Can anyone tell me why I dont want the new Zune?
Nov 9, 2007 at 9:43 PM Post #16 of 51
Quote:

Originally Posted by krmathis /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Exactly!
very_evil_smiley.gif



so, what Apple stands for ..lately ????
buggy iPod, iMacs, buggy OS, bricked phones, etc..etc.

But, I guess..."IT JUST WORKS". not

@anadin
He is talking about the Zune 80. Get with the times. D2 is thickier at 0.65inch than the Zune 80 0.5inch

BTW, not taking anything from the D2
 
Nov 9, 2007 at 9:58 PM Post #17 of 51
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ricardo Dawkins /img/forum/go_quote.gif
so, what Apple stands for ..lately ????
buggy iPod, iMacs, buggy OS, bricked phones, etc..etc.

But, I guess..."IT JUST WORKS". not



Apple "Just works" for me!
..and always has. But for all I know I might just have been damn lucky.
wink.gif
 
Nov 9, 2007 at 9:59 PM Post #18 of 51
Quote:

Originally Posted by rr423 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Microsoft could have won some more people over if the new Zune supported FLAC. Who Knows how long WMA Lossless will be around. I'm definitely interested in checking it out. CNET's mp3 podcast tested it out and seemed to like it.


I wouldn't be too worried about the longevity of WMA lossless. Players that support it after this are going to be your biggest concern, but as long as there are still Windows computer that still have WMP, you will still be able to use that codec I would bet.
 
Nov 9, 2007 at 10:03 PM Post #19 of 51
I Know computers will support it, but if you convert your whole library to WMA Lossless and then it's a dead format when the Zune 3 comes along, then you have to covert everything again. FLAC right now is the leader in lossless, microsoft and apple should just get on bored.
 
Nov 9, 2007 at 10:17 PM Post #20 of 51
Converting your entire library to only WMA lossless would be pretty stupid IMO. If you have plenty of space, I would have separate libraries of both formats. If not, I would suck it up and use 320 (oh no!). I guess I can't think of a solution for the situation where you have to have lossless and don't have space for two separate libraries. I prefer FLAC either way and don't really care. Just a bit of problem solving fun here.

Who knows.. the OP might use 128 and then none of this matters
tongue.gif
 
Nov 10, 2007 at 3:40 AM Post #21 of 51
Well if your using it in the car, it's no contest... the Zune DEFINITELY wins. The extra big text on the Zune80 will definetely be better than the touch interface on the D2.

And judging from the previous Zune30, it should sound spectacular. Adding that to the cheap price... no contest, get a Zune80.
 
Nov 10, 2007 at 4:13 AM Post #22 of 51
it can't do gapless
its screen has a low pixel density
you can't use it to store files
you can't use it on linux or os x
it doesn't have a clock, contacts, games (let me know if they have added any of these)
its only available in 80GB
its rated battery life is lower than the ipod's
you can only rate songs as like it or hate it (no more 5 star rating system)
the old zune didn't have a line out (may change)

now, why should you get? the interface looks spectacular, the screen is huge, the old zune sounded great (hope that holds), it has a radio, it will be integrated well with the social site they are setting up (community), all around it seems like a good device integrated with a good system.
 
Nov 10, 2007 at 4:22 AM Post #23 of 51
Quote:

Originally Posted by HyperM3 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I wont be storing video or pictures. I do however want the best audio quality and storage space. UI is a very close second.

I was looking at the Clix2/D2 but for $249 and 80gb how can you beat the Zune?



Quote:

Originally Posted by HyperM3 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I currently have 15+g of music on my DAP now. I dont want to have to shell out for extra cards that I could possibly end up losing. That cost would bring me well over $200 to get the same memory capacity of the zune. Even if I needed 30gb that would cost a pretty penny in extra memory cards.


just out of curiosity, why dont you want the old zune. other than pure cosmetics, the only advantage that i know so far of the new to the old would be

a) the storage
b) the screen

but you said you wont be storing videos, plus you said you only have around 15 gigs of music right now...

anyways, nothing wrong with getting the new one, its always nice to be the first to get a new toy, i can understand the satisfaction in that.
 
Nov 10, 2007 at 4:48 AM Post #24 of 51
Quote:

Originally Posted by stevenjchang /img/forum/go_quote.gif
just out of curiosity, why dont you want the old zune. other than pure cosmetics, the only advantage that i know so far of the new to the old would be

a) the storage
b) the screen

but you said you wont be storing videos, plus you said you only have around 15 gigs of music right now...

anyways, nothing wrong with getting the new one, its always nice to be the first to get a new toy, i can understand the satisfaction in that.



And battery life. And native support for that h.264 or whatever codec. And slimmer. And better output display resolution.
 
Nov 10, 2007 at 5:39 AM Post #25 of 51
Quote:

Originally Posted by jfindon /img/forum/go_quote.gif
And battery life. And native support for that h.264 or whatever codec. And slimmer. And better output display resolution.


good point about the battery life

i understand your other points but i thought they were negated since op said he wont be using it to watch videos
 
Nov 10, 2007 at 7:44 AM Post #28 of 51
Quote:

Originally Posted by stevenjchang /img/forum/go_quote.gif
good point about the battery life

i understand your other points but i thought they were negated since op said he wont be using it to watch videos



Battery wouldn't really matter either.. if he's using it strictly for the car i'm assuming he'll have one of those car chargers?
 
Nov 10, 2007 at 12:07 PM Post #30 of 51
What all this info about wma lossless going the way of the dinosaurs!

Where is that information coming from? The latest release of WMP -11(?) uses it. Is there something somewhere about it being abandoned?

It seems more likely that a niche format like FLAC (no matter how good or how much its liked here) is far more likely to be unsupported than WMA.

comments?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top