Creative Zen Vision:M reviewed by CNET Asia: receives 8.2/10

The Creative Zen Vision:M spotted in the wild yesterday just got its first, proper review posted over at CNET Asia. They slap down an "excellent" 8.2/10 rating stoked by the fact that the Vision:M supports not only MPEG-4 video but also the other major video codecs including DivX and XviD. They also liked the "scorching" fast transfer speeds albeit using a new proprietary port (bye bye, mini USB) and Creative's improved vertical scroll for navigating those fully customizable menus. Of course, as expected that 2.5-inch 262k color screen was deemed "brilliant". On the downside, some reviewers found the keys stiff and the unit to be an unattractive fatty — almost twice as thick as the iPod. They found the battery to pump 15 hours of looped MP3s, but sadly don't confirm (or deny) the claimed 4 hours of vid life. However, they are still finalizing the video tests so we'll just have to wait and see. And just to fuel the iPod vs. everything-else fanboy fire a bit — you might recall that they gave the 5G video iPod an 8.3 rating just a few months ago. Now have at it dear readers and please remember, the first rule of the comments section is that no one talks about the comments section.

[Thanks, patsy tam]

[Apoco-Lips @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

Appleinsider calls it a blatant ipod ripoff... apple fanboyz eh...

http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1407

[Khaytsus @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

No iPud zealots all over this yet? Wow.

[Khaytsus @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

Whoops, posted too late ;-)

[apeguero @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

$339.00 is too high a price for this device. Creative will not sell as many if it can't give people insentive to buy this over the 30gb iPod video. The battery, at least, is removable so one can always just carry an extra battery which one cannot do with the iPod, except for those external backup batteries. That's where the size of this device may become moot when comparing to the iPod 30gb - replaceable battery. Also, they should do a side by side with the 60gb iPod video which claims 4 hours of video as well.

Come on Creative, lower the price or include some extras like an extra battery and a wall charger then you'll give yourself a chance at taking some of Apple's market share.

[DG @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

$339.00? Forget it. Not interested when a better supported iPod is less.

What a stupid decision and one more DAP that won't change the marketplace.

[RE @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

Not bad. Anyone know when it will be available in the US?

[Dave Zatz @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

I agree with 'apeguero' that they will have a hard time competing with Apple at this price point. Not to mention iTunes/iPods are getting buzz because you can buy/transfer television shows - never mind the quality, transfer limitations, or price.

Here's my question... is double battery life worth the extra thickness? Also, based on some pictures that have been posted this device isn't much smaller than the Zen Vision - so for 70 bucks more do you go whole hog? I guess that depends if the screen on how the screen on the new model compares to the Vision.

Personally, the Archos AV500 is the device I'm lusting after. The price is somewhat steep, but maybe I'll be getting some holiday gift cards. ;)

[TZK @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

Isnt the VISION $399 also?

Good God... I think I will wait for the nano rip-off of the luxpro. Hahahaha.

[Mike @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

Is it just me or doesn't that vertical scroll thing remind you of Goat-se?

Something about the design also screams Fisher Price to me as well.

[Bruce M. @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

If it won't play the season of "Lost" I bought and downloaded from iTMS, then forget it. Seeing how it doesn't support "Fairplay" I highly doubt it will. Also, why is this thing so fat? It seems electronics are just like people, when they're fat their usually lazy and have a few other bad habits as well.

[dave95 @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

Will this ship with a white earbud also?

Not to sound like a 'fanboy' but you have to give credit where credit is due. Apple created the iPod/iTunes combo to be so freaking simple; even your grandparents can ues it. I plug in my iPod in the morning and it does the rest. Syncs with iTunes and download all my latest Playlist and subscribed podcasts, that's it. Can this Creative:M do the same thing without me taking a Geek Class first.

[dave95 @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

Will this ship with a white earbud also?

Not to sound like a 'fanboy' but you have to give credit where credit is due. Apple created the iPod/iTunes combo to be so freaking simple; even your grandparents can ues it. I plug in my iPod in the morning and it does the rest. Syncs with iTunes and download all my latest Playlist and subscribed podcasts, that's it. Can this Creative:M do the same thing without me taking a Geek Class first.

[John @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

I will probely ditch my 20gb ipod for this it has twice the video time as the ipod. I had a creative zen micro before and it was phinominal creative has a great reputation wit me. The whole scrool wheel is much more fun than the click wheel just takes time getting used to.

[Dave @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

I love how little they mention the actual audio quality. I think the actual quote is

"In terms of audio, the Zen Vision: M certainly delivered the goods when it came to the base line. The low end was tight and powerful enough without the need to activate the bass booster. For the mids and highs, there was detailed articulation though we felt the sound was a little too clean at times."

Now, seriously. What the f*** Cnet? Isn't this a freaking AUDIO PLAYER? That's the last paragraph in the review! FELT THE SOUND WAS A LITTLE TOO CLEAN? Dear... sweet... Jesus. "Audiophiles" they call themselves. Right. Bet your Bose Triports sounded reallllll good on that, didn't it fellas?

[Goodman @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

Well, it'll play the season of Lost I downloaded free with Bittorrent, that's more than I can say about the iPod.

I gotta say, I like the looks of it. I promised myself I won't buy another player until April, so we'll see what the competition looks like then. But I won't buy a player that doesn't support music subscriptions, so the iPod is out for me.

[delerious @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

I'd pay $330 for it with the bundle it has. For an iPod, that stuff Creative bundles would probably cost around 40 bucks or more. You get your monies worth with the purchase.

[DG's male lover @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

Wow! $299 to $339 must be a HUGE jump in price for you. More features costs more money. This is the iPod that should have been.

[DM @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

"...though we felt the sound was a little too clean at times"

Hahaha. What do you expect? CNET likes their sound dirty ;-)

[Rahul Sinha @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

FWIW, I downloaded an episode of BSG off of iTMS, and played it fullscreen on a 23" LCD monitor (usually quite unkind even to DVDs)

The quality was better than cable. I know the stats argue otherwise (in re resolution), but what this has that cable does not is _no_visual_noise_, which I find far more irritating than what is effectively interlaced video (All cable is interlaced).

Now I'm not sold on watching video on either of these players, but I will say one thing. I majored in CS, I now work as a systems analyst. I had a succession of mp3 players prior to my current iPod. Each one I stopped using after a month or two because it was too damn annoying to use. Not too hard; anyone can learn to use any of these devices, but sufficiently non-intuitive that I didn't want to keep using it after the rush of buying it had faded.

I've had my iPod for over a year, and I don't find using it irritating. That is the feature Creative needs to strive for. I have friends who have WMA DAPs. They all stop using them because none of them is pleasant to use after a while.

Not better battery life (12 hrs, 24 hrs, couldn't care), not more formats (if I can get everything I want in the format it plays, why do I care about others?). It has to be pleasant to use, after some time has passed.

[John @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

That review is complete bullcrap. You can't review something without going over all the aspects of it. If you leave things out, you don't have a complete review. That's like if you were to review a car and base the review off that gas pedal and the radio.

[slash @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

"If it won't play the season of "Lost" I bought and downloaded from iTMS, then forget it."

Sorry but i think its kinda sad that they make you PAY for something you can record for FREEE! i just download each episode after it comes out on a torrent.

[Rahul Sinha @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

slash: I'm not a poor college student (I suspect neither is the other poster), and as such I don't feel I need to steal anymore. The record companies are indeed asses, but I do sort of want to give subpop records (not one of the big 5) and the bands in question money for what I am getting, and I want BSG's ratings to go up, SciFi to have the money to make more of it, and more like it.

Sure in college its somewhat more reasonable to BitTorrent whatever, but do recall, there are a lot more people who have graduated college and aren't eating ramen than that are in it. Paying $25 for a season of video is quite frankly preferable to waiting for crappy BT seeds to send me the files over the course of 30-60 hrs. It's just not that much money. (and its higher quality than cable; I have an eyetv for the Daily Show etc, but for this, well, I'd rather have it w/o the visual noise.)

[snarkey @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

What motivation would anyone have for buying this chunk-style player, anyways? The thought process must go something like this:


"Hmmm. Those 5G iPods are really sweet, and I really, really want one, but I hate Apple so darn much, I just won't do it (grumbles.)


Hey! What's this? Creative has a player that looks just like the iPod! It does all of the same things, kind of. And I don't mind having to rip/transcode/resize/load songs, photos, and videos all on my own. I am a +18 Linux palladin after all.

And what's this? It's only $40 dollars more than the iPod 30GB? Well I'd say that's a bargain if I don't have to be seen with a stupid Apple product. And I don't mind paying Creative more: I want them to stay in business. Vision:M here I come. As soon as mom comes home with the car."

[uelsimon @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

so...does this work with a mac?... itunes?...

[clicclic @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

Competition is good. Period.

[VM @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

>> ...though we felt the sound was a
>> little too clean at times"

> Hahaha. What do you expect?
> CNET likes their sound dirty ;-)

In this case, clean refers to it being too high pitched, ie: not balanced.

[Jason Petersen @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

Rahul, I hate to break it to you, but lots of shows on BT are HD nowadays. I have an eyeTV 200, on which my girlfriend and I record and watch many shows (the Daily Show among them). I also frequently purchase seasons of TV (every Flying Circus and Aqua Teen episode, for instance)

However, if my girlfriend misses Alias or Gilmore Girls or whatnot (I really don't watch TV very seriously, so I don't do this), she downloads it from BT or DC++, and the quality far exceeds that of my eyeTV. HD shows are sent as an MPEG2 stream, which can be captured on the viewing end and written straight to a file, the quality of which exceeds DVDs (and, obviously, analog DVRs and iTMS stuff). Watching the shows in VLC on a widescreen laptop is a treat I've never had with a normal TV (since I've never had HD or a receiver ( and yes, I'm a 'poor' college student)). And while BT does take hours, the DC++ hub here is local to our campus and only accepts addresses within the campus network, so we get at least 10mpbs on files there.

Just thought you should know.

[Dave @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

I've never heard "clean" refer to "too high pitched." And I spend a lot of time on Head-Fi.org. They might have been trying to say "bright" but that isn't necessarily bad... basically, I don't think these guys know sh** about audio quality. They don't even mention what they were listening through... stock earbuds don't cut it for a review of an audio player.

[Maarek @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

Just made a call to Creative and the $329 price includes a wall charger. I think that may be what the different in price is. Recall that the Ipod 30GB is $299 and to get a wall charger is another 29.99. I would get a wall charger anyway, so this is a no brainer for me, Zen Vision M.

[yaya @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

Does anybody happen to know if it has an a/v out or Infrared remote like the Zen Vision?

[DG @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

"Wow! $299 to $339 must be a HUGE jump in price for you. More features costs more money. This is the iPod that should have been."

No doubt this has more features than the iPod. It better, considering it's twice the size. But I have plenty of iTMS downloads (see previous post about the whole being out of college and willing to pay for music thing above), my files are nicely stored and displayed in iTunes, and I'm not about to switch to player that will only offer me the ability to listen to bad FM radio or watch pirated video.

If Creative wants to be noticed in the marketplace, selling an iPod lookalike for more than the iPod isn't going to do it.

[apeguero @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

Not to pick on you Rahul Sinha or to put words on slash's mouth but these programs are already free. If he feels like going the extra effort to keep it that way then he has every right to do so. Buying already played shows that are either free on air tv or already paid for in Cable is for those that either don't know how to or don't care about the work that it takes to convert these programs to play. One can record these programs in many different ways and then convert them to the format required by the PMP used or one can download said programs from bittorrent. No one is really stealing any of these shows since no one is using them to make a profit or encouraging or facilitating people to make profits from them. These shows are either already paid for (with your Cable subscription fees) or are free if you watched them over the air! Besides, they are already getting enough from advertisers. These people aren't struggling musicians that constantly get corn-holed by RIAA. Getting them into your PMP of your choice is no different than recording them in your VCR and then playing that tape at a later time at different locations. The $1.99 you pay for in iTunes, and slash refuses to pay, is for the convinience of the conversion and packaging. You shouldn't go around acusing people of stealing unless you have your facts right! I happen to like to service of ITMS so I may eventually buy hard to get stuff there but not current shows that I am already paying for with my Cable bill.

[Alan Strangis @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

#19: slash: I'm not a poor college student (I suspect neither is the other poster), and as such I don't feel I need to steal anymore.

wha wha...

Seriously, what's the moral difference of taping and downloading a show that I've paid for through my satellite company? How am I denying them one red cent?

[E @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

I have the 60g iPod video. I was holding out for something for a few years that never happened, a decent rival for the iPod. all of them were larger that the iPod, and for me, a commuter on the subway, less is more... to a point.

Speaking of commuting, I find that a 30 minute TV show is perfect if you commute on mass transit. Any longer than that, I might get annoyed holding it.

I would actually consider this device though, the problem I have with the iPod video is the lack of a decent DVD/Video converter. I've been trying to use PQDVD, which is very fast, I capture a 30 min show in about 5 minutes. Often when it comes to my TV show DVDs, the naviation simply doesn't work. I've sent emails to support, and no reply. This could be an awesome app if they would get their sh*t together. Sure you can spend hours ripping to VOB, then another couple hours converting to QT. One format?? What a bunch of crap!

I want to pop in my DVDs and capture a file (just like PQDVD is supposed to) and drop it on the player. i don't want to D/L movies from iTunes, most TV is crap, and so they don't have anything I want anyway...

Personally I don't like being restricted to using one company's apps or codecs for something like this. Apple is fast becoming the Microsoft of Media... I don't mean that in a good way.

[jimmy johnson @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

People wake up!! I keep hearing that this is for geeks because you can't buy content from itunes and that Apple is so non-geek. Guess what!!!??? 1) What about the thousands upon thousands of hours worth of content that you can't buy from itunes? You can only put that stuff on your ipod in some backasswards way. Same as the M. Only with the M you have more format option.
2)You're on a gadget site therefore you are a geek. And... the fact that you can't figure out how to get movies onto the M makes you a stupid geek.

[Rahul's Mother @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

Rahul is an asstard. People that LOVE their shows MIGHT buy them, but usually don't. Hell, there are shows that DON'T box their seasons for sale. It is better for the broadcasters to get their content out any way possible, since this generates viewership, and thus profits.

Oh, and if I want to see a show... I generally want to see it right now, before the DVDs are out. So your post is stupid both financially, and in practicality.

[hydrogen_wv @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

Personally, I am a poor college kid. $25 is a lot for me. I'd definitely go with the Creative. It might not look as nice to some (although, personally I think it looks better than the iPod), and it might not be as small, but really... It's an MP3 player, not a fashion accessory (The iPod is a fashion accessory to some, that's for sure). 15 Hours of audio? Rock on. 4 Hours of video? Awesome. And, what's that? I can carry an extra battery so if I have a 30 hour trip I can swap one out for hte other without the need for an electrical outlet? Awesome. The last one doesn't effect me, but for some people it will.

And, to me, the extra time it'd take to download tv shows from seeds is worth it. And quality isn't a huge factor because you are watching it on a 2.5" screen. As long as it is a decent quality, you'll be fine.

On a side note, I'd like to see someone take the guts out of one of these and stick them in a Gameboy SP. Use the screen from the player, the scrollbar could be re-wired to the D-pad, and the 4 buttons to start, select, a, and b. Hah, how rad would that be?

[Civil Disobedient @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

"Paying $25 for a season of video is quite frankly preferable to waiting for crappy BT seeds"

Paying $25 for a DVD is quite frankly preferable to an iTunes rip. Too bad you can't watch DVD-compliant MPEG-2 on either the Z:M or the iPod.

Oh wait! You *can* watch MPEG-2 on the Z:M. Silly me.

[TK @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

jimmy johnson > Thank you

[Rom @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

Umm....iPod video Much?? This thing should be under the "bootleg iPod section" its so uggly...yet the meues are so familiar

[Philip Quarles @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

Could someone please explain to me what the big deal about this player is? Creative's Zen Vision (original flavor) is a much better video player (it has a better screen, which should be the first thing you look at), as are the Cowon A2 and several offerings from Archos. I understand that not everybody needs or wants portable video, but if you're not interested in it, why even consider a portable video player?

I really don't understand why, when the portable video section of Engadget lists so many really different and full-featured video players, the ones that generate the most interest, by about two orders of magnitude, are the iPod, an audio player with video shoehorned into it, and this Creative Zen Vision:M, which seems to be a knock off of the aforementioned iPod.

[slash @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

Quote from "The $1.99 you pay for in iTunes, and slash refuses to pay"

its not that i refuses. for 1. i dont have an ipod lol and 2. i still just dont believe you should pay even a cent for something that you can download for free. now when it comes out on DVD or something thats a different story(hint hint then it would be illegal). id gladly buy it on DVD once it comes out.

[jaysins @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

I would like to add #36 post. I am sure this thing will be of a much more durable build than your fanboys POS ipod. No need to frantically try to keep it scratch free and I'm sure it will out do ipod's pathetic 11 times drop test. It's worth the money to buy something that actaully won't fall apart on you or get scratched on your first day.

[Doc. @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

Yeah, competition is good, and sure it has some extra features- that's all well and good. But, a lot of people aern't going to care what's under the hood, and will want something pretty. In that respect, this is just an Apple ripoff. When I saw the picture, I figured the story was about how Apple was gonna be suing. The design is so unoriginal, it's amazing. Still, I like some of what I hear. Hopefully Apple will reverse-copy and upgrade the color and battery soon.

[carl @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

hmmm... It has an A/V out, but replaceable battery seems to be a mystery, and bye bye regular ol' USB. These last two are key for me. A dock might look cool, but the standard USB connection is more important to me. Grrrr, creative. If you could somehow combine the best (well, best IMO) traits of all your different players, you could have something so super-duper dope!

The thing I like about similar DAPs to these: subscription services. All someone needs to do is fire up an unlimited subscription video service for a couple bucks a month that's compatible with this thing, and off you go. Apple of course is not about to do this, so iPod users probably won't see a service like that, so the best hope for a subscription/rental service is for non-iPods. If some savvy buinessperson can get those stodgy tv networks to go for it, I'm sure there could be a tidy profit to be turned eventually. Better yet, strike a deal with netflix, and I'm totally there.

Oh, and then there's the price. I bet it'll be $329 for about 2 weeks, before you start seeing it for $300 or less online. Creative products seem tor work that way (I'll leave you, dear fanboys, to reckon why).

[carl @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

No one's mentioned comment section rule#2, which is: I'm always right, the rest of you are defective.

and to poster #67, shut up you stupid fanboy/zealot/troll.

[locknroll @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

First of all for all you bittorent users - The iPod CAN PLAY YOUR PIRATED VIDEOS!!! YOU JUST HAVE TO CONVERT THEM.
But you say, the creative can play without conversion!

HAHAHAHAH! WRONG, unless the video is downloaded at a low enough resolution and bitrate for the creative to play you STILL HAVE TO CONVERT THEM. JUST LIKE THE IPOD

So if that's the reason you buy creative, you must hate iPods more than I do.

[PB @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

The fact of the matter is that the Ipod became popular because of its ease of use and elegant design. By incorporating both of those into a small and versatile player, that�s how they won a majority of the market share. The Ipod didn�t need to change much over the years because they didn�t need to. If it ain�t broke then why fix it. Granted that the Ipod can play video; but in reality it�s an mp3 player first with video functionality as a bonus. I applaud them for that. And I know the xvid and divx support is extremely nice, but is it that much more difficult to just rip your own movies files and re-encode them using free programs such as Videora Ipod Converter? And correct me if I�m wrong, but isn�t it only double the battery life based on video playback? If you want and Creative go for it, it�s a nice alternative but I�m going to still be using my click wheel to navigate b/c a circular motion is that much easier.

[Craig @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

you know Some Guy, it's really not that big a deal. i'm still getting a new iPod because the Vision's fat, ugly, and undoubtedly comes with buggy software (creative has always had crappy software).

regardless, any differences don't necessitate your idiotic rant/cursing storm. no iPod owner feels like they've just been 'served' as you'd like to think.

[Brian @ Dec 19th 2005 2:06AM]

Ok people, time to put something into perspective...

How many people out there do you think even know what the difference between MPEG-4 and DivX is? In fact, how many people do you think even know what either of those are? The answer is a very small portion of the general public. As an iPod video owner (got it for free) it would be nice if it supported more video formats, but there's software out there (videora ipod converter) that'll convert anything to the correct format. So video format compatability isn't really an issue.

Heck, I'll go so far as to say that the Vision:M has a better feature set than the iPod. I don't think that point is really arguable, even though many may not find the features useful (voice recorder, etc...). HOWEVER, when buying the iPod, you're getting not only the player, but the fabulous integration it offers with iTunes. That's something that absolutely can't be ignored and THAT is what is making the iPod so successful, in addition to the simple design. As far as I know, no other DAP company out there offers that kind of convenience and integration between their players and software.

That's what everyone is missing in this discussion. It's not just the player, but the digital music experience that the company is offering. 90+% of the public doesn't want to have to hunt for their music on their computer and then drag/drop into the player, etc... Putting a CD in, having it ripped into iTunes and then automatically put on your iPod is a seamless and incredibly simple process.

Summary: Vision:M has better features on papers but lacks the software integration to really make it a competitor to the already established iPod. Because of the iPod's ease of use, it has become synonomous with mp3 players.