Log in

View Full Version : Apple Strikes Back At Sony


Kent Pribbernow
07-07-2004, 10:00 PM
<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2004/07/07/walkman/' target='_blank'>http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2004/07/07/walkman/</a><br /><br /></div><i>"Sony Corp.'s new hard disk-based Walkman is the product with the biggest brand recognition that Apple Computer Inc.'s market-leading iPod has had to face since its introduction. But it's not the Walkman's 25-year history that bothers Apple executives, it's Sony's marketing message. When Sony released the 20GB Walkman they claimed to have trumped Apple with the number of songs that their device could hold -- 13,000 compared to the iPod's 10,000 -- even thought the total capacity was half of the iPod's. That message is misleading to consumers, according to Apple."</i><br /><br />Good for Apple! Sony is duping consumers by playing a numbers game. I don't really give a flying monkey's behind if Sony's ATRAC3 format can compress tracks into a smaller file size because the audio quality sucks. I mean come on...who encodes music at 48Kbps? That's AM radio quality! :roll:

Felix Torres
07-07-2004, 10:20 PM
I'll refrain from bringing up Apple's own history of deceptive advertising (re:tv commercials banned for lack of verity) and suggest instead that Apple seems to be taking Sony very seriously, considering their self-proclaimed 70% market share and "superior integration of hardware software and services".
Whatever happened to "don't let tgem see you sweat?"

Could this be Sony's way of gaining instant credibility by getting Apple to over-react?
Maybe Sony intends to challenge Apple to a sound-off?
This could get fun.

Btw, while I wouldn't consider 48kbps anything to be "cd quality", I have played with WMA at that rate (and the older 32kbps rate from WMA7) and found both to be better than cassette quality.
If you've been to enough loud concerts, you *might* confuse it with cd quality. :twisted:

That said, to somebody used to mini-discs and cassettes, the ATRAC3 48 kbps format might *indeed* be acceptable.
Maybe that is made Apple's knee jerk?
The idea that the walkman installed base might migrate en-mass to the WHD-1?

Anybody out there with Sony experience?
It'll be fun to see who comes out darker here. the pot or the kettle... :wink:

dean_shan
07-07-2004, 10:58 PM
The only think I encode at 48kbps is audiobooks.

Felix Torres
07-07-2004, 11:25 PM
The only think I encode at 48kbps is audiobooks.

You may be wasting space.
Most modern codecs can do voice just fine at 16kbps.
(I think that's what Apple recommends.)
WMA has a special voice mode at 8kbps.

James Fee
07-07-2004, 11:37 PM
Well it is all moot. I won't defend Apple's past, but the usual comparison is for 128 kbs. That is how AAC and WMA are usually compared with mp3. To assume anyone would rip at 48 is a joke.

I've search google to try and find how AAC/WMA/MP3 and ATRAC3 stack up, but no one seems to have done it with ATRAC3.

dean_shan
07-07-2004, 11:44 PM
The only think I encode at 48kbps is audiobooks.

You may be wasting space.
Most modern codecs can do voice just fine at 16kbps.
(I think that's what Apple recommends.)
WMA has a special voice mode at 8kbps.

A lot of the audiobooks I've ripped have music backgrounds. I don't want the music to be all distorted so I do 48kbps.

Lee Yuan Sheng
07-08-2004, 12:49 AM
Ugh, ATRAC3 at 48kb/s isn't hot. Tested on the old but cool MDR-900.

Felix Torres
07-08-2004, 03:47 AM
A lot of the audiobooks I've ripped have music backgrounds. I don't want the music to be all distorted so I do 48kbps.

Fair 'nough. 8)

Janak Parekh
07-08-2004, 04:15 AM
I've search google to try and find how AAC/WMA/MP3 and ATRAC3 stack up, but no one seems to have done it with ATRAC3.
ATRAC3 is not good -- it gets the lowest ratings at 128kbps (http://www.rjamorim.com/test/multiformat128/results.html). I would expect it to do even worse at 48kbps -- historically, I believe ATRAC (the original format) was designed for higher bitrates. I'm not sure how ATRAC3Plus, or whatever it's called, compares.

Felix, I'm pretty sure this is lame attempt at marketing on Sony's part. Apple was caught by their G5 marketing, and Sony should be caught by this -- it's quite misleading.

--janak

James Fee
07-08-2004, 04:52 AM
ATRAC3 is not good -- it gets the lowest ratings at 128kbps (http://www.rjamorim.com/test/multiformat128/results.html). I would expect it to do even worse at 48kbps -- historically, I believe ATRAC (the original format) was designed for higher bitrates. I'm not sure how ATRAC3Plus, or whatever it's called, compares.
Thanks for the link. I'm not surprised.

I personally think we can file this format along with mp3PRO in the trash bin. Apple at least waited until the iPod was the "standard" before introducing AAC. Sony is doing the opposite and the end result will be, no sales.

Felix Torres
07-08-2004, 02:21 PM
Felix, I'm pretty sure this is lame attempt at marketing on Sony's part.
--janak

Probably.
Thing is, it worked.
Just a couple days ago folks were saying Sony was no threat whatsoever; today *Apple* is feeling threatened.
In Madison Avenue they say there is no such thing as bad publicity; it doesn't matter *what* they say about you as long as they talk about you.

Not the way I like to see anybody do business, but it worked... :roll:
And to a lot of customers it'll be just a matter of "he said-they said".

The Yaz
07-08-2004, 03:06 PM
I know we all have different preferences in terms of acceptable audio quality, but I think using 48kbps as a baseline is a little extreme. I don't remember which audio program I was using, but they had these comparisons when allowing you to select the rate that the cd would be copied at:

48kbps...AM radio
64kbps...FM radio (mono)
96kbps...FM radio (stereo)
128kbps.Minimum CD quality

I agree that for hardware sporting storage in gigs, the comparisons have to be based on 128kbps. For the smaller units (128/256/512mb) I think the consumer would be more concerned that they can store 1-10 complete albums at one time, regardless of quality.

Steve 8)

Mojo Jojo
07-08-2004, 04:16 PM
...today *Apple* is feeling threatened...

Do you really think they feel threatened? I mean seriously.

How about they *had* to make a rebutal because Apple's product was directly mentioned in a lie? If Apple didn't say anything and no one called Sony on it, people could just as easily come to the conclusion that Sony is telling the truth.

If anything I would say Sony feels there is some need to manipulate the information on its product instead of letting its true abilities stand on its own in comparision to the iPod. Perhaps Sony is the one feeling threatend.

James Fee
07-08-2004, 04:50 PM
...today *Apple* is feeling threatened...

Do you really think they feel threatened? I mean seriously.
Still Apple stock goes up. The investors (http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=reutersEdge&storyID=5621347) think the iPod is the real thing and so do most people.
Once seen as a value play that traded at little above its cash value, Apple's stock is now attracting long-term and momentum investors sold on Chief Executive Steve Jobs' vision of the company as a high-margin style-setter at the hub of an emerging "digital lifestyle."
"Longer-term investors are looking at it right now and saying Apple's got these great products out there and more coming and we trust them," said analyst Shannon Cross at Cross Research, while noting that there are now likely a sizable number of momentum investors in Apple.

The stock took a hit last week when the company announced plans for a next-generation iMac desktop computer, but said that it would miss its own internal schedule and won't ship the new one until September. The resulting sell-off took the shares down from their highest levels since 1999 and analysts reiterated their "buy" ratings, urging clients to take advantage of the price dip.
Felix thinks that not having WMA will mean sales will decrease, but it has not happened yet. Eventually his hope is crying wolf will be correct and he'll be able to tell us all how right he was. :roll:

Felix Torres
07-08-2004, 06:29 PM
[Felix thinks that not having WMA will mean sales will decrease, but it has not happened yet. Eventually his hope is crying wolf will be correct and he'll be able to tell us all how right he was. :roll:

Reading minds, now, are we?
Sorry, but you're reading someone else.

I am *hoping* for nothing.
I am predicting nothing.
Re-read my past posts if you must.

I am not however willing to concede a market to hype and hoopla.
I think Apple is playing a dangerous game.
I think it will backfire.

I don't care if it does or not.
I have no personal stake vested in the outcome and I do not define myself by the products or technologies I use.

And I don't cry wolf or say I told you so.
But I may make an exception in a year or so when the next round of market share numbers come about.
Until then, I'd rather see the various vendors fight (they can be quite amusing) than go picking needless fights myself.

As for Apple and Sony, I've bought products from both and I'll probably do it again.
But it probably won't be a digital music player since neither company meets my needs.
It *is* fun to see *them*, fight though...

Peace.

James Fee
07-08-2004, 06:38 PM
Reading minds, now, are we?
Only on the internet.
http://members.cox.net/jamesf1/media/2004/dippittydew.gif