zune 30) will have a new, redesigned interface and feature parity. In other words, early Zune 30 adopters will have all the same software features as new Zune 80, 8, and 4 users.

# Additional native video codecs for h.264 and MPEG-4 -- users no longer need transcode those file types to WMV.

# Zune can FINALLY sync video from your Media Center PC! Jeez, took you friggin long enough, guys!

# WiFi sync to host computer! Includes moving over music, movies, photos, podcasts, etc.

# Podcast support! (Sorry, no over the air downloads -- sync only.) Podcasts can also be shared via WiFi.

# The 3x3 song sharing DRM has had its three day restriction removed, but users can still only play files three times.

# There is still NO wireless music store.

# The Zune software is all new and rewritten, and is supposed to actually be more than a rebadge of WMP10 now. Friggin finally.

# The Zune music store is going DRM-free, with over 1m MP3 tracks being made available for download. Other details (like which labels, whether there is a DRM-free upgrade path is for users who've bought music with DRM, price differences, etc.) are not yet revealed

A couple nice things here:

-podcast support! (and sharable via Wifi) I'm curious to see how well they are supported. I'd love to dump my iPod. (although the fatty has been outstanding and has 2" screen over Zunes 1.8")

-wireless transfer to PC is very nice

-DRM free music store is nice

-song sharing allowing 3 plays but not limiting to three days is more useful than before IMO

-adding mpeg and h.264 support is nice although Divx/xVid would be nice too!

Overall, these new Zunes look much more competitive with the iPods.

May Red-x:

The new Zune 80GB is slightly smaller but has larger 3.2" screen than the original Zune and looks a bit better IMO as well (original was ugly)

My initial thoughts are than the larger Zune will fair well vs iTouch while the smaller Zune may have more issues vs the Nano Fatty due to smaller screen but it appears the smaller flash Zunes will also have wireless which is cool.

Here's a video of the new larger Zune. The guy has the ugliest thumb seen yet in a demo but near the end, it show Podcasts and they look structured well in the UI, both video and audio.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/ ... ource=mypi

I kind of want a memory card slot and bluetooth in my next larger portable player though so for me, I may not grab one without seeing a few more competitive options.

go Bill!

The old Zune is getting all the new features. All. Microsoft did something fantastic here and rewarded the believers who purchased Zunes in the first year by allowing them to get in on all the cool new stuff without having to pay more. Are you paying attention Apple? This is how you should treat your customers.

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/zune/firstge ... 306422.php

Not only is the 30GB getting the new Wi-Fi syncing, it's getting the updated sharing features, the new codecs, the podcasts, and the new Windows Media Center TV on the go. It's essentially the new Zune, except thicker and with less storage space...which makes us ask why Microsoft would be so generous as to kill half the reasons why you'd ever upgrade to a new Zune. But as buyers, we'll just say thanks.

Animalor · Post by **Animalor** » October 3, 2007, 11:00 am

The upgrade of the 30GB option to the new standard is a very VERY smart move. I think a lot of people who have gotten left out in the cold with iPods may take notice of this and ask Apple to do the same.

I haven't seen any work of the availability of these in Canada yet however.

I'm gonna wait till I start seeing comparative reviews between this one and the phatty.

Frankly, Podcast support, native support of Media Center TV stuffs and an FM tuner would make me pick one of the Zune Flash or the Zune 30(they're not discontinuing these when the new Zunes hit right?) instead of the Nano phatty in a heartbeat.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 3, 2007, 2:54 pm

Decent initial comparison between new Zunes and iPods here:

http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/03/zune ... smackdown/

Fash · Post by **Fash** » October 3, 2007, 3:02 pm

I don't think anything can compare to the Touch.

I swear if my iPod Touch had a dick I'd suck it.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » October 3, 2007, 3:19 pm

God reading the comments below was fucking painful. It's good solid entertainment for me to listen to apple fanboys spout off about how superior everything apple is to Microsoft, when in fact that couldn't be any further from the truth.

I am thinking about getting some kind of mp3 player, but honestly the only thing that would get me to really get behind one of them is:

No DRM, no cooperation with RIAA or ANY media company. What I mean by this is I want to use the wireless on my mp3 player that has a 200g HD and is no larger or heavier than the models out now to send however many songs (that I did not pay for) I want to whoever I want, and not have them go away, ever.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 3, 2007, 4:40 pm

Fash wrote:I don't think anything can compare to the Touch.

I swear if my iPod Touch had a dick I'd suck it.

I checked an iTouch out at lunch. As expected (especially at a store) the touch part was caked with gook.

I like the touch's 3.5" screen and that it's thin, not using a hard drive. I don't like the touch screen.

I like the Zune's Wifi capabilities better than iTouch and that the nano sized Zunes have WiFi as well.

I'm one of those that can't stand a single fingerprint or smear on my LCD monitor (24" or laptop) so always touching where I'm viewing bothers me. iTouch is cool though, just not for me. I even make sure there's not a spec of dust on the Nano Fatty screen whenever I pull it out.

BTW, I watched a freebie first episode of Gossip Girls on my Fatty while in bed last night to see how it would be. I put on my Bluetooth Headphones and laid on my side, placing the Fatty Nano about six inches from my face. The little Bluetooth wireless transmitter connected to the bottom of the Fatty kept it propped up on its side facing me. At that distance, the Nano screen looked great. Now that's something you wouldn't do at home usually but if traveling, the Stereo Blutooth Headset combined with Nano Fatty would be an excellent traveling setup. I have a hard time ignoring that the Nanos are so small and thin they slip right into my shirt pocket every day without any bulk/weight issues. The 2" fatty screen is surprisingly viewable, bright, clear, viewing angles, etc. I'd be a little hesitant about 1.8" Zune screen. I'd want to see it in person first. As with cameras, etc. The smaller electronic gizmos are, the more times I take them with me and the more I use them. The Zune flash looks to be another winner in that area.

Fash · Post by **Fash** » October 4, 2007, 1:36 am

Winnow wrote: I like the Zune's Wifi capabilities better than iTouch and that the nano sized Zunes have WiFi as well.

it has a web browser and soft keyboard??... I could've posted this with my ipod.

noel · Post by **noel** » October 4, 2007, 3:47 pm

Funkmasterr wrote:It's good solid entertainment for me to listen to apple fanboys spout off about how superior everything apple is to Microsoft, when in fact that couldn't be any further from the truth.

It's always so crystal clear when you post something from the comfortable space of complete ignorance.

Take the next $1200 you've got budgeted out for weed over the next few months and buy a low-cost MacBook or maybe save some cash and pick up the Mac Mini. Use it for 3 months, then come tell me how far from the truth it is.

Anyway, you're a huge Linux guy, so you should appreciate that OS X is based on BSD UNIX. There's no one on this forum better suited to make use of the underlying power of UNIX in OS X.

Animalor · Post by **Animalor** » October 4, 2007, 5:52 pm

I haven't "used" a mac per say. I've had to do some troubleshooting on the couple we have here in the office.

I have a real issue with an OS that doesn't have any type of event logging or troubleshooting tools other than something that will reset the permissions on every single system file.

There are some real positives to the OS but in my opinion, the negatives far outweights the good.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » October 4, 2007, 6:42 pm

noel wrote:
Funkmasterr wrote:It's good solid entertainment for me to listen to apple fanboys spout off about how superior everything apple is to Microsoft, when in fact that couldn't be any further from the truth.
It's always so crystal clear when you post something from the comfortable space of complete ignorance.

Take the next $1200 you've got budgeted out for weed over the next few months and buy a low-cost MacBook or maybe save some cash and pick up the Mac Mini. Use it for 3 months, then come tell me how far from the truth it is.

Anyway, you're a huge Linux guy, so you should appreciate that OS X is based on BSD UNIX. There's no one on this forum better suited to make use of the underlying power of UNIX in OS X.

Way to make what I said into something entirely different, not that I expect any less from you, you just love to make clever remarks and I would never take that from you.

I have used macs at friends houses, not extensively, but enough to know I don't like them. I am by no means as knowledgeable as you or a lot of others on VV when it comes to computers, but I do not need a computer that over simplifies things for me, I find it insulting, not convenient. I also don't find a need to be trendy (which I can say with confidence is at least 30% of the reason everyone I know that owns one bought their mac.)

Not to mention that 99% of the reason I have a computer at home is to play games on it (or at least that was the reason I bought it originally), and games come out on the pc months, if not years before they do for the mac..

So there is just a couple quick reasons why they are in fact, not better. Easier to use != better. Not to mention I don't want to have to pay to upgrade to the newest version of the OS X that seems to come out what, once a year?

And since when do I spend that much on weed? Fuck, I wish I had that kind of money laying around.

noel · Post by **noel** » October 4, 2007, 6:44 pm

Animalor wrote:I haven't "used" a mac per say. I've had to do some troubleshooting on the couple we have here in the office.

I have a real issue with an OS that doesn't have any type of event logging or troubleshooting tools other than something that will reset the permissions on every single system file.

Huh?

Learn about Console
As your software runs it exchanges messages about its activities between the different parts of the system. This information is stored in message logs. You can use Console to view any messages sent between your system and applications. Although these messages are rather technical and not very meaningful to the average user, they can be very valuable in helping programmers or support techincians in solving problems.

Animalor wrote:There are some real positives to the OS but in my opinion, the negatives far outweights the good.

Other than gaming, I'd love to hear what the negatives are.

noel · Post by **noel** » October 4, 2007, 6:55 pm

Funkmasterr wrote:Way to make what I said into something entirely different, not that I expect any less from you, you just love to make clever remarks and I would never take that from you.

I have used macs at friends houses, not extensively, but enough to know I don't like them. I am by no means as knowledgeable as you or a lot of others on VV when it comes to computers, but I do not need a computer that over simplifies things for me, I find it insulting, not convenient. I also don't find a need to be trendy (which I can say with confidence is at least 30% of the reason everyone I know that owns one bought their mac.)

Not to mention that 99% of the reason I have a computer at home is to play games on it (or at least that was the reason I bought it originally), and games come out on the pc months, if not years before they do for the mac..

So there is just a couple quick reasons why they are in fact, not better. Easier to use != better. Not to mention I don't want to have to pay to upgrade to the newest version of the OS X that seems to come out what, once a year?

And since when do I spend that much on weed? Fuck, I wish I had that kind of money laying around.

Why should an OS be any more complicated than it needs to be? Isn't it just there to make the tasks you have to do; the work more efficient? I don't know about you, but the complexity and difficulty in what I do isn't any less just because the OS is easier and more intuitive.

I also want to clearly state that there are several things I don't like about the Mac OS at all. Mostly minor UI things that are hereditary from earlier generations of the OS, but they're nothing but minor annoyances. I also don't dislike Windows. Each OS has its pros and cons, but anyone who states the Mac OS or Macs are bad has simply never used one.

Just so I'm clear though, the reasons you don't like Macs:
1. They're easier to use and you find that insulting.
2. They're trendy.
3. Lack of Games.

My response:
1. Funny.
2. Percentage of PCs vs. Macs? Funny.
3. Totally agree.

BTW, I'm not saying you drop $1200 on weed regularly. I'm saying over a long period of time take the $1200 you would have spent on weed (or whatever, I was trying to be funny) and buy a Mac.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » October 4, 2007, 7:02 pm

noel wrote:
Funkmasterr wrote:Way to make what I said into something entirely different, not that I expect any less from you, you just love to make clever remarks and I would never take that from you.

I have used macs at friends houses, not extensively, but enough to know I don't like them. I am by no means as knowledgeable as you or a lot of others on VV when it comes to computers, but I do not need a computer that over simplifies things for me, I find it insulting, not convenient. I also don't find a need to be trendy (which I can say with confidence is at least 30% of the reason everyone I know that owns one bought their mac.)

Not to mention that 99% of the reason I have a computer at home is to play games on it (or at least that was the reason I bought it originally), and games come out on the pc months, if not years before they do for the mac..

So there is just a couple quick reasons why they are in fact, not better. Easier to use != better. Not to mention I don't want to have to pay to upgrade to the newest version of the OS X that seems to come out what, once a year?

And since when do I spend that much on weed? Fuck, I wish I had that kind of money laying around.
Why should an OS be any more complicated than it needs to be? Isn't it just there to make the tasks you have to do; the work more efficient? I don't know about you, but the complexity and difficulty in what I do isn't any less just because the OS is easier and more intuitive.

I also want to clearly state that there are several things I don't like about the Mac OS at all. Mostly minor UI things that are hereditary from earlier generations of the OS, but they're nothing but minor annoyances. I also don't dislike Windows. Each OS has its pros and cons, but anyone who states the Mac OS or Macs are bad has simply never used one.

Just so I'm clear though, the reasons you don't like Macs:
1. They're easier to use and you find that insulting.
2. They're trendy.
3. Lack of Games.

My response:
1. Funny.
2. Percentage of PCs vs. Macs? Funny.
3. Totally agree.

BTW, I'm not saying you drop $1200 on weed regularly. I'm saying over a long period of time take the $1200 you would have spent on weed (or whatever, I was trying to be funny) and buy a Mac.

As far as the trendy comment, I guess I could have been a little more clear on what I meant. The people I know that buy macs are the type of people that do everything in their power to be different, just to be different (one of my biggest pet peeves, btw.) They are the type of people that jump on new things/trends before most people do just because (hybrid cars, macs, etc.)

noel · Post by **noel** » October 4, 2007, 7:06 pm

The people I know who use them are primarily artists, musicians, and a bunch of network engineers that I work with.

Oh I'm driving a hybrid now. Do you understand the difference between trying to be trendy and caring about the environment?

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » October 4, 2007, 7:10 pm

noel wrote:The people I know who use them are primarily artists, musicians, and a bunch of network engineers that I work with.

Oh I'm driving a hybrid now. Do you understand the difference between trying to be trendy and caring about the environment?

I understand the difference between the two just like you understand the point I was trying to make, you just like being combative, which is perfectly ok.

Sionistic · Post by **Sionistic** » October 4, 2007, 7:29 pm

I use both macs and pc's at work. Fuck Macs. It's the UI I really hate. Now keep in mind I cant change too many settings on them, but it is 3 times easier for me to use the pc than mac.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » October 4, 2007, 8:23 pm

noel wrote:The people I know who use them are primarily artists, musicians, and a bunch of network engineers that I work with.

Oh I'm driving a hybrid now. Do you understand the difference between trying to be trendy and caring about the environment?

Spandex is trendy too!

Animalor · Post by **Animalor** » October 5, 2007, 10:46 am

noel wrote:
Animalor wrote:I haven't "used" a mac per say. I've had to do some troubleshooting on the couple we have here in the office.

I have a real issue with an OS that doesn't have any type of event logging or troubleshooting tools other than something that will reset the permissions on every single system file.
Huh?
Learn about Console
As your software runs it exchanges messages about its activities between the different parts of the system. This information is stored in message logs. You can use Console to view any messages sent between your system and applications. Although these messages are rather technical and not very meaningful to the average user, they can be very valuable in helping programmers or support techincians in solving problems.

Animalor wrote:There are some real positives to the OS but in my opinion, the negatives far outweights the good.
Other than gaming, I'd love to hear what the negatives are.

Just a bit of a clarification on my position here. I LOVE Apple hardware. Their engineering and asthetics is awesome. I dislike OSX, which is what I'm addressing here.

Dislikes
Very little developper support coming from Apple. Devs for some reason don't seem in the know about what is happening with hardware and interaction with the OS. At the moment, my designers here can't use Quark 7 cause Apple changed something with their print system in 10.4, which in turn meant Quark had to change their print filters in version 7, which means that now printer makers need to incorporate this filter in their drivers. We use RICOH and Kyocera printers here and neither of these had updated drivers for OSX to address this.

Very little support for software that isn't made for the latest and greatest OS version(Seriously, all the software out there is made for 10.2.9+ or something of that nature. You can't find anything made for OSX anymore.)

You have to pay for service packs (Again you can't really make people believe that the differences between 10.3 and 10.4 were worth shelling out 120$ for.)

Charging people for bootcamp instead of including it with OSX 10.5.

Having a delete button on the keyboard and not allowing people to delete delected file with it. (I really hate using the mouse to do absolutely everything)

I hate that when you click that red dot, it doesn't close the App, just the window.

Likes
I love that all the apps are mostly encapsulated in their own folder in the application area. Uninstall is pretty painless.

The UI is pretty sharp. I love the animations that Apple have built in to it. I love the concept of the dock and how easy it is to add and remove stuff from it.

Frankly the Mac OS works great for a lot of people. It just doesn't work for me and it's a real pain in the ass(for me) to setup and configure for the corporate environment here at the office.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 10, 2007, 5:20 pm

From Engadget:

Zune Insider has a little update about specifics of the new Zunes up on their site, with the rather minor -- but interesting -- tidbit that the new Zunes natively support video of up to 720x480 at 30fps, or 720x576 at 25fps. These formats will only play at full quality via TV-Out -- the Zune display is expected to be a regular 320 x 240 affair -- but it's nice to know that you'll be able to lug around full DVD resolution movies on the next Zune, right?

Nice. Nice to be able to take a bunch of movies, TV shows, Podcasts, etc on vacation/business trip with you and play them on whatever TV you have available at a decent resolution.

Neost · Post by **Neost** » October 10, 2007, 5:42 pm

Since I can't imagine a time I would ever use the TV out on the new Zunes, I picked up a zune 30gb on woot the other day for 100 bucks. It should arrive via fedex tomorrow. I have been putting off buying a portable media player for some time but with the old zunes getting the new zune firmware I figured 100 bucks wasn't too much to spend on one. If I find I don't like it, no big loss.

I figure if I don't like it I'll give it to one of my kids for Christmas and get an Archos since they support pocketdish.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 10, 2007, 5:54 pm

Neost wrote:Since I can't imagine a time I would ever use the TV out on the new Zunes, I picked up a zune 30gb on woot the other day for 100 bucks. It should arrive via fedex tomorrow. I have been putting off buying a portable media player for some time but with the old zunes getting the new zune firmware I figured 100 bucks wasn't too much to spend on one. If I find I don't like it, no big loss.

I figure if I don't like it I'll give it to one of my kids for Christmas and get an Archos since they support pocketdish.

Are you sure the original Zune won't support the new res since it's probably just a firmware update? Do the original Zunes not have a video out?

Neost · Post by **Neost** » October 10, 2007, 11:08 pm

originals do standard def. Not sure if the firmware update ups the rez on them or not, I'll have to go read some more. I doubt it will, or what would be the incentive to buy a zune 2?

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 10, 2007, 11:13 pm

Neost wrote:originals do standard def. Not sure if the firmware update ups the rez on them or not, I'll have to go read some more. I doubt it will, or what would be the incentive to buy a zune 2?

Well, there was an article saying that with the firmware update, there's almost no reason to buy a new Zune if you have an old one. Microsoft was being praised for not crippling things like Apple does.

Neost · Post by **Neost** » October 11, 2007, 3:43 pm

the only model i see referenced for the HDTV out is the zune 80gb. i guess i'll find out before too long.

Neost · Post by **Neost** » October 13, 2007, 2:08 pm

I still can't confirm the tv out will be HD capable, however I did discover some current goodness that I didn't realize existed:)

I was screwing around with orb again, streaming some content to my HT through my 360. I was trying to get matroska's streaming with no luck. Anyway, my new zune was sitting here and i thought "wonder if i can play zune content via the 360?". Quick google and oh yeah baby.

I can connect the zune to the usb port of the 360 and it id's the zune and allows you to playback media directly from the zune. Also, the zune software allows you to stream media to the 360 from a pc. I was pleasantly surprised at the interoperability. I didn't even realize it but apparently the first time i had the zune software running and turned on my 360, the zune software picked it up and automagically configured for it.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » October 13, 2007, 2:11 pm

Has anyone tried iPod video on the 360? I know I can use my 360 to play back music.

Animalor · Post by **Animalor** » October 14, 2007, 11:51 am

Nope on the iPod video for the 360.

I believe it's cause the devices don't have compatible formats.

Neost · Post by **Neost** » October 15, 2007, 12:39 pm

woot.com has 30gb refurb zunes for 100 bucks today.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » November 12, 2007, 7:45 pm

Some comments about the new Zunes being released tomorrow:

CMag
We'll just come out and say it: The 80GB Zune trumps the iPod Classic...For the same $250 price as the 80GB iPod classic, the new Zune 80GB offers a much larger screen, FM radio, wireless player-to-player sharing, Wi-Fi syncing with your PC, and a rear panel that can be customized with some cool artwork--for free. Simply put, Apple is no longer the leader in the realm of hard drive-based players. While the Zune 80GB and the iPod classic are both outstanding devices, the Zune has more features--and it's more fun.

CNET
The 80GB Zune cuts a much slimmer figure than its bricklike older brother. Measuring 4.3 inches high by 2.4 inches wide by 0.5 inch deep, Microsoft shaved some considerable bulk off the Zune's thickness, while nearly tripling its capacity...we believe the latest crop of Zunes should finally take hold as a true iPod alternative. (83/100)

PCWorld
All of the new Zunes are built around a rounded touch-sensitive control that also doubles as a clickable d-pad-style controler, much like the Click Wheel on Apple's iPods. Flick your thumb up or down the pad repeatedly, and you begin to build up momentum while scrolling through long lists. At any time, you can tap to stop the scrolling, though it will eventually come to stop naturally. In my experience, it's a very fun way to navigate through a music collection, even in a long view of artists on the 80GB player...All in all, the 80GB Zune is a decent choice as an 80GB MP3 player. (no score at this time)

Wired
Video performance is very good, with the screen size really helping...Battery life didn't meet the published specs of 20 hours for music and 4 hours for video with the Wi-Fi turned off. My rundown test on music was 18 hours, and video was 3.5 hours, which is, you know, fine.... Would I recommend the Zune? Yeah, I think I would. If you're not invested in the iPod/iTunes ecosystem, it's the most polished competitor I've used to date. Especially if you're looking for a subscription service, the integration of player and service just crushes everyone else. (6/10)

YahooTech
...the most innovative new feature on the Zune: wireless syncing. Setup was a piece of cake: you just connect the Zune to your PC via USB, fire up the Zune software, and enable wireless syncing under the Settings menu. If your system is already connected to a wireless network, those settings are transferred to the Zune automatically—no need to key in the access point name or password...automatic syncing only works when the Zune is plugged into its charging dock. Overall, I thought wireless syncing worked pretty seamlessly, and I loved being able to sync new songs and playlists over the air (why can't the iPhone or the iPod Touch do this?)

Dean Takahashi
The Zune Marketplace website looks better than iTunes because it feels less like a spreadsheet. It still uses the MTV Urge back-end but is completely redesigned.... All of these things represent improvements that allow Microsoft to claim that it is going its own way. Clearly, they aren't copying Apple...At this rate of improvement, Microsoft will be a contender. But it has a long way to go before it keeps Steve Jobs up at night.

Fash · Post by **Fash** » November 12, 2007, 8:21 pm

Wired
Video performance is very good, with the screen size really helping...Battery life didn't meet the published specs of 20 hours for music and 4 hours for video with the Wi-Fi turned off. My rundown test on music was 18 hours, and video was 3.5 hours, which is, you know, fine.... Would I recommend the Zune? Yeah, I think I would. If you're not invested in the iPod/iTunes ecosystem, it's the most polished competitor I've used to date. Especially if you're looking for a subscription service, the integration of player and service just crushes everyone else. (6/10)

Why don't the review and the score match up?...

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » November 12, 2007, 8:50 pm

YahooTech
and I loved being able to sync new songs and playlists over the air (why can't the iPhone or the iPod Touch do this?)

I wonder why myself! That's the most useful part of being wireless! (along with wireless podcast updating)

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » November 12, 2007, 9:07 pm

Kind of funny. Threads like this make me feel so out of touch technologically.

We'll just come out and say it: The 80GB Zune trumps the iPod Classic...For the same $250 price as the 80GB iPod classic, the new Zune 80GB offers a much larger screen, FM radio, wireless player-to-player sharing, Wi-Fi syncing with your PC, and a rear panel that can be customized with some cool artwork--for free. Simply put, Apple is no longer the leader in the realm of hard drive-based players. While the Zune 80GB and the iPod classic are both outstanding devices, the Zune has more features--and it's more fun.

Here's what I think about those items:
1. Larger screen: Cool. That's nice.
2. FM radio: Don't care. Don't listen to FM radio.
3. Wireless player to player sharing: That's nice I guess. I would care if I could actually transfer music instead of 'sharing' it.
4. Wi-Fi syncing with your PC: I don't mind plugging in a cord once in awhile.
5. Rear panel that can be customized with some cool artwork: Who gives a shit?

I don't mean to denigrate this product, as I'm sure these features are useful to many people. I just chuckle at how useless the majority of selling points trumpeted by various tech products are to me (and to a significant portion of the user base).

Here are the things that are important to be in an mp3 player, in no particular order:

1. Physical size
2. Storage capacity (although this is less important since many players now have hard drives larger than the one on my computer)
3. Ease of use
4. Durability
5. Sound quality (up to a point... i use players in public, using headphones, with noise from traffic, people, etc, going on... really top-notch quality is unnecessary)

Animalor · Post by **Animalor** » November 12, 2007, 9:25 pm

You know what would make me excited about the Zune? Availability in Canada..

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » November 12, 2007, 9:30 pm

I would actually like an AM receiver. Serious! Of course, Dan Patrick no longer does sports radio.... Jim Rome can be entertaining at times though. FM kinda pointless imo, unless you have a talk show to listen to.

WTF about customized back-panel graphics? Only thought on that is they are playing towards the preteen demographic.

If the video looks better and it is not as fuckawful as working with iTunes, I may buy one.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » November 12, 2007, 9:30 pm

Sueven wrote:
1. Physical size
2. Storage capacity (although this is less important since many players now have hard drives larger than the one on my computer)
3. Ease of use
4. Durability
5. Sound quality (up to a point... i use players in public, using headphones, with noise from traffic, people, etc, going on... really top-notch quality is unnecessary)

1. Not sure on this, has to do with screen size.
2. Tie
3. Zune
4. Tie
5. Zune

Also, battery life should be important to you, format support if you like movies/tv shows, all you can eat music to fill you 80GB hard drive with easy wireless sync to your PC, no lame USB mounting issues like iPods have.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » November 12, 2007, 10:08 pm

I forgot about battery life. That one is important.

Format support I guess is important, but more for other people than me. I have an iPod and have yet to have a problem with format support. I use it for few enough functions that I imagine it's unlikely I ever will.

1. Not sure on this, has to do with screen size.
2. Tie
3. Zune
4. Tie
5. Zune

I walked into a store a month or so ago, looking to buy the best mp3 player I could find. I had no idea what I'd be getting, I just knew it'd be something.

The only thing they had were Zunes and iPods. The iPod looked to be about half as thick as the Zune. I looked at prices and storage capacities and immediately chose the iPod on this basis.

Apparently the new generation Zunes are smaller, and I imagine I was looking at the old generation, so maybe I wouldn't have made the same decision if I walked in now.

On ease of use: I've never used a Zune so can't comment. But considering how RIDICULOUSLY easy it is to use an iPod, I can't imagine that I care much if the Zune is in fact easier.

Sound quality isn't really a big deal to me, either. I've never been overly concerned with sound quality. I can tell the difference between an mp3 encoded at 128 kbps (or whatever) and one encoded at 256 kbps (or whatever) if I'm paying attention, but when I'm going about my daily business and listening to music in the background, I'm not paying attention. So what do I care? I know that other people notice these things much more easily than I, and for them, I totally understand it being an important consideration.

Anyway:

I'm happy with my decision. It was the best one for my particular circumstances.

If I went in today, I might make a different decision (if the new Zunes are comparable in size to the iPod). Still, though, I'd base my decision on picking the two of them up, looking at them both, and deciding which one I'd rather own.

That might seem like an absurdly silly decisionmaking methodology to those who actually know shit about this stuff, but the bottom line is that I'm happy with my purchase, and that's really the result Apple wants. If Microsoft wants to compete with Apple in this market (and I hope they do, because I dislike Apple and like Microsoft generally), they're going to need to figure out how to compete for ignorant consumers like myself. Because right now, Apple's got that market cornered. And the Zune can be a superior product, and you in-the-know folks can trumpet that fact to high heaven, but that, alone, will not make the Zune a successful product.

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » November 13, 2007, 6:15 am

Sueven wrote:I forgot about battery life. That one is important.

Format support I guess is important, but more for other people than me. I have an iPod and have yet to have a problem with format support. I use it for few enough functions that I imagine it's unlikely I ever will.

1. Not sure on this, has to do with screen size.
2. Tie
3. Zune
4. Tie
5. Zune
I walked into a store a month or so ago, looking to buy the best mp3 player I could find. I had no idea what I'd be getting, I just knew it'd be something.

The only thing they had were Zunes and iPods. The iPod looked to be about half as thick as the Zune. I looked at prices and storage capacities and immediately chose the iPod on this basis.

Apparently the new generation Zunes are smaller, and I imagine I was looking at the old generation, so maybe I wouldn't have made the same decision if I walked in now.

On ease of use: I've never used a Zune so can't comment. But considering how RIDICULOUSLY easy it is to use an iPod, I can't imagine that I care much if the Zune is in fact easier.

Sound quality isn't really a big deal to me, either. I've never been overly concerned with sound quality. I can tell the difference between an mp3 encoded at 128 kbps (or whatever) and one encoded at 256 kbps (or whatever) if I'm paying attention, but when I'm going about my daily business and listening to music in the background, I'm not paying attention. So what do I care? I know that other people notice these things much more easily than I, and for them, I totally understand it being an important consideration.

Anyway:

I'm happy with my decision. It was the best one for my particular circumstances.

If I went in today, I might make a different decision (if the new Zunes are comparable in size to the iPod). Still, though, I'd base my decision on picking the two of them up, looking at them both, and deciding which one I'd rather own.

That might seem like an absurdly silly decisionmaking methodology to those who actually know shit about this stuff, but the bottom line is that I'm happy with my purchase, and that's really the result Apple wants. If Microsoft wants to compete with Apple in this market (and I hope they do, because I dislike Apple and like Microsoft generally), they're going to need to figure out how to compete for ignorant consumers like myself. Because right now, Apple's got that market cornered. And the Zune can be a superior product, and you in-the-know folks can trumpet that fact to high heaven, but that, alone, will not make the Zune a successful product.

No one can make people care, especially those that have no concern for sound quality in an MP3 player. I'm glad you are enjoying your purchase, but it's a bit weird to read a post where anyone would trumpet thier indifference about something they just bought.

The masses will continue to purchase ipods, but those who know, know. The same can be said about a myriad of other products and services. At the end of the day, there is room for both average and excellent. There will always be those that know the difference.

noel · Post by **noel** » November 13, 2007, 12:02 pm

Fairweather Pure wrote:No one can make people care, especially those that have no concern for sound quality in an MP3 player. I'm glad you are enjoying your purchase, but it's a bit weird to read a post where anyone would trumpet thier indifference about something they just bought.

The masses will continue to purchase ipods, but those who know, know. The same can be said about a myriad of other products and services. At the end of the day, there is room for both average and excellent. There will always be those that know the difference.

Yeah because iPod's suck...

Get over yourself.

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » November 13, 2007, 12:53 pm

If Apple would fix the inferior quality of the iPod surfaces, I would be very happy. Breathe on the fuckers wrong and they scratch up. That aside, I love the sound quality of my 30GB video iPod. It just gets ugly quick!

Nothing about the new Zune really impresses though!

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » November 13, 2007, 12:56 pm

Canelek wrote: Nothing about the new Zune really impresses though!

It has a built in sonar for finding fish!

noel · Post by **noel** » November 13, 2007, 1:13 pm

I just love how wannabe audiophiles come around bashing ANY portable music player. Unless you're listening to your music as lossless, shut the fuck up and never bring up the audio quality ever again. Seriously shut the fuck up. They're all the same. Pick the one that you like the best for whatever reason, but there's so little difference it's no wonder at all that Sueven was expressing indifference about his purchase. It's really whatever company/software/ergonomics you like. There is no TRUE differentiator between any of them. Except the Touch. Which is made by Apple and is an iPod.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » November 13, 2007, 1:27 pm

noel wrote:I just love how wannabe audiophiles come around bashing ANY portable music player. Unless you're listening to your music as lossless, shut the fuck up and never bring up the audio quality on any of the ever again. Seriously shut the fuck up. They're all the same. Pick the one that you like the best for whatever reason, but there's so little difference it's no wonder at all that Sueven was expressing indifference about his purchase. It's really whatever company/software/ergonomics you like. There is no TRUE differentiator between any of them. Except the Touch. Which is made by Apple and is an iPod.

That's not true. I've upgraded my sound card from the integrated solution on the motherboard to various sound blaster or Diamond cards over the years and there's a big difference. Just because it's all digital but not lossless doesn't mean it sounds the same.

And the difference between 128kbps and 256 or 360kbps is easily recognized...if not, then I guess you're OK with whatever Apple provides. Of course, if you're using the crap earphones provided by Apple (and most other brands) it won't matter either.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » November 13, 2007, 1:28 pm

I ordered one of the refurbished Zune's from woot yesterday for $85. Will see what it's like when it arrives. I am back to my old Nano now, as I returned the iPod Touch last weekend.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » November 13, 2007, 1:29 pm

Winnow wrote:
noel wrote:I just love how wannabe audiophiles come around bashing ANY portable music player. Unless you're listening to your music as lossless, shut the fuck up and never bring up the audio quality on any of the ever again. Seriously shut the fuck up. They're all the same. Pick the one that you like the best for whatever reason, but there's so little difference it's no wonder at all that Sueven was expressing indifference about his purchase. It's really whatever company/software/ergonomics you like. There is no TRUE differentiator between any of them. Except the Touch. Which is made by Apple and is an iPod.

That's not true. I've upgraded my sound card from the integrated solution on the motherboard to various sound blaster or Diamond cards over the years and there's a big difference. Just because it's all digital but not lossless doesn't mean it sounds the same.

And the difference between 128kbps and 256 or 360kbps is easily recognized...if not, then I guess you're OK with whatever Apple provides. Of course, if you're using the crap earphones provided by Apple (and most other brands) it won't matter either.

How did you change the sound card in your portable music player?

noel · Post by **noel** » November 13, 2007, 1:35 pm

Actually, Winnow that wasn't a reply to you at all. I was just pissed at Fairweather's stupid post.

Let me rephrase. If you're concerned about true audio quality on a portable you're an idiot. There's not one out there that's going to get close to the sound quality of a nice rack system.

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » November 13, 2007, 1:35 pm

noel wrote:I just love how wannabe audiophiles come around bashing ANY portable music player. Unless you're listening to your music as lossless, shut the fuck up and never bring up the audio quality on any of the ever again. Seriously shut the fuck up. They're all the same. Pick the one that you like the best for whatever reason, but there's so little difference it's no wonder at all that Sueven was expressing indifference about his purchase. It's really whatever company/software/ergonomics you like. There is no TRUE differentiator between any of them. Except the Touch. Which is made by Apple and is an iPod.

Spoken like someone who thinks they know, but obviously dosen't. It's like me telling you that all bicycles are the same because they have 2 wheels and if you disagree then your nothing but a rabid bikeophile or whatever they call bike people besides faggots.

noel · Post by **noel** » November 13, 2007, 1:39 pm

Fairweather Pure wrote:
noel wrote:I just love how wannabe audiophiles come around bashing ANY portable music player. Unless you're listening to your music as lossless, shut the fuck up and never bring up the audio quality on any of the ever again. Seriously shut the fuck up. They're all the same. Pick the one that you like the best for whatever reason, but there's so little difference it's no wonder at all that Sueven was expressing indifference about his purchase. It's really whatever company/software/ergonomics you like. There is no TRUE differentiator between any of them. Except the Touch. Which is made by Apple and is an iPod.
Spoken like someone who thinks they know, but obviously dosen't. It's like me telling you that all bicycles are the same because they have 2 wheels and if you disagree then your nothing but a rabid bikeophile or whatever they call bike people besides faggots.

Educate us. Show me a portable digital audio player that's close to a home system. Show me a portable digital audio player that is SIGNIFICANTLY better that another in ANY way.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » November 13, 2007, 1:44 pm

Boogahz wrote:
How did you change the sound card in your portable music player?

What you do, and this may be too difficult for most, is replace the entire unit with another brand that has a better sound processor.

I listen to podcasts on my iPod so it's not crucial for me but when I put on the Sennheiser headphones while at home and listen to music, it matters and in that situation, Creative Zen > iPod.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » November 13, 2007, 1:48 pm

The other thing was third-party product support. I really wanted something I could use while exercising. As such, I needed an armband which I could use to securely strap the product to myself. I also might eventually want other products, like speakers, car mounts, or whatever. The store contained an entire freaking aisle of such items designed for iPods. It contained maybe 2 or 3 such items, total, for Zunes. I'm sure I could find that shit for the Zune, on the internet or whatever, but that would be a pain in my ass. The store had no product, designed to fit a Zune, which would allow me to strap the thing to myself while I exercise.

iPod's are so ubiquitous that I actually owned iPod speakers before I owned an iPod. I went on a job interview and the employer gave me a set of iPod speakers as a thank-you gift. If I have an iPod, such things are useful to me. If I have a Zune (or Creative Zen or whatever), they are not. The $30 I gained by getting speakers for free instead of paying for them is well worth sacrificing wireless syncing or whatever the hell else I'm apparently missing out on.

Basically, the Zune may very well be a better technology product in various ways that are totally irrelevant to myself and a majority of consumers. The iPod is significantly more convenient to own. It's an easy decision for me.

And yes, I don't plan on carrying a pair of awesome, high-quality headphones with me. If I'm listening to my iPod, I'm doing one of the following things:

1. Exercising. Meaning I'm paying attention to my exercise and not paying much attention to my music. Additionally, there is other noise going on around me-- weights dropping on floors, treadmills running, traffic going by if I'm outside, etc. I'm going to want the smallest possible headphones (earbuds) so they'll stay out of my way as much as possible.
2. On the subway. Subways are loud.
3. Walking through the city. Cities are loud.
4. Studying/working, in which case I'm paying attention to what I'm doing, and the music is background.

I suppose I could get a really badass pair of headphones which silence all outside noises. Unfortunately, in the real world, this is not a good idea. I generally need to be able to hear what's going on around me, for my own safety and for my own entertainment.

Seriously, what do you guys do that you have all this time when you can sit around in a silent environment, with your Zune and your top-notch headphones, and just sit back and devote your attention to music? Do you think that most people use their media players this way?

Again, I'm not saying that the iPod is better, or even equal on the dimensions that you're interested in. For people who do care about sound quality, wireless syncing, etc, I'm happy to believe that the Zune is better. I'm also happy to believe that there are people for whom these are very important considerations.

I'm just saying that, for myself, and for many other consumers, issues like "how easy is it to walk into a store and buy third-party products?" and "will I be able to plug this thingy into adapters in my friends cars?" are far more important.

This doesn't mean that YOU should value the iPod more highly than the Zune, but it is a real explanation for why the iPod is more successful than the Zune which is NOT 'morons like Apple because it's trendy.'

On the other hand, I don't have separate media players which I use to listen to podcasts and music. That sound totally ludicrous to me (although it's totally legitimate for you). I think that it probably also sounds ludicrous to most consumers.

My whole point is this: People like Winnow (not to single out Winnow, because there are plenty of others like him) are not representative of the consumer market for portable media players.

Truant · Post by **Truant** » November 13, 2007, 2:07 pm

Fairweather Pure wrote:
noel wrote:I just love how wannabe audiophiles come around bashing ANY portable music player. Unless you're listening to your music as lossless, shut the fuck up and never bring up the audio quality on any of the ever again. Seriously shut the fuck up. They're all the same. Pick the one that you like the best for whatever reason, but there's so little difference it's no wonder at all that Sueven was expressing indifference about his purchase. It's really whatever company/software/ergonomics you like. There is no TRUE differentiator between any of them. Except the Touch. Which is made by Apple and is an iPod.
Spoken like someone who thinks they know, but obviously dosen't. It's like me telling you that all bicycles are the same because they have 2 wheels and if you disagree then your nothing but a rabid bikeophile or whatever they call bike people besides faggots.

Man anyone who carries a zune is obviously a caveman who cares nothing about sound quality. I carry around my record player for the best, purest sound all the time. I can only listen to the highest quality sound or my superior ears will be so disappointed that they will revolt and put a bullet in my brain. Anyone who doesn't listen to vinyl through tube amplifiers on sound isolating studio monitor headphones is a sheep!