The same applies to websites and media, too. There were over six thousand members of the press at CES, and I saw a decent proportion of them walking in and out of the always-overcrowded press room on-site. It's hilarious to check out people's badges then go and check out their website after they've walked on. Honestly, how many gadget weblogs does the world need? As I said, I'm all for choice, but are you honestly going to top Engadget, which put out the most outrageously comprehensive coverage of the event? I don't think so, somehow. So why exist?
I have to say that could have been worded a lot better Wil, the way it comes off in the article is arrogant at best.
Like others have said, if you and the rest of the team had thought that way 3 years ago, bit-tech would not have expanded to where it's at now.
..
..
Quote:
'd like to talk about Windows Vista here, as demonstrated by Bill Gates at this keynote at the show. I would like to go on about how similar Windows Vista is to Apple OSX, but if I do, I'll get blasted by the rest of the guys for being such a blatant Apple fanboy, having already spent half this column talking about iPods. But let me put it this way, succinctly: Vista delivers the same functionality as Tiger. But 12 months later. And less sexily.
This is something I'm looking forward to, it will be Windows with some of the OSX functionality, you just can't get better than that, an OS that will run everything and look nice.
Originally Posted by Hamish :D
itanic is the nickname for the itanium, itanic-> titanic cos it sank like a brick :p
but yea, 64bit chips were out a long time before Athlon 64's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/64_bit#Timeline
Originally Posted by Hamish very true, but they were the first to bring 64bit to mainstream desktop pc's
before that 64bit chips were pretty much exclusive to servers and very specific applications (itanic anyone? :D)
Quote:
Originally Posted by M0dd And I can't remember but was AMD not the first processor manufacturer to bring out 64-bit processors and dual core processors into the consumer market
Originally Posted by Ramble Sounds like you are jsut another Apple fanboy writing an article about how they are so much better.
Get this.
Apple doesn't innovate, they market.
Hitler wasn't really a good leader, he just used propaganda to his advantage.
See my point?
Sounds like you are just another poster who is trying to be incisive.
Get this.
Calling someone an Apple fanboy does not make reasoned argument.
Making spurious (and incorrect) parallels with Hitler does not emphasise your point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue65 So because Apple has most of the market share in MP3 players all the other manufacturers should just shut up shop and admit defeat? It seems as if you're trying to get across the idea that if someone does it well everyone should leave the whole market alone and find something new. Surely then bit-tech should have given up a few years ago when it wasn't one of the biggest modding/hardware sites around?
That was not his argument. His argument was (as the title says ;) ) that other manufacturers should try to produce something different or better, rather than to make weak derivatives. In that respect Bit-Tech wasn't the biggest modding site about, but it was better and different enough to distinguish itself from the rest.
Originally Posted by Nexxo That was not his argument. His argument was (as the title says ;) ) that other manufacturers should try to produce something different or better, rather than to make weak derivatives. In that respect Bit-Tech wasn't the biggest modding site about, but it was better and different enough to distinguish itself from the rest.
I know that he wasn't using the entire column to put across that argument, but it still came across as if he was saying there should be no competition at all. Bit-tech was better than a lot of other modding sites, but who's to tell whether another site could come along and be better still? Eliminating competition isn't the way to improve, though variation does improve the quality and variety of content, just in a different way.
Most of (for example) the Nano clones are "imitating" the Nano, but adding something else, or changing something that the designers didn't like about the Nano. if people didn't do this, then technology woudn't develop as fast as it does today.
And there are many people who don't want to buy an Ipod.
Originally Posted by Blue65 I know that he wasn't using the entire column to put across that argument, but it still came across as if he was saying there should be no competition at all. Bit-tech was better than a lot of other modding sites, but who's to tell whether another site could come along and be better still? Eliminating competition isn't the way to improve, though variation does improve the quality and variety of content, just in a different way.
That did not come across to me at all. What the article argued (to me) was that competition should strive to bring something better or different to the market, rather than to produce poor imitations in the same price bracket.
If another site comes along that is better than Bit-Tech, that would be just fine. That's how progress works. To produce a somewhat bland imitation however would obviously be pointless, both logically and in terms of commercial competition.
It is a natural selection dynamic. You make variations and improvements on a theme, and see which are favoured by the public. That is how you improve and refine a product. But if you produce poor clones, there is no contest, and hence no progress. People will stick with the original because it remains a just-that-bit-better alternative. And then are called "Apple fanboys". :p
Lots of comments here! Wil seems to have hit a bit of a nerve...in some ways, that's great, discussion is good. In other ways, it invites rabid fanboyism and spurious hitler references (excellent wording, Nexxo).
Personally, if you get too caught up in Wil's particular allegiances, you're missing the point. I've talked to people from AMD...he's not all that wrong about Vision, at least anymore. But you have to understand, they position themselves differently than Intel.
Intel has a view of where the whole MARKET of computers will go. What a COMPUTER will do. NB, SB and CPU are all designed with various functions in mind, and sold as a package. That is a huge difference from AMD, who says "What will a CPU do?" Like it or not, Intel push the market, and then AMD refines it. Both are essential, but one is definitely the leader. 64 bit computing on your consumer desktop? Please tell me, what has this done for you that you couldn't do before? As of yet, nothing. AMD did it because they could, because it would enhance the CPU as a whole, not because it would push the market in one direction. They refined the desktop processor, and they keep refining whatever market intel wades into next. Do they make it better? Yes, so maybe it's not such a good comparison for Wil's point. But do they make a complete system designed to pull the market in one way or another? Not at all...and that's a big difference.
And complaints about CES...once again, don't take it out of context. The beauty of Op-ed is you get to rant, and that needs to be emphasized here (i.e., his views do not necessarily represent all of us :D)...but don't miss the point. I can't tell you how many knock-off things I saw wandering around, and honestly the differences between them and the giant they were trying to knock off were slight except for quality. 12 MP3 players that I wandered past in one day, with nary a difference between them except for shape. There's a difference between the guys who really did take the idea and refine it, like Sandisk. That's ala AMD vs. Intel. But then there were the bunch of just crap reproductions trying to function as close to the iPod as they could without violating patents, which accounted for a variety of the differences.
All in all, just try not to miss the point. Yeah, Wil's opinionated, but that's why it's an OP-ED column. ;) But the idea underneath...maybe that's a little more valid than we'd like to admit, as we all have our allegiances.
Originally Posted by Firehed Well I for one totally agree with the article. I'm sick of copycat products that aren't as good as the original. I'm not an apple fanboy by any means, but I do have an iPod.
Dude I have a ipod also and I know that a ipod is a copy. The ipod copyed the touch wheel design from the Creative Zen. So to all that think ipod is the first no it isn't. THe Creative Zen has been around much longer then the ipod. Apple was late on the ban wagon when it came to mp3 players. Rio being the first won. iPods are Imitations of there current imitator. Take that world. :p
Why apple didn't choose AMD, I can kinda see why. Apple was the first to release there 64Bit PC. The G5 desktop. Not only did they have 64bit, but had dual CPU also. Talk about power hunger users. Right after they released the 64bits desktops, AMD came out with there K8 CPU a few months later. Taking away from the Apple image of power and unquieness. I doubt this is why but its an idea. Maybe Steve Jobbs tooke it realy personal when AMD did this.
It doesn't matter who came up with something first. What matters is that who comes next does it better, or different. To create the cycle of variety, competition, selection, progress and refinement. And when it comes to MP3 players, Apple did it very, very well. Apple did for MP3 players what Sony did for game consoles.
And at the million dollar business level people do not take anything personally. Business is business.
I personally find OS X to be much better than Vista, if we're strictly talking about operating systems. OS X has been out since 2002, and have had 4 years to improve upon itself. I was utterly disappointed, when finding out that a fresh install of Vista, with no applications running, already uses up 500+ MB of RAM - almost double that of XP's pagefile. I feel mixed about Vista's interface, as while it certainly is fresh, and I certainly am excited about it, I'd probably end up using the classic theme again (like I did with XP). Eye candy wise, Apple excels. They're bouncy, ripply, realtime whatever, interface animations are amazing (even if you find them annoying), and it's interface is very clean, and refined. Of course, this is not a fair comparison, as Vista is still in Beta, but if it remains remotely close to it is now, OS X certainly exceeds.
However, Vista's got its very strong points too, but mostly, due to the fact that it's Windows. As hard as you try, there will always be differenes between the operating systems, and there will always be a preference.
I personally grew up with Windows. My first computer was Windows 3.1, and then Windows 95, ME, then XP. Even if Apple offers an extremely easy to use interface, it can't possibly replace my 10+ years of Windows familiarity.
I am somewhat disappointed in Vista's new way of organizing and navigating, but I'm hoping it will pass, like me and the XP start menu (I still remember how odd it was at first to find 'My Computer' NOT on the desktop).
There really is no distinction between OS X and Vista. OS X is better only due to its underlying technology, and 4 years of improvements. If I wasn't such a gamer, or a hardware tweaker, Mac OS would be fine for me, but I stand by my Windows.
I'm really hoping that Vista will finally offer some OS Xesuqe eye candy and stability. After all, it has been delayed 3-4 years now, while OS X basks in glory of its absence.
Beh, what a stir this article has caused (and on purpose, quite obviously)
I agree with the 'why should bit-tech bother?' route.
Hell, im starting to not like some of the decisions made on this site, for example - ie, its wrong to have an opinion on the alienware pc thread, just reeks of 'alienware is paying us, can you please be a bit nicer rather than calling it a blatent rip off, because they might not send us more stuff!'
I agree about the 'me too' rant though. Many companies (mostly small asian ones, cannily enough) are doing this - direct copies with worse UI's, which is annoying. However, without these companies doing this, the price of your beloved ipod etc would be through the roof. Doesnt give these companies an excuse not to expand on an idea though, i agree at the lack of innovation, its fairly frustating.
Originally Posted by Nexxo That did not come across to me at all. What the article argued (to me) was that competition should strive to bring something better or different to the market, rather than to produce poor imitations in the same price bracket.
If another site comes along that is better than Bit-Tech, that would be just fine. That's how progress works. To produce a somewhat bland imitation however would obviously be pointless, both logically and in terms of commercial competition.
It is a natural selection dynamic. You make variations and improvements on a theme, and see which are favoured by the public. That is how you improve and refine a product. But if you produce poor clones, there is no contest, and hence no progress. People will stick with the original because it remains a just-that-bit-better alternative. And then are called "Apple fanboys". :p
Definitely, and I agree so far as to say that the whole aim of the column seemed to be to express that; there were just a few points I thought might have been presented better. ;)
Originally Posted by Etacovda Beh, what a stir this article has caused (and on purpose, quite obviously)
I agree with the 'why should bit-tech bother?' route.
Hell, im starting to not like some of the decisions made on this site, for example - ie, its wrong to have an opinion on the alienware pc thread, just reeks of 'alienware is paying us, can you please be a bit nicer rather than calling it a blatent rip off, because they might not send us more stuff!'
I scanned the thread in question and I disagree (moreover, I wonder why you feel the need to bring it up here).
On Bit-Tech forums, you can voice any opinion. But so can others, and theirs inevitably will differ at some point. So be prepared to be challenged on yours, like you challenge theirs. Moreover if your opinion is poorly reasoned or informed, do not be surprised when its weak points get exposed pretty quickly. There is no point in getting huffy about that, that's just how debate works.
Bit-Tech is like strong liquor: a sophisticated and acquired taste, best enjoyed responsibly by adults, best left alone by those who can't handle the drink.
Originally Posted by Nexxo That did not come across to me at all. What the article argued (to me) was that competition should strive to bring something better or different to the market, rather than to produce poor imitations in the same price bracket.
If another site comes along that is better than Bit-Tech, that would be just fine. That's how progress works. To produce a somewhat bland imitation however would obviously be pointless, both logically and in terms of commercial competition.
That's not how it came across to me.
Quote:
...but are you honestly going to top Engadget, which put out the most outrageously comprehensive coverage of the event? I don't think so, somehow. So why exist?
That reads to me "someone already has a site with full coverage of the event, don't bother trying to do the same as you won't beat them."
I don't bother to not read an article/review on another site just because I've already read something similar elsewhere. I don't think that just because one site is comprehensive it's any reason for other sites to not even exist. As I said in my earlier post, why does BT.net bother trying to write reviews/articles/cover CES? Why are no other sites allowed to cover CES? No one i forcing you read them. How about next year we cut down CES and rather than a whole bunch of press people going, we will just send Engadgets. Would that make things better? I don't think so.
As for the Nano thing, there is only so much you can do with MP3s. Personally I am a big fan of the Sony NW1000 series. I really like the 'favourites' and 'time machine' playlist features. I'm not sure if the Nano does such things, but I don't think it has the 'time machine' option. Does this not count as innovation? I'm not really sure what more you are wanting? All I'm after is a low profile, high capacity MP3 player with good sound quality and decent playlist options and I'm sure this is what most other people want too. Is it no surprise that if Apple have one of the smallest (depth wise) players then any other companys attempts to make a player are going to be similar dimensions.
It isn't all about immitation, it's about what the consumer wants.
And I think we're forgetting that technology is a business. Innovation involves huge risks and investment. Do we have any idea how unstable the market would be if EVERY company tried to be innovative risk-leaders? Most companies pick and choose their battles based on what their largest markets are. In the case of Apple it's their overly-devoted niche market who will pay more than the average person because it has their certain appeal and it's what they're familiar with. Companies also seek to serve their specific market (if they've identified it) and do so at a certain price level.
I respect dependable and respondant companies more than I do risk-taking ones. I don't care how innovative a company is if their innovations aren't going to improve my end-user experience by solving a problem (known or unknown). Or if their next innovation is going to leave their current customers SOL.
Originally Posted by eek That reads to me "someone already has a site with full coverage of the event, don't bother trying to do the same as you won't beat them."
I don't bother to not read an article/review on another site just because I've already read something similar elsewhere. I don't think that just because one site is comprehensive it's any reason for other sites to not even exist. As I said in my earlier post, why does BT.net bother trying to write reviews/articles/cover CES? Why are no other sites allowed to cover CES? No one i forcing you read them. How about next year we cut down CES and rather than a whole bunch of press people going, we will just send Engadgets. Would that make things better? I don't think so.
At no point was it implied that other sites aren't allowed to do the same thing. Just that they might as well not bother. There's a big difference.
In any case, other sites covering the CES may give a different emphasis, a different angle, a different opinion (they may, for instance, assert that Apple makes bland and derivative products. :p ). In that respect Bit-TEch is not trying to imitate Endgadget either (why bother?), it's trying to do its own thing. However if sites are trying to do the exact same thing as Endgadget, the opinion voiced is that it is pointless (though not forbidden).
Quote:
Originally Posted by eek Does this not count as innovation? I'm not really sure what more you are wanting?
Well, good for them, then! ;)
And Captain Slug: we're back to the natural selection process. If the innovation is crap, people won't buy it, and it gets selected out. If it is experienced by the customer as a Good Thing, it is retained, and progress is achieved.
As always, the Ed-Op is an opinion. It is not blasphemy. Agree, disagree, it's all good.
Originally Posted by Nexxo I scanned the thread in question and I disagree (moreover, I wonder why you feel the need to bring it up here).
On Bit-Tech forums, you can voice any opinion. But so can others, and theirs inevitably will differ at some point. So be prepared to be challenged on yours, like you challenge theirs. Moreover if your opinion is poorly reasoned or informed, do not be surprised when its weak points get exposed pretty quickly. There is no point in getting huffy about that, that's just how debate works.
Bit-Tech is like strong liquor: a sophisticated and acquired taste, best enjoyed responsibly by adults, best left alone by those who can't handle the drink.
I didnt mean that bit-tech shouldn't bother, i apologise; in back reading, thats how it came across. What i was meaning was, if he was going to say something like 'engaget is there, why bother', he should point his opinion barrel at his own site/job.
"On Bit-Tech forums, you can voice any opinion."
And yet, in that thread, you were threatened with being banned if you did so. Doesn't sound particularly democratic to me... i know for a fact that i could build a comp faster, better and quieter than the alienware pc - doesnt mean theres not a market for it, but you were specifically told NOT TO SAY THAT in that discussion thread, which suggests 'dont make the people that sent us this stuff mad!'. Thats not a debate, thats a moderated discussion where if you say the wrong thing, you're out.
"Bit-Tech is like strong liquor: a sophisticated and acquired taste, best enjoyed responsibly by adults, best left alone by those who can't handle the drink."
Are you insinuating that im not an adult, and i cannot 'handle the drink?'. Ive been reading this site for a good 2 years plus. My rants are rarely unresearched or unfounded, and if they're not factually based i say so (ie, reeks of, not 'is').
I wonder if Will would have been accused of such fanboyism had his preference lied on the other side of the Apple vs Microsoft fence. All you disparagers know he has a point, perhaps if he had not used the example of an iPod and substituted AMD for Intel, you would be happier. When you can't see someone's side of the argument because you're too busy accusing them of fanboyism, then you're clearly not going to understand the underlying points. The article is not "Apple>*", he's just used Apple as a (good) example.
Just mellow out and read the article again with less predjudice :)
Originally Posted by Tomm When you can't see someone's side of the argument because you're too busy accusing them of fanboyism, then you're clearly not going to understand the underlying points.
only a few things do i have to say, no offense to the author, it was a well put together article
1) itunes is by far the worst media 'whatever' player i have ever used, personally i use eph-pod for my ipod 3rd gen, and its wonderful, i had nothing but trouble out of itunes, maybe the newer versions are better, but good hardly ever comes out of something terribly bad
2) the ipod is hardly the best mp3 player out there, all it does is successfully look good, amoung our most favoritve flaws are: the horrible batteries apple seems to find in the garbage for these things, ive had mine replaced and now its just as bad as it was before, i notice it start to happen even on the newer ipod's...., and their little problems they have docking or undocking, ive noticed on both my brothers ipod video and my ipod 3rd gen that its touch and go at best..., mine constantly goes into 'disk-mode' or some other apple bs, and no im positive its no just my ipod, and my brothers video sometimes goes into a mode where it becomes just unresponsive until you trick it into working
3) way to go intel, for bringing back the market, for a lifetime intel user i am very proud, actually i sometimes fail to see where the amd proccessor is actually that much more powerful then the intel one, from head to head comparisons often featured on bit-tech i dont see the amd proccessors always taking the title of winner, furthermore with those amd proccessors costing twice as much as my entire computer, its not that 'cool'
Originally Posted by Warrior_Rocker only a few things do i have to say, no offense to the author, it was a well put together article
1) itunes is by far the worst media 'whatever' player i have ever used, personally i use eph-pod for my ipod 3rd gen, and its wonderful, i had nothing but trouble out of itunes, maybe the newer versions are better, but good hardly ever comes out of something terribly bad
2) the ipod is hardly the best mp3 player out there, all it does is successfully look good, amoung our most favoritve flaws are: the horrible batteries apple seems to find in the garbage for these things, ive had mine replaced and now its just as bad as it was before, i notice it start to happen even on the newer ipod's...., and their little problems they have docking or undocking, ive noticed on both my brothers ipod video and my ipod 3rd gen that its touch and go at best..., mine constantly goes into 'disk-mode' or some other apple bs, and no im positive its no just my ipod, and my brothers video sometimes goes into a mode where it becomes just unresponsive until you trick it into working
3) way to go intel, for bringing back the market, for a lifetime intel user i am very proud, actually i sometimes fail to see where the amd proccessor is actually that much more powerful then the intel one, from head to head comparisons often featured on bit-tech i dont see the amd proccessors always taking the title of winner, furthermore with those amd proccessors costing twice as much as my entire computer, its not that 'cool'
So in other words, the article is wrong because your opinion is superior? Honestly, you're bashing the iPod after saying you love your 3G. I must question that thought process. With iTunes, as good as other software may be (and I avoided iTunes for as long as possible), there's no beating how well-integrated everything is - plug in the iPod, music syncs, go; burning, playlists, (limited) video and podcasts all nicely worked together, etc. It's more of a matter of getting used to it.
We all know the iPod wasn't the first MP3 player, nor is it the "best" (though you couldn't pick a more subjective term if you tried to). Apple pulled off some incredible marketing, and effectively did "iPod : mp3 player :: Windows : computer" (we all know better, but many people don't). It's the same as the walkman - until the iPod became the latest thing, Walkman was THE generic term for "portable audio device".
As for the batteries... dunno, I've had two iPods and neither had battery issues. I used that as an excuse for using my warrantee to get a newer one, but they were fine. And procs - you'll note the latest Intel costs about the same as AMD's latest, and dollar-for-dollar, AMD almost always comes out on top with regards to apps that Bit readers are most likely to use. Intel may occasionlly win in theoretical benches, but AMD tends to deliver higher real-world performance (framerates, encode times, whatever).
I think the underlying point of the article is that it all comes down to marketing. Apple doesn't have the "best" product, but it's certainly the best-marketed, and sales reflect it. People try and copy off it's success. Intel created Viiv to be synonymous with HTPC much like Centrino is with laptops. AMD said "oh, good idea" and thought up Live; even though their processors tend to be faster in many of the apps that HTPCs would use (and don't even start about actual usability - power draw/heat/etc, why else would Intel be starting to put their once-laptop chips in desktops?), Intel will probably come out ahead because of their marketing. Why do we frequently see movies come out in content-pairs (Armageddon and Deep Impact come to mind as a notable one, Troy and Alexander as well, though they were quite spaced out with timing)? If you can take any old product and make it sound like a must-have item, that's what matters - once it's sold, customer satisfaction really doesn't mean crap.
I'm afraid I'm going to have to take issue with your claim that iTunes/iPod is the best media player ever. For Mac, it is. There's simply no competition. However, for PCs, I'd rather run something that speaks a more standard format, like, say *.MP3. For that matter, why do they even call the iPod an MP3 player to begin with? (But, I digress.) If I'm using a PC, running a PC OS, I'd rather use a more standard PC audio format than *.AAC.
I want to be able to use my collection of *.MP3s, so I'm not going to buy an iPod. It's really that simple.
Quote:
Vista delivers the same functionality as Tiger. But 12 months later. And less sexily.
You forgot something: With far more overhead. Aside from that, absolutely. The more I hear about Vista, the less I like it.
Comments 26 to 50 of 91
Like others have said, if you and the rest of the team had thought that way 3 years ago, bit-tech would not have expanded to where it's at now.
..
..
its not like i came up with teh name or anything
edit: :o read your first post wrong thought you were saying amd weren't the first company to make 64bit chips :)
Get this.
Calling someone an Apple fanboy does not make reasoned argument.
Making spurious (and incorrect) parallels with Hitler does not emphasise your point.
:? :? :?
:( :( :(
:?]
nm forget about it.
I know that he wasn't using the entire column to put across that argument, but it still came across as if he was saying there should be no competition at all. Bit-tech was better than a lot of other modding sites, but who's to tell whether another site could come along and be better still? Eliminating competition isn't the way to improve, though variation does improve the quality and variety of content, just in a different way.
And there are many people who don't want to buy an Ipod.
If another site comes along that is better than Bit-Tech, that would be just fine. That's how progress works. To produce a somewhat bland imitation however would obviously be pointless, both logically and in terms of commercial competition.
It is a natural selection dynamic. You make variations and improvements on a theme, and see which are favoured by the public. That is how you improve and refine a product. But if you produce poor clones, there is no contest, and hence no progress. People will stick with the original because it remains a just-that-bit-better alternative. And then are called "Apple fanboys". :p
Personally, if you get too caught up in Wil's particular allegiances, you're missing the point. I've talked to people from AMD...he's not all that wrong about Vision, at least anymore. But you have to understand, they position themselves differently than Intel.
Intel has a view of where the whole MARKET of computers will go. What a COMPUTER will do. NB, SB and CPU are all designed with various functions in mind, and sold as a package. That is a huge difference from AMD, who says "What will a CPU do?" Like it or not, Intel push the market, and then AMD refines it. Both are essential, but one is definitely the leader. 64 bit computing on your consumer desktop? Please tell me, what has this done for you that you couldn't do before? As of yet, nothing. AMD did it because they could, because it would enhance the CPU as a whole, not because it would push the market in one direction. They refined the desktop processor, and they keep refining whatever market intel wades into next. Do they make it better? Yes, so maybe it's not such a good comparison for Wil's point. But do they make a complete system designed to pull the market in one way or another? Not at all...and that's a big difference.
And complaints about CES...once again, don't take it out of context. The beauty of Op-ed is you get to rant, and that needs to be emphasized here (i.e., his views do not necessarily represent all of us :D)...but don't miss the point. I can't tell you how many knock-off things I saw wandering around, and honestly the differences between them and the giant they were trying to knock off were slight except for quality. 12 MP3 players that I wandered past in one day, with nary a difference between them except for shape. There's a difference between the guys who really did take the idea and refine it, like Sandisk. That's ala AMD vs. Intel. But then there were the bunch of just crap reproductions trying to function as close to the iPod as they could without violating patents, which accounted for a variety of the differences.
All in all, just try not to miss the point. Yeah, Wil's opinionated, but that's why it's an OP-ED column. ;) But the idea underneath...maybe that's a little more valid than we'd like to admit, as we all have our allegiances.
Dude I have a ipod also and I know that a ipod is a copy. The ipod copyed the touch wheel design from the Creative Zen. So to all that think ipod is the first no it isn't. THe Creative Zen has been around much longer then the ipod. Apple was late on the ban wagon when it came to mp3 players. Rio being the first won. iPods are Imitations of there current imitator. Take that world. :p
Why apple didn't choose AMD, I can kinda see why. Apple was the first to release there 64Bit PC. The G5 desktop. Not only did they have 64bit, but had dual CPU also. Talk about power hunger users. Right after they released the 64bits desktops, AMD came out with there K8 CPU a few months later. Taking away from the Apple image of power and unquieness. I doubt this is why but its an idea. Maybe Steve Jobbs tooke it realy personal when AMD did this.
And at the million dollar business level people do not take anything personally. Business is business.
However, Vista's got its very strong points too, but mostly, due to the fact that it's Windows. As hard as you try, there will always be differenes between the operating systems, and there will always be a preference.
I personally grew up with Windows. My first computer was Windows 3.1, and then Windows 95, ME, then XP. Even if Apple offers an extremely easy to use interface, it can't possibly replace my 10+ years of Windows familiarity.
I am somewhat disappointed in Vista's new way of organizing and navigating, but I'm hoping it will pass, like me and the XP start menu (I still remember how odd it was at first to find 'My Computer' NOT on the desktop).
There really is no distinction between OS X and Vista. OS X is better only due to its underlying technology, and 4 years of improvements. If I wasn't such a gamer, or a hardware tweaker, Mac OS would be fine for me, but I stand by my Windows.
I'm really hoping that Vista will finally offer some OS Xesuqe eye candy and stability. After all, it has been delayed 3-4 years now, while OS X basks in glory of its absence.
I agree with the 'why should bit-tech bother?' route.
Hell, im starting to not like some of the decisions made on this site, for example - ie, its wrong to have an opinion on the alienware pc thread, just reeks of 'alienware is paying us, can you please be a bit nicer rather than calling it a blatent rip off, because they might not send us more stuff!'
I agree about the 'me too' rant though. Many companies (mostly small asian ones, cannily enough) are doing this - direct copies with worse UI's, which is annoying. However, without these companies doing this, the price of your beloved ipod etc would be through the roof. Doesnt give these companies an excuse not to expand on an idea though, i agree at the lack of innovation, its fairly frustating.
Definitely, and I agree so far as to say that the whole aim of the column seemed to be to express that; there were just a few points I thought might have been presented better. ;)
On Bit-Tech forums, you can voice any opinion. But so can others, and theirs inevitably will differ at some point. So be prepared to be challenged on yours, like you challenge theirs. Moreover if your opinion is poorly reasoned or informed, do not be surprised when its weak points get exposed pretty quickly. There is no point in getting huffy about that, that's just how debate works.
Bit-Tech is like strong liquor: a sophisticated and acquired taste, best enjoyed responsibly by adults, best left alone by those who can't handle the drink.
That reads to me "someone already has a site with full coverage of the event, don't bother trying to do the same as you won't beat them."
I don't bother to not read an article/review on another site just because I've already read something similar elsewhere. I don't think that just because one site is comprehensive it's any reason for other sites to not even exist. As I said in my earlier post, why does BT.net bother trying to write reviews/articles/cover CES? Why are no other sites allowed to cover CES? No one i forcing you read them. How about next year we cut down CES and rather than a whole bunch of press people going, we will just send Engadgets. Would that make things better? I don't think so.
As for the Nano thing, there is only so much you can do with MP3s. Personally I am a big fan of the Sony NW1000 series. I really like the 'favourites' and 'time machine' playlist features. I'm not sure if the Nano does such things, but I don't think it has the 'time machine' option. Does this not count as innovation? I'm not really sure what more you are wanting? All I'm after is a low profile, high capacity MP3 player with good sound quality and decent playlist options and I'm sure this is what most other people want too. Is it no surprise that if Apple have one of the smallest (depth wise) players then any other companys attempts to make a player are going to be similar dimensions.
It isn't all about immitation, it's about what the consumer wants.
I respect dependable and respondant companies more than I do risk-taking ones. I don't care how innovative a company is if their innovations aren't going to improve my end-user experience by solving a problem (known or unknown). Or if their next innovation is going to leave their current customers SOL.
In any case, other sites covering the CES may give a different emphasis, a different angle, a different opinion (they may, for instance, assert that Apple makes bland and derivative products. :p ). In that respect Bit-TEch is not trying to imitate Endgadget either (why bother?), it's trying to do its own thing. However if sites are trying to do the exact same thing as Endgadget, the opinion voiced is that it is pointless (though not forbidden).
And Captain Slug: we're back to the natural selection process. If the innovation is crap, people won't buy it, and it gets selected out. If it is experienced by the customer as a Good Thing, it is retained, and progress is achieved.
As always, the Ed-Op is an opinion. It is not blasphemy. Agree, disagree, it's all good.
I didnt mean that bit-tech shouldn't bother, i apologise; in back reading, thats how it came across. What i was meaning was, if he was going to say something like 'engaget is there, why bother', he should point his opinion barrel at his own site/job.
"On Bit-Tech forums, you can voice any opinion."
And yet, in that thread, you were threatened with being banned if you did so. Doesn't sound particularly democratic to me... i know for a fact that i could build a comp faster, better and quieter than the alienware pc - doesnt mean theres not a market for it, but you were specifically told NOT TO SAY THAT in that discussion thread, which suggests 'dont make the people that sent us this stuff mad!'. Thats not a debate, thats a moderated discussion where if you say the wrong thing, you're out.
"Bit-Tech is like strong liquor: a sophisticated and acquired taste, best enjoyed responsibly by adults, best left alone by those who can't handle the drink."
Are you insinuating that im not an adult, and i cannot 'handle the drink?'. Ive been reading this site for a good 2 years plus. My rants are rarely unresearched or unfounded, and if they're not factually based i say so (ie, reeks of, not 'is').
Just mellow out and read the article again with less predjudice :)
and vice-versa? no?
1) itunes is by far the worst media 'whatever' player i have ever used, personally i use eph-pod for my ipod 3rd gen, and its wonderful, i had nothing but trouble out of itunes, maybe the newer versions are better, but good hardly ever comes out of something terribly bad
2) the ipod is hardly the best mp3 player out there, all it does is successfully look good, amoung our most favoritve flaws are: the horrible batteries apple seems to find in the garbage for these things, ive had mine replaced and now its just as bad as it was before, i notice it start to happen even on the newer ipod's...., and their little problems they have docking or undocking, ive noticed on both my brothers ipod video and my ipod 3rd gen that its touch and go at best..., mine constantly goes into 'disk-mode' or some other apple bs, and no im positive its no just my ipod, and my brothers video sometimes goes into a mode where it becomes just unresponsive until you trick it into working
3) way to go intel, for bringing back the market, for a lifetime intel user i am very proud, actually i sometimes fail to see where the amd proccessor is actually that much more powerful then the intel one, from head to head comparisons often featured on bit-tech i dont see the amd proccessors always taking the title of winner, furthermore with those amd proccessors costing twice as much as my entire computer, its not that 'cool'
We all know the iPod wasn't the first MP3 player, nor is it the "best" (though you couldn't pick a more subjective term if you tried to). Apple pulled off some incredible marketing, and effectively did "iPod : mp3 player :: Windows : computer" (we all know better, but many people don't). It's the same as the walkman - until the iPod became the latest thing, Walkman was THE generic term for "portable audio device".
As for the batteries... dunno, I've had two iPods and neither had battery issues. I used that as an excuse for using my warrantee to get a newer one, but they were fine. And procs - you'll note the latest Intel costs about the same as AMD's latest, and dollar-for-dollar, AMD almost always comes out on top with regards to apps that Bit readers are most likely to use. Intel may occasionlly win in theoretical benches, but AMD tends to deliver higher real-world performance (framerates, encode times, whatever).
I think the underlying point of the article is that it all comes down to marketing. Apple doesn't have the "best" product, but it's certainly the best-marketed, and sales reflect it. People try and copy off it's success. Intel created Viiv to be synonymous with HTPC much like Centrino is with laptops. AMD said "oh, good idea" and thought up Live; even though their processors tend to be faster in many of the apps that HTPCs would use (and don't even start about actual usability - power draw/heat/etc, why else would Intel be starting to put their once-laptop chips in desktops?), Intel will probably come out ahead because of their marketing. Why do we frequently see movies come out in content-pairs (Armageddon and Deep Impact come to mind as a notable one, Troy and Alexander as well, though they were quite spaced out with timing)? If you can take any old product and make it sound like a must-have item, that's what matters - once it's sold, customer satisfaction really doesn't mean crap.
Well, not really. But mostly.
I'm afraid I'm going to have to take issue with your claim that iTunes/iPod is the best media player ever. For Mac, it is. There's simply no competition. However, for PCs, I'd rather run something that speaks a more standard format, like, say *.MP3. For that matter, why do they even call the iPod an MP3 player to begin with? (But, I digress.) If I'm using a PC, running a PC OS, I'd rather use a more standard PC audio format than *.AAC.
I want to be able to use my collection of *.MP3s, so I'm not going to buy an iPod. It's really that simple.
You forgot something: With far more overhead. Aside from that, absolutely. The more I hear about Vista, the less I like it.