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 ZWeb for everyone's busy ZLife, they can download ZTunes from the ZStore.
From the article:
And while the Z5 can't play songs from Apple's iTunes Music Store, it can play songs from Rhapsody, Napster, Musicmatch, MSN Music, Wal-Mart, AOL Music Now, Yahoo Music and other members of the "MMS-MMS" consortium (Microsoft-based Music Stores with Minuscule Market Share).
Recently on German news they covered CeBit and plainly stated that the next generation phones would be iPod killers. I was thinking by myself: WTF? Then they started to enumerate the advantages of having MP3 player in your phone. The main thing seemed to be that you could download songs on a whim. Essentially iTMS but over wireless. I fell over laughing. (I know that the device in the article is not a phone, but I just wanted to mention it)
So, I first am going to shell out money to get the song, then pay UMTS packets? Are you *insane*? How expensive will be a 3Meg song that way? Waaaaay beyond the current prices in iTMS.
The iPod is successful because it is simple and later on the seamless integration with iTMS was the big winner. Any competing product must at least match this and make it less expensive.
None of these so-called iPod-killers will fly. At least that is MHO.
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
It's always much harder to overturn an entrenched leader in a field than to jump ahead of the pack - and the iPod has massive marketshare. The article has this really important observation:
That's the problem for other manufacturers. That's a damn near insurmountable hill to climb. Sony had some solid electronics but terrible software. The players that use PlaysForSure are doomed with the horrendous WMP system, terrible DRM, and electronics that are crappily designed. Even if you get nicely designed hardware and nicely designed software, you're stuck in a world where you can get iPod accessories everywhere, but nobody's going to carry accessories for your particular product unless you can get a credible amount of marketshare - which is hard when you don't have the accessories to spur sales.
The only way the iPod can be beaten is if Apple screws it up (which is unlikely, but possible) or someone manages to buy their way into market. The only company that could compete with Apple is Microsoft, doing what they did to the gaming market with the XBox. If Microsoft wanted to create a product that would be a severe loss-leader (priced well under the iPod) and could totally redesign WMP to be halfway usable, they might have a shot at unseating the iPod - but not a good one. Microsoft won't do that because the XBox division is currently hemmorhaging money as it is and Microsoft's bottom line would be adversely affected by trying to go toe-to-toe with the most popular piece of consumer electronics on the planet.
The iPod didn't get it first, but it got it right, and unless the cachet wears off (which may happen, but not for a while), trying to beat the iPod is not a particularly sound business strategy.
You should ask to borrow one of your mom's iPods. :)
If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
Careful ... the spec sheet says it only supports MTP under windowsXP with mediaplayer 10. So you may have a very exciting time getting it to hook up to your linux box. Then again, you may be one of the XP users out there who use ogg.
Why do they do this? At least Apple had the sense to support their iPod stuff under non-apple OS's.
Actually, the iPod was an enormous improvement over the mp3 players which came before, because it combined three features which had not yet come together: form factor, storage capacity and ease of use. There were small players, but they had limited storage capacity. There were players with lots of storage, but they were large and heavy. An no other player had an easy-to-use interface. From my limited experience (i.e., I have played around with other mp3 players but have not undertaken a serious study of them) no other manufacturer has yet produced as elegant an interface as has Apple.
I think the comment above points out one of Slashdot's enduring biases and explains one of the reasons Slashdot as a whole has such a terrible track record in predicting success of failure of things like the iPod. The focus here is on technology and techno-fetishism, something the vast majority of the buying public doesn't care about. To that end, saying that the iPod was only an incremental improvement over previous players is pedantic. One may only say that if one only takes into account the hard tech itself. To do that one must ignore the very important things which often mark the difference between successful and unsuccessful products, namely the ability to take techology and make it availble to Joe and Jane Computer User. This is the genius of iTunes and the iPod: it makes the process of buying, burning and managing digital music and an mp3 player easy for even the most technologically ignorant person.
Such an ability often gets short shrift in the Slashdot and wider geek world, which has its own macho posturing built around how deep one can get into a command line or a kernel. But, while doing that, one must remember that, like any subculture, the values of that subculture are not the values of the wider society. The fact that the iPod doesn't play Ogg Vorbis files, while cause for concern here, is of absolutely no value in the wider consumer world. The fact that the iPod's tech wasn't very different from pervious mp3 players is equally unimportant: the iPod packaged what was there, along with a few improvements, in such a way that it was now easy for anyone to have an mp3 player. That is Apple's huge achievement, and that is what Apple understands better than almost any other computer or consumer electronics manufacturer.
If someone wants to beat Apple at this game, they are going to have to offer a better complete package than Apple, and I do not see that happening any time soon. Microsoft can't do it, because it isn't their focus: they've almost become a technology services company which happens to sell an operating system. The Sony of twenty years ago could do it, but that is very definitely not the Sony of today. Samsung can't do it, because they only offer, at most, one third of the player/store/software combination. if anyone is to knock the iPod off its throne, I think it will be Apple, when they introduce the next generation of iPod/video iPod/whatever they're planning.
I am a believer of momentum and curves.