I think Steve Job has intentionally missed the point. Yes, the whole sharing thing is pointless and won't be used.
Well, it sounds like you agree with Steve's point.
But Wi-Fi will be the future (hopefully for iPods too) for uploading music to the device and playing back to speakers.
Of course, but the Zune doesn't do this. Presumably when Apple goes WiFi, they'll implement a solution that not only doesn't drain battery life but is also actually useful. Steve didn't disparage WiFi; he mocked Zune's sharing feature.
It's minimalist and fun to use, and it's cool-looking, which people like in a music player. Tech geeks like to call that trendy and flashy, but these are the same people who ran Winamp with a dozen flashy skins in the 90s. The clickwheel is neat, and people who haven't seen it before are always impressed, even though it's really just a circular touchpad. The way it's implemented in the interface is cool and fun to them.
It's just a neat, fun little device. It's really not more complicated than that (which accurately describes the iPod itself).
No, didn't you know? Intel may have owned AMD this year, but AMD will win in some theoretical future in which Intel sits still, which means AMD is still better, goshdarn it!
On the contrary, he points out how lame the feature is because of how long and complicated the process is, when it's just easier to share an earbud. And if someone wants one of your songs, they're going to do what every iPod user does and simply ask for the actual MP3 by email or IM.
In other words, the Zune WiFi feature is a little useless and cumbersome compared to the more obvious solution of just sharing a bud.
Yeah, successful businesses like Microsoft who spend three years ignoring a government directive to document server interoperability APIs. Oh, those poor, successful companies who did nothing wrong. Other than defying the government.
Re:Add feature when they can make them work.
on
Jobs Unfazed by Zune
·
· Score: 1
The big issue with wireless (and a bigger screen) is battery life. Apple won't go wireless until they get the battery life down to a reasonable level. And I suspect Apple will implement the REAL reason to go wireless--WiFi syncing with iTunes, or at the least, playback of shared iTunes playlists.
You know damned well that when (not if) iPod comes out with wireless, his tune on that will change in a hurry. Kind of like Intel was slow until Apple was using it.
Maybe that's because Intel was slow until the Core chips came out. And maybe Jobs' tune will change when the iPod goes wireless because Apple's implementation won't be long and cumbersome like the Zune (god, that name).
In other words, Job didn't criticize wireless. He criticized Zune's wireless.
When he says that customers aren't asking for compatibility he's either defining his terms VERY carefully or he's in denial.
Okay, which people have been demanding compatibility outside of Slashdotters who think Ogg still matters and Apple competitors who haven't been able to make a better product? iTunes is the software for the iPod, and if you buy music through iTunes, it's clear it's only for the iPod. Don't want to be tied to the iPod, then don't buy iPod music.
In other words, since they can no longer compete with Intel on the merits of their chips, they need the European governments to give them a little push...
Intel may have won this years battle, but they are clearly losing the war through lack of long term thinking and loads of panic actions all around. Quite entertaining actually.
I think it's more entertaining to see AMD fanboys desperately justify AMD being behind Intel in 2006. You've basically pulled an entire future sequence of events out of thin air and declared that because of it, AMD will be the winner again in 2 years, goshdarned it.
They may not want Windows, the software... but they do want Windows, the platform.
They don't even know what "platform" means in that context. They don't even understand that to use Windows software requires Windows. To them, it's just programs that run on all computers. The thought probably never even crosses their mind that there are other "operating systems" that their programs won't run on.
Seems like grandparent's point was that the interface isn't broken at all and you can change what you don't like.
Forcing the user to change to sensible defaults IS a broken interface.
Hey asshole, now tell us how Windows is broken for no other reason than because you have to right click on the desktop and go to properties and effects to turn on cleartype. Laff.
Now you're getting it! That's a broken interface, though that's hardly the only reason the laughable Windows interface is so shoddy (don't get me started on the Start menu).
You are wrong. Microsoft is prohibited from such actions by their consent decree.
By the time that rolled around, it was too late, and Microsoft had firmly knocked out every superior competitor of the 90s--OS/2, BeOS, and so on. Face it, they are a convicted abusive monopolist. They still try to exert there influence by threatening to pull Windows from key markets if their governments don't cooperate. Thankfully, the EU didn't bow down.
First off, your assumption about my level of expertise is cute.
Second, let me know when Ardour supports things like VST, AU, RTAS, Rewire, and doesn't run on Linux and that goofy JACK audio format. Also let me know when it upgrades its interface out of 1990s-era Pro Tools, since the interface is a direct rip-off, and let me know when it stops being slower than the Windows and Mac alternatives. Let me know when it interfaces with front-ends like Logic or Ableton (oh, right, Linux doesn't have them). And let me know when you can get professional technical support without resorting to IRC channels and sparse mailing list archives.
Yes, I do know what I'm talking about. Ardour is a third-rate Pro Tools clone. Literally, every element in the interface is directly cloned from Pro Tools. It doesn't support the top plug-in formats, AU/VST/RTAS, and it requires going through that crappy JACK format, and there aren't alternatives for all the apps that typically interface with Pro Tools, such as Logic, Ableton Live, Reason, Final Cut Pro, etc. Ardour also only runs on Linux, and Linux consumes time like a whore consumes jizz. Pros just want to get up and running, not tinker with Ubuntu installs.
It's safe to say Apple isn't worried about losing ANY market share in the content creation industry.
Absolutely not. Ardour tries to be a third-rate Pro Tools clone but without the hardware support, plug-ins, and other features. It comes nowhere close to a Logic Pro or a Cakewalk Sonar. Now, if you want to compare Ardour to limited consumer products like Garageband, then sure. But high-end software that the pros use in the studios? Not a chance, and if you go to a professional studio in L.A., you won't be seeing copies of Ardour running. You'll be seeing Pro Tools on Macs with Logic MIDI front-ends.
Users shouldn't have to fix someone else's broken interface. Telling someone to go to "Control Center --> Appearance & Themes --> Fonts --> Tick 'Use anti-aliasing for fonts'" or tear off all the toolbars to get them out of the way is just stupid.
Ha, yeah right. Linux audio software is horrible compared to the professional alternatives, and most people already have ultra-low latencies through their high-end audio hardware and provided drivers.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, it sounds like you agree with Steve's point.
Of course, but the Zune doesn't do this. Presumably when Apple goes WiFi, they'll implement a solution that not only doesn't drain battery life but is also actually useful. Steve didn't disparage WiFi; he mocked Zune's sharing feature.
It's minimalist and fun to use, and it's cool-looking, which people like in a music player. Tech geeks like to call that trendy and flashy, but these are the same people who ran Winamp with a dozen flashy skins in the 90s. The clickwheel is neat, and people who haven't seen it before are always impressed, even though it's really just a circular touchpad. The way it's implemented in the interface is cool and fun to them.
It's just a neat, fun little device. It's really not more complicated than that (which accurately describes the iPod itself).
Just tell her your phone number while she has your earwax-encrusted earbud in her ear. If you're sharing wax, you can share numbers.
No, didn't you know? Intel may have owned AMD this year, but AMD will win in some theoretical future in which Intel sits still, which means AMD is still better, goshdarn it!
On the contrary, he points out how lame the feature is because of how long and complicated the process is, when it's just easier to share an earbud. And if someone wants one of your songs, they're going to do what every iPod user does and simply ask for the actual MP3 by email or IM.
In other words, the Zune WiFi feature is a little useless and cumbersome compared to the more obvious solution of just sharing a bud.
Yeah, successful businesses like Microsoft who spend three years ignoring a government directive to document server interoperability APIs. Oh, those poor, successful companies who did nothing wrong. Other than defying the government.
The big issue with wireless (and a bigger screen) is battery life. Apple won't go wireless until they get the battery life down to a reasonable level. And I suspect Apple will implement the REAL reason to go wireless--WiFi syncing with iTunes, or at the least, playback of shared iTunes playlists.
Maybe that's because Intel was slow until the Core chips came out. And maybe Jobs' tune will change when the iPod goes wireless because Apple's implementation won't be long and cumbersome like the Zune (god, that name).
In other words, Job didn't criticize wireless. He criticized Zune's wireless.
Okay, which people have been demanding compatibility outside of Slashdotters who think Ogg still matters and Apple competitors who haven't been able to make a better product? iTunes is the software for the iPod, and if you buy music through iTunes, it's clear it's only for the iPod. Don't want to be tied to the iPod, then don't buy iPod music.
Athlon 64 is bullet proof? Core 2 has already trumped AMD's highest end Athlon 64 in benchmarks.
As for AMD showing off a 65nm chip, wow, welcome to 2005, AMD. Intel's roadmap has a 45nm chip coming out when AMD ships 65nm.
In other words, since they can no longer compete with Intel on the merits of their chips, they need the European governments to give them a little push...
Intel may have won this years battle, but they are clearly losing the war through lack of long term thinking and loads of panic actions all around. Quite entertaining actually.
I think it's more entertaining to see AMD fanboys desperately justify AMD being behind Intel in 2006. You've basically pulled an entire future sequence of events out of thin air and declared that because of it, AMD will be the winner again in 2 years, goshdarned it.
The only reason you can buy a Core2 Duo for such a great price is because of the performance of AMD over the past few years.
AMD fanboy logic--even when Intel is beating AMD, it actually means AMD's better!
Right, the state where O.J. got away with it for being black is racist against blacks.
They don't even know what "platform" means in that context. They don't even understand that to use Windows software requires Windows. To them, it's just programs that run on all computers. The thought probably never even crosses their mind that there are other "operating systems" that their programs won't run on.
Uh, it's both. You watch movies and you play video games, don't you?
It's kind of hard not to consider him guilty when the police found splatters of Nina's blood in his house.
Forcing the user to change to sensible defaults IS a broken interface.
Now you're getting it! That's a broken interface, though that's hardly the only reason the laughable Windows interface is so shoddy (don't get me started on the Start menu).
Next.
By the time that rolled around, it was too late, and Microsoft had firmly knocked out every superior competitor of the 90s--OS/2, BeOS, and so on. Face it, they are a convicted abusive monopolist. They still try to exert there influence by threatening to pull Windows from key markets if their governments don't cooperate. Thankfully, the EU didn't bow down.
First off, your assumption about my level of expertise is cute.
Second, let me know when Ardour supports things like VST, AU, RTAS, Rewire, and doesn't run on Linux and that goofy JACK audio format. Also let me know when it upgrades its interface out of 1990s-era Pro Tools, since the interface is a direct rip-off, and let me know when it stops being slower than the Windows and Mac alternatives. Let me know when it interfaces with front-ends like Logic or Ableton (oh, right, Linux doesn't have them). And let me know when you can get professional technical support without resorting to IRC channels and sparse mailing list archives.
I could go on and on and on here...
Yes, I do know what I'm talking about. Ardour is a third-rate Pro Tools clone. Literally, every element in the interface is directly cloned from Pro Tools. It doesn't support the top plug-in formats, AU/VST/RTAS, and it requires going through that crappy JACK format, and there aren't alternatives for all the apps that typically interface with Pro Tools, such as Logic, Ableton Live, Reason, Final Cut Pro, etc. Ardour also only runs on Linux, and Linux consumes time like a whore consumes jizz. Pros just want to get up and running, not tinker with Ubuntu installs.
It's safe to say Apple isn't worried about losing ANY market share in the content creation industry.
Absolutely not. Ardour tries to be a third-rate Pro Tools clone but without the hardware support, plug-ins, and other features. It comes nowhere close to a Logic Pro or a Cakewalk Sonar. Now, if you want to compare Ardour to limited consumer products like Garageband, then sure. But high-end software that the pros use in the studios? Not a chance, and if you go to a professional studio in L.A., you won't be seeing copies of Ardour running. You'll be seeing Pro Tools on Macs with Logic MIDI front-ends.
Every one of those features is originally from Mac OS X, not Vista.
Users shouldn't have to fix someone else's broken interface. Telling someone to go to "Control Center --> Appearance & Themes --> Fonts --> Tick 'Use anti-aliasing for fonts'" or tear off all the toolbars to get them out of the way is just stupid.
Ha, yeah right. Linux audio software is horrible compared to the professional alternatives, and most people already have ultra-low latencies through their high-end audio hardware and provided drivers.
Wishful thinking, my friend.