hmm maybe right on this off the look in that picture, but get hold of the real thing mate.. having sold alot of the standard Creative Zen MP3 players and the build/feel/quality of these are so SO much better then ANYTHING by iPOD... seems more stable as a whole..Originally Posted by dangerous_dom
i dont see a point tbh tho... get yourself a PSP... MP3 player plays movies games and get on t'internet, maybe a bit bigger but much better ^ ^
Damn, why didn't they just call it a Creative Ipod
I'd still buy one over an Ipod though.. Creative's players are better any day of the week
Home cinema: Toshiba 42XV555DB Full HD LCD | Onkyo TX-SR705 | NAD C352 | Monitor Audio Bronze B2 | Monitor Audio Bronze C | Monitor Audio Bronze BFX | Yamaha NSC120 | BK Monolith sub | Toshiba HD-EP35 HD-DVD | Samsung BD-P1400 BluRay Player | Pioneer DV-575 | Squeezebox3 | Virgin Media V+ Box
PC: Asus P5B | Core2duo 2.13GHz | 2GB DDR2 PC6400 | Inno3d iChill 7900GS | Auzentech X-Plosion 7.1 | 250GB | 500GB | NEC DVDRW | Dual AG Neovo 19"
HTPC: | Core2Duo E6420 2.13GHz | 2GB DDR2 | 250GBx2 | Radeon X1300 | Terratec Aureon 7.1 | Windows MCE 2005
Laptop: 1.5GHz Centrino | 512MB | 60GB | 15" Wide TFT | Wifi | DVDRW
Which had the smooth white shiny plastic with screen at the top and touch pad interface at the bottom first? Apple
Which had that software interface fist? Apple - certainly the old Zen Xtras that i've used looked nothing like that.
Which feature set is better? Creative - I never tried to argue any different.
My point was - no matter how you look at that, it does resemble an iPod Photo/Video more than a little bit, both in the physical style and the software.
I never for a minute suggested Creative lie down and die, far from it, In fact I'd love to see them do very well, the only reason I didn't buy one last year was because it couldn't directly transfer pictures from Camera to Player, which was an important feature for me.
^ Me neither. I was coming from a design point of view and would probably buy the creative given the choice. However, HD based MP3 players still are not 'mature' enough for me so i wont be buying either. If i had too, it would actually buy a Sony, for reasons that i cant be bothered to go into for the 1,000th time (yes, i know sonic stage is not as good as itunes, blah blah). I find it amazing that Apple have added video playback anyway, when they still need to work on thier firmware and other issues. But i guess Apple are just cynical and know that the Joe's on the street can't/don't/won't see the past the shiney white box and examine the deeper issues.
Thanks Bob, but I don't think it's quite fair for you to imply that I am bigoted about Apple products. Having worked for an IT reseller (and authorised Apple 'solutions expert') for the last two years I've seen firsthand the sort of problems most people only hear about through Slashdot et al when they hit critical mass, and on a regular basis. Apple are capable of producing great products, but they're also capable of producing stinkers, whipping up demand and then failing to supply - for nearly two months (I've just had my Mac mini arrive mysteriously today which wasn't due until after christmas, even though it was ordered 3 weeks ago), have incompetent supply and support procedures and generally show all the hallmarks (i.e. problems) of any reasonably large IT corporation. They are by no means infallible.
I fail to see, however, how this has any bearing on whether or not Creative have just hit it out of the park with this new music player. I don't think they have, and I remain unconvinced that anyone will better Apple's offerings - across the board - until there is a serious rival to iTunes which combines all of the benefits it brings; playlist creation and management, online music purchase, music importing and device integration.
Sure, this product looks - on paper - to offer a good range of features to compete with the iPod, but what exactly about it is significantly better? The built-in microphone will be of interest to some (in particular my employer, as we used to sell iPods with the Belkin/Griffin voice recorder kits for people to use as dictaphones; these no longer work with the new video iPods) but otherwise the featurelist reads like all they're trying to do is compete in-kind. 30 gigs of storage? Check. 14 hour battery life? Check. Video playback? Check. Album art for songs shown as they play? (woohoo!) Check. What about it makes it so good that it's worth championing, other than the fact it's not made by Apple? I honestly think this is the only reason people are showing any interest, hence my cynicism towards all the enthusiasm.
The actual ablility to play back an album properly? Nope. It's true, the 5th generation ipod is still not capable of playing an CD album. Surely this should be apples main priority in a DAP.
If you dont know ehat i mean, then dont worry about it
Much better format support for a start. Why shoud people have to transcode there music collection just to play it on thier ipod? This is obviously more important to other people than you. People have different priorities. Anyway, why not show interest in something just because it's not the same old thing? Bring it on i say (just be a bit more original in the design stakes). It's like saying people only show an interest in Linux just because its not made by MS only. Dont underestimate people so much.
And sure, technically the itunes store is by far the best - but why on earth would any sane person want to buy thier music from there? Only noobs or idiots by music from Itunes. As for simple transfer, i think people would prefer just dragging and dropping.
All that said, it looks far too much like an ipod. That is a bit lame IMO.
Who came up with the interface first?
Good question, and according to Creative (who are smugly sitting on a very handy patent) it might well be them. In fact, I think they're threatening to sue Apple right now..
I have neither product, but probably wouldn't go with an Ipod simply because of their reputation for customer 'support' and the fact that i think other players offer more in terms of both features and sound quality (amazing how the latter is obscured from most people's minds when buying a 'music' player). Similarly, I woudn't buy music from iTunes as there are better, cheaper alternatives that don't involve running bloatware on my computer.
Perhaps I seem anti-Apple, but really I just evaluate products on their merits and aside from the neat click wheel idea they've not done much to impress me in the music arena. In fact, I think it's high time we had some decent competition for the Apple marketing monopoly machine which isn't doing anything to help you or I as consumers..
Crosshair VIII Hero (WIFI), 3900x, 32GB DDR4, Many SSDs, EVGA FTW3 3090, Ethoo 719
Trouble is, that's how it came over and that's why I responded as I did but, since you've made a significant effort to lower the temperature (for which I thank you), let's keep it down there and move on.
Indeed, but Apple is far from alone in those failings - and they are the sort of failing I personally try hard to point out, irrespective of the company involved.Having worked for an IT reseller (and authorised Apple 'solutions expert') for the last two years I've seen firsthand the sort of problems most people only hear about through Slashdot et al when they hit critical mass, and on a regular basis.
Apple are capable of producing great products, but they're also capable of producing stinkers, whipping up demand and then failing to supply - for nearly two months (I've just had my Mac mini arrive mysteriously today which wasn't due until after christmas, even though it was ordered 3 weeks ago), have incompetent supply and support procedures and generally show all the hallmarks (i.e. problems) of any reasonably large IT corporation. They are by no means infallible.
Conversely, when a product does genuinely stand out, I try to point that out too - and my initial comments about the Zen are suggesting this MIGHT be the case here.
I'll leave others to continue responding to that one and to continue pointing out things such as their view that a Sony PSP dumps over Zen and iPod.I fail to see, however, how this has any bearing on whether or not Creative have just hit it out of the park with this new music player. I don't think they have, and I remain unconvinced that anyone will better Apple's offerings - across the board - until there is a serious rival to iTunes which combines all of the benefits it brings; playlist creation and management, online music purchase, music importing and device integration.
I'm not personally championing anything right now - to do so would be plain stupid given that my only experience of the Zen was a few minutes' hands on at the press event and then a bit more later in the day in a dimly-lit bar.Sure, this product looks - on paper - to offer a good range of features to compete with the iPod, but what exactly about it is significantly better? The built-in microphone will be of interest to some (in particular my employer, as we used to sell iPods with the Belkin/Griffin voice recorder kits for people to use as dictaphones; these no longer work with the new video iPods) but otherwise the featurelist reads like all they're trying to do is compete in-kind. 30 gigs of storage? Check. 14 hour battery life? Check. Video playback? Check. Album art for songs shown as they play? (woohoo!) Check. What about it makes it so good that it's worth championing, other than the fact it's not made by Apple? I honestly think this is the only reason people are showing any interest, hence my cynicism towards all the enthusiasm.
In each case, I think that what I was fiddling with was an engineering sample.
However, like I said at the very outset, on paper, the specs of the Zen are very much superior, in most ways, to those of the video-capable iPod. That's all.
If you're referring to the lack of gapless song playback, then granted, this is a problem - and one of my few pet peeves with the iPod. It isn't, however, significant enough to make me want to use another player, but I would very much like Apple to fix it. The fact that iTunes allows you to flag a song as being part of a compilation via ID3 data suggests that it should at least theoretically be supportable and configurable.
My music collection was in MP3 format to begin with. I strongly suspect you'll find that's by far the most popular open format out there (and please let's not get into an argument on the semantics of 'open' in this context). I didn't have to transcode anything at all. OGG support would be a checkbox ticked, but not one that is going to win or lose customers in the larger market.
Well, which am I then, I wonder? As it happens I prefer to buy music on CD (then rip to MP3), but for the 79p cost, if I'm really hankering to listen to a song I've not heard in years it is an absolute doddle, and - as I said in my initial post - it just works.
Computer literates, perhaps. But you have to remember that the digital music player market is far larger than those who are au fait with the vagaries of a particular OS' method of copying files. Even as a veteran computer user I'd still say that drag and drop is more complicated, unwieldy and time-consuming than plug iPod into dock; wait for it to say 'Updating complete'; done.
I think it more of a problem than you think. Firstly its the main reason i wont buy one. It's also the reason several people i know went for Sony, or bought an ipod then took it back. i know the manager of a Dixons store who says its a complaint he hears often.
I think there a couple of factors at play here; Firstly, ignorance is bliss. People just asume thats how they must work. And also, there are very few players that do to be fair.
Oh, and that ID3 tag is not for that. In fact ID3 does not really have a tag for gapless playback. There are very simple ways to impliment it, such as encoded the file correctly in the first place, in fact its the simplicity of it that amazes me it's not been added.
Yeah, fair enough. But better format support would be nice, as well as video codecs.
As such an Apple fan, i guess you will never buy anything else. But for the rest of us it would be nice to not have to purchace our music all over again if we one day we wanted to play it on a non-apple device. Sure, for the odd track. But people who like to buy music on a regular basis would be better off buying the CD. It's cheaper. It full quality. You have the CD as a backup. There is no DRM so you can play YOUR music how YOU want.
i kind of agree, but a good deal of people prefer to drag an drop. Maybe not most i agree, but the option would be nice.
Anyway, i think i ipod is a great bit of kit. Not for me, but for many it's great (even if Joe Bloggs does not understand what he is missing ). It's not any one particular issue, accept for the gapless playback issuse, that bothers me about the ipod, It's a culmination of many little niggles. No one makes the perfect player, i just think the Sony players are currently the ones that closely fit my personal preferences. Although to be fair again, i dont know enough about the latest Irivers, Creatives etc.
However, i think this is a sillystatement. ;
That sounds a little fanboyish to me. No offence though, dont take it personally. It's just the way it comes across to me but maybe i am reading you wrong.
Last edited by autopilot; 13-12-2005 at 08:12 PM.
Well, given that I was able to get gapless playback via a WinAmp plugin back in the old 3.x days with the very same files that don't play gaplessly on my iPod, I'm fairly certain this is a software issue, rather than a problem with the encoding.
I'll ignore the ad hominem there, but do me a favour and go back and re-read what I initially wrote about my music purchase preferences. You'll see that's pretty much what I said; I prefer to buy on CD, but will download via iTMS on occasion.
But as for your dream of not having to re-purchase your music to play on a non-Apple device... turn that one on its head; all these competing DRM standards stop you playing your music on Apple devices, too. DRM is a pretty irritating thing from any perspective, regardless of your chosen device, as it is built with the intention of restricting your freedom to fair usage. That's the same whether it's from Apple, Microsoft, Real, Napster or whoever else. The only way you're going to get around that is with a non-DRM music format.
I've heard enough spurious arguments against Apple kit over the years that it isn't difficult to see that some people just don't like them, and haven't got a good reason to back it up. Maybe it's because Apple are in the rare position of being market leaders for once that people cheer on the underdog, I'm not sure. But being accused of being an 'Apple fan' doesn't exactly undermine my argument...
Oh, and by the way - I found this image in another discussion of the relative merits of the two players. Surely the one on the left is a tupperware tub, not a music player?
Firstly, i never mentioned that DRM was specific to itunes. So i think we are actually kind of agreeing there and you missed my point too mate. I conceed that i may have misread what you meant (although you were cheeky enough to remove that from the bit you quoted). But you are also guilty of this. As you did with Bob etc. But never mind, its all good fun
Secondly... ah, fook it. Your right. I give up. Ipod rocks, blah, blah...
...except with a MS DRM track i can choose a whole stack of players that are compatable with it (and none of them made by the same people who sold me the DRM-ed track I might add) so i have some choice. Some choice is better than none..
Crosshair VIII Hero (WIFI), 3900x, 32GB DDR4, Many SSDs, EVGA FTW3 3090, Ethoo 719
Well, the forum kind of tends to do that with second-level quotes. Nevermind. It wasn't my intention to make it seem an un-warranted comment.
Yeah, the iPod rocks! Or at least I think it does. You don't have to, though. But competition is a good thing, I do agree. If I felt that there was an alternative out there that was good enough to consider, then I'd be happier, really. A one horse race tends to lead to market stagnation, but as yet Apple still seems to be pushing hard to gain that lead. I would say, anyway.
Very true. But what are the specific terms of usage on MS DRM? This is where the problems start, as although you're right that it's not tied to a single device manufacturer, the actual terms of what you're 'allowed' to do with the music are very much variable dependent on the flavour of DRM. Not all DRM is made equal.
Oh, I found this forum thread (via b3ta) about the iPod's launch. Thought it was worth sharing. Best quote so far: "All that hype for an MP3 player? Break-thru digital device? The Reality Distiortion Field™ is starting to warp Steve's mind if he thinks for one second that this thing is gonna take off."
I doubt there's much difference in terms from AAC (aside from it's almost certainly cheaper to licence given the number of manufacturers doing so). I'd still rather have a choice in device versus none at all tho
Crosshair VIII Hero (WIFI), 3900x, 32GB DDR4, Many SSDs, EVGA FTW3 3090, Ethoo 719
As an owner of neither I would prefer the Creative as it isnt tied to one or two video codecs. I also happen to HATE iTunes... whoever said "It just works" is being a blatant "fan boy". My daughter has an iPod and finds it hard to get iTunes working sensibly. I hate the way that as standard it tries to take over stuff like MP3 associations. It piddled me off so much I built a machine for her and told herm, her iPod and and her iTunes to go elsewhere and get thee hence from MY system!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
