Slashdot Mirror
Critical Review of the Zune
ceallaigh writes "Andy Ihnatko of the Chicago Sun-Times has a critical review of the Zune. "Avoid," is my general message. The Zune is a square wheel, a product that's so absurd and so obviously immune to success that it evokes something akin to a sense of pity."
Never mind that Andy is usually an advocate for Apple's products, however, as he is often, Andy is right on and I agree with his sentiments. In addition to his comments, I got to spend a little time with a Zune and initially liked the large screen until I actually turned the device on. I found it to be clunky, awkward, irritating, non-intuitive, completely incompatible with previous Microsoft music standards, and has none of the features that make the iPod so completely useful (ability to hold various media and data, even allowing you to boot from Firewire iPods). And forcing users to rely on the Zune application to move data onto or off the device is infuriating (kind of like the Creative devices. Is it possible to "open" a Creative media player and put data onto it without having to use the Creative application?).
I simply cannot believe that Microsoft *ever* asked itself how users might interface with such a device and it's obsequious pandering to the music industry in an effort to out-compete Apple in this space rather than putting the effort into making a better product to the iPod quite simply offends. Hey Microsoft, how much did you spend coming up with this marketing, because I am simply stunned at how bad this is. If Microsoft *really* was interested in making a better product and not acting as a pimp for the record industry, they would also not have relied on "Zune Points" to purchase music. As anybody who has ever taken Marketing101 knows, you should always facilitate the process of getting people to spend money on your products and anything that steps in-between or slows this process down had better have a damn good reason for existing. Why do I have to buy "Zune Points" to then make music purchases? It's just stupid.
Oh, and Microsoft..... Just a suggestion: Very few end users want their products to "squirt" anything at them. That is just bad marketing.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
The thing is that in the $200+ price range most MP3 players sound pretty good. They hold a decent amount of music. The question becomes what other features do they have and why should I buy one that isn't the ipod. For the thing to be successful it has to be easier to use. If the reviewer had to manualy rig up a dll, it isn't easy to use. Since it came from MS you would expect it to work seamlessly with windows and the media player that windows comes with, it doesn't. It has wifi it should be able to link up with other wifi devices and move data around, it doesn't. The music share feature is so limited as to be useless. The Zune would be disapointing if some third party built it, but coming from ms it is inexcusable.
The reason why The ipod is used instead of the iRiver or the creative is that the gold iPod is the standard by which music players are judged. By now most people have experianced an iPod, but wouldn't know an iRiver if it bit them.
Perhaps this is a
I used to have a cool sig, back when I cared
The Zune can be an incredibly cool and useable device as soon as the hackers get into it and create a differen Firmware/OS for it like they did with the ipod,iriver,creative and other popular mp3 players.
Sounds interesting, but it seems to me Andy's job is to review products as they are now, as shipped by the OEM. His reading audience isn't out to pimp their ride; they're out to get a device that does great stuff right out of the box.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
Remember Robert X Cringely's dictum about Microsoft - the third product is always the real one. The first two are just to scope out the market.
In every single black friday ad I got in the mail and paper and went through, Best Buy, Circuit City, Walmart, etc, not one bothered to even mention the Zune for my local stores. Most of them had the iPod on page one or two or in the hot gifts section. Their displays are kind of sad little things next to the area full of iPod gear and accessories and of course the iPod itself. One of the stores had more space for Sandisk players than the Zune. It would seem even some retailers know this is probably just going to be an expensive side shelf paperweight.
As for the iPod, the local grocery store now carries the iPod and accessories back in the TV and Game aisle and the corner gas station had shuffles for sale next to the compact flash cards, aimed at travelers and vacationers. You just don't get more pervasive than that. Until the Zune can even near this and can branch out into other small flash based devices as well, Microsoft just isn't going anywhere with it.
--Won't that be grand? Computers and the programs will start thinking and the people will stop. - Dr. Walter Gibbs
Actually, this review is in the Chicago Sun Times; it's targeted at the average Joe Blow consumer, not the technical people. As a result, the style makes a lot of sense. The style is conversational, to try to get people to read it. It's also short and not very in-depth. Yes, you're right it focuses on all the bad aspects of the player with no room for the good. Well, that's how people think and how people talk in social circumstances. More often than not, people WANT to hear about the bad from a new MP3 player rather than the good; it gives them a reasonable expectation of their own experiences with the device. I know that if I buy a consumer level device and have a bad experience with it, I want to tell my friends about the bad and the good takes a serious back seat to the bad experiences I had. That's so I can try to help my peers and friends avoid the same pain I went through.
Honestly, if you can't even install the software without hitting support.microsoft.com then that's going to set a precedent among the average user. The sound quality and interface become secondary if you can't even get music onto the player without serious hassle. This reviewer just gave his opinion and his bad experiences with the software and hardware overshadowed everything else. In fact, it was some time before he could even get it to work! I agree with his point, on Christmas day the last thing I'd want to deal with is my 9 year old daughter bugging me constantly wondering why she can't use her new Zune. Of course, I don't think I'm going to spend that on her, but I see his point.
And the comparison to Apple? Well, the average consumer knows Apple, knows iPods... and refers to every MP3 player as an iPod. I've seen them in Best Buy so the comparison is valid. Plus the comparison to the Toshiba? Well, I don't know if you've taken a close look, but the Zune *is* a Toshiba device. It's an evolutionary advance on a player that Toshiba already sells with a new button interface and wireless. So although it's a bit of a stretch, that's a valid comparison too.
Yes, I've played with a Zune (though not the software I'll admit). I was underwhelmed. It seemed a little kludgy to me to get where I wanted in the interface (though I'll admit I am an iPod owner and therefore used to that interface), and the rubber coating reminded me of a rather disturbing green/brown sex toy. That's my personal opinion, and not to be taken as gospel, though!
I was about to write a positive comment about the review and found this as the first comment. I disagree with the premise that a review has to have a good point or two listed in it. I found that the review had me thinking about all sorts of things other than just the basics of the Zune. I've read those a hundred times already, starting long before the thing saw the light of day. This review was focused not on the Zune device but on the Zune environment and in that regard it got to all the points it needed to make.
Do I think that the review was a shill for the iPod? No. Instead, the author promoted the way of thinking used by the iPod designers and the other successful makers of digital players. The point wasn't to tell you all about how to play songs on the Zune or any of that stuff, it was to say that the method of design, the planning of the product, and the theory behind all of this is deeply flawed.
I see in my morning newspaper, sales for the Zune. I have yet to hear one of my friends thinking about buying one. It's not because they are all addicted to the iPod, several have other types of players. But not one of them is looking for a player that gives them less control over their music. Mostly we talk about how we wish that we could easily move music between players, use wireless devices, receive radio on the iPod without an add-on, and the like. In short, we talk about ways it could be better. It seems to me and to this reviewer that Microsoft worked diligently to find ways to make the player less convenient and more locked up.
I'll say no thanks to that design model and thank you to the reviewer for succinctly getting at an idea that I had thought of but not been able to articulate.
Yeah, I'm as old as my UID would suggest.
On the other hand, I can't stand reviews that fall into a volley of pros and cons. It creates a text-based tennis match that makes me want to vomit after a few paragraphs of indecisive rambling.
"Sure, the software took hours of troubleshooting to get working, but once it was running it loaded files without a problem!" or "It wouldn't play any files created in the advertised to work playsforsure format, but those formats that did work sounded great."
So, no, he didn't go out of his way to say anything nice about the unit because he had nothing nice to say. The positive things I appended to his comments weren't worth saying because the unit should do these things anyway. One would expect the software to work as designed and formats to play as advertised, so why should he tout these abilities? He shouldn't make apologies for a bad user experience. What I wonder is - did he buy the unit himself or was he supplied the unit for a review? What about other reviewers who might be doing volley reviews of the Zune? If anything, freebie product creates a positive bias that simply can't be trusted to be accurate, lest you piss off your source of free crap.
Jalopnik did a great article about how car magazines won't slam a long term tester because of the benefits they receive by being given free cars to drive. Every "review" they publish balances each bad aspect with a good one. This is not "subjective", this is biased. A review shouldn't straddle the fence - it should go one way or the other.
Once it flops the next version they can tell the RIAA to kindly piss off because their ideas don't work.
Doubtful, if they're willing to pay the labels for each Zune sold. (Then again, that part is probably to force Apple to pay when their label contracts come up, which effectively INCREASES the leader's cost, when normally it drops.)
"Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
It's not so much a review as a rant. Hardly any info is given about how the thing works. The software didn't install? Big deal!
On the planet where I come from, this would be a big deal.
It's utterly amazing, amazing... how much Microsoft's shit has made people, often unknowingly, lower their standards.
And MS fanbois in this thread think it's unfair to beat up on Microsoft. What a bunch of bullshit. If the damn product won't install on your own computer, when the same manufacturer makes the opearting system on both machines, that's beyond bad.
It's a shame some of these youngsters weren't into computers back when they actually worked properly. When operating systems didn't need to be rebooted at random or every time you updated something, when products you bought actually lasted a little while or didn't cause you tremendous grief just to get them working. Thanks Microsoft!
Yes, but it's not a reflection on "ease of use".
If you think that getting it to work in the first place is not a part of ease-of-use then I can just pray that you will never be responsible for designing anything I will need to use.
"When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
Only from the standpoint of people receiving one who really wanted an iPod. :-)
Trust me, the Zune won't put a dent in Apple's Christmas season iPod sales. This is not hubris talking, it's a plain fact. The thing has gotten almost uniformly bad reviews and has even been soundly mocked on CNN. Zune 1.0 is nothing for Apple to worry about. By the time Microsoft gets a worthy competitor to the current iPod out the door (if history is any guide it will be their 3rd generation Zune), Apple will have advanced the iPod further, still leaving MS at a disadvantage.
The network effect of the iPod is probably just too great for Microsoft to ever overcome-- there are already thousands upon thousands of iPod accessories out there, and the majority of new cars now offer iPod connectivity as an option. Furthermore, it's doubtful many companies will jump to make Zune accessories in any great hurry, seeing how willing Microsoft is to abandon things at the drop of a hat when they decide what they're doing isn't working out. In short, by going up against the iPod Microsoft is learning what it's like to be a competitor to Windows, where they are the ones enjoying the network effect.
~Philly
It amazes me that every review of the Zune has completely missed the point:
In today's day and age, with always-on devices with mandatory updates, DRM, and proprietary file formats, who you buy from and trust with your memories, pictures of family and friends, music collections, videos, pictures, letters, etc., is a very, very important decision.
Will you be able to look at the digital pictures of your child 30 years from now? Yes, we have entered that age.
The fundamental problem with the Zune is Microsoft's lack of integrity. Not the Zune's design. Not the Zune's user interface, or anything else. The problem is the lack of character of the company behind the product.
The Zune showed that Microsoft is more than willing to leave good, paying customers who bought 'Plays for Sure' music high-and-dry with a bleak future. And the killer is there is no practical reason for this other than to be sure they copy Apple identically and make people pay twice for the same music.
What's worse, what happens when the whole Zune thing (inevitably) fails? Then what? Customers should expect, based on current behavior, that MS will change the format again and make you re-buy your music. How could a logical, sane person assume otherwise?
(I know a guy, who despite my advice, bought about 2 grand of Plays for Sure music because "MIcrosoft is going to be around forever and they support their stuff." Needless to say, when he learned his music collection didn't work with his new Zune, he was at the Apple store a day later dropping 6 grand on a MBP, 30" display, nano and 5G iPod and tons of iPod accessories. Yes, one guy voting with his wallet--a fat one at that--but this guy is another data point on the tsunami that is building of CIO's, consumers, SMB customers, etc., who are sick of MS' lack of business ethics and their silly, silly games.)
That, for me, is the kiss of death for the Zune. And it should be for all people. For it demonstrated all the lipstick Steve "We need to act like Industry Leaders" Balmer is putting on the Microsoft pig hasn't changed it's DNA. Microsoft is, and always will be, a monopolist protecting its Windows and Office franchise. At any and all costs.
(Full disclosure: Never used Linux in my life. Nor Open Office. Use MS products daily. Don't "hate" Microsoft.
But I can tell a person/company lacking morals and character when I see one. And I know a doomed product when I see one.)
Your first mistake was nailing your flag to the DRM flag at all. Now you've got a significant amount of music that you don't want to abandon, and it's like a millstone round your neck, dictating to you which machines you can consider buying. And that's after a fairly short space of time. Imagine if you'd spent ten years building your whole record collection out of this shite. You'd be baying for blood.
I just don't get why people buy downloaded music at all, especially not DRM'd stuff. For a marginally higher cost, a CD gives you your music in an uncompressed format and leaves it up to you how you want to encode it. And it's got pretty packaging too. Until music downloads are losslessly encoded, DRM-free, and allow me to send for the cover art at no additional charge, I'm not buying.
So that'd be "never", then.
Fuck 'em. Don't give them your money. Keep buying CDs until they come back with the online music stores we want, rather than the ones they see fit to give us.
As I said, I have years worth of WMA and WMV files.
Not meant as a troll or a flamebait, but you're one stupid sonofabitch. Why did you get married to a proprietary (and inferior) format invented with the sole purpose of DRM and vendor lock-in? You could have just as easily gone with standard formats like MP3 and use whatever player/platform you wanted.
I must say, friend, you really did drink the Kool-Aid. And I'm going to sit in the corner and laugh my ass off.
"Most however are young kids who can't afford to buy the music in the first place... so they're not screwing the artist..."
Now THAT'S just another rationalization. When I was a kid music was important to me, and somehow my friends and I always managed to find the money needed to get the music we wanted. We might not have been able to afford everything we WANTED, but we did manage to buy the stuff that was important to us, using money from jobs, allowances, and so on.
Today, too many kids make the same rationalization that you just did... and then go spend the money they "didn't have" on clothes or other things they can't rip off quite so easily.
Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.