Microsoft Launches Zune HD [Archive] - Page 3

DMann

Sep 16, 2009, 03:21 PM

Yes I know. That's one of the reasons why AI has gone down the toilet.We get it - anyone who reveals valid and credible weaknesses with any of MS products, in your opinion, is toilet worthy.

For an individual user, a better viewing angle isn't too important. In a more social environment (say, if you're showing people some photos or videos on your phone), the viewing angle is more important than on, say, a TV, since the screen is so small.

I'd agree, that brightness is more important; if you use your phone outside a lot.Now this all depends on the user. I can think of many users who would prefer to have their private information less visible peripherally, especially in public places. While viewing media, though, under ideal lighting conditions, the trade-off between having a significantly smaller screen and wider viewing angle may work for the Zune. Here's hoping that the next iteration of OLED will be able to handle direct sunlight better with quasi-transflective pixels, in combination with brighter, adjustable luminescence. This would not only benefit the Zune, but the next revision of the iPhone/iPod touch as well.

CylonGlitch

Sep 16, 2009, 03:41 PM

Did I mention, I'm a Linux user, almost full time (work and at home), I also have a PS3. I don't have an iPod but I absolutely love my brother's iPhone 3GS and I absolutely enjoyed the days I was messing around with OS X (hackintosh, but I have the right to say the OS is great).

I don't understand the hate either, seriously. I was a PC fan for 25+ years and switched to Mac a few years ago. Sure it works for me, and does exactly what I want it to do without some of the headaches that Windows has. But it isn't perfect, nothing is. I run Windows 7 at home on some machines, and it's a good OS. I hated Vista, but it didn't bother me, I stuck with XP. I have Windows 7 on order, no big deal.

I switch to Mac in 1988 and man did things suck back then. PC's weren't great but Macs were just horrific. Color was a new thing and the Mac II (original) what a hunk of junk. The OS was buggy and unstable; I could not take it! After 6 months I sold the pig and stayed PC for close to 20 more years.

Will there come a day when there is something better then what I have now? Maybe, I don't see why not. What will I do? Switch. I try not to stay tied to any one vendor of anything.

Sometimes I sound like a fanboy but I just enjoy what I have right now. But that doesn't make it perfect for everyone, and that doesn't mean it will last forever. Enjoy what you have, here and now. Worry about tomorrow when that happens. :D

Ok, but sometimes it is fun to throw stones. :D Zune HD, is that 1% of their 1% market share? :D

BongoBanger

Sep 16, 2009, 03:44 PM

We get it - anyone who reveals valid and credible weaknesses with any of MS products, in your opinion, is toilet worthy.

Quite incorrect. There are many, many things wrong with Microsoft and many, many people have pointed them out quite rightly. Unfortunately Dilger has lost all perspective and credibility and is little more than an embarrassment.

I think it happened when he did a 180 on third party apps on mobile platforms or maybe it was when he invented the global conspiracy that Microsoft paid Charlie Miller and the other hackers to target Apple first. Perhaps earlier, who knows? Of course you will have your own opinions - there are two sides to every story after all.

Well unless you're Daniel Eran Dilger that is.

birch25

Sep 16, 2009, 04:00 PM

Competition is good when the other competitor isn't an entrenched monopoly known for peddling mediocre wares. Microsoft is not a healthy competitor and I really despise this argument that Microsoft competing with Apple is a good thing for all. No it isn't.

Microsoft needs to focus on 2 things... Windows and Office. Both are their bread and butter but they keep failing their shareholders by expanding into new markets and losing a ton of cash.

Had Palm not originally taken off, there never would've been WindowsCE.

Without the iPod, there would not be a Zune.

Without the iPod Touch, there would not be the ZuneHD.

I could go on an on...

Microsoft tries to destroy open standards every chance they get. That is not fair competition. Blu-ray was nearly undone by Microsoft propping up Toshiba's HD DVD merely in an effort to defeat the launch of the Playstation 3. Is that healthy competition? No.

What we are truly missing in MP3 player competition is a healthy Sony taking on Apple. I would love to see the market split between Apple and Sony but Sony has to overcome their ever persistent hurdle with software.

You criticize Microsoft for not embracing open standards but think Sony is who should be competing in this market? Sony is even worse! Have a Sony digital camera? It doesn't have an SD card but a Memory Stick. Have a PSP? It uses UMD instead of flash memory. Remember MiniDisk?

Microsoft has every right to compete in this market. The Zune HD is the best product on the market that competes with the iPod Touch. If nothing else, the Zune HD costs less than the 2G iTouch did and drove the prices of the new Touches down. I'm not saying I'm going to drop my Touch, but the Zune HD is a quality product.

clevin

Sep 16, 2009, 04:09 PM

We get it - anyone who reveals valid and credible weaknesses with any of MS products, in your opinion, is toilet worthy.

you don't have to pretend the opposite isn't true here. massive amount of people here won't tolerate any criticism of any apple products and being xxx about whoever post them.

I found apple critics here are usually more facts based than apple fanboys. and dont forget, those who pointing out apple's weakness are those who actually made contribution to the further products, that benefit both apple and apple fanboys who bought that products.

a thank you is not demanded, but dont be ungracious.

MacFly123

Sep 16, 2009, 04:15 PM

I think the facts are more profound if you just take a quick look at above photos.

e.g., your linked article says

now look at it, what do you think?

http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/6289/photo3xs.jpg

also the articles filled with tech terms, ended with conclusions that are filled with speculations or partial facts that may or may not be biased, I really dont think it would enlighten normal end users.

I agree. But for tech people like us, I thought it was very interesting. I realize it is very biased coming from Apple Insider, but there were some interesting points. Like the hype of the Tegra chip and the history of them being a former Apple supplier, and some of the numbers on OLED battery stats, etc.

I think the Zune HD is by far their best attempt yet, but it really is just a repackaged next attempt after multiple failures, which is what Microsoft pretty much always does. So no matter how cool they try to spin it, I don't think this one will be massively successful either. I do appreciate the competition to push Apple further though!

clevin

Sep 16, 2009, 04:18 PM

I agree. But for tech people like us, I thought it was very interesting. I realize it is very biased coming from Apple Insider, but there were some interesting points. Like the hype of the Tegra chip and the history of them being a former Apple supplier, and some of the numbers on OLED battery stats, etc.

i think the battery claim is unfounded, ZUNE HD has spec out for a while, and it apparently has longer battery life than iPT.

Tegra chip, I completely do NOT have opinion on it, however, I dont think THEY should have any prediction on that neither, to make a assertion on the future of a relatively new technology is just crazy.

MorphingDragon

Sep 16, 2009, 04:21 PM

you don't have to pretend the opposite isn't true here. massive amount of people here won't tolerate any criticism of any apple products and being xxx about whoever post them.

I found apple critics here are usually more facts based than apple fanboys. and dont forget, those who pointing out apple's weakness are those who actually made contribution to the further products, that benefit both apple and apple fanboys who bought that products.

a thank you is not demanded, but dont be ungracious.

So True.

The next iPod touch better blow my freaken mind or Im not gonna buy squat.

DMann

Sep 16, 2009, 04:22 PM

I don't understand the hate either, seriously. I was a PC fan for 25+ years and switched to Mac a few years ago. Sure it works for me, and does exactly what I want it to do without some of the headaches that Windows has. But it isn't perfect, nothing is. I run Windows 7 at home on some machines, and it's a good OS. I hated Vista, but it didn't bother me, I stuck with XP. I have Windows 7 on order, no big deal.

I switch to Mac in 1988 and man did things suck back then. PC's weren't great but Macs were just horrific. Color was a new thing and the Mac II (original) what a hunk of junk. The OS was buggy and unstable; I could not take it! After 6 months I sold the pig and stayed PC for close to 20 more years.

Will there come a day when there is something better then what I have now? Maybe, I don't see why not. What will I do? Switch. I try not to stay tied to any one vendor of anything.

Sometimes I sound like a fanboy but I just enjoy what I have right now. But that doesn't make it perfect for everyone, and that doesn't mean it will last forever. Enjoy what you have, here and now. Worry about tomorrow when that happens. :D

Ok, but sometimes it is fun to throw stones. :D Zune HD, is that 1% of their 1% market share? :DHad you held out for System 7 (1991) things would have been significantly better. I had 2 Mac Quadra 950s from '91-'95 before upgrading to Power PCs ('95-'02). Systems 9 was really, really stable, for running a recording studio, editing and burning digital media, arranging, printing & publishing music and journals. The Win3.1, 95, 98, 2000 machines I had were far too abysmal for productivity, incapable of handling QuarkExpress, Finale, Logic, Avid, Photoshop, & Toast without perpetually crashing. I switched over to 10.2 (Jaguar) in '02 after upgrading to G4s, then G5s, Pro towers, etc., and haven't looked back since. I continue to run a partition of W7 just in case the need arises, but this hasn't happened yet.

DMann

Sep 16, 2009, 04:41 PM

Quite incorrect. There are many, many things wrong with Microsoft and many, many people have pointed them out quite rightly. Unfortunately Dilger has lost all perspective and credibility and is little more than an embarrassment.

I think it happened when he did a 180 on third party apps on mobile platforms or maybe it was when he invented the global conspiracy that Microsoft paid Charlie Miller and the other hackers to target Apple first. Perhaps earlier, who knows? Of course you will have your own opinions - there are two sides to every story after all.

Well unless you're Daniel Eran Dilger that is.Yet you erroneously and haphazardly deemed Daniel Eran Dilger responsible for the writing in question:

I take the point about OLED screens but would point out that the examples given refer to first generation low nit screens (the N85 series 1 is a 170 nit screen - the series 2 replaced it with a superior 300 nit model).

Dilger's argument is spurious until we know the specifications of the Samsung AMS326FA05 display the Zune HD uses. I'm guessing it's a second geenration screen but let's wait and see.

However, let's not kid ourselves - OLED screens are the way forward and I find it ironic that Dilger - who is a critic of the OLED in the Zune - was waxing lyrical about the possibility of an OLED in the rumoured iPad.

That's the problem with Dilger - he's inconsistent and doesn't do enough research. That and he's quite mad obviously.If anyone "has lost all perspective and credibility and is little more than an embarrassment," that would be you. The great extent of derisive and pejorative finger pointing emanating from you, is quite hypocritical, to say the very least.

LagunaSol

Sep 16, 2009, 05:06 PM

Gizmodo review " The Zune HD is the best touchscreen PMP on the market. enuff said!

This is kind of like saying "X is the best SUV on the market!" - when the market doesn't really care about SUVs any longer.

I'm sure the Zune HD is a great device, but the world has moved on from PMPs that do nothing but play music and videos. 2 years ago the Zune HD would have been a hot item. But I think in 2009 it will get mostly yawns from consumers. Why buy a music/video-only PMP when, for the same money, I can also use email, Facebook, eBay, Evernote, Shazam, Slacker Radio, Google Maps, and any one of thousands of other things? I wouldn't. Nor would 99% of other buyers. These are the facts. And the Zune fanboys (yep, it swings both ways people) may rant and rave about it, but those facts won't change.

A lot of the reviews I've read claim that Microsoft isn't trying to compete with the iPod touch. I disagree. In fact, the argument is laughable. I think they merely aren't able to compete yet, with the lack of a mature software foundation for the device. Can anyone say with a straight face that Microsoft isn't trying to take sales from the iPod touch? That they are perfectly content with the distant #2 spot? Please. Anyone who thinks Microsoft is happy with leftovers doesn't know Microsoft very well.

And what happens when the iPod touch has an OLED screen and a camera (which it will)? What will be the big sales pitch for the Zune HD? HD radio. Seriously? Yes, Apple blew it with such a wimpy update this month - they could have put a knife in the Zune HD right out of the oven. That said, you know these iPod updates are coming - and they'll just make the Zune HD look even more irrelevant.

It doesn't take an "Apple fanboy" (a favorite derisive around here) to recognize that the Zune HD is a new product in a product category the world is no longer really interested in. All those positive reviews from the tech punditry is not going to move these things off the shelves in any significant number.

Will the Zune add an SDK and an App Store? Eventually, sure. Probably when they announce the inevitable ZunePhone. Will it be too little, too late? Probably. Android and Palm can't get any real traction with their apps yet. By the time Microsoft enters the game, the outcome will have already been decided. But Microsoft will continue to pour billions into its Xbox/Zune efforts in a desperate quest for "cool."

clevin

Sep 16, 2009, 05:17 PM

Why buy a music/video-only PMP when, for the same money, I can also use email, Facebook, eBay, Evernote, Shazam, Slacker Radio, Google Maps, and any one of thousands of other things? I wouldn't. Nor would 99% of other buyers. These are the facts. And the Zune fanboys (yep, it swings both ways people) may rant and rave about it, but those facts won't change.

Zune HD does browsing, you didn't get the data sheet? and facebook is in developing as well.

for the same money, with Zune HD, you got HD radio, fabulous UI, crazy beautiful display, great feeling and shape in hand and in front of people with large fat iPT, even free unique and fashionable engrave arts! Do those counts? of course they do for end users, only apple defender will intentionally ignore them.

MS probably did some market research and figure browser is THE most used features, which is probably true, correct?

not to mention, google map? gps? browser? ebay? do you even know any smartphone in the market don't do those? if people already have phones to do those, why exactly its important for Zune HD to have them?

99% of buyers? why people like you love to make up data from nowhere ALL THE TIME? is fact based discussion just beyond you guys?

KnightWRX

Sep 16, 2009, 05:23 PM

Except the browser is the atrocious IE 6. GG.

clevin

Sep 16, 2009, 05:28 PM

Except the browser is the atrocious IE 6. GG.

gizmodo seems to think its fine, I will test it when I got it.

kdarling

Sep 16, 2009, 05:32 PM

Except the browser is the atrocious IE 6. GG.

Naw, not really. That's just what they call it.

Mobile IE6 uses IE8's Javascript engine, for example. It also has some IE7 display features. But it's reportedly based on the lighter weight IE6 codebase, heavily modified.

IE6 has worked fine for years on my work computer. We have a lot of corporate sites that need to stay that way, too.

TuffLuffJimmy

Sep 16, 2009, 05:35 PM

IE6 has worked fine for years on my work computer. We have a lot of corporate sites that need to stay that way, too.

I take it you've never visited a web page in your life.

clevin

Sep 16, 2009, 05:37 PM

I take it you've never visited a web page in your life.

dont be too low, my friend, IE has 70% of market anyway, facts can not be denied, why making statement that has absolutely no meaning, except insulting other people?

TuffLuffJimmy

Sep 16, 2009, 05:42 PM

dont be too low, my friend, IE has 70% of market anyway, facts can not be denied, why making statement that has absolutely no meaning, except insulting other people?

Sorry I just have bad memories with that browser. I hadn't touched it in years, in fact it's highly probable that my last encounter with IE was IE 5, but I had to use it to test my web pages in a design course. Gah! Every line of code perfect, every bit of CSS formatted correctly, each drop of javascript written elegantly. Safari and Firefox both swam through my galleries and info pages, but the second I opened a site in IE 6 it would all fall apart. So many bad margins and several images misaligned.

Sorry, but IE 6 is a complete waste of code.

cumanzor

Sep 16, 2009, 05:43 PM

I take it you've never visited a web page in your life.

I take it you've never worked in a corporate environment before.

That being said, IE6 is the worst thing that could ever happened to the web.

DMann

Sep 16, 2009, 05:44 PM

Except the browser is the atrocious IE 6. GG.Actually, it is fine, as long as you can tolerate page load speeds of a dial-up modem:

http://static.arstechnica.com/2009/09/16/zune_bench.png

LagunaSol

Sep 16, 2009, 05:46 PM

Zune HD does browsing, you didn't get the data sheet? and facebook is in developing as well.

You might want to check the reviews on the Zune HD's browser experience. Try ArsTechnica. It's not good. [EDIT: I see DMann included the graph from the Ars review above. Ouch.]

And "in development" doesn't mean squat. Am I going to buy a device that promises some apps someday in the future or the device that offers 70,000 of them right now?

for the same money, with Zune HD, you got HD radio, fabulous UI, crazy beautiful display, great feeling and shape in hand and in front of people with large fat iPT, even free unique and fashionable engrave arts! Do those counts? of course they do for end users, only apple defender will intentionally ignore them.

Windows market share shows that people don't care about "fabulous UI" - they care about ubiquity.

iPod touch is "fat?" I believe it's thinner than the Zune HD, FYI.

"Unique and engrave arts?" Really? That's a selling point??? Geez, they should have thrown some neon lights in the Zune too to give it that true hardcore gamer vibe.

Not only will "Apple defenders" ignore these "features" you tout - the buying public will too. Watch.

not to mention, google map? gps? browser? ebay? do you even know any smartphone in the market don't do those? if people already have phones to do those, why exactly its important for Zune HD to have them?

Ah, so every potential Zune HD buyer already has a smartphone. Uh huh.

99% of buyers? why people like you love to make up data from nowhere ALL THE TIME? is fact based discussion just beyond you guys?

I'll let the sure-to-be-disappointing sales numbers for the Zune HD speak for themselves, just as the disappointing sales numbers for prior Zune models have done (which is, BTW, a fact).

I remember when FM radio and squirting songs was to be the death of the iPod. Ah, nostalgia...

The Zune vs. iPod arguments are funny though. The Microsoft defenders are now arguing the benefits of the snazzy UI on the Zune while the Apple fans argue for the vast ecosystem of the iPod. Talk about complete role reversal. Curious times indeed.

Even more curious is the adamant and vocal pro-Zune brigade on a Mac/Apple-centric forum for a device that 1) competes directly with an Apple product and 2) is not even Mac compatible. Curiouser and curiouser.

trekkie604

Sep 16, 2009, 05:46 PM

Actually, it is fine, as long as you can tolerate page load speeds of a dial-up modem:

http://static.arstechnica.com/2009/09/16/zune_bench.png

afaik my first-gen iPod touch with the original iPhone OS would have safari randomly quit for no reason. Growing pains, man.

clevin

Sep 16, 2009, 05:47 PM

Actually, it is fine, as long as you can tolerate page load speeds of a dial-up modem:

http://static.arstechnica.com/2009/09/16/zune_bench.png

I will copy my reply to this figure from another post to make sure readers understand what you are putting out.
gizmodo seems to think browser is fine.

Sunspider isn't exactly a test suite for mobile browsers, large amount of js functions just doesn't make any use on a mobile browser. e.g., a hovering event.

furthermore, sunspider runs each function 1 million times to measure difference, so that 184356 is merely 0.1s, can you tell?

on top of that, you are intentionally, or unknowingly, trying to equal JS speed to page loading speed, which is totally bogus.

You might want to check the reviews on the Zune HD's browser experience. Try ArsTechnica. It's not good.
1. you can pick and chose the reviews all you want, fact is ars stated "third time is a charm", with NO question mark, and it praise ZUNE HD in many aspect.
2. gizmodo has review as well, calling zune HD "best of the breed", and stated the browser experience is "fine".

I apparently checked more reviews than you, and I dont make statement like you do, based on partial facts, or no facts at all.
And "in development" doesn't mean squat. Am I going to buy a device that promises some apps someday in the future or the device that offers 70,000 of them right now?

yeah right, following your logic, people shouldn't buy mac at all, since windows obviously has way more apps, games, hardwares, peripherals, etc. which is fine, since macs has 4% market share anyway.

70,000 apps? who has 1000 on their iPT? do you?

and you dont have to assume zune app store is all air, many reviews indicated its probably true.

Windows market share shows that people don't care about "fabulous UI" - they care about ubiquity.
absurd, so only mac people know what fabulous stuff is? totally unfounded and completely apple jerky statement.
iPod touch is "fat?" I believe it's thinner than the Zune HD, FYI.
a hair thinner, while much wider, what does fat mean to you?
http://cache-foo-05.gawkerassets.com/gawker/assets/images/4/2009/09/500x_IMG_9348.jpg
http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/4/2009/09/500x_IMG_9349.jpg
"Unique and engrave arts?" Really? That's a selling point??? Geez, they should have thrown some neon lights in the Zune too to give it that true hardcore gamer vibe.
yeah right, anything apple products don't have is useless and unattractive, that apple fanboys' old tune, and idiotic.
Not only will "Apple defenders" ignore these "features" you tout - the buying public will too. Watch.

Ah, so every potential Zune HD buyer already has a smartphone. Uh huh.

I'll let the sure-to-be-disappointing sales numbers for the Zune HD speak for themselves, just as the disappointing sales numbers for prior Zune models have done (which is, BTW, a fact).

I remember when FM radio and squirting songs was to be the death of the iPod. Ah, nostalgia...

The Zune vs. iPod arguments are funny though. The Microsoft defenders are now arguing the benefits of the snazzy UI on the Zune while the Apple fans argue for the vast ecosystem of the iPod. Talk about complete role reversal. Curious times indeed.

Even more curious is the adamant and vocal pro-Zune brigade on a Mac/Apple-centric forum for a device that 1) competes directly with an Apple product and 2) is not even Mac compatible. Curiouser and curiouser.
making up stuff again, old habit die hard, I guess.

yeah, please do ask the mod why zune thread is showing up here.

TuffLuffJimmy

Sep 16, 2009, 05:49 PM

I will copy my reply to this figure from another post to make sure readers understand what you are putting out.

on top of that, you are intentionally, or unknowingly, trying to equal JS speed to page loading speed, which is totally bogus.

yet they are entirely related. It would be BOGUS to suggest they're mutually exclusive. Not all pages have scripts on them, many do. Javascript is getting more and more important. It would be moronic to not take javascript speeds into account when choosing a web browser.

DMann

Sep 16, 2009, 05:50 PM

LagunaSol

Sep 16, 2009, 05:52 PM

dont be too low, my friend, IE has 70% of market anyway, facts can not be denied, why making statement that has absolutely no meaning, except insulting other people?

Says the guy with a Netscape avatar and Firefox in his sig. I guess IE sucks unless it's on the Zune, in which case it's a WIN, right clevin?. ;)

bobertoq

Sep 16, 2009, 05:58 PM

Videos are scaled down to the same width and height on both devices. You don't get better quality because the screen is 16:9, the only thing you don't have is black bars, but the video is 480 pixels wide and 272 pixels high, same on both devices.

And if you don't understand why having 48 more height pixels in a menu is a good thing, you're just a MS Fanboy, worse than the Apple fanboys here.But I'm not an MS fanboy, nor am I an Apple fanboi. The fanboism on here disgusts me to a degree. Some people on here were acting like 48 less pixels was a legitmate reason to say the Zune HD is a terrible product. 48 pixels is not the reason.

clevin

Sep 16, 2009, 06:01 PM

yet they are entirely related. It would be BOGUS to suggest they're mutually exclusive. Not all pages have scripts on them, many do. Javascript is getting more and more important. It would be moronic to not take javascript speeds into account when choosing a web browser.
of course it does, however, did you not read the following sentence? sunspider runs function 1 million times to get a number, how much real life difference are you suggesting people will see?

I will do a side by side page loading test when I got it, we can discuss more about it then.
LOL, I've actually used the Zune's browser - to call pathetic would be too kind.
yeah, consider your fanboy attitude, I think of no reason to trust your words over what gizmodo has to say about it.
Says the guy with a Netscape avatar and Firefox in his sig. I guess IE sucks unless it's on the Zune, in which case it's a WIN, right clevin?. ;)

yeah, safari sucks too, except its on my Pre, I use what I have to, you just want to comment on my personality? or you have something meaningful to say about the topic?

dejo

Sep 16, 2009, 06:05 PM

yeah, safari sucks too, except its on my Pre
Pre does not have Safari. It has a Webkit-based browser. Webkit != Safari.

LagunaSol

Sep 16, 2009, 06:06 PM

But I'm not an MS fanboy, nor am I an Apple fanboi. The fanboism on here disgusts me to a degree. Some people on here were acting like 48 less pixels was a legitmate reason to say the Zune HD is a terrible product. 48 pixels is not the reason.

To the contrary, the Zune fanboys were arguing that the 48 fewer pixels were somehow a plus in the Zune's column. Because, you know, all we do with these devices is watch 16x9 movies. :rolleyes:

clevin

Sep 16, 2009, 06:06 PM

Pre does not have Safari. It has a Webkit-based browser. Webkit != Safari.

my bad, it does better than safari on iPhone, I forgot that. it actually has better urlbar behavior for one. live content for two, but all these are different topic tho.

TuffLuffJimmy

Sep 16, 2009, 06:09 PM

my bad, it does better than safari on iPhone, I forgot that. it actually has better urlbar behavior for one.

Define "better" considering iPhone kicks the Pre's ass in every benchmark I'm having a hard time finding what's "better".

clevin

Sep 16, 2009, 06:13 PM

Define "better" considering iPhone kicks the Pre's ass in every benchmark I'm having a hard time finding what's "better".

every js benchmark? Im tech enough to know the real life experience is what counts.

Its easy integration to wikipedia, combined urlbar/searchbar saving more taps, auto hide UI give more space on screen, and live content on every opened tabs for switch back and forth. and guess what, never crashed on me in 3 month!

DMann

Sep 16, 2009, 06:14 PM

yeah, consider your fanboy attitude, I think of no reason to trust your words over what gizmodo has to say about it.Considering your anti-Apple fangirl persona, self-righteous attitude, feeble ability to articulate your own scattered thoughts, extreme gullibility (If it's good enough for Gizmodo, then it must be fine) and overall blatant lack of insight and knowledge of technical issues (JS and page loading, Safari on Pre) consider your well earned status here confirmed.

polaris20

Sep 16, 2009, 06:15 PM

my bad, it does better than safari on iPhone, I forgot that. it actually has better urlbar behavior for one. live content for two, but all these are different topic tho.

Yeah, looks like it does better. :rolleyes:

Web Browser Dialer Google Maps Camera Email
Apple iPhone 3GS 0.7 s 0.7 s 2.7 s 2.8 s 0.8 s
Apple iPhone 3G 0.8 s 1.2 s 3.3 s 3.9 s 1.2 s
Palm Pre 3.0 s 1.5 s 8.6 s 4.4 s 3.3 s
T-Mobile G1 5.4 s 2.0 s 4.4 s 4.9 s 2.0 s

iPhone 3G Phone 3GS Palm Pre T-MobileG1
anandtech.com 16.3 s 7.8 s 8.2 s 17.2 s
arstechnica.com 17.7 s 6.3 s 7.8 s 17.8 s
hothardware.com 35.2 s 14.7 s 11.2 s 24.4 s
pcper.com 33.3 s 15.0 s 18.0 s 34.0 s
digg.com 34.3 s 15.0 s 22.1 s 40.0 s
techreport.com 24.1 s 9.6 s 9.0 s 20.5 s
tomshardware.com 21.4 s 16.4 s 13.8 s 26.0 s
slashdot.org 26.0 s 10.0 s 20.9 s 46.0 s
facebook.com 31.7 s 13.5 s 19.6 s 37.7 s

iPhone 3GS Advantage over Palm Pre 21%
iPhone 3GS Advantage over iPhone 3G 122%

http://www.anandtech.com/gadgets/showdoc.aspx?i=3587

TuffLuffJimmy

Sep 16, 2009, 06:16 PM

every js benchmark? Im tech enough to know the real life experience is what counts.

Its easy integration to wikipedia, combined urlbar/searchbar saving more taps, auto hide UI give more space on screen, and live content on every opened tabs for switch back and forth. and guess what, never crashed on me in 3 month!

Not just javascript, but real life page loading. Side by side of NY Times, Apple.com, any page of your choice. The iPhone will load it faster. AND the iPhone has wifi so you're not stuck with a phone connection.

The iPhone has a bigger screen anyway, so the Pre HAS to hide its UI, or else all the content would be obstructed.

clevin

Sep 16, 2009, 06:19 PM

Yeah, looks like it does better. :rolleyes:

Web Browser Dialer Google Maps Camera Email
Apple iPhone 3GS 0.7 s 0.7 s 2.7 s 2.8 s 0.8 s
Apple iPhone 3G 0.8 s 1.2 s 3.3 s 3.9 s 1.2 s
Palm Pre 3.0 s 1.5 s 8.6 s 4.4 s 3.3 s
T-Mobile G1 5.4 s 2.0 s 4.4 s 4.9 s 2.0 s

iPhone 3G Phone 3GS Palm Pre T-MobileG1
anandtech.com 16.3 s 7.8 s 8.2 s 17.2 s
arstechnica.com 17.7 s 6.3 s 7.8 s 17.8 s
hothardware.com 35.2 s 14.7 s 11.2 s 24.4 s
pcper.com 33.3 s 15.0 s 18.0 s 34.0 s
digg.com 34.3 s 15.0 s 22.1 s 40.0 s
techreport.com 24.1 s 9.6 s 9.0 s 20.5 s
tomshardware.com 21.4 s 16.4 s 13.8 s 26.0 s
slashdot.org 26.0 s 10.0 s 20.9 s 46.0 s
facebook.com 31.7 s 13.5 s 19.6 s 37.7 s

iPhone 3GS Advantage over Palm Pre 21%
iPhone 3GS Advantage over iPhone 3G 122%

http://www.anandtech.com/gadgets/showdoc.aspx?i=3587
nice, while dont forget the 21% translate into how much second again? oh, my god, 2 seconds!, how important! and Im sure ALL people visiting just these several site ALL their LIVES.

Get real, a browser is more than what that number portrays.

and app open time, sure Pre is a bit slower, but how about I dont ever need to close them as often as iPhone? that gotta save you some major time, does it?
Considering your anti-Apple fangirl persona, self-righteous attitude, feeble ability to articulate your own scattered thoughts, extreme gullibility (If it's good enough for Gizmodo, then it must be fine) and overall blatant lack of insight and knowledge of technical issues (JS and page loading, Safari on Pre) consider your well earned status here confirmed.

thats fine, except.

I DIDN'T make a judgment on the ZUNE HD browser, YOU DID.

at least I know what I know and what I don't, you apparently don't.
Not just javascript, but real life page loading. Side by side of NY Times, Apple.com, any page of your choice. The iPhone will load it faster. AND the iPhone has wifi so you're not stuck with a phone connection.

The iPhone has a bigger screen anyway, so the Pre HAS to hide its UI, or else all the content would be obstructed.

webkit is open source, palm WebOS 1.2 will be out on 9-23, and browser improvement is mentioned. its a back and forth competition, whats the surprise? and all pages, iPhone faster? thats simply false.

and pre has wi-fi too, I dont get stuck with phone anyway, and sprint 3G is quite fast.

you can't be real to say iphone has a bigger screen thus there is no need to maximize the display space, its the same res, pre display more content on screen than iPhone, engadget did the test.

dejo

Sep 16, 2009, 06:30 PM

...oh, my god, 2 seconds!, how important!

...that gotta save you some major time, does it?
Wait! So is saving time important or not?

DMann

Sep 16, 2009, 06:45 PM

thats fine, except.

I DIDN'T make a judgment on the ZUNE HD browser, YOU DID.

at least I know what I know and what I don't, you apparently don't.

Ah, first you claim:

"gizmodo seems to think browser is fine."

Then you contradict yourself by claiming:

Im tech enough to know the real life experience is what counts.

I actually have used the Zune's browser, which accounts for real life experience, and backed it up with data. Quite apparently, you have not, and by your own misaligned viewpoints, you have no basis to refute "real life experience" until you've tested it yourself.

But wait,

"gizmodo seems to think browser is fine."

Then again,

Im tech enough to know the real life experience is what counts.

Furthermore,

"at least I know what I know and what I don't"
Do you?

Your non sequiturs haven't taken you very far, now have they?

KnightWRX

Sep 16, 2009, 06:51 PM

IE6 has worked fine for years on my work computer. We have a lot of corporate sites that need to stay that way, too.

Oh yes, IE6 has been working just fine all these years. Too bad it's primary function is to hold back web advancement and promote vendor lock-in by not supporting standards.

and you dont have to assume zune app store is all air, many reviews indicated its probably true.

And Microsoft confirmed it's all air :
http://www.businessinsider.com/zune-hd-app-store-2009-9

And straight from the horses mouth :
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/technologybrierdudleysblog/2009867170_microsoft_launches_zune_clarif.html

a hair thinner, while much wider, what does fat mean to you?
http://cache-foo-05.gawkerassets.com/gawker/assets/images/4/2009/09/500x_IMG_9348.jpg
http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/4/2009/09/500x_IMG_9349.jpg

Again, the iPod Touch is wider because it has a higher resolution screen. Didn't we already cover this ? Same ppi with more pixels, better resolution.

Notice however that the iPod Touch is indeed thinner. The iPod Touch could also be thinner and have the same width as the Zune HD if Apple had sacrificed screen resolution to do so.

I prefer Apple's decision in this regard. More pixels = more resolution = more stuff on screen at one time = better.

But I'm not an MS fanboy, nor am I an Apple fanboi. The fanboism on here disgusts me to a degree. Some people on here were acting like 48 less pixels was a legitmate reason to say the Zune HD is a terrible product. 48 pixels is not the reason.

No, again, MOSX the Microsoft shill/troll/astroturfer came here and said that the Zune HD's 16:9 screen offered a better experience than Apple's higher resolution screen, precisely because it had less pixels and a 16:9 aspect ratio.

No one claimed Apple's higher resolution screen made the Zune HD a terrible product, that is a figment of your imagination and delusion. This thread and this forum in general is getting astroturfed everyday and you'd have to be blind to believe that all these "Zune HD and other Microsoft fans" are legitimate neutral parties.

KnightWRX

Sep 16, 2009, 07:01 PM

double.

xIGmanIx

Sep 16, 2009, 07:10 PM

We have a lot of corporate sites that need to stay that way, too.

I feel your pain brother, same here, our main corporate site was written i guess with the expectation that no advances would ever be made in browsers:eek: so only really works with IE 6!!

RaZaK

Sep 16, 2009, 07:11 PM

either pointed and laughed or yawned from extreme lack of interest. :rolleyes:

MorphingDragon

Sep 16, 2009, 07:29 PM

inkswamp

Sep 16, 2009, 07:43 PM

Gah, the arguing over this one is really getting tiresome, but I have to admit that I like seeing the side-by-side pics.

Anyone with both devices care to do a direct sunlight shot?

xIGmanIx

Sep 16, 2009, 07:53 PM

either pointed and laughed or yawned from extreme lack of interest. :rolleyes:

This just in, RaZak now represents all of the tech community :eek:, if you don't like it don't use it. if you haven't tried it, don't knock it.

Gah, the arguing over this one is really getting tiresome, but I have to admit that I like seeing the side-by-side pics.

Anyone with both devices care to do a direct sunlight shot?

To me, i want to know how easy it is to get media onto it, and how long batter life is, radio etc. To ME, how it is viewable in the sun isn't going to sway my purchase.

polaris20

Sep 16, 2009, 08:04 PM

nice, while dont forget the 21% translate into how much second again? oh, my god, 2 seconds!, how important! and Im sure ALL people visiting just these several site ALL their LIVES.

Get real, a browser is more than what that number portrays.

and app open time, sure Pre is a bit slower, but how about I dont ever need to close them as often as iPhone? that gotta save you some major time, does it?

You really think 2 seconds isn't noticeable for web browsing? Really? 2 seconds is a LONG time for page loads.

The Pre is a nice idea, and a decent effort for a 1.0 effort. But I found it to be an absolute pig to use, and the lack of speed made the whole "multitasking" thing irrelevant.

As for IE6, it's a horrid piece of crap. While IE7 and IE8 are definitely better, I haven't used any version of IE more than absolutely necessary for years, relying mostly upon FF and now Chrome. It would be cool to see Opera or Google come out with versions of their browsers for the Zune HD.

PCMacUser

Sep 16, 2009, 08:12 PM

This Zune HD is one of the best looking players I've seen so far. It looks a heck of a lot nicer than a Touch. I still won't buy one though, because they won't be released in this part of the world.

seedster2

Sep 16, 2009, 11:34 PM

CQd44

Sep 16, 2009, 11:49 PM

I want one.

Anyone wanna buy me one? :]

$ahil

Sep 17, 2009, 12:24 AM

got one tuesday

it is pretty awesome :) i love it. Although it is missing some things I wish it had that iPod Touch has such as a dedicated e-Mail app which checks all your e-mails at once. but other then that if you like HD radio and music the OLED screen is very sharp to look at.

both iPod touch and Zune HD are great players

ob81

Sep 17, 2009, 12:32 AM

I have an ipod touch already, but I can still give the Zune HD credit. It trumps the touch on numerous levels. If Apps aren't your primary concern, Zune seems like the better choice. It's not a crime to enjoy a product not made by apple. It's a corporation, not a family/cult.

Members here blindly attack MS products without even having used them, pick and choose excerpts from biased articles while ignoring others, state subjective points as fact and contrive spurious statistics,e tc. You would swear SJ has some of you on the payroll. Different strokes for different folks

Best part is when apple adopts some of the same advancements, the same opponents will suddenly transform to proponents and claim innovation...It's quite entertaining. It's no wonder the device is windows only. Why bother with some of you wackadoos:p

Yeah that innovation thing has always been weird to me. Earlier though, most apple users were closed to anything else. When Apple did it, it was their first exposure to it. Great job by Apple if you ask me.

I think the Zune looks pretty decent. That is about all I can say since I haven't actually used one. Some people have this power to know about a product without trying it.

inkswamp

Sep 17, 2009, 01:36 AM

To ME, how it is viewable in the sun isn't going to sway my purchase.

It barely matters to me too. I wouldn't base my buying decisions on that. I don't even think that would make the top 10 list of my concerns in a media player.

The main reason I'm asking for someone to produce such a shot is more out of technophile curiosity than looking to declare a winner. I've heard so much hype about OLED in the last year or so (and not just in regard to the Zune.) There's something of a mythbuster-ish interest to me in hearing about its downsides.

Macminiintel

Sep 17, 2009, 01:43 AM

According to Cnet :D

Regardless of how you're trying to navigate, the on-screen keyboard seems to require more finger accuracy than the fault-tolerant keyboard on the iPhone (probably because of the smaller screen). The back button is hard to hit--I kept selecting the favorites menu by mistake. Sites are also considerably slower to load than on iTouch, and the resolution doesn't seem to be nearly as good as the iPhone or iPod Touch, with a noticeable flicker on pages with white backgrounds.

Source:http://news.cnet.com/8301-13526_3-10354240-27.html

DMann

Sep 17, 2009, 01:44 AM

BongoBanger

Sep 17, 2009, 01:54 AM

Another recent commentary for the Zune HD (http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/22450/) based upon the CNet review.

For anyone who feels that the Zune HD has been slighted around here, be sure to check out all of the Reader's Comments below.

Mac Daily News?

Oh dear.

Why does it matter to you if the Zune HD is a nice piece of kit and gets favourable reviews? Pogue - who is a strong advocate of Apple - gives it a glowing review whilst pointing out the obvious problems with the ecosystem and why the iPod Touch will, of course, outsell it by a considerable margin.

It seems your agenda is "if it's Microsoft it must be bad" which is sad really because this market actually needs a competitor as witnessed by the, frankly, disappointing updates to the Touch. If there's no competition then where's the incentive to improve.

For example, the iPhone - which is an awesome device - gave the smartphone industry the massive kick in the pants it needed other wise we'd probably all still be using yet another version of a slider phone. That's what competition brings.

So why the desperate need to rain on the parade of a device which has generally had very strong praise from all sides of the divide? Is it because it has the word 'Microsoft' on it and that alone?

Whatever. It doesn't really matter I suppose. Everyone has an opinion after all.

DMann

Sep 17, 2009, 02:24 AM

MorphingDragon

Sep 17, 2009, 02:41 AM

Europe/Oceana release???

xIGmanIx

Sep 17, 2009, 03:07 AM

It barely matters to me too. I wouldn't base my buying decisions on that. I don't even think that would make the top 10 list of my concerns in a media player.

The main reason I'm asking for someone to produce such a shot is more out of technophile curiosity than looking to declare a winner. I've heard so much hype about OLED in the last year or so (and not just in regard to the Zune.) There's something of a mythbuster-ish interest to me in hearing about its downsides.

i can understand that, however most folks on this forum only believe that innovation comes from the folks at mapple :eek: They should change their slogan to Apple, an Iphone company:D

surferfromuk

Sep 17, 2009, 03:40 AM

Mac Daily News?

Oh dear.

Why does it matter to you if the Zune HD is a nice piece of kit and gets favourable reviews? Pogue - who is a strong advocate of Apple - gives it a glowing review whilst pointing out the obvious problems with the ecosystem and why the iPod Touch will, of course, outsell it by a considerable margin.

It seems your agenda is "if it's Microsoft it must be bad" which is sad really because this market actually needs a competitor as witnessed by the, frankly, disappointing updates to the Touch. If there's no competition then where's the incentive to improve.

For example, the iPhone - which is an awesome device - gave the smartphone industry the massive kick in the pants it needed other wise we'd probably all still be using yet another version of a slider phone. That's what competition brings.

So why the desperate need to rain on the parade of a device which has generally had very strong praise from all sides of the divide? Is it because it has the word 'Microsoft' on it and that alone?

Whatever. It doesn't really matter I suppose. Everyone has an opinion after all.

Here is where I must step in again.

Microsoft ARE bad. They have too much money and too much market share and no real competition. Ideally they won't use all their money to try to destroy Apple (like they did to so many others by stealing a market they never created and will do to Nokia and Yahoo on top of Novell and the open source community through their crafty deal making.)

Before your shotgun response of carefully researched rebuttals - please read the site below carefully - especially the convictions for astroturfing. You should know exactly who your championing here (since we've established your not getting paid for it though I'm certain many in this thread are )

http://boycottnovell.com/wiki/index.php/Main_Page

If Microsoft were a fair and decent company and won by innovation, hard work and fair play I'd celebrate everything they did - I'd even give the Zune HD a pat on the back - but we all know that just isn't so - this thread alone proves MS Standard operating procedure is back in play - and we all know that as soon as they get total control nothing different ever flourishes again.

50% of the reason I buy Apple is to avoid a stagnant monoculture.

BongoBanger

Sep 17, 2009, 05:38 AM

My, aren't we overreactive? I simply posted MDN to illuminate the fact that the readers' comments there were far more scathing than those posted here. Do you also have a problem with CNet? Seems you'll soon be running out of acceptable sources altogether.

I have no problem with CNET at all. You could, of course, have linked directly to CNET rather than MDN because, as you know, CNET has a number of opinions and reviews on the Zune HD, some positive some not. MDN does not.

It's called 'being objective'.

Now, a few other things since we're talking about objectivity...

Yet you erroneously and haphazardly deemed Daniel Eran Dilger responsible for the writing in question

Daniel Eran Dilger is Prince McLean. It's a nom de plume he uses.

If anyone "has lost all perspective and credibility and is little more than an embarrassment," that would be you. The great extent of derisive and pejorative finger pointing emanating from you, is quite hypocritical, to say the very least.

Really? Let's see what I said...

I take the point about OLED screens but would point out that the examples given refer to first generation low nit screens (the N85 series 1 is a 170 nit screen - the series 2 replaced it with a superior 300 nit model).

Dilger's argument is spurious until we know the specifications of the Samsung AMS326FA05 display the Zune HD uses. I'm guessing it's a second generation screen but let's wait and see.

So here I acknowledge that low nit OLED screens do have issues with direct sunlight whilst raising the point that the second generation OLED screen with higher nit vaules are far less impacted.

You would agree that's a reasonable thing to say, right? Although it seems Dilger does not.

See the thing is I didn't even point out the most ludicrous comparison that Dilger made in the article - the comparison of a Tegra running Quake 3 to the Pandora - not the iPhone 3GS - in which he seems to forget to mention the Tegra demo is running at WVGA resolution (800 x 480) and has AA and AF on whereas the Pandora is running at about a quarter of the resolution with AA and AF off.

Here's a link to what happens when Pandora actually tries to run Quake at the same resolution with AA and AF on:

http://openpandora.wordpress.com/2009/03/06/quake-2-is-warming-up-to-the-pandora/

The key point is:

800×480 with sound 689 frames, 21.6 seconds: 31.9 fps

And this is for Quake 2 not the more graphically intensive Quake 3 which the Tegra is running.

You do see the problem, don't you?

Which is why Dilger has no credibility left.

Nuff said.

Here is where I must step in again.

Microsoft ARE bad. They have too much money and too much market share and no real competition.

As do Apple in the PMP sector which is why we should welcome competition.

I know the evils of Microsoft. That doesn't excuse the evils of others nor is it an automatic indicator that everything they do is wrong.

macintoshtoffy

Sep 17, 2009, 05:45 AM

Zune HD doesn't look too bad; its a shame that Microsoft refuses to support the Mac or sell it in New Zealand.

Once again iPod Touch wins again because Microsoft is too bloody lazy to do the bare basic of winning me over as a customer.

MorphingDragon

Sep 17, 2009, 05:52 AM

MH01

Sep 17, 2009, 05:54 AM

I played with one last night as we were putting them up on display... It's a POS. I hated it! The screen is jumpy, it doesn't actually have HD onboard, you have to output to an HDTV. Once again Microsoft Over promises, and under delivers. I wish they would do the world a favor and just make par for the course office software and gaming systems. Leave the rest of the tech market to organizations that know quality and design.

Interestingly enough, I gave a customer who had told me he wasn't on the iPod band wagon, and was waiting for the Zune HD, the opportunity to play with the device last night... He handed it back to me and said, "It's not what I expected. It's way smaller, and feels cheap. Let me see the iPod Touch". Needless to say, he walked out with an iPod Touch 16GB in hand.:apple:

You do not get the concept of HD video do you? So you are disappointed that the zune does not show HD720 video on its little screen??? Learn to read mate and it will all become clear, it might even make you a better salesman.

KnightWRX

Sep 17, 2009, 07:01 AM

Members here blindly attack MS products without even having used them, pick and choose excerpts from biased articles while ignoring others, state subjective points as fact and contrive spurious statistics,e tc. You would swear SJ has some of you on the payroll. Different strokes for different folks

Members here blindly praise MS products without even having used them, pick and choose excerpts from biased articles while ignoring others, state subjective points as fact and contrive spurious statistics,e tc. You would swear BG has some of you on the payroll. Different strokes for different folks.

Works both ways buddy.

MacMonster1985

Sep 17, 2009, 07:21 AM

Well I see a lot of Apple fanboys here have an Xbox 360. I am constantly amused by their hate of MS and their hypocrisy when buying a Xbox 360 as well as other MS products like keyboard and Mice.

clevin

Sep 17, 2009, 07:24 AM

Again, the iPod Touch is wider because it has a higher resolution screen. Didn't we already cover this ? Same ppi with more pixels, better resolution.

Notice however that the iPod Touch is indeed thinner. The iPod Touch could also be thinner and have the same width as the Zune HD if Apple had sacrificed screen resolution to do so.

I prefer Apple's decision in this regard. More pixels = more resolution = more stuff on screen at one time = better.

I found it amazing you kept making a judgment without really trying both. and Since when more pocket friendly size itself worth nothing anymore?

and you are making a statement assuming ppl looking at the screen for games or webs all day long, how exactly "ZUNE HD is a PMP" doesn't register to you? You can prefer iPT for the games or other stuff that need wide screen, just like others can prefer ZUNE HD for its nice pocket size. whats wrong with that?

Your statement falls into that suspicious of remarks, "whatever apple's products do are good, whatever apple's products don't do are useless and not important". I can't believe this kind of biased attitude is actually so widely spread, even in your statement?

when accusing other people, aren't you doing the same? not to mention I, personally, didn't make a judgment on the resolution, and I wont until I got my hand on it.

My, aren't we overreactive? I simply posted MDN to illuminate the fact that the readers' comments there were far more scathing than those posted here. .

people who read MDN and RD are not just any "readers", they are zealots.

Now, back to topic, here are two video of browser speed side by side (ZUNE HD and iPT), its not mine, my tests are still to come.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHjN5bLrxiE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKgGmLZiajA

its only two websites, looks like iPhone is significantly faster in one, of course, do withhold your conclusion until more tests are out. Its unwise to make conclusion with two brief tests.

EDIT: ignore the first video, the guy is testing the crunchgear with iPhone has the cache already, its stupid and obviously not fair.

EDIT two, the original poster mentioned he tested CNN and Yahoo as well, and ZUNE HD is faster by "1 second". http://www.zunescene.mobi/forums/index.php?topic=48506.new#new

kurosov

Sep 17, 2009, 07:34 AM

Yeah that innovation thing has always been weird to me. Earlier though, most apple users were closed to anything else. When Apple did it, it was their first exposure to it. Great job by Apple if you ask me.

I think the Zune looks pretty decent. That is about all I can say since I haven't actually used one. Some people have this power to know about a product without trying it.

Well i can base my decision without having to use the product for four reasons.

1. recently got a 3gs and i am not looking to buy a pmp.

2. I use a mac so the zune is as good as a brick to me.

3. i live in the UK so even if i was to import one then one of the 'awesome' features just wont work.

4. I think it is ugly. Simple reason but one that is important to me.

Now, if they bothered to release it in the UK, with or without DAB support (i don't listen to the radio when i have last.fm in my pocket) then i would certainly try one out at a store to see how well it runs but if im not in the market for anything new then i wouldn't buy one.

That is one problem the zune HD faces. They will have to try and gain sales from people who have never bought a touch/iphone because those who have will not easily throw away access to apps they have purchased and would sooner upgrade to a newer touch if anything.

Im guessing most people who havn't bought a touch already made that decision because they do not want a device with its feature list and as such would not be interested in a zune.

Well I see a lot of Apple fanboys here have an Xbox 360. I am constantly amused by their hate of MS and their hypocrisy when buying a Xbox 360 as well as other MS products like keyboard and Mice.

Maybe because instead of being apple fanboys they are just people who think this product sucks?

KnightWRX

Sep 17, 2009, 07:36 AM

I found it amazing you kept making a judgment without really trying both. and Since when more pocket friendly size itself worth nothing anymore?

and you are making a statement assuming ppl looking at the screen for games or webs all day long, how exactly "ZUNE HD is a PMP" doesn't register to you? You can prefer iPT for the games or other stuff that need wide screen, just like others can prefer ZUNE HD for its nice pocket size. whats wrong with that?

Your statement falls into that suspicious of remarks, "whatever apple's products do are good, whatever apple's products don't do are useless and not important". I can't believe this kind of biased attitude is actually so widely spread, even in your statement?

when accusing other people, aren't you doing the same? not to mention I, personally, didn't make a judgment on the resolution, and I wont until I got my hand on it.

If all I needed from such a device was a PMP, i'd buy a 100$ refurb Nano. The big seller for the iPod Touch and devices like the Zune HD is wi-fi Internet on the go and the apps.

And seriously, both are crap. 480x320 is 3 years ago in terms of technology. Devices on the horizon are now pushing 800x480 in the same format as an iPhone.

So no, I'm not biased towards what Apple makes. I'm biased towards screen real-estate. If I'm supposed to use these devices for some kind of mobile computing on top of media playing, I want all the screen real-estate I can get.

I don't need to use the devices to know that more pixels = better. And I doubt the Zune HD is so much more pocket friendly than the iPod Touch or vice-versa. They are both pretty much on par, it's not a mm here or there that's going to change that. Again, I was just pointing out to you, my biased pro-Zune HD friend, that the iPod Touch is not fat compared to the Zune HD like you claimed it was.

Who is more balanced between you and me ? You who keep drilling that the Zune HD is a great devices, better than Apple's ? Or me who keeps telling you both have advantages over the other and that in the end, your personnal needs dictate what you will get ?

The only anti-Zune comments I have made here have been in reply to false claims like "The Zune HD has better resolution than the iPod Touch" or "the Zune HD is much thinner, so it's better"!

MacMonster1985

Sep 17, 2009, 07:42 AM

Its about the industry, entirely related. If your looking for an echo chamber go somewhere else.

Because macrumor posted about Windows 7 released which is industry related as well. What about all the hardware releases from different PC manufacturers which compete with Apple? Oh wait... for some strage reason macrumors decided to post only about the Zune HD.

clevin

Sep 17, 2009, 07:46 AM

If all I needed from such a device was a PMP, i'd buy a 100$ refurb Nano. The big seller for the iPod Touch and devices like the Zune HD is wi-fi Internet on the go and the apps.

And seriously, both are crap. 480x320 is 3 years ago in terms of technology. Devices on the horizon are now pushing 800x480 in the same format as an iPhone.

So no, I'm not biased towards what Apple makes. I'm biased towards screen real-estate. If I'm supposed to use these devices for some kind of mobile computing on top of media playing, I want all the screen real-estate I can get.

I don't need to use the devices to know that more pixels = better. And I doubt the Zune HD is so much more pocket friendly than the iPod Touch or vice-versa. They are both pretty much on par, it's not a mm here or there that's going to change that. Again, I was just pointing out to you, my biased pro-Zune HD friend, that the iPod Touch is not fat compared to the Zune HD like you claimed it was.

Who is more balanced between you and me ? You who keep drilling that the Zune HD is a great devices, better than Apple's ? Or me who keeps telling you both have advantages over the other and that in the end, your personnal needs dictate what you will get ?

The only anti-Zune comments I have made here have been in reply to false claims like "The Zune HD has better resolution than the iPod Touch" or "the Zune HD is much thinner, so it's better"!

every review I see, even those are hostile to ZUNE HD, praises its pocket size, you just need to feel it in real life. In the already small size gadget category, a little can be a lot more than you think.

and You are telling both have advantages and in the end people's personal preference would dedicate which is better for them? Sorry, I dont buy that, maybe you intended to say that, but I got no feeling of you saying that in recent posts. Otherwise, there would be no disagreement and no argument at all.

edit. no, Im going to take above statement back, whatever you said previously, the sentence you uttered here is absolutely fair and correct, I have no disagreement on this.

To talk about balance, sorry Im human and so are you, I need to respond to more people than you, and I dont fault myself for sometime mixing up the response. Obviously, I dont fault you for reading my post feeling like Im responding to you alone sometimes, which is probably not the case.

Fair, I'm, balanced? why asking me? there are overwhelming hostile attitude towards ZUNE HD here (which is fine and expected), and Im not making anything up. facts are there, just that people choose not to see, while I put it up front. facts has no bias.

celtikmind

Sep 17, 2009, 07:51 AM

1. recently got a 3gs and i am not looking to buy a pmp.

How does this promote or demote the Zune as a product exactly? Wouldn't this make you rather opposed to any newer pmp surfacing than one you recently bought? i.e. recent buyer's partiality syndrome.

Just sayin'... ;)

kurosov

Sep 17, 2009, 07:58 AM

How does this promote or demote the Zune as a product exactly? Wouldn't this make you rather opposed to any newer pmp surfacing than one you recently bought? i.e. recent buyer's partiality syndrome.

Just sayin'... ;)

I did state they where reasons why I, as in just me, talking about myself, would not buy a zune.

And the fact that i used the term 'pmp' and not zune does indicate that i meant them all. The zune fits into the category of "all".

celtikmind

Sep 17, 2009, 08:15 AM

I did state they where reasons why I, as in just me, talking about myself, would not buy a zune.

And the fact that i used the term 'pmp' and not zune does indicate that i meant them all. The zune fits into the category of "all".

Again, since you've recently bought a pmp, you wouldn't be in the market for any pmp, regardless manufacturer. But that doesn't define the Zune as a bad product in a categorical way. It just makes you severly partial to the product you've just bought and a rather unconvincing argument from your end.

Anyway, I'm glad you're happy with your pmp because either way, I strongly dislike to see any corporation having anything near a monopoly on any market. Whether it be Apple iPod/iPhone or Microsoft Windows, having no free choice at all would only make them the bringers of a true nightmare.

KnightWRX

Sep 17, 2009, 08:17 AM

Fair, I'm, balanced? why asking me? there are overwhelming hostile attitude towards ZUNE HD here (which is fine and expected), and Im not making anything up. facts are there, just that people choose not to see, while I put it up front. facts has no bias.

And like the other guy I replied to this page, you missed the that fact that amongst all the negative Apple-biased responses there are positive raves far from grounded in fact from people that are obviously anti-Apple-biased.

Aligning yourself with either camp isn't a good idea.

VoR

Sep 17, 2009, 08:18 AM

And seriously, both are crap. 480x320 is 3 years ago in terms of technology. Devices on the horizon are now pushing 800x480 in the same format as an iPhone.

It's slightly thicker (but has a cf, sd slot, large removable battery, stylus etc) but my pda is over 5 years old, has a 640x480 screen, nice grey magnesium case, wifi, bluetooth, usb host adapter, gps etcetcetc. It doesnt have an app store, but the internet has always done the job fine when I want software - proper applications too :)
It plays h264 and mpeg2 fine. I can choose between IE/opera/webkit/gecko based browsers, it was cheaper then than an iPT is now, it runs tomtom/garmin/igo/1000 other consumer/pro air/land/sea gps apps that most don't know about.

It doesn't have a cell phone built in (looking at the 'subsidy' companies offer these 'new' products, it's a very good thing) and the UI isn't quite as simplistic and flash as iPT/zunes/etc but it can drain the blood from the face of an iPT/'portable media player X' user at the range of about 10 meters.

Did I mention that its well over 5 years old? What was everyone else on forums like these using before the bbc told us all to by ipods?

jmcguckin

Sep 17, 2009, 08:23 AM

I have to admit that I actually like the Zune HD's design, though it's still a bit chunky-looking compared to the smooth, contoured design of the iPod touch/iPhone... to its credit, it definitely seems to have an impressive set of features, a couple of which I wish had found their way into the latest iPod revision (OLED screen and out-of-the-package HD video playback capability), and overall it seems to be a very nice device.

and that's about as in-depth an opinion as I'm going to give about it since it's not Mac-compatible and I much prefer the iPod touch's design/UI (though I'd still like to stop by my local electronics retailer and give one of these a spin, just for kicks :)).

celtikmind

Sep 17, 2009, 08:27 AM

It's slightly thicker (but has a cf, sd slot, large removable battery, stylus etc) but my pda is over 5 years old, has a 640x480 screen, nice grey magnesium case, wifi, bluetooth, usb host adapter, gps etcetcetc. It doesnt have an app store, but the internet has always done the job fine when I want software - proper applications too :)
It plays h264 and mpeg2 fine. I can choose between IE/opera/webkit/gecko based browsers, it was cheaper then than an iPT is now, it runs tomtom/garmin/igo/1000 other consumer/pro air/land/sea gps apps that most don't know about.

It doesn't have a cell phone built in (looking at the 'subsidy' companies offer these 'new' products, it's a very good thing) and the UI isn't quite as simplistic and flash as iPT/zunes/etc but it can drain the blood from the face of an iPT/'portable media player X' user at the range of about 10 meters.

Did I mention that its well over 5 years old? What was everyone else on forums like these using before the bbc told us all to by ipods?

Does this product have a... name? :cool:

VoR

Sep 17, 2009, 08:39 AM

Does this product have a... name? :cool:

To check if I'm telling porkies or not?
I've got an hp hx4700 and a cooked rom, dell had the x51v which was also a vga screen and had a vga output etc, fair few others about with vga screens, but I don't have experience with them. The newer pdas can probably handle things like h264 (coreavc was born on these older devices) fine on whatever cpus theyve got, but the old hp and dells both had seperate gpus that made them run higher bitrate media so well.
It's worked so well for so long, I've never really looked at the current tech to see whats about. I'm pretty sure pdas never sold amazingly and have pretty much died out - no idea why...I can and have been doing 'everything', 'better' on them than limited and locked down newer devices like the iphone - certainly could have done with apples marketing team.

excuse the nonsensical speed typed posting :)

MacMonster1985

Sep 17, 2009, 08:47 AM

Maybe because instead of being apple fanboys they are just people who think this product sucks?

I am talking about the people who automatically assume it sucks because it's made by MS. But if you dig enough, you will find that most of them have a Xbox 360 which is a Ms product and defend it against PS3 fanboys.

martint84

Sep 17, 2009, 08:50 AM

My take on the Zune HD...

It is definitely a viable alternative to the iPod for Windows users. iPod competition of any kind is great for us Apple fanboys. Clearly, a major reason Apple kept an 8gb iPod touch in the lineup for $199 is because the Zune HD sells for $219 (I don't buy Apple's $199 price point BS).

While I think we would have seen the following new features anyway, there is now a little more pressure on Apple to roll these out ASAP:
1. fm radio
2. better HD playback
3. better way to play iTunes content on your tv
4. wireless syncing
5. better screen

Regardless of whether anyone here wants to buy a Zune HD, you cannot deny the fact that it is a relevant device. We should all be happy that there is yet another competitor to the iPod. While I don't think the Zune HD is going to significantly hurt iPod sales, the fact that it exists will make the iPod a better device.

celtikmind

Sep 17, 2009, 09:00 AM

To check if I'm telling porkies or not?

No, not all. Pure interest.

I tried iPhone for a while but couldn't shake the locked-in, parental feeling besides making me feel somewhat dumb the way it wouldn't let me configure it or run stuff. Jailbreaking (and breaking warranty just to make it useful) seems so ironical in it's own sense so I never bothered. Never understood how limiting the user's options could ever get so popular.

Thanks!

kdarling

Sep 17, 2009, 09:04 AM

Oh yes, IE6 has been working just fine all these years. Too bad it's primary function is to hold back web advancement and promote vendor lock-in by not supporting standards.

Grrrr. Don't get me started on standards. :rolleyes:

When the iPhone came out, there was a huge opportunity to push websites to provide mobile versions for everyone as an alternative choice.

Instead, Apple came up with a ton of iPhone-specific meta tags, to make websites look okay on their device only. Thanks for nothing.

=> However, and this is IMPORTANT... mobile IE6 is NOT REPEAT NOT the same as desktop IE6. It has none of the usual Microsoft specific extensions, but is far more standards compliant and internally advanced. We cannot compare the two at all. MS should've called it something else to prevent confusion.

I prefer Apple's decision in this regard. More pixels = more resolution = more stuff on screen at one time = better.

Hurray then for the latest WM phones with 800x480. Much less of that messy side-scrolling or need to zoom.

No, again, MOSX the Microsoft shill/troll/astroturfer came here ...

People shouldn't use personal attacks if they can't come up with a good counter-argument.

I feel your pain brother, same here, our main corporate site was written i guess with the expectation that no advances would ever be made in browsers:eek: so only really works with IE 6!!

Amen brother. Until recently we were still supporting thousands of users with handhelds running IE 4 (!) on an app dating back to 2001.

Ordinary consumers don't realize that when an app costs a half million dollars to write and deploy, that corporations don't want to change it every six months :)

LagunaSol

Sep 17, 2009, 09:17 AM

They're free, they take forever to load (30 seconds for chess???), and they're accompanied by ads(!!!). Guess the Zune team is finally being asked to pay a few of their own bills.

http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/09/zune-hd-apps-are-here-complete-with-pre-roll-ads.ars

*Waits for Zune fanboys to inevitably rave about the sheer awesomeness of Goo Splat and Weather.*

polaris20

Sep 17, 2009, 09:41 AM

It's good for MS to come out with the HD, if for no other reason than to continue pushing Apple. Competition is good, and the HD looks to be promising as a PMP.

Since I use the iPT as more of a PDA than just a PMP it's got a while to catch up, and the 16:9 is irritating, but otherwise it looks nice.

KnightWRX

Sep 17, 2009, 09:59 AM

Hurray then for the latest WM phones with 800x480. Much less of that messy side-scrolling or need to zoom.

Hurray indeed. I'm presently waiting to see what the 800x480 Android offerings are (Rumored Sony Xperia X3) and keeping a close eye on Nokia's N900.

I might not get an iPhone after all.

People shouldn't use personal attacks if they can't come up with a good counter-argument.

I'll keep this in mind. I did counter his argument though and mosx is a very well known Microsoft troll on here. Just search for all his posts and read through them, you'll see it right away. People quoting mosx and then calling others "Apple fanboys" need to look in a mirror.[/QUOTE]

cumanzor

Sep 17, 2009, 10:11 AM

Windows market share shows that people don't care about "fabulous UI" - they care about ubiquity

I'm not exactly sure about what you mean with ubiquity. Window's market share just means people go for things they are used to. And if they stick to it's because they still like it. Hell, I bet many people switched over after the Vista pre-SP1 fiasco. But I can tell your with a high degree of certainty that many people will love and praise MS with Windows 7, just like every single tech blog has.

Also, I do care a lot about UI. That's why I'm using Linux and Gnome, because I can change it and tweak it in some many ways I end up with something completely new every week. Unlike OS X or Windows for that matter.

unfrozen.jon

Sep 17, 2009, 10:11 AM

Gizmodo review " The Zune HD is the best touchscreen PMP on the market. enuff said!

Playing with it since yesterday... I must say Oh YEA!... I am making excuses to play with it... it's one cool little gadget...

From the way Gizmodo has been heavily promoting Windows 7 and Zune HD I think they've been bought. I enjoyed reading their news because of their humour but I unsubscribed their RSS feed today after reading their Zune HD review:

"The narrower 3.3-inch widescreen isn't as spacious as that of the iPod Touch and pages definitely load a little slower, but besides that it's a full-featured, fast and responsive browser."

Ars Technica's review:

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2009/09/zune-hd-review.ars/3

The browser is more than a "little slower". I agree there are some definite areas where it shines but they're downplaying its weaknesses.

And Windows 7 is the best Windows since XP but I don't think its worth the hype. Yes they hype Apple a lot but they're products are excitedly discussed even when their existence is kept under wraps.

dejo

Sep 17, 2009, 10:20 AM

...and Im not making anything up. facts are there, just that people choose not to see, while I put it up front. facts has no bias.
A large percentage of what you post is not facts, though, it is opinion. Let me know if you need examples.

LagunaSol

Sep 17, 2009, 10:21 AM

People quoting mosx and then calling others "Apple fanboys" need to look in a mirror.

Word. Funny how on a Mac-centric board like this you're accused of being closed-minded or an Apple cultist if you vocally reject the silly tripe posted by some of these obvious Apple-hating agitators.

From the way Gizmodo has been heavily promoting Windows 7 and Zune HD I think they've been bought. I enjoyed reading their news because of their humour but I unsubscribed their RSS feed today after reading their Zune HD review.

Still, nothing compares to CNET's "tears of joy" headline when they had a Zune HD first look. Tears of joy? Seriously?

The tech journalism world is desperate to say something nice about Microsoft, after years of not being able to justify it (Vista, Xbox 360 self-destruction, Windows Mobile horror, Zune flop) - though they've tried mightily...

Jimmy James

Sep 17, 2009, 10:30 AM

Does this product have a... name? :cool:

Probably a Dell X30/50/etc.

aristobrat

Sep 17, 2009, 10:34 AM

Not sure if it was already posted here, but Andy Ihnatko's review was a good read (IMO, anyway):
http://bit.ly/kPwb9 17 minutes ago

celtikmind

Sep 17, 2009, 10:47 AM

Word. Funny how on a Mac-centric board like this you're accused of being closed-minded or an Apple cultist if you vocally reject the silly tripe posted by some of these obvious Apple-hating agitators.

Still, nothing compares to CNET's "tears of joy" headline when they had a Zune HD first look. Tears of joy? Seriously?

The tech journalism world is desperate to say something nice about Microsoft, after years of not being able to justify it (Vista, Xbox 360 self-destruction, Windows Mobile horror, Zune flop) - though they've tried mightily...

Yes, some things they've done are laughable but still i.e. the Xbox 360 is rather popular, even here at MR.

And in all fairness, I don't think Apple is currently doing an inch better in the quality department. The iPhone was a minor disappointment to me and something I already more or less forgotten but I won't consider it again until it changes radically. But after have tried four (4) unibody MBP, all with hardware defects I have given up on Apple until they make something that resembles the quality they used to represent. This is not counting my other Apple computers I've owned, all with one defect or another, however minor.

Today's lineup is just very unsatisfying for someone who've used Apple in the past. And I wish it wasn't so but it is.

Mattie Num Nums

Sep 17, 2009, 10:56 AM

Grrrr. Don't get me started on standards. :rolleyes:

When the iPhone came out, there was a huge opportunity to push websites to provide mobile versions for everyone as an alternative choice.

Instead, Apple came up with a ton of iPhone-specific meta tags, to make websites look okay on their device only. Thanks for nothing.

Apple doesn't believe in standards thats why my environment here (50K PC's and around 10K Macs) our Macs are suffering horribly.

Consultant

Sep 17, 2009, 11:23 AM

Zune HD versus Apple iPod touch 2009 / 3rd gen, 12 page comparison
http://obamapacman.com/2009/09/microsoft-zune-hd-vs-apple-ipod-touch-3g-feature-comparison

Apple doesn't believe in standards thats why my environment here (50K PC's and around 10K Macs) our Macs are suffering horribly.

Yeah right. And you are saying that because Zune HD with mobile IE6 which dates from 2001 is a better choice than something that something with HTML 5, Acid 3 Compliance?

Safari features
http://www.apple.com/safari/features.html

celtikmind

Sep 17, 2009, 11:26 AM

Zune HD versus Apple iPod touch 2009 / 3rd gen, 12 page comparison
http://obamapacman.com/2009/09/microsoft-zune-hd-vs-apple-ipod-touch-3g-feature-comparison

Yeah right. And you are saying that because Zune HD with mobile IE6 which dates from 2001 is a better choice than something that something with HTML 5, Acid 3 Compliance?

Safari features
http://www.apple.com/safari/features.html

Newer isn't always better. And regardless, Apple have never been big on standards, other than their own. Unfortunately for everyone.

polaris20

Sep 17, 2009, 11:28 AM

A large percentage of what you post is not facts, though, it is opinion. Let me know if you need examples.

That habit runs rampant among the MS shills here.

cumanzor

Sep 17, 2009, 11:28 AM

Word. Funny how on a Mac-centric board like this you're accused of being closed-minded or an Apple cultist if you vocally reject the silly tripe posted by some of these obvious Apple-hating agitators.

Still, nothing compares to CNET's "tears of joy" headline when they had a Zune HD first look. Tears of joy? Seriously?

The tech journalism world is desperate to say something nice about Microsoft, after years of not being able to justify it (Vista, Xbox 360 self-destruction, Windows Mobile horror, Zune flop) - though they've tried mightily...

I believe it is hilarious how guys think it is impossible for MS to do anything nice. It think it's hilarious how you think blogs were bought because they give good reviews. (either way, Apple, MS, Sony have done in the past, and it would be childish to think companies don't resort to this kind of ********).

That habit runs rampant among the MS shills here.

And it is also the way Apple marketing team works. (e.g every single "I'm a Mac" ad.)

CylonGlitch

Sep 17, 2009, 11:32 AM

BTW someone asked for a side by side shot of the ZuneHD and iPodTouch in the sun :

(stolen from a review)
http://media1.suntimes.com/multimedia/zune091609.jpg_20090916_21_47_22_98-285-400.imageContent

But when using the Zune indoors, the quality of the display more than makes up for the slightly smaller acreage. The Zune’s screen is OLED. Blacks are utterly black and when the colors of a piece of album art are meant to pop, they damned-near poke your eye out.

...

The photo is intentionally overexposed; otherwise, it’d be difficult to make out the Zune HD display at all.

Looks like the ZuneHD is a decent PMP, sounds good. The problem with comparing it to an iPod Touch is that the iPT is not just a PMP, sure that is one of it's features but it does so much more too. If you're looking for a PMP, then the ZuneHD seems to be the way to go. If you're looking for a PDA/PMP/Casual Game rig; then the iPT seems to be the way to go.

Whatever fits your needs.

MacMan86

Sep 17, 2009, 11:35 AM

Yeah right. And you are saying that because Zune HD with mobile IE6 which dates from 2001 is a better choice than something that something with HTML 5, Acid 3 Compliance?

This post made me wonder what the Zune HD gets in an Acid3 test. http://discuss.gdgt.com/microsoft/zune/hd/general/A-Bit-of-curiosity/

People saying 5/100 or 14/100 at best. Wow

kdarling

Sep 17, 2009, 11:47 AM

And you are saying that because Zune HD with mobile IE6 which dates from 2001 is a better choice than something that something with HTML 5, Acid 3 Compliance?

Again, mobile IE6 doesn't date from 2001. Just the name does.

There was a WinCE IE6 dating from 2006 that we used in industrial devices that was pretty much IE6.

But the Zune version of "IE6" uses IE8's Javascript engine, IE7's css engine, and the rest is only nominally based on IE6 code.

They should've called it "Zune Mobile" or something, to avoid people trying to directly compare it to desktop IE6.

celtikmind

Sep 17, 2009, 11:53 AM

This post made me wonder what the Zune HD gets in an Acid3 test. http://discuss.gdgt.com/microsoft/zune/hd/general/A-Bit-of-curiosity/

People saying 5/100 or 14/100 at best. Wow

What the heck is Acid3? And what usefulness does it have to a PMP?

Never heard of it before now.

Rodimus Prime

Sep 17, 2009, 11:55 AM

This post made me wonder what the Zune HD gets in an Acid3 test. http://discuss.gdgt.com/microsoft/zune/hd/general/A-Bit-of-curiosity/

People saying 5/100 or 14/100 at best. Wow

yeah but run the other mobile browser and there and you would get the save very piss poor results

KnightWRX

Sep 17, 2009, 12:16 PM

yeah but run the other mobile browser and there and you would get the save very piss poor results

Don't you hate being wrong all the time ?

http://att.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=182824&d=1247611016

What the heck is Acid3? And what usefulness does it have to a PMP?

Never heard of it before now.

Acid3, Acid2 and Acid are test suites for Browser w3c standard conformance. They basically test how standards compliant (for the various parts of the standard they test) your browser is. As you can guess, IE lags behind, even in version 8 in these tests. Webkit, Gecko and Opera are all very standards compliant and as such, when you write a page to the standard, it usually displays the same in all 3 engines.

That is why people whine about IE, because you constantly have to remove functionality or do convulted tricks to get your web pages up and displaying properly in IE. Microsoft just doesn't like standard compliance, it goes against their "Vendor lock-in" goal.

(stolen from a review)
http://media1.suntimes.com/multimedia/zune091609.jpg_20090916_21_47_22_98-285-400.imageContent

Wow, I guess the MS-fanboys are going to have to find that review and then actively dismiss it as "Apple-biased, fanboy spouted crap", and then nitpick at every possibility that could undermine the credibility of the author while inventing hundreds of reason why this picture is fake.

Because you know, Appleinsider can't be objective when they report something.

LagunaSol

Sep 17, 2009, 12:18 PM

I believe it is hilarious how guys think it is impossible for MS to do anything nice.

I don't think that exclusively - I just think it's impossible for MS to do anything nice before someone else does something nice before them and gives them something to emulate. It's just their corporate DNA. I would love to hear examples that counter this notion.

It think it's hilarious how you think blogs were bought because they give good reviews.

Hmm, did I say that? No, I didn't.

And it is also the way Apple marketing team works. (e.g every single "I'm a Mac" ad.)

The MicroFanboys are always complaining about how dishonest the I'm A Mac ads are, yet they never provide specifics. Are they embellished? Of course - all ads are. Are they lies? Absolutely not. PCs have more virus problems, generally come loaded with crapware, don't have the great iLife apps, Vista was a flop, customer service for PCs is a nightmare ("Go to the hardware folks." "No, go to the software folks."). These are universal facts.

If anything, these ads annoy the Windows faithful because they're painfully true. And they know it.

Rodimus Prime

Sep 17, 2009, 12:35 PM

Don't you hate being wrong all the time ?

http://att.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=182824&d=1247611016

Odd there considering Safari on my PC pulls pulled a 75/100. Firefox pulls a 93/100 and IE 7 pulled a entire 14/100.

I just question the results not lining up with the windows verson of safira.

KnightWRX

Sep 17, 2009, 12:40 PM

Odd there considering Safari on my PC pulls pulled a 75/100. Firefox pulls a 93/100 and IE 7 pulled a entire 14/100.

I just question the results not lining up with the windows verson of safira.

Safari scores 100/100 since Safari 4. Mobile Safari in iPhone OS 3.1 and 3.0 before it was pretty up-to-date vs the desktop version. Don't forget Webkit is a seperate component and is very adaptable.

CQd44

Sep 17, 2009, 12:55 PM

I'm not sure why the Acid3 test is so important to some people. It tests a browser's ability to handle badly coded java, doesn't it?

TuffLuffJimmy

Sep 17, 2009, 01:07 PM

Safari scores 100/100 since Safari 4. Mobile Safari in iPhone OS 3.1 and 3.0 before it was pretty up-to-date vs the desktop version. Don't forget Webkit is a seperate component and is very adaptable.

Mobile Safari still doesn't pass the Acid3 test. The image is supposed to look EXACTLY like the reference image, and there are definite artifacts (even in your screenshot) that don't match the reference image. Just because it says 100/100 does not mean it passed. Also, it wasn't a smooth animation, which is another requirement of Acid3.

cumanzor

Sep 17, 2009, 01:20 PM

So you are not even an Apple fanboy, you are just anti microsoft, for whatever reason. You are calling me a MS fanboy for defending them, guess what: I'm not. As I said and I've been saying, I use linux almost 24/7 (I do manage a few Server 2003 boxes though).

I just think it's impossible for MS to do anything nice before someone else does something nice before them and gives them something to emulate. It's just their corporate DNA. I would love to hear examples that counter this notion

This is completely biased opinion. They sure do "implement"some features seen elsewhere, but so does most companies, including Apple. Look around, browser wars, OS wars, etc, they all just use stuff from their competitors and implement them in different ways.

Having said that, it goes both ways. Obviously both companies innovate every once in a while, but only a true fanboy believes either company is perfect in this sense.

The MicroFanboys are always complaining about how dishonest the I'm A Mac ads are, yet they never provide specifics. Are they embellished? Of course - all ads are. Are they lies? Absolutely not.

No, people complain because most of those "facts" are either half-truths or just ********.

PCs have more virus problems, generally come loaded with crapware,

********, Windows does have more malware issues, PCs in general? No, a virus can infect your Windows boot camp install as well. Get off your high horse, your Apple computer is just a regular PC with proprietary ******** on it. About the crapware, guess what, this is not MS's fault either. Blame the manufacturers.

don't have the great iLife apps,
While there are no bundled apps in Windows of this sort, there a gazillion free and commercial alternatives, literally. Some of them even better than can iPhoto, iDVD or iMove. GarageBand on the other hand is amazing, I give that to you.

Vista was a flop
True, but have you tried Vista after SP1. Probably not. Have you tried Windows 7? Probably not. Almost every user out there agrees that Windows 7 is the best OS yet. Even OS X users agree. Of course those who are blind fanboys will use whatever excuse they can to trash the OS, just like they are doing with the Zune.

If anything, these ads annoy the Windows faithful because they're painfully true. And they know it.

True? You think those ads are truthful? Oh well, way to lose all credibility there pal.

I'm not sure why the Acid3 test is so important to some people. It tests a browser's ability to handle badly coded java, doesn't it?

Javascript (not Java), and it also measures the level of compliance against web standards. It is ridiculous to use it as a benchmark tool.

inkswamp

Sep 17, 2009, 01:35 PM

i can understand that, however most folks on this forum only believe that innovation comes from the folks at mapple :eek: They should change their slogan to Apple, an Iphone company:D

I know what you're saying and that can be annoying but, to be fair, this is a site intended for Apple users. It's a self-selecting bunch and criticizing that is sort of pointless.

Members here blindly praise MS products without even having used them, pick and choose excerpts from biased articles while ignoring others, state subjective points as fact and contrive spurious statistics,e tc. You would swear BG has some of you on the payroll. Different strokes for different folks.

Works both ways buddy.

Happens on both sides. People look for bias and accuse people of being "fanboys" or whatever but the thing is, I've used lots of MS products and I find that they generally under-deliver and are badly designed, so my tendency is to assume the worst with new MS products. It's not blind hatred for MS. It's a bias, I admit, but a bias with some rationale behind it. It doesn't make someone a fanboy because they assume they will see the same sketchy quality in a new MS product that they've experienced in the past.

BTW someone asked for a side by side shot of the ZuneHD and iPodTouch in the sun :

(stolen from a review)
http://media1.suntimes.com/multimedia/zune091609.jpg_20090916_21_47_22_98-285-400.imageContent

Thanks. That was my request. Any idea where that review is? Looks like whoever did that knew what they were reviewing.

EDIT: Ah, I found it. It's Andy Ihnatko's review (should have known.)

http://www.suntimes.com/technology/ihnatko/1775373,ihnatko-zune-hd-microsoft-091609.article

LagunaSol

Sep 17, 2009, 01:39 PM

This is completely biased opinion.

Examples of great original Microsoft innovations please?

And the classic "sure Microsoft copies, but Apple does too" response is not what I'm looking for (the classic easy way out).

Having said that, it goes both ways. Obviously both companies innovate every once in a while, but only a true fanboy believes either company is perfect in this sense.

That's a strawman. Who said Apple is perfect? I didn't. I'm saying that Microsoft can't do anything original.

iPod -> Zune
Wii -> Natal
Mii -> 360 avatars
Coverflow -> Xbox Live
YouTube -> Soapbox (RIP)
Mac -> Windows
MobileMe -> My Phone
iTunes App Store -> Windows Mobile Store
Google -> Windows Live Search/Bing

The list goes on and on and on, but I don't care to spend more of my time proving the obvious.

No, people complain because most of those "facts" are either half-truths or just ********.

I'd love to see you back up this claim.

a virus can infect your Windows boot camp install as well. Get off your high horse, your Apple computer is just a regular PC with proprietary ******** on it..

You're seriously arguing that Apple is dishonest about viruses because Windows on a Mac gets viruses too? Seriously??? Wow.

And I see you're playing the "you're arrogant because you disagree with me" card. A classic arrow from the Apple-haters quiver, but ultimately pointless.

While there are no bundled apps in Windows of this sort,

So the point made in that commercial is true. Moving on.

True, but have you tried Vista after SP1. Probably not. Have you tried Windows 7? Probably not.

Actually, I have Windows 7 RC on my Mac as a virtual machine right now.

And as you mention, the point made in that particular commercial is also true. Moving on.

Almost every user out there agrees that Windows 7 is the best OS yet. Even OS X users agree.

Bzzt, wrong. Best Windows version yet. Sure. Best OS? No way. OS X still beats it. I use both. I think you'll find relatively few OS X users that agree with you, contrary to what you are claiming. And who are these "almost every user out there" you are referring to? I imagine their identity will remain a mystery.

Of course those who are blind fanboys will use whatever excuse they can to trash the OS, just like they are doing with the Zune.

And using the "blind fanboy" line as a line of defense proves that you have nothing to add to the debate.

And I'm hardly "trashing" the Zune - I'm just saying that it's not a compelling product in today's market.

True? You think those ads are truthful? Oh well, way to lose all credibility there pal.

Still waiting for you to lay out all the blatant lies of these ads. *crickets*

KnightWRX

Sep 17, 2009, 02:07 PM

Mobile Safari still doesn't pass the Acid3 test. The image is supposed to look EXACTLY like the reference image, and there are definite artifacts (even in your screenshot) that don't match the reference image. Just because it says 100/100 does not mean it passed. Also, it wasn't a smooth animation, which is another requirement of Acid3.

Exactly. But it's not doing so bad either, like Rodimus was claiming. It's doing much better than many other desktop browsers were just back in january.

And the animation requirements are lifted when using a mobile browser, so the only things left are the artifacts.

polaris20

Sep 17, 2009, 02:07 PM

True, but have you tried Vista after SP1. Probably not. Have you tried Windows 7? Probably not. Almost every user out there agrees that Windows 7 is the best OS yet. Even OS X users agree. Of course those who are blind fanboys will use whatever excuse they can to trash the OS, just like they are doing with the Zune.

I've used Windows 7 daily since the beta came out. It is indeed the best Windows OS ever released. I didn't think it's the best OS ever, and I doubt you'll find Linux users like myself agreeing it's the best OS ever either, much less OS X fans. An OS is a personal thing, and there is no "best OS ever".

And Vista SP2 is still sluggish compared to XP, 7, and OS X. Which is fine, since 7 is officially out next month anyway.

TuffLuffJimmy

Sep 17, 2009, 02:17 PM

And the animation requirements are lifted when using a mobile browser

Who says?

As for the test itself:
Considering that Safari doesn't actually hold up the standards of the Acid3 test, it's just optimized to pass it, I doubt that Mobile Safari would actually score 100/100 had it not been optimized for the test. That's why the real test will be Acid4 since the requirements for that won't be published and therefore actual standards will need to be implemented in order to pass.

KnightWRX

Sep 17, 2009, 02:22 PM

Who says?

As for the test itself:
Considering that Safari doesn't actually hold up the standards of the Acid3 test, it's just optimized to pass it, I doubt that Mobile Safari would actually score 100/100 had it not been optimized for the test. That's why the real test will be Acid4 since the requirements for that won't be published and therefore actual standards will need to be implemented in order to pass.

http://ln.hixie.ch/?start=1207096078&count=1

As for WebKit's standard compliance, I've found that it pretty much adheres to what the w3 puts forth. It still might not implement all standards and all revisions, but it's pretty advance. So is Gecko. So is Opera's engine.

IE... not so much.

kdarling

Sep 17, 2009, 02:42 PM

Examples of great original Microsoft innovations please?

The Surface is pretty cool. And Natal is not the same as Wii.

I'm saying that Microsoft can't do anything original.

Some of your histories seem to start with Apple, for some odd reason.

MP3 players -> iPod -> Zune
Enright -> Apple buys Coverflow -> Xbox Live
PARC -> Mac -> Windows
Any app store -> iTunes App Store -> Windows Mobile Store

Hey, I spend YEARS trashing Microsoft. I refused to use their stuff for a long, long time. I even helped start a computer company back in the 80's to compete with them (and Atari and Amiga). That's more than most MS haters have done.

But I'm impressed these days with MS's openness. MS is slowly becoming younger. Most teams have blogs, and they will answer questions. So unlike Apple and their secretiveness.

LagunaSol

Sep 17, 2009, 03:02 PM

The Surface is pretty cool. And Natal is not the same as Wii.

Surface? Really? The Big Ass Table?

Natal is not the same as the Wii, but it is going after what made the Wii such a hit - motion control (which most Xbox gamers derided as silly and pointless but now seem to like the idea now that Microsoft has jumped on board).

And the guy primarily responsible for Natal concocted the concept using Wii controllers (it didn't originate in-house) - after his demo he was quickly made a Microsoft employee.

Some of your histories seem to start with Apple, for some odd reason.

Talk to Microsoft about that, not me.

MP3 players -> iPod -> Zune

Yes, the old "Microsoft only copies Apple after Apple copies someone else" routine. :rolleyes:

Enright -> Apple buys Coverflow -> Xbox Live

The difference being Apple purchased this technology, only to have it ripped off (for free) by Microsoft. This was not a good example of Apple innovation, obviously, but it is a good example of Microsoft's "Me Too" approach to business and design.

Any app store -> iTunes App Store -> Windows Mobile Store

Yes, of course, and before the iMac there was colored plastic, thus the iMac was not really innovative either. :rolleyes:

But I'm impressed these days with MS's openness. MS is slowly becoming younger. Most teams have blogs, and they will answer questions. So unlike Apple and their secretiveness.

A tiger doesn't change his stripes. Only a fool would believe in a new kinder, gentler Microsoft.

And Microsoft's "openness" is more about sewing FUD than anything else. "Check out our new Zune which we'll be shipping in 18 months! Surely you don't want an iPod now!"

I'll be impressed if/when they actually come out with a product that doesn't already have someone else's fingerprints all over it.

CylonGlitch

Sep 17, 2009, 03:37 PM

TuffLuffJimmy

Sep 17, 2009, 03:40 PM

Who says?

As for the test itself:
Considering that Safari doesn't actually hold up the standards of the Acid3 test, it's just optimized to pass it, I doubt that Mobile Safari would actually score 100/100 had it not been optimized for the test. That's why the real test will be Acid4 since the requirements for that won't be published and therefore actual standards will need to be implemented in order to pass.

Odd, Safari on both my MacBook and my iPhone passed 100%.

/shrug.

Please read what I write.

And no. Safari on your iPhone did not pass. There are artifacts that do not match the rendered image, just because it says 100/100 does not mean it passed.

CylonGlitch

Sep 17, 2009, 03:47 PM

Please read what I write.

And no. Safari on your iPhone did not pass. There are artifacts that do not match the rendered image, just because it says 100/100 does not mean it passed.

Do you have proof to back it up that Safari doesn't actually have compliance to the standards? My recall is that communities have a tendency to get all upset when a company lies to make something pass. Oh, I recall this happening both nVidia and ATI a few years ago; both had done things to make themselves look better in the test suites. Once it was revealed there was a whole lot of stink about it.

So, I ask, what's the proof that they are cheating and why isn't there a big stink about it? I'm sure MS would LOVE to use that info in their commercials.

TuffLuffJimmy

Sep 17, 2009, 03:54 PM

Do you have proof to back it up that Safari doesn't actually have compliance to the standards? My recall is that communities have a tendency to get all upset when a company lies to make something pass. Oh, I recall this happening both nVidia and ATI a few years ago; both had done things to make themselves look better in the test suites. Once it was revealed there was a whole lot of stink about it.

So, I ask, what's the proof that they are cheating and why isn't there a big stink about it? I'm sure MS would LOVE to use that info in their commercials.

Do you not remember when the browsers started passing the Acid3 test? :confused:
The very group that puts together the tests made a stink about it.
The only reason why it didn't blow up is because it appeared all browsers were artificially raising their scores in standards tests.

CylonGlitch

Sep 17, 2009, 03:58 PM

Do you not remember when the browsers started passing the Acid3 test? :confused:
The very group that puts together the tests made a stink about it.
The only reason why it didn't blow up is because it appeared all browsers were artificially raising their scores in standards tests.

According to Wikipedia (and other sources)
Browsers which pass

Note that only stable, public releases are listed here (alpha and beta versions, for example, would not qualify).
Desktop browsers
Browser Score 100/100 Pixel-perfect rendering Performance
Safari 4.0 (8 June 2009) [26] Yes Yes Yes
Opera 10.00 (1 September 2009) [27] Yes Yes No
Mobile browsers
Note: For mobile browsers it is not possible to consider the "performance" portion of the test, as mobile browsers cannot be run on the reference hardware.
Browser Score 100/100 Pixel-perfect rendering
Iris Browser 1.1.4 (14 March 2009) [25] Yes Yes

Yes, I see the failure on the Mobile Safari now, the little pink box. Gotcha.

EDIT : BTW, found nothing when searching for "Safari 4 cheats acid 3 test" in google; maybe I'm looking in the wrong place.
EDIT2 : Searching www.acidtests.org and www.webstandards.org didn't find anything about them cheating as well.

cumanzor

Sep 17, 2009, 04:03 PM

And the classic "sure Microsoft copies, but Apple does too" response is not what I'm looking for (the classic easy way out).

Still holds true.

Coverflow -> Xbox Live
wtf :confused:

Wii -> Natal
Natal is not even close to the Wii. Their target might be the same (and even that's debatable) but they are completely different technologies.

iTunes App Store -> Windows Mobile Store
Package manager -> Any App Store -> Windows Mobile Store. The difference is Apple found a way to milk the concept as well.

MobileMe -> My Phone
You can compare the early days of .mac and iTools to the first days if The Microsoft Network. Tip: MSN came years earlier.

Mac -> Windows
Oh god I lol'd. Different operating systems based on entirely different technologies. Yes, Apple sued MS for copying the GUI, but then again, Apple didn't invent that either.

The list goes on and on and on, but I don't care to spend more of my time proving the obvious.
Do elaborate, for the sake of discussion. This only obvious thing here is that companies compete by following the same trends. Saying that Microsoft is not original is just your opinion, sorry.

iPod -> Zune
Mii -> 360 avatars
YouTube -> Soapbox (RIP)
I'm not sure about the story behind the 360 avatars and soapboax so I'll have to give this to you.

You're seriously arguing that Apple is dishonest about viruses because Windows on a Mac gets viruses too? Seriously??? Wow.

What? He he, I have to ask, how the hell did you managed to reach that conclusion? I never said nor implied such thing. Here's the deal. The way Apple shows the PC is that they are boring computers made for boring white collar guys. This cannot be possibly true, given the huge chunk of their market share. From gamers to professionals in every single area.

They also imply that PCs crash every 5 minutes and that you get a virus out of nowhere every minute. Whoever says this is true hasn't used Windows since the W98 days (and well, we all know ME was a disaster). I used Windows since W3.1 to Windows 7. I only got a virus two or three times, which were my fault. Getting a virus nowadays is just a matter of not being careful enough. The same ******** that can get you in trouble in Windows (opening suspicious executables, etc) can get you in trouble in OS X (remember the trojan being spread in pirated copies of iWork?).

They imply that hardware compatibility is better in Windows than OS X, when this is clearly a fallacy. Windows runs on an extremely wide range of hardware combinations, OS X? Only in a few. Are they lying? Not entirely, but they are giving half truths based on common myths.

And I see you're playing the "you're arrogant because you disagree with me" card. A classic arrow from the Apple-haters quiver, but ultimately pointless.

Wrong, you are the one being arrogant. You are the one who believes that your opinion is the only truth in this discussion, you are the one who believes that you are right, when you are clearly wrong about many things. In case you haven't noticed, we do agree in a few points at least.

Bzzt, wrong. Best Windows version yet. Sure. Best OS? No way. OS X still beats it. I use both. I think you'll find relatively few OS X users that agree with you, contrary to what you are claiming. And who are these "almost every user out there" you are referring to? I imagine their identity will remain a mystery.

Yes, I forgot to clarify that. It is the best Windows version yet. I do prefer by a long shot any version of Linux that I've set up and customized myself. OS X still beats it? How so? Why? What exactly can you accomplish on OS X that you can't on Windows 7? And by -almost every user out there- I mean those who have tried Windows 7. Read the blogs, read the news, read the discussion, even some companies are planning on updating from XP already, thing that never happened with Vista for clear reasons (and just for the record, back when I was working in HP they give you the option to install Windows Vista, although a modified version that worked EXTREMELY well).

And I'm hardly "trashing" the Zune - I'm just saying that it's not a compelling product in today's market.

It isn't for you. It is for a lot of people who want something else than an iPod or an iPhone. Are there more people out there who prefer the iPod, sure there are. Does this makes the iPod a better product??? No. If you say yes then you would also have to agree that Windows is better than every other OS because more people use it. (it's a logical fallacy).

Take a -real- look at this:

http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/

Microsoft is not all about the evil empire that holds the monopoly in the OS market. Would you be ok if Apple hold the majority of it? I wouldn't be, and right now I wish more companies could be out there promoting their own operating systems, so we could stop this retarded polarity between Apple and MS.

dejo

Sep 17, 2009, 04:40 PM

They also imply that PCs crash every 5 minutes and that you get a virus out of nowhere every minute.
That is what you are inferring based on what is said. Just stick with what is actually said and not your own, biased implications of that.

They imply that hardware compatibility is better in Windows than OS X...
Hmm, you would think that would be a good thing, wouldn't you? ;)

KnightWRX

Sep 17, 2009, 04:59 PM

The Surface is pretty cool. And Natal is not the same as Wii.

No, Natal is the Eye toy evolved.

Yes, of course, and before the iMac there was colored plastic, thus the iMac was not really innovative either. :rolleyes:

Of course, the iMac wasn't innovative because of its colored plastic exterior. The concept had been done before, by things like the NeXT cube, the SGI Indigos and Octanes, IBM Aptivas and many others.

What the iMac brought to the table was the split from the old world of computing. USB only, no floppy drive, everything integrated and no connections to make for the user besides his keyboard and mouse and the power. The iMac was about simplicity, bringing computers and the Internet to people who thought computing and the Internet was a thing for nerds and geeks.

LagunaSol

Sep 17, 2009, 05:40 PM

Yes, Apple sued MS for copying the GUI, but then again, Apple didn't invent that either.

Ah yes, Microsoft only copies what Apple copies from someone else. Right.

Saying that Microsoft is not original is just your opinion, sorry.

I'm still waiting for you to share some examples of Microsoft originality. Please. Enlighten me.

I never said nor implied such thing.

Actually, you did. Here's the quote:

a virus can infect your Windows boot camp install as well

Your implication being that Apple can't knock Microsoft for Windows viruses because Macs can get viruses too if you put Windows on them. A point which deserves the WTF? of the day.

They also imply that PCs crash every 5 minutes and that you get a virus out of nowhere every minute.

I don't recall "every 5 minutes" or "every minute" mentioned in any of the ads. Curious.

Getting a virus nowadays is just a matter of not being careful enough.

Yep, the old "blame the users" routine. Look, I'm not blaming Microsoft for their malware woes. It simply comes with being the 90% market share OS. That said, the fact is that viruses and malware are a huge problem for Windows users. And that's a fact.

Are they lying? Not entirely, but they are giving half truths based on common myths.

The bottom line is if the Apple ads were even half as false as the Microsoft fanboys argue, Microsoft would have sued Apple years ago when the ads started rather than let themselves get slapped around on national television for all these years. The fact that they didn't pursue legal action says they didn't have a legal case to do so. Meaning there was nothing in the ads that could legally be construed as a lie.

The only whimpering response Microsoft could eventually muster was "Have you heard how cheap Windows laptops are?" Sad.

What exactly can you accomplish on OS X that you can't on Windows 7?

What can you accomplish in a 2010 Honda Accord that you can't accomplish in a '72 Pinto? Nothing. This argument makes no sense.

It's not what can be accomplished, it's how it's accomplished. And as a long time Windows user, I can tell you that the how on the Mac side is far more pleasant than the how on the Windows side.

And by -almost every user out there- I mean those who have tried Windows 7.

Hmm, I've tried Windows 7. I find it far better than XP (which I've been using 40+ hours a week since 1993). But I still find OS X better than Windows 7. I haven't seen many reviews that claim otherwise.

Does this makes the iPod a better product???

Yes, because the iPod touch, for the same money, can do lots of things the Zune HD can't do. Things that consumers actually care about (read: not HD radio).

You keep implying that I'm bashing the Zune based on the quality of the product. I'm not. I'm simply arguing that the Zune is trying to compete in a market that has become irrelevant: the dedicated PMP market. Microsoft is simply two steps behind.

A year from now the sales numbers for the Zune HD will make my argument for me. Just as they have with the previous two Zune generations.

Microsoft is not all about the evil empire that holds the monopoly in the OS market.

Hmm, what are they about exactly?

Would you be ok if Apple hold the majority of it?

Heck no, that would be a nightmare. I don't want Apple acting like Microsoft any more than they already are, and I don't want the virus and malware headaches. I'm perfectly fine with Apple's position in the market. And that doesn't change my opinion that Microsoft are a den of weasels that don't have an original idea in their collective heads.

I can't wait to see the ZunePhone...

celtikmind

Sep 17, 2009, 06:13 PM

What the iMac brought to the table was the split from the old world of computing. USB only, no floppy drive, everything integrated and no connections to make for the user besides his keyboard and mouse and the power. The iMac was about simplicity, bringing computers and the Internet to people who thought computing and the Internet was a thing for nerds and geeks.

Eh... There was something called 'Performa' before that, remember? Performa 5200? All in one too... and marketed as consumer products. I know a lot of ordinary (as in non-geeks and non-nerds) who were using various Performa models for dialup internet. A few people I know had ISDN or some variant of cable too. Hell, anyone else remember the Color Classic?

Middle part is mostly right though. The iMac didn't come with Airport in the early standard configurations, or?

How quickly people forget... :D

DougB541

Sep 17, 2009, 06:55 PM

Wow this thread turned into an entire MS vs. Apple thread (big surprise).

I'll chime in with my opinion that MS doesn't just copy everything....its funny whoever said that used the examples that worked for him (tho calling saying that NXE copied cover flow is a bit far fetched).

But MS does a lot of things not following someone else. Tablet PC? What are apple fans going to call it when APple comes out with a tablet?

But at the same time, what super original thing has Apple done? They are good at taking an idea and making ti their own and branding it as such. Thats what corporate America does. They didn't invite the cell phone...but they took a smartphone idea and said, lets make it more simple.

Anyway, thats all I had to say about that.

cumanzor

Sep 17, 2009, 07:39 PM

Ah yes, Microsoft only copies what Apple copies from someone else. Right.

I'm still waiting for you to share some examples of Microsoft originality. Please. Enlighten me.

Actually, you did. Here's the quote:

Your implication being that Apple can't knock Microsoft for Windows viruses because Macs can get viruses too if you put Windows on them. A point which deserves the WTF? of the day.

I don't recall "every 5 minutes" or "every minute" mentioned in any of the ads. Curious.

Yep, the old "blame the users" routine. Look, I'm not blaming Microsoft for their malware woes. It simply comes with being the 90% market share OS. That said, the fact is that viruses and malware are a huge problem for Windows users. And that's a fact.

The bottom line is if the Apple ads were even half as false as the Microsoft fanboys argue, Microsoft would have sued Apple years ago when the ads started rather than let themselves get slapped around on national television for all these years. The fact that they didn't pursue legal action says they didn't have a legal case to do so. Meaning there was nothing in the ads that could legally be construed as a lie.

The only whimpering response Microsoft could eventually muster was "Have you heard how cheap Windows laptops are?" Sad.

What can you accomplish in a 2010 Honda Accord that you can't accomplish in a '72 Pinto? Nothing. This argument makes no sense.

It's not what can be accomplished, it's how it's accomplished. And as a long time Windows user, I can tell you that the how on the Mac side is far more pleasant than the how on the Windows side.

Hmm, I've tried Windows 7. I find it far better than XP (which I've been using 40+ hours a week since 1993). But I still find OS X better than Windows 7. I haven't seen many reviews that claim otherwise.

Yes, because the iPod touch, for the same money, can do lots of things the Zune HD can't do. Things that consumers actually care about (read: not HD radio).

You keep implying that I'm bashing the Zune based on the quality of the product. I'm not. I'm simply arguing that the Zune is trying to compete in a market that has become irrelevant: the dedicated PMP market. Microsoft is simply two steps behind.

A year from now the sales numbers for the Zune HD will make my argument for me. Just as they have with the previous two Zune generations.

Hmm, what are they about exactly?

Heck no, that would be a nightmare. I don't want Apple acting like Microsoft any more than they already are, and I don't want the virus and malware headaches. I'm perfectly fine with Apple's position in the market. And that doesn't change my opinion that Microsoft are a den of weasels that don't have an original idea in their collective heads.

I can't wait to see the ZunePhone...

All I can read in your posts is "I am right and you are wrong, I am right and you are wrong, blah blah blah."

You are adding absolutely nothing to the conversation, all you are doing is implying things I've never said.

Also, you seem to be a ****ing know it all when it comes to what customer actually want and need. Listen, you don't represent anyone or any group in here. You are just giving your opinion and making it look like universal facts. It is impossible to discuss with people like you.

Have a nice one.

DMann

Sep 17, 2009, 10:22 PM

For you, when a journalist favors a Microsoft product, the journalist is good, and the review is worthwhile:

Pogue - who is a strong advocate of Apple - gives it a glowing review whilst pointing out the obvious problems with the ecosystem and why the iPod Touch will, of course, outsell it by a considerable margin.

This very same journalist, however, is hypocritically condemned, losing all credibility, when favoring Apple's products or is less flattering of MS's products:

Pogue lost any credibility he had a long time ago.Yet, once he offers favorable observations about the Zune, he is redeemed, magically.

Furthermore, certain periodicals and/or tech blogs are worthy of recommendation on some days:

You don't read Gizmodo or Engadget or any other tech journal then?

On other days, (when critical of MS) these very same sites are arbitrarily declared as worthless:

Ah, Gizmodo.

LOL! Not exactly a reliable source of info.

Your hypocritical and highly dismissive nature is astounding. Observe a mere sampling of the deprecating, derogatory denouncements of periodicals and authors who have ever cast MS in a negative light, or have had praise for Apple:

This story is just a big pile of FUD.
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=462

The Inquirer as a reputable source? Surely some mistake.

Actually I have read the article which is why I know it's silly....

I wonder if the authors of this article realise how ridiculous they look and how they actually end up making MS's case for them?

The tragedy is they probably don't.

Sure. However neither does reading some of the bollocks posted by some of the less able tech journals and their followers....

*Reads article*

What a load of drivel. Wishful thinking does not reality make.

Yes I know. That's one of the reasons why AI has gone down the toilet. ..... yes, we know - that is, until they decide to mention something positive about MS or the Zune HD.

Here's one more hypocrite for you:

I quite like the Zune HD but it's a dying market. PMPs are starting to drop off in sales.

My bet is this is a tester or a MS phone. As for apps, who do you think all those developers developed for before the iPhone?

We're glad to see that you were, at one time, aware of this.

Extreme arrogance and hypocrisy, at its best.

Priceless

ZorPrime

Sep 17, 2009, 10:55 PM

Missing a camera and another step behind the big apple. Although, the OLED screen looks very clear and bright; a noticable improvement over the competition.

Sorry for commenting on a first 5 comment in a 600 comment thread; I'm a little slow. :o I had to comment about OLED... props to M$ for using "cutting edge" tech, even though OLED has roots dating back to the 60's, but here's my concern... screen half life. OLED have a wicked short half-life, which means you better not keep the thing shining too brightly. At the risk of being particular, blues have 30% the longevity of greens... meaning, as soon as you turn the thing on you'll have a year maybe two of "optimal" viewing at levels that distinguish it from standard LCD... no thanks, i'll pass on something that doesn't even have 15k hours of life: that's about 4 years of FUNCTIONAL viewing; functional meaning before everything looks red or purple but in the meantime you'll start to notice picture degradation after a year of use (meaning, your colour off-balance with be noticeable in a year) if you were to compare to a new unit or LCD of the same age. *just sayin* :rolleyes:

ZorPrime

Sep 17, 2009, 11:05 PM

Wow this thread turned into an entire MS vs. Apple thread (big surprise).

LOL, yup. hmmm.... a site called "MAC"rumors posts an article about arch-nemesis M$'s Zune... sit back and watch the hits... it's like going on a a certain M$'s console website and discussing a particular $lim unit. ;) hit's and posts = $$$

kdarling

Sep 17, 2009, 11:54 PM

no thanks, i'll pass on something that doesn't even have 15k hours of life: that's about 4 years of FUNCTIONAL viewing;

Even four years is a long time, but that assumes 10 hours a day.

It's not a TV set. The display on a mobile isn't on that much.

Let's be ridiculous and say the owner views 2 two-hour movies a day and spends another hour playing games for a total of five hours display time a day... each and every day.

15,000 hrs / (365 * 5) = 8+ years for the blue pixels.

But that assumes that we're actually using _each and every_ blue pixel every second of those hours in order to use them up. Ain't gonna happen.

More like 10 years or more. By that time, the flash could be getting flakey.

DMann

Sep 18, 2009, 01:34 AM

Ah yes, Microsoft only copies what Apple copies from someone else. Right.At least Apple actually paid Xerox to access PARC before significantly developing and refining their own OS.

I'm still waiting for you to share some examples of Microsoft originality. Please. Enlighten me.When BG duped IBM into thinking he actually had an OS to license to them at the time, and IBM fell for it.

Yep, the old "blame the users" routine. Look, I'm not blaming Microsoft for their malware woes. It simply comes with being the 90% market share OS. That said, the fact is that viruses and malware are a huge problem for Windows users. And that's a fact.They are partially to blame though, integrating IE into their OS, with 5 open portals: "the doors are open everybody, come on in!"

The bottom line is if the Apple ads were even half as false as the Microsoft fanboys argue, Microsoft would have sued Apple years ago when the ads started rather than let themselves get slapped around on national television for all these years. The fact that they didn't pursue legal action says they didn't have a legal case to do so. Meaning there was nothing in the ads that could legally be construed as a lie.The truth hurts.

The only whimpering response Microsoft could eventually muster was "Have you heard how cheap Windows laptops are?" Sad.Even more so, since it backfired on them.

What can you accomplish in a 2010 Honda Accord that you can't accomplish in a '72 Pinto? Nothing. This argument makes no sense.
It's not what can be accomplished, it's how it's accomplished. And as a long time Windows user, I can tell you that the how on the Mac side is far more pleasant than the how on the Windows side.Excellent analogy - W7 does it all, albeit, in a casually sluggish manner. (user experience)

Hmm, I've tried Windows 7. I find it far better than XP (which I've been using 40+ hours a week since 1993). But I still find OS X better than Windows 7. I haven't seen many reviews that claim otherwise.Ditto

Yes, because the iPod touch, for the same money, can do lots of things the Zune HD can't do. Things that consumers actually care about (read: not HD radio).Saturated markets tend to be cold to latecomers. No external speaker? Another reason to pass.

You keep implying that I'm bashing the Zune based on the quality of the product. I'm not. I'm simply arguing that the Zune is trying to compete in a market that has become irrelevant: the dedicated PMP market. Microsoft is simply two steps behind.Even BongoBanger agrees with you on this.

A year from now the sales numbers for the Zune HD will make my argument for me. Just as they have with the previous two Zune generations.As Ballmer said, "the little engine that could"['nt]

Hmm, what are they about exactly?Chasing innovation(s), perhaps?

Heck no, that would be a nightmare. I don't want Apple acting like Microsoft any more than they already are, and I don't want the virus and malware headaches. I'm perfectly fine with Apple's position in the market. And that doesn't change my opinion that Microsoft are a den of weasels that don't have an original idea in their collective heads.

I can't wait to see the ZunePhone...It's gonna be a game changer - - just wait................................................................................................ .................................................................................................... ..................

KnightWRX

Sep 18, 2009, 06:55 AM

Chasing innovation(s), perhaps?

No, actually, they wait for innovations, then they apply the Plan™ : Embrace, Extend, Extinguish.

The Web is their most blatant example of this. For a long time, they refused to follow standards for the DOM and for CSS. Luckily, they also stagnated in the extend phase and competitors such as Gecko and WebKit managed to take back a significant enough portion of the web and organizations like the w3c that publishes the standards managed to remain relevant, so they failed at the Extinguish part.

And speaking of not understanding the market :

http://www.pcworld.com/article/172151/zune_hd_games_ads.html

I guess now we know why they don't want to release an SDK and open up the marketplace to just any developpers, it might cut into their ad revenue.

And I guess now that PC world have posted such a negative article, that they too are biased and don't have any credibility.

fat phil

Sep 18, 2009, 07:00 AM

Even four years is a long time, but that assumes 10 hours a day.

It's not a TV set. The display on a mobile isn't on that much.

Let's be ridiculous and say the owner views 2 two-hour movies a day and spends another hour playing games for a total of five hours display time a day... each and every day.

15,000 hrs / (365 * 5) = 8+ years for the blue pixels.

But that assumes that we're actually using _each and every_ blue pixel every second of those hours in order to use them up. Ain't gonna happen.

More like 10 years or more. By that time, the flash could be getting flakey.

What a noisy thread.

Regarding the OLED...

The majority of the people fawning over Zunes and iPhones are tech collectors, and a good many are early adopters too:

In 2 years time most of us will have relegated today's hardware to a shelf, or occassional usage, and in 8 years time it'll be a nostalgia item - and the screen will probably be ok because you haven't even charged it, nevermind turned it on, for the past five years.

LagunaSol

Sep 18, 2009, 11:14 AM

When BG duped IBM into thinking he actually had an OS to license to them at the time, and IBM fell for it.

Absolutely. Microsoft's one and only stroke of genius. Their very first product was a ripoff. And so the pattern began.

DMann

Sep 18, 2009, 05:10 PM

No, actually, they wait for innovations, then they apply the Plan™ : Embrace, Extend, Extinguish.

The Web is their most blatant example of this. For a long time, they refused to follow standards for the DOM and for CSS. Luckily, they also stagnated in the extend phase and competitors such as Gecko and WebKit managed to take back a significant enough portion of the web and organizations like the w3c that publishes the standards managed to remain relevant, so they failed at the Extinguish part.Yep - WebTV, Hotmail, and currently, Yahoo, come to mind, all of which were not Plan™survivors. Netscape Navigator was also a sorry case - BG found a company (similar to the birth of QDOS) which possessed the same basic source tree as Navigator, and entered into a deal to pay them royalties for every copy of his own web browser he sold. It's just that Gates, and only Gates, knew that he was never going to actually sell Internet Explorer - he was going to give it away for free to run Netscape out of business. 

And speaking of not understanding the market :

http://www.pcworld.com/article/172151/zune_hd_games_ads.html

I guess now we know why they don't want to release an SDK and open up the marketplace to just any developpers, it might cut into their ad revenue.Too deplorable for words - on top of this, I can see them spinning this ad/gaming experience into a 'Gaming-Social,' whereby all ads would be synchronized amongst multi-players at the beginning of each game - players will love it for the 'count-down' aspect. You can also squirt your score to your friends, with great pride, at the end of each game.

And I guess now that PC world have posted such a negative article, that they too are biased and don't have any credibility.Yes, another one bites the dust...

Absolutely. Microsoft's one and only stroke of genius. Their very first product was a ripoff. And so the pattern began.A claim to fame they've clung onto for decades.

KnightWRX

Sep 18, 2009, 06:04 PM

Absolutely. Microsoft's one and only stroke of genius. Their very first product was a ripoff. And so the pattern began.

Actually, their first product was BASIC, and in their defense, they didn't rip it off anyone and they didn't shove it down everyone's throat. Plus it was pretty useful back in the days.

However, they did end up paying the DOS guy a few millions after settling a lawsuit with him.

BongoBanger

Sep 19, 2009, 07:06 AM

A pile of out of context quote mining

Is that really the best you can do?

Let's face facts - you didn't even know that McLean is Dilger and you haven't addressed the fact that he posted the Quake 3 demo out of context.

When you actually have answers let me know.

clevin

Sep 19, 2009, 07:36 AM

I see, the topic finally turned away from facts of ZUNE HD, and now a bunch of apple lover began to bashing MS as always.

very good spirit. Every iPod Touch or ZUNE HD buyers should stand before the counter and reflect the decades of history of Microsoft, Apple, Netscape, HP, Real, etc, before they make a purchase. Very interesting indeed.

mrochester

Sep 19, 2009, 08:31 AM

But MS does a lot of things not following someone else. Tablet PC? What are apple fans going to call it when APple comes out with a tablet?

Can someone who's been laying into MS due to a lack of originality please address this? It'll be interesting to see what your views are when it's Apple who are being unoriginal. No doubt it's perfectly OK for Apple to be unoriginal... that's my guess.

littleasian

Sep 19, 2009, 01:55 PM

wow, ive never see a topic go sidetracked so fast. you diehard apple fanboys should lay off the crack and realize that microsoft made or not, the zune hd is a nice little gadget and should be appreciated for that

its a valient effort by microsoft to break into the ipod dominated industry and like it or not, you guys all know deep down apple needs some competition. competition breads innovation, and consumers all win. i mean look at the incremental upgrades to the touch, faster is always better but at the end of the day its still pretty much the same touch that launched 2 years ago.

yea it doesn't have a camera, doesn't make calls, the apps will probably never rival the app store but at least it gives people a nice alternative to the ipod. and im saying this as someone who has an iphone and a mbp, this device is quite nice and will be a formidable competitor.

just look at it this way..imagine if ford held 90% of the auto market...wouldn't be very fun now would it.

DMann

Sep 19, 2009, 02:51 PM

Is that really the best you can do?

Let's face facts - you didn't even know that McLean is Dilger and you haven't addressed the fact that he posted the Quake 3 demo out of context.

When you actually have answers let me know.No, it's the very least I can do. I'll gladly place each and everyone of your derogatory blurbs into proper context, at your request.

If you so strongly believe and allege Daniel Dilger to be writing under the alias of Prince McLean, then why did you not specify it for all of those who have read the article, e.g. Prince McLean aka Daniel Eran Dilger?

I take the point about OLED screens but would point out that the examples given refer to first generation low nit screens (the N85 series 1 is a 170 nit screen - the series 2 replaced it with a superior 300 nit model). Dilger's argument is spurious until we know the specifications of the Samsung AMS326FA05 display the Zune HD uses. I'm guessing it's a second geenration screen but let's wait and see. However, let's not kid ourselves - OLED screens are the way forward and I find it ironic that Dilger - who is a critic of the OLED in the Zune - was waxing lyrical about the possibility of an OLED in the rumoured iPad.
That's the problem with Dilger - he's inconsistent and doesn't do enough research. That and he's quite mad obviously.Readers who are not aware of his alias, (and there are many who are not, especially since McLean's article was originally posted on AI) would only be mislead by your inaccurate misquotes. The author posts his name as Prince McLean, yet you address him as Dilger, without acknowledging his alias.

Furthermore, you are critical of Dilger for posting the Quake 3 demo out of context, while your glaring blunders regarding sources and content are paramount:

A while back, for example, you recommended a source regarding Vista's Superfetch:

http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/windows-vista/how-to-disable-superfetch-on-windows-vista/

Followed by accusations of not having read it:

Well, if you read the article you would have noticed that they actually agree....

When it is pointed out that your endorsement contained comments which contradicted your beliefs, you stated:

You know, I would reply in detail to your post but since the entire content consists of a copy and paste of reader comments rather than, say, the dozens of tech journals and blogs who endorse superfetch coupled with the usual nonsense that Leopard is less bloated than Vista despite it having about 40% more lines of code I'm not sure there would be much point.

While all along, the content you was refuting was entirely derived from the source that you yourself endorsed.
http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/windows-vista/how-to-disable-superfetch-on-windows-vista/

To add insult to your own injury, you reaffirmed your blatant disregard to content, by accusing me of submitting reader comments, which in fact, were cited from the very site which had been endorsed, posted and recommended by you.

Your glaring blunder(s) have been repeatedly pointed out by others:

As you haven't bothered to reply to me I thought I'd reply to your post - The copy and paste of user comments criticizing superfetch that DMann posted was from the site you originally sourced not DMann. So the very site you recommend for explaining superfetch is full of users criticizing it. LOL.

Overall, your over-the-top arrogance in regard to tech journals and writers remains baffling, in lieu of whence they emanate - as duly noted:

.....And I guess now that PC world have posted such a negative article, that they too are biased and don't have any credibility.