although I personally think iTunes kicks WMP in the rear end, still, for this debate
What if the iPod gets a new feature, but WMP can't support it
due to MS lagging in development (and vice versa)
What if there's a bug in WMP
Keeping a one application philosophy clearly works best here.
Now you might say India doesn't have an iTunes store. So what? The iPod has already proven to be working with iTunes.
The iPod caught on because:
(a) It has always had an edge in having the largest storage capacity;
(b) The whole iTunes + iPod combination works like a charm;
(c) It is brain dead simple to use;
(d) The user interface is the best in class;
(e) It has all the important features that actually matter and they all work, for a change;
(f) Excellent battery life;
(g) It's sexy and cool; and
(h) Excellent marketing.
You just plug it in, hit Autofill and then hit Play.
Geeks aside, most people prefer to be taught to use one way. They have no preffered way of doing things. So once you show them how easy it is to import music into iTunes, rip CDs, burn them, sync your iPod, it all becomes really simple
When you plug in a shuffle (but not the other iPods), a new button appears in iTunes labeled 'Autofill'. Just hit it and it randomly fills your shuffle up to the maximum capacity from your iTunes library.Not owning an iPod, so asking out of curiosity,
1. If you have a 2 GB collection of songs, and you try to sync a 1GB Shuffle, what is synced? Do you not have to choose the files?
The syncing happens automatically only if you configure it that way. So, if you own an iPod, you can have it configured to sync automatically whenever you connect it. But when a friend comes over and plugs in his iPod, you'll have to sync manually.2. If your friend brings his iPod over, is syncing automatic or can you cancel it?
Aside for the market share, I'm not really talking about the whole world owning an iPod. I'm talking about all those who own iPods. So if Apple wants to implement a feature into their iPods, WMP will not support it. So Apple makes their own software.Why the hell do you guys think that the whole world owns the ipod!!!
Not really sure what you mean by copy files between drives, cause macs can do that. And note that I mentioned Vice versa. Say there's an awesome feature in WMP that has also been implemented in the Zune. iPod users would want that as well but since Apple has lagged in development, the users are left in the lurch leaving a bitter after taste. So Apple makes their own software.really man!!! well atleast MS can copy files b/w drives....i mean what kinda development is that? right?
What if iTunes has a bug that doesn't go well with the iPod? Apple will quickly fix it of course cause they are obliged to. MS on the other hand is no in any way obliged to fix a bug. So Apple makes their own software.really man!!! ur best defence is "what if"?? i may ask the same question WHAT IF ITUNES HAS A BUG????????????????????????
Please don't play stupid. I meant one application for the iPod. I didn't mean every music player user out there should use iTunes for their players (and it's not possible in any case).That is if the whole world had on the ipod!!
So if Apple wants to implement a feature into their iPods, WMP will not support it. So Apple makes their own software.
MS on the other hand is no in any way obliged to fix a bug.
Please don't play stupid.
I meant one application for the iPod. I didn't mean every music player user out there should use iTunes for their players
Thanks for acknowledging that! It's good to know that there are some people around here who actually read what others are posting, understand English and, when they change their minds about something, are willing to acknowledge it publicly. The other ongoing conversation between goobimama and those two dullards really makes one want to tear one's hair off. This response offers some respite.Ok, after a lot of intraspection, I am actually convinced that you are indeed right aayush.
I have to hand it to you, it really does not make sense to have a screen on a player the size of the shuffle, and creative is stupid for having done so. On the surface, the shuffle looks easy to use, friendly and warm, while the stone looks like just that, a glorified stone. The shuffle's clip is another genius idea, i won't even bother arguing there. Also, the one thing that really would sell the shuffle for me would be durability. I know i can toss it around, have it fall down a few times, put it in my pocket with my pins (No i don't really carry pins around) and still have not a scratch on it. I have to admit, if I had to buy a secondary MP3 player, it would be the shuffle.
It is. There is no doubt about that. The point is that some people find that to be a positive quality, while others don't, much in the same vein as I love the integration between Mac OS X and Macs and you or someone else might say it is too restrictive and monopolistic. Opinions are bound to differ. What matters is that you should be able to find a common ground even while you hold conflicting opinions.But I stand by what I said about iTunes. It is too airtight for it's own good.
But if you want your phone to be just that, a phone, it is perfect, isn't it? I mean, as close to perfection as Nokia can get anyway.Also, I don't agree with you on the iPod interface. It's not simple, it's simplistic. There aren't enough features to cramp up the UI. The Nokia 1100's interface is dead simple, but only because it doesn't do much.
I won't comment on that because:But one thing has always pissed me off about iPods. The sound quality is nowhere close to the best. To be completely honest, the only reason I chose my Creative Zen over the nano is because the SQ is significantly better. Otherwise, i would have bought the nano in a heart beat.
Keeps the packaging trim and is more environment friendly. In this day and age of cheap and all pervasive high speed broadband access, that's hardly an issue. If anything, it's better.Other manufacturers give the option of using their own software (which they provide with the player on a CD unlike Apple which forces people to download it from their site)
Yes, but using the Windows Explorer is absolutely the worst way to manage your music. Suppose you have five thousand songs in your library and you copy them all onto your music player. It takes several hours and it's done. Great. No iTunes required, simply copy-paste. You're very happy.Anybody who can use a pc will be able to use the windows explorer. In that case filling up the player would be just as easy as filling up your pen drive, which IMO easier than downloading an app from the net, starting it, update your library in it and then syncing your player with it.
LOL! Are you sure you don't want to take that back? You actually think that no one uses iTunes to play music? LOL! Any proofs to back that ludicrous statement?I'm sure no Windows user uses iTunes to play their music.
I was talking about their marketing in general, i.e. the countries that they do advertise in, not specifically about India. It was one of the reasons for why the iPod is successful globally.Aayush said something about Apple marketing. Well to be honest I haven't seen a single ad for Apple products all my life. And thats all 21 years of it.
I agree. I don't care about radios and eqalisers, but I would rather not have he calendars and notes on an iPod, the iPod touch being the only exception.One weird thing is Apple puts all stupid things like calendar and notes on the iPod (which actually deviates from their ideology of staying focused on the prime function i.e. playing music) but they ignore music related features like FM radio, manual equalisers, etc. Strange.
Suppose you have five thousand songs in your library and you copy them all onto your music player. It takes several hours and it's done. Great. No iTunes required, simply copy-paste. You're very happy.
One month from now, you want to update your music player but you realise that you've deleted several songs from your player that you want again and you've added or deleted several songs from your computer too and basically, you want your music player to have all the same songs as your computer.
What do you do now, dude? Sort out all the different songs and copy them over and delete all the ones that you've deleted from your computer? It can take ages and can be very frustrating, specially given the fact that since you don't use any media management application, your collection is probably full of songs named "Track 01" and "Track 02", etc. and don't have the proper ID3 tags.
Or you'll just have to empty the whole player and copy the whole collection again, which again takes several hours. And what if those songs are spread all over the drive?
You see what I'm getting at? You see how a mediator like iTunes helps?
For example, all my songs have artwork associated with them, only because iTunes has Cover Flow. Why would I bother with it if I didn't have any incentive to?