Imitation is no match for innovation

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.

 

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.

 

That's not how it came across to me.

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.

 

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. ). 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).

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.

 

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

 

and vice-versa? no?

 

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.

 

Once again, you are completely correct, Wil.

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.

 

i was under the impression there was 3rd party applications/plug ins to do exactly that...

 

Dunno who you've talked to, but iPods can play MP3s fine. You can even set it to the default ripping format in iTunes. They just can't do WMAs, and in any case it'll automatically transcode unprotected WMAs to whatever your ripping choice is.

In any case, AAC is the codec name, not the extension. It uses .M4A, .M4B and .M4P files (for AAC audio, AAC audiobooks/"spoken word content" and protected of either one respectively). Do get your facts straight before hating

So first party apps let you use .MP3 files on an iPod. Third party as well (who ends up as the second party, anyways?), but it's not necessary. The only time you'd need to use a third party app is to transcode open codecs like OGG and FLAC (unless you can be bothered to do the burn-and-rerip method).

In any case, MP3 isn't open, per se, it's just ubiquitous. Almost like windows - it's certainly not open (hacking jokes aside), but almost everyone uses it.

 

Wow, way to read what you wanted to read rather than what bigz actually said.

Now let us end this little attention-distracting aside, and get back to the matter at hand. Wil is a dirty Apple fanboy, but he makes some worthwhile points, live with it

 

An Editor of mine always used to say to me: "Wil, your writing is great, but damn... your opinion columns need more bloody opinions, you English *insert torrent of abuse here*."

I was writing this column thinking... "Hmmm, opinions..."

It's probably worth adding in a couple of my own points here in response.

I really do think Apple have the market cornered in MP3 players. I have a mini, my girlfriend has a nano, all my colleagues in the office have either a mini, nano or video. I have seen hundreds of these things, and I have honestly never seen anything better. That is my opinion, but it's also one that's held by a lot of other people.

CES / Engadget: Don't get me wrong, CES was awesome, and in moaning about it, I'm using a little bit of journalistic license. Look at the coverage that we put out: Quad-SLI, DFI and Aopen boards, all kinds of stuff. It was a frickin' amazing show, and I enjoyed every second. The Engadget thing was a little bit controversial, I realise, but it was meant to be. My motto when I'm putting together bit-tech is, why does someone want to read this here? There are bigger sites out there that cover technology and hardware, why read it here? In the case of CES, Engadget covered a lot of the gizmo and gadget stuff, but mostly left the component stuff alone - and componenets are what you guys are interested in, so my angle is, that's something that Engadget isn't doing. In terms of general show coverage, I really didn't see anyone that did it better than those guys and I learnt a lot from watching them work first-hand.

I certainly don't intend to say: people shouldn't bother trying to do their own thing if there's competition out there. As people quite rightly point out, bit wouldn't exist if that was the case. There's a lot to be said for doing what you want to do, and enjoying it: but if you really want to bring success and acclaim to your endeavour, rather than just personal interest, you really have to work out what your differentiator is, and what the point is of your existence. There's plenty of room for people to start up sites in the vein of Engadget, and for people to read them and enjoy them: I'd just suggest that there is less chance of critical and commercial success due to the fact that the standard of editorial coverage there is so high.

In terms of iTunes, I really couldn't give a toss about 20 megs here or 10 megs there for system processes: at the end of the day, I believe it is more powerful than anything else. The deep search facility is fantastic, and its ease of use is emphasissed by the fact that Apple took it and built it right into the OS in Tiger! I think the music store is a great way to find and buy new music, although it's overpriced in the UK. Apple is stoo narrow when it comes to standards, and a lot of what it does is marketing rather than technology: but you have to agree that it's good at doing things in a way which makes them appealing, hence its ability to get TV studios onboard the video store, get iPods everywhere and get digital music to the point where its nigh-on ubiquitous. In terms of the digital media industry, Apple and its products are at the very front right now, driving everyone in the direction we want to go in, for the most part (although I have not the space to get into detailed discussions of the digital media future): I think that's pretty cool.

Intel: I'm not an Intel fanboy. I love AMD's processors, I have one in my rig here. I just really feel, from talking to them, that they lack Intel's capacity for forethought. Intel has stuffed up a lot: but I have to say that since Otellini has taken the reigns, they've stuffed up a lot less. You're right to point out AMD's server move, suggesting that AMD has shown great vision there. You are dead right, and I should have mentioned that. I suppose the point is that AMD's approach is very much: develop one killer product, then try and carve out a niche around it. I just wish AMD would work harder on marketing and on broader initiatives, so that it could get the same kind of traction within the industry that Intel holds. When was the last time you saw an A64 ad on TV? When's the last time you saw an Intel one? I know that I've never even seen an AMD ad on TV.

All in all: happy to see that there's some good discussion going. Discussion contributes to the communal knowledge base, and that's a great thing.

One more thing: constructive comments are one thing. Flaming is another. You'll never, ever be banned from bit-tech for constructive comments, even if they're directed negatively towards something you've read or a product you've seen on the site. At the end of the day, please remember guys: we're putting up stuff so that you can read it and enjoy it, then bring your own opinions to the table. Don't get annoyed because we don't share our opinions, and don't get annoyed if you don't express them in a constructive way.

EDIT: Dirty apple fanboy?? You bugger. I disagree: there's loads of Apple stuff that I think is stupid and rank. I just happen to like my iPod and PowerBook

 

This is pretty much the only place I'm going to completely disagree with you, but as it's on a point very close to my heart I'll do it vehemently.

The iPod sucks.

Now I'll qualify, so I don't get banned or anything

There is no argument that Apple brought the MP3 player into the public view more successfully than anyone else could ever have dreamt of. The iPod revolution was indeed groundbreaking, moving from lugging around a CD player and a case-load of CDs to having one little white box housing all or most of your collection.

But things have changed.

Now, players that just play MP3s are a dime a dozen. Hell, they even give them away when you get a bank account. So what's left?

There are three ways you can improve an MP3 player:

1) Aesthetics (the human side - size, looks, etc)
2) Hardware (the computer side - extra things that the player can do)
3) Usability (the human-computer interface - control and software)

Apple have gone with all of 1) and a large chunk of 2), whilst leaving 3) pretty much where it was back in the day. The iPod's UI is still as reasonably intuitive as it ever was (far better than anything else back then, now it has rivals aplenty), and iTunes is still brilliant (hah) as always. At the same time, the aesthetics of the things are undeniable, and even if you happen to hate white things with every fibre of your being you can just get a black one now, the Nanos are so damn cute I want to eat them, and even the bizarrely-shaped 5G Videos you can get used to.

So that leaves us with the features. Apple, in their wisdom, have decided to go one way with features. Give the public loads of things they don't really want, and make them think they want it enough to actually use it. Who really was baying for the ability to play badly-compressed videos on something that really shouldn't be taken out of your pocket for any length of time anywhere you can't use a laptop? How about something useful, like FM Radio without having to buy yet another £30 accessory? How about taking the simply brilliant amplification stage out of the Shuffle, widely regarded to be the best-sounding DAP in the history of Ever, and putting it in any of their players since? How about gapless mp3 playback? It probably doesn't bother as many of you as it should do, but the thought of having to listen to an album with small gaps between the tracks that by rights and by design should flow seamlessly is horrifying to me. How about an equaliser that you can actually customise, rather than picking from a few dozen that some kid with a boombox preselected for the iBud generation? How about being able to drag files straight to the hard drive as it mounts in your filesystem, rather than having to trudge through yet another badly-realised piece of software?

These are things that should be standard on every MP3 player. Not showing your ****ing holiday snaps to your Mum on a 2" screen. Apple, as world leader in personal digital audio, should pick up on some of this stuff and give people the features they want as well as the ones they don't. So yes, I have seen better than an iPod. The Rio (RIP) Karma is the only MP3 player I have ever considered buying, due to the number of features on the above list that it actually fulfills. I've never been unhappy about my purchase, and even now I wouldn't swap it for any of the other players on the market. The new technology that Sigmatel (who own nearly all of Rio's property and have most of their engineers) demonstrated at CES was very interesting, I have hopes for both the players that are based on these chips and for the new Neuros player, which promises to actually include the main features of any decent MP3 player as well as lots of other audiophile-friendly options. The iPod? I'm not holding my breath, unless there's a major turnaround from Cupertino.

Wow, rant over.

 

i would kill for something in my iAudio M3's box with Creatives UI
i love my iAudio but the UI is not the greatest, once you've gotten used to it it works but i really love the ui on my creative zen brick

 

Talk about making a point there. Quite what we're looking for

Now, the (slightly briefer, as I'm in a midterm exam right now) rebuttal:

Why do you want FM radio on your PAD? Surely the purpose of having thousands of tunes in your pocket is so that you don't have to put up with the DJ's bad choices and advertisements.

Gapless playback... yep. Just yep. They really need that. At least iTunes can crossfade, which is something.

Equalizer - I agree to a point. However it seems to me that if you're really needing an EQ to enjoy your music, you need better headphones. If we want to discuss the damned iBuds, I'm sure we'll be in agreement: I hate those things with a fiery passion, and not because I don't like the idea of having white crap coming out the side of my head. The audio quality is abysmal and the comfort level is nonexistant. I replaced mine immediately with a pair of $15 clip-on things, and while they're not great by any stretch of the imagination, at least they don't fall out of my ears and hurt them when they do manage to stay in.

Video and photo support: definately has minimal uses, and I'd much rather have seen something that equates to longer battery life. The large majority of the time, I'm listening, not watching. It's nice if you've got a long car ride home and aren't the one driving. As for photos - that IS a good idea imo. It's certainly no substitute for a big screen or prints, but putting together a load of thumbnails with almost zero effort that doesn't require you being at a computer of sorts is nice. My use for it has been nigh, but I take comfort in the fact that I can show off my mod if someone is interested.

As for drag and drop - well, as much as I would have liked the idea, I think iTunes (or third-party substitutes) are already a step ahead. Yes, you have to load up another program - if that kills you, you need to move beyond 256MB of ram. Syncronyzing all my portable media files (or just ones I choose) simply by plugging in the device, and keeping them all very well organized on the hard drive is much more convenient. I've done more than enough reorganizing and renaming to drive me to insanity and back, and while iTunes can get a bit tedious, at least moving things around in there changes the tags so I could put 6000 songs in the same folder (oh the horror!) and they'd all go to where they needed to be by importing them. If the solution wasn't so well-rounded and integrated into one software package, I'd totally be with you, but I love being able to drop my iPod into the dock and it takes care of everything for me. While I'm typically against sticking a ton of features into one thing, I love this - Apple makes sure all of the features actually work properly, not like the useless camera on my cell that takes crappy shots at 640x480 and gives me no easy way to take them off the camera.

Now admittedly if I didn't get a 5G I'd probably still be using Winamp/ml_ipod. While that solution is a bit snappier, the free CD burning and ripping support of iTunes is just lovely, and Winamp (last I checked) wouldn't reorder and retag my songs by how I've set them in the library.

I'm NOT saying the iPod is the best thing ever, nor is iTunes - they both have big faults. But - and be honest - are you really going to listen to FM radio when you have thousands of songs *that you like* in your pocket, which you can choose from without commercial interruption? The only time I can honestly think I'd use FM in a PAD would be at the drive-in movies where they do a short-range FM broadcast for the movie audio (as they have four screens, speakers wouldn't work). Video support is just the latest silly idea - if you try and watch over 30min or so, you really can feel yourself losing brain cells from concentrating on a 2" screen with typically-artifacted video. But that's true of all players.

I've seen people get players other than the iPod simply because they're anti-iPod (much like me and Sony), but none of them seem to be especially happy with their player beyond the fact that it's not produced by Apple.

So much for shorter...

 

I think the only thing lacking from this column, and this discussion for that matter, is the innovation of bringing products to market. It's especially powerful when Wil brings up the "liberal" idea of choice, which is really a fundamental element of free market.

None of the mp3 players would exist if Sony had not created the walkman portable cassette player. It was truly a monumental and innovative device and launched the idea of portable entertainment beyond just a transister radio.

While Sony absolutely owned the highest quality version of this new device, it was well out of reach of many consumers, price-wise. So you had a slew of immitators that brought similar products at around the same price. Sony (just like apple) had a strong interest in protecting the value of their products. The immitators did not and the main differentiator became price. Suddenly, everyone could afford a portable cassette player. You had a choice of buying Sony for $200 or a pioneer for $50. This forced Sony to consistantly bring new qualities to the product to maintain their high cost and make their product better. In the end, they had to concede and reduce the price of their product to compete.

Without "immitators" Apple's version of choice would be you can choose to spend top dollar for an mp3 player or not. With more players in the market, you can choose a top of the line ipod or something more in line with your budget that is arguably similar in quality.

 

Are you not contradicting yourself.

Based on your original article and your reply, what you have basically implied is that companies should differentiate itself, both on a corporate identity level and on a product level. Than you go on to express how you would prefer to see AMD follow Intel's plan of action. Is that not just suggesting AMD mould and model itself based on Intel - in essence just another Intel replicate.

As some other forum member stated before, Intel has gradually become a platform company, whereas AMD is not. That is why I think AMD does have a clear vision of where it is heading. AMD is a processor manufacture and will continue to do what they do and that is to improve their products, as seen with their latest re-designed architecture. Hence just because they do not want to expand into other areas, does not suggest that it lacks 'forethought'. It is a processor company and building processors is what it does, its vision is how they will continue to improve the performance of their cpu's. What Intel has demonstrated is that they have a good vision of how PC's could be used in the future (media home concept) and in turn how their processors will be used in the future.

In addition that is why it has been stressed that, in terms of vision on a primary scope, AMD have had a clearer vision, as shown with AMD shifting the emphasis on more efficient architecture design and multicores and off of higher clock speeds. Would you not agree that Intel's sudden and recent abandoning of increasing processor clock speeds, not considered as lacking forethought.

The perception of AMD has not only gradually become very positive, but AMD has created a distinguished image for itself - usually associated with high performance, enthusiasts and gaming.