iPod MS please give up on the Zune

[weg]

pointless rant, follow OP's logic, there should only be monopoly in this world. and competition is absolutely useless.

Is that right? follow that logic, there wouldn't be OSX at all. go back and enjoy OS classic forever.

Well, there will always be this part of the Apple community that worships Steve Jobs as a god and believes that everybody who doesn't buy Apple products exclusively is an utter idiot. I've learned to ignore them...

Touch and iPhone, when they decide to add it...

The question was which iPod supports WLAN sync, not whether Apple would be able to add that feature "when they decide to add it". According to your argumentation, somebody who needs a tablet PC should not buy a Windows tablet, because Apple could always start building a tablet, when they decide to do so.

 

[princealfie]

WLAN sync would suck that battery down too quickly without the wire.

 

[mikes63737]

I think that the new Zunes look kind of nice. I don't like that green, though.

The first Zune was a piece of ----. I think that the new ones might make Apple realize that they iPod isn't as good as it could be.

It'll be interesting to see what the zPhone is like...

 

[mosx]

I really don't understand the Zune hate. It's quite illogical. Sure, MS kind of botched the original Zune launch.

But the new Zunes are very nice. WiFi syncing.. why doesn't my iPhone have that? The iPhone syncs slow enough as it is over USB 2.0, so speed isn't an excuse for Apple. I can put my entire library of music on my 80GB iPod (5.5G) in about the same amount of time it takes to fill up an iPhone. So its already ridiculously slow. Why not add wi-fi syncing?

Aside from the other features already discussed, the Zune has one major feature that the iPod + iTunes combo lacks...

A subscription music service. Now Apple, and the fanboys, always say "people want to own their music". But you know what? For a lot of people like me who are music lovers, the subscription services offer a much better overall value. With the amount of money I've spent at iTunes over the last 3.5 years, I could have paid for many years worth of a subscription service. I've mostly purchased singles from iTunes. When I liked what I heard enough to get the full album, I purchased the CD. No sensible person is going to buy a full album from iTunes, especially not when the much higher quality DRM free CD costs about the same, or maybe $2-$3 more. Whats even better about the subscription services is that when they all upgraded from 128kbps files to 192 or higher, they did it for free. Even people who had purchased music on Napster found that Napster upgraded all of their purchased songs to the higher bitrate for free. Apple charged 30 cents per song, and it still doesn't sound as good as a CD. I can't even use any of the games I bought for my 5.5G iPod on my 3G iPod nano simply because Apple wants me to purchase them AGAIN.

Now that I think about it, buying all of that music on iTunes was a waste. Why did I spend so much money on 128kbps DRM'ed files? If I wanted to waste money on DRM'ed files, I could have been paying for a subscription service where I could download all the music I wanted.

And the whole firmware update for previous Zune owners. People claim Apple has done the same. When? Adding the ability to read notes to the older iPods isn't exactly what I would call a worthy update. Adding podcast support? Again, not really noteworthy.

Look at what Microsoft did for the Zune. The original Zune received the update with the entirely new UI, new features (wi-fi syncing), etc.

Let's see Apple give us 5G and 5.5G iPod owners the new UI. Or at least let those of us who bought iPod games use them on our new iPods.

As it stands right now, I'm not buying any more iPods. How can I buy iPods or even things from iTunes with the way Apple has acted recently? I have absolutely no guarantee that what I buy now will continue to work with future revisions, like the games. When my 5.5G iPod goes bad, I'll either be buying a Zune or giving a 3rd party repair company my money.

That brings me to another point.. Apple won't let those of us who bought iPod games use them on the new iPods without purchasing them AGAIN. People are suspecting that Apple will begin selling applications for the iPhone and iPod touch after the official SDK is released. How can people willingly buy those without any kind of guarantee that you will be able to use those applications on future iPod touch or iPhone revisions?

How can those of us who own a current iPhone know that we will even get any kind of updates or anything once a newer version of the iPhone is released? Apple has basically dropped support for previous hardware entirely once new hardware is out, just look at the iPods. How do we know they won't do the same when the next iPhone is released?

 

[JNB]

Subscriptions benefit one party only - the subscribee. Why do you think that cell service, cable/satellite, and the like are so profitable? Purchasing (to fully own) benefit the purchaser, not the seller.

My own company uses the subscription model for our annual licensing. Our Board loves it, our investors love it, Wall Street loves it. Who doesn't? The folks paying that annual license.

Subscription is just indefinite-term rental. It doesn't even offer the price protection of a lease. Nothing more, and certainly nothing better. Complete consumer bend-over, that's all.

Unless one is so completely short-attention-span as to not listen (or watch) anything beyond a few weeks or months, then it's a lose-lose proposition from the get-go.

 

[Digital Skunk]

I'm just going by all the reviews I've read for it thus far. It is, apparently, a more appealing device overall.

By the way, you never owned up for being wrong about that iMac keyboard.

I did, I think the iMac Thread got bombarded with new posts about the computer though... or there was more than one place that was talking about it. I was eating a lot of crow then.

My girlfriend has an iMac with that keyboard, and I am still fumbling around it trying to find the eject key, the audio keys, and the Expose keys. I still think Apple should have kept those keys the same, and the wireless keyboard should have still had the number pad, but that is a dead discussion.

As for the Zune... I can only speak from personal opinion although I do weigh general consensus on tech devices now and then. I like that MS is doing it differently and if they were to make it work with iTunes and Macs it would be a nice move on MS's part. But until that happens, and it works as smoothly as the iTunes, iLife, iPod combo the Zune will still be on par.

I want to see if that new backing on the Zune is as scratch prone as the iPod's. If not, that and the artwork will make it two things i want on the next iPod.

WLAN sync would suck that battery down too quickly without the wire.

Exactly. I would never want to sync my Zune over WLAN ever. I can't see how that is something the world is asking for in a music player, just plug it up then unplug it.

 

[nsbio]

I would look at an iPod alternative, such as Zune or Creative player, if they had Mac compatibility. I want to sync my player wirelessly and once in a while I want to be able to listen to FM radio, which none of the Apple's offerings do. iPod Classic is a good player but is no longer much ahead of competition. Unfortunately, Mac users have no chance to be able to chose the competition.

In my case, I own a 2nd gen Nano that freezes on me if I wait more than an hour or so before turning it on after syncing with the computer. I would give Zune a try if I could, since I do not care which label my music player has as long as it works.

 

[Digital Skunk]

I would look at an iPod alternative, such as Zune or Creative player, if they had Mac compatibility. I want to sync my player wirelessly and once in a while I want to be able to listen to FM radio, which none of the Apple's offerings do. iPod Classic is a good player but is no longer much ahead of competition. Unfortunately, Mac users have no chance to be able to chose the competition.

In my case, I own a 2nd gen Nano that freezes on me if I wait more than an hour or so before turning it on after syncing with the computer. I would give Zune a try if I could, since I do not care which label my music player has as long as it works.

I would buy a Zune phone if it works on the Sprint or Verizon network, and syncs with my many AAC files on my Mac. If Microsoft debuted a Zune Phone, that was just like the iPhone except on the Sprint network, it could have less storage and i would still buy one.

 

[mosx]

Subscriptions and purchases are beneficial in different ways.

You generally buy the music you love. As I said, I have mostly bought singles from iTunes and those that I liked the most ended up being CD purchases.

You buy what you "love" and you keep it to have "forever".

Does buying music online make sense? Not really. As I said before, I've purchased tons of music at iTunes. Several hundred songs. Now that I think about it, that was a complete waste of money. All but a few songs are DRM'ed. The sound quality isn't anywhere near as good as what you get with a CD or other online services. My ability to play them is also dependent on Apple keeping the iTunes authorization servers up. Let's look ahead 20 years from now. Let's say that Apple just happens to go under and I can no longer authorize my computer. Guess what? All those hundreds of songs are gone. Yet all of my CDs will still work. Unless I burned all of those songs to CD. But then I'd have to fish out those CD-Rs, hope they still work, and rip them again and suffer with further decreased sound quality due to a generation loss by using lossy compression on the song twice.

Then theres the fact that you're at the mercy of Apple or whoever thanks to DRM. Let's say Apple wants you to pay for some ability to continue to play your songs on new iPods or iTunes. Much the same way they're trying to ripoff/force people to repurchase their iPod games for their new iPods.

We already know that Apple is charging people to upgrade the sound quality of their songs (when all of the WMA services did it for free), how do we know they won't extend that kind of attitude to other areas?

The way Apple has dropped compatibility in the past, and now with the iPod games, how do we know that they won't require some kind of payment in the future to be able to continue to use our purchased iTunes content?

Buying is generally better than long term rentals. But when you're at the mercy of DRM, buying doesn't make sense. Because theres no knowing if your purchase will be rendered unusable and payment required to continue using it. Apple has done it before and theres no way of knowing if they'll do it again.

This is where music subscription services make sense. Yes you are renting, but you know what you're getting immediately. You're not getting into it think that the company is good, only to be ripped off later (iPod games, other issues). You know from the start that you are renting your music and it will disappear if you stop paying. You get as much music as you can handle for a small fee, you can sync it to a compatible player, and take it everywhere. If they upgrade the sound quality, you get that for free. If you want to "buy it" you get a discount, being a paid subscriber and all.

Considering how Apple has been treating customers lately........... with the issue with ringtones on the iPhone, locking out all but certified video accessories on the new iPods and refusing to release firmware that allows you to use what you want, making customers buy their iPod games again, build quality issues (like the tilted screen on the nano, bad screen on the iPod touch, all around build quality issues with the MacBooks and MBPs), renting music from Microsoft makes more sense than buying music from Apple and not knowing if they're going to find a way to charge you again for it in the future in some way or another.

I'm not the only one who feels this way either: http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/articles/comments/11475/

I'm definitely close to finding buyers for all of my Apple products (iPhone included). I'd rather have a Zune and my HP notebook and know what I'm getting into rather than my MacBook and iPods and not know what Apple will do in the future to try to get more money out of me.

 

[gloss]

I did, I think the iMac Thread got bombarded with new posts about the computer though... or there was more than one place that was talking about it. I was eating a lot of crow then.

Was just teasing. Sorry if I sounded like a prick.

As for the Zune... I can only speak from personal opinion although I do weigh general consensus on tech devices now and then. I like that MS is doing it differently and if they were to make it work with iTunes and Macs it would be a nice move on MS's part. But until that happens, and it works as smoothly as the iTunes, iLife, iPod combo the Zune will still be on par.

I agree. While the new interface and software are a very great improvement over the original (which, frankly, sucked profoundly), no Mac support means it will never be my primary player. It'll be my 'I don't want to get mugged on the Metro' player.

 

[Digital Skunk]

Was just teasing. Sorry if I sounded like a prick.



I agree. While the new interface and software are a very great improvement over the original (which, frankly, sucked profoundly), no Mac support means it will never be my primary player. It'll be my 'I don't want to get mugged on the Metro' player.

No no ... not a prick at all seriously. I laughed my butt off when the keyboard was introduced with the iMac and thought, "Those guys and gals at MacRumors are going to have my head now!" I think I was the loudest opposition to that keyboard, and the only person to stay up until it was released.

I have one of those "Hey he's gotta gun... take my MP3 player please" devices... the shuffle. I may upgrade to a Nano but right now I am in the county where crime exists in cow tipping and deflating the tractor's tires.

I said to nsbio a few posts back that I'd buy a Zune Phone if it worked with the Mac, and I could copy my AAC files onto it, or sync it through the Zune Store for Mac if it worked on the Sprint network, and was just as much a worthy competitor to the iPhone, as the Zune is to the Classic. In fact, I am probably going to keep my ears open for a Zune Phone since Apple has a stupid contract with AT&T on that bloody iPhone.

I hope this thread doesn't become the Purchase vs Subscription thing again. I think we have already decided that both are a good model if done correctly. Right now Apple charges a reasonable price (whether you think it's reasonable or not is your own opinion, but everyone is following after Apple and Apple's iTS is still in good business so it works) for their songs even with DRM.

If you want to strip the DRM, buy a re-writable CD and burn the songs to it, then copy them back in, or spend the extra $.30 to get the DRM free songs, the whole situation has been blown way out of proportion.

Now... subscription services can work if they follow a lot of the current businesses models, like eMusic, which sucks because it only has the underground/indie artists which usually include some suburban kid using a MacBook and garage band to scream into his microphone and sing about how tough his spoiled life is. The good thing about eMusic is that you could download anything. Apple could get their hands on it and turn it around, especially with video and movies.

 

[Evangelion]

Touch and iPhone, when they decide to add it...

I'll take that as an "no iPod offers that feature at the moment". Thanks for playing! No, "iPhone and touch MIGHT offer that feature in the future!" does not cut it. Vaporware does not cut it.