And what happened a little more than a year after the Windows-compatible iPod was released?
iTunes for Windows was released. Before that, it shipped with MusicMatch Jukebox. iTunes was half of what made the iPod such a compelling solution. So, it wasn't really until iTunes that Windows users could get a "real" iPod.
People buy from the front shelves, not the bottom shelf in the back.
So, how do you explain the popularity of things like the Wii and PS3, before they were even on the shelves at all? How do you explain the popularity of the iPod before it was on the "front shelves."? How do you explain the popularity of Dell computers, which aren't even on shelves at all - yet is the most popular brand of PC?
Then any player that has a play button would be easy to use so long as it integrates with iTunes?
Not quite. I still have to interact with it sometimes, like adjusting the volume, and sometimes want to change playlists. The form factor is very important, so it is comfortable in my pocket. I used a shuffle for a long time, and wasn't bothered by the lack of a scroll wheel. However, when I did move to a Nano with scroll wheel, I did like it better, the very light touch it takes, and the ease of scanning through tracks.
I thought that iPods were easier to use because of their superior, patented scroll wheels?
That's one of their benefits. I'm not sure why you have such a one-dimensional view of iPods. Some people like to jump around songs and constantly interfact with their iPod. I happen to listen to many very long recordings, so the scroll wheel is a boon when I want to scan to a particular part of the track. But the iPod is more than just the hardware or the software. It is the way all the parts work together.
Not everyone uses iTunes/iPods in the same way and I'm certain it took you some work to get iTunes to manage your player in the manner you prefer.
Not really, it was extremely easy. I had been using iTunes since it first came out, and even before that, my MP3 files were all meticulously tagged. So, when the "smart playlists" feature was added, it was amazingly simple to set up. Just "create new smart playlist" and then set some rules. Done.
You are free to redefine what constitutes your portable music player in order to meet your "ease of use" perspective. For the rest of us, the player itself is what we use to listen to the music while we aren't at our computer.
I'm not "redefining the player" - just saying that the players are heavy reliant on software support. You need some sort of software to be able to use these players. The quality of that software affecte ease-of-use. I don't think you speak for "the rest of us" - because many disagree with you that software does not affect the portable music experience.
I don't agree with that at all. I hated iTunes when it came to Windows.... iTunes is successful on Windows only because people own iPods.
Your opinion has no bearing on market-share. Just because you don't like iTunes, doesn't mean it isn't the most popular software out there. The fact is that it did take over from previously popular applications, notably WinAmp. Your argument is like me saying "I disagree that Windows has a large market-share. I hate Windows."
As for the success depending on the iPod, that's a chicken-and-egg argument. The iPod would not be successful without iTunes. They go hand-in-hand. iTunes gave rise to the iPod. The iPod fueled iTunes popularity.
So much for iPods being marketed as "iPod + iTunes".
The box packaging is hardly the most significant part of marketing. Haven't you ever seen the TV ads for the iPod? At the end they have "iPod + iTunes" in huge letters on the screen. Same with many of their billboards. I suspect you might be trolling, or otherwise live in a remote part of society with no advertising if you don't know of this.
If I am, you aren't doing anything to enlighten me. As far as I'm concerned, I'm unaware of them because they don't exist
Now this just takes the cake for spurious logic. "If I haven't seen it, it doesn't exist." Bravo! Clearly you are an intellectual giant. I don't suppose you tried actually looking, or opening your eyes, did you? From a 10-second web search:
Why would programmers have less reason to use Windows? It's a very profitable platform for programmers, with perhaps the greatest number of applications of any platform.
Also, saying that most gamers use Windows (whether they are technical or not) is very different from saying that gamers are mostly technically savvy. Most gamers are just consumers. Sure, there are some gamers who are also technically savvy, but it's not the factor that defines them.
Yes, but iPod ease of use has nothing to do with iTunes.
Actually, it does. Because of iTunes' smart playlists, it means that I hardly ever have to interact with the iPod. I already have iTunes set up to select the music/podcasts I want, so I basically just press play and put it in my pocket.
Integration and ease of use aren't the same either.
They are not exactly "the same," but they are extremely inter-related. The quality of integration is one of the main forces behind ease-of-use, as explained above.
Not on the PC it wasn't. What competition existed on the mac before iTunes?
Plenty. I tried many Mac applications before iTunes, such as SoundApp, Musicmatch, MacAmp, SoundJam, and others I can't even remember. It wasn't until iTunes that it all came together in a really pleasing way. The same happened on Windows. Before iTunes came to Windows, there were many competitors. But iTunes slaughtered them all, even the popular WinAmp.
It is, but who says that "Zune" refers to the system? Does "iPod" refer to the system? No, it doesn't. The iPod and iTunes are separate products that integrate together. You've already recognized that. Point to any review or commentary that discusses iTunes when discussing iPod usability.
Yes, "Zune" refers to the system, just as "iPod" also refers to the system. Note that the iPod is marketed as "iPod + iTunes." Likewise, the Zune is marketed with "Zune Marketplace." There are plenty of commentary and reviews that discuss iTunes when discussing iPod usability - are you just ignorant of them?
Confusing setup with use is something I am not doing, but you and the author are happy to do.
How is setup not a part of using the product? That's just inane. It's not confusion, it's just reality. Setting up a product is part of using it. It may not be a part of day-to-day use, but it is definitely use.
What the author has done has deliberately misrepresent a setup problem in order to criticise ease of use.
How is the author misrepresenting the setup problem? And how is the setup not part of the use of the product?
No, that's completely wrong as evidenced by your very language. Setup and use are different and unrelated things
How is this "evidenced by my language?" Care to elaborate? Setup is definitely a part of use. Would you care to explain why it is not? Is installing Windows not a part of its use? Almost everybody would disagree if you were to say that.
What kind of an excuse is that? Why do we want Microsoft entering new markets that it is not good at? And how is this something new? Microsoft have always tried to embrace and extend themselves into new areas they suck at. It's what they've always done, and it's pathetic. How about actuallly focusing on users and existing products for once?
If the Zune is anything like an iPod, it's battery will run dead within 48 hours whether it is used or not. Without the software, the Zune almost certainly will never charge over USB.
I'm not sure where you're getting this from. An iPod battery will not run dead in 48 hours whether used or not, unless you have a defective unit. An iPod will charge over USB without any software installed.
Some Zune users haven't had to deal with it anyway. Apparently the install process doesn't always fail.
I'm certain that some users haven't. But it seems that most reviews mention at least some difficulties with the install process. The inverse is true with the iPod. Some users have install issues, but most of them go very smoothly. With the Zune - even those whose install goes well technically, if you look at the screenshots and description of the install process - it is needlessly convoluted and complex, even when it works.
When an iPod fan touts it's ease of use, are they describing iTunes and the iTunes installer? Of course not.
Often, yes, they are. Many consider iTunes to be one of the keys to the iPod's success. It's not just the iPod hardware, it's the integration of the whole system.
Remember, iTunes itself was a massive hit before the iPod even existed. I believe it to be more important than the hardware itself.
How many people here would be outraged at the suggestion that the iPod were hard to use because the QT upgrade failed?
Not many. That is indeed a problem with usability. If the problem was as widespread as Zune installer problems appear to be, there would be plenty of outrage.
Zune is an electronic gadget. The install process is part of support software that runs on the PC.
Zune is an electronic gadget that relies on software. How is the software not a part of the usability of the system? your comment is like saying the PC is an electronic gadget, so the quality of the OS and software has no bearing on the usability of a computer.
You could just as well argue that the install failure means "poor sound quality" since without it you can't load music on the player.
No you couldn't, because that would be stupid and inaccurate.
Claiming ease-of-use is bad because of the out-of-box experience is a deliberate misrepresentation.
No, it's not. It's a very valid point. You don't seem to have much idea about how users respond to products. "Out-of-the-box" is just another part of the user experience. I'm not sure why you need to make up a term to differentiate that phase. Once you take it out of the box, your use has begun, and all impressions matter. Anything that makes it harder to set up reduces usability. If it were easy to set up, that's obviously a part of using it that is easier.
No, it's three different frequencies, multiplied by intensity. Each pixel can do more than just be on or off. So, in combination, you do get more actual values.
Of course the actual advantage of this is when the feds start looking through your files and find the image you tell them "Oh, I made a program to draw random shapes, but forgot to tell it when to stop."
I'm pretty sure that drawing random shapes is illegal under the PATRIOT act. The only thing you are allowed to draw is Bald Eagles and American flags with the President standing in front of it. Or any combination thereof. As long as the eagle is not crushing the President's skull or pooping on him.
But wouldn't the triangles help with things like error-correction, or tolerance for a degraded image? If you use dots only, and some of those dots get damage, the data is gone. But the shape of a triangle can be inferred from the angles, even if part of the image is missing. Maybe it's not "wasted" as such, but used to make the storage medium more robust?
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
I think it usually works the other way around. If you pay your hard earned cash for something, you are more likely to defend it, and put a positive spin on it, because you don't want to feel/look like a chump who got ripped off. It depends on the situation. Those journals who rely on continued advertising revenue from the manufacturer are likely to sweeten the review to keep the advertising dollars rolling in. But if the manufacturer does not advertise with you, then freebie products are not really enough of an incentive to write glowing reviews, unless you actually like the products. After all, why would you want a freebie product if you hate it?
Once it flops the next version they can tell the RIAA to kindly piss off because their ideas don't work.
That sounds pretty implausible. Microsoft needs the music labels to make Zune a success. The music labels do not need Microsoft. Basically, Microsoft is in a position of weakness, and is forced to whore themselves out to the record labels on their terms. Apple is able to stand up to them (and has in the past) because they are coming from a position of strength.
With Apple, it's the reverse. If the labels try to frop Apple, their musicians will be pissed off and ask their label why they aren't on iTunes - and switch labels to one who will get their songs on iTunes.
Most pro-audio colleagues as well as sound connoiseurs to this day seek to buy this discontinued model due to its high quality sound output and more importantly CD-quality recording feature which includes also optical I/O.
So, do you have links to the blind A/B tests that these "audiophiles" have done to indicate the Creative's sound is so much better?
And wouldn't an audio pro already have a pro recording unit that does 24 bit/96kHz recording, and has real inputs like XLR? Why would a pro record at 44.1kHz/16 bit?
I work with quite a few audio pros, and have never seen them using a Creative device.
It's interesting that you speak of luddites, because there is just as much cost to being a too enthusiastic technophile as there is to being a luddite. What does South Korea gain from wasting money on "smart homes" and RFID chips in every product? They don't really benefit people in any significant way, but add costs to the economy. So, if it is popular, it may actually be a loss to society overall.
It's not a technical impossibility, but the economic liability doesn't make it attractive. If you were a yoghurt company, would you bother increasing your product price, just for the convenience of the 0.0001% of the market who has a smart home?
It's a competitive market. Increase your price, and people will probably switch to the cheaper yoghurt brand that doesn't have RFID tags.
Plastic surgeons could create artificial boobies that can morph into three different shapes, depending on the weather. Four if you count erect nipples.
Slashdot Mirror
iTunes for Windows was released. Before that, it shipped with MusicMatch Jukebox. iTunes was half of what made the iPod such a compelling solution. So, it wasn't really until iTunes that Windows users could get a "real" iPod.
So, how do you explain the popularity of things like the Wii and PS3, before they were even on the shelves at all? How do you explain the popularity of the iPod before it was on the "front shelves."? How do you explain the popularity of Dell computers, which aren't even on shelves at all - yet is the most popular brand of PC?
What do Mac users have to do with it? The vast majority of iPod owners are using Windows.
Not quite. I still have to interact with it sometimes, like adjusting the volume, and sometimes want to change playlists. The form factor is very important, so it is comfortable in my pocket. I used a shuffle for a long time, and wasn't bothered by the lack of a scroll wheel. However, when I did move to a Nano with scroll wheel, I did like it better, the very light touch it takes, and the ease of scanning through tracks.
I thought that iPods were easier to use because of their superior, patented scroll wheels?
That's one of their benefits. I'm not sure why you have such a one-dimensional view of iPods. Some people like to jump around songs and constantly interfact with their iPod. I happen to listen to many very long recordings, so the scroll wheel is a boon when I want to scan to a particular part of the track. But the iPod is more than just the hardware or the software. It is the way all the parts work together.
Not everyone uses iTunes/iPods in the same way and I'm certain it took you some work to get iTunes to manage your player in the manner you prefer.
Not really, it was extremely easy. I had been using iTunes since it first came out, and even before that, my MP3 files were all meticulously tagged. So, when the "smart playlists" feature was added, it was amazingly simple to set up. Just "create new smart playlist" and then set some rules. Done.
You are free to redefine what constitutes your portable music player in order to meet your "ease of use" perspective. For the rest of us, the player itself is what we use to listen to the music while we aren't at our computer.
I'm not "redefining the player" - just saying that the players are heavy reliant on software support. You need some sort of software to be able to use these players. The quality of that software affecte ease-of-use. I don't think you speak for "the rest of us" - because many disagree with you that software does not affect the portable music experience.
I don't agree with that at all. I hated iTunes when it came to Windows. ... iTunes is successful on Windows only because people own iPods.
Your opinion has no bearing on market-share. Just because you don't like iTunes, doesn't mean it isn't the most popular software out there. The fact is that it did take over from previously popular applications, notably WinAmp. Your argument is like me saying "I disagree that Windows has a large market-share. I hate Windows."
As for the success depending on the iPod, that's a chicken-and-egg argument. The iPod would not be successful without iTunes. They go hand-in-hand. iTunes gave rise to the iPod. The iPod fueled iTunes popularity.
So much for iPods being marketed as "iPod + iTunes".
The box packaging is hardly the most significant part of marketing. Haven't you ever seen the TV ads for the iPod? At the end they have "iPod + iTunes" in huge letters on the screen. Same with many of their billboards. I suspect you might be trolling, or otherwise live in a remote part of society with no advertising if you don't know of this.
If I am, you aren't doing anything to enlighten me. As far as I'm concerned, I'm unaware of them because they don't exist
Now this just takes the cake for spurious logic. "If I haven't seen it, it doesn't exist." Bravo! Clearly you are an intellectual giant. I don't suppose you tried actually looking, or opening your eyes, did you? From a 10-second web search:
iPod Nano review - Another Nano review
Quote from the CNET editor's review:
Also, saying that most gamers use Windows (whether they are technical or not) is very different from saying that gamers are mostly technically savvy. Most gamers are just consumers. Sure, there are some gamers who are also technically savvy, but it's not the factor that defines them.
Actually, it does. Because of iTunes' smart playlists, it means that I hardly ever have to interact with the iPod. I already have iTunes set up to select the music/podcasts I want, so I basically just press play and put it in my pocket.
Integration and ease of use aren't the same either.They are not exactly "the same," but they are extremely inter-related. The quality of integration is one of the main forces behind ease-of-use, as explained above.
Not on the PC it wasn't. What competition existed on the mac before iTunes?Plenty. I tried many Mac applications before iTunes, such as SoundApp, Musicmatch, MacAmp, SoundJam, and others I can't even remember. It wasn't until iTunes that it all came together in a really pleasing way. The same happened on Windows. Before iTunes came to Windows, there were many competitors. But iTunes slaughtered them all, even the popular WinAmp.
It is, but who says that "Zune" refers to the system? Does "iPod" refer to the system? No, it doesn't. The iPod and iTunes are separate products that integrate together. You've already recognized that. Point to any review or commentary that discusses iTunes when discussing iPod usability.Yes, "Zune" refers to the system, just as "iPod" also refers to the system. Note that the iPod is marketed as "iPod + iTunes." Likewise, the Zune is marketed with "Zune Marketplace." There are plenty of commentary and reviews that discuss iTunes when discussing iPod usability - are you just ignorant of them?
Confusing setup with use is something I am not doing, but you and the author are happy to do.How is setup not a part of using the product? That's just inane. It's not confusion, it's just reality. Setting up a product is part of using it. It may not be a part of day-to-day use, but it is definitely use.
What the author has done has deliberately misrepresent a setup problem in order to criticise ease of use.How is the author misrepresenting the setup problem? And how is the setup not part of the use of the product?
No, that's completely wrong as evidenced by your very language. Setup and use are different and unrelated thingsHow is this "evidenced by my language?" Care to elaborate? Setup is definitely a part of use. Would you care to explain why it is not? Is installing Windows not a part of its use? Almost everybody would disagree if you were to say that.
What kind of an excuse is that? Why do we want Microsoft entering new markets that it is not good at? And how is this something new? Microsoft have always tried to embrace and extend themselves into new areas they suck at. It's what they've always done, and it's pathetic. How about actuallly focusing on users and existing products for once?
I'm not sure where you're getting this from. An iPod battery will not run dead in 48 hours whether used or not, unless you have a defective unit. An iPod will charge over USB without any software installed.
Some Zune users haven't had to deal with it anyway. Apparently the install process doesn't always fail.
I'm certain that some users haven't. But it seems that most reviews mention at least some difficulties with the install process. The inverse is true with the iPod. Some users have install issues, but most of them go very smoothly. With the Zune - even those whose install goes well technically, if you look at the screenshots and description of the install process - it is needlessly convoluted and complex, even when it works.
Often, yes, they are. Many consider iTunes to be one of the keys to the iPod's success. It's not just the iPod hardware, it's the integration of the whole system.
Remember, iTunes itself was a massive hit before the iPod even existed. I believe it to be more important than the hardware itself.
How many people here would be outraged at the suggestion that the iPod were hard to use because the QT upgrade failed?
Not many. That is indeed a problem with usability. If the problem was as widespread as Zune installer problems appear to be, there would be plenty of outrage.
Zune is an electronic gadget. The install process is part of support software that runs on the PC.
Zune is an electronic gadget that relies on software. How is the software not a part of the usability of the system? your comment is like saying the PC is an electronic gadget, so the quality of the OS and software has no bearing on the usability of a computer.
You could just as well argue that the install failure means "poor sound quality" since without it you can't load music on the player.
No you couldn't, because that would be stupid and inaccurate.
Claiming ease-of-use is bad because of the out-of-box experience is a deliberate misrepresentation.
No, it's not. It's a very valid point. You don't seem to have much idea about how users respond to products. "Out-of-the-box" is just another part of the user experience. I'm not sure why you need to make up a term to differentiate that phase. Once you take it out of the box, your use has begun, and all impressions matter. Anything that makes it harder to set up reduces usability. If it were easy to set up, that's obviously a part of using it that is easier.
Yeah, but this is better than the original.
No, it's three different frequencies, multiplied by intensity. Each pixel can do more than just be on or off. So, in combination, you do get more actual values.
I'm pretty sure that drawing random shapes is illegal under the PATRIOT act. The only thing you are allowed to draw is Bald Eagles and American flags with the President standing in front of it. Or any combination thereof. As long as the eagle is not crushing the President's skull or pooping on him.
But wouldn't the triangles help with things like error-correction, or tolerance for a degraded image? If you use dots only, and some of those dots get damage, the data is gone. But the shape of a triangle can be inferred from the angles, even if part of the image is missing. Maybe it's not "wasted" as such, but used to make the storage medium more robust?
I think it usually works the other way around. If you pay your hard earned cash for something, you are more likely to defend it, and put a positive spin on it, because you don't want to feel/look like a chump who got ripped off. It depends on the situation. Those journals who rely on continued advertising revenue from the manufacturer are likely to sweeten the review to keep the advertising dollars rolling in. But if the manufacturer does not advertise with you, then freebie products are not really enough of an incentive to write glowing reviews, unless you actually like the products. After all, why would you want a freebie product if you hate it?
How is it not a factor in ease-of-use?
That sounds pretty implausible. Microsoft needs the music labels to make Zune a success. The music labels do not need Microsoft. Basically, Microsoft is in a position of weakness, and is forced to whore themselves out to the record labels on their terms. Apple is able to stand up to them (and has in the past) because they are coming from a position of strength.
With Apple, it's the reverse. If the labels try to frop Apple, their musicians will be pissed off and ask their label why they aren't on iTunes - and switch labels to one who will get their songs on iTunes.
So, do you have links to the blind A/B tests that these "audiophiles" have done to indicate the Creative's sound is so much better?
And wouldn't an audio pro already have a pro recording unit that does 24 bit/96kHz recording, and has real inputs like XLR? Why would a pro record at 44.1kHz/16 bit?
I work with quite a few audio pros, and have never seen them using a Creative device.
But it's got a cow on it! That can't be good for your music files.
It's interesting that you speak of luddites, because there is just as much cost to being a too enthusiastic technophile as there is to being a luddite. What does South Korea gain from wasting money on "smart homes" and RFID chips in every product? They don't really benefit people in any significant way, but add costs to the economy. So, if it is popular, it may actually be a loss to society overall.
Yes.
Cheddar?
It's a competitive market. Increase your price, and people will probably switch to the cheaper yoghurt brand that doesn't have RFID tags.
Hello Kitty Island Adventure.
Plastic surgeons could create artificial boobies that can morph into three different shapes, depending on the weather. Four if you count erect nipples.
There's nothing Safe for Work about Wil Wheaton.