Switched On: Dark side of the Zune
posted June 5th 2009 6:06PM
When the iPod touch swiped away the small display, aversion to WiFi and telltale scroll wheel of previous iPods. Microsoft was left with Zune models squarely targeted at Apple's state of an older art. This fall, though, Microsoft will close the features gap and, in some ways, leapfrog the iPod touch with the Zune HD, which takes advantage of the startling contrast of OLED screen technology and will be one of the first (and likely the most popular) portable HD radio receivers. But no DNA test is needed to see that the Zune HD is inspired by the iPod touch, with a single button below the screen, side-mounted volume controls, and a power button at the top.
Now that the Zune HD will have a hardware exterior that looks like a credible challenger to at least today's iPod touch, what about filling the flash memory in its interior? Here, Microsoft has a number of opportunities that could improve the Zune's standing if successful, or leave it in the iPod's shadow if not.
First, there's the music, of course. Microsoft has been fighting the subscription crusade with Zune since the device's inception, but may be on to something with the Zune Pass 10 MP3 song/month "use it or lose it" subscription credit. While the downloads are on some level at odds with promulgating the notion of "access", the downloads help combat consumer fears about losing access to music, provide an escape clause out of the Zune since they are unprotected MP3 files, and at least more closely resembles one established music subscription business in the US – the Columbia House music club (now at yourmusic.com) that dates back to the days of cassettes.
The download credits idea has also been picked up by Napster, which is offering an even lighter version of the Zune Pass plan with five songs per month for $5. That price hearkens back to what the now defunct Yahoo Music subscription service charged for unlimited on-demand streaming, which both Microsoft and Napster offer. But that becomes almost a bonus as consumers rationalize the subscription as a sort of monthly music allowance.
Second, there are the applications. The iPod touch has benefited mightily from the success of its subsidized brother; the vast majority of iPhone applications can also run on the iPod touch. But Microsoft is clearly in a state of transition with its smartphone applications. The Windows Mobile app store won't launch until Windows Mobile 6.5, but even bigger changes are likely in store for Windows Mobile 7, the interface of which Zune HD may offer foretell. Microsoft is certainly starting to focus on consumer applications for Windows Mobile that could transfer over the Zune HD, but the road ahead is long if it is to create the kind of library Apple has. Even at launch, the world of Windows Mobile will be the genesis for the Zune HD's most important application, its Web browser.
Finally, one non-PC platform where Microsoft has certainly seen developer adoption and critical mass is XBox. The company has already rebranded Xbox Live Marketplace to Zune, signaling tighter integration of the devices that began in the company's Entertainment and Devices group. Games have been the most popular application category for the iPod touch, and the category in which Microsoft has the strongest position of any application category.
And yet, Microsoft has done nothing beyond the design of the iPod touch to make the Zune HD more appealing to gamers – no D-pad, no joystick, and no extra buttons to mash. Granted, the Zune HD is not being dubbed the XBox Portable and need not take on the likes of Sony's PSP Go. But in creating a design that simply enables developers to port over their iPod touch user interfaces instead of adding some minimal physical controls that could enhance gameplay, Microsoft is passing on an opportunity to leverage an area of strength and further differentiate from the iPod touch.
Convergence products such as the Zune HD place their bets. Microsoft's are that a new way of valuing music subscriptions will drive content, a focus that eschews optimization will drive authenticity, and that some source of high-volume mobile applications can drive the platform versatility to make inroads against that pocket computer sold with white earbuds.
Ross Rubin is director of industry analysis for consumer technology at market research and analysis firm The NPD Group. Views expressed in Switched On are his own.
I don't care about any of that stuff, really. I just wanted a larger storage format in this device and they failed to deliver. I'll be sticking with purchasing a Zune 120 in the near future.
One thing Microsoft needs to work on is getting the Zune software working on Mac computers. iTunes works in Windows, but Zune doesn't work on OSX? Nice logic there, MS...
Windows has about 90% of market share. Mac OSX has about 8%. Microsoft doesn't need to make Zune software for Macs at all. Apple on the other hand did need to make iTunes for Windows, otherwise they would be nowhere near as big as they are today.
I believe that it's apple that doesn't want zune software for macs, not microsoft screwing up.
The only reason MS hasn't bothered with making Zune software Mac compatible is because there's very little reason to. If you have a Mac, the chances of you having a zune, in MS's eyes, is virtually zero, and therefore, wasting time and money on porting it is pointless. However, because most people still use Windows, Apple would've sold considerably fewer iPods if they didn't make iTunes Windows compatible.
You can install Windows on a Mac, but you cant install OSX on a PC*
*you can under some circumstances
"You can install Windows on a Mac, but you don't have to install OSX on a PC"
Fixed.
@ Mark Anderson
Massive Win for you, good sir
iTunes "working" in Windows is debatable at best. It is the most bloated, slow piece of crap available for showcasing your media.
@ M3tric
I have never had a problem...
Never been inclined to buy a Zune.
@Mark
Yes, good show indeed. You don't have to install OSX on a PC, just wait a couple years and MS will just rip off the whole thing. (or maybe that's what you were saying already?)
@Fred
No, I was saying that Windows is the more versatile OS. Just so we're clear here.
If you want to work for Microsoft's advertising firm, you have to have a Mac though, so no, not totally versatile.
Hence the word 'more', Paul.
Mark, I usually don't agree with you, but that is the first sensible thing you've said.
Also, m3tric is 100% correct, iTunes is horrible for Windows.
@Paul Chapel
you're not paying for the subscription and buying songs. you're just paying for the subscription and with that subscription, you get a bonus 10 songs to keep. other songs you get are available to you as long as you have the subscription.
"ITunes for Windows is the best Windows app ever written,'' Jobs said.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/10/17/BUG2N2D81H1.DTL&type=printable
This is the same software that show duplicates of every single MP3 I own, and (upon rebuilding the catalog) decided to delete my entire music collection. Thankfully, I had a backup.
Just one instance in a long line of false claims by Mr. Jobs. Don't drink the Kool-Aid.
I think that Microsoft needs to put out a Zune client for OS X regardless of the Windows' marketshare in the computing market. They need all of the marketshare that they can get. You don't get to the top of the PMP market by excluding a significant portion of said market.
Personally, I would like Microsoft to just go to a drag and drop setup. I like the Zune software, but drag and drop is significantly better overall. It's less of a hastle than syncing with any piece of software.
More importantly, it might be worthwhile for Microsoft to sell the Zune outside the US. It's practically unknown outside tech enthusiast circles here in the UK.
I don't know if I'd call it versatile. Tyrannical seems to be a better fit.
It doesn't make any sense ... you are are one of maybe 20 people in the country that own a Mac that hasn't totaly drank the Apple KoolAid.
Mac owners only buy Apple media players.
It's a waste of Microsoft's time.
@tmacfan
It would be nice if all media players had optional drag and drop interfaces. Syncing is easier for the masses.
If you want to drag and drop files to your zune you can do a quick registry change and have the that option available.
"You can install Windows on a Mac, but you don't have to install OSX on a PC"
OS X on regular PC Hardware is still a mess. You have to modify the BIOS and hope the drivers work with your hardware. You're always afraid of Updates since they might break stuff. You're 100% right, PC users don't have to install OS X for an experience like that.
@Markanderson
Truth wins
But anyway, it would be nice to have a sort of clip on gamepad that allows you to play games on the zune like it was an xbox, because it could do so much more with it. But as it stands i already see the Zune HD as the new standard PMP on the market. If they price it right, i can see the same thing that happened to sony and playstation, happen to apple and the ipod.
iTunes is built on iTunes. Zune is piggy backing Windows Media Player APIs.
In order for Apple to port iTunes to Windows they just had to port iTunes to Windows Quicktime. Microsoft has no Windows Media Player APIs for OSX. A Zune OSX Port isn't going to happen.
So....the Zune HD is to Ipod Touch as a prism is to Pink Floyd?
That's about all I can figure out in this article.
It is a bit confusing isn't it. In fact the ZuneHD won't be the iTouch's nemesis, especially when MS have clearly stated that the ZuneHD will devoid of any PDA-like functionality[Something that Ross Rubin doesn't seem to be aware of]. And they painted that picture perfectly with what they've shown us to far -- the ZuneHD's interface is that of the Zune80 plus extra theatrics. Thus media is pivotal focus while Win Mobile handles the office functions. This is different from the iTouch which is both, a music player and a PDA. Apple has nurtured an ecosystem of applications that has brought death closer for Pocket PCs, while not compromising the "iPod experience" people love about Apple music players.
its the album art for 'The Dark Side of the Moon'
funny, I dont care much for HD radio nor do I care for watching movies on my ipod. I am a music buff period. I dont want a subscription because I want to own my music and no, it did not cost me 30K to fill my pod. I dont need yet another storage device with enough capacity to store 1000 movies either. I know not one person that can fill their ipod/zune with just music, we just dont listen to that much even if we could afford it. The bottom line with me personally and I think a lot of people out there is the ease of use with the ipod. Who cares who makes it apple or MS. It is just what I like. Now anyone that wants to argue with me I can simply say this. There is nothing you can say on an internet blog that will change my love for one device of mine or another so shut the hell up and dont try.
Thank you, come again.
Nice logic there William. "I'm gonna say my side of the debate, then cover my ears so I can't be wrong!"
I don't really think having volume buttons on the side and a power button on the top, counts as being inspired by Apple. What's next, the taj Mahal copped apple because its white.
agreed. Those are just the logical places.
Yea, I'm pretty sure my Cingular 8125 had this like in 2006 and my Palm well before that. I guess it didn't officially exist until Apple did it, which makes perfect sense.
I think what he is saying is that my Samsung LCD ripped it's design aesthetic from Apple since it has a screen that fills out most of the body, a button underneath that centrally located, and a couple buttons on the side...
Maybe they should put them in the middle of the screen???
If you're going to make that logical assumption, than please mention how apple ripped GUIs from windows way back when they made that bet and lost, and how everything apple does from that point forward is a "me too" product.
Wow, I thought I was alone on this. I guess if you have buttons now then your copying Apple. Oh, a touch screen? Apple. Whoever wrote this article is moron.
I have an iPhone and reading this article made this person sound so biased. If the Zune was a phone, I would ditch my iPhone in a second. Apple's layout blows compared to the new Zune. I will buy the next iPhone coming out, but Zune has way better features and design hands down.
1. Do not ever compare what Napster is offering to what Zune is, both services are deffirent in their own way and the Zune wins just for the fact that you can "download" and use that music in your car and or any place where you can connect to a sound export gadget from your Zune: a media player.
2. Zune HD is NOT a gaming device/platform and is not targeted for gamers. It is an HD video/music player with touch and is thin enough to carry around. Period. Music lovers will still buy the Zune 120 and /or other market options.
The whole Zune Pass thing is stupid and isn't going to help Microsoft. It's not like you can fill your Zune with songs that way. For example, Microsoft says that it will cost you 30,000 to fill an iPod, but to get 30,000 songs using Zune Pass's 10 song credit, it would run you $45,000 in Zune Pass subscription fees over 250 years. And that's if you remember to use your 10 song credits every month, because they expire a month later.
Subscriptions for Music is just something that people aren't going to accept, no matter how you repackage it. If Microsoft was doing to great with it, why the heck aren't they even in second place? SanDisk is still taking them to the cleaners for God's sake.
Paul, you can always buy more then 10 songs on the Zune whenever you like and as much as you want, even after using your 10 songs.
In theory, to fill 10 GB of your iPod with legal songs you have to pay the same amount of money that will get you over 20 years of Zune Pass, that is more than what you will ever need.
Also Zune is still new, give it a little time and you'll see how people will go for it, just like how people love Netflix now.
But if you're paying a subscription every month AND buying songs, what good is the subscription? That's like having sex with your wife every month for free, while paying to sleep with prostitutes. Why waste more money when you can just stay home?
That's why most sane people won't use Zune Pass. It doesn't make much sense to pay for music every month, when you're just buying songs too.
I buy physical CDs from online auction sites, at an average of around $5 a pop. Pretty much anything you want, new or old. Bonus: I have a physical copy that I can burn to whatever format I want, as often as I want.
When I want some variety, I just stream last.fm.
But what do I know, I'm still using an ancient iPaq 1935 as my PMP.
"The whole Zune Pass thing is stupid"
As a Rhapsody subscriber/Zune owner, I've gotta disagree. I'm fine renting my music, since there ends up being not a ton of new material I'm really interested in anyway. I do, however, think that the marketing campaign was deceiving and flat out irritating. Also, your right, subscriptions probably will never catch on (unless Apple does one).
That being said, I don't plan on getting a Zune pass.
Also, I'm pretty sure SanDisk is in second because you can pick up one of their players for $20.
@Galactor693
I had a conversation with a Zunebot and he brought up the same point. He was like, "Man, with Zune Pass I can test drive songs before I buy them" and I was like, "Why don't you just listen to the radio?"
He looked at me dumbfounded for a moment and then said, "F*ck you!"
I mean, really, isn't that what the radio is for? Why else does the Zune have a radio? Subscription models don't work because people are cheapskates. They don't like monthly fees for something unless it's vital, like electricity or water. But whenever I hear someone say they want to "test drive" their music, I think of Pandora on an iPod touch or the radio on the Zune. It's totally unnecessary to "test drive" your music and pay for it.
@Paul
So I can listen to entire albums on the radio now? Awesome! Please let me know what station to dial in for that capability. I'd love to check it out!
Seriously, now -- unless all you care about are the current Top 40 hits, then the radio *alone* is just fine. For the rest of us, though, we enjoy these things called "albums" -- you know... 10 songs, 12 songs, etc... all recorded and packaged together! They're great!
You either "get" the subscription music thing, or you don't. You are a Mac-lovin'-knob, Paul, and thus I'm not surprised that you don't get it. It appears to be your lot in life. Many of us, however, have moved on and realize that subcription-based music is actually cheaper (in the long run) and likely the way things are going.
Paul, your arguments are always all over the place, sometimes I wonder if you are actually for real or just joking around!
1. You say "But if you're paying a subscription every month AND buying songs, what good is the subscription?":
A subscription is there to listen to music that you don't want to spend a full dollar on, For example, I downloaded Eminem's new album from Zune and listened to the whole album, not just a 30 seconds cut but the full songs, then bought one song that I like. Now, anytime I feel like listening to some other songs of the same album that I almost like I could easily go back and listen to the song from my Zune through my PC or WiFi whenever I like. Can't you see how that is awesome?! Maybe it is not what you like: Don't subscribe, just buy the music!
Buying songs is not what the subscription service is all about. This service is something like the Xbox Live Gold account, it is not the music that I only get but I also get along: Social interaction where I can find and set to automatically download music based on some of my friends' taste, I find detailed information about each artist, I get one of the hundreds of free professionally developed playlists that update every week with great music that I would pay or waste so much time doing it myself. I get to use the same account on three different Zunes on three different PCs. I learn more about an artist all in one place within one software.
Do you not see some value to all of that?
2. Then you talk about "That's like having sex with your wife every month for free, while paying to sleep with prostitutes"
To keep it simple, your wife is not a subscription material. Your example is too missed up.
3. Then later you bring up a fake story about some Zune user, comparing the "Radio" to the "Zune Pass".....!
That's comparing Apples to Oranges; At least in a radio station you don't have the choice of downloading your song and playing on any speaker of your choice at the time of your choice, and I can go on with the reasons, but, it isn't even worth it.
Man, why can't you accept things and face the facts? Why do you always have to fake your way or create some nonsense arguments into proving a point?
Paul A. Chapel:
"to get 30,000 songs using Zune Pass's 10 song credit, it would run you $45,000 in Zune Pass subscription fees over 250 years. And that's if you remember to use your 10 song credits every month, because they expire a month later."
Is this a serious statement?
You're not comparing what matters: access to music, not ownership.
"30,000 songs using iTunes: $30,000."
Lifetime (50 years) of unlimited songs, plus 6,000 songs to "keep" (if you really need to): $9,000.
It should be obvious that a subscription service is not a method to buying individual songs to keep -- the 250 year metric is pointless. The 10 songs a month to keep are a bonus (and are merely there as an insurance/incentive), so if you cancel your subscription down the line you're not left with nothing.
In reality, you wouldn't be left with nothing, since you got value each month from your music (you wouldn't say 10 years after buying a gallon of milk that it was all for nothing). Keeping the extra songs is sort of just a psychological extra to get people who are attached to the concept of music ownership to rationalize the subscription service as less risky.
Paul, you say:
"All I'm saying is that people who want to own their music are going to just buy it anyway. People who rent music, are just going to rent it, but it's rare that you're going to see people who do both."
Not really, this isn't what you stated first. The problem with your arguments isn't bad words or wrong grammar but it is the fake stuff that you claim or conclude which boggles the mind. You seem like a guy who likes to talk, but you sometimes over think or really just not think at all before talking.
You always start by denying facts, then disapproving them, followed by fake backing and then a weak outro as if you didn't mean it.
Think man, think a little, share your opinion with at least some real facts after giving it some thought, is that really hard for you?!
@Paul
Look at it this way, $15.00 a month to download and keep any song you want, on top of that, while you are paying $15.00 a month you can download and listen to an unlimited amount of songs.
Downloading the "Hottest" songs on itunes at 10 songs a month would cost $13.00. I realize im using the most expensive songs as an example, but the "Hottest" songs are generally the ones played on the radio, which are apparently the only songs worth listening to with your logic. An extra $2.00 a month to have access to any song seems pretty good to me.
The following statement is really not true at all. I can't believe you actually said "Any song worth listening to on an album is going to be played on the radio" First of all, no. Second, you can't arrange a radio stations playlist, and if you want to hear a certain song, chances are, it wont be played for a while. Third, the quality on the radio isn't so great.
"I had a conversation with a Zunebot..."
You said that you never met anybody with a Zune, but you have had conversations with Zune owners about ZunePass. Which is it, you did or did not meet somebody with a Zune? You should really write these things down so you can keep your lies in order.
As for the "Zunebot" comment - no, you are not a Apple loving, Microsoft hating person, you just report things fairly and with "facts".
You do realize that most people don't listen to thousands of songs, nor do they fill up their music device with that much music from online purchases. You can compare your gigabyte to the dollar all you want. The fact is, it's a rip-off for the majority of users, hence it will never gain the popularity you see with per purchase stores.
A side note, I applaud Microsoft for taking an edge with the OLED screen, further advancing the screen's market. Though, I don't see the marketing sense at the moment. Are most users going to care? No.
Apple made a smart move not differentiating the software from iPhone and the iPod Touch. The problem I foresee with Microsoft's applications market is that they are for a myriad of devices running two different operating systems. Thus is Microsoft must sell the new Zune off-the-shelves to save the application store that has yet to see fruition.
@Paul
Civil discussions usually involve facts, and usually do not involve prostitutes and the chauvinist belief of owning ones wife.
@ Saad
I felt you were right on with the benefits of a subscription service, really hitting one of the lesser known points of community interaction. I had iMesh (the name was around way before iTunes), which allowed you to look at different users profiles, and music they listen to. This was great for finding new music from users with similar tastes.
@Paul
"Any song worth listening to on an album is going to be played on the radio, so why waste $15.00 a month listening to something that you can get for free anyway? That sounds stupid to me."
are you fucking kidding me? there's so many things wrong with this sentence I can't let it go by:
1) so if any song worth listening to on an album is going to be played on the radio, then that means all non-singles in the history of music are not worth listening to.
2) there's commercials on radio
3) on-demand...being able to listen anything you want whenever you want. you can pick exactly what you want to listen to on the radio now? i had no idea! thanks paul!
4) older stuff...most radio stations play recent music, within the last 2 months or so.
there's really just no comparison between the two at all. your "argument" is almost like comparing black & white broadcast tv to netflix...but makes even less sense.
i feel dumber after having read what you said and we are all a little bit worse off in our lives after you decided to type in this thread. may god have mercy on your soul.