Too little, too late for Zune in '07
The technology and music pundits wrote off Microsoft's Zune player immediately after it launched, and one reviewer predicted that it would be such a failure that Microsoft would quietly forget about it by the middle of 2007. I was willing to give Microsoft a little more credit, only because I don't think that the iPod and iTunes are perfect, and because I've seen how Microsoft comes from behind: it refines, improves, outspends and waits until the competition stumbles.
This evening, Microsoft unveiled version 2.0 of its Zune family, and this time, it's got a credible music player--for 2006. Unfortunately for Microsoft, it's 2007.
Meet the new Zunes, not quite the same as the old Zunes.
(Credit: Microsoft)The new Zunes have a scroll pad (sort of like the ones on notebook computers), which is a reasonable competitor to the click wheel of the old iPods and certainly better than the four-way clickable ring of the first Zunes (which everybody assumes is a click wheel when they try it). But that's last year's battle.
The iPhone and iPod Touch have touch screens, which make all other music players--including the new Zunes--look dated. You'd think that a company with the resources and technical depth of Microsoft could come up with a portable music device with a touch screen. Apparently not (yet).
The Zune's had Wi-Fi built in from the start, but there's still no online connectivity--no Wi-Fi Zune store, no anytime-anywhere access to music using the subscription Zune Pass, and certainly no Web browsing. No comparison to the wireless capabilities of the iPhone and iPod Touch.
To be fair, the new Zunes do have wireless sync with the PC-based software, which saves you the trouble of walking into the room where your PC is and docking it. I'm not sure how much of a hassle that was in the first place. And they got rid of the "three days" and "no passing it on" restrictions of Zune-to-Zune wireless sharing, which makes it marginally more interesting, but shared songs still expire after three plays.
These two shortcomings are related. Connecting to a public wireless network can be clunky--it usually displays the local network's sign-in screen, which might require a username and password. For that experience to be as smooth as possible, you need to connect through a Web browser. And to use a Web browser on a small device without adding a tiny keyboard--a nonstarter for a consumer product--you need a touch screen. Microsoft told me that it'd prefer to lose out on a couple of features than deliver a poor or confusing user experience. Hence, no wireless Internet or music store for Zune.
Even with the new flash-based Zunes, Apple still has better segmentation. At the low end, it has the $79 iPod Shuffle, which almost anybody can afford.
For the serious music and video collector, Apple has the 160GB iPod Classic at $349. And for the gadget freak, there's always the iPod Touch (starts at $299) and iPhone (starts at $399, not including the AT&T contract). In other words, regardless of your budget or interest, Apple has a product for you.
And Microsoft isn't offering any discount versus the comparable iPod models. The 4GB and 8GB flash-based Zunes cost $149.99 and $199.99, respectively, and the player with the 80GB hard drive costs $249.99--all 99 cents more than their iPod competitors. If you're competing against the industry standard (nearly everybody who sees my Zune asks, "is that the Microsoft iPod?"), and you're not offering any major advantages in terms of features or functionality, then you darn well better offer a discount.
So what's Microsoft doing right with Zune? It did add video to its flash-based players, which could have trumped Apple...if Apple hadn't announced the Nano with video first. It finally fixed most of the glaring holes in the first Zune, like lack of podcast support and the inability to play TV shows recorded on a Media Center PC.
It's trying to build a community with Zune Social, though it could be accused of getting late to this game, given that companies like iLike already offer applets that let you view what other users are listening to--on their iPods, no less.
Even so, Zune Social might eventually encompass enough music recommendation and social-networking features to make it interesting--imagine iLike meets Pandora meets MySpace, back when it was mostly for musicians and their fans, all with an integrated music store.
(Side note: one of iLike's top executives is Hadi Partovi, who used to run the division encompassing MSN Music--remember that download store? It was quietly forgotten when the Zune launched.)
Microsoft says it's not trying to compete with Apple in this generation. Instead, the company hopes to vault into the clear No. 2 position, then mount its attack on the market leader (sort of like it did with the Xbox and Xbox 360 versus Sony's PlayStation 2 and PS3). A reasonable goal, though I don't think that Sandisk is going to give in as easily as Microsoft hopes.
The problem is, Apple's not standing still. At some point, Microsoft is going to have to come up with two years' worth of innovation in a single year. And based on what I've seen so far, Microsoft's commitment to the product isn't deep enough to do that.
Matt Rosoff is an analyst with Directions on Microsoft, where he covers Microsoft's consumer products and corporate news. He's written about the technology industry since 1995, and reviewed the first Rio MP3 player for CNET.com in 1998. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network. Disclosure.
Then you complain that the player is not "discounted enough" (at MSRP) to the iPod. But remember, while many do respect the MSRP, even the 1st Gen Zunes saw some sales and discounts (something you NEVER see with an Apple product), so while the MSRP may be .99 higher, that may not necessarily mean anything in the long term.
You also fail to point out the larger screen on the Zune (3.2") to the iPod "Classic" (2") But I guess anything that is better on the Zune wasn't worth reporting.
Finally, your "segmentation" complaints. So Zune doesn't have a competitor to the Shuffle. So what? This market is flooded, and with products far better than the shuffle, but most reviewers still give their "Choice" awards to the Shuffle for some odd reason, so why should Microsoft bother? They have selected what the deem the sweet spots and are not trying to compete with Apple at every segment. Their "written off" first gen device grabbed 10% of the large hard drive market, with a single device. Obviously they have done their homework on what would provide their strongest foothold without needing to hit "every segment" to get there.
Is this new version of Zune an iPod "Killer"? No of course not, there is no way that it can be. If Microsoft duplicated everything exactly to the iPod then everybody would call it a "me too" player. But, believe it or not there are people out there that have no desire to own an iPod, and despite what you seem to suggest, the game is not over. For players such as Microsoft, Sansa, Samsung and the like, it is only the beginning. Hell based on your logic, there never would have been a Microsoft Office, because it would have been "too little too late" compared with WordPerfect, right?
Now if these companies could just get reviewers to not start their checklist with "not an iPod" as a point against them before they even start their reviews, maybe some fair comparisons could be made.
mistake....
But the iPod Classic has a 2.5" screen- Not a 2"
And the iPod Touch has a 3.5" screen
It's nice that the new Ipod classic has a ton of memory now, but the screen size is unchanged and still small. If you want the big cool screen, the ipod touch has it, but with only 8gb max size, you'll run out of space super quick.
The new Zune with 80 gigs and a 3.2" screen is the big differenciator. You get great storage size (10 times the capacity of the ipod touch) and a great size screen for $150 less cost than the ipod touch. That's where microsoft will gain some market share here (especially if they are smart with their marketing to tout that).
As far as waiting for MS to be "smart with their marketing"- don't hold your breath.
That's going to be the audience of appeal for this thing: disenfranchised iPod users. Myself, I bought a 5th-gen Video iPod. I sold it on eBay after just two days of use. I was that unimpressed; and I couldn't find a player out there that wasn't trying to copy the iPod with its goofy circular scroll wheel. This includes Creative Labs' newer players, like the Zen Touch.
For reference, I owned an Archos Jukebox Recorder 20GB for a while that I absolutely loved. It felt flimsy and it was unreliable; but combine it with the Rockbox OS and it both sounded great (powerful enough to make my Sennheiser HD555 headphones tangibly vibrate with no distortion from the player) and featured a highly efficient, if complex, user interface.
So yes, when I first picked up a Zune at Best Buy, I thought the wheel was touch-sensitive. I was utterly ecstatic when I realized that it, in fact, was not; that it was just a four-way click wheel. While this does limit high-speed browsing, the simplicity and familiarity of navigation, not to mention the blatant rejection of what's "hip," made me giddy. So I'm hoping the switch to a touch pad for the Zune 2 isn't too great a change, or I might be purchasing a used Zune 1!
But I liked what I heard from the Zune 1 at Best Buy. The touch-screen of the iPod makes for a great toy that's pretty to use, but I'll take the familiarity of the Zune if the interface still manages to be efficient and friendly and the sound manages to capture my ears and tame my Sennheiser headphones.
How about hand-held entertainment device (HED)?
My roommate has used the iPod from the 1st gen the video iPod and after purchasing the 1st Gen Zune, he is a convert. I used the Creative Zune for a while and loved it. Get off iPod's lap and realize that there are other players that can stand on its own.
This new Zune is a definite purchase. These writers and reviewers needs to realize that iPod is really not the end all, be all device.
the 80gb Zune and twice the size of the largest flash drive zune.
Also the Zune may have a larger screen, but it has the same resolution as an
iPod classic's 2.5 inch screen (320 x 240) meaning it has the same number of
dots, they are just bigger and will look blocky. The iPod touch/iPhone screen
has a larger screen and a higher resolution (480 x 320). So if the larger
screen is a selling point you may want to think about how nice the image is.
It was a good idea to come after Apple's monster iPod market, but you have
to bring a lot more to the table to take a chunk out of their market share than
wifi synching and a pixelated screen. I am sure MS will come out w/ a product
that is comparable to the iPod touch, I just wonder if they will do it before
Apple releases a new line w/ more memory, games, sharing, etc that people
have been clamoring for. They are currently about a year behind in features
and I haven't heard the slightest murmur of anyone wanting one (unlike the
roar for nanos and iPhones).
Btw, i love how CNET can never find any faults with the iCrap, despite the fact that the latest generation of them were overpriced, shoddy pieces of crap with minimal upgrades. Of course, though, when big bad Microsoft tries its hand, they slam it without even trying it.
uncompetitive. From OS to iPod, Apple is running rings around MSFT. If it were
not for the infamous pressure of compatibility, would Microsoft even be in the
game?
I'm going to have to disagree pretty wholeheartedly with this statement (not to mention the rest of the clearly biased article). Apple has spent the better part of the last couple of years building and hyping up their iPhone. They have shown very little true innovation in the actual iPod product lines. My first iPod was a 4G 40GB. Having watched each new iteration of the product the changes that I have seen have been relatively minor. All in all Apple has done nothing more than add some color to the screen, increase the memory capacity and shrink the width a little more each year. What is most appalling however is that Apple clearly does not support their previous models. Apple's recommended solution to dealing with software issues is to buy their new "improved" model. This is contrast to virtually every other company that provide firmware upgrades at no charge.
To specifically address the iPod Touch it is a great innovation but it is not what people have asked for. People demanded a touch-screen capable iPod, not an over priced touch-screen Nano (or what most people just called the gimped iPhone). iPhone and iPod Touch are really not all that innovative in and of itself. There have been PDA and SmartPhones for years. Newer such phones even include MicroSD card slots that let you play MP3's and other media. At least with a MicroSD slot these devices are not limited, memory wise, the same way iPhone/Touch is. A solid PDA with MicroSD card slot running WindowsCE beats the iPhone hands down in terms of features and functionality.
So to wrap it up I think Microsoft is doing exactly what they should be doing. Producing a solid alternative to the main competition. Not copying the competition. They are providing their customers with the features they have requested and provided a level of service that, in my opinion, beats Apple. I ended up having my 4G iPod completely fall apart on me so I bought a Zune 1 and it has been great. I will be very happy to be walking around with my Zune 1 using the new software.
You may have been told this, but how can you quote it without breaking your keyboard? Microsoft has
made its fortune by hawking feature bloated software with an ugly and unintutive user experience.
which saves you the trouble of walking into the room where your PC is and
docking it."
I could have sworn that I read that the wireless syncing only works when the
Zune is in it's dock or plugged into it's wall charger...so much for not walking
into another room. When I first heard about the wireless sync I thought that
was probably the coolest new feature, now I just think it's a silly feature. If it
has to be in it's dock anyway, wouldn't the syncing be faster over USB?
(Answer: yes)
As for Zune 2, it sounds very interesting. I look forward to hands on reviews, of both the player and the related web sites.
- Wireless syncing, detailed
-
by MattRosoff
October 9, 2007 3:06 PM PDT
- To the commenter regarding wireless syncing: it's true that AUTOMATIC wireless syncing requires the Zune to be in a dock. In my case, I have my Zune dock connected to my little music player upstairs, and my computer with all my music on it downstairs, so this is actually useful. But you can do a MANUAL wireless sync from anywhere within range of your network. The reason they didn't do auto-sync from the second you walked into range was to save on battery life.
-
Reply to this comment
-
(15 Comments)