I have a 2nd Gen Zune device (80Gig), and it's pretty much better than an equivalent iPod Classic in every measurable way... better hardware, better sound, better quality ear-buds, better device UI, better PC Software (not that besting iTunes on Windows takes much effort). It's a rock-solid device, high quality, and a great experience. The Zune "social" website was also fun (with achievements for listening habits, matching friends with similar tastes, etc).
Of course, by the time it came out, the iPod Touch was right around the corner, and the entire category was in its last years before smart phones took over.
As to what makes it better, I agree with the other reply: it's not so much about additional capabilitis (though Zunes did come with built in FM Tuner that iPods lacked, the "social", the sharing, and ZunePass... all of which were very significant), it was just the experience of using it.
The Zune gets a bad rap because of the clunky first generation design, the brown color, and the somewhat lame marketing campaign (some of the commercials were really good, but after they were over, you had no idea what they were for, so they weren't effective in the way they needed to be obviously). It gets a further bad rap for having failed in the marketpalce, even though it was a superior solution. It was of course, just too late.
By "variety of form factors" I was refering to physical sizes, physical keyboards available, and other differing options, from various manufacturers, on a host of carriers. It's not "just one phone, period".
On the flip side... WP7 doesn't NEED a multi-core and is as fast and responsive as many Android devices with faster, and more, cores. It's about functionality not specs.
And some people think the different UIs for various Android manufactures is a problem, not a solution... you can't just hand your "Android" device to someone else who has an "Android" device, and know your way around. It's all different. I've seen someone who has an Android phone get totally lost when handed a friend's Android phone, and just hand the phone back. That doesn't happen with iPhones or WP7 phones. Obivously, it's give and take here, but there are people who value these things differently than you (or me).
WP7 seems to be staking out a "middle-ground" between the one-size-fits-all locked-in world of iPhone, and the everyone-for-themselves wild-wild-west of Android. Currently they're tacking closer to iPhone than Android, but theyr'e still somewhere in the middle, offering a variety of form factors, without nearly the fragmentation, and locking down the security quite a bit (Android is the only platform I'm aware of with significant malware issues).
And judging Microsoft on the basis of Win95/98 is ridiculous. I understand the psychology there, I just think it's silly and I have little patience for it. I worked on Macs all through that time, and had so many damn system-bombs that I have to laugh at any idiot Mac Fanboy that makes fun of blue screens. ALL computers were crap back then, even Macs (anyone else remember the paperclip required to hard-reset a Fat Mac, or to pop out the disc when the thing inevitably locked up solid?)
Microsoft products lately have actually been decent. They deserve objective consideration. And the advantage of WP being "in the mix" in the competitive environment is many-fold... first, it's not just an obvious copy of the iPhone like Android is. Second, already WP has driven new features into iOS (as has Android of course)... many iOS 5 and 6 features were obvious "me too" catch-ups with WP7/7.5. This is a GOOD THING for EVERYONE.
So I'm not sure why there are people rooting for Windows Phone to fail... other than just being petty, fan-boy dicks about it.
But even if I wanted a WP7 phone, I would not buy it for the same reason I don't buy an iPhone: does not play well with linux, and I'm not about to switch my PCs over to Mac/windows because of a stupid phone.
Not an employee. I use the products in my daily work (development on.Net and Microsoft platforms). I have no desire to work for Microsoft, though I do know a couple of (highly tech) people who work there (former co-workers from previous work-lives). I own no stock. And I know no such things about astro-turfing, and am certainly not one.
Man, the conclusions people are so eager to jump to, and unfounded assumptions people are so willing to make...
You are delusional, I cut& paste nothing, and I'm not paid anything to post here or anywhere else. I was responding honestly to a comment. You're just being a dick (and being wrong) while adding nothing of any value to the conversation. Congratulations.
Actually, I'm speaking from experience with AT&T phone stores, Verizon phone stores, and other stores like Radio Shack and Best Buy... none of which are anything like you describe.
I don't get paid for anything... sad that your only 'comeback' is to accuse anyone with a different opinion than yours of being a paid shill. Kind of pathetic, really.
Twitter, Facebook, and Shazam features are built in (dedicated apps do provide more features).
And given how many people I know personally who are running VS11/2012 on MacBooks and Airs, I know your second statement is a lie. And having used it, as well as other dev environments, I also know that it's development envrionment and debugging abilities are top notch.
Don't be a pedantic idiot. I said "from a user perspective". What user knows or cares about the underlying code base. Like a typical Mac users cares about the fact that there's BSD Unix running under the pretty UI...
WM6 is NOTHING like WP7. Two completely different beasts. Don't have the same UI, don't run the same apps, don't work the same way, etc.
And yet Windows Phones have the best development environment and tools for developers of any phone platform.
And to be honest, apps aren't as important in the Windows Phone 7 world... many things that you need an app for on other phones are "built in" to WP7.
There is a chicken-and-egg problem, though, for sure. While there may be 100,000 apps in the WP7 app store (a fraction of the total count in the other stores), there are some missing big names, and "old" versions... due mostly to the lack of users, which of course is due mostly to the perceived lack of apps.
It's possible WP8 will help break the logjam. We'll see.
But "Windows Mobile" has NOTHING to do with the new WP7 phones... nothing in common at all from a user perspective. So that's a ridiculous and irrational reason to avoid WP7 phones, definitely.
They're worth a try. They're pretty cool, actually.
Google the "Smoked by Windows Phone" vidoes on YouTube. It's not the "same old way", it's a new way of thinking about a phone and apps and functionality.
You haven't used one, that much is clear. Perhaps you should open your mind, go down to the phone store, and get a nice Lumia 800 or 900 demo, hold it in your hand, play around with things... and see that there are other, better ways of dealing with things beyond a 'static grid of app icons'.
WP7 is an odd duck because it has to be used to be appreciated. Static photos in ads or quick passive clips on TV aren't enough to really get you to understand what's going on with the phone.
It also takes a little bit of time to learn, because it's not just a copy of what already exists everywhere, it's got a definitely new design and philosophy... an interesting and modern one, imho.
But the small investment you make to "get it" seems worth it to me for the most part.
No, I'm not wrong, and you prove it with your own post.
He knew how to run OS X because he was already familiar with a similar system, Windows XP.
My point was, and what I said CLEARLY was, if you set someone down in front of OS X who had never used a computer before, and wasn't familiar with mice and windows and buttons and scroll-bars, they wouldn't find it intuitive either.
You're judging Win8/Metro by old standards. It's actually a pretty decent and ingenius design, but it's different enough that it's going to take training at first.
The fact that you can't find any advantages to running it on a desktop shows a failure of your imagination, and isn't really a commentary on Windows 8.
And it's absolutely nothing like MS Bob, and has nothing in common with it.
Yes, things aren't "discoverable" to those who are used to standard Windows or OS X. Just like I fully remember my first time with Mac OS (back in 1984) I was completely flumoxed, and though things like "how to close a window" wasn't at all discoverable. And it wasn't... until you were told or trained.
The windows kernel was designed to run across multiple processor architectures (MIPS, Alpha, Intel, and now ARM). So you're wrong there.
And a lot of the guts have been rewritten to more fully support not just full touch experiences, but also new networking experiences and applications (i.e. deep knowledge of 3G/4G and metered and expensive connections, roaming, etc), and tuning the entire OS for signficantly better performance and battery life.
And the "expense" is due to WinRT including MS Office in every WinRT device. It's the sum total of TWO licenses on WIn7 and Win8.
Just trying to correct some of the massive amount of misinformation in your post...
Slashdot Mirror
I have to agree.
I have a 2nd Gen Zune device (80Gig), and it's pretty much better than an equivalent iPod Classic in every measurable way... better hardware, better sound, better quality ear-buds, better device UI, better PC Software (not that besting iTunes on Windows takes much effort). It's a rock-solid device, high quality, and a great experience. The Zune "social" website was also fun (with achievements for listening habits, matching friends with similar tastes, etc).
Of course, by the time it came out, the iPod Touch was right around the corner, and the entire category was in its last years before smart phones took over.
As to what makes it better, I agree with the other reply: it's not so much about additional capabilitis (though Zunes did come with built in FM Tuner that iPods lacked, the "social", the sharing, and ZunePass ... all of which were very significant), it was just the experience of using it.
The Zune gets a bad rap because of the clunky first generation design, the brown color, and the somewhat lame marketing campaign (some of the commercials were really good, but after they were over, you had no idea what they were for, so they weren't effective in the way they needed to be obviously). It gets a further bad rap for having failed in the marketpalce, even though it was a superior solution. It was of course, just too late.
By "variety of form factors" I was refering to physical sizes, physical keyboards available, and other differing options, from various manufacturers, on a host of carriers. It's not "just one phone, period".
Which is accurate.
Can't we all just stop bickering, and agree that "WinRT" is a HORRIBLE name?
Especially for a CONSUMER product?
On the flip side... WP7 doesn't NEED a multi-core and is as fast and responsive as many Android devices with faster, and more, cores. It's about functionality not specs.
And some people think the different UIs for various Android manufactures is a problem, not a solution... you can't just hand your "Android" device to someone else who has an "Android" device, and know your way around. It's all different. I've seen someone who has an Android phone get totally lost when handed a friend's Android phone, and just hand the phone back. That doesn't happen with iPhones or WP7 phones. Obivously, it's give and take here, but there are people who value these things differently than you (or me).
WP7 seems to be staking out a "middle-ground" between the one-size-fits-all locked-in world of iPhone, and the everyone-for-themselves wild-wild-west of Android. Currently they're tacking closer to iPhone than Android, but theyr'e still somewhere in the middle, offering a variety of form factors, without nearly the fragmentation, and locking down the security quite a bit (Android is the only platform I'm aware of with significant malware issues).
And judging Microsoft on the basis of Win95/98 is ridiculous. I understand the psychology there, I just think it's silly and I have little patience for it. I worked on Macs all through that time, and had so many damn system-bombs that I have to laugh at any idiot Mac Fanboy that makes fun of blue screens. ALL computers were crap back then, even Macs (anyone else remember the paperclip required to hard-reset a Fat Mac, or to pop out the disc when the thing inevitably locked up solid?)
Microsoft products lately have actually been decent. They deserve objective consideration. And the advantage of WP being "in the mix" in the competitive environment is many-fold... first, it's not just an obvious copy of the iPhone like Android is. Second, already WP has driven new features into iOS (as has Android of course)... many iOS 5 and 6 features were obvious "me too" catch-ups with WP7/7.5. This is a GOOD THING for EVERYONE.
So I'm not sure why there are people rooting for Windows Phone to fail... other than just being petty, fan-boy dicks about it.
In fact no WP7.x phone will get WP8 MS has said.
I keep seeing this repeated... when in fact, nothing of the sort has been said (let alone confirmed).
But even if I wanted a WP7 phone, I would not buy it for the same reason I don't buy an iPhone: does not play well with linux, and I'm not about to switch my PCs over to Mac/windows because of a stupid phone.
THAT, at least, is a legitimate, rational reason.
Careful... saying anything positive (no matter how factual) will get you moderated a troll in this place, as I've found out the hard way.
Or it'll get a serious post modded "Funny". Ha ha.
Seriously, moderation in this forum (on this topic anyway) is WAY out of line.
But thanks for actually posting some facts to the irrational bashers and haters.
Moderators are being biased, ignorant idiots... nothing about parent is a troll. It's my personal opinion. Seriously, ... this is ridiculous.
Moderators are idiots... nothing about parent is a troll. Seriously, ... that's ridiculous.
Not an employee. I use the products in my daily work (development on .Net and Microsoft platforms). I have no desire to work for Microsoft, though I do know a couple of (highly tech) people who work there (former co-workers from previous work-lives). I own no stock. And I know no such things about astro-turfing, and am certainly not one.
Man, the conclusions people are so eager to jump to, and unfounded assumptions people are so willing to make...
You are delusional, I cut& paste nothing, and I'm not paid anything to post here or anywhere else. I was responding honestly to a comment. You're just being a dick (and being wrong) while adding nothing of any value to the conversation. Congratulations.
Actually, I'm speaking from experience with AT&T phone stores, Verizon phone stores, and other stores like Radio Shack and Best Buy... none of which are anything like you describe.
I don't get paid for anything... sad that your only 'comeback' is to accuse anyone with a different opinion than yours of being a paid shill. Kind of pathetic, really.
Twitter, Facebook, and Shazam features are built in (dedicated apps do provide more features).
And given how many people I know personally who are running VS11/2012 on MacBooks and Airs, I know your second statement is a lie. And having used it, as well as other dev environments, I also know that it's development envrionment and debugging abilities are top notch.
Don't be a pedantic idiot. I said "from a user perspective". What user knows or cares about the underlying code base. Like a typical Mac users cares about the fact that there's BSD Unix running under the pretty UI...
WM6 is NOTHING like WP7. Two completely different beasts. Don't have the same UI, don't run the same apps, don't work the same way, etc.
And yet Windows Phones have the best development environment and tools for developers of any phone platform.
And to be honest, apps aren't as important in the Windows Phone 7 world... many things that you need an app for on other phones are "built in" to WP7.
There is a chicken-and-egg problem, though, for sure. While there may be 100,000 apps in the WP7 app store (a fraction of the total count in the other stores), there are some missing big names, and "old" versions... due mostly to the lack of users, which of course is due mostly to the perceived lack of apps.
It's possible WP8 will help break the logjam. We'll see.
But "Windows Mobile" has NOTHING to do with the new WP7 phones... nothing in common at all from a user perspective. So that's a ridiculous and irrational reason to avoid WP7 phones, definitely.
They're worth a try. They're pretty cool, actually.
WP7 is revolutionary.
Google the "Smoked by Windows Phone" vidoes on YouTube. It's not the "same old way", it's a new way of thinking about a phone and apps and functionality.
You haven't used one, that much is clear. Perhaps you should open your mind, go down to the phone store, and get a nice Lumia 800 or 900 demo, hold it in your hand, play around with things... and see that there are other, better ways of dealing with things beyond a 'static grid of app icons'.
But it's not really rational.
WP7 is an odd duck because it has to be used to be appreciated. Static photos in ads or quick passive clips on TV aren't enough to really get you to understand what's going on with the phone.
It also takes a little bit of time to learn, because it's not just a copy of what already exists everywhere, it's got a definitely new design and philosophy... an interesting and modern one, imho.
But the small investment you make to "get it" seems worth it to me for the most part.
No, I'm not wrong, and you prove it with your own post.
He knew how to run OS X because he was already familiar with a similar system, Windows XP.
My point was, and what I said CLEARLY was, if you set someone down in front of OS X who had never used a computer before, and wasn't familiar with mice and windows and buttons and scroll-bars, they wouldn't find it intuitive either.
You're judging Win8/Metro by old standards. It's actually a pretty decent and ingenius design, but it's different enough that it's going to take training at first.
The fact that you can't find any advantages to running it on a desktop shows a failure of your imagination, and isn't really a commentary on Windows 8.
And it's absolutely nothing like MS Bob, and has nothing in common with it.
Yes, things aren't "discoverable" to those who are used to standard Windows or OS X. Just like I fully remember my first time with Mac OS (back in 1984) I was completely flumoxed, and though things like "how to close a window" wasn't at all discoverable. And it wasn't... until you were told or trained.
It's no different here and no different now.
Ridiculous.
The OEM Pricing simply reflects the fact that every WinRT device sold includes a full copy of MS Office.
I doubt it costs OEMs more than a Win7 OEM license + MS Office license. In fact, it's probably a pretty good deal.
WinRT pricing isn't out of line. All WinRT devices include the Microsoft Office suite. Word, Exel, etc. The OEM licensing price reflects that fact.
The price has a lot more to do with all WinRT devices including a copy of the MS Office suite, than anything you speculate about.
The windows kernel was designed to run across multiple processor architectures (MIPS, Alpha, Intel, and now ARM). So you're wrong there.
And a lot of the guts have been rewritten to more fully support not just full touch experiences, but also new networking experiences and applications (i.e. deep knowledge of 3G/4G and metered and expensive connections, roaming, etc), and tuning the entire OS for signficantly better performance and battery life.
And the "expense" is due to WinRT including MS Office in every WinRT device. It's the sum total of TWO licenses on WIn7 and Win8.
Just trying to correct some of the massive amount of misinformation in your post...
All WinRT devices will include MS Office. This is the reason for the higher price.
OEM Windows RT licence + OEM Microsoft Office license is going to be bigger than a simple OEM Windows 7 license.
It's not high pricing. Do the math yourself. What does a Windows 7 + Office license cost an OEM today?