URGE is no iTunes overall, but it is really sleek and cool. And it does beat iTunes if you like to discover new music. For example, by including audio podcasts from mp3 blog superstars like FluxBlog (fluxblog.com), Microsoft seems to be trying to tap into the undeground music scenes a bit, too.
Now, if only we could do something about the DRM issue.
Give it an artist you like, and it will start streaming tracks that its team of music analysts (humans) have classified as similar across a number of vectors.
I just happened to scan through then pro and con postings about MS versus Apple. Personally, I have always been using a PC and labtop that are loaded with XP. That was before I purchased an Apple iBook G5; and, since then, I have ditched (donated to non-profit org's) both PC and laptop and use the Apple exclusively. The Apple iBook is real fast, booting up in a zippy; and, it is so easy to use. In addtion, I have also purchased a 30GB IPOD. It is such a great device that can hold a lot of music, and it can also be used as an USB external disk drive, which is extremly handy for temporary storage. In fact, a friend of mine has setup the IPOD as an external USB boot disk.
In conclusion, Apple has done its homeworks and produce an exceptional product.
"Technology critic Paul Thurrott, for example, gushed in a review on his Web site that despite being an avid iTunes user, he found himself "drawn to Windows Media Player 11" because it "offers dramatically better performance" than iTunes."
LOL, Paul Thurrott is an M$ tool, what else is he going to say but gush over a Microsoft product... pretty much the same as any CNET "news" :/
I'm running a Powerbook G3 Series Mac laptop with 10.2.8 and it performs admirably with iTunes.
On its way from Suzhou China as we speak is a MacBook. When it gets here Wednesday, within 10 minutes of delivery I will be playing shared music from my G4.
Paul Thurrott speaks about better performance in his conclusion, but doesn't clarify what aspect he is referring to.
Faster at moving through the interface? Faster at loading online store offerings? Playing back compressed audio with less CPU overhead? What else is there?
I can imagine there could be better performance in the interface, given that WMP is Windows native and Apple's iTunes is basically a Mac program being emulated on Windows (look at the blue scrollbars, etc). iTunes is still pretty smooth to use though.
For loading online content, given that it's a beta store and doesn't yet have millions of users taking bandwidth from its servers, I could imagine it is.
He also says WMP is better looking? After spending years being puzzled by the cryptic little symbols dotted around the WMP interface, all I can say is thank god for the "ugly" but simple brushed metal iTunes.
well maybe she doesnt want to be a conformist like everyone else? or maybe she doesnt want to shell out 300-400 dollars for a MP3 player when she could get the Creative Nomad for much less at the same capacity.
For me, the perfect music service would be one that:
1.)Offers both pay-per-song and monthly subscription service options.
2.)Offers song downloads in both compressed and lossless formats.
Don't underestimate Microsoft's ability to eventually surpass Apple, and don't underestimate Apple's ability to "blow it". The battle has just started - check back in another five years.
I don't know about URGE, but I know that other services have the option of the subscription with permanent downloads at a discount, if that is what you were talking about.
Actually, the battle started several years ago. This isn't MS's first attempt at trying to steal the jewels from the iTunes/iPod crown. If I'm not mistaken, the URGE/WMP combo will be their third failed attempt.
Gee MS, you must be getting old. It only took you one attempt with Netscape!
Don't underestimate Apple's ability to always surpass Microsoft at everything they do, before they 'do' it, and don't underestimate Microsoft's ability to "blow".
I agree that apple could blow it, but one of the biggest hurdles of the new Urge service is that WMA is totally non mac compatable. Microsoft doesn't want it to be nor does apple. It will impinge on Apples "Ecosystem". When you are marketing a product to 30% of the users thats also a problem. Also take into consideration that yeah all the online music is cool but still most people would prefer to buy a cD and make it MP3.
Optimally if APple wanted to squish Microsoft they would need to: 1. Offer a cheaper subscription service (mind you you can't put these on your MP3 player (no one is talking about that!)) Maybe tie it in to .Mac 2. A new more inovative player iPod Video 2.0 3. A new more robust player.
Apple is dominant... but they have blown dominance b4.
Microsoft has made Windows Media Player for Mac and is available at <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.microsoft.com/mac/otherproducts/otherproducts.aspx?pid=windowsmedia" target="_newWindow">http://www.microsoft.com/mac/otherproducts/otherproducts.aspx?pid=windowsmedia</a>
I am not sure if it would play protected music. But it can sure play wma and wmv files. I recently read somewhere that Microsoft would stop making newer versions of Windows Media Player and Internet Explorer for Mac. I think this makes sense as the market share of Apple is only 3% and it may not be economically viable to make products for that market
"Technology critic Paul Thurrott, for example, gushed in a review on his Web site that despite being an avid iTunes user, he found himself "drawn to Windows Media Player 11" because it "offers dramatically better performance" than iTunes."
That's a subjective statement! I prefer a simple user interface where everything is easily accessible. Podcast, Audiobooks, TV Shows, soon movies, and oh also 2 million songs. That to me is a dramatically better performance. You want Audiobooks (Audible is in partnership with Apple), go into the Audiobooks section, one-click, and a few seconds later the book is downloaded ready to sync with your iPod. No signing into different accounts, or going into different services, everything is integrated into iTunes.
"The products by Apple's rivals only confuse consumers," said Shaw Wu, a financial analyst with American Technology Research. "The public doesn't know their names or which device is better from the next. Apple's approach is pretty simple and straightforward."
Exactly.
"For a company to win the digital music market, say analysts, it needs to duplicate that stereo system simplicity."
That's the very reason Apple has taken the lead (with help from advertising sure). Consumer electronics are not PCs. They are consumer electronics and should be simple enough for the average consumer who wants to transition from a Sony Walkman to do so. I laugh when I see PVP/MP3 trying to replicate the Windows PC environment using (Folders, Root file, etc).
A good start but ways to go to catch up to the iPod/iTunes
iTunes is in twenty-one countries Music, TV Shows, Vid/Potcast, Audiobooks, all integrated beautifully into iTunes, that then syncs an exact replica to the iPod, no guess work needed.
I have been using Windows Media player for last couple of years and I am completly used to the interface, tips and tricks associated with it. In some cases I find iTunes harder to use than WMP. Same is the case with people using iTunes who try out WMP. So, the answer to the question "which one is easier to use" will be different for different people.
Audible might be easier to use with iTunes, but it works equally good with other devices. Audible is compatible with more than a hundred 'non-iPod' portable music players. Besides, how many people use Audible anyways? I haven't met even one yet.
Microsoft is trying to have a stereo system like simplicity with it's Windows XP Media Center Edition and a newer version in upcoming Vista. It integrates all the media, from Videos, Pictures, Music and TV into one unit, which until now was not possible with a stereo system. If you try it once, you will know what I am talking about
apple's itunes and and ipod set up is a wonderful thing. i don't own an ipod though, and probably never will. they have done a great job creating simplicity with their system, and it's true, nothing that MS ever does will be as simple. that's because (like has been said a million times) MS doesn't have control and make the player and the DL service. so right now, that's easily enough incentive to stick with them, or jump on the apple bandwagon right now.
their problems are going to start happening when two things occur: 1. companies start consistantly making players as good and better than apple 2. the ipod craze/fad/etc wears off
i'm not saying thier whole dominance is because of the image they've created, but it largely is. they created a valid image as "the mp3 player" because it was the best. but it's been seen over and over that as everyone gets an ipod (dick cheney has one for God's sake, how uncool is that??) people will want one less and less. as those sentiments grow, someone will come out with a great player and give everyone who didnt' want an ipod the option they're looking for.
that's where apple's problems will start. another player will become all the rage and people will say "wow, that's hot, i want it!" but when they have to stick with an ipod because apple closed the system, there will be massive backlash by the people who bought one because it was an ipod and not because they're the "apple faithful." granted, some people will stay because they can't justify giving up the library they've purchased, but they'll cease to preach the "apple gospel" of how great it is.
apple needs to open up it's DRM to stay dominant or they will have to make the hands down best MP3/video players or they will see the rock on one side and hard place on the other.
"Of course, tech historians may recall that Apple's go-it-alone approach to the PC was one of the reasons Microsoft ultimately gained control of the desktop. People initially scoffed at Microsoft's operating system. But with every new version, it got a little better. Microsoft also partnered with far more PC and software makers and, ultimately, drove Apple into a corner of the market."
This quote slays me. The situation with Mac vs. PC was entirely different than what we now have with iPods vs. everybody else. Business & Corporate IT made MS what it is today. The Mac NEVER, ever had more than 10 to 20 % market share at it's height. If Apple had made a seamless transition between the Apple II and the Mac, it might have held on to the early lead it had with personal computers. Apple was also one of the worst managed companies from the late 80s to the late 90s. That had more to do with their small market share than their "failure" to license the OS. With the iPod, however, corporate IT is not part of the equation. The iPod is a purely consumer product and consumers are unwilling to put up with the same crap from MS that corporate types seem to accept blindly.
So, the only evidence you found is a paid MS consultant who said he might switch to WMA 11?
That's a fine bit of reporting - and of course, dragging misapplied history into the equation. When MS controls a monopoly (desktop, servers), they are deadly (to most companies and as governments have determined - illegal) but when they have a fair fight where CONSUMERS get to choose - they do not choose MS because unlike corporations, we are NOT willing to pay for something that might work years down the line ... hence MS's failure in MSN, the internet search, MS watches, MS home networking, etc, etc ... even the XBox has cost them $10 billion dollars to sell 25 million boxes - success?
MTV has been selling music online for YEARS 9in case you decide to do research next time) and so has MS without success - and the latest reviews, WMA 11 is still difficult to use ... and ipod competitors? Like the one you cited? The screen turns itself off after a minute - no, not dims itself - TURNS ITSELF OFF ...
Yes, right now, the only people who are not buying ipods are:
a) cheapskates b) people with psychological problems in buying anything popular - that if it's popular, it must be dumb.
That's not much of an audience. It is an audience - just not much of one because they will CLEARLY not be buying tracks online because they are cheapskates.
Is it better than before ... but it's 1965 and MS is B&W and the ipod is COLOR TV - what are you going to buy so you don't have to explain to your neighbors?
Both Windows Media Palyer 11 and iTunes 6 got a rating of 8.0 on CNET review. So, it's not only 'the paid consultant' who is saying this.
and think before you use the work cheapskates for people who don't buy their music online... Just in case you don't know, 95% music is still sold through conventional means like CDs and cassettes and only 5% is sold online. I think the word is 'Smart Buying' which most appropriatly describes people who don't buy iPods and don't fall into the viscious cycle of iTunes store and iPod.
Like someone said before on one of these forums, apple has sold 50 million iPods and 1 billion tracks, giving an average of only 20 tracks per iPod. So either they are big fools, buying a 30 gig iPod to store only 20 songs or they are buying it elsewhere (outside iTunes), or in your own words, being cheap. And if you are an iPod owner, you fall in one of these two categories.
microsoft hit a grandslam by corning the corporte market, and of course employees had to be "compatible" with the office so it translated in the home PC sales. However I've been stunned to see Google, Yahoo and Apple run rings around them of late, and it will likely get worse.
I guess they will have to bundle every song known to man in the next version of Windows.
This Author has no CLUE to what actually happened, he mistakenly thinks the Macintosh has low marketshare because "Apple went it's own way"
WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It has lower marketshare for 2 main reasons. 1st and foremost is Steve Jobs LEFT in 1985, 2 years into the early days of the Mac. If this wouldn't have happened, Macs would enjoy very similar marketshare that the iPod enjoys today and will for decades to come.
2nd, when Steve left Apple management maintained high pricing when they should have became real and lowered pricing to keep Windows out of the market. Apple is doing EXACTLY that with the iPod so there is no way a 2nd competitor can emerge.
So PLEASE Wake UP to the FACT, the Mac Marketshare is NO WAY related to iPod Marketshare, unless you TOTALLY ignore what actually happen.
Wise up Authors... you don't have a CLUE when you spout nonsense, based on the WRONG FACTS.
Both the iPod and new Macs running OSX will increase marketshare for many years to come.
Yeah! You should apply for a job at cnet and write about what you think is correct. Should we expect to see your articles here 10-15 yrs down the line.
Or if you think you can't accomplish that, maybe you shouldn't read the articles on this website...
I agree. I am a long time Windows user, still have it because I need it for work. But when it came time to buy a new computer, I went straight to the Apple store, pulled out my Visa Card and my studen ID to get a $300 discount and purchased a brand new G5 (which I love). MS never came out with a product that I like to much.
I must admit in liking their xbox 360, but that's about it. I like the Office Excel/Access, but I think Office 2007 will mess all that up and I am going to be a hater of that update.
I can't see the sense on why people want to give Microsoft more money?
They basically haven't produced anything significant in the last few years except security updates. They have an OS that has stalled in production several times. The OS is practically five years old already and has never been out of beta in its five year history. They have a gaming machine that will eventually lose to Sony's Playstation. They've come up with such a gimmicky online service that only serves to extract more money from its customers called LIVE. They have an online music service that really in all honesty, won't show any real profit unless Itunes and Ipod all of a sudden disappear. They are seriously trying to compete in search by using their aging brand name in the hopes that people will still view them as a competitor, certainly there hasn't been any real innovativeness coming out of Redmond in the last five years except, to be frank their practice of copying others. I mean how long should this lie of a company surivive.... and how does Microsoft existence help consumers if they haven't really shown any real innovativeness in this industry?
I recently installed Windows Media Player 11 and was quite impressed with the user interface. Before this I hadn't used much albumart, but WMP 11 made adding albumart a breeze. I did some image search on google and drag n dropped images in WMP 11. It can't get any easier.
Just look at these screenshots: <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/wmp11_review_06.jpg" target="_newWindow">http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/wmp11_review_06.jpg</a> <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/wmp11_review_03.jpg" target="_newWindow">http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/wmp11_review_03.jpg</a>
This time, let's see if iTunes copies this feature to be as nice looking as WMP 11
This has been a no-brainer in iTunes since before the iTunes music store. And, you don't have to drag and drop each one, you can do your entire library automatically. Or, haven't you been paying attention? I see from your other comments that you have a psychological problem with anything Apple.
Drag and drop actually WORKS in media player? Wow, that IS news! You mean it 'works' in the Microsoft sense (hardly at all) or in the Apple sense (as any rational person would expect.)
Paul's real conclusion--he's not switching from iTunes
CNet didn't print the full conclusion. Here is the missing excerpt:
"Despite being an avid iTunes user for the past few years, I find myself drawn to Windows Media Player 11. It's better looking, has a better user interface, and offers dramatically better performance than Apple's entry. What's lacking are iPod integration and a few iTunes-related niceties that I've come to expect, such as integrated support for podcasts and a decent tag editor. Unfortunately, these are basically must-have items for me, so I won't be switching to WMP 11."
I am sure you must have heard about the Blu-ray Disc and the HD DVD which are two competing formats for the next generation of DVDs.
In case you don't know, Blu-ray Disc is backed a quite a few companies including Apple and similarly, HD DVD is suppored by a couple of companies including Microsoft.
Here come the interesting part.... Blu-ray disc supports Windows Media 9 codec, which means, it would play WMV and WMA files. Just in case you don't believe me, follow the link <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.bluraydisc.com/top/search/Article-14883.html" target="_newWindow">http://www.bluraydisc.com/top/search/Article-14883.html</a>
and.. it doesn't support MOV and AAC format
...and just to remind the Apple fanatics... Apple supports Blu-ray and Microsoft doesn't
As soon as iTunes became available for Windows(or as soon as I found out it was), I immediately downloaded and have used it ever since. It was just a fantastic and easy way to organize music(even though I had no iPod). While making some internet rounds I saw that the new WMP 11 Beta was up and just decided to download it thinking, "what could happen?"
What actually happened is now I'm using WMP 11 more than I'm using iTunes. It's extremely easy to use(then again, I've had experience in most mainstream media players). Plus the fact that I can hook up mu Nano to it has stopped me from using iTunes almost completely. I do however regurlarly check iTunes for podcasts, since I was amazingly dissapointed that WMP doesn't offer support for that(or if it does, it's not boasted as it in iTunes)
I say to everyone to at least try it. Reviews however positive or negative, do not give an accurate representation of the design of this player. Fantastic Microsoft, you've won me over, for now.
Oh, let's cut the crap. The iPod's so cute you just WANT to have one, which is more than I'll ever so abaout the offerings of sony and the like... As long as that is the case, I guess Jobs doesn't have to bother that much.
MS should also kill Symantec, another market lost to monopoly
So, MS can't protect it's software from virus, spam, etc, so what is it doing? It's entering a market (antivirus) that has been vibrant (there are so many holes to patch!) and will close that market because no can compete after MS enters a market.
Try getting Venture Capital for any software that competes head to head with Office, or Windows, or Powerpoint, or... Game over for Symantec and they know it. Others will follow. Open market? Competition? Choice?
My son wanted the full experience, so we input my credit card number for the full Urge ($14.95) service. It didn't work. Couldn't synch songs with his "Plays for Sure", certified on the MS website player. Checked the FAQs and there was no help there. Turned off the account. Now I expect I'll have to battle a credit card charge for a service that was not delivered as advertised.
Maybe he'll be back when they fix it. Maybe he won't. Personally, I don't listen to RIAA music and would just as soon my son boycotted them, too.
I think WMP 11 is a big improvement upon WMP 10. The biggest improvement was the way album art is integrated into the system. Looking at album art in my CD case makes me remember what I have more than looking at a long list of songs, which is the method used in WMP 10 (to an extent) and iTunes and eveything else out there. So, when this feature was included in WMP 11, I was really excited. My library seems more organized now. URGE has a lot of potential as well. I am not a heavy music purchaser, most of the stuff I want that isn't on URGE (and MSN) isn't on iTunes either.
The only problem I have is the inability to play music from old Creative Jukebox Zen NX player in WMP11. I have a 4 year old computer with a 20GB hard drive, so I can't put all of my CDs on my computer. I don't know if this is an "old MP3 player" issue or what. I can still add and delete tracks though. And the library is managed the same as the library on my computer.
WMP 11 is a great product and it has tons of potential.
I think everyone needs to stop yelling "shill" "fanboy" etc and actually review the software. For disclosure, I am a Windows user that uses Itunes on all my computers for music. I have used it since the first time it came out on PC. I downloaded Media Player 11 and have used it for a little bit. It is miles ahead of Media Player 10 already and in its final release will be even farther I suspect. The simplicity of Itunes can't be matched, but this new player is intriguing to me. The interface is extremely smooth and responsive, and yes I know Itunes works much better on a mac, but the fact remains this one is more responsive. I can only deal in reality. I still don't like how this and itunes make playlists, but that is a seperate issue. The volume and other things at the bottom of the default skin is more to my taste than itunes, but that is personal preference.
So to not get into the details, my overall findings was that itunes still rocks in main interface simplicity and ease of finding things. However, for ripping, organizing, and syncing things media player wins by a wide margin. The album organization is awesome and fast too. I looked online for reviews on media player 11 and there are good review almost across the board from a wide variety of different people. The nice thing is that MS actually brought something of their own to the table this time instead of purely ripping off itunes. I still think I will use Itunes in the near future anyway.
Manage updates with the Download App
Competition = Good news for customers
URGE is no iTunes overall, but it is really sleek and cool. And it does beat iTunes if you like to discover new music. For example, by including audio podcasts from mp3 blog superstars like FluxBlog (fluxblog.com), Microsoft seems to be trying to tap into the undeground music scenes a bit, too.
Now, if only we could do something about the DRM issue.
Give it an artist you like, and it will start streaming tracks that its
team of music analysts (humans) have classified as similar
across a number of vectors.
I often have it on all day.
In conclusion, Apple has done its homeworks and produce an exceptional product.
on his Web site that despite being an avid iTunes user, he found
himself "drawn to Windows Media Player 11" because it "offers
dramatically better performance" than iTunes."
LOL, Paul Thurrott is an M$ tool, what else is he going to say but
gush over a Microsoft product... pretty much the same as any CNET
"news" :/
and it performs admirably with iTunes.
On its way from Suzhou China as we speak is a MacBook.
When it gets here Wednesday, within 10 minutes of delivery
I will be playing shared music from my G4.
Good luck M$.
conclusion, but doesn't clarify what aspect he is referring to.
Faster at moving through the interface? Faster at loading online
store offerings? Playing back compressed audio with less CPU
overhead? What else is there?
I can imagine there could be better performance in the interface,
given that WMP is Windows native and Apple's iTunes is basically
a Mac program being emulated on Windows (look at the blue
scrollbars, etc). iTunes is still pretty smooth to use though.
For loading online content, given that it's a beta store and
doesn't yet have millions of users taking bandwidth from its
servers, I could imagine it is.
He also says WMP is better looking? After spending years being
puzzled by the cryptic little symbols dotted around the WMP
interface, all I can say is thank god for the "ugly" but simple
brushed metal iTunes.
"because everybody else has one."
Some people just don't get it and that's M$ only chance - mopping
up the stragglers
1.)Offers both pay-per-song and monthly subscription service options.
2.)Offers song downloads in both compressed and lossless formats.
Don't underestimate Microsoft's ability to eventually surpass Apple, and don't underestimate Apple's ability to "blow it". The battle has just started - check back in another five years.
Gee MS, you must be getting old. It only took you one attempt with Netscape!
Don't underestimate Apple's ability to always surpass Microsoft at
everything they do, before they 'do' it, and don't underestimate
Microsoft's ability to "blow".
Optimally if APple wanted to squish Microsoft they would need to:
1. Offer a cheaper subscription service (mind you you can't put these on your MP3 player (no one is talking about that!)) Maybe tie it in to .Mac
2. A new more inovative player iPod Video 2.0
3. A new more robust player.
Apple is dominant... but they have blown dominance b4.
PS- im an apple fan
I am not sure if it would play protected music. But it can sure play wma and wmv files. I recently read somewhere that Microsoft would stop making newer versions of Windows Media Player and Internet Explorer for Mac. I think this makes sense as the market share of Apple is only 3% and it may not be economically viable to make products for that market
My butt cheeks could come up with better advertising than that..I thought Apple was a great marketing company...Guesss not.
ps: 1/16th apple fan.
"Technology critic Paul Thurrott, for example, gushed in a review on his Web site that despite being an avid iTunes user, he found himself "drawn to Windows Media Player 11" because it "offers dramatically better performance" than iTunes."
That's a subjective statement! I prefer a simple user interface where everything is easily accessible. Podcast, Audiobooks, TV Shows, soon movies, and oh also 2 million songs. That to me is a dramatically better performance. You want Audiobooks (Audible is in partnership with Apple), go into the Audiobooks section, one-click, and a few seconds later the book is downloaded ready to sync with your iPod. No signing into different accounts, or going into different services, everything is integrated into iTunes.
"The products by Apple's rivals only confuse consumers," said Shaw Wu, a financial analyst with American Technology Research. "The public doesn't know their names or which device is better from the next. Apple's approach is pretty simple and straightforward."
Exactly.
"For a company to win the digital music market, say analysts, it needs to duplicate that stereo system simplicity."
That's the very reason Apple has taken the lead (with help from advertising sure). Consumer electronics are not PCs. They are consumer electronics and should be simple enough for the average consumer who wants to transition from a Sony Walkman to do so. I laugh when I see PVP/MP3 trying to replicate the Windows PC environment using (Folders, Root file, etc).
A good start but ways to go to catch up to the iPod/iTunes
iTunes is in twenty-one countries
Music, TV Shows, Vid/Potcast, Audiobooks, all integrated beautifully into iTunes, that then syncs an exact replica to the iPod, no guess work needed.
Audible might be easier to use with iTunes, but it works equally good with other devices. Audible is compatible with more than a hundred 'non-iPod' portable music players. Besides, how many people use Audible anyways? I haven't met even one yet.
Microsoft is trying to have a stereo system like simplicity with it's Windows XP Media Center Edition and a newer version in upcoming Vista. It integrates all the media, from Videos, Pictures, Music and TV into one unit, which until now was not possible with a stereo system. If you try it once, you will know what I am talking about
Microsoft is the underdog in this space?
Don't they already dominate enough with their respective
monopolies?
But hey competition is good for consumers, thanks Apple.
At least with Microsoft music software, users can choose different music player hardware, and different music services.
iPod/iTunes is a closed Apple-only system.
Apple is the monopoly in this space?
their problems are going to start happening when two things occur:
1. companies start consistantly making players as good and better than apple
2. the ipod craze/fad/etc wears off
i'm not saying thier whole dominance is because of the image they've created, but it largely is. they created a valid image as "the mp3 player" because it was the best. but it's been seen over and over that as everyone gets an ipod (dick cheney has one for God's sake, how uncool is that??) people will want one less and less. as those sentiments grow, someone will come out with a great player and give everyone who didnt' want an ipod the option they're looking for.
that's where apple's problems will start. another player will become all the rage and people will say "wow, that's hot, i want it!" but when they have to stick with an ipod because apple closed the system, there will be massive backlash by the people who bought one because it was an ipod and not because they're the "apple faithful." granted, some people will stay because they can't justify giving up the library they've purchased, but they'll cease to preach the "apple gospel" of how great it is.
apple needs to open up it's DRM to stay dominant or they will have to make the hands down best MP3/video players or they will see the rock on one side and hard place on the other.
approach to the PC was one of the reasons Microsoft ultimately
gained control of the desktop. People initially scoffed at
Microsoft's operating system. But with every new version, it got
a little better. Microsoft also partnered with far more PC and
software makers and, ultimately, drove Apple into a corner of
the market."
This quote slays me. The situation with Mac vs. PC was entirely
different than what we now have with iPods vs. everybody else.
Business & Corporate IT made MS what it is today. The Mac
NEVER, ever had more than 10 to 20 % market share at it's
height. If Apple had made a seamless transition between the
Apple II and the Mac, it might have held on to the early lead it
had with personal computers. Apple was also one of the worst
managed companies from the late 80s to the late 90s. That had
more to do with their small market share than their "failure" to
license the OS.
With the iPod, however, corporate IT is not part of the equation.
The iPod is a purely consumer product and consumers are
unwilling to put up with the same crap from MS that corporate
types seem to accept blindly.
That's a fine bit of reporting - and of course, dragging misapplied history into the equation. When MS controls a monopoly (desktop, servers), they are deadly (to most companies and as governments have determined - illegal) but when they have a fair fight where CONSUMERS get to choose - they do not choose MS because unlike corporations, we are NOT willing to pay for something that might work years down the line ... hence MS's failure in MSN, the internet search, MS watches, MS home networking, etc, etc ... even the XBox has cost them $10 billion dollars to sell 25 million boxes - success?
MTV has been selling music online for YEARS 9in case you decide to do research next time) and so has MS without success - and the latest reviews, WMA 11 is still difficult to use ... and ipod competitors? Like the one you cited? The screen turns itself off after a minute - no, not dims itself - TURNS ITSELF OFF ...
Yes, right now, the only people who are not buying ipods are:
a) cheapskates
b) people with psychological problems in buying anything popular - that if it's popular, it must be dumb.
That's not much of an audience. It is an audience - just not much of one because they will CLEARLY not be buying tracks online because they are cheapskates.
Is it better than before ... but it's 1965 and MS is B&W and the ipod is COLOR TV - what are you going to buy so you don't have to explain to your neighbors?
and think before you use the work cheapskates for people who don't buy their music online... Just in case you don't know, 95% music is still sold through conventional means like CDs and cassettes and only 5% is sold online. I think the word is 'Smart Buying' which most appropriatly describes people who don't buy iPods and don't fall into the viscious cycle of iTunes store and iPod.
Like someone said before on one of these forums, apple has sold 50 million iPods and 1 billion tracks, giving an average of only 20 tracks per iPod. So either they are big fools, buying a 30 gig iPod to store only 20 songs or they are buying it elsewhere (outside iTunes), or in your own words, being cheap. And if you are an iPod owner, you fall in one of these two categories.
I guess they will have to bundle every song known to man in the next version of Windows.
WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It has lower marketshare for 2 main reasons. 1st and foremost is Steve Jobs LEFT in 1985, 2 years into the early days of the Mac. If this wouldn't have happened, Macs would enjoy very similar marketshare that the iPod enjoys today and will for decades to come.
2nd, when Steve left Apple management maintained high pricing when they should have became real and lowered pricing to keep Windows out of the market. Apple is doing EXACTLY that with the iPod so there is no way a 2nd competitor can emerge.
So PLEASE Wake UP to the FACT, the Mac Marketshare is NO WAY related to iPod Marketshare, unless you TOTALLY ignore what actually happen.
Wise up Authors... you don't have a CLUE when you spout nonsense, based on the WRONG FACTS.
Both the iPod and new Macs running OSX will increase marketshare for many years to come.
-
Or if you think you can't accomplish that, maybe you shouldn't read the articles on this website...
I must admit in liking their xbox 360, but that's about it. I like the Office Excel/Access, but I think Office 2007 will mess all that up and I am going to be a hater of that update.
money?
They basically haven't produced anything significant in the last
few years except security updates. They have an OS that has
stalled in production several times. The OS is practically five
years old already and has never been out of beta in its five year
history. They have a gaming machine that will eventually lose to
Sony's Playstation. They've come up with such a gimmicky online
service that only serves to extract more money from its
customers called LIVE. They have an online music service that
really in all honesty, won't show any real profit unless Itunes and
Ipod all of a sudden disappear. They are seriously trying to
compete in search by using their aging brand name in the hopes
that people will still view them as a competitor, certainly there
hasn't been any real innovativeness coming out of Redmond in
the last five years except, to be frank their practice of copying
others. I mean how long should this lie of a company surivive....
and how does Microsoft existence help consumers if they
haven't really shown any real innovativeness in this industry?
Just look at these screenshots: <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/wmp11_review_06.jpg" target="_newWindow">http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/wmp11_review_06.jpg</a>
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/wmp11_review_03.jpg" target="_newWindow">http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/wmp11_review_03.jpg</a>
This time, let's see if iTunes copies this feature to be as nice looking as WMP 11
music store. And, you don't have to drag and drop each one,
you can do your entire library automatically. Or, haven't you
been paying attention? I see from your other comments that
you have a psychological problem with anything Apple.
Drag and drop actually WORKS in media player? Wow, that IS
news! You mean it 'works' in the Microsoft sense (hardly at all)
or in the Apple sense (as any rational person would expect.)
"Despite being an avid iTunes user for the past few years, I find
myself drawn to Windows Media Player 11. It's better looking,
has a better user interface, and offers dramatically better
performance than Apple's entry. What's lacking are iPod
integration and a few iTunes-related niceties that I've come to
expect, such as integrated support for podcasts and a decent
tag editor. Unfortunately, these are basically must-have items
for me, so I won't be switching to WMP 11."
In case you don't know, Blu-ray Disc is backed a quite a few companies including Apple and similarly, HD DVD is suppored by a couple of companies including Microsoft.
Here come the interesting part.... Blu-ray disc supports Windows Media 9 codec, which means, it would play WMV and WMA files. Just in case you don't believe me, follow the link <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.bluraydisc.com/top/search/Article-14883.html" target="_newWindow">http://www.bluraydisc.com/top/search/Article-14883.html</a>
and.. it doesn't support MOV and AAC format
...and just to remind the Apple fanatics... Apple supports Blu-ray and Microsoft doesn't
What actually happened is now I'm using WMP 11 more than I'm using iTunes. It's extremely easy to use(then again, I've had experience in most mainstream media players). Plus the fact that I can hook up mu Nano to it has stopped me from using iTunes almost completely. I do however regurlarly check iTunes for podcasts, since I was amazingly dissapointed that WMP doesn't offer support for that(or if it does, it's not boasted as it in iTunes)
I say to everyone to at least try it. Reviews however positive or negative, do not give an accurate representation of the design of this player. Fantastic Microsoft, you've won me over, for now.
Really.
doing? It's entering a market (antivirus) that has been vibrant (there
are so many holes to patch!) and will close that market because no
can compete after MS enters a market.
Try getting Venture Capital for any software that competes head to
head with Office, or Windows, or Powerpoint, or...
Game over for Symantec and they know it. Others will follow. Open
market? Competition? Choice?
Maybe he'll be back when they fix it. Maybe he won't. Personally, I don't listen to RIAA music and would just as soon my son boycotted them, too.
mark d.
I have absolutely no issues with synching this unit with WMP10 right out of the box. I'm sure it is as easy as using the Apple combo.
WMP11 is a nice upgrade in looks.
I'll take my money saved vs purchasing an Apple product and be able to purchase more content.
Please stop it.
: )
The only problem I have is the inability to play music from old Creative Jukebox Zen NX player in WMP11. I have a 4 year old computer with a 20GB hard drive, so I can't put all of my CDs on my computer. I don't know if this is an "old MP3 player" issue or what. I can still add and delete tracks though. And the library is managed the same as the library on my computer.
WMP 11 is a great product and it has tons of potential.
So to not get into the details, my overall findings was that itunes still rocks in main interface simplicity and ease of finding things. However, for ripping, organizing, and syncing things media player wins by a wide margin. The album organization is awesome and fast too. I looked online for reviews on media player 11 and there are good review almost across the board from a wide variety of different people. The nice thing is that MS actually brought something of their own to the table this time instead of purely ripping off itunes. I still think I will use Itunes in the near future anyway.
...and didn't that iRiver line just get canceled?
sheesh