[Jason Dunn]

http://www.cio.co.uk/concern/infras...=allchantopdate

"CIO: Why has Microsoft developed Zune?

Ballmer: At the end of the day, one of the big trends is that all content is going digital. And if we don't have the software and services that are useful, helpful and valuable for the consumption of music and video, we are sort of not really a player. Now, we built the Zune hardware with the Zune software - and what you'll see more and more over time is that the Zune software will also be ported to and be more important not just with the hardware but on the PC, on Windows Mobile devices, etc."

What can I say other than IT'S ABOUT FREAKING TIME. I feel like I've told this story 1000 times by now, but here it is again: about four years ago I was at a Mobius or MVP event (I can't remember which) and a Microsoft person came up to me and asked me if I thought they should scrap Windows Media Player Mobile on the device and instead implement the Portable Media Center interface as the way end users would access their photos, videos, and music. I said "Yes, absolutely" before he was even finished talking. The first generation PMC hardware might have been pretty suck-tacular, but the UI was easy to use. The Zune is an evolution of that UI, and while the Zune still needs improvement on a number of levels, the Zune UI is very easy to use - easier to use an an iPod in my opinion. If Microsoft really cared about the consumer market, they would have implemented that media UI years ago and we'd be having a different discussion today. They didn't because they're focused on the enterprise market first and foremost, but that's slowly (oh so slowly) changing.

Putting the Zune software onto Windows Mobile gives Microsoft a bunch of advantages: first, it lets them stop developing Windows Media Player Mobile, a piece of software that has sadly languished for years, hardly getting any updates or improvements. Secondly, it gives end users a great UI for media consumption, and assuming they go all the way with this, it gives users a media management solution (the Zune desktop software) that enables them to easily manage music and podcasts, and somewhat more easily manage photos and videos.

I see this as a win-win all around if implemented properly. I can't see a single down-side to this - what do you think about it?

[Jason Dunn]

http://www.cio.co.uk/concern/infras...=allchantopdate

"CIO: Why has Microsoft developed Zune?

Ballmer: At the end of the day, one of the big trends is that all content is going digital. And if we don't have the software and services that are useful, helpful and valuable for the consumption of music and video, we are sort of not really a player. Now, we built the Zune hardware with the Zune software - and what you'll see more and more over time is that the Zune software will also be ported to and be more important not just with the hardware but on the PC, on Windows Mobile devices, etc."

What can I say other than IT'S ABOUT FREAKING TIME. I feel like I've told this story 1000 times by now, but here it is again: about four years ago I was at a Mobius or MVP event (I can't remember which) and a Microsoft person came up to me and asked me if I thought they should scrap Windows Media Player Mobile on the device and instead implement the Portable Media Center interface as the way end users would access their photos, videos, and music. I said "Yes, absolutely" before he was even finished talking. The first generation PMC hardware might have been pretty suck-tacular, but the UI was easy to use. The Zune is an evolution of that UI, and while the Zune still needs improvement on a number of levels, the Zune UI is very easy to use - easier to use an an iPod in my opinion. If Microsoft really cared about the consumer market, they would have implemented that media UI years ago and we'd be having a different discussion today. They didn't because they're focused on the enterprise market first and foremost, but that's slowly (oh so slowly) changing.

Putting the Zune software onto Windows Mobile gives Microsoft a bunch of advantages: first, it lets them stop developing Windows Media Player Mobile, a piece of software that has sadly languished for years, hardly getting any updates or improvements. Secondly, it gives end users a great UI for media consumption, and assuming they go all the way with this, it gives users a media management solution (the Zune desktop software) that enables them to easily manage music and podcasts, and somewhat more easily manage photos and videos.

I see this as a win-win all around if implemented properly. I can't see a single down-side to this - what do you think about it?

[David Tucker]

I think I would not complain about this at all

[Sven Johannsen]

Originally Posted by Jason Dunn

I see this as a win-win all around if implemented properly. I can't see a single down-side to this - what do you think about it?

Depends on whether the sync solution is ported from the Zune to WM or from WM to the Zune.

[Jason Dunn]

Originally Posted by Sven

Depends on whether the sync solution is ported from the Zune to WM or from WM to the Zune.

This is just a guess, but the Zune team defends their brand and turf pretty strongly - they couldn't get off the Windows Media Player codebase fast enough - so I think it would be a Zune trickled down to WM type thing...which is good, because I rarely have any trouble synching my Zune.

[Lee Yuan Sheng]

So does it mean anything for us outside North America? :P

[onlydarksets]

This could be compelling - if they get the interface right, I'd consider going back to WM. Of course, the Touch HD would be a good combo with the Zune interface...

[inteller]

hey maybe now zune can get some ****ing UNICODE support because I can hack code pages onto WinMo a lot easier than the current crop of Zune devices.

[Cattle-Dog]

I would be very disappointed if they only took advantage of the zune UI for media management. I think it should be freshened up and modified to run the UI for the whole phone. It's hard Microsoft, I know (not really), but phones don't need a Start Button!

[cab124]

Originally Posted by Cattle-Dog

It's hard Microsoft, I know (not really), but phones don't need a Start Button!

Does it bother anyone else, or just me, that Windows Mobile is being referred to with increasing frequency as a "phone" OS?

I tend to think of my mobile device as a pocket computer that has phone functionality. But over the past couple of months, I have really noticed that people seem to be moving away from the concept of a pocket-sized computer, to something that is primarily a phone, with a phone operating system.

Windows Mobile has a "Start" button because it was initially designed to be a pocket computer, not just a glorified phone.

If phones do not need a "Start" button (or any such element that suggests that the device is actually a computer), do they also need need web browsers, GPS capability, Office document editing capability, third-party software capability, media players, etc.? These are functions that I typically attribute to computers, not phones.

I am not able to put my finger on it, but for some reason there is something about this that really bothers me. Maybe its that I feel like our phone/text-crazed culture is imposing its way of thinking on the concept that I have really grown to appreciate over the past several years - the computer that fits in your pocket.

It could be that we are just evolving the term "phone" to refer to much more than it ever has in the past. At the same time, I have a tough time imagining myself referring to my Touch HD (if I ever get my hand on one) as my "phone." Its really a pocket PC, and I'm glad it has a "Start" button (or some form of computer-oriented UI element).

[Cattle-Dog]

I respectfully disagree. I think a phone of the caliber of Windows mobile phone, should not have to dig through menu's to find needed applications or information. I don't think this user experience is synonymous with GPS or web browsing. The start button is a great way to manage hundreds of applications and 100's of GB's of information and optimized for a mouse interface. I don't think it is the best way to organize a user interface for a small screen (even for the Touch HD relative to a desktop) device that (should) specializes in keeping you most import information and applications as easy to get to as possible.

In short, I don't think you have to sacrifice flexibility as a mobile computing system at all while modernizing and specializing the UI for a small phone based device. Short of the home screen, even 6.1 is essentially the same UI that was on my HP 300LX.