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/technology/circuits/16POGUE-EMAIL.html?ex=1106283600&en=afd987caba2abfdd&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.