Cause it happened this morning, and crickets on this thread.
I was at first excited for the Zune, but Microsoft completely dropped what little momentum it gained when it first launched by not doing a thing until today. They should have been constantly upgrading and improving the experience and introducing new functionality. They could have beat Apple to the wifi music store punch by months if they had actually moved.
As it is, the new Zunes just play catchup with the new iPods. And since all three models match the corresponding iPods in price, there’s pretty much no reason to get one.
I’m not in the market for a new music player, but when I am I will almost certainly get a Zune.
Here are the updates:
* Wireless syncing with a PC? Check.
* Software now supports podcasts? Check.
* Move TV shows automatically to the Zune? Check.
* Share whole playlists, albums, and podcasts (with no more silly time restrictions)? Check.
* Bring DRM-free music to the Zune Store? Check.
All of these updates are being applied to the original Zune via firmware updates also.
Ars has a good article up that contains some tidbits from Microsoft that make my head hurt.
Well, not just the products do the talking. Bill Gates has also done some talking.
Yesterday, he told the New York Times that the first Zune had been “pulled together in six months,” that it was “just so-so on the software side,” and that “a year from now we’ll do even better.” This is hardly the sort of no-holds-barred defense of one’s shiny new product that most CEOs would give.
This explains why the client software sucked so, so badly. The problem now is that they didn’t do a modest retail launch with the ho-hum Zune 1.0, they firehosed the channel. Which means they are going to have to keep doing so and hope that people take notice this time.
I’m really curious how much money MS has lost on Zune at this point.
All I can think of are FM, wireless syncing, and the wireless store. Wireless share is bogus, given the drm is puts on every file, including straight mp3s.
They both play video, they both play similar kinds of music, and for the nanos/flash zunes, they both have the same price points.
Now, if you have windows, and don’t have any music from iTunes, I could easily see choosing the Zune. It’s an mp3/movie player, and it has a radio. I don’t see it as overwhelmingly better, but then again, those feature sets aren’t appealing to me.
No argument there! I think in their rush to get to market at all, they went with a modified and rebranded Media Player 11 (with a store that looks way too much like the Urge store). I think a lot of time was spent developing desktop software that was more truly their own. But I want to get my hands on it to see how different it really is. Still, they needed to be more agile over the first year.
They could have beat Apple to the wifi music store punch by months if they had actually moved.
Let’s not forget that Apple only has the WiFi music store on $300+ flash player models with the big touch screen. That’s telling: it’s murder to cram that whole store into the screen on regular iPods and Nanos (not to mention that those models don’t even have WiFi at all). And by sales volume, the Nano and $249 Classic make up like 90% of all iPod sales, maybe more. Most iPods don’t have the wifi music store.
They did beat them to WiFi syncing, though. And sharing (PC-to-PC and player-to-player). And the sharing doesn’t even TOTALLY suck anymore now that they’re axing the 3-day limit.
As it is, the new Zunes just play catchup with the new iPods. And since all three models match the corresponding iPods in price, there’s pretty much no reason to get one.
There are plenty of reasons. They might not appeal to you as an individual, and that’s fine. But my iPod is gonna keep collecting dust until Apple gets a subscription music service going.
I don’t know how anyone can actually argue for a defacto monopoly in the portable music player business. Especially from a company as closed and controlling as Apple (see: clamping down on the iPhone, not licensing out their DRM, not allowing people to build their own Macs, and so on and so forth).
(note that my post shouldn’t be read as an endorsement of the new Zunes or desktop software. I wanna use 'em first. On the surface, they appear to have addressed many of my issues with the first-gen, though.)
I’ve been waiting for the new models, because I want the cheap flash model with the subscription option for the Zune Marketplace. I’ll pick up the $150 model as soon as I can, unless my wife makes me wait for it as a Christmas present.
As the long as the near monopoly is based on building a better player, I’ll argue for it. If I was Microsoft stockholder, I’d really argue for it. Unlike the Xbox, I don’t see how the Zune ever makes money or even fits into the larger Microsoft business plan.
Does the iPod make money? (Note: Yes.) Then whyever would you think the Zune couldn’t?
And it does fit into their larger strategery in the sense that managing one’s media is the main purpose of a modern home computer. If you use iTunes an an iPod, and buy Apple-DRMed shit, you now can’t really use a lot of Microsoft’s products, plus you can switch to a Mac easily.
If you use the Zune, now you can use it in conjunction with Media Center and buy a Media Center Extender, and store all your music on a Home Server in your basement where it’ll still sync up wirelessly to your Zune, and it’s awfully hard to switch to a Mac.
You could argue – and I would – that Microsoft would have been better served by continuing to be a platform company, licensing its PlaysForSure protocols and DRM, and Portable Media Center OS; but that was clearly not working as it was, and while I think it would have been successful eventually (look at how many MP3 players are still PlaysForSure compatible long after MS ditched the program), I can understand why Microsoft got impatient and decided they needed to be in the business end-to-end if they wanted to beat Apple.
Because Microsoft has no expertise in consumer electronics. Sure, you say, the first Zunes sucked but they’re getting better. So what, I say, the iPods are getting better too and have a several year head start.
I don’t see how Microsoft ever closes the gap.
And it does fit into their larger strategery in the sense that managing one’s media is the main purpose of a modern home computer. If you use iTunes an an iPod, and buy Apple-DRMed shit, you now can’t really use a lot of Microsoft’s products, plus you can switch to a Mac easily.
If you use the Zune, now you can use it in conjunction with Media Center and buy a Media Center Extender, and store all your music on a Home Server in your basement where it’ll still sync up wirelessly to your Zune, and it’s awfully hard to switch to a Mac.
OK, so the whole reason to spend millions to develop the Zune is to prevent people from switching from the PC to a Mac? Crazy talk. Music players do not drive computer sales. If they did, Apple would have seen a bump from the iPod.
Great, support divx/xvid, remove additional DRM from shared music, add a good web browser, include a bunch of internet-enabled widgets, release a development SDK, include apps like a calendar with outlook calendar synchronization, ebook readers, etc, and finally undercut apple by at least $50 and maybe people will buy them. But we all know that won’t happen.
Apple did see a major bump in Mac sales from the ipod. In fact, the “halo effect” was coined to describe that very phenomenon.
support divx/xvid, remove additional DRM from shared music
I’ll vote for these two.
Anyways, I’m all for more players in the music scene. I especially liked that the Zune introduced one more stupid DRM format. This means the only way to sell online to people that will cover everyone is something like Amazon’s MP3 store.
So, here’s to Apple! May they enjoy a healthy marketshare, and continue to put the screws to the record companies. Here’s to Microsoft! May they introduce a 1000 incompatible DRM schemes. Hasten the rise of files that fill play on my ipod, linux laptop, xbox 360, ps3, wii, and anything else I care to want to play files on.
Tangentially related anecdote: I’m going to buy a Mac tomorrow. Have the money in my pocket. I’ve used PCs and Microsoft software since the 8086. Why? I love my iPhone to death, which I purchased because I loved my (gen2) iPod to death.
But how can you say the new Zunes, together with the new Zune software, is not a “better player?” Have you used 'em yet? I know I haven’t. As someone who has used the current Zune and Zune software extensively, Microsoft is coming closer to making a “better player” than the iPod than anyone else. And on the face of it, the new stuff seems quite competitive.
With Media Center, the Xbox Video Marketplace, and the Zune Marketplace, you don’t see how Zune fits into MS’s long-term business plan? Really? You can’t see how the company would want to leverage it’s burgeoning digital media enterprises into a vertically-controlled portable player market? How there could be grand future synergy between the Xbox stuff and the portable player? Hell, Zune Tags (your Zune ID used to log into the software) are identical to your Gamertag. I mean, you share the same pool of Microsoft Points even, and buy songs for 79 points a piece if you don’t have the subscription.
Because Microsoft has no expertise in consumer electronics. Sure, you say, the first Zunes sucked but they’re getting better. So what, I say, the iPods are getting better too and have a several year head start.
Did Apple have any CE experience before iPod? I don’t think Newton counts. Xbox and Xbox 360 are MS’s CE experience. And though you’ll never get me to claim the 360 has anything other than an abysmal hardware failure rate so far, it sure does seem to be pretty darn popular. And all MS’s competitors in that market had a “several year head start” too. But I’ll quickly name four ways in which iPods are clearly not “getting better” enough:
No subscription music plan.
WiFi only on $300+ models with low storage, not on the vastly more popular flash and inexpensive HDD based units.
No WiFi sync on the units that do have WiFi.
Even worse video format support than Zune (no WMV, DVR-MS, MPEG2, divx/xvid)
Removing DRM from shared music is just never going to happen. NEVER. You might as well say “hey Microsoft, just freely distribute all songs with no payment.” The labels will never go for it, ever ever. For what it’s worth, technically it doesn’t actually “add” DRM to anything. The file itself isn’t changed. The Zune just takes all music it gets transferred to it via the sharing function and puts it in what amounts to an encrypted folder, and says “don’t play anything in that folder more than 3 times.” Not that it makes a difference to the end user experience. Every product that supports legally purchased music from major record labels is going to either have no sharing, or some sort of DRM-like limitation like this. It’s not like MS has the power to flip the switch there.
I’ll second support for divx/xvid. Hell, I don’t even care if the device itself doesn’t support it. Just let the desktop software see my divx/xvid videos and transcode 'em for the device. I think all the rest of that stuff you suggested is extraneous stuff that the mass market doesn’t care about. A web browser is wholly impractical on either Zune or any iPod other than the Touch (you know, the crippled iPhone). You need what amounts to a mouse-like interface to do the web right. Surfing the web on a small screen with a D-pad, scroll-wheel, “squircle”, or any other simple direction-and-button interface is an exercise in frustration and disappointment. The same goes for making a WiFi version of the music store, for that matter. Notice how the only iPods with WiFi, and the store, is the one where you can pull up a keyboard and enter text relatively quickly? There’s a very good reason for that.
Looks like they’ve finally incorporated podcast support. Since I’ve got an iPhone, there’s no Zune in my future, but at least its now within the realm of consideration.
