Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iPod Creative Video iPod Killer (again)

Bern said:
I don't think we could call Creative a serious competitor when they rip off the technology and design. Now if they could actually think for themselves over there and come up with something new well maybe then we could discuss the serious competitor idea.
Click to expand...

Although it turns out that Apples innovative navigation system is a rip off from...... Creative. So Apple is not quite as hot or perfect as they make out. Which reminds me, good to see the usual Mac blindness to others abilities showing up here in a well informed debate. ;)

The Creative product is better technically, the Apple is better looking and more innovative in its design (though not in its software navigation). The odd thing here is that if you really want the best player, then the Creative is the one, yet most of us don't, we all want the iPod. I love my Nano, I mean I obsess about the damn thing. This disturbs my girlfriend who only has a shuffle. :)
 
Bern said:
I doubt these guys have an original idea in their heads. They keep touting they are major competitors to Apple's iPod yet they rip off the concept and design and produce something cheap and nasty that really doesn't deliver as well as promised in any case.
Click to expand...

It's not new. It's how the company started. Adlib was the standard which creative ripped off and then inherited the pc soundcard market when adlib folded (through adlib's stupidity). They also lied about having DSP technology in their boards even printing it on a chip (which wasn't a DSP at all).
 
Creative Ipod of the Future

I want that iPod that stores 8 million songs, floats in the air, wireless, smaller than my thumb nail and is invisible. Plus it will do HD video and store all my photos and movies.

Creative's iPod killer of that magical iPod would be very much the same but produce a really bad odor.
 
Chinashaw said:
Although it turns out that Apples innovative navigation system is a rip off from...... Creative. So Apple is not quite as hot or perfect as they make out. Which reminds me, good to see the usual Mac blindness to others abilities showing up here in a well informed debate. ;) ...
Click to expand...

Just because Creative beat Apple to the post on one patent doesn't mean they were ripped off by them. :rolleyes: I doubt a company like Apple (always at the forefront of design and new technology for over 20 years) would rip off a small, insignificant company in a third world country. I've been to SE Asia many times and seen many "rip offs" of technology, and sometimes before the original has hit the mainstream public.
 
Chinashaw said:
The Creative product is better technically, the Apple is better looking and more innovative in its design (though not in its software navigation). The odd thing here is that if you really want the best player, then the Creative is the one, yet most of us don't, we all want the iPod. I love my Nano, I mean I obsess about the damn thing. This disturbs my girlfriend who only has a shuffle. :)
Click to expand...

It is NOT the best player, if you need more than 30GB. Not to mention it is heavier and thicker even than Apple's 60GB model.
 
BornAgainMac said:
I want that iPod that stores 8 million songs, floats in the air, wireless, smaller than my thumb nail and is invisible. Plus it will do HD video and store all my photos and movies.

Creative's iPod killer of that magical iPod would be very much the same but produce a really bad odor.
Click to expand...
How do you plan to watch video on an invisible screen?
 
Chinashaw said:
Although it turns out that Apples innovative navigation system is a rip off from...... Creative. So Apple is not quite as hot or perfect as they make out. Which reminds me, good to see the usual Mac blindness to others abilities showing up here in a well informed debate. ;)

The Creative product is better technically, the Apple is better looking and more innovative in its design (though not in its software navigation). The odd thing here is that if you really want the best player, then the Creative is the one, yet most of us don't, we all want the iPod. I love my Nano, I mean I obsess about the damn thing. This disturbs my girlfriend who only has a shuffle. :)
Click to expand...

Good writing... I agree with you. I was surprised at how close the menu systems looked and was surprised as well that the menu was patented from Creative, not the other way around. Also, it is not a bad product, and offers quite a number of features on it for the money. There are a number of people who would buy this unit. I would consider one myself if I wasn't already the proud owner of a 60GB iPod w/Video.

Apple is not the end-all of products in the world today. Others deserve credit as well. While Apple has a number of things going for it right now, they cannot sit on their laurels and watch the world go buy with a satisfied look on their face, otherwise they will once again be playing catch-up.
 
Chinashaw said:
Although it turns out that Apples innovative navigation system is a rip off from...... Creative. So Apple is not quite as hot or perfect as they make out. Which reminds me, good to see the usual Mac blindness to others abilities showing up here in a well informed debate. ;)

The Creative product is better technically, the Apple is better looking and more innovative in its design (though not in its software navigation). The odd thing here is that if you really want the best player, then the Creative is the one, yet most of us don't, we all want the iPod. I love my Nano, I mean I obsess about the damn thing. This disturbs my girlfriend who only has a shuffle. :)
Click to expand...

I call ******** on this.

That navigation scheme has been used far longer than before Creative ever thought about it.
Secondly, the Creative is NOT better. So it plays WMA and WMV. So what? those formats are even more proprietary, and less quality than anything Apple releases. Sorry, it's true. And both of those formats have repped-off code from Quicktime.

It's heavier, it costs more, and
 
Onizuka said:
I call ******** on this.

That navigation scheme has been used far longer than before Creative ever thought about it.
Secondly, the Creative is NOT better. So it plays WMA and WMV. So what? those formats are even more proprietary, and less quality than anything Apple releases. Sorry, it's true. And both of those formats have repped-off code from Quicktime.

It's heavier, it costs more, and
Click to expand...

and....?

My slightly more balanced opinion:

Creative DID have a HD based player using that navigation system before Apple, and that is what the patent is based on. However, Creative have never been able to create a package that was as good as the iPod. This latest (slightly ugly) idea probably comes close, but when I used the Creative Touch (big white one) it was OK, but the menu system wasnt nearly as nice to use as the iPods. Nor did the feel quite as good. It didnt look as good either.

And thats the problem with Creative's competant HD players, they look too much like a second rate version of the iPod. No matter how much better the feature list or the battery life. Most people dont care that much about that, they want something thats cool. The Creative players look like they were designed largely by a desperate marketing department who were too obsessed with trying to mimic the iPod. The iPod looks like its been designed with passion, warts and all.

Sony has the right approach- making cool looking players that arnt trying to mimic the iPod. The newer ones look really good i think, although it looks like they've given up trying to find an alternative to the scroll wheel.
 
Not bad actually. if imitation really is the more sincere form of flattery, than Creative must lust after Apple.
 
Chinashaw said:
Although it turns out that Apples innovative navigation system is a rip off from...... Creative. So Apple is not quite as hot or perfect as they make out. Which reminds me, good to see the usual Mac blindness to others abilities showing up here in a well informed debate. ;)

The Creative product is better technically, the Apple is better looking and more innovative in its design (though not in its software navigation). The odd thing here is that if you really want the best player, then the Creative is the one, yet most of us don't, we all want the iPod. I love my Nano, I mean I obsess about the damn thing. This disturbs my girlfriend who only has a shuffle. :)
Click to expand...

What's innovative about the menu system? Sorting music/categorizing music by Artist, Albums, Genre, in a hierarchical(sp?) fashion? So maybe creative did it first but I wouldn't say its innovation. It's something thats been done in computer OS's for years. I had my mp3s structured on my HD this way long before the days of itunes or any portable players.

If creative truly had a leg to stand on with its patent, I think they would have filed already.
 
OK, this thing is a brick.
zenvisionmappleipod32eu.jpg


That's a 30GB 5G iPod next to it and it would still be marginally thicker than the old 60GB iPod photo.

There's just no style to it, all plastic, lots of join seams and it just looks second rate. I'm sure it's a fine music/video player but the fact of the matter is I don't want something thicker, heavier and with more features I'll never use in my pocket.
 
2nyRiggz said:
that thing looks bigger than the biggest ipod
Click to expand...

It is.

30GB iPod = 1.1cm (0.43")
60GB iPod = 1.4cm (0.55")

5GB 1G iPod = 1.98cm (0.78")

Creative Zen vision:m = 1.9cm (0.75")

It's a dead set tank of a thing. Only the 1G iPod is thicker and by a scant 0.08cm (0.03").
 
Here's a comparison. Considering the 5G iPod was out before the Creative which do you think is the copy?? :confused:
 

Attachments

  • creative_ipod_clone.jpg
    creative_ipod_clone.jpg
    43 KB · Views: 96
Chundles said:
It is.

30GB iPod = 1.1cm (0.43")
60GB iPod = 1.4cm (0.55")

5GB 1G iPod = 1.98cm (0.78")

Creative Zen vision:m = 1.9cm (0.75")

It's a dead set tank of a thing. Only the 1G iPod is thicker and by a scant 0.08cm (0.03").
Click to expand...

That thing looks like a flat out portable DVD player.....its just too bulky.....imagine walking with that thing in your pants....the girls might be offended.....
:)

Bless
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back