New Zune review (part 2): upgrade, hardware, software and Social
By Ryan Block 
posted Nov 18th 2007 3:21PM
posted Nov 18th 2007 3:21PM
What we were hoping for was that the portable media world might be in store for another Sony / Nintendo upset. Remember in the 90s how Sony and Nintendo's partnership went awry, and Sony, totally sick of Nintendo completely owning the game console space, brought out the original PlayStation? Before the console's second generation was through Sony had more market share than they knew what to do with. Sony upped Nintendo's game with the PlayStation, then upped their own with the PlayStation 2 -- and took over.
If Sony could do the impossible and topple the infallible Nintendo of old, surely Microsoft, the world's largest technology company, could make at least make a dent in Apple's armor. Yeah, the first-gen product is important, but the second gen product is crucial, because if you can't up your game -- and everyone else's -- you're just another player. This year, Microsoft really had to make the Zune count. Read on to judge for yourself whether they did.
The first generation Zune, as we all know, was little more than a slew of off the shelf hardware and software Microsoft cobbled together in a rush to make a play for the annual holiday gold rush. (Peep our original Zune review here.) And the interesting part is, all things considered, it really wasn't bad at all. No one thought it was "done", but it was a lot better than some of the other PMC-based devices we'd seen to date. This year Microsoft brought a slew of new Zune products (and enhancements) to the table, including two new players (flagship 80GB and the flash model), new device software (which runs on all devices), new desktop software, and a new service (Zune Social, a music-oriented social network reminiscent of Xbox Live).
Device software
Yeah, we know Microsoft technically skipped right past device software v2.0 and jumped to 2.2, but the update is the best place to start since it affects the most users and devices. Microsoft won some well-deserved brownie points for ensuring all Zune players new and old can run the new firmware, meaning that for now your old Zune will have feature parity with the new hardware.
So here's the deal with the device software: it adds some crucial bits (many of which we expected the first time), takes away some minor but important things, and leaves the other 90% largely unchanged. First, the stuff Zune 2.0 takes away:
- Song flagging
- The five star rating system
- The language menu
- MPEG-4 and H.264 playback support
- Podcasting support
- Sync over WiFi (which we'll get to later)
Interface and apps
As for the interface, there's almost nothing to say there, either. Microsoft prettied a few things up, but there were very few substantive UI changes -- nearly everything was cosmetic. The main menu is now in an amusingly massive font; the Community menu is now the Social (and it doesn't sleep when looking for devices, anymore), which is also now listed above FM. The cursor has more of a glow, but users now also have one more click to get to the enable / disable WiFi option (which is pretty annoying -- turning WiFi on and off should as close to a root-level menu option as possible, if you ask us),
Browsing music is largely the exact same experience. We still prefer the Zune's twist interface to just about everything else out there, including our beloved SanDisk Sansa, but that didn't stop us from hoping that Microsoft would make some significant changes this time around and take the concept to the next level. So you could say we were let down in that department. The only other things of interest that have changed is the ability to disable display of the album name when browsing by artist, the removal of track flagging and the five star rating system (which is now blank, heart, or broken heart, and totally reminds us of Zelda), and the addition of micro-sized album cover art up top when twisting horizontally through albums and tracks.
And unfortunately for the Zune team, Apple made some significant improvements in their products' UIs since last year. In fall of 2006 the Zune twist UI pretty much categorically trumped the iPod's, but it's been a long year, and while Microsoft basically stayed basically at a standstill, the iPod interface got a much needed and much-improved redesign. (We'll leave the iPod touch and iPhone out of this, although we do think those devices' media apps handily outclass the iPod classic and nano.) Deciding whose UI is better is wholly subjective, but our feeling is that while we prefer the twist UI concept, the iPod now has more polish.
Still, it makes you wonder why Microsoft didn't try a little harder on that. For example, iPhone with Cover Flow was announced shortly after the first Zune, and browsing your music by album art is quite the novelty that would have been right at home on the Zune. Or why not fill out some of the utilitarian functions the iPod still doesn't do, like add a recently played tracks list, or the ability to delete tracks on your player? And how about the ability to make more than one on the go playlist? Microsoft could have really gone to town here.
The Zune also isn't up to speed on many of the apps and extras other media players have bundled. Besides the obvious omission of content downloads over the air like the Archos 605, there are no games for the Zune, nor is there a PIM app. Not that we do a lot of data organizing on our MP3 players, but the iPod does go the extra mile with mini-apps for calendars and contacts, multiple clock types (world time, alarms, and a stopwatch that even logs data), notes / text reader, and, of course, games. When it comes to the value-adds the Zune is still a non-starter.
WiFi sharing
Another part to get overhauled is the WiFi music sharing feature; most notably, shared songs are no longer limited to three days (but they are still limited to three plays), and now they can also be re-shared without purchase. But there are caveats. Like despite the fact that you can send and receive podcasts via WiFi, you still can't download them over the air. (Neither the iPod touch nor the iPhone are capable of this out of the box, either, although there are 3rd party apps that fill the gap.)
There is one upshot to podcast sharing, though: if you receive an audio podcast from a friend it won't be three-play DRMed the way shared songs are. (Say, do we smell some tracks-shared-as-podcast hacks coming on?) But there's a pretty big downside to podcast sharing, too. Microsoft separates audio and video podcast content, and for whatever reason video podcasts can't be shared. At all. Why Microsoft differentiates sharing between video and audio and podcast content is entirely beyond us. And another irritating and baffling problem: you can't send or receive tracks with Zunes of different firmware versions. Just can't, sorry. If whomever you're sharing with didn't want to upgrade their software, well, tough noogies, you just can't exchange music until they upgrade (or you downgrade).
Part of us wonders, though, do any of these WiFi sharing problems really even matter? Hear us out. We don't know about you, but in the last year not one of our Zunes has ever gotten busy with another Zune in a public place; most of us have never even seen another Zune out there. It could well be years before enough Zunes are floating around out there that the whole sharing thing isn't just a total writeoff. So maybe that's what we need to do here -- just totally write off the sharing.
Hardware
This year Zune hardware underwent three significant changes: the flagship player was upgraded to 80GB of storage and thinned / lightened, there's the addition of the two flash players, and all new devices make use of the Zune Pad, a four-way d-pad combined with a touch sensor, so that users may click or sweep in four directions. (Selection is still done by pressing the center.) We'll tackle these hardware changes one by one.
As we mentioned before, Microsoft neglected to send along a Zune 80 for us to test, so we can't comment so much on that device's hardware, although we have spent some real time with the Zune 8. First, the screen size: while the flash Zune's 1.8-inch screen isn't all that much smaller than the nano's 2-incher, when you're watching video on a screen this small every fraction of an inch counts. And when you realize the like the SanDisk Sansa View has comparably massive 2.4-inch screen you'll feel all the more cheated. Of course, the upshot of a smaller QVGA display is that that the menus look friggin amazing against the larger screened devices. Don't get us wrong, we'll take the full-size Zune's 3.2-inch QVGA display over the iPod classic's 2.5-inch display any day, but since it's QVGA any way you cut it, the menus and on-screen effects tend to look worse the larger the screen gets.
As for the Zune Pad, we turned it off. It's a fine enough idea, the whole sweeping back and forth thing, but we're sticklers for tactility and there's little reason to sweep when clicking the squircle sides tends to work better than the pad's touch sensing. Besides the Zune Pad just not feeling quite right (sweeping motions didn't predictably correspond to cursor movement), it's also worth mentioning that our experience with the Zune Pad wasn't entirely bug free, either. Even with touch sensitivity turned off, clicking left or right with a second thumb resting (but not pressing) on the opposite side of the Pad resulted in scrolling the reverse direction. We're not even kidding. (It took us a while to figure that one out, so if your Zune ever scrolls the wrong way, make sure no other fingers are touching the pad.) And yes, even despite all this we prefer the simple, tactile 4-way d-pad to most -- if not all -- of the other hardware interfaces out there, especially the iPod's clickwheel. (Of course, given our druthers we'd just move entirely to touchscreen media interfaces since they're far more conducive to that kind of task.)
Sound quality was fine, nothing to write home about. We don't even test with stock headphones anymore, they're almost always a joke. And any audio nerd worth his or her weight in vinyl will tell you that most devices are designed well enough by now that your cans and the bitrate of your tracks are likelier to affect sound quality than the hardware. Some Zune users have reported an inordinate amount of noise coming from the drive in the Zune 80, but we did our tests on the Zune 8, and had no problems -- things sounded exactly as they should with 192Kbps MP3s and our reference Shures.
Desktop software
If you want to get down with the new Zune player it's impossible not to notice the new Zune desktop software. Partly because your fresh-from-the-box second-gen Zune is disabled from playing any of its pre-bundled content until it's activated with this software, but mostly because there's not another piece of media playing software out there that anywhere near resembles the new Zune 2.0 desktop app.
This time around Microsoft's traded in the stack-filled content view from WMP11 / Urge-cum-Zune 1.0 for a much more list-oriented interface. We think it's a lot better. The ability able to sort by tracks you dislike is also good for quickly finding music you want remove from your Zune or library, although it'd still be better be preferable to delete it on the go so you don't have to think about doing that later. The layout is, for our money, far better than Zune 1.0, which was muddy and tried to do too much at once. The new Zune app is far simpler and easier, although in editing it down Microsoft left out some essentials, like ID3 tag editing. Frankly, the company would do well to consolidate its efforts and bundle its best of breed audio app with Windows boxes. There's just no reason to make people choose between WMP10 and Zune, especially with Urge dead and gone.
Wireless sync is a welcome addition, and definitely something we wish more portable media did, no doubt. You can't set it up without plugging in though, but the process was fairly painless, and the system supports almost all kinds of WiFi encryption. Just like turning wireless on and off, though, we wish it wasn't buried two menus deep.
Another new nicety is the now playing screen, which builds up a tiled background based from your album art. Zune Marketplace hasn't undergone too many changes, except that it's a little less visually overwhelming than before, making browsing a little easier. And instead of the semi-vague way Apple tags iTunes Plus tracks, just expecting everyone to know what that even means, DRM-free tracks in the Marketplace are simply marked MP3 -- a lot more to the point, and appreciated.
The other notable additions to the software tie into other new services: Podcasting and Zune Social. Podcasting is as simple as you'd expect: search for your podcast (or browse by topic / genre), then add it to your subscription list and download recent episodes. The only real issue we saw here was that this podcast directory was missing a lot of images, and plenty of shows aren't yet filled in. Of course, that will get better with time. As for the Zune Social integration with the desktop app, well, there isn't much. Microsoft obviously wants to make the Zune Social a web-based experience, so besides seeing incoming messages from other Zune users, everything is funneled to the Zune Social site.
Zune Social
The big story this week was that J Allard and his crew want to integrate Microsoft's device-centric services, like Xbox Live and Zune Social, into something a little more cohesive. If you've given Zune Social a shot and know a thing or two about Xbox Live, this won't surprise you at all. Zune Social is Xbox Live re-envisioned for a browser instead of a console, with music replacing games. Ok, maybe that doesn't sound very similar at all, but the touches are all over it. If you use the same Windows Live ID as your Xbox Live account, your Zune Social account will come pre-populated with your Xbox Live friends. And the same as Live, you can see what those friends are doing (in the form of recently listened to tracks), send messages, show off your favorite and recently listened to music, and so on.
It's not without issues, though. It's irritating that the one cross-platform aspect of the Zune experience -- the social music site -- works for crap in Firefox. (We didn't even try it in Safari or Konqueror or anything else.) The Flash interface loads all wonky like and the audio didn't always play. Also, when we listened to music on our device and synced back to the software, nothing changed over on our profile -- which was kind of the whole point of Zune Social, right? Oh, and what's with the fact that you can't actually use the word "Zune" in your user status?
Zune Social is a fine novelty and diversion, and might one day make a compelling extension to Zune -- especially when you can do things with Zune Social FROM your Zune device, and not just a desktop -- but for music nerds it just won't replace or even really expand on powerful discovery sites we like to use to find new artists, like RCRD LBL, Hype Machine, and Critical Metrics.
Wrap-up
The market leader takes it from all sides, and this year's Zune fixes many of the problems the first Zune suffered -- meaning those waiting on the sidelines for the Zune to improve will want to take a second look. But in many regards, a lot of these upgrades -- like H.264 and MPEG-4 support -- could (and should) have been rolled out much sooner to make the first Zunes more attractive over the course of the last year. There just wasn't any need to make first-gen users wait for second-gen hardware to get something as basic as podcasting support. And given the ever-so-minor tweaks to the UI, we just get the general feeling of Zune 1.5 -- not 2.0. The statement we think they're trying to make, though, is that between the interface and hardware, which got decent (but not drastic) upgrades, and the overhauled and rewritten software, Microsoft is on track to what the Zune team probably originally envisioned for the product. The only problem? This product isn't ahead of the curve, and consumer expectations aren't the same as they were when the product launched last year. You don't get ahead by playing catch-up.
Granted, there are numerous things the Zune can do that the iPod can't -- just like the iPod does numerous things the Zune can't. (And don't even get us started about players like the View, which can be had for less than a Zune 8 or an 8GB iPod nano, yet has twice the capacity.) But we don't see the peripheral features on either side like WiFi song sharing or games as being key differentiators; as everyone and their mother (literally) gets a portable media device, it's becoming a matter of familiarity, and the fact is that statistically most people are familiar with using an iPod. The same familiarity that keeps the hordes of mainstream users from making any drastic changes to their technology habits will keep them from tossing in the iPod / iTunes towel so quickly.
What that means for Zune is that if Microsoft wants to take some chunks -- not chips -- out of Apple's market share, they're going to have to out-iPod the iPod. They have to come up with truly compelling reasons to change. Now it's not just about having a nano killer, it's about having a touch killer and an iPhone killer too, since those devices are selling like hotcakes and pumping up the iBrand. While we've got to give it to Microsoft for not losing vision on the Zune and doing their best to master the basics, the reality is that the vertically-integrated media player game is one Apple's been playing since 2001, and any competitor, be it MSFT, SanDisk, iriver, or whomever, are really going to have to pull out all the stops if they want to thin that lead. A game-changing device is not what we feel we've got in Zune 2.0.
So as we said before: same place, same time in late 2008? Bring your A-game, Zune, and we'll be ready.
I love my Zune 80.
@Ryan Block:
"There's just no reason to make people choose between WMP10 and Zune, especially with Urge dead and gone."
Um, maybe you haven't been updated about this, but there's a WMP 11 out there, you know.
I still find it to be the best media management/playback program, because it:
1) supports a ton of devices and online stores
2) has a beautiful graphical UI
3) supports add-ons ( http://wmplugins.com/ )
4) fully works in the Windows Taskbar
5) has tons of visualizations (look at this! : http://www.istartedsomething.com/20070831/psychedelia-wmp-visualization/ )
6) simple to make playlists
7) many media playback enhancement (Now Playing > Enhancements > Show Enhancements)
I can go on and on. But it's #1 in my head. Far better than iTunes, and just marginally better than ZMP.
Now if only Microsoft could combine the fluid UI of ZMP, and the graphical beauty of WMP 11.
That would be the ULTIMATE media program.
michael, I think that's what he's saying, microsoft should combine the two since they're both good programs, but zune users *have* to use zmp even though they might like windows media.
Michael... I'm not trying to oust you or anything, cause I too like WMP 11, I think WMP in general is a great program...
But...
For managing music...
I think Amarok is the best (IMO Hands-down) music player... the only real downside to it is that it's Linux-BSD-Solaris (any of those non-proprietary OSS's, or OSX with an X11 Layer) only...
Amarok may not support as many stores... but, it will support ANY player (cept' the Zune of course), some with a little work... but it gets it done.
So... yeah...
A matter of opinion... but, Amarok is in alot of opinion THE killer-app when it comes to music playing.
GR
where did you get your zune 80 i can't find one in stores anywhere?
All the Zune-ecstatic astroturfing here is fine and good (Microsoft perfected the art after all), but if you want some *real* perspective on the new Zune, specifically the new desktop software, check any of the online Zune forums, where the new desktop software is being met with digital torches and pitchforks, from the Zune faithful no less. Sounds like things have been seriously dumbed down, when they work at all. Well played, Microsoft, well played.
Vote me down, but it's true.
@Quix:
If you don't even care at all about Zune, why'd you bother commenting?
And yes, while the Zune is dumbed down in features, I find it very much easier to find music, sync music, and do what I need to do.
For everything else, there's WMP 11. If only MS could just put those two together.
Compare both to iTunes, and they win. Seriously, iTunes is by far a really junky player. It amazes me that Apple made that hideous thing.
And while there are complaints, there are obviously praises about the software. A quick new release could fix a few problems in no time.
So does Apple pay you to troll around on Zune sites and bring up the worst, or what? Because that's really sad.
actually, this review hits the nail pretty much on the head, as do these first comments. That has to be a first.
- zmp1.x was good at organising your music library, but horrible at synching
- zmp2 is good at searching / playing / synching, but useless for organising / tag editing. It also lost the ability to create custom/dynamic playlists - which was a big loss for a lot of zune users.
- overall the experience of using my zune30 is a lot nicer and streamlined now than it was before, i'd say it's up there with itunes.
- because of the lack of id3 tag editing, a separate app is needed to edit tags. I'm using Helium (www.helium-music-manager.com) to manage, as it actually saves tags back to the mp3s, which some other players do not (ahem)
- zmp2 also lost the ability to transcode music to wma when synching, so i now use db power amp to transcode to wma10 pro (which the zune supports natively, zmp1 used to use wma9 iirc).
if ms can up their game with zmp2, and give us regular updates, bringing back some of the features from zmp1, i think we will all be happy puppies, but as it is the totally re-writen zmp is a good starting point.
"Compare both to iTunes, and they win. Seriously, iTunes is by far a really junky player. It amazes me that Apple made that hideous thing."
Apple actually didn't create iTunes, at least not initially. They bought "SoundJam MP" from "Cassady & Greene" and have been building upon that base. Myself, I like iTunes quite a bit, though certainly have some quibles with it too. I should also note that I run it on a Mac, so perhaps it works better on the Mac than it does in Windows.
Have they added gapless playback on the Zune 2?
Zune FTW
I really hope not.
Not because I hate Microsoft, they make some great products: Excel is one of my favorite programs ever (although it does still bite me on occasion), SQL Server, Exchange, all pretty good. Although I wouldn't say they are the greatest innovators in the world, they are good at persistently following through until they finally get there.
But Microsoft are a SOFTWARE company, so why do they make Zune (and Xbox)? Because there are HARDWARE companies that do not use their software "standards" and therefore pay them a fee on every device sold; as they are used to in the PC market, were used to in the PDA market, and are becoming used to in the mobile phone market.
I like the fact that HARDWARE companies like Apple create their own vertically integrated system that happen to run on Windows or Mac OSX, and ignor Microsoft's "standards".
Does anyone think Microsoft would've bothered with Zune if Apple included WMA playback in iPods? It must irk them that the hardware in iPods has been capable of decoding and playing WMA since the first versions but Apple choose to disable it, and ignor the licensing of it for iTunes. Instead they use AAC, the modern successor to MP3.
Diversity is good for consumers, having Zune 'win' here will just mean Microsoft dominating more stuff ... and that can't be good for anyone.
"But Microsoft are a SOFTWARE company, so why do they make Zune (and Xbox)?"
For better or for worse, they're out there to make money...
"Does anyone think Microsoft would've bothered with Zune if Apple included WMA playback in iPods?"
I don't think it would have made much difference at all, really. Barely anyone uses it, and even if they threw support onto the ipod very few people would care. WMA may be decent, but there are really better alternatives. MP3 is the widest spread, and if you want the best sound quality to file size there are better options there too.
@Vanillacide
Why would you hope against the Zune doing well? If you don't like it you could at least hope for it to have an influence on the iPod's pricing. And why shouldn't Microsoft make the Xbox, it's incredibly successful. All we can hope for is that the Zune is as successful in the PMP market as the Xbox is in the console market.
"And why shouldn't Microsoft make the Xbox, it's incredibly successful."
By what standard do you consider the Xbox "incredibly successful"? Because from a business perspective (you know, that whole "making money" thing) the Xbox is one of the biggest failures in the digital world. Aside of a quarter or two, it has been nothing but a financial black hole that MS have pumped billions in and have yet to make any money on.
Popular (mostly) among the people using it? Oh yes, very successful at that. But as a business model, the whole Xbox operation is a $5 billion dollar failure thus far…
(not to say I disagree with the general point that competition for the iPod is a good thing. It is, no matter who it comes from)
@Vanillacide
I don't think anything you said made any sense. Period.
@JDizzle
I like competition and choice, strong Zune is a good thing; players from Creative etc good thing too. Zune as the only player on the market (because it won) = bad thing. Which is why I didn't say I hope it doesn't do well, I said that I hope it doesn't "win" (from the FTW comment above mine).
My point was that Microsoft make me laugh as officially a 'software' business they've started doing hardware in markets where their software has not won (i.e. games and music players), which ironically was a strategy they used to ridicule. You won't see them doing hardware where their software has won, like PCs or to some degree mobile phones.
@vanillacide
They are failing with the Xbox 360? I think you are mistaken. Maybe you are just thinking of the RRoD, but that has not, in the least slowed their sales. The 360 has a huge sales lead on the PS3 overall and *since* the PS3 has launched. If the 360 was not there, gamers would have just a choice between a PS3 and a Wii... how in the world would that be good? The NPD gives a clear picture of console sales that you cannot dispute.
Your hardware/software grumbling is just nonsense. Why would Microsoft enter as a competitor in the PC manufacturing business when it is essentially a partner with virtually almost every PC manufacturer? The same goes with the mobile platform.
They don't have any major partners in the portable media or gaming industries that could mount a serious run at taking the market share. The last console to have anything MS based in it was the Dreamcast. There are a few pmp's that run Windows software but none that can pose a threat to the iPod. MS felt, in both markets, to make a run at it they had to enter themselves. It makes complete sense if they want to expand their business (and why wouldn't they) that they will have to start developing some hardware.
@farukates
The Xbox is one of the biggest failures in digital electronics history? If you are really going to argue profitability look at the competition. Sony is bleeding a lot more $$ on the PS3. The Wii is profitable, but the technology is essentially the same as a Gamecube with motion sensing. That isn't a knock on the Wii, but it is the honest truth.
The 360 has become profitable, and with the exception of the 1 billion dollar write-off, (which doesn't mean they actually spent it), the product has been very strong in sales all year. The entertainment division, which includes the 360 and the Zune, has gone green and is projected to continue to do so. They are beginning to make money on the hardware in addition to software and Xbox Live. Will you next say that Xbox Live is one of the biggest failures as well?
I have no problem with anyone disliking MS or the Zune; I do however, have a problem with stupid people.
Now as far as the review goes, pretty solid. The complaints here are the same as I have. These are mistakes that can be corrected with firmware updates, and I hope MS gets the memo.
Nice, well laid out review, you still have the same opinon as in the first "review," but now we can see where you're coming from and your conclusions seem a lot more valid. Any stats on battery life?
Also, the PCMag review of the flash zunes mentioned laggy performance in the menus, though they didn't have any trouble with the lag in the 80gb version, notice any of that? I was wondering if that was a problem for all of them or perhaps they got one with buggy software/hardware.
I agree, the last review had to be the worst review I've ever read. This is one of the better Zune reviews.
Zune 80 battery life:
30 Hours Music
4 Hours Video
I'm guessing the larger screen drains the battery.
I agree, this is an excellent and informative review.
I have owned many iPods and I'm often frustrated at how easily they crap out (usual life span is about a year in my hands) and therefore am seriously interested in moving into a Zune (or "other") player. But with the literally thousands of dollars I've spent on music, tv shows, movies, and videos, at iTunes I'm not sure that i can ever leave apple. The price of their players is trivial to how much they have me indebted to the service. Maybe someday when the Social and Xbox Live are synced and I can port over my tv and movie purchased to a Zune, it will be worth the switch.
@jason
Just switch to another player. The Apple DRM is simple to bypass. It'll take time to convert all the files, but you won't be under their thumb anymore, and that's the important part, right?
Nicely done. Thank you. I wish you had mentioned the lack of intelligent playlists. The way my iPhone and AppleTVs keep ALL my media in sync, bookmarked and rotating is why I use iPods. Cheers.
Umm the Zune syncs and keeps bookmarks on media to.
Does that mean you have an iPod AND an iPhone???But...but....wasnt the iPhone meant to be the greatest iPod ever??Why would you need both???OMG
@McGinley
Maybe he had another iPod before the iPhone. Or maybe he needed more space.
@ Peter
"Maybe he had another iPod before the iPhone. Or maybe he needed more space."
Phew, thanks! Maybe I can finally get some sleep tonight knowing there was some kind of logical explanation for owning both Apple products!
Much better and more well though out review this time. This one sounds like you aren't a blatent Apple fanboy this time.
i would say they're not "fanboys" of anybody in particular. They seem to be equally harsh on everybody...but that's my take.
My guess is that he had to go to the principals office after the first reivew and following censorship.
actually you can still switch languages, english spanish or french. in the zune30 with the new firmware atleast...
ya, zune 80 has language menu too. looking at it right now. Don't know what Ryan's talking about with that
I must say, the review is a lot more unbiased this time, Ryan. However, you fail to mention a few critical points, such as the whole Zune Originals thing, the glass screens, the FM radio....
It's some of the niceities that Apple would never put in because they may add .001 inches to the iPod or give the user some control over it [gasp!].
All I'm saying is, for the Zune 80 to get an 8.3 while the iPod Classic only got an 8 on CNet is definitely saying something, and while you're right that the Zune is missing some critical features, I think it deserves a little more credit.
agreed... overall this was a much better review but you still gave apple too much credit and zune not enough. zune doesnt have to be better in every respect to sell units but it has to be as good and this is that when compared to the classic and nano.
i still disagree with your comparison to the touch.... they are two different products.
what I really don't understand is how can you review a product that you haven't actually touched? Sure you could do a Zune 4/8 to Nano comparision, since they sent you one... but if you haven't actually touched the flagship model why would you even attempt to compare anything to the Zune 80?
When reading the first review, I really thought you had a touched a Zune 80.... this review is a more balanced, so thats something...
also tracks that are not in the Marketplace do not show up on your Zune card...
It DOES Deserve more credit, and quite a bit more
If this should be compared to any iPod, it should be the Second gen. I know it's 5 years since that but think about it, the second gen iPod was more compatible, added better software and a slightly better UI and added a touch sensitive navigation pad. Sound familiar?
Microsoft have taken the exact same idea with the Zune 2.0. Everyone seems to forget that this is only their second PMP, and their first flash based PMP. Yet it already has some advantages over the iPod Classic & Nano, so I say give it a chance, and hope enough people buy it to make Apple scared and maybe even add some of the Zune's features to the iPod's
As the guy above me said, stop comparing with the iPod touch, because they are very, very different, and the iPod touch makes it look a lot worse that it is.How is it fair to say that this should have functions that the Touch and Archos 605 have, when it is meant to rival the iPod Classic & players similar to that?
Much better but feels like you are trying to justify your original zune review. You say a zune feature is better than the ipod's (eg: UI) then proceed to undercut it. I bet if you made a simple table (or not. [see vista vs leopard]) breaking out the features of the nano/classic vs the zune 4/8/80 it would tell a much different story.
some things to add:
- zune 80 comes with premium earbuds.
- new zune UI option to "go to artist" when you center click while a songs is playing. This is helpful if you are shuffling 5000 tracks and you want to switch gears quickly.
some things I disagree with:
- the competitors have to "pull out all the stops" to beat apple. you make it sound like the other devices are lacking in features. if you look at brands like iriver, sandisk, and meizu thats not the case (you even hinted at this). what apple has is a 7 year head start and killer advertising. so pulling out all the stops will really only involve time and advertising by a company (which is what MSFT is doing).
- ~video and audio breakout is annoying~. you are nitpicking.
- the zune social site works fine in firefox. music samples and all.
- zune software uploaded plays to the social site with no problems. i have a feeling you made very little effort to troubleshoot once you found it didnt work.
thats all for me. others will critique.
@ Aaron "i still disagree with your comparison to the touch.... they are two different products." I disagree, they are both portable music players. That is what is being reviewed here. One has FM and wi-fi sync, larger device space, at least in the 30GB and 80 GB models. The other has a web browser, portable music store downloads and if hacked, mail, calendar, notes, GBA, afp, etc. all with a very functional keyboard. The quickest I have used in such a small device. Each to their own. Each person has different needs. But, please do not insinuate that the devices cannot be compared.
@willyboy: They really shouldn't be compared simply because they serve 2 completely different purposes. I think Leo Laporte hit it right on the head when he said that the ipod touch is not a good music player, although it's an excellent video player. It has a great screen and it touch screen and has wifi and all that but as a pure music player doesn't match up to almost any player out there, because it's not meant to be a pure music player. They aren't similar enough to be compared, the same way it's tough to compare a big home theater system to a pmp.
The removal of auto-playlists in Zune software 2.0 wasn't even mentioned? It seems like the Zune software was released by a certain date (instead of when it was finished) with features removed. As it is now, the Zune v2 software is now only marginally better than a simple drag-and-drop copy of music a la the no-name PMPs.
They are adding auto-playlists to the Zune once they find out how the consumer wants the to work.
go to Zune.net.
You still forgot the most important, sound quality analysis!
Um, it's in there!
as ryan mentioned (bravo)
the sound is pretty much what you'd expect from a pmp- and largely depends on the quality of your media along with the headphones you are using.
@ Ryan Block
That was a pathetic analysis of sound quality. I think he's interested in how well the equalizer works... which is probably better than the iPod.
I haven't used the new Zune at all, but . . . everything I read pointed to there being no equalizer presets (or custom) at all. So . . . it must not work as well. The equalizer, I mean. Of course it's very, very arguable whether or not an EQ preset is any better than the pre-loaded levels you get out of the box.
@ js
i thought the EQ was removed in the new Zunes. or are you making a joke and i just dont see it?
I don't know where the whole 'no equalizer' thing came from - maybe an early feature set document?
Anyhow, my 30 upgraded to 2.2 still has presets. Unless the equalizers were a hardware thing, it's in there.
And trust me, they make a HUGE difference, at least with the Zune. When I first upgraded the firmware, the equalizer was set to none. Once I went looking for it and changed, it, there was a noticeable difference (for the better IMO).
I still get the feeling this line of PMPs is being reviewed against what the reviewer thinks they should be, not what they claim to be. That's unfortunate, and will turn a lot of people off from what is really a great device.
All I need to know is if the sound quality is better or worse than the horrible sound quality of the iPod Classic. Anyone?
(Forgot to mention, I have a Zune 30 and I "upgraded" back to the Zune V1 software once I realized what I lost with V2.
I did too... The v2 software just wasn't cutting it for me.
It would auto sync every time I plugged it in, even with autosync disabled.
I couldn't change basic things.
And the general laggyness was horrible... A bonus of the new marketplace being v2 only is that it doesn't slow the old software now.
I have a feeling like they're gonna kill off the Zune sooner than later. Seriously. Microsoft's the type of company that would want to cut their losses before it has to support a losing battle for an extended period of time. I point to Plays for Sure as an example. Yes, there are some points that are good for the new Zune, but I can't shake the feeling that they wanted a smash hit with the "social" out of the gate (understandably) and are sort of bewildered that it wasn't. Balmer will hand down the decree, and try to spin it as a success. Just "words" Balmer.. just words.
More likely they are taking their Xbox approach and are just trying to gain as much marketshare as they can no matter the cost. There's the possibility to make lots of money with an online media store in the future and I think they see that.
@404error
Is there? I always was under the impression that online media stores are a break-even endeavor.
As far as the approach like the Xbox, it's precisely that approach that doesn't instill confidence. I mean, if you had a company strictly in it for the money and being a competitor, I'd be a little wary of it's motivations, which is what Microsoft seems to to me. Yes, I know, all companies have that motivation, but in Apple's case, at least they took a chance on an unproven field and that translated to sales and in a way, consumer confidence.
@404error
Or the Microsoft Portable Media Center approach (RIP)(http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/08/microsoft-portable-media-center-rip-2004-2006/
Or the PlaysForSure Approach (Since changed strategy for Zune)
Or the NSN Music Store approach (Competed with iTunes Store -Since Closed Down)
Or the MSN Butterfly approach (Competes with AOL)
Or the Tablet PC approach (Gates 2002:"It's a PC that is virtually without limits and within five years I predict it will be the most popular form of PC sold in America.")
Just saying, MS always tries to compete with every market leader, does not mean their approach are golden (or XBox 360 golden). So far their approach for the Zune (while improved in Gen 2) won't do much to dent the iPod's brand. Take the price: why in the world would they price it the same as the iPod? Are they comparing it to the pricing competition with XBox and Sony? That's no way to put any dent in your competition.
Guys, are you seriously that off? You complain twice about the wireless function being too unaccessable, yet if you just click "Social", it says right there, "Turn on Wireless". So there's not need to go into the menu anymore. Just hit "social", "turn on wireless" and it starts looking.
By the way, from my experience the device interface was indeed faster. There was no more noticeable delay when skipping tracks in shuffle (unless you went crazy and just clicked it a million times), and images load up faster when browsing cover art or pictures. Also, they shortened the time it takes to turn it off (how long you must hold the play button).
It's not about turning it ON, it's about how easy it is to turn it back OFF.
Ahhhhh yes. Well, then I guess your annoyance is founded. Still, I don't have much of a problem in going two menus deep. Although I will say, Wireless Sync was lame. It ate up my entire battery (although my signal was less than perfect). I started with about 5/6 (whatever the one-less-than-full set is) and by the time it finished my battery was in the red.
Joe poor example of Microsoft cutting their losses. Look at Xbox 360 and thats what Microsoft is attempting to do with the Zune. They'll lose money but its a long term investment.
I think the Xbox is a different animal. I don't have one, and I never play video games, but to me it's only one of three units in town (PS3 and Wii being the other two). It has a lot to gain here, so it can wait. But the iPod and other contenders are too far ingrained and there is no proprietary MP3 or AAC (not speaking of DRM)... unlike "Xbox games" vs PS3 games. I could be wrong on this point since I don't have a console.
Mr. Block,
"...if you can't up your game ... you're just another player."
I don't think this is really true because many (if not most) people are looking for an mp3 player that just performs one task really well - playing mp3s (or digital music of some sort). People don't want to have to continually buy new products every year either. The point is, the iPod has had some great models in its past, but by trying to continually innovate, they have arguably created worse products.
The best example of this happened most recently with the creation of the iPod nano 3rd Gen and iPod touch. The 2nd Gen nano had a great form factor and just played mp3s; it didn't really do much else. But it played music pretty darn well, and it made the mp3 experience really seamless and enjoyable. Then, with the 3rd gen nano, they added video, scrunched down the nano, and made the back chrome, which really hurt its appeal. So while the 2nd gen nano will still look beautiful in 5 years, both the new nano and the iPod touch will look scratched up. + No tactile feedback on the iPod touch due to "continued innovation" means you have to take it out of your pocket and take off your gloves to change song or volume.
So while I acknowledge that updates must continually be made, theres no need to try and reinvent the wheel when it comes to a consumer-level mp3 player in a small form factor. Just get one thing done right and make it really easy to use, and the world will love you for it.
I know this is really nitpicking on what you mean
by "up your game."
Just throwing it out there though...
You do realize that that your claim regarding the degradation in aesthetics from the 2nd gen nano to 3rd gen nano is purely subjective, and not every one will agree with you, right? For every person who's complained about the looks of the 3rd gen (they're usually 2nd gen users OR Apple haterz), I know 2 people who have really liked the 3rd gen; they think they're cute.
And in terms of how they'll look down the line: you've got to be kidding me. The 2nd gen nanos, were the most scratch prone media player in the history of DAPs. Compared to them, the iPhone/iPod touch screens are diamond. Unless, of course, you're more worried about the back side of those players than the screens.
Why is there not a single mention of the subscription service? That is what sets Zune apart from the iPod. It is the only feature they have -- other than wireless syncing -- that iPods do not.
I was extremely disappointed to find that Zune Marketplace does not
have dynamic / auto-updating playlists.
With most subscription services, you add "dynamic playlists" (such as
the Billboard Top25 Rock, Top25 Dance, Top 10 New Rock Songs this
Week, etc) to your player and it will automatically download those
songs every week. You simply connect the player to the PC and it
automatically downloads all the newest songs and hits.
I was under the impression that this was a standard feature on all
subscription services. (Isn't that what a subscription service is
for?) But as far as I can tel, Microsoft's Zune service does not
offer that functionality. That's a glaring oversight, in my opinion.
It severely limits the usefulness of the subscription service.
I agree, to an extent. Certainly the exclusion of a subscription service is a total deal-breaker for the iPod for me. After having one for a year and a half I shudder at the prospect of going back to buying music based on a 30-second clip, the artist's reputation, the cover art or whatever rationale I used to use in buying music before. But I love my subscription service for exactly the opposite reason as you-- I want to hear music that's not in the mainstream.
Why is it that Microsoft has had such high expectations on their first PMP and gets constantly criticized for not receiving a larger market share, but other companies with less never get a word said about them?
I just think it's funny that everyone expected Microsoft to completely dominate in a new market, when already established companies have hardly changed at all.
@Dragod
I think it's because of Microsoft's size and clout. As a developer of both hardware and software for UI and media, there is a lot of expectation that they can "do it right" if they pay attention to consumer needs and desires. They have the time, capital and data to be able to produce an amazing product without having to depend upon it for sustaining revenue. When a smaller consumer-electronics company puts a new PMP on the market it is generally expected that it will be "evolutionary" rather than "revolutionary" and willcoform to most predecessors. With Microsoft's foray into a new realm, especially one dominated by a long-time rival, expectations are high that they will pull out all the stops and truly innovate. However, Microsoft has not generally been known to be exceedingly innovative, and therefor it is wise to be cautiously optimistic with MS product launches and updates.
There are plenty of other huge companies that make PMP's that are seemingly immune to Engadget's harping on market share and taking "chunks" out of the iPod market rather than "bites." Sony for one. Making a device that does more for the same amount of money isn't enough for Engadget, you also have to convert people over like some sort of messiah. The fact of the matter is, most people who have iPods stick with iPods because Apple brand-locked them three years ago with proprietary DRM and the fact that, out of the box, iTunes doesn't support any other portable media players. You have to get a third party application to sync a non-apple device with iTunes, and most people don't know about it. (http://www.binaryfortress.com/itunes-sync/).
Engadget has morphed from a gadget review site to gadget review + op-ed + state of the industry commentary. The fact of the matter is that Apple is continually reducing the quality of electronics in the iPod and nobody seems to care. The audio quality of the new iPod classic is borderline abysmal, yet we rarely hear any more than a couple of sentences on audio quality in Engadget PMP reviews, but get slammed with information on stuff like coverflow and how thin the new devices are.
Granted, audio quality is often subjective, but come on. Get some UltimateEars headphones (wayyyy better than the Shure's), and sit down with some stuff encoded at 320kbps, and tell me how Player X compares to Player Y. We listen to music on the device more than looking at it, you know.
I'm aware that most consumers have music encoded at 128kbps, but most consumers don't read Engadget. Crazy people like me who rip in lossless or 320kbps VBR read engadget.
I saw the new Zune commercials. I had a panic attack, but then i realized that I actually WASN'T overdosing on hallucinogens. Microsoft, there's a distinct line between original/artistic and whacky ass shit. Having a little girl walk through a garden of giant pink bunnies definitely crosses it, I think.
Oh and Microsoft is doing their thing again. MSNBC.com is praising the Zune and reporting widespread sellouts. Makes no sense that the Zune was sold out before it hit shelves, but more power to them. I wish I had one.
Wow ... great detailed review Ryan :)
From my experience i think the "zippyness" people are reporting from the firmware update is the response time ... every once in a while you'd get the little clock "please wait" spinner thingy with the old 1.0 firmware. No spinner now ... the Zune responds to commands faster much like the iPod has always done.
Everyone may not agree with you on some points but that was a great detailed review. :)
Well what WOULD you expect from a multinational supercompany?
If anything, our 'expectations' should be HIGHER than they currently are.
Oh, my comment was meant to be in reply to 'Dragod'.
Horrible device, really its just a poor rip off of the iPod Nano / Touch, it doesn't even have a web browser!
That is by far the weakest comment i have ever heard.
BTW, neither the Nano nor the Classic have a web browser, as well as no WiFi. Whats your point?
How is it a rip-off of a touch? That comment makes no sense whatsoever. At all!
Just unplug your keyboard so you dont infest this comment section with filth.
You are joking in the iPod polish comment, right? Have you used one of the new iPod Classics or Nano's? Clickwheel navigation is practically broken, compared to what iPod owners have gotten used to. I consider menu navigation a pretty basic feature, and the "polish" in this regard is pathetic. This is a huge issue, and prompted me to stick with my 1 GB Nano instead of upgrading. I don't want to take such a massive step back (and the iPhone are iPod Touch are overpriced and slow (flash) in the case of the iPhone, and cheap, crappy feeling in the case of the Touch (along with slow flash)).
The interface got polish, but as I said (and constantly say), I don't really like the clickwheel as a hardware interface, and prefer the Zune's 4-way d-pad to to it.
I guess that's where we disagree. I love the clickwheel, prior to the latest gen conventional iPods, far above any other DAP input systems. That what makes the difference in the newer iPod's so stark, IMO. People that agree with me on the (prior) superiority of the click wheel, probably would also agree on the inappropriateness of the word "polish" applied to the current experience at all.
(Not saying that I hate the new UI, but everytime I have used it in a store, I have been struck how awkward it feels. This is mostly because of the halted and jerky clickwheel movement, and partly because of the general slow speed of the interface compared to what I am used to).
i love the click wheel on the iPod than the 4way thing on zune which requires you to lift your finger hundred times (depending on how many music u have) to get to the song you want which when you get there the moment you press the button and slightly made a miss on the middle it will move and play/goto the next selection.
you have to be very careful and precise in pressing the middle button to get it right the first time... i hate it specially while driving.
MS are smart enuf to have put an option to turn that feature off though.
As an Apple fan, I have to say that the new iPod OS is silly looking. Having half the screen cut off for random cover art is superfluous and not even attractive. I don't own an iPod yet, but I'm shopping around for one, and I'm picking between the old iPod nano (RED) or a 30GB 5.5G white.
I agree in part. The user should be able to turn off the artwork/half-of-the-screen-used-by-graphics feature.
You missed out answering the final question (on purpose I guess). If you are choosing between an Ipod classic and a Zune 80 (which millions will be doing this Christmas), which will you chose and why? (and please dont talk about mac compatibility; thats only an issue for
You missed out answering the final question (on purpose I guess). If you are choosing between an Ipod classic and a Zune 80 (which millions will be doing this Christmas), which will you chose and why? (and please dont talk about mac compatibility; thats only an issue for less than 10% of people)
Remember, the Zune 1 got 15 out of a 100 people buying HDD based devices. Will it get 30 or 10% this Christmas?
Friendly Suggestion, maybe you guys could switch over to video reviews. The still picture gallery really doesn't do justice for the new gadgets coming out. I don't have a problem reading a 3 page review, I think you guys did a good job. But, I think I would prefer hearing it first hand from someone on a video while actually holding the Zune and going through it. Not like those crappy CNET video reviews though (2 minuters), maybe something like 5-7min where you could actually go through the review.
Love the new software, and the new Firmware. I have a Zune 30 from Woot!
That's not part 2 of your review, that's the review that was missing last time
The *only* playlists I use for my PMP are smart (auto) playlists. Leaving this out = FAIL. I wouldn't consider a Zune just because of that. Even the old standby Winamp has had smart playlists for a couple years now.
Come on, Ryan. You're just giving excuses now. You disliked the Zune and people called you a fanboy. So you had to come up with an explanation. Not too many people bought it. Then someone had to use Walt's review to justify yours. But Walt is not the most disinterested of reviewers so that cut no ice with commenters. And now, this. I'm not saying I disagree with your review. Hey, I'm an Apple fanboy too. But why are you so ashamed of it?
"Hey, I'm an Apple fanboy too."
Doing a Ryan here. That doesn't mean I dislike Zune. Zune 80's pretty decent actually. Better than iPod Classic IMO. Zune 4/8 are pretty good too. My favorite player is still the iPod Touch, though.
You're making some asusmptions: first, you assume I'm an Apple fanboy. Why, I don't know; I use a Mac, but I use a number of platforms, and don't believe I ply any unfair "bias" one way or another to my editorial. If something is good, it's good. If it sucks, it sucks, period.
Second, you assume that I'm ashamed or trying to hide it -- when in reality I'm just being fair, as I always am. I think most people tend to project their own preferences on balanced editorial. I get it from both sides, calling me a Mac and a PC fanboy. It's tiring, why fixate on this stuff, anyway?
Well, for one, your review should've focused on what the device is rather than an ideal device that blitzes iPods. Secondly, you mention minor features like games as reasons why iPods are better then dismiss features such as wireless sync as practically useless. Thirdly, to justify your claims you focus too much on the negatives and even present some positive features, such as the Zune pad, which was widely praised by other reviewers in a negative light. I give credit to Microsoft for at least getting the basics right. Adding new features now is just a matter of updates. You have to remember that Rome wasn't built in a day.
Oops, I thought I hit reply! My bad. Here's my response to your comment, which shows up later in this thread by accident.
In defense of Ryan, comparisons of the Zune to the iPod are an inevitability because it is blatantly clear that the iPod is what the Zune is gunning for. The capacities, price points, and feature sets make that clear - unlike Sansa or Meizo (whose players are wonderfully cheap compared to Apple), Microsoft thinks they can sell 4GB/8GB/80GB players at $149/$199/$249 just like Apple does. If they wanted to, they could sell the players cheaper than their iPod counterparts, but by having the same price point, they force the comparison - "which is the better $199 value? Ipod or Zune?" This wouldn't happen if each Zune was, say, $25 or $50 cheaper than their iPod counterpart - the value winner would be clear.
As far as praising/downplaying certain features - that is the reviewer's prerogative. Each reviewer will value different features and react differently - Ryan didn't like the touchpad, other reviewers did. That does nothing to discredit his review or anybody elses - he doesn't have to like it just because everybody else did. /*Cue joke about Ryan and Walt Mossberg - I know at least one person out there wants to say it :)*/
As far as your comment about Rome not being built in a day, I need simply to pull the last line from this Engadget review to show that Engadget even agrees with you - "So as we said before: same place, same time in late 2008? Bring your A-game, Zune, and we'll be ready." Everybody realizes that, as a young PMP, the Zune is more a process than it is a product - each iteration being an improvement over the last. It's just a matter of which has a higher slew rate - the stagnating of the iPod brand, or the Zune's rate of improvement. Maybe this time next year, the Zune will finally pull ahead!
----------------------------------------------------------
On a side note, I was quite shocked to see just how badly the Engadget community treated Ryan after his initial review of the new Zune - there were personal insults, accusations of being paid by Apple, calls to step down as chief Editor, etc. Yes, the review was pretty bad (perhaps had he called it a "rant" and not a "review" it would've gone over better), but the attacks were at best uncalled for and not warranted.
I shudder to think that EVERY post from now on dealing with Apple, the Zune, or any Apple-competitor will be flooded with comments recalling Ryan's review to justify calling Engadget a bunch of Apple fanboys, when in fact a number of Apple stories in Engadget's archive are negative (like the iPod Touch Review, the lukewarm iPhone review, Leopard's BSOD, the various screen issues Apple computers have had, the iPod Classic's many issues, the iBook's design flaw lawsuit, etc).
@manifesto:
I agree with you. The comparison to the iPod is inevitable considering that that's what Microsoft is going against. Although I haven't personally seen the new Zunes, from what I've heard, the match up quite evenly against their iPod counterparts. (Except for the Touch, of course, which, again, is the best mp3 player out there in my opinion.) Regarding the Zune pad, what I meant to say was that it's quite weird that he found it sluggish when every other reviewer liked it. He probably got a defective unit. I don't know.
In any case, regarding taking on the iPod, you really don't know what will work. Other companies have tried bundling features and failed miserably. Microsoft, in my opinion realizes that this is a long term thing. Yes, their devices are not revolutionary but they represent a step in the right direction. I don't think Microsoft intended for this generation's devices will be iPod killers, which is why I think Ryan was wrong to use that as a basis for his review. Also, I think Ryan got too defensive with this review. Almost like he was too embarrassed to admit that he didn't like them.
Much better review. Although I disagree with you on some points, mainly about how iPod classic have "improved" UI, and "ibrand" (Why would they release a brand to compete with the iphones and itouch? On their second generation prodct).
also i think its funny you mention coverflow.... that thing is so buggy/slow its not even funny. i wouldnt exactly be trumpeting that as a feature.
Again, it needs to spelled out to people that the new software does NOT add MP4/H264 support to the old Zunes. I am sure a lot of people know this but, with everyone talking about the new features for ALL the zunes, it is easy to think the firmware/software upgrade allows this to happen. So, with the Zune 30, everything still has to be transcoded to WMV.
Some big problems with this review.
You guys have not even tried the Zune 80?! What is going on? How does this review make any sense at all?
Second, if you guys would have tried the Zune 80 you would know that it came with some significantly better earbuds making that whole sound-quality paragraph a writeoff, the Zune takes it in a heartbeat. This whole post is so biased and lacks so much information its terrible.
all of that said i still can't imagine my self buying ipod classic or even ipod touch over zune 80, not that im an ms fanboi or sumthing, actually i use more ubuntu ever since.I bought an ipod before but were ashamed to bring it to work, so i bought zune (lol i know it does sucks as an excuse) but hey after a few borrowing of my mates i converted lot of them to switch to zune without even trying to convince them (and not that i wanted them to).
Anyway maybe because I'm sort of a trend setter and id rather seen listening to my music with something else other than the "ever popular" iPod (that'll ruin my style in the office) but still get tons of features and trend.
iPod iS DEAD.
God, Zune fanboys are the worst.
Defending inferior products and low ranking anyone who has the slightest criticism of their crippled player.
Face it. The Zune is DOA.
No wonder they were practically giving them away for less than a hundred.