iPod shuffle, price vs the competition?

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Asher

Smoke and mirrors.

pwned. You asked for it and you got it. Thurrott thinks itunes is a better jukebox. He doesn't like the music store lock in (he complains about that a lot), but he's pretty clear here.

Which part of that article claims WMP is a poor copy of iTunes, again?

That would be a remarkable achievement indeed, given that WMP has existed years before iTunes ever did.

It doesn't need to. it is obvious to anyone that looks at WMP over WMP 9 that WMP 10 is an attempt to copy itunes because of its success. It looks a lot more itunes like than WMP 9 does. They've even abandoned the old shape in favour of the same style as itunes.

Of course this is not obvious to lunatics like you, but to regular people who can see past their own prejudices is seems quite plain.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Once again... you ever driven a Benz? The smooth ride, handling, and acceleration is definetly worth $30,000 more than a Camry.

What a stupid, stupid argument -- you're comparing things in different classes.

Compare a Benz to a BMW, or even an Acura. Benz sales have dropped off in recent years for a reason.

They sell entirely off image now -- they do have bigger engines than Camries (oh, what an accomplishment ), but they don't compare with other makers in its class. BMW regularly has ads focusing on performance and reliability in car magazines, Mercedes focuses on image only.

And have you ever looked INSIDE an H2? Yeah, its just like a Yukon (but loaded on the inside like a mini-limo) .

Mini-limo my ass. It looks like boxy crap...


Apparently you don't want to believe me, but the H2 has HUGE part commonality with the Yukon XL. It's nothing but a Yukon with a harder image and the "Hummer" brand.

And the automobile market has no selling points beyond image and style?

When did I ever say that -- another strawman.

Please comprehend arguments before tearing down what you want my argument to be.

Maybe they are finally starting to get it... perhaps the digital music market doesn't have a 'true selling point' (as defined by Asher) .

The true selling point of the iPod is image and style -- that's what the marketing is based on, accordingly.

That's not a reason to buy IMO, and I understand most people don't agree with me. That's fine. They're likely the same people who buy Fords year after year, or make other ridiculously uninformed decisions.

People are stupid, and by catering to stupidity Apple is making a fortune in the low-end electronics market. This strategy fails once it becomes a "big ticket" purchase like a computer, where most people do a bit more research into it before buying.

I congratulate Apple on their success in marketing to people lacking intellectual capacity, and I congratulate you on joining the ranks as well, Imran. Your constant stream of strawmen makes it abundantly clear that you're likely on the waiting list for a PowerMac, or you will be soon.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Agathon
It doesn't need to.

Actually, ace -- if you make the assertion that Paul claims that WMP is a "poor immitation copy" of iTunes, you do need to quote a source. You don't have to say it's not necessary and then justify it yourself -- if you claim someone said it, you do need to show them saying it to prove they said it.

That may not be how it works in philosophy academia, but in the real world, thems the breaks.

Quote Paul saying WMP is a poor immitation copy of iTunes, or retract your statement.

[Agathon]

I forgot:

Quick searching. One area that iTunes excels in is searching, and I was interested to see whether Microsoft had made any progress in this area. And sure enough, a new always-on search box is available in the Media Library view, making it easier to find music in today's suddenly massive collections. Sadly, the search function in WMP 10 isn't instant, as it is in iTunes: You can to click the Search button (or press Enter) manually to display the results of a search (Figure). And there's no "back" button, so you have to manually navigate back to your previous position in the Media Library if your search was unsuccessful.

WMP doesn't even have proper search? Shame...

[Asher]

I've no idea, I use Winamp like real men do.

Which had all those features well before iTunes BTW, and still has a simpler and more functional interface with SUBSTANTIALLY less resource usage and more compatibility.

[MarkG]

/me makes a note to self: always remember to make sure ahser posts in your thread or it's dead

[Agathon]

Actually, ace -- if you make the assertion that Paul claims that WMP is a "poor immitation copy" of iTunes, you do need to quote a source. You don't have to say it's not necessary and then justify it yourself -- if you claim someone said it, you do need to show them saying it to prove they said it.

Um.. nice try at pedantry to hide the fact you've been pwned.

He clearly says it is inferior.

As for a copy...

From his preview of WMP10

http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/wmp10_preview.asp

Fans of iTunes might be confused for thinking this product is a melding of both iTunes and WMP 9: WMP 10 still sports a rounded, colorized WMP 9-like "chrome," or shell, but its been dramatically simplified. The menu bar, previously enabled via a mouse-over by default, is now just off by default, which better retains the clean lines of the player. (You can enable the menu bar using a weird new button on the top of the player, situated to the left of the window control buttons).

Much of the point of his preview is that MS has simplified WMP10 to be more itunes like. He goes on to mention:

Or, you could choose option number three. The one that works just like iTunes.

I suppose you want to quibble about this, but it seems evident to me.

Everyone who looks at both knows that MS made WMP to be more itunes like (and Musicmatch like) because these players were better.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by MarkG
* MarkG makes a note to self: always remember to make sure ahser posts in your thread or it's dead

Just post a thread admiring an Apple product and he'll go insane.

[Asher]

Originally posted by MarkG
* MarkG makes a note to self: always remember to make sure ahser posts in your thread or it's dead

I'm the life of the party.

The problem with your threads is they lack trolls. Every thread needs one, subtle or not.

If it's an Apple or MS thread, they always end up the same. I argue with Agathon about who runs a business better.

In the end Agathon is sure to think he's won, but looking at the company finances and size and marketshare tells a very different story. It's been getting even better recently -- Apple finally has a successful product (its first in MANY years), and Agathon is now blindly telling other companies how to run their business, and to be more like Apple.

We need to step back and look at how Apple turned out. They used this same business strategy before with the first Apple desktops. It works great at first, generates lots of hype...and then it falls prey to the open market as the market matures.

Conveniently, it's Microsoft (and Creative, Rio, iRiver, etc) who are once again targeting the open market. Apple is trying to play the closed market again.

And it won't work.

[MarkG]

The problem with your threads is they lack trolls

i must be geting old

[Agathon]

In the end Agathon is sure to think he's won, but looking at the company finances and size and marketshare tells a very different story.

What does this have to do with this argument? You were clearly wrong. Stop trying to change the subject.

Hell even Microsoft admitted that WMP copies itunes.

From The New York Times

Sept. 2, Microsoft unveiled its iTunes Music Store. That sentence may sound a little strange, but that is, in fact, what happened. The Microsoft music store (in beta at music.msn.com) couldn't look more like Apple's iTunes music store (itunes.com) if you ran it through a copying machine."Apple set the bar very high," a Microsoft manger admitted. "We're trying to match that. We told our developers, 'Look at how Apple does it.'"

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/16/te...2abfdd&ei=5070

[Agathon]

If it's an Apple or MS thread, they always end up the same. I argue with Agathon about who runs a business better.

No they do not. Most of the time I don't care about that stuff.

What usually happens is that you make some blatantly ridiculous claim ("Mac's Exposé is blatant copy of MS technology"; "itunes deletes your music if you move outside the US"), which you then get called on.

Cue you trying to weasel out of it or posting irrelevant technical material or just plain abusing people who disagree with you.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Asher
What a stupid, stupid argument -- you're comparing things in different classes.

Compare a Benz to a BMW, or even an Acura. Benz sales have dropped off in recent years for a reason.

I have been inside all three.

The question is - have you?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Agathon
Um.. nice try at pedantry to hide the fact you've been pwned.

He clearly says it is inferior.

As for a copy...

From his preview of WMP10

http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/wmp10_preview.asp

Fans of iTunes might be confused for thinking this product is a melding of both iTunes and WMP 9: WMP 10 still sports a rounded, colorized WMP 9-like "chrome," or shell, but its been dramatically simplified. The menu bar, previously enabled via a mouse-over by default, is now just off by default, which better retains the clean lines of the player. (You can enable the menu bar using a weird new button on the top of the player, situated to the left of the window control buttons).

Much of the point of his preview is that MS has simplified WMP10 to be more itunes like. He goes on to mention:

Or, you could choose option number three. The one that works just like iTunes.

I suppose you want to quibble about this, but it seems evident to me.

Everyone who looks at both knows that MS made WMP to be more itunes like (and Musicmatch like) because these players were better.

The simple problem with this is you're equating making the program simpler to being like iTunes.

Just where do you get that?

When WMP9/10 were under development, Winamp was by far the #1 music app on the desktop. It was simpler, it was smaller, it was easier to use.

iTunes came after Winamp (substantially after...), in case you didn't know.

Most people on Windows weren't using WMP, they were using Winamp. People's complaint with WMP was it was too big and complex to use.

So Microsoft slimmed it down. It incorporated more and more things and design choices that have been in Winamp for years.

So suddenly MS is trying to copy iTunes?

Please. WMP's main competition is Winamp, especially when WMP9/10 were developed, not iTunes. WMP9/10 gravitate more towards the Winamp usage and style than iTunes (iTunes isn't even a full media program, just music).

iTunes added features that were in Winamp, and they also make it into WMP. Nevermind we can argue this is a natural progression in response to user complaints, but the fact is, Winamp was the first major program to do these before the others.

Is everyone copying Winamp, or iTunes?

This debate is identical to the one about the desktop metaphor. Mac heads still claim today that everyone is ripping off the MacOS desktop concept. I suppose the next generation Mac heads will claim the same about the iPod/iTunes.

Talk about lack of scope.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
I have been inside all three.

The question is - have you?

Inside all three - yes.

Personally driven, only a BMW.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Agathon
What does this have to do with this argument? You were clearly wrong. Stop trying to change the subject.

Hell even Microsoft admitted that WMP copies itunes.

MS Music Store != Windows Media Player.

...

[Giancarlo]

Hey, what's up with that Mini-Mac thing? What a piece of crap.. that's what I said after looking at the specifications. I'm sure you'll really be blazing with an ATI Radeon 9200. Wow.. not. The Mac Mini rocks I see on that article Agathon posted? Really? How so? It is a horrific piece of crap. For $499 I can buy something far better then it based on the AMD Sempron. The Mac Mini can't compete because it just doesn't stack up. I'm sorry.

[Asher]

The Mac Mini obviously isn't intended for people who understand the specs it has, it's for people who:
1) Don't know any better
2) Buy it 'cause it's "cute"

Apple's still aiming for the ignorant, easy customer, but they've set their sights lower now. The Mac Mini is to capture the ignorant, easy customers without as much money to blow as those who buy the iMacs and PowerMacs.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Apple's still aiming for the ignorant, easy customer, but they've set their sights lower now. The Mac Mini is to capture the ignorant, easy customers without as much money to blow as those who buy the iMacs and PowerMacs.

im sorry that your inferiority complex makes you need to put down people who are less computer-oriented in order to feel good about yourself. perhaps a visit to a pshrink would be in order? your hysteria against apple has reached new levels.

[MORON]

Well, it takes two to tangle......

[Asher]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
im sorry that your inferiority complex makes you need to put down people who are less computer-oriented in order to feel good about yourself.

Most people would argue I have a superiority complex, not an inferiority complex.

If the target market is ignorant consumers, then that's just what it is. It's not a put-down as much as it is a description. Feel free to correct me if Apple's target market is not ignorant consumers, and that they're targetting the iPod to technophiles and audiophies...

[Agathon]

Most people would argue I have a superiority complex, not an inferiority complex.

No. It's called "anti-social personality disorder" and you are the second clearest case I've ever seen.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Agathon
No. It's called "anti-social personality disorder" and you are the second clearest case I've ever seen.

Stick to Plato, man.

There is a pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others occurring since age 15 years, as indicated by three (or more) of the following:

1. failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest
2. deceitfulness, as indicated by repeated lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure
3. impulsivity or failure to plan ahead
4. irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults
5. reckless disregard for safety of self or others
6. consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations
7. lack of remorse, as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another

I am virtually the polar opposite of every one of those attributes.

I have seen a professional psychiatrist (well, two), but that was because I was avoidant, not anti-social. It has nothing to do with this thread, in any case, and is yet another example of you pretending to know something you don't.

I've yet to see a single educated, logical post you've made outside of an ancient philosophy thread.

[Agathon]

Actually, based on your behaviour here you are almost certainly suffering from a mild version. Not all of them end up becoming criminals.

Let's see:

You can add to your (somewhat incomplete) list

Narcissism: clear in your case, many of your threads are simply about you. In a community with many narcissists, you stand head and shoulders above everyone else.

As for the rest:

1. failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest

This is overstated. Many sociopaths do not engage in criminal activity. Many of them manage to live quite normal lives.

2. deceitfulness, as indicated by repeated lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure.

Sorry, but this sounds just like you.

3. impulsivity or failure to plan ahead.

You will fly off half-cocked at the least provocation or misunderstanding.

4. irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults.

You are too much of a wimp to get physical, but otherwise this is on the ball.

5. reckless disregard for safety of self or others

Pretty much. You're malicious towards anyone who disagrees with you.

6. consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations

As I said above, many sociopaths manage a career. I assume this list is more about extreme cases. There is a scale, invented by the world's authority on it, who happens to be a Canadian.

7. lack of remorse, as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another

Wow... based on your actions here, that's you again.

Of course, you might be completely different in person, but I doubt it.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Asher
The Mac Mini obviously isn't intended for people who understand the specs it has, it's for people who:
1) Don't know any better
2) Buy it 'cause it's "cute"

Apple's still aiming for the ignorant, easy customer, but they've set their sights lower now. The Mac Mini is to capture the ignorant, easy customers without as much money to blow as those who buy the iMacs and PowerMacs.

Well I can buy a PC that looks cute, but is far better inside then the Mini Mac. Seriously this may push their market share up to about 2.1%. The Mini Mac, or Mac Mini (sounds like some kind of submachine gun or something lol) is of poor quality. And once people realize its inferiority they won't buy it (it probably won't even be able to compete with Celerons). But then again you are right, there are those who don't know any better.. like Agathon.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Agathon
Narcissism: clear in your case, many of your threads are simply about you.

Name one.

Sorry, but this sounds just like you.

But it's not -- you say I lie "all the time" and make things up to support my case. That, ironically, is a lie. You always point to the same two examples, both of which are not accurate. For example, the iTunes deleting your music when you moved to a non-USA country with a non-USA credit card -- I didn't make that up, in fact I've linked you to the article many times since. The fact that it doesn't do that any more -- in response to the public backlash, no doubt -- doesn't make it a lie.

You will fly off half-cocked at the least provocation or misunderstanding.

I'm aggressive online, that doesn't make me anti-social. That's also not even what the point said that you quoted -- I'm one of those types who always has to plan a head. I'm not one of those impulsive people. It bothers me to not have a plan...

You are too much of a wimp to get physical, but otherwise this is on the ball.

Aggressive debater = anti-social?

Pretty much. You're malicious towards anyone who disagrees with you.

That doesn't say anything about reckless disregard about the safety of others...

Wow... based on your actions here, that's you again.

Lack of remorse? Just how do you prove that based on Apolyton?

It must be a logical conclusion from the Tsunami-Christian thread, isn't it? How I called the actions of the Christian "aid" workers disgusting and inhumane. Yeah, it sounds like I'm anti-social alright.

Quit playing games, man. You're usually wrong, and you're way off here again. Professional psychiatrists who I've dealt with strongly disagree with you, as does common sense with a list of the symptoms.

You're almost always out of your league, but you'll never admit it, or admit defeat.

I'm aggressive online because I have a low tolerance for ignorance. It's not that I constantly just insult people (though it does get to that point with specific people whose names I won't mention), I try to educate as well. I try to post rational, details arguments with support for my claims. In constrast, you exist just to be a contrarian. Seldom do you actually know what's being talked about, and even more rare is when you can actually build an argument based on facts and logic. You're just here to use whimsical rhetoric and ad hominems.

This thread is a brilliant example. Not only did you first try the smoke-and-mirror approach to debate, you've since abandonded that completely to try to discredit me by trying to analyze my personality now. The best part is, that, too, is wildly inaccurate.

What's next?

[Giancarlo]

Come on Agathon, you know it isn't nice attacking people personally. There are in reality people who actually do have emotional problems you speak and it isn't nice to those who do. I'm narcisstic. And that's my own issue. However, you shouldn't go around insulting people who are.

[Thue]

Originally posted by Giancarlo
Well I can buy a PC that looks cute, but is far better inside then the Mini Mac. Seriously this may push their market share up to about 2.1%. The Mini Mac, or Mac Mini (sounds like some kind of submachine gun or something lol) is of poor quality. And once people realize its inferiority they won't buy it (it probably won't even be able to compete with Celerons). But then again you are right, there are those who don't know any better.. like Agathon.

I think I know a thing or two about computers, and I am thinking about buying a MAC mini.

Who cares if they are slower then celerons, they are fast enough for far most uses.

And it is small, and noiseless. And quite cheap, I haven't seem a convincing price comparison for a completely comparable package. And you get to play with OS X, which is probably the best OS user experience available currently (or so I hear).

If nothing else I can run an X server on it, put my current noisy linux athlon 64 3000+ in the basement, and run it over the 100Mbit network when I need the horsepower.

[Asher]

Why is your Athlon 64 3000+ noisy?

My Athlon 64 3200+ is noiseless.

It'll be noisy unless you want to make it noiseless.

If you want small, noiseless, and cheap, buy a mini-ATX motherboard and put a Pentium M in it. Not only is it way faster than the G4, it's way cheaper. And cooler. In fact, a 1.2GHz Pentium M is faster clock-for-click than the G4, and can be cooled with just a heatsink.

[Asher]

Nano-ITX is even smaller.



The whole buzz around the Mac Mini is strange to me. Similar products have been out for ages, and now it's suddenly a new and original thing?