quote:Originally posted by rivka: External speakers are easy. Yeesh, my Palm has those.
Yes, but in a package the size of the Nano (1.7" x 3.5" x 0.26"), accounting for all the rest of the features?
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Do the larger ipods have 'em? I don't think they do either.
Thanks, Eurip. I was taking a brief hiatus . . . and then my DSL modem went kaput. New one came yesterday. Only it turns out the problem was not the modem, but the cord/transformer. arg! Oh well, at least I didn't have to go through the annoyance of setting up a new one. And now I have a backup modem.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by erosomniac: The external speakers are the main one. I've only seen one player, a Samsung, that had a built-in speaker.
Also, the Sansa is almost twice the size of the Nano.
Meh?
Nano: Dimensions: 1.6 x 3.5 x 0.27 inches
e200: 1.7 in. wide x 3.5 in. long x 0.5 in. high.
It's basically the same size. It's less than a quarter of an inch thicker. Saying "almost twice the size" might be literally true with regards to thickness, but seems a bit dishonest when we're talking about such small sizes.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Thanks, Eurip. I was taking a brief hiatus . . . and then my DSL modem went kaput. New one came yesterday. Only it turns out the problem was not the modem, but the cord/transformer. arg! Oh well, at least I didn't have to go through the annoyance of setting up a new one. And now I have a backup modem.
Sorry to hear it. Did you get cold turkey?
Posts: 1762 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:It's necessary for Apple advertising to adopt a 'righteous underdog' aspect. Because Apple still is the underdog.
Not in the mp3 player market. They are the exact opposite of an underdog.
And generally speaking, Apple avoids an aggressive advertising attitude completely in their mp3 player ads. The iPod commercials have never been an attack on their competitors in any way; they're simple and fun, the same ideas adopted in the design of the player itself.
quote:Originally posted by Euripides: Sorry to hear it. Did you get cold turkey?
Um, do you mean "go cold turkey," or was that a question about leftovers? If the former, then yes. And if it weren't for the upcoming Shinda, I probably would've stayed away a while longer.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by erosomniac: The external speakers are the main one. I've only seen one player, a Samsung, that had a built-in speaker.
Also, the Sansa is almost twice the size of the Nano.
Meh?
Nano: Dimensions: 1.6 x 3.5 x 0.27 inches
e200: 1.7 in. wide x 3.5 in. long x 0.5 in. high.
It's basically the same size. It's less than a quarter of an inch thicker. Saying "almost twice the size" might be literally true with regards to thickness, but seems a bit dishonest when we're talking about such small sizes.
When you're talking about how to squeeze that much hardware into a space? No, equating the two is dishonest.
Space comes at an even higher premium when you're working in smaller sizes.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
It bugs me that since Apple is also trying to make money in other areas, like OS X and music downloads, that they somewhat cripple their mp3 player. Granted, they aren't as bad as Sony, but it's still pretty distasteful.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Er, what? Not in these parts it can't. The only way I've ever heard the expression used is "to go cold turkey," and it means to quit completely (as opposed to cutting back or reducing).
posted
I cannot think of a good reason for someone who just makes mp3 players to make it so that you DnD the mp3s onto and off of the player. Apple's players don't have that functionality because, I presume, they have a conflict by also selling music.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I find iTunes much easier than DnD. I own a 15GB iPod and a shuffle (which my mother got as a present but didn't need). When I want to synch my 15GB, I put it in the dock. That's all. I don't have to wonder which music folder I put my new tracks in, or whether I've bought new music since I last plugged in my iPod.
When I want to update my shuffle, I make up a playlist in iTunes, which is easier than rooting through my music folders looking for the tracks I want.
And iTunes was around long before the iTunes Store. That doesn't disqualify the store as being the reason Apple chose to go the iTunes route (as opposed to the DnD route), but it does make you wonder.
Posts: 1762 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
I guess I meant it in more of an aesthetic sense. From a consumer point of view, an extra cubic inch and a half isn't that big a deal. It still fits in the pocket of a pair of tight jeans.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
You can drag and drop with an iPod, btw, it just takes a minor bit of know-how. Apple doesn't have it as the default because their way is a lot more user-friendly (and as noted, it was how it was done since well before the iTMS came into being).
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Moreover, Mr. Jobs also appears to be restricting the potential for third-party software developers to write applications for the new handset — from ringtones to word processors.
To be sure, this strategy has not limited the success of the iPod, which has become the defining hand-held consumer appliance and fashion statement in the last half-decade. The world of digital cellular phones, however, is rapidly becoming a simple extension of the world of personal computing. The leading handset makers — Microsoft, Motorola, Nokia, Palm, Research in Motion, Samsung and Sony Ericsson — are all pushing in the direction of making their devices increasingly look like PCs you can put in your pocket.
Mr. Jobs is moving in that direction, too, but it appears that he wants to control his device much more closely than his competitors.
“We define everything that is on the phone,” he said. “You don’t want your phone to be like a PC. The last thing you want is to have loaded three apps on your phone and then you go to make a call and it doesn’t work anymore. These are more like iPods than they are like computers.”
The iPhone, he insisted, would not look like the rest of the wireless industry.
“These are devices that need to work, and you can’t do that if you load any software on them,” he said. “That doesn’t mean there’s not going to be software to buy that you can load on them coming from us. It doesn’t mean we have to write it all, but it means it has to be more of a controlled environment.”
Rules it out completely for me.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
I'm surprised they couldn't put some high level language in a decent resources sandbox to prevent interference with functionality.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Euripides: 1) Software neutrality - Fair enough, the iPod isn't software neutral. 2) Ogg, MP3, and WMV support - I don't find OGG is too common. WMV is a Windows specific format. The Windows version of iTunes has a converter too. 3) Playlist control on device - Check. Smart Playlists - Check. 4) File storage (ideally DnD) - Check. 5) Removable/replaceable battery - Okay. 6) Voice recorder - Most people don't need one. You can also get an attachment to do it. 7) One-handed operation - Check. 8) External speakers - You want these built in? 9) Video and image playback - Check. Notes, Calendars, Games - Check. 10) FM tuner/recorder - Again, most people don't need it, and you can get an attachment to do so. 11) Outlook-synchronizable tasks, calendar, and contacts - Well, it synchronizes perfectly with a Mac, and supports vCards and iCalendar calendars. 12) eBook reader - Converting ebooks to iPod readable text files is simple. 13) Removable flash storage - Personally, I'd rather not.
Did you notice that most of your rebuttals are of the type "the average user doesn't need/miss this"? Since the entire point of the list was the featureset Tom would like to see, I can't see how that's relevant.
------
re: Apple's ad campaign -- there's absolutely no reason why Apple can't advertise what they do well without denigrating Windows. It makes Apple look petty, and the ads turn me off almost as much as the real life Apple snobs do.
Both Apple and PCs have things they do well. I don't have any problem admitting that. An ad campaign that insults most of its potential customer base is a colossal failure in my opinion.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
BTW, I just want to clarify that when I say "Nano-sized," I'm talking about height and width. Depth is almost irrelevant to me, as long as the thing isn't a cube.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
Did you notice that most of your rebuttals are of the type "the average user doesn't need/miss this"? Since the entire point of the list was the featureset Tom would like to see, I can't see how that's relevant.
It was about Tom's reasons for seeing the iPod as a "crippled" product. I don't think it's a crippled product, and asked why he felt that way. He put forward his points, and I explained why I disagree. How is it not relevant?
quote:re: Apple's ad campaign -- there's absolutely no reason why Apple can't advertise what they do well without denigrating Windows. It makes Apple look petty, and the ads turn me off almost as much as the real life Apple snobs do.
Are we talking about the switch commercials here?
Posts: 1762 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by fugu13: I'm surprised they couldn't put some high level language in a decent resources sandbox to prevent interference with functionality.
Surely I'm not the only one who does not believe that they can't, and this is just an excuse?
Treos, for example, do occasionally have to be reset. But the research I did a year or so back (before I decided I definitely did NOT want my PDA/mp3 player to be the same device as my cell phone) indicates that it is only rarely (which is consistent with my experience with Palms in general).
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Did you notice that most of your rebuttals are of the type "the average user doesn't need/miss this"? Since the entire point of the list was the featureset Tom would like to see, I can't see how that's relevant.
What I see from that list is that most of Tom's desired features are addressed by the iPod, although perhaps not always in the most ideal way. It doesn't seem like most music players offer all of those features either. The iPod does seem to be more limited than it needs to be, but I wouldn't consider it to be "crippled" since there are ways to work around most of the issues. However, the primary goal of most of Apple's products seem to be about the overall user experience, so I can see how those that aren't as concerned about Apple's version of a desirable user experience may see their products as being crippled.
[Added]Although, I'd be curious to see those options ranked in terms of importance.
Euripides,
quote:Are we talking about the switch commercials here?
I thought the commerials announcing the switch to Intel were fairly insulting as were the commercials that insulted the Intel chips years ago.
Posts: 1256 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
rivka: Apple's been big on improving the ease of creating user-developed applications in the OS. Given the flimsiness of their excuse and that, I suspect there's a technical reason (and one associated with several of the applications being very unfinished): namely, I suspect they're having performance issues with user apps, sufficient that they need to create their apps in C (likely Objective-C) or similar, which opens up the phone to exactly the problem Jobs is using as an excuse . IOW, I think their flimsy excuse is real, but just a byproduct of the real problem.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
I'm not sure if it is the fact that you are less cynical, or just that I am less knowledgeable. But you are giving them way more benefit of the doubt than I.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:re: Apple's ad campaign -- there's absolutely no reason why Apple can't advertise what they do well without denigrating Windows. It makes Apple look petty, and the ads turn me off almost as much as the real life Apple snobs do.
Part of the problem with that ad campaign is that the Windows guy is actually funny, and I always want to see more of him and less of of the Mac guy.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
I hadn't seen the Intel ones (don't watch much TV) until now; just looked it up on YouTube.
If you feel insulted by these ads, there is probably nothing I can say to change your mind. But here's where I think Apple is coming from:
Apple is the minority in the computer market. Microsoft software is bloated with features, without taste, and counter-intuitive. Apple software contains just what most users need, is elegant and well designed, and user-friendly. The simplest way Apple can tell the consumer what their products all about, in the short time available in a TV commercial, is so state what it is not. A great many ad campaigns do this.
The characterisation of the PC is probably what is annoying people. I believe that's meant to play on PC users' own frustrations at their own computers. After all, the ads were produced for PC users, not for Mac users' entertainment.
As for the intel ad; it seems to be an extension of the 'Windows was made for office work, Mac was made for digital living' line.
Posts: 1762 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: BTW, I just want to clarify that when I say "Nano-sized," I'm talking about height and width. Depth is almost irrelevant to me, as long as the thing isn't a cube.
Ah. That changes everything, since my objections to the plausibility of your feature set were from an engineering standpoint.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
JT, They're meant to ridicule the computer, not the person using it. Also, PC users who are perfectly happy with their computing experience are not the target audience. PC users who find their computers frustrating, or want something more user friendly but have never considered switching; they're the target audience.
Posts: 1762 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
ALmost every article I see about "feature bloat" in Microsoft Office very quickly lists several features that I use regularly.
I also find them to have excellent UIs. Some of it is due to Windows' familiarity to me. But much of it is due to fairly consistent UI standards across applications.
There are a few Microsoft apps that, for some reason, have entirely different UIs. These UIs are more "intuitive" (in the sense that a total stranger can pick them up more easily and use without having to reason anything out) than most other apps. They very quickly become far more furstrating to use because the thing that makes them easy is that they have a single use path.
Intuitiveness is needed for seldom-used applications. Ease of learning and ease of use after learning - which are different things than intuitiveness altogether - are far more useful for apps that will be used often.
MS apps are by no means perfect. But they are not counter-intuitive and they, in general, have very good UIs compared to the rest of the desktop world.
I read a great book on the failure of intuitiveness as a UI goal a long time ago. I'll try to remember the name.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:You can use your PC, and I'll save up for my Macbook Pro.
And while you're saving for the Macbook Pro, I'll be using my PC. It's a good thing you don't need any work done right now, really. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:What are you comparing the Microsoft UIs to? Have you tried Apple's apps?
OSX and its apps are far easier to learn and easier to use after learning.
I have used Apple apps extensively in the past, some before I had extensive experience with Windows, some after.
They are not far easier to learn. They might be far easier to perform the single most common task, but this is not a good measure of ease of use.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:re: Apple's ad campaign -- there's absolutely no reason why Apple can't advertise what they do well without denigrating Windows. It makes Apple look petty, and the ads turn me off almost as much as the real life Apple snobs do.
Part of the problem with that ad campaign is that the Windows guy is actually funny, and I always want to see more of him and less of of the Mac guy.
Absolutely. The Mac guy is smug and boring. The Windows guy is my kind of geek.
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:Microsoft software is bloated with features, without taste, and counter-intuitive.
You make these assertions, and I believe they are to a significant extent unfair and untrue.
That Microsoft software is perceived this way does not necessarily indicate that it is reality.
Agreed 100%.
quote:Originally posted by Euripides: JT, They're meant to ridicule the computer, not the person using it.
Very fine line, as the emotionalism and vitriol of too many computer debates shows.
quote:Originally posted by Euripides: PC users who find their computers frustrating, or want something more user friendly but have never considered switching; they're the target audience.
Who are these people? Seriously, if someone is frustrated with their OS, why had they not considered switching?
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: Almost every article I see about "feature bloat" in Microsoft Office very quickly lists several features that I use regularly.
I also find them to have excellent UIs. Some of it is due to Windows' familiarity to me. But much of it is due to fairly consistent UI standards across applications.
There are a few Microsoft apps that, for some reason, have entirely different UIs. These UIs are more "intuitive" (in the sense that a total stranger can pick them up more easily and use without having to reason anything out) than most other apps. They very quickly become far more frustrating to use because the thing that makes them easy is that they have a single use path.
Intuitiveness is needed for seldom-used applications. Ease of learning and ease of use after learning - which are different things than intuitiveness altogether - are far more useful for apps that will be used often.
MS apps are by no means perfect. But they are not counter-intuitive and they, in general, have very good UIs compared to the rest of the desktop world.
quote:You can use your PC, and I'll save up for my Macbook Pro.
And while you're saving for the Macbook Pro, I'll be using my PC. It's a good thing you don't need any work done right now, really.
Compared to a PC laptop with similar specs, Macbook Pros are not too expensive. The problem is that I'm a university student with an irregular income.
I'll be doing my work on this PC until then, thanks very much.
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee:
quote:What are you comparing the Microsoft UIs to? Have you tried Apple's apps?
OSX and its apps are far easier to learn and easier to use after learning.
I have used Apple apps extensively in the past, some before I had extensive experience with Windows, some after.
They are not far easier to learn. They might be far easier to perform the single most common task, but this is not a good measure of ease of use.
What can I say. I totally disagree. In my own experience, the only reason people have had trouble learning how to use a Mac is because they have trouble shedding Windows habits. That would work the other way around too.
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
Who are these people? Seriously, if someone is frustrated with their OS, why had they not considered switching?
You don't know people who find their PCs frustrating? People who haven't tried other OSs because they prefer what's mainstream and supports the software they know, or don't have the time to deal with computer issues? I do.
---
As a typical example of Microsoft software, take Internet Explorer 7. The browser doesn't comply with W3C standards, which gives web developers and designers a headache - they have to write more illogical unsemantic code to work around IE's erroneous interpretation of code. But the end user doesn't see this. Okay.
IE7's new text rendering 'features' make small initialised text difficult to read, and makes large text look ugly. The old IE problems have not been fixed; it's still a leaking sieve security wise (thanks to the browser's many bugs), and IE7 is more difficult to navigate than IE6. Microsoft was late to include tabbed browsing, PNG alpha channel support, and each release has been bug-ridden.
It's a similar picture for most of Microsoft's products.
posted
Microsoft can't be all bad. After all Microsoft Office is on the Mac. The vast majority of Mac owners also use it. It would be a big blow if Microsoft stopped making it for the Mac.
Posts: 796 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Compared to a PC laptop with similar specs, Macbook Pros are not too expensive.
Errrmmmm...no.
Macbook Pro (mid-level model): $2499 Core Duo 2.33 2 gigs DDR2 667 RAM 120 gig hard drive 15" display 6x Combo Drive Radeon X1600 256 MB
For comparison:
Dell Inspiron E505: $1,579 as configured Core Duo 2.00 2 gigs DDR2 667 RAM 120 gig hard drive 15.4" display 8x Combo Drive Radeon x1400 256 MB
Mildly different specs (.33 ghz diff in proc speed but identical FSB/L2 Cache, Radeon x1400 instead of x1600), but an almost $1,000 difference in price.
quote: As a typical example of Microsoft software, take Internet Explorer 7. The browser doesn't comply with W3C standards, which gives web developers and designers a headache - they have to write more illogical unsemantic code to work around IE's erroneous interpretation of code. But the end user doesn't see this. Okay.
IE7's new text rendering 'features' make small initialised text difficult to read, and makes large text look ugly. The old IE problems have not been fixed; it's still a leaking sieve security wise (thanks to the browser's many bugs), and IE7 is more difficult to navigate than IE6. Microsoft was late to include tabbed browsing, PNG alpha channel support, and each release has been bug-ridden.
This, however, I definitely agree with. I hate IE. I hate that because so many people use it, almost every major page in existence warps their code to conform to it. As a designer, I hate having written wonderfully simple code only to discover that whoops, IE has no clue what to do with it. What's that, IE? You don't know how to interpret float when it applies to a freakin' div? You selectively read the spaces and hard returns in code, making it extraordinarily difficult to organize code for easy editing?
quote:Originally posted by Euripides: I stand corrected re: the laptop prices.
Part of the problem is that Apple's prices & specs remain static for extended periods of time. Because Windows PC makers have such a wide variety of components to choose from (and are not competing not only against a rival OS, but also against each other), their prices and components change much more frequently.
Six months ago, when the MacBook was probably near identical in specs (edit: and price), the equivilant Dell notebook was probably closer to $2000-2200.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've never had any problems with it. For the year and change that I've had it, I've liked it more than I ever liked Sprint.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Cell service providers vary wildly in coverage and service from one region to another.
I know people in Florida who swear by Nextel, when it was all but useless here (in Louisiana) until two years ago. Sprint is generally loathed in the South, but my east coast friends use it almost exclusively. Cingular is very big here, but spotty in the NW (at least in the areas I've lived/visited).
Saying <huge company> sucks is about as accurate as saying "I hate blue jeans." For every one person who agrees there're probably 4 who've never had a problem with them.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
<--- desperately wants an iPhone; is having a hard time justifying spending that much to call the 3 people she talks to on her cell
Posts: 834 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
IE is absolutely horrible. The only time I ever use it with pages that insist that I do so. Firefox is teh AWESOME. But I do not agree that IE is representative of Microsoft -- Office is good, and some pieces are great. I adore Outlook, really love Word, and Publisher and Powerpoint are fun.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm actually annoyed with Cingular. As an old AT&T wireless user I had to deal with the merge and change of names and the confusion around that. Since the "new" at&t gobbled up Bell South and thus gained 100% control over Cingular they are changing the name. From Cingular, to at&t.
Posts: 796 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
. IOW, I think their flimsy excuse is real, but just a byproduct of the real problem.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
