Zune, about a common as a blue moon?

[Woochifer]

Who says most consumers don't want it to work like a USB-attached device. It seems to me that most of us here, do.

But, people posting here don't necessarily represent the mainstream consumer, most of whom will not ever own a component-based audio system.

I seriously doubt that is the reason it was a failure.

Never said it was "the reason" -- simply that the PlaysForSure devices failed in the market, despite the fact that they provided that very USB-attached device utility that you feel is so essential.

Nope, iTunes doesn't want to do it that way. It wants everything based on the ID tags and preset music categories. That kind of sucks for those of us who like to put together our own mixes of styles and bands. So much for that freedom of choice they keep touting.

While iTunes does leave a lot to be desired, I question how many people out there want the degree of customizing and tweaking that you're talking about. While the utility is lacking at times, I've never had huge issues with getting iTunes to do what I want with my iPod. I can see how iTunes' limitations would be an issue with a larger capacity iPod Classic, but not for the smaller capacity Shuffle, Nano, and touch models.

So how large is a mini-SD card again? Yeah, OK that'll add to the bulk....

It's not just the card dimensions. It's the space both inside and outside of the device required by the reader that's at issue. Considering how crowded the innards of the iPhone already are, it's that trade-off of whether you're willing to bump up the bulk of the device in order to provide that utility. Apple obviously isn't. If you really want a card reader on your media player or smartphone, there are other options on the market.

Apple's exclusion of a memory card reader is no different than the design edict that drove the MacBook Air, which completely dispenses with the optical drive in order to make the computer as thin as possible. You can dispute the merits of this kind of design-driven product development, but it is consistent with how Apple has done their product lineup across the board. They were the first company to drop support for the 3.5" floppy disks. They abandoned their ADB devices in favor of USB back when USB's survival as a standard was in question. They abandoned hard drives on their smaller iPods in favor of flash memory, even though the iPod mini was their best selling player.

I'm not so sure they are lagging that far behind. They probably still have the lion's share of the corporate market because of the Outlook-Exchange integration.

But, the ability to integrate with an Exchange server is what the RIM and iPhone OS' already provide. Windows Mobile is not the only mobile OS that can integrate with an Exchange server. Where Windows Mobile lags in the user interface, which most reviewers now regard as outdated, cumbersome, and overly derivative of desktop Windows.

How's that?

If MS decides to use the Zune model and come out with their own MS-branded Zune phone, they would basically go into competition with their existing Windows mobile partners.

I don't think that's the same thing. And then that's also a leap to suggest those partners will jump to Simbian, Android, or RIM: there's a lot more to making a move like that then a little competition from a product (a Zune-phone) that most people see will have a significant up-hill battle from the start.

Problem though would be if those partners perceive MS as diverting resources away from future Windows mobile development. The current version is already considered outdated, and the new version is not expected until well into next year.

Another rumor is that the Zune phone would simply slap a revised multitouch user interface onto the existing Windows mobile platform, and allow existing partners to co-brand their Windows mobile phones as Zune phones. Question though is whether MS can successfully port that optimized touchscreen interface onto an existing smartphone OS without bogging the device down.

That has never stopped Microsoft. This reality never kept them from jumping with both feet into the competition with established products & markets. Now whether they'll continue to compete will have to be seen, but it never kept them from starting something.

Hasn't stopped them, but the problem here is that they haven't even begun yet. This ZuneHD announcement just smacks of a classic Microsoft FUD campaign. They made the announcement two weeks before Apple is expected to release the final version of the iPhone/touch 3.0 OS, as well as rumored updates to the iPhone and iPod touch. Yet, the ZuneHD isn't even expected to arrive in stores until September at the earliest. Also, Microsoft has yet to recoup the billions of dollars they've already spent on the video game and music player markets.

Or you could just as well say: "...and Micrisoft's development feeds off of the work they do on Windows, since they share many of the same application frameworks...."

But, not to the same degree that the iPhone/touch OS draws from OS X and vice versa. My understanding is that Windows Mobile uses a separate code base from 2000/XP/Vista, whereas the iPhone/touch use a scaled down version of OS X.

As much as I dislike Microsoft, I have to say that in this, they are way ahead of Apple, not to mention the legions of developers out there that would completely overshadow anything Apple could field. Development is the one area where Apple still struggles against every one of its competitors.

That would be true in the desktop space, but that's not as much the case in the mobile market where MS is weaker. The app store is really where Apple leaped far ahead of the competition by providing both consumers and developers with a simple one-stop-shop for finding and downloading applications. It's not without its faults (i.e., Apple's often arbitrary app approval process), but nobody else's offerings are even close to what the app store has brought.

[nightflier]

But, people posting here don't necessarily represent the mainstream consumer, most of whom will not ever own a component-based audio system.

But the people here also don't necessarily represent the fringe, either. In this case we're talking about a device that is of equal interest here and in the mainstream, so the people here could very well be representative of the sentiment.

Never said it was "the reason" -- simply that the PlaysForSure devices failed in the market, despite the fact that they provided that very USB-attached device utility that you feel is so essential.

Well that's a clever play on the topic. But the fact remains that PlaysForSure's failure or success had little to do with the fact that it supported USB-attached devices. The bottom line is that Apple either wants to control access to it's players and media or is irritatingly dumbing it down so that those who do know their way around files and folders are increasingly frustrated with it.

While iTunes does leave a lot to be desired, I question how many people out there want the degree of customizing and tweaking that you're talking about. While the utility is lacking at times, I've never had huge issues with getting iTunes to do what I want with my iPod. I can see how iTunes' limitations would be an issue with a larger capacity iPod Classic, but not for the smaller capacity Shuffle, Nano, and touch models.

Well, OK, so you like it. There are millions of people who don't and who want more control. Apple pissed those people off.

It's not just the card dimensions. It's the space both inside and outside of the device required by the reader that's at issue. Considering how crowded the innards of the iPhone already are, it's that trade-off of whether you're willing to bump up the bulk of the device in order to provide that utility. Apple obviously isn't. If you really want a card reader on your media player or smartphone, there are other options on the market.

That's nonsense. I've seen controllers for SD and MiniSD that are smaller than the card itself. And the innards of the iPhone are no more crowded than those of other phones or the Zune for that matter, and most competitors do have the expandable memory. This has nothing to do with size, but everything to do with one of the two issues I mentioned above:

(1) Control or
(2) Dumbing down

Apple's exclusion of a memory card reader is no different than the design edict that drove the MacBook Air, which completely dispenses with the optical drive in order to make the computer as thin as possible. You can dispute the merits of this kind of design-driven product development, but it is consistent with how Apple has done their product lineup across the board.

I'm not disputing that Apple is engineering these things out of their products or that they are trend-setters, but I'm disagreeing with their reasons for doing so. I actually owned an Air for a while and ended up giving it to one of my employees. Why? because its' pure unadulterated lock-in. Nothing is upgradable, nothing is standard, and most of it's capacity is too quickly outdated. They've taken Detroit's motto of the disposable 5-year car and put it on steroids. The Air is already obsolete. Every PC manufacturer out there makes a better more compatible laptop, netbook, or ultralight and it shows because sales of the Air aren't exactly stellar.

But, the ability to integrate with an Exchange server is what the RIM and iPhone OS' already provide. Windows Mobile is not the only mobile OS that can integrate with an Exchange server. Where Windows Mobile lags in the user interface, which most reviewers now regard as outdated, cumbersome, and overly derivative of desktop Windows.

As someone who oversees several Exchange integrations with Blackberry Enterprise Server and iPhones, not to mention the support for the users who use these devices, I can tell you with no uncertainty that this isn't as easy, convenient, simple, or inexpensive as you make it sound. As a matter of fact, our corporate policy is for our users to use Windows mobile and only with very special exceptions the other OSes. No, that is one thing that Apple definitely does not do well. Now whether that's Microsoft's fault for keeping competition out or not, that's a different discussion, but for now the integration is a PITA, and will remain so as long as Exchange rules the roost of email, calendaring, and document exchange.

If MS decides to use the Zune model and come out with their own MS-branded Zune phone, they would basically go into competition with their existing Windows mobile partners.

They would start off as a very minor player and grow slowly from there. And I'm not convinced those other partners wouldn't jump on-board with their own Zune-OS based phones. From past experience, there is one thing that no other company can compete with Microsoft on and that is price. They will give product away if they have to, to enter a new market. I'm not saying this is competing on a fair playing field, but I am saying that we've seen this happen over & over again. As evil as we want to describe it, that's Microsoft's way and it's worked for them.

The current version is already considered outdated, and the new version is not expected until well into next year.

Microsoft's customers will wait, they have always done so. Even if they have to skip a generation, they'll wait it out and eventually join the borg. We saw that with Windows Me, Windows Vista, several generations of IE, and with the first generation Zune.

Ironically, with the latter, the #1 complaint was also about control. If Microsoft wants to compete in this market, they need to provide more freedom that Apple. The built-in HD tuner is a nice side-step to provide more content for the consumer without having to cow-tow to the draconian RIAA rules on compressed music. If they also include a slick media player that can stream internet radio more conveniently than Apple, then they will expand on that goal even more. But I digress.

Another rumor is that the Zune phone would simply slap a revised multitouch user interface onto the existing Windows mobile platform, and allow existing partners to co-brand their Windows mobile phones as Zune phones. Question though is whether MS can successfully port that optimized touchscreen interface onto an existing smartphone OS without bogging the device down.

It's a question that has been answered. Yes they can.

This ZuneHD announcement just smacks of a classic Microsoft FUD campaign. They made the announcement two weeks before Apple is expected to release the final version of the iPhone/touch 3.0 OS, as well as rumored updates to the iPhone and iPod touch. Yet, the ZuneHD isn't even expected to arrive in stores until September at the earliest. Also, Microsoft has yet to recoup the billions of dollars they've already spent on the video game and music player markets.

It's not FUD, it's a product that reviewers are already working with. September isn't that far off considering the slow economy and the summer months ahead. If they get it out to stores in the fall, they will not only capture the returning student youth population, but be in a good position to compete with Apple this x-mas season.

And as far as recouping millions, Microsoft is one company that has enough cash reserves to outlast several Apples in any market. Yes, they are also hurt by this economy, but that is one company that knows how to survive, even in the face of huge market failures like Vista.

But, not to the same degree that the iPhone/touch OS draws from OS X and vice versa. My understanding is that Windows Mobile uses a separate code base from 2000/XP/Vista, whereas the iPhone/touch use a scaled down version of OS X.

That is true, but the skills required are very similar. Moreover, the number of Microsoft developers on both Windows and Windows Mobile is much greater than those who specialize in either Apple software. The number disparity is much greater than would have an impact in this scenario.

That would be true in the desktop space, but that's not as much the case in the mobile market where MS is weaker. The app store is really where Apple leaped far ahead of the competition by providing both consumers and developers with a simple one-stop-shop for finding and downloading applications. It's not without its faults (i.e., Apple's often arbitrary app approval process), but nobody else's offerings are even close to what the app store has brought.

I think you're confusing iPods with iPhones. Apple's market share for iPhones isn't that large. Now I'm not saying that this confusion is unwarranted - after all Apple's done a great job to blur the line itself. The fact remains that Apple does not dominate the mobile phone market and Windows Mobile is still the dominant platform in the corporate sector, most likely because of it's cozy integration with Exchange.

Now I'm no fan of Microsoft by any stretch, but I also can't ignore that the 800lb gorilla exists and that Apple is still just a little fox terrier by comparison. Granted, the terrier is cuter, more portable, and easier to love, but when that Gorilla makes a move there isn't anyone who should ignore it. And the terrier, well he's also hard to train, very picky about who he plays with, and likes to do things his own way. One the other hand, he's simple to keep around. To each his own.

[Woochifer]

But the people here also don't necessarily represent the fringe, either. In this case we're talking about a device that is of equal interest here and in the mainstream, so the people here could very well be representative of the sentiment.

Anyone who buys a component-based audio system is in a small niche market. That's simple fact. I'm part of the audio hobby, but I don't think that my preferences and purchasing choices reflect anything other than a small portion of the overall market, which like it or not is dominated by mobile and portable devices.

Well that's a clever play on the topic. But the fact remains that PlaysForSure's failure or success had little to do with the fact that it supported USB-attached devices. The bottom line is that Apple either wants to control access to it's players and media or is irritatingly dumbing it down so that those who do know their way around files and folders are increasingly frustrated with it.

But, the USB-attached device support that you feel is so important has not had a bottomline impact on the market. It's important to you, but don't try and generalize it to everybody else.

Well, OK, so you like it. There are millions of people who don't and who want more control. Apple pissed those people off.

See above.

That's nonsense. I've seen controllers for SD and MiniSD that are smaller than the card itself. And the innards of the iPhone are no more crowded than those of other phones or the Zune for that matter, and most competitors do have the expandable memory. This has nothing to do with size, but everything to do with one of the two issues I mentioned above:

(1) Control or
(2) Dumbing down

Believe what you want to believe. I'm simply indicating that the iPhone/touch design is very consistent with how Apple designs all of their current products. They add and subtract ports and connectors seemingly at will with all their products, and these decisions are frequently based on aesthetics. If you don't like Apple's approach, then there are plenty of alternatives out there.

I'm not disputing that Apple is engineering these things out of their products or that they are trend-setters, but I'm disagreeing with their reasons for doing so. I actually owned an Air for a while and ended up giving it to one of my employees. Why? because its' pure unadulterated lock-in. Nothing is upgradable, nothing is standard, and most of it's capacity is too quickly outdated. They've taken Detroit's motto of the disposable 5-year car and put it on steroids. The Air is already obsolete. Every PC manufacturer out there makes a better more compatible laptop, netbook, or ultralight and it shows because sales of the Air aren't exactly stellar.

The sales rankings I see on various websites indicate that the Air outsells the Mini and the Pro, which puts it right in the middle of Apple's current offerings.

Check the news out of WWDC. The Air has already been upddated. Has no appeal to me, but then again neither does a netbook or ultralight.

As someone who oversees several Exchange integrations with Blackberry Enterprise Server and iPhones, not to mention the support for the users who use these devices, I can tell you with no uncertainty that this isn't as easy, convenient, simple, or inexpensive as you make it sound. As a matter of fact, our corporate policy is for our users to use Windows mobile and only with very special exceptions the other OSes. No, that is one thing that Apple definitely does not do well. Now whether that's Microsoft's fault for keeping competition out or not, that's a different discussion, but for now the integration is a PITA, and will remain so as long as Exchange rules the roost of email, calendaring, and document exchange.

Yes, it's your policy to use Windows mobile, but that doesn't mean that Windows mobile commands the "lion's share" of the market as you claimed. Windows mobile market share been running behind RIM, is barely ahead of the iPhone, and has been in decline for the last couple of years. I never said that the integraton is "easy, convenient, simple, or inexpensive," so don't try to manufacture an argument out of something I never said or implied.

Microsoft's customers will wait, they have always done so. Even if they have to skip a generation, they'll wait it out and eventually join the borg. We saw that with Windows Me, Windows Vista, several generations of IE, and with the first generation Zune.

Ironically, with the latter, the #1 complaint was also about control. If Microsoft wants to compete in this market, they need to provide more freedom that Apple. The built-in HD tuner is a nice side-step to provide more content for the consumer without having to cow-tow to the draconian RIAA rules on compressed music. If they also include a slick media player that can stream internet radio more conveniently than Apple, then they will expand on that goal even more. But I digress.

But, the Zune is a totally different market from the OS market because they don't have any contractual tie-ins with manufacturers. Most importantly, this is a market that MS is entering by themselves, without benefit of partners. They already tried to replicate their PC model with the media player market, and failed. Right now, they are trying to compete with the iPod by basically copying the iPod model and slapping on a couple of new features, and they lack the ecosystem that has built up around the iPod over the last 8 years.

You're complaining about the iPod lackof "freedom," but the ZuneHD does absolutely nothing to address these issues.

It's not FUD, it's a product that reviewers are already working with. September isn't that far off considering the slow economy and the summer months ahead. If they get it out to stores in the fall, they will not only capture the returning student youth population, but be in a good position to compete with Apple this x-mas season.

It's also a product that lacks a working web browser, and has numerous features missing or in a very preliminary state -- how a reviewer comes to the conclusion that they're looking at an iPod killer just doesn't pass the smell test. Apple is already locking up the student population, like they do every year, with their annual back-to-school promotion (free iPod Classic or touch with the purchase of any Mac).

And they update their iPod lineup every year around September. The reviewers praising the ZuneHD to no end were comparing a non-production ZuneHD with an iPod touch running the iPhone 2.2.1 OS. By the time the ZuneHD hits stores, a new version of the iPod touch will be either already out or announced, and the iPhone 3.0 OS will have had 3 months on the market.

And as far as recouping millions, Microsoft is one company that has enough cash reserves to outlast several Apples in any market. Yes, they are also hurt by this economy, but that is one company that knows how to survive, even in the face of huge market failures like Vista.

In actuality, Apple's cash reserves right now are higher than MS'. Only Cisco is sitting on a bigger cash reserve than Apple. MS has been spending money right and left and sustaining huge losses on its consumer products, while Apple has been stockpiling.

I think you're confusing iPods with iPhones. Apple's market share for iPhones isn't that large. Now I'm not saying that this confusion is unwarranted - after all Apple's done a great job to blur the line itself. The fact remains that Apple does not dominate the mobile phone market and Windows Mobile is still the dominant platform in the corporate sector, most likely because of it's cozy integration with Exchange.

There is no confusion since the app store provides applications to both the iPhone AND iPod touch, which incidentally outsells the iPhone.

In the mobile market, there is no dominant player. You're confusing the Windows monopoly in the desktop space with the mobile market. Just about everybody I know accesses their corporate e-mail using a Blackberry. I hardly know anyone who uses a Windows Mobile device nowadays.

Windows Mobile's market share is only 12%, while the iPhone has somewhere around 11%. RIM and Symbian outsell both of them. The difference is that the iPhone market is growing and Windows Mobile is declining. Plus, Apple makes a helluva lot more off of each iPhone sale since they make the hardware, they develop the OS, and they get a cut off the top from the phone companies. Add the millions more iPod touch devices out there, and you have a much larger market reach that the iPhone/touch OS has built for itself via the app store. The Zune would be starting from ground negative, given that MS hasn't even announced a Zune phone.

Now I'm no fan of Microsoft by any stretch, but I also can't ignore that the 800lb gorilla exists and that Apple is still just a little fox terrier by comparison. Granted, the terrier is cuter, more portable, and easier to love, but when that Gorilla makes a move there isn't anyone who should ignore it. And the terrier, well he's also hard to train, very picky about who he plays with, and likes to do things his own way. One the other hand, he's simple to keep around. To each his own.

And MS is not the 800 lb gorilla in every market that they enter. Right now, in the media player market, Apple IS the 800 lb gorilla, as the iPod lineup has a 70% market share and outsells the entire home audio industry by more than 3-to-1. And unlike MS' other ventures, they are not entering an unsettled and rapidly growing market. The media player market has plateauing growth and declining margins. This is why Apple is blurring the line between their iPod and iPhone products. The smartphone market is poised for huge growth, while the media player market is maturing. And Apple's iPhone OS development carries over to the iPods, which helps them maintain market share with media player

The markets for mobile devices, video games, and media players do not benefit from MS' desktop monopoly. No matter how much cash MS throws into those markets, they don't have a monopoly position that they can use to bully their way in. They actually have to compete on their own merits, and the results so far have ranged from mixed (video games) to downright abysmal (the Zune).

The ZuneHD is MS' first foray into a touchscreen device of any kind, and they'll already be more than two years behind by the time it hits stores. In order for that device to succeed, it cannot merely be an iPod with a few extra features. It has to be much better than the iPod in multiple areas. The reviewers salivating over the ZuneHD mistakenly presume that the iPod is a stationary target. Next week's release of iPhone OS 3.0 already moves the goal posts.

Plus, we don't know what the iPod lineup will look like by September. MS' FUD strategy has time after time been to overpromise and underdeliver, but make those announcements in order to freeze the market in the interim. The ZuneHD just smacks of that strategy given how incomplete it is. Apple is almost the exact opposite in how secretively they operate. With the iPod, Apple has always had a surprise or two that keeps them ahead of the competition.