So... Does anyone remember the Zune?
What's a Zune?
... And that's all I have to say about that.
So... Does anyone remember the Zune?
What's a Zune?
... And that's all I have to say about that.
Zune> iPod, unfortunately consumers are like a school of fish, they just follow the leader. I actually think that the Microsoft Surface looks like a true contender. MicroSoft will be able to forgo their usual licensing fee for the OS, cuz it's them releasing it, so they'll be able to undercut guys like HP, Dell & Asus with price.
I'm gonna go ahead and guess that you never actually used a Zune.
My wife has yet to throw hers on the scrapheap where it belongs, but what an utterly retarded excuse for an MP3 player.
On an iPod you just flip through a few record covers, and you're listening to what you want to listen to. On a Zune you get the option between one kind of idiotic list, another kind of idiotic list, or a third kind of idiotic list.
Microsofts developers design stuff around their cocks. As much as I despise Apple, at least they design their stuff to be used with ease.
I think it's impressive that Apple managed to make a program as horrible as iTunes to use with the iPod, but I think it's twice as impressive that Microsoft managed to make one that was at least every bit as bad.
Both were actually poor choice as MP3 players, the Zune had the advantage with audio quality but it was never spectacular. Both using proprietary services for transferring shit is also a pain in the back but even still, the Zune is better. The only good thing about the classic iPod is how much storage the more expensive models have.
A device that makes organizing and selecting music a chore deserves to die.
High definition audio might matter if you're sitting in a recliner at home, or wearing humongous muffs around town, but for two devices that most are going to be using with a pair of average joe earplugs, it's a wasted expense.
I don't see the point in spending a lot on fidelity for a mobile device. It's not exactly useful at the gym, or in a train, or in a car, or walking down a crowded street, or sitting at a cafe, or a windswept meadow.
Completely silent post-apocalyptic wasteland, yes. At home, yes.
But if you're just going to be listening to music at home, you're far better off with a computer and some proper monitors.
Don't care about the Zune. iirc, MS never even released it outside of the US, anyway. They can't have had high hopes for it, themselves.
Anyway, Surface is basically just an MS branded ultrabook (ultratab?) with no built in keyboard.
Which makes it a PC.
Which means that 'it's sales' dwarf iPad sales already.
TBH I don't like Windows 8 all that much and we all know price tags on a Microsoft product is like blood money. Considering the economy today and how there are different and useful choices other than iPad on the market with different array of features MS Surface better weigh in cheap or don't bother coming at all.
People who buy these devices doesn't need huge PC-like needs, they have basics needs on the go, needs that devices like iPad or Galaxy Tab already dominantly address. I don't like Apple even as a brand but iPad is great. So an iPad killer, I doubt it, no I don't even doubt it, it wont happen. It can serve as another Luxury tech item on geeks and MS Whores table but I don't believe it'll change the face of the market. It might dominate the Netbook market tho.
I actually weighed both the Zune HD and iPod Touch up, the only deciding factor between them for me was that the iPod was cheaper for more memory (£200 for 32gb whereas Zune was £250 for 16gb), so the choice was a no-brainer from that.
Not too sure on the tablet though.
"SCRATCH THE SURFACE...DONT WASTE MY TIME"
LYRICS:SICK OF IT ALL
- Posted on iPad 2
Buy an Android tablet & shove Windows 8 onto it. Wonder if MS would actually be willing to sell Windows RT licenses to Android tablet users who meet the criteria.
Android, the Linux of smartphones. As good as the free software by indian enthusiasts.
Let me just undo that /thread for you. Yeah, there we go.
See, Android is nice for a phone but it just doesn't translate well to tablet. Its just too much of a Linuxesque 'tinkerers toy' to be mainstream.
Where I work we have been crying out for a full-on windows tablet. Like most internal IT departments we develop intranet apps in .net languages but spend an inordinate amount of time taking docs from iPads and various phones and converting/uploading to our systems.
To develop a portable windows app with in-office syncing would be trivial and save vast amounts of time.
Its going to sell, that's for sure, but it could be mainly to business.
I don't see it 'killing' iPad, but the market for it is ready and waiting.
@Gwyn If you're talking about ethics, then Apple and Microsoft are pretty much two peas in a pod.
When it comes to hardware like this, they're probably going to be using the very same factories. Who makes the 360 and the iPad? Foxconn does.
In terms of keeping your hands clean it's a lose/lose. I don't like either company.
I do like Google, and I do like Samsung, but then I don't like their OS and I don't like their phones :p
Where exactly did the idea of Samsung and Google not manufacturing theirs at Foxconn come from?
It might be true with Google.. Actually I would be interested in knowing where they make theirs.
I didn't say they weren't. I wouldn't be surprised, and that's not why I like them.
I like Google because they're progressive and adaptive, and I like Samsung because they genuinely sell their stuff on quality instead of just an expensive brand.
Generally, mobile phones are almost always dirty. Some of the metals are mined by mining companies using "military contractors" to take mines in African conflict zones, and the rest is owned by governments who don't have any intention of using it for the benefit of the public, and often use it to buy weapons so they can keep those conflicts running.
Recently China has moved in and are apparently trying to cap a huge stake in African resources, and I'm pretty sure they can afford to pay for some of those resources with guns.
Oh I thought you were saying how Apple 're the only one making theirs at Foxconn..
That's precisely the reason why I don't like Google though: take ideas and concepts of others, adapt to the lowest common denominator. No wonder they manage to sell comparably when most of those sales are mid and low tier phones.
I've had less problems with my 2 iPhones (Mine and my dad's) and our 2 iPads than my sister has had with her Android.
So yeah, I'll pay the extra price.
Progress has always been based on an accumulation of ideas. Apple weren't the first to think of an iPad or an iPhone or an iPod, they just did it better than most of the guys who came before.
I think most major tech companies make their stuff at Foxconn, that's why I pulled out the 360 and the iPad. Even companies who are mortal rivals do it.
When it comes to picking what to use, I just go with what's comfortable. With Google I love the search engine, the e-mail and the browser, with Samsung I love the sharp image and the ease of use, and with Apple I like the apps and the ease of use.
The third world problem in all of that, is that you may prefer stuff that's made by people you don't like, or don't agree with. I play plenty of Activision and EA games, but I don't like either of the two as a business. I fucking hate iTunes, but I'm quite satisfied with my ancient iPod Nano.
I also have an ancient Sony Ericsson phone, and an Xbox, so I think I can rightly call myself a polytheist.
The man behind the company said himself that Good Artists Copy, Great Artists Steal. There's no point in trying to reinvent the wheel every time you design a car, it's a freaking circle! So trying to play some ethics games when they're all in fact faceless blotches of evil is just pathetic & tiresome. Also, there was little to nothing new about the iPod, iPhone & iPad, what Apple does & does well, is make things popular, they've got an unmatched cult following from egotists who all look down upon the common Windows man, thinking that they're somehow superior- don't tell me I'm making up bs, I know a lot of Mac users who won't touch anything else because it's somehow 'below' their standards.
Using that logic you can describe anything as 'nothing new'.
As I said before, in regards to innovations, in all fairness you could make a list, from Mac GUI becoming the defacto standard for all PCs even though earlier workstations used a similar concept but those were that, workstations, numerous OS features like Expose and dock, to Plug & Play, Quicktime, 64 bit desktops, Firewire, to personal digital assistant (which was the ancient predecessor to even today’s tablets and smartphones/iPods), unless you count the early 80s Psion as such but then every single thing in existence is based on something from before, to iTunes to advancing the industry in general e.g. by acquiring NEXT.
I think people who have no idea all iMacs/Minis are notebooks inside and hate Apple are more sad than elitist OSX users.. at least the latter have a point.
I dislike Apple because of its culture, Steve Jobs, their 'walled garden'(I hate that term but it describes Apple better than anything else) approach & the fact that their products cost so much more per specs than just about anyone else, even Sony. My biggest problem with them today is they way they approach litigation.
You could argue quality> quantity or whatever, fact is that goes down to perspective, not false facts or bias statistics. If you like Apple, I won't judge, I just wish that they'd return the favour.
Also to note, my logic was that nothing new comes entirely out out of nowhere, it's already based on another idea & improved upon. What Apple has always been good at doing is improving it to the point that it becomes mainstream, trust me, if Apple weren't there, someone else will always be there to fill the void. I'm not denying that Apple hasn't shaped technology to date, they've been pioneers in getting many forms of computers up to a point acceptable by the general population.
Obv not quite, since if not for them we would've had a decade of even more lazily and poorly made Windows (if any..), and even more years of Java and Symbian with taco shaped N-Gages and whatnot...
A real problem today is widereaching patents being filed left and right by these corporations. It's like the next step in giving corporations ownership of just about anything.
If you had been able to get away with so many general patents back in the 80's, then the only PCs on the market would be an Apple or an Apple.
That's going to slow down progress considerably. Every time someone wants to use something contemporary as a platform for the next big thing, they're going to be hit by a tidalwave of lawsuits and legal departments.
It's already happening. Apple got a recall issued for Samsung phones, simply because they used the "slide to unlock" mechanic. How is that mechanic essential to Apples business?
It simply could've never happened 10 years ago, but it's becoming standard practice now. Your portfolio of patents is no longer meant to protect your business, but meant to hurt that of others.
I have no idea how that slide to unlock thing passed. A picture of a locking bolt should have had it laughed out of court.
@DSB, that's exactly one of my points, sure they're all doing it now but remember the times when a company only asked for their fair share & not just total removal of a product over a non-essential feature?
You must log in to post.
© videogaming247 Ltd.