The new Zune: better than before, but not quite good enough
By Ryan Block 
posted Nov 13th 2007 2:42PM
posted Nov 13th 2007 2:42PM
Well, we've been playing with the new Zune hardware (as well as the software update to our first gen device), and there's no mistake about it: Microsoft's really put their nose to the grindstone, prettying it up and filling out essential features that should have been there on day one, like podcasting support and wireless syncing. But we also think Microsoft's invested so much time mastering the basics that technologically it's fallen even further behind the pack than before. Will this new hardware cure what ails the Zune? Read on for the full review.
- QVGA display
- WiFi (now with wireless sync)
- WMV, H.264, and MPEG-4 video support
- MP3 and WMA audio
- Track sharing (up to three plays and now with the ability to pass along shared songs)
So while it's safe to say that many of last year's kinks have been worked through, there's still no dearth of stuff to find fault in with this year's product. Let's start with the essentials that weren't added (and that we're sorely missing), like a video download store and games (hey, contacts and simple apps would be nice too). And then there's the fact that Mac users are still left out of the party; sorry Microsoft, we're not fielding further excuses here, it's time to get your head in the game and hit Apple where it hurts. If they can develop iTunes for Windows then the largest software company in the world can develop Zune for OS X. The assumption that Mac users represent a mere fraction of consumer electronics buyers is plain wrongheaded, and ignoring the halo effect, which is drawing increasing numbers of users to the Mac platform, is actually costing Microsoft business in desktops. The fact is that these days you can't take a gadget -- even a Microsoft gadget -- very seriously unless it takes platforms other than Windows seriously. (We know the Windows fanboys in the house just winced, but deep down they probably know we're right.) And the painful part is sometimes all it means to take users seriously on other platforms is making the device mass-storage compliant.
There's also the fact that all our Zunes are virginal to this day because of the lack of other devices -- and incentive -- to share share tracks on the go. The Zune Social online network is supposed to give a boost to song sharing among Zune users, giving users the means to send along tracks on the web. But we think someone forgot to pass Microsoft the memo that millions of people have been sharing music -- DRM free music! -- for nearly a decade. In fact, it's that very online music sharing that gave the portable media market a purpose and its first dose of content, and no one's ever needed a hand from Redmond to do so. And then there are those overhyped interface tweaks, which really just amount to some eye candy, vaguely rearranged and tweaked menus, and massive home screen fonts we're sure our cataracts-ridden great aunt Gertie will have zero problem reading. We'll take 'em, but it's hardly a whole new Zune experience, if you ask us.
We'd also be remiss if we didn't point out the fact that while the new Zune lineup is priced competitively with the iPods classic and nano, technologically we still feel cheated. What's the point of a huge screen and WiFi if you can't do anything interesting with it? WiFi sharing is still a joke, there's no over the air podcast downloads, and while wireless sync is nice, but definitely not the killer app that will set the Zune apart. We're sure the eight Engadget readers that formed the Schenectady Zune Users' Group are totally stoked to be able to share and re-share tracks that can each only be played three times, but the rest of us have moved on to the concept that a WiFi-equipped portable should do start doing useful things like download new content while we're out, or at very least have a lightweight browser -- like the Archos 605 WiFi and iPod touch, to name a couple. And for our money, the new Sansa View is still the flash portable to beat for the Zunes 8 and 4; for what you're paying to get an 8GB Zune you could be getting 16GB of capacity from SanDisk -- and with a far larger screen to boot.
The first time around, we were disappointed less by the Zune's many shortcomings than by the fact that instead of creating something new, Microsoft essentially released a shoddy, hacked-together collection of white-label Microsoft products: Portable Media Center as the Zune UI; Toshiba's GigaBeat S as the Zune hardware; Windows Media Player as Zune desktop software; Urge as Zune Marketplace. Well, good on Microsoft for spending the last year rebuilding the Zune foundation and making sure to dot and cross more of the Is and Ts this time. But there's still a fundamental disconnect; Microsoft is spending all its time trying convince people to share music with Zune when the Zune team could be whipping up devices that current iPod users will actually sit up and take notice of.
For the second year running the Zune and its anti-Apple pedigree squanders its unique position to chase after the iPod-disenfranchised; it offers nothing special to ex-iPod owners, nor anything innovative to the proto-geeks looking to buy just about anything but an Apple product. It doesn't do much anything better, cheaper, or all that differently from its primary competition, and it's further behind today's leading edge devices, like the 605 WiFi and the touch, than the original Zune line was last year. When we really look at the product, perhaps FM radio aside, we can't think of a single compelling reason to recommend it to an iPod user that's ready to upgrade or switch -- and we don't even have any particular affinity for iPods.
So Zune, same place, same time in late 2008? Bring your A-game, do something new. We'll be ready.
Where was the review? What I read was a long rant. Hopefully Engadget can come out with a review for the new Zune soon.
I agree. Is it worth mentioning that, conversely to the MS stuff, nearly all the Apple products (iPhone, iPods, Leopard, new iMac, etc) have had glowing reviews here?
What is a review but a person or publication's opinion about something? What, exactly, was lacking? We covered the changes, improvements, shortcomings, and comparisons of the new hardware and Zune 2.0 software to other devices in the market.
Mike, you're wrong -- I reviewed the iPod touch and I doubt anyone thinks that was a "glowing" review. Try paying closer attention, we're very critical of Apple, just as we are of everything consumer tech related.
Perhaps they come off a little harsh on the new Zune not because they dislike the idea of a competing product to the iPod, but because they had such high hopes for it that just weren't met. It seems the complaining isn't that it's not as good as an iPod, but that it isn't better. Why settle for average?
I did not mention the iPod Touch. Nor did I say, "All Apple products." I don't want to get into a semantical war with you, or anyone, Ryan. I am an avid Engadget reader; have been for a long time. I only wanted to voice my opinion that Engadget appears to be rather harsh with MS-related news.
I'd love to be a Mac-fanboy as much as I am an MS and Linux fanboy (it's true, I thoroughly enjoy both), but I cannot afford to buy an iMac "just to play around with."
Man, when did the PC/Windows/Zune mafia get so angry and venomous? I mean really, rating down the comments of the author of the blog you're reading? That's cold.
Ryan, don't listen to these guys, we still like you.
"Try paying closer attention, we're very critical of Apple, just as we are of everything consumer tech related."
I just can't believe Ryan said that. Deep down somewhere the truth lies.
And it's just like Gizzmodo'z rating of 6/10 despite a good review. I thought Engadget would do a little better than that.
I applaud for the excellent coverage though (good going).
Ryan,
I agree that a review is someone's opinion of something. A gadget review is, however, usually a review of the device and not necessarily a commentary on the industry with a few comparisons of other devices thrown in.
I clicked through the link because I wanted to know how the device worked, not because I wondered how it compared to an ipod. I know how ipods work.
I have to say this article was accurately earlier described as being more of 'rant' than a 'review'! I honestly think you guys should do a part two to somewhat 'redeem' yourselves. Intentions aside, the article reeks of 'fanboy-ism'.
In other news, I used to really like iTunes on the PC, but recently I have started looking up alternatives because iTunes 7.5 SUCKS ON VISTA! I am not alone in this opinion (Check out the comments and ranking on the Betanews.com page for iTunes). It's gotten very slow and unresponsive over time. I really like Apple, but when they are on top in a market they act just like M$. The sit on their asses and start cranking out crappy products (PowerPC anyone? Dark days I tell you).
The Zune software (which you can get here - http://www.zune.net/en-us/products/zunesoftware/download.htm) is actually a great iTunes alternative!
It's fast a slick! The BEST feature for me has to do with PODCASTING, which was hardly covered in this review! Zune put podcasting at the forefront and makes it easy to find new podcasts and subscribe to them. It even automatically discovers the podcasts that you subscribed to with iTunes - Charming!
Pluses for Zune (Software only):
- Slick and stable
- Faster than iTunes on Vista
- Imports unprotected music and podcast from iTunes
- Easy to navigate
- You can play photo slideshows and music together
- Better than iTunes for getting at podcasts (I nearly chocked my HD because I went crazy downloading!!!)
- Did I mention fabulous for podcasting yet??? :)
- It will download podcasts from your PC, but not from the internet (plus and a minus, but mostly a plus if your PC is up to date)
Minuses for Zune (Software only):
- Large format may turn off Winamp users
- Cannot play protected music purchased in iTunes
- PC only
- I did not get CD text titles when I burnt an Audio CD :(
All in all my experience with the Zune software was very positive. In case you’re wondering, I don't have a Zune player yet, but the software is 'worth' covering on its own - it's a real gem. I’ll sure be looking at getting the 80GB model this Christmas!
You know I might think of buying one, but it doesn't supporting hooking up to a Mac. The iPod will always hook up to a P.C have to go both ways I think for the Zune, and maybe they might sell some of those
Rarely would I hear a mac person actually confess to wanting a Zune, its not worth M$'s money to invest in the mac fanbase.
I really bet that is the case. How many MAC users would actually do more than "test" a friends Zune or something. I don't mean any kind of flames or anything like that, but people that are usually Mac users are going to go with an iPod over the Zune. Probably even if the Zune was a better product. I think MS thought this as well and decided it wasn't worth their time or money to try to get into a market that doesn't want them.
It would be like marketing a Toyota to my Redneck uncle, it just isn't worth the time.
The iPod will hook up to a PC because it has to. If they didn't, there's no way it would have the market share it enjoys now.
iPhone, FTW!!!
As a Mac user and Windows user i would look at a Zune if was Mac compatible, but its not..
The Zune UI is much more slick than the UI of the iPod nano and Classic. Offering the artist engravings all the time would be cool. And now that they changed to the squircle from the D-Pad that i absolutely hated.
I've always been a Mac user and would thoroughly consider getting a Zune if it had OS X support. Mind you, we don't all have some life-time commitment to all and any Apple products.
Perhaps what's missing from this review are more detailed descriptions of the features, functionalities and user experience of this new product. Someone who has never used a Zune before wouldn't benefit much from reading this. Too much comparison with other products while not enough info on the one being reviewed. A thorough video on the new interface might not have been a bad idea either.
Wow what a review. When pictures and information started coming in about the Zune 2 it seemed like Engadget had finally got rid of their anti-Microsoft, anti-Zune sentiment but once again here we go: "Its better than the iPod but still not good enough". When will it ever be enough Engadget?
I don't think they said that it's better than the iPod.
Pretty much they say that it sucks... lots of Hype, but it doesn't offer up anything unique, just one big runner-up... Buy the 80gig for $80 next year (I just bought a Zune1 for $80 on woot.com), and it'll be a good deal.
they said it was better than the last zune, not the ipod. Zune better than iPod? ha
@dizilbdog: Don't forget that the media library is terribly portable with iTunes as well. Drag over your folder to the Mac, remove the .itl extension from the one file and viola it pulls in your library, all your ratings, etc. It's terribly simple to move between Mac and PC with iTunes. If I put everything into my Zune I'd have to rebuild my library and playlists if I wanted to go back again.
That being said the new firmware and client is realllyyy slick. I upgraded my Black 30 this morning.
PS: Where the heck is the ID3 tag editor!? Am I just blind?
"and we don't even have any particular affinity for iPods."
LMAO!
Yeah, I spit out my lunch when I read that. Who are they trying to convince, us or themselves?
I think you'll be hard pressed to actually demonstrate some finite examples of us having said something unfairly positive about an Apple product -- especially iPods -- and unfairly negative about Microsoft products. It's not some secret that we're not firm iPod believers.
I'll have to give Engadget (and Giz, for that matter) some credit. They're Zune coverage has been much more even-handed ever since the announcement of the v2 (and the firmware update for v1). They've actually had some positive things to say about the Zune.
Of course, that still doesn't change the fact that on lanch-day for the iProne- I mean, iPhone there was approximately three thousand different posts about it, each one more masturbatory than the last.
and by "they're coverage" of course I mean "their coverage".
I hate when other people do that, but I hate it even more when I do it.
Should the Zune support OSX?
I don't think it's about Microsoft ignoring the Mac user base... it's more like realistically, how many Mac users would adopt the MS product?
With all the competition and animosity between the two camps what would be the point? Perhaps the omission of an OSX could be viewed as a professional courtesy.
When I think of Microsoft, "professional courtesy" isn't at the top of the list.
I am a mac user and would consider this device! In fact, when I saw the cheap refurb units I even seriously considered it until my research showed that there is nothing that makes the Zune work on a Mac.
Therefore my short-list of media players is: an Archos 605 (for functionality) or iPod Touch (for engineering/design).
Agreed. This "review" was written by a Mac user, and if Mr. Block is a representative of the "Mac community", then it would appear that Mac support would be a complete waste.
John, I'm a long time PC user; on my desk I have a Vista machine sitting right next to the Mac on my desk. In a former career I worked for years running IT in Windows-only companies. Try not to make uninformed assumptions.
but wait.. aren't Macs incredible wonder machines because they can run OSX *and* Windows? so what's the problem? Mac users can simply use their Zunes on their Windows partitions..
Spyvie makes a good point about how many Mac users would use the Zune, but at the same time, I do see Ryan's point to MS and if they are really having the Zune be at least somewhat of an iPod competitor, they need to make their product work on the Mac. As with Ryan, I'm a Windows IT guy, but use a Mac for my personal computer and as much as I like the iPod, I can see a point in having another choice for a DAP player.
Regardless of all that, I think the Zune is missing one key piece in competing with the iPod: suport for AAC. Obviously iTunes Store purchases with DRM would not work, but think about a lot of people that use iTunes to rip their CDs. By default, it rips songs into the 128k AAC (unless you change it under Preferences).
Given a huge library of songs, it would be nice to have Zune find those songs and not convert them, but attach them to it's library, very much how iTunes can find songs.
If Zune already does this, it wasn't mentioned above. But given the listed formats that Ryan puts in his first look review, I'm assuming AAC is not supported.
OMFFFFG!! F'n software comPLETELY F'd up all of my album art and ID tags!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >
...and most importantly, it doesns't play FLAC and Ogg Vorbis.
http://flac.sourceforge.net
http://www.vorbis.com
Ogg. FLAC.
LOL. Seriously. Other than being open source fap material for uber nerd geek fanboys, nobody cares about ogg or flac.
FLAC and Ogg Vorbis...
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
You actually listen to audio into those two formats? Oh man.
Wait, maybe you're being sarcastic?
Could you guys be any more Apple-Centric? There is a ton of buzz over this product and I for one am thrilled that MS just gave me a 'new' device by upgrading the firmware. I'm glad I was an early adopter. Try a little objectivity and get off the bandwagon!
Wow... that had a decidedly negative tone to it. Maybe the Zune isn't the perfect solution for everyone, but it really seems like it is a good product. For those of us that aren't able to use an iPod, or just plain don't like them (for whatever reasons), the Zune seems to be a great alternative. I'll be picking one up this afternoon if I can find one to find out for myself how good they are.
I'm starting to get a little frustrated with the increasingly pro-Apple agenda here at engadget. As time goes by it seems like unbiased product information is becoming harder and harder to find.
just out of curiosity, what would prevent a person from being able to use an iPod? I am pretty sure they can be used with PCs, Macs, and Linux.
For the record, I highly dislike Apple, so don't think I am some Mac fanboy, I am just curious as to why a person wouldn't be able to use an iPod.
out of honest curiosity, why would you not be able to use an iPod? (but *could* use a Zune?)
Except that it looks like mickey mouse!
I have 1100 CDs and about 950 of them are ripped using WMA. I ripped them before the iPod became popular, and it took nearly 4 months to finish them all. (MP3 sound quality isn't acceptable, so WMA was my only option at the time.)
Since Apple chose to remove (not omit) WMA support from the iPod, I can't play my files, and I'm not going to go through the CD ripping process again. Plus, the audio artifacts from converting WMA->AAC are too audible for me to ignore, so conversion is absolutely out of the question. Therefore, an iPod is not an option for me.
Plus I find the whole Apple system way too closed for my taste. Granted the Zune is just about as closed a system, but at least I can play my files in just about every piece of software on Windows. You certainly can't say that about AAC.
I bet you're kicking yourself now for converting that entire collection to an extremely closed format like WMV (or AAC). Yikes. Everyone else reading this should learn the lesson his story teaches before falling into this trap yourself.
Actually I'm very glad I went with WMA instead of AAC. Very few of the pieces of software I use on a regular basis support AAC. WMA is much more widely supported.
I bought a zune30 because woot gave them away.
I am a "hater" of all things Ipod (well, the iphone is kinda cool so is the touch).
I really hate itunes.
With the zune, I feel like microsoft has taken all the bad things about the Ipod (proprietary software, limited format compatibility, etc) and released them about a year after the apple has. Oh, and they are a bit uglier too.
I was really hoping the new firmware would somehow make a revolutionary jump forward. Maybe jump up and challenge a real media library like media monkey.
Nope. Zune still sucks. I agree with engadgets statements:
we don't even have any particular affinity for iPods.
So Zune, same place, same time in late 2008?
Bring your A-game, do something new. We'll be ready.
-AD
"squircle" is the best word ever.
For me, the FM radio is enough of a difference, and I don't care for iTunes. I'd be interested to know what you base your comments about the number of Mac owners to suggest Microsoft need to support OSX, is it more than the usual 70/30 rule (Which if I remember correctly, Apple follow too) ?
Are most iPodians Mac owners, or are they using it on Windows, My guess is that the iPod was helped considerably more by bringing it to Windows, than it'd help the Zune going to OSX.
Is there some way to filter out Ryan's entries? I think I've finally had enough.
You might at least change the 'Review' in the headline to 'Editorial'. What I continue to read on this site is not how the device meets its stated goals, but how it fails to live up to the random expectations of the contributing author.
WE DON'T CARE what you want the device to do. Does it do what it is SUPPOSED to do? Sheesh.
Umm, last I checked, Engadget is an editorial blog on all things gadgets. Don't like it? There are many other blogs that care more about your opinions than actually having one. Love'em or hate'em, at least they take a position and they don't make any apologies for doing so.
Isn't a "review" basicaly an editorial? That is, the reviewers opinion of a product is being stated. Otherwise, it's just a product description.
Speaking of filters, is there a way to filter out any comment that uses the word "bias"? Because it'd be really nice to, I don't know, read comments about the actual device being reviewed instead of comments about the reviewer, or other commenters, or other commenters' moms or whatever. But that's just me. Really, few things make me sadder than thinking about people sitting somewhere, and deciding that, yes, it's is TOTALLY worth my time to log into the comments and type a rant about how this article is mac- or PC-biased.
And yes, it was totally worth my time to write this.
I have absolutely no problem if they want to editorialize - there is certainly merit in that.
When I see the word 'review', I expect to see an at least *somewhat* objective discussion of the device's pros and cons, based on what its creator has stated it is supposed to do or be. How is the interface? How does the screen look? What is the software like?
It's a well worded and well thought out opinion and/or editorial. As a review, however, it is utterly worthless. Any nugget of solid information is overwhelmed by the obvious bias and contempt.
Umm, last i checked, Engadgat contains this great comments section where people can voice their opinion on what they just read or the device or story in question. Why dont you go read a magazine, where no one can respond to what was said.
And to be fair, they are reviewing the 4 and 8 gig versions, which are great, but its not as great as the 80gig vs. the classic. I'm sorry, the 80 gig Zune annihilates it all over.
The 4 and 8, not so sure. However, it probably has better sound quality (because the nano is absolute garbage), but ill leave that up to my Shures to judge.
"Because it'd be really nice to, I don't know, read comments about the actual device being reviewed"
Well, I might make a comment about the device being reviewed, if it was actually reviewed.
There's nothing to comment on here in that department. The battery life? Uh, if I knew what it was I might say it was good or bad. Wireless Sync - is it easy? Does it work? I still don't know, and I guess I'll have to go find another site to tell me that, or wait till I get my 30 upgraded. What's the glare like now that it has a glass screen? I guess it's a trip to the store for me to find that one out.
What we got here was a 'product description' followed by several paragraphs berating Microsoft for not creating the "reviewer's" dream PMP.
This was a pretty harsh review, if it even was one. However, I'll say it's because you guys didn't have the 80gb unit. After all, the flash players aren't worth anything. Neither Apple nor Microsoft offers the best flash player and besides, a phone can hold the same amount of music. Sure there is the Touch, but that's ridiculously expensive. The real unit here is the Zune 80, which you would have to compare to the 80gb iPod classic. Clearly the Zune 80 has much better features. And why are you guys downplaying wireless sync so much? I'd say most people find that pretty nice. I'd say there are certainly enough things to recommend the Zune 80 over the iPod classic.
If I read (someplace else) you have to be connected to AC power or docked to do wireless sync. Which makes "wireless" sync utterly useless.
(FWIW, I'm an Apple fanboy and even I thought the "review" was more of a rant. A rant I agreed with, but a rant nonetheless).
Question: what does the iPod do so much better than the Zune?
You spent all your time explaining how it doesn't surpass the iPod, but you never said a damn thing about how the iPod is better than it. You complain about how little the wifi does - well, this competes with the iPod classic, not iPod touch, and that has no wifi features at all.
The Zune also has a 64% larger screen, a glass screen at that. But god forbid you mention that.
Is the Zune definitively better than the iPod? It's hard to say anything is definitively better than something else, but based on the issues YOU raised, yes it is. You didn't mention how you can't add smart playlists anymore - something that the iPod can still do, or any of the other various things that the iPod has on the Zune.
"What's the point of a huge screen and wifi if you can't do anything interesting with it?" Well, last I checked, you can play media on it, jackass. It's a PMP, not a PDA, and is nothing LIKE a PDA.
The only semivalid point you raised was that Mac users are still out in the cold, but really, from Microsoft's standpoint, Mac users don't matter. Really. If you're part of the "Mac community", as you called it, you probably don't like Microsoft. You already use an expensive Apple computer, odds are you'll use an Apple media player too, and that combined with the small market share means that it's not effective to try and target Mac users. I mean, you're a Mac user, and just read how you reviewed it. But yes, it would be nice if they still made the effort.
I was so impressed when Engadget did a side by side comparison of the Zune 80 and iPod classic, because it was actually fair, entirely facts. But now, it's just why Ryan Block thinks the Zune could have been better and because it could have been better it must be crap now. Your final paragraph is about how you can get a player with a bigger screen for the same price as a Zune 8. Well, I can get a player with a bigger screen than an iPod classic for the same price by buying a Zune.
After this, I wish I'd voted Gizmodo instead voting for Engagdet 4+ times.
Amen!
Article title should read "Better than the iPod, but could be better"
What I never understand about these reviews, is that they say things like "brings nothing new" or "out of date hardware", when compared to its actual competition (the iPod Classic 80GB) it offers Wifi (No Wifi on iPod), it offers Radio tuning (Not on the classic unless you dump ~$50 on an external tuner thing), a larger screen (3.2" vs 2.5"), and a lot more.
How is that behind the pack leader? Leave the Touch out of this, $399 for 16GB, .3 inch larger screen, and a web browser is the new wave of engineering?
I just don't understand this review and some of the others that say the Zune 2 offers nothing new, right after saying it offers new things. "It offers things that make it great, like over the air Wifi Syncing and sharing tracks from your player without a computer, 80GB of storage, larger screen". "Its still behind the flagship iPod".
I just don't get it. I hope someone can clarify it for me. I don't own a Zune yet, at least not a Gen 1, I had an iPod 5G which I am selling. My Zune 2 comes tomorrow. The reason I am switching is because I am on my third iPod in two years because they just randomly fail, and 2.5" screen is just too small for videos.
So I am selling it, moving to a larger screen, more storage, and Wifi if I want to use it. Outside of the storage, the current 80GB iPod classic offers none of those.
HOW IS THIS "TECHNOLOGICALLY CHEATING" PEOPLE?
Don't misquote me. I didn't say it was behind the iPod classic. I said it was far behind leading-edge hardware -- which it is.
Ryan, you should be comparing it to its competitor. The Touch, while advanced, is not its competitor. Compare it to the Classic and Nano, and not apples entire library. Leave the Touch out of it. As far as were concerned, in this field, it doesn't exist.
And its funny that all your comments are lowest ranked. People are really pissed at you. I recommend you re-do your review. Weren't you involved in the Leopard vs. Vista feature breakdown, where people annihilated you there as well?
Oh my god, do you even read your own reviews? I DID NOT misquote you, you were just so busy bashing something you probably barely tested to notice what you were writing.
Direct Quote:
"We'd also be remiss if we didn't point out the fact that while the new Zune lineup is priced competitively with the iPods classic and nano, technologically we still feel cheated."
Now, given the ye olde style writing device known as context, you just compared the new Zune's to the current Classic and Nano, and said that you were "technologically cheated" by comparison.
If you did not mean to associate technologically cheated with a comparison between the Zune and Classic, I suggest a rewrite.
I think that what Microsoft (& Apple) are going to see are more people like me: ditching their iPod but going to a "nontraditional" device (i.e. phone) as the storage capacity becomes greater & the user interface becomes more robust (SE's new Walkman phones w/ the PS3 layout are pretty good).
Sorry MS- you missed your chance. I'd focus on things you do well. You know, like wireless mice.
This review is definitely not biased in the slightest.
Of course it is not. If it were this tirade-- I mean review would go on and on about the disregard or the Mac community, and no significant improvements, and compare it too what any idiot would recognize is not its main competition and a bunch of other nonsense. But we can clearly see that none of that is mentioned here, no.
I can't beleive I just wasted my time reading that garbage. You call that a review? You guys really don't anything new, ever. Same gripes about nobody to share song with - Where is the song sharing innovation offered by Apple? Same wisecracks about the colors - brown, green, citron, you don't like it buy another fukcin color.
All in all, it appears that APPL diehards are a bit scared by this release and must feel let down that their favorite mp3 player company never treated them so well almost a decade of buying their shiet.
I'm just happy that my APPL stock went up so nicely last month so that I can use the money to buy the new Zune for myself and all my friends.
Engaydget
yeah i dont know why i kept thinking it was appl. the first time i typed it i typed aapl but it didnt make sense. it doesnt matter anymore anyways, i sold it all. now i have to remember pot, sbux, siri, fslr, bidu, cea... haha aapl appl all the same to me, all i know is that i was up 32%
although its a little bulky i might get one for christmas, but i must say i will be holding tight to my sales receipt in case steve decides to pull a movie rental option on mac world for itunes, one of my friends got one already and his telling me that the screen its not as bright as the nano and also the battery its more like 3 hour instead of the 4 they said, also the touch pad has some kind of lag, but i like trying things myself and then returning them if i dont like them, he also points out wifi sync its not that great because speed depands on the distance from your computer and is no where close to the speed of a usb cable, he says he can see clear now why apple never pick that up,
I can see where the wireless sync can be a drag. Such as when you're in a hurry and just want to sync something fast. And there are times (which for me is the scenario i'd be using it in) is when my zune is sitting in my car and i pull up into the garage or into the parking spot next to my apt when i get home from work, and it automatically syncs with my computer (assuming it's in range of my wireless network, which I haven't tested yet) so that when i leave for work the next morning my zune is ready to go.
I can't say I'm really surprised by this.
My favourite parts were (in no particular order):
The token positive paragraph or two that I'm sure the author thought made this an impartial review.
Comparing the device to the iPod Touch, when they are completely different devices catering to completely different customers and not direct competitors at all.
The new Zune interface is "just some eye candy" while Coverflow is revolutionary somehow.
Maybe I'm reading that paragraph wrong, or the author came across awkwardly, but did you guys really just say that the Zune's online music sharing network is bad because you can illegally share music over Bittorent and P2P networks? Wow.
Complaining about the touchpad because the reviewer personally just used the d-pad functionality more. Because we all know that giving the user more options is a terrible thing.
You feel "technologically cheated" because the Zune is priced competitively with the iPod Nano and Classic and has more features than both? The things you are complaining about are valid (insofar as a wishlist of features for a product that just released hours ago can be valid in a review), but these are things that could easily be added later in a firmware update. I don't think the same could be said about the iPods' lack of hardware features.
The killer feature for me is the subscription service. I like to discover music. It is too expensive to do on an ipod.
Wow ... your Zune review was doomed because it wouldn't work with your Mac?
The software is 100% better this time around ... on the PC and firmware on the Zune.
Reason to buy Zune vs. iPod:
1. unlimited downloads for $15 per mo ... that's a BIG plus.
2. The new Zune Marketplace is way easier to use than iTunes ... all the way from making a play list to downloading. Keep it simple. The 3 column interface is awesome.
3. Wireless sync is sweet. If i get out to my car and realize forgot to sync i can do it from my drive way.
4. No matter how silly you think the 3 play share is there are people out there that use it several times a week.
5. 3.2 inch screen vs smaller.
Your review was just an editorial rant which isn't something we expect from Engadget ... you didn't talk about the new marketplace or the functionality of easy to use menu system (which is by far the best working/logical/easy to learn on any MP3 player i've seen to date).
So the devices aren't innovative. MS got into this real late in the game. It is very stiff competition to the 80gb iPod classic and the awkward iPhatty. Cut the ZUne some slack dude.
The iPod Classic is called that now for a reason: it's a half-decade-old design that's on its' way OUT.
The Zune is still struggling to compete with 2003, and just around the time that it finally does the Classic will be discontinued and all iPods will be later versions of the Touch.
Where is your God now?
Exactly, this is old technology and is also the Microsoft history, nothing new, nothing amazing, ever...
Oh, and I think it's hilarious that they did a side-by-side with the new Nano... have you felt the lack of quality in the new Nano? Just barely put the slightest amount of pressure on the screen and you feel like your going to prevent the disc inside from spinning, while at the same time letting the lcd bleed all over the place. Now do the same for the new Zune haha fukin solid as a brick.
Umm, I don't believe there are any moving parts inside a Nano, so press away. I haven't ever even seen a Zune, so I don't have any point of comparison.
lol, yeah. but if there were....
Uhh where they heck was the review, i personally love the software update, tell us about the improvements on the device, its got to have some positives about it, let us know, this writing feels like a scolding from a parent who expects way too mush from a child. "Oh you got a B+, well it just aint good enough!!""
I just wish they would release this in the UK.
It's funny, when I look at the list of Zune features it just seems like definitively the best MP3 player on the market today. This review really does sound, like the poster above said, "Its better than the iPod but still not good enough."
The new interface is useful and interesting. It is easier to navigate that the touch, although it misses a bit of the "Wow" feel of Apple product(Ironic, i know) but at the same time, the wimpy storage capacity of the iPod Touch makes it an entirely useless product to serious music listeners, and only serious music listeners are going to spend that kind of cash on a player. I love the idea of the touch, but it's a bit difficult to operate while on the run compared to the classic pod, and just doesn't have the storage.
The real comparison should be between the zune and the classic. Again, I don't see any area that the ipod can claim an advantage in except for smart playlist support, which I have no use for. I know lots of engadget readers do, but I don't know anyone in the real world who does. Throw in the wireless syncing, which is a huge convenience and well implemented, as well as a better screen (again, I'm comparing the zune 80 and the ipod classic, which is see as the only two choices for a dedicated music fan) and I can't think of a reason not to recommend the new Zune.
I've been using Windows Media player to organize my music since I upgraded to Vista, and it responds quicker and looks nicer than itunes. From what I've seen, the Zune marketplace is more attractive to my consuming habits (massive ammounts of music for a low monthly fee) compared to itunes, but honestly the only music I've ever bought online was from emusic, so i'm not really influenced in either direction by the market integration.
The zune also has radio and the social, but I don't count either of those as a feature. That said, I'm much more likely to occasionally listen to a tune on the radio than to care about a dedicated ID3 tag editor.
My ipod has been dead for a while now and I've been getting by on the 2 gigs of storage on my DS, constantly swaping songs in and out. After Christmas I'll be buying a new player and it looks like it's going to be a zune.
I really liked the part of the review where you compared battery times, lag times, the new wifi syncing, and some different video codecs on it. Oh wait, this review was just whiny shit.
IMHO, both the Giz and Engadget had really nasty reviews of the Zune that seemed to play up the negatives and play down the positives. They also seemed to have it competing with a magical, non-existent iPod Touch 160GB.
I would love for OTA marketplace buying and remote synch, but one thing at a time. The _hardware_ is finally in good shape, with the exception of no Bluetooth A2DP support.
I didn't read anything in the "review" about the sound quality of the new Zune. I mean, it IS an audio player isn't it? So isn't the sound quality coming out of an audio player.... important?
People may love the interface, glamour, etc. of the iPods, but frankly, the sound quality coming out of them sucks....
So tell me engadget, how does the Zune stack up in terms of sound quality?
the problem with sound is it's so subjective and depends on a large degree on prior experience with other equipment, headphones, music, encodings...time of day, hours listened and personal preference. I think the only way of testing and getting any sort of real answer is doing it yourself, unfortunately.
Yeah, I thought the same thing after reading the "review". I dunno, I just kind of figured a review of a device that is meant mainly to play audio would have some mention of the sound quality.
Who cares about sound quality.. Don't you know that the main reason to buy an mp3 player is for bling?
What an unprofessional review! This "review" glosses over the real improvements to this line of products that make them compelling. Really, I was the first to laugh at the horrible Zune 30 (as it's now called) and pretty much gave up on Zune. This revamp somewhat surpasses my expectations (not hugely, but still) and actually has me wanting one.
So far, based on what I've read, my only gripes are:
1. The Zune 4/8 should be the Zune 8/16
2. The flash zunes should have bigger screens and less black bevel.
3. The Marketplace should get movie rentals (but that's not a device issue)
4. Should support streaming music to media extenders.
real improvements? The one improvement is the squircle... THAT IS IT. The new Zune software is horrible, the forums are awash with tons of people who have lost their entire music library because of upgrading. The font is bigger, but the interface still has 1-2 second transitions between screens, very annoying once you've gotten past the "ooh pretty colors" stage and actually start using it.
Engadget nailed it on the head, MS had better roll up their sleeves and start offering up something with a little bit of innovation. As it is, these will be selling on woot.com for $80 next year.
So... it's like the first gen iPod nano, except with wireless?
... Yeah, we Mac users won't want it anyway. ;)
God damn you readers are picky. I mean really, holy crap. Seriously, if you figure out a paragraph or two into the article that you don't like it, DON'T READ IT.
Did you pay to read this article? No.
The people on this site such as Ryan and crew spend THEIR time writing these articles for YOU. If you don't like the articles, leave. End of story.
No one is forcing a gun to your head to read the articles on this blog. (I hope... if they are, we're coming for you. Hold tight.)
Low rank me if you'd like, I know I'm right, and so do you.
the beauty of blogged reviews on places like engadget, is that you CAN add your own two cents, and review the review.
I'm still rocking a Sansa e250, and don't have a dog in this fight, but objectively, it's easy to see the review was not objective.
Wes,
I completely agree with you on both points. Reviewing a review is a good feature, and the article was biased.
However, once one or two people chime in on the article being biased, there wouldn't be another 70 comments on it.
Eh. Whatever. People will do what they want. I'll do what I want and skip over the comments. Easy enough!
are the guys at Microsoft all color blind or are they really the big NERDS that apple like to portray them as...the color is horrible ...how a COBALT BLUE ...and calling the next verision of the software COBALT ...the new music platform from Micrsoft....get rid of that PUKE color ...what person would want that color ..... PUKE PUKE PUKE
Is it possible for you iPodiots to describe a color as anything other than a bodily function? Seriously. Jesus Christ, grow the fuck up.
Three things that the Zune offers that the iPod doesn't:
1. FM radio. Yes, it's a big deal. And it's such an easy thing to add, there's no reason Apple hasn't done so yet.
2. Better sound quality. Yes, I've had both. Yes, I've compared them side by side. The Zune simply sounds better.
3. Sturdier construction. I dropped my first iPod on carpet from a height of about 4 feet and it stopped working. Apple "repaired" it, but it still never worked as well after that. I've dropped my Zune on the concrete floors in the building where I work several times and it hasn't missed a beat. In fact, if I didn't know what I was looking for, I would be hard-pressed to find the tiny little scratches it picked up.
Is the Zune as "cool" looking as the iPod? No, of course not. But then again, I'm not some fragile emo poseur asshole who needs to have the coolest looking gadgets. For me, it's more important that they just work right.
2. Better sound quality. Yes, I've had both. Yes, I've compared them side by side. The Zune simply sounds better.
-------
Different models have different sonic signatures. The 'iPod' is a family of products.
One really nice thing about the FM radio is that a lot of gyms have TVs setup that broadcast their audio over an FM signal. If you get tired of music and want to watch whatever is on the TV you just tune your Zune to whatever station and you can follow what is on TV.
I am a Mac user and an iPod owner, an I am perfectly happy with both. I don't think I'd consider a Zune as I don't see (if it were available for the Mac) what different it would offer from the iPod, but I think the Zune is a solid product and very viable for those folks who won't do the Apple products. believe
me, I know that there are Mac users, and there is everybody else! : )
I have two questions that I hope folks can answer: Some people say they don't like iTunes, what don't you like? I'm asking because I don't really have a point of reference as to what is good or bad about it. The other thing is FM radio on the iPod. Some reviews say this is a differentiator for the Zune, but my iPod has FM radio. It came with a remote control that the headphones plug into that provides FM radio. Do they not make that any more?