[David Tucker]

http://www.forbes.com/technology/20...19ipodzune.html

“A 120 GB iPod Classic goes for $249, though its screen is roughly two-thirds the size of the Zune's. As far as music goes, when you're strolling through town listening to your tunes with your device in your pocket, will you really care which of the two you're using? The sad fact is, many would. The level of brand loyalty Apple enjoys today was prompted by increasingly aged innovations. As I see it, the main reason people turn their noses up at the Zune is that Microsoft is seen as uncool.”

If that isn’t the truth, I don’t know what is. Asher Hawkins did a side by side comparison of the Zune and iPod Touch. This is a comparison that at first glance seems a bit unfair given the very different nature of the two devices. When Asher admits to having been an Apple customer since age 5, then I didn’t exactly expect an unbiased look. I give Forbes credit for their professionalism though! Asher was very positive about the Zune in comparison to the iPod, even questioning why someone would choose a classic over the Zune 120.

Other than the fact that Asher was pretty positive on the whole thing, the most interesting comments came in regards to what you use day to day to listen to your music. And I agree completely. There is a difference of course between today’s MP3 players and yesterday’s CD player market. If you had a CD it would (usually) work in any player available.

Because of DRM and varying file formats, that’s of course not as easy anymore. I would guess, however, that most people who have their own music collections have them available in MP3 so that they can listen to them on any device they choose.

[David Tucker]

http://www.forbes.com/technology/20...19ipodzune.html

“A 120 GB iPod Classic goes for $249, though its screen is roughly two-thirds the size of the Zune's. As far as music goes, when you're strolling through town listening to your tunes with your device in your pocket, will you really care which of the two you're using? The sad fact is, many would. The level of brand loyalty Apple enjoys today was prompted by increasingly aged innovations. As I see it, the main reason people turn their noses up at the Zune is that Microsoft is seen as uncool.”

If that isn’t the truth, I don’t know what is. Asher Hawkins did a side by side comparison of the Zune and iPod Touch. This is a comparison that at first glance seems a bit unfair given the very different nature of the two devices. When Asher admits to having been an Apple customer since age 5, then I didn’t exactly expect an unbiased look. I give Forbes credit for their professionalism though! Asher was very positive about the Zune in comparison to the iPod, even questioning why someone would choose a classic over the Zune 120.

Other than the fact that Asher was pretty positive on the whole thing, the most interesting comments came in regards to what you use day to day to listen to your music. And I agree completely. There is a difference of course between today’s MP3 players and yesterday’s CD player market. If you had a CD it would (usually) work in any player available.

Because of DRM and varying file formats, that’s of course not as easy anymore. I would guess, however, that most people who have their own music collections have them available in MP3 so that they can listen to them on any device they choose.

[Janak Parekh]

Perhaps Asher deserves a little credit for her(?) balance, but this is an absolutely terrible article. It omits both the Zune's and the iPod touch's biggest features: Zune Pass and the App Store, respectively. The former makes the Zune a terrific music-exploring device, while the latter makes the iPod touch a mobile computing platform to compete against Windows Mobile.

In fact, it may be the worst comparison article I've read on these products, period.

--janak

[David Tucker]

Well, given that both devices have been compared and reviewed extensively by everyone, I found Asher's thoughts in general more interesting than a feature comparison. We've had plenty of those.

[Janak Parekh]

Originally Posted by David Tucker

Well, given that both devices have been compared and reviewed extensively by everyone, I found Asher's thoughts in general more interesting than a feature comparison. We've had plenty of those.

But, by discounting their key features, you're making an utterly worthless comparison. As many readers noted, a more apt comparison if music is your only use case is the iPod classic vs. the Zune. If she preferred the Zune as an MP3 player then, that's fine. But she considers the iPod touch expensive while discounting the features that make it a premium product.

--janak

[David Tucker]

What are the key features of the Touch exactly?

[Janak Parekh]

I don't understand your question? You're not seriously implying that it has no features that differentiate it from the Zune, are you?

--janak

[David Tucker]

The author was pretty clear that they didn't think WiFi enabled browsing was very important in an MP3 player and I tend to agree. Other than that they also stated that the 8 GB model was pretty limiting on actually using the other features and even 32 GB wasn't that great for large amounts of video & other media.

What exactly on there is different about the touch than the Zune other than web browsing and a bigger screen. The screen is the nicest feature of the Touch. But with limited memory unless you're willing to shell out $400 then using it isn't much fun.

Its an MP3 player. And a nice one. It plays music and movies just like the Zune does though. What on that page makes it so special, exactly? My question still stands. You gave me a feature page of features almost exactly mirrors the Zune.

[Janak Parekh]

David,

Either you're:

a) willfully ignoring the fact that the touch is a full-powered mobile device, with email, web, PIM (with synchronization), installable applications ranging many classes of software, including games thanks to its rich API on top of a full mobile OS, all of the above with a fast CPU, an excellent GPU, and a touch screen that provides rich UI interaction;

b) don't think these are worthwhile differentiating factors from a Zune;

c) genuinely unaware of what the recent iPhone/Touch OS platform contains. (The iPod touch contains nearly all of the features of the iPhone, excepting the phone but with the Nike+ integration.)

If it's (c), I strongly suggest you try a touch out at some time, either a friend's or at an Apple Store. It is a completely different, far more extensible platform than the Zune, something more competitive with Windows Mobile 6.1 Classic or the Android platform. The difference between the latter two and the iPod touch is that the touch also contains a first-class music and video playing app, comparable to the Zune in most aspects except for the aforementioned Zune Pass/subscription music platform. The iPhone/iPod touch are precisely why there's been rumors of Microsoft adding the Zune interface to WM.

If it's (a) or (b), then I'm afraid we have nothing further to talk about. I am all for the Zune succeeding as a device, but calling the touch and the Zune as roughly equivalent featurewise is simply incorrect, incomplete, and misleading, and a disservice both to the touch and the Zune.

--janak

[David Tucker]

If I'm shopping for an PMP then I don't care about anything other than the features that facilitate its use as a PMP. Its like when someone tells me their phone's camera is better than mine. That may be true...but it doesn't matter to me since I'd just as soon have no camera.

Same with most of those features. If you REALLY need mobile email or web connectivity you won't be using a Touch with only a wifi connection. You'll have a phone that does keep you connected. That makes those features superfluous at best. And if you don't need the features enough to have a data enabled phone...I seriously doubt most of those people would choose to hunt down a wifi hotspot just to get their email on the go.

You present the Touch as basically not an MP3 player. I don't think that's how Apple markets it.

[doogald]

I think that most people who are buying an iPod Touch - and I understand that they are very, very popular (they currently sit number 1 and number 2 on Amazon, with the black 8 GB Nano third) - are not buying it merely to be an MP3 or video player.

Originally Posted by David Tucker

You present the Touch as basically not an MP3 player. I don't think that's how Apple markets it.

Then maybe you missed the ubiquitous ad?

[edit] My son has a Touch, by the way, and it really is a very nice MP3 player as well.