MSFTs "iPod Killer" Readied for Europe

rocketjam writes "Reuters reports that the first hardware to run Microsoft's "iPod Killer" software will be available in Europe in the second half of 2004. MS has been working with several manufacturers, and is expected to introduce a device which will play movies and songs as well as store digital photos through Microsoft's yet-to-be-unveiled Portable Media Center software. A spokesman said 'We think this is going to be one of the hot devices for Christmas 2004,' The players are expected to sell for between about $700 to $800. They will play MP3s as well as audio and video recorded in Microsoft's digital format. The player will be significantly larger than the iPod in order to accomodate a video screen. A Jupiter Research analyst, Mark Milligan said 'By definition, (the devices) just don't have widespread appeal', and he doubts the devices would change the consumer electronics landscape in any way."

Comments

Different Market

[druske]

I'm not sure with that high of a price (about $670-$810 US) and the additional size (3X as thick, twice as long!) that this thing qualifies as an "iPod killer" in any real sense; they're playing for an entirely different market segment. It seems like a very small niche to me.

Give 'em a couple of versions, maybe they'll get it right and the market will materialize. I wouldn't bet on it though. "More TV, more often" isn't a big hole in my life, anyway...

Re:Different Market

[jsebrech]

I think microsoft is annoyed with the ipod's success. The ipod doesn't play windows media, so it completely circumvents microsoft's attempt to become the standard in media compression. Microsoft has tried to get wmv and wma support into everything they can (it's even included in the new dvd standard), but none of those devices come close to being as appealing as the ipod. I highly doubt apple will be able to win unless the EU trial forces MS to open up windows media, since wmv and wma are literally everywhere but the ipod. However, the ipod is a credible threat to MS nevertheless, so they must keep people from buying it. Saying they have an ipod killer coming out Real Soon Now is an excellent way of achieving that. MS always promises a soon to be released product will be the answer to everyone's woes, so people wait, and wait, and wait.

Re:Different Market

[k_head]

When they say "ipod killer" they know the media will swallow it without thinking and write all kinds of stories about how the days of ipod are numbered and how apple is dying.

So far their plan is working brilliantly.

Re:Different Market

[laird]

"now that Pocket PCs are comparably priced and sized, they outsell the PalmOS stuff"

Actually, according to Gartner data comparing 2Q02 and 2Q03 (http://www3.gartner.com/5_about/press_releases/pr 15aug2003b.jsp) it looks like Palm's worldwide market share is growing (30.5% to 38%), as is Sony's (10.3% to 11%), while the WinCE licensees' market shares dropped, HP from 15.9% to 15.3%, and 'others' (including Dell) from 41.2% to 30.4%. RIM also grew from 2.1% to 5.3%.

In the US, Palm is more dominant, growing from 40.5% to 46.7%, while Sony shrank slightly, from 13.1% to 12.1%. RIM went from 3.1% to 7.3%, leaving all of the WinCE licensees dropping from43.3% to 33.9%.

So while Palm is doing very well so far, it's always possible that the next version of WinCE turns out to be easy to use, reliable and efficient. But since MS is still stuck with the "Windows everywhere" approach instead of the "sell the best possible product for the market" approach, I think they'll be stuck in second place for a while yet.

Re:Different Market

[Durandal64]

There's no doubt that Apple spent a lot on product design for the iPod, and like I said, it's a pretty thing. But has it really changed all that much in the last few years? That initial cost has been paid for many many times over by now. If a company like Rio can produce something like the Karma which is quite different in form factor, and many would argue also quite attractive, and sell it for so much less, then why can't Apple?

Capacity has increased, and the unit has gotten smaller and been redesigned with touch-sensitive controls instead of physical buttons. That doesn't come cheaply.

The answer is that they can, they just don't have to. Their marketing is so good that people are happy to pay $400 for a 20gb iPod. Why would they sell it for less? This makes perfect sense - they're making the bucks now before the market matures and prices drop across the board. If I were an Apple shareholder I'd support this, but as a potential customer, it puts me right off.

Why? You may not think it's worth $400, but as a Mac user, I can tell you that it's the best $400 I've ever spent. The iPod makes it easy to carry large files around with me, along with my entire music collection, and it integrates with my system painlessly. I just plugged it in, and BAM. It was ready to go. I haven't been fawning for Ogg Vorbis or FLAC support, or lamenting about my inability to connect it to an ethernet port. I've been too busy enjoying the fact that it's made my life easier.

You can compare it with Windows XP - there's a huge upfront cost to produce the software, and then very low per unit costs. But at a retail of $300 you can bet that upfront dev cost was paid off a long time ago. Why don't they now reduce the cost to just $20 to cover duplication and distribution? Because they don't have to. People are wowed by the flashy colours and marketing and pony up the cash in ever increasing numbers. Many consumers don't even realise they have a choice in O/S. This is why they have a license to print money, regardless of the fact that better (and cheaper) alternatives exist. This is exactly what is happening with Apple and the iPod. I have no problem with people buying whatever mp3 player they want, but someone who harps about choice, freedom, etc and then goes sheep-like to the Apple store for an iPod is somewhat hypocritical in my book.

So people who talk about freedom of choice exercising their freedom of choice by not choosing your preferred choice are hypocrites? Ever thought that some people may just think that it's the best digital music player on the market, and are willing to pony up the extra cash for it?

iPod Killer my arse!

[jwthompson2]

I like my iPod because it packs a lot of storage in a small package and I don't want to watch video on a stinkin' handheld, that is why I tote my powerbook around. This idea seems plain old dumb to me, but I guess if it is competition it is good for consumers but just strikes me as a dumb idea that I'm not going to consider buying, especially at twice the price of an iPod.

This kinda makes me think of the gamegear

[Moocowsia]

Anyone remember this thing? It was fairly large but you could get a TV tuner for it. Sounds kinda like the next step up.

Re:idiots

[Kenja]

"an ipod killer would have to be cheaper than an ipod."

No, it just has to offer better value. For me my USB pen MP3 player is an iPod killer since it offers more of what I want for a better price. I dont WANT to carry around more music then I can listen to. I also dont want a player with moving parts.

Is it just me...

[inode_buddha]

... or does "Portable Media Center" software just not roll off the tongue like "iPod"? Actually I'm wondering why I even care; I do OK either way on Linux.

Re:Sloppy editing...

[forrestt]

Is that what Piccard was saying all these years...

"N-Gage..."

Uhh, Troll !

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple was NOT the first company to have an MP3 player. I do not know who was, but Creative is one of the ones that comes to mind that was around long before Apple.

Apple simply took the idea and added a bunch of really great things to it (iTunes, etc) to make it take off.

Microsoft sees the success Apple has and wants to replicate it. But by no means is Apple one who came up with all these ideas, they simple took existing ideas and packaged them together.

Wheel Mice

[Planesdragon]

Not to mention I have yet to see microsoft come out with anything that is elegant and easy to use.

Check out MS's hardware department sometime, specifically their mice.

There's a reason why the only real players in hardware anymore are Logitech and Microsoft.

Re:not an ipod killer

[Hello this is Linus]

I bought an iPod, and I probably would buy this, if I wasn't saving up for a laptop. Microsoft's Media Center version of Windows XP is easy to use, and it does look pretty good. If the portable Media Center is anything like the Media Center version of XP then I would buy it.

Re:not an ipod killer

[Random BedHead Ed]

Agreed. This is another example of Microsoft "fishing" for a new market. XBox, XP Media Center and other ventures also exemplify this.

Microsoft is rarely successful, at least in the short term. The XBox, for example, is popular enough, but not yet profitable. Microsoft is still a two-product show - with Windows and Office. And the Office monopoly is dependent upon the Windows monopoly.

Maybe these will catch on, maybe not. But I don't see any way they could kill the iPod, since the target audience and price range are distinctly different.

Yeah, that'll sell!

[El]

So, it only costs twice as much as the Archos players that are already out and that already have the same capabilities! I can't wait!

Re:Nice but not quite "innovative"

[saden1]

At 700/800 dollars how can it possibly kill the iPod? Come on, they aren't even the same market segment. I know this and I'm not even a "Licensing Engineer." I think they should be targeting the same crowd that buys portable DVD players and such because your average Joe will expect their "iPod Killer" to STAFT for 700/800 dollars. Honestly, where do they get off? If they are smart they would be going after auto manufactures.

We Have A Winner...

[clean_stoner]

So this will be big, heavy, can only play MS formats (with the exception of mp3) and can't run other software? Yes, it's obviously better than a laptop...

Flawed Convergence thinking!

[Thanatopsis]

This reflects the flawed conventional thinking that consumers want a convergence device. That somehow combining the ability to play both video and MP3s will appeal to both market segments. What actaully happens that the device appeals to neither market segment.

You see this time and time again. Marketing people assume that if you give someone a "new improved digital media center" everyone will buy it. No one buys it because the product is a "Jack of All trades, master of none." People buy component stereos for the same reason. They want the best reciver coupled with the best amplifier and the best DVD player. They want the flexibility of adding components. They tend not to buy a single component that does a mediocre job on all three elements. Simply piling on features that are unrelated but don't bring additional value to each other is silly. Camera phones work because you can send pictures to your friends. In this case adding a digital camera enhances the phone experience. Adding a video player, and jacking the price point to an entry level laptop adds nothing to the experience. I predict big fucking failure for MS. I don't get why people still insist media convergence is the wave of the future. Media really hasn't converged before. I mean how many of us use Radio/Television combo devices? No one because who wants a machine that does a crappy job at two things instead of a good job at one.

Apple seems to want this too

[Midnight Thunder]

If AppleInsider is anything to go by, then Apple also seems to be developing an iPod with these sort of features. See story: Apple readying 4th-generation iPod. Apple already learnt their lesson, circa 1990, whereby standing proud, simply give the competition time to catch up - in that case it was MS catching up, and bypassing, with MS-Windows. If Apple is smart, they will keep one step ahead of the game.

Before I buy.....

[Anonymous Coward]

What kind of DRM does this player have? I don't
want any bullshit preventing me from copying, or
doing anything else that I should expect from a
player/recorder. If my $29 radio/casette player
can do it, this device better can!

Module formats.

[Short Circuit]

Personally, I'd like a portable music player that'll handle my 2.5GB collection of music. Consisting of MODs, XMs, ITs and a few other module formats.

There's tons of that stuff out there you can download for free, in bulk, off of FTP and archive sites around the world. I've got enough music in those formats for continuous play for 160 hours without hearing the same song twice. (Well, there's the odd duplicated file, but other than that...)

Re:Nice but not quite "innovative"

[LetterJ]

Unfortunately, if you haven't run into space problems with a 15 gig iPod, your collection probably isn't accurately described as "HUGE" or is compressed down to bitrates below 64kbps. Up until a lightning strike this weekend (that destroyed my MP3 collection as well as the backup hard drive), I maintained a 28GB music collection that had what I consider to be huge gaps in it and not nearly as extensive as I wanted.

$800? I don't think so

[ThousandStars]

I think Microsoft is ignoring a cardinal rule of consumer gadgets: a few things that do one thing well are better than one device that does a few things poorly. In this case, they're trying to position themselves between the expensive portable DVD players that I've seen on planes / the iPod, and laptops. For $800, someone can get a laptop. For $1000, someone can get a pretty nice laptop.

I think it flops.

There are so many things wrong with this device I can't name them all. Sorry, it's not an iPod killer.

My decision to buy is made

[CdBee]

For some months now I have been contemplating purchasing either a Creative Labs MuVO or an Apple iPod

I've now decided, definitely the iPod. I don't want to contribute to yet another Microsoft monopoly. I can't imagine the horror of being forced to use WMP to access my mobile device and being locked to a single platform.

Re:My decision to buy is made

[loraksus]

I got a 20 gb archos recorder v2 off amazon for $120 last week. plays mp3s, hacked oss firmware available (google rockbox)
No ogg, because the chip inside does only mp3s.
usb 2.0, mounts as a drive, so no f***ing software to install to connect (except on win98, mac os 8.6 etc), no drm garbage, spdif in / out, built in mic. You can even read text files with it.
Battery life is decent, you can hack it open and replace the batteries (lion cells) in a year or two when they die (or add a bigger hdd, but I digress)

I'd rather have an iPod for the wheel but for a $200 difference, I can tolerate living without one. Check out some of the other stuff they make, you won't be dissapointed.

Creative Labs has 25% off $100 orders with coupon code AFL030425 [Exp 3/22] which makes a 40gb zen $225, but that has some other downsides, looks better than the archos, but has a bunch of other "features" that the archos doesn't have.

Re:welll, yes, a laptop-but

[way2trivial]

I'm not defending this MS device at all, I'm talking about a similar device I own and USE..
to the hell with media edition, I run divx video on it. I get TV from my tv card, and put it on the archos.

it serves a purpose, a purpose a laptop cannot fill for me, is that so painful to accept?

Re:Ipod Killer?

[Durandal64]

The iPod has no built-in DRM. Or didn't you know that you can play m4p's from iTMS on any iPod you want?

Re:Nice but not quite "innovative"

[MoneyT]

If you're used to a two button mouse, you already own one. ANd if you're used to a two button mouse, you probably prefer the one you own. In otherwords, your problem is solved because you already have the mouse. Plug it the fuck in and shut up

Re:Nice but not quite "innovative"

[Cyberllama]

You could fit a 3 inch or larger screen on an ipod. Remember screensize goes by diagnol not by length or width. A 3 inch screen is bigger than you'll find on MOST portable tvs.

So now imagine this: You have two devices. Both are the same size. They both play the same mp3 files with the same battery playback. One has a nice large color screen for file lists and can also use that screen to playback video files or display pictures directly from your digital camera. It costs 50 dollars more than the other unit. Which one will you buy?

It's just a matter of waiting for the technology to catch up a bit so that the cost and size both decrease enough to make video a standard feature . . . give it 3 years or so and it'll happen.

Re:In fairness

[ElGanzoLoco]

Of course not! In some european countries (was the case in France until recently) it was forbidden to mention a competitor's product / name / brand in your own advertisements or statements. IOW, "Comparative advertising" is forbidden.

This is why Europe never got the Pepsi vs. Coke ads...

Re:no thanks...

[LetterJ]

How are you ripping CDs? I use ExactAudioCopy+LAME and it takes no more than 2 mouse clicks and about a minute to rip and queue up the encoding. That means that I can rip 10 CDs in about 10 minutes. Granted, it will take a while longer to do the encoding, but that sits in the background. And, they're named appropriately and encoded to alt-preset-standard quality with playlists and all dumped into my music library.

Basically, an entire album's worth of high quality MP3 can be had for the low, low price of 2 overly loud car sales commercials on FM radio.

iPod Killer my foot...Sheesh!

[GFLPraxis]

This is ridiculous. Compare: 40 gigabyte iPod = $499. 40 gigabyte "iPod Killer" + color screen = $800. The only difference between Microsoft's iPod killer and the iPod is 1) A fancier screen 2) A gigantic "wallet killer" price tag It's basicly a color iPod that can play WMV as well as music. Oh yes, and who wants WMV? DVD's are encoded in MPEG, not WMV. To get WMV you have to own a Windows Media Center edition PC (which cost way more than a normal PC) with a TV tuner, and record TV shows, to get the WMV format. So I need a Media Center PC AND need to spend $800 to use this device? Right. I'll just take my education discount and buy an iBook G4 complete with a 40 gig HD, much bigger screen, much faster processor, CD-RW AND DVD drive, honking powerful Radeon 9200, and way better OS for $200 more...

I care

[jack_csk]

Get over the OGG thing. It's not going to get adapted. It's like BETA and VHS. It might be a little better, but people don't care. I personally use 160bit AACs for most everything. AAC? I encode my CDs in OGG format and I can bring it everywhere. I use Winamp on Winblows, Macamp on OSX, and XMMS on Solaris + Linux. (My school has all those types of machines). One time I encoded a new album into AAC, and the XMMS on Linux(SuSE) boxes refused to play it. Putting OGG support in hardware does not hurt those player manufacturers.

Once again...

[BiOFH]

...Microsoft just doesn't get it. Their poor understanding of what makes the iPod a seller just illustrates their ever-increasing detachment from the pulse of "cool". Apple looked at what people wanted and made something ingenious _and focused_ to fit the bill. Microsoft, true to style, looked at the sales figures and area of penetration, formed a committee and... totally missed the point.

Sticking a gear shift on a camel doesn't make the camel cool or more useful. In fact, if the placement of the gear shift isn't a factor of the design, you get a camel that's a pain in the ass.

So MS doesn't make the hardware or do the design. Which means some toaster manufacturer with a factory full of cheap labour will get a good deal on some boring enclosure, slap together the cheapest version of this 'killer' app and flood the market with mediocrity. So we'll get clunky beige box MP3 players to go with our clunky beige boxes* running the most insecure commercial OS on the planet.

Go Bill...

* - Yes, even with the neon tubes and plexi-covered hole and the 'wizard riding a unicorn on a rainbow in space' applique.