Slashdot Mirror
The Latest iPod Assassination Attempt
Insani-CTO writes "David Pogue at the New York Times reviews Samsung's new Z5, the latest attempt at an 'iPod killer' He gives it a pretty favorable review, though doesn't quite count the Nano as dead quite yet. From the piece: 'The Z5, then, will not cause any discernible dip in iPod market share. It does, however, deserve to be a hit for Samsung. For someone who wants a Nano that's not a Nano, it's a close enough match in looks, sleekness, capacity and crystal-clear software design. In fact, if iPod didn't loom over every conversation as the screamingly obvious point of comparison, the Z5 could be the next little thing.'"
the formats it plays includes
OGG!!
That is all, this has been a non-emergency broadcast system non-emergency announcement.
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
The Z5 won't make a dent in iPod sales and here's why: It's ugly. iPod (like all of Apple's products) are sleek and sexy. I almost exploded in laughter at the big square button. Does a pocket protector and eyeglass repair tape come with it too? Seriously, it looks like someone took a mini-cassette voice recorder from 1987 and put a screen on it. I wonder if it has an orange record button on the side.
The other reason really isn't Samsung's fault. It's rhapsody, napster and the other WMA-file companies that insist on a subscription system for music that self-destructs when you cancel. It's nothing more than expensive on-demand radio. You mean I get to pay you $15 a month PLUS 79 cents per song? Oh thanks Rhapsody, I love paying you twice to hear music that doesn't become mine. This subscription model is nothing more than the hare-brained ideas of music industry grey-beards in ivory towers who have lost all touch with reality. Scratch that actually, the idea probably came from their half-wit imbeciles for-hire, er, I mean "consultants."
I know no one important reads this, but I have one thing to say to the RIAA, Microsoft, Napster, Rhapsody and every other cartel affiliate:
PEOPLE HATE SUBSCRIPTIONS!
Nobody wants *another* bill every month. I realize it just shows up on your credit card, but overall music subscriptions are a bad deal. Case in point:
Rhapsody charges $15 a month and 79 cents per song (last I checked), with iTunes charging 99 cents per song, it seems like a better deal. Well a simple division problem can dispell this myth: 15 / 0.20 = 75. Seventy-Five, that's how many song you would have to buy from Rhapsody EVERY MONTH, to just end up in a wash with iTunes. That's roughly 6 or 7 albums. I know no one who buys this much music.
I will close this rant with some free advice for any internet business out there:
Do not complicate your puchasing schemes, the more you make your point-of-purchase like a brick-and-mortar store (et. al. no subscriptions, you actually get to KEEP what you buy), the more successful you will be. THIS is why iTunes is number one, and will be for a very long time.