Quote:
Originally Posted by m_memmory /img/forum/go_quote.gif
We all seem to adore the underdog ... until it actually does well at which point we turn and adore something else instead.
|
I think this is mostly an issue with items that contains elements of subjectivity. Sound is subjective past a certain point, and fashion/brand is definitely subjective. An MP3 player is something you will carry around with you, so it is unsurprising to me that some people would consider it as an accessory, as part of clothing, where style matters (to some people).. think of it like a watch - there are people who don't care, yet others consider an important piece of accessory (and I see no reason to criticise). This is different from items like, say, a CPU, where the performance can be more objectively assessed [with benchmarks - though it is worth noting that some benchmarks will favour one type of CPU design over another]. 12-18 months ago, many computer enthusiasts favours AMD chips. But these days, it is pretty hard to back the underdog, when Intel's chip have reclaimed the performance crown.
Let's say, for the sake of argument, that the average audio enthusiast can overlook the style/brand of an MP3 player, and focus just on the 'performance'.. that is, sound quality and feature set. In terms of feature sets, it's a win-some, lose some. The iPod requires may require accessories for what other players include in the player (i.e. radio). It may not have the best screen (last time I checked, I favour the Creative Vision:M - but I've not looked into DAP for a while). But it does support lossless, has a lineout, and is overall pretty lightweight for the capacity. People should weight their needs when making decisions. If someone put zero weight to 'smart playlists', then it doesn't count for anything. Overall though, I don't think that the iPod feature set is particularly inferior. That leaves sound quality, which again, is subjective. I sometime hear people comment that the iPod has 'crap quality'. I do remember being underwhelmed when I tried a 2nd Gen iPod a few years back, but when I tested between the iAudio X5, iPod 5G and Creative Vision:M, I didn't find the iPod to be inferior to the other two. I could've been very happy with any three, and I really couldn't find a favorite between the X5/G5 (both of which I prefer
slightly over the Vision:M).
My point (which I am dragging it a little), picking among top tier MP3 players is almost solely subjective. I think that is what makes it easier to root for the underdog when it comes to MP3 players. If someone doesn't care that much about the specific feature sets, can't tell that much appart from the SQ, they'll go for what they think is 'coolest' or 'least uncool' (can't have the iPod alternatives be 'cool' or the whole argument falls appart doesn't it?).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schalldämpfer /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I just don't like Apple and their bullcrap advertising and slandering of other companies. Yeah, Microsoft isn't doing that great of a job, but Jobs doesn't have to go insulting it in commercials and advertisements. Their products are good, but their fanatical fanbase insists too much that everyone should convert to their product.
|
Umm. In terms of slandering, I would like to see some examples: it could be that Apple is worst than other companies - but frankly, I don't recall any commercials where Apple takes it on it's competitors. I know the current Nano advert at the cinemas in the UK make no reference whatsoever to other MP3 players.
And in terms of business practices.. I am far more fearful of Creative. Anyone remember Aureal? I would say that Creative make decent sound card these days, but I also have to wonder how much progress we would have seen had Aureal not been wiped out. And it makes me wonder. What would the DAP market be like if it was Creative who had the largest market share.. Yes, Apple is taking advantage of their position with iTune store, and DRM does get marked down in my book. But there are worse ways they could abuse their positions.
