Sony takes on iPod Shuffle 501
Ben writes "It seems that Sony has decided to take on Apple with a low cost flash based player that will go up against the Shuffle.
Pocket-lint has
the low down on some of the stats,
as does the BBC and Engadget." The major improvement in my eyes is that some models have an FM tuner.
Can I be the first to say, Yuk. (Score:5, Insightful)
The other comment is - what on earth are Sony smoking - they really need to learn about branding - the models are the NW-E103, NW-E105, NW-E107, NW-E405, NW-E407, NW-E505, NW-E507. Apart from 'bigger numbers are better' (which is a guess), what does that tell me ? What are the distinctions between them ? both in-range and between the ranges (presuming the E1xx, E4xx and E5xx are 3 distinct ranges).
Even I get this, and I write s/w for a living. You'd have thought someone in the highly-paid 'marketing director' position would have a clue too.
Simon
Re:Can I be the first to say, Yuk. (Score:2)
ie: they're already the de-facto standard in a market that's 2 months old.
The flash player market is only 2 months old? Pretty sure the flash player market has been around for 5 or 6 years!
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Branding (Score:5, Insightful)
Plus what about Itunes (Score:4, Insightful)
Sure, there are tools to decrypt these files, but many of the average ipod users don't have a clue about that stuff. If they consider an IPod competitor, they'll be informed that their music won't carry over and they'll get another IPod.
It's the same game Microsoft plays if on a different scale. Everybody needs windows to run the software they bought and it's too expensive to change to a different operating system because you have to get all new software.
Re:Plus what about Itunes (Score:3, Insightful)
Sorry, this is a lame arguement. You should add "... and I am anal about not introducing artifacts into my purchased music..." or "... and I don't want to use Hymn [hymn-project.org] to remove the protection". You see, you can always convert your AAC tracks into a CD/loseless and recompress the music into mp3/ogg/whatever, or just rip out the Fairplay protection and keep the music.
Re:Can I be the first to say, Yuk. (Score:2)
Re:Can I be the first to say, Yuk. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Can I be the first to say, Yuk. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Er... WTF? (Score:5, Interesting)
For what its worth, I saw several people crowded around the Shuffle and other iPods and no one around the other players which were in a different area of the store.
FM Radio (Score:4, Insightful)
If they want to include a radio at least include a DAB one (the digital radio service in the UK).
Re:FM Radio (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, a DAB radio would be nice, but I don't really need it, and I think the extra cost would be too much for most people.
Re:FM Radio (Score:2)
Re:FM Radio (Score:2, Insightful)
Yeah, well, but then you also have to carry another pair of headphones because cell phones never seem to have a standard 3.5 mm plug. It seems strange to me that Nokia and SE don't include such a connector a phone nowadays with built in MP3 players in their phones (in addition to the FM radio which has been present in most models the last few years).
> If they want to include a radio at least include a DAB one (the digital radio service i
Re:FM Radio (Score:2, Insightful)
The whole reason that I have an iPod is so I don't have to listen to FM radio.
I suspect the majority of people who buy portable players do so because they don't like the selections that radio offers them. Why include another battery sucking feature that most people won't use?
Of course this is a generalization, but somehow I have a hunch it's true.
Re:FM Radio (Score:3, Informative)
-paul
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:FM Radio (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not anti-convergence as long as the device can do the job well or not add anything to the cost. My experience with FM reception on small devices is the quality is not worth it. I actually listen to the radio a lot in the car because the quality is fine bu
Re:FM Radio (Score:5, Insightful)
If "convergence" means a phone/mp3/radio/camera/pda/gps device in which:
The phone doesn't connect reliably or sound good
The MP3 player runs down the battery in an hour
The radio barely tunes in broadcast towers from standing across the street
The PDA is clumsy and slow
The camera is extremely low-res with no flash
The GPS can be used to track my location by Big Brother...
Personally I have a good phone in one front pocket of my jeans, and an iPod in one back pocket. I don't really need any of that other stuff with me, so why would I want a "convergence" type device which has them permanently built in?
FM Radio built into a flash media player? That at least I can kind of see making sense. I hate the radio, so it's not for me, but I could see where some people would prefer this gadget over the iPod Shuffle.
An MP3 player which takes pictures? Nah. I'm sure Apple is probably working on a camera enhancement for the iPod photo, but it seems like a foolish bolt-on idea to me.
Then again, like George Carlin once said about American commerce, "if nail together two things that have never been nailed together before, some schmuck with buy it from you."
IIRC, he said that back in the 60's. Way ahead of his time, that guy.
Re:FM Radio (Score:3, Insightful)
I carry a phone with me wherever I go. I feel naked without it. It's always with me.
I also carry a driver's license, a bank card and a credit card, and a little bit of cash.
If I'm driving, I carry a car key.
That's it. That's the total contents of my pockets at any given time.
If I'm going someplace where I want to listen to music, I carry an iPod. If I'm on the train commuting, say, I like to have my iPod for listening to musi
Re:FM Radio (Score:4, Insightful)
The kind which recognizes the reality that multi-purpose devices almost never do all purposes well.
Prove me wrong. Show me a device which:
1. Plays MP3's with the ease, capacity, and battery life of an iPod
2. Takes pictures as well as a Sony CyberShot 5.1 MP
3. Has a good-quality GSM phone built in to it
4.
Re:FM Radio (Score:4, Funny)
Re:FM Radio (Score:2)
does fm tuner really add value to these? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:does fm tuner really add value to these? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:does fm tuner really add value to these? (Score:2)
Actually, what I want is an AM tuner. I have a 5GB iPod, and if I had an AM tuner, it would be great. On the way to work in the morning, I want to listen to the news, and
Re:does fm tuner really add value to these? (Score:3, Insightful)
In the past, this has been my primary objection to the iPod (lack of FM), however, I'm starting to think I can get along without it, now that I've started to use Audio Hijack [rogueamoeba.com] from Rogue Amoeba. I can programmatically capture the broadcasts I want, similar to how Tivo works, as long as there's a station that does an internet broadcast, and copy the MP3s to listen to
Sony Shell (Score:2)
What is this "FM" you speak of? (Score:5, Funny)
Well, I guess that's -kind- of like the shuffle... I mean, you still know exactly what songs are going to be played, you just don't know the order.
Pop Music Uncertainty Principal? (Score:5, Funny)
I do believe we now have a new theory of the universe: The Pop Music Uncertainty Principal
You can know what station is playing crap, but not in what order.
Or, you know now what crap will be played, but not on which station.
This explains a lot...
Blockwars [blockwars.com]: free, multiplayer, Tetris like game.
Why the best FM stations have a "Top 40" format... (Score:2, Funny)
What, you don't see the benefit of Top 40 programming? You get the same functionality as the iPod shuffle without the expense. They're saving you $99 or more! How many other media outlets can make that same claim?
OK, so you don't get to choose the songs on the radio. Minor detail.
Re:Why the best FM stations have a "Top 40" format (Score:3, Funny)
I want AM (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I want AM (Score:2)
Us tech geeks have plenty of wants. The problem is we represent a very small percentage of the population, and therefore, "we don't matter". AM is a technology soon to disappear altogether with the emergence of Satellite radio, Microwave-based wireless techologies (I can't wait to see a WiFi-based MP3 Player, play streams directly
The problem with AM (Score:4, Informative)
It's more a problem of the technology behind AM than anything else. Not that they don't want to implement it.
Re:I want AM (Score:2)
FM radio can use the headphone wire as an antenna. AM requires a completely different antenna, one that would double the size of these devices and still have crappy reception.
I'd like the AM radio for
Which Sony (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Which Sony (Score:5, Funny)
Really, we need some official rules on how to post.
Here's how you rate the people/organizations posted though:
1) Apple
2) Garage / Lego nerds
4) Everyone not on this list
5) US Government
6) RIAA/MPAA
7) Yakov Smirnoff
Or something.
This should be in the /. FAQ (Score:2)
It's the Sony that's competing with the iPod: Therefore we hate them.
And to save you future mental anguish:
When the PSP comes out it'll be the gaming Sony that's competing with Nokia's N-Gage, so we'll love Sony that day. As far as content-provider Sony, we despise them... except when they make Spid
they don't get it (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:they don't get it (Score:2)
If you mean the store.. that's only attractive to those who don't mind paying physical media prices for a lossy compressed copy.
Re:they don't get it (Score:2)
Re:they don't get it (Score:3, Insightful)
No. People want iPods for iPods, because their sleek sexy and trendy. Every *single* person I know only started using iTunes to listen to music *after* they got an ipod, not before. iPod sales drive iTunes usage, not the other way around.
Re:they don't get it (Score:4, Insightful)
People might get it because other have told them they should, but WHY are people saying that? Because they've used it and realized yes, this is how it should be - simple, elegant, and It Just Works.
I don't see why they don't all have tuners (Score:5, Informative)
I suppose I should mention WHY I want the tuner... (Score:2)
1) use at the gym
2) use at the gym
3) use at the gym
There are a bunch of TVs there, each tuned to a different channel and broadcasting their sound on FM.
Anyway, I don't go to that or any gym anymore, but I still use the tuner at work.
Sort out the software.. (Score:5, Insightful)
It conforms to NO Human Interface Guidelines at all, it has huge amounts of extremely choppy and pointless animations and is such a CPU hog that it doesn't respond even when the only application open on a 2.6GHz P4 laptop. Quite unbelievable.
Now if I could sync it with iTunes, that would be another matter.
Re:Sort out the software.. (Score:2)
Re:Sort out the software.. (Score:2)
Re:Sort out the software.. (Score:5, Informative)
With the iPod shuffle, you can tell iTunes to automatically select just the right number of songs to fill it up, at random, taking your song ratings into account.
Kind of ugly- (Score:2)
But (good for Sony), the players all have native mp3 support....I always hated the fact that they used their propretary ATARC3 for minidisc players
-Chris
All our prayers are with you, Sony (Score:5, Funny)
Nice (Score:4, Insightful)
However, as we all know, Sony are a music company too which means that however great this is, they'll crippled or fudge it up in some spectacular way meaning that, yet again, it'll be a flop.
My guess is that it'll be the required usage of SonicStage.
Re:Nice (Score:5, Informative)
Damn, I should have read the press release [sony.com] (emphasis mine):
Oh well, never mind Sony. Better luck next time.
Re:That kills it for me too. Sorry try again Sony. (Score:2)
Mind you the various Ipods are in the same boat.
I believe Sandisk has proper drag, drop n play operation on any platform.
Re:Nice (Score:2)
In anycase, I find it pretty sad that Sony is reduced to ripping off Apple's transparent iMac look circa 1993 and then adding the ripped off iPod mini multi-color look circa 2004 (or dating all the way back to the iMac, I s'pose).
Sony have done so much iconic (& great, IMHO) design: I'm really surprised to see them throw in the towel like this.
Ipod competitors (Score:3, Insightful)
Apple understands style, SONY only understands style sometimes.
There have been other MP3/flash players that have better stats than the Ipod or the Ipod Flash. People buy these things cause it's "cool" to have an Ipod.
Re:Ipod competitors (Score:5, Insightful)
Jesus. Not everybody is a slave to fashion. I hate when people say that they're bought because they're cool. They BECAME cool because they work better than anything else out there for the majority of people's use.
whaaaaaah? (Score:3, Funny)
Is anyone buying this?
Ousted Sony CEO was given iPod as Gift (Score:5, Interesting)
Kudo to Apple... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Kudo to Apple... (Score:5, Interesting)
Until the shuffle came along, most flash-based player manufacturers thought "People need to see what song they are listening to" and thus tried to cram a poor interface with display on a tiny gadget. But Apple said "let the interface be clean and simple, and let there be new no display -- and there was no display". "Let the users listen to songs that they like, and they listened to songs that they liked, whether it was in a playlist order or a random order -- they still liked the songs."
I didn't think I'd like the iPod shuffle without a screen, but I wanted a flash-based player (& iTunes support).
Having had a shuffle since Macworld, I can say it is the only player I use (I also have a 20GB iPod). Screen? Don't really need the screen.
And here's a tip -- ONLY ADD THE SONGS YOU WANT TO HEAR!! Then it doesn't matter if it is in playlist mode or shuffle mode, you'll always be listening to songs that you like.
Re:Kudo to Apple... (Score:3, Insightful)
I felt the same way about iTunes for a long time. I used the standard artist/album/track layout for my mp3 folder. Who wants to use crappy software just to transfer music to a player? The trouble starts when you have some unfiled music, or forget the artist or title in compilations. Winamp, Quintessential and the like have good playerlike in
Every month (Score:5, Informative)
FM tuner? I can buy one of those as an accessory add-on thanks to the burgeoning "iPod economy," as Jobs puts it. I even have that FM broadcaster that lets me dial into the frequency with my car radio to hear my iPod through my car speakers without any special hookups.
I don't see Sony's player going anywhere. They feature a display, which Apple abandoned as being pointless in a tiny flash player (and they're right). And it's still more expensive.
Re:Every month (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah cycling through 100+ songs(512 version) trying to find a song is really enjoyable.
Easy solution (Score:2)
Re:Every month (Score:2)
OS X[.3] (G4, 1.256GB ram):
Safari with one tab: 29,340K. Safari with 20 tabs: 36,500K.
Firefox with one tab: 30,011K. Firefox with 20 tabs: 35,790K.
I'd say your numbers are either bogus, a worst-case scenario (flash on both tabs in firefox?), or all the tabs in Opera were of a blank page. A link to benchmarks would be more accurate, kthx.
Re:Every month (Score:4, Funny)
Sony may actually have something here (Score:5, Interesting)
Now all we need to do is find out if the audio quality is just as good.
Re:Sony may actually have something here (Score:2)
The ipod seems to need charging once every couple of weeks which is a pain.
Re:Sony may actually have something here (Score:3, Insightful)
Equally important is that the batteries are replaceable and generic. It's easy to carry an extra one with you (if being musicless is going to be a crisis for you, that is), and you can buy them anywhere.
Re:Sony may actually have something here (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Sony may actually have something here (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes, "insane" is a good word to describe it. Remember the touted battery life of Sony's PSP, vs. the real-world performance?
Unless Sony has discovered a radical new MP3 decoding chip or audio amplification circuit that no one else knows about, I'm likely to disbelieve that their products actually do have ten times the battery life of similar devices.
More likely what's going on here is that Sony's still transcoding all your music to ATRAC3 -- it's a power-friendly format to decode and you'll never notice the difference through $10 earbuds anyway.
Not LCD... OLED! (Score:2)
"The major improvement in my eyes is that some models have an FM tuner."
My eyes don't care about an FM tuner, they care about the nice "backlit LCD screen" but according to Engadget [engadget.com] these will have OLED screens, which (from the pictures) look sweet!
OLED @ Wikipedia (Score:3, Informative)
Wikipedia OLED [wikipedia.org]:
"An organic light-emitting diode (OLED) is a light-emitting diode (LED) made of semiconducting organic polymers. These devices promise to be much cheaper to fabricate than inorganic LEDs. Varying amounts of OLEDs can be deposited in arrays on a screen using simple "printing" methods to create a graphical colour display, for use as television screens, computer displays, portable system screens, and in advertising and information board applications. OLED panels may also be used as lighting dev
Actually comparable? (Score:2, Insightful)
The major drawback (Score:2, Insightful)
Apple has simply done with the music industry what they've already done with their computers. They've made software that's so good that it's almost (and is, in my case) worth it to pay more for hardware that will work with said software.
Doubts (Score:5, Interesting)
The iPod isn't a blazing success because of technical superiority; the iPod isn't a blazing success because of crazy mad features. The iPod is a success because it does what it was designed to do very, very well--better than the players that boast eternal battery life, radio tuners, wireless, video playback, more storage, more audio formats, lower prices, and smaller packages.
It's about finding the right balance--and based on what I'm seeing, I don't think that Sony's upcoming offering will succeed at striking that balance.
More importantly. (Score:3, Interesting)
This will most likely mean a shift for Sony from being a hardware company to a content company. It will also mean hightend interest in DRM and copy protection on Sony's part.
Personally, I think it's a big mistake for Sony to forget "their old slogan".
Sony -- Because caucasians are too damn big!
The price point (Score:2, Interesting)
Ironic though that after all these years of complaining about the high cost of Apple computers, all of a sudden it hard for others to beat the quality, user experience, AND price point Apple does? *shrug*
Why The iPod Reigns Supreme... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm convinced that every time some product is touted as the "iPod Killer" it's destined to be a flop. This Sony design won't be any different.
Why do people buy a flash music player like the Shuffle? To listen to music. The problem with competing with the Shuffle is that it serves one purpose and does it well. Trying to compete with it on features can easily raise the price so that it's no longer price competitive.
The other big reason is that the Shuffle is being driven by the success of the iTunes Music Store. Any other player doesn't work with the most popular online music store. Any player that wants to compete with the iPod has to either play iTMS songs (which Apple won't do for obvious reasons) or have a music store that's better than the iTMS. So far none of the competition even comes close. They either have horrible interfaces, bloated prices, or draconian DRM -- and most of the time they have all three.
Unless Sony can not only create a flash player that's cheaper, but a music store that's better, they're not going to put much of a dent in the iPod's sales figures. Personally, I don't see Sony doing either of these things.
The iPod Shuffle works because it's small, cheap, stylish, has the benefit of iTunes' excellent UI, and works with the iTunes Music Store. The Sony player is Yet Another Flash Player, and it won't sell necessarily better than an iRiver, Rio, etc. would.
Re:Why The iPod Reigns Supreme... (Score:3, Insightful)
In fact, whenever things are touted as an "[anything]-killer", it's probably going to fail. When people use the language of "[whatever]-killer", they're aready operating in a situation where:
A) They're stipulating that [whatever] is "king of the mountain"
-and-
B) [whatever] is somehow bad, and therefore needs "killing".
Now, very often, if [whatever] is, in fact, king of the mountain, it's because people l
The shuffle won't stay the way is it. (Score:2)
It will have a screen in the future and it will eventually have a FM tuner (it is built into the chip).
Apple scaled out the features with the first iPod (touch wheel, screens, ect) and they will with the shuffle as well. You will get the people that bought the first gen to dump out money for the better ones as they come out as well.
Re:The shuffle won't stay the way is it. (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple has always shied away from features it doesn't want enabled in their product but which are supported by the hardware. For example, all iPods since 3rd gen have been able to play WMA! But Apple never enabled it. The original iPod OS can control FireWire CD Burners - Apple never enabled that feature. It would be trivial (and cost nearly nothing) to add an FM Tuner to the entire iPod range, but Apple thinks (right IMO) that people buy Music players, not radios, and complicating a product with extra unused features is not a good thing.
In fact, looking at the original iPod to the Click Wheel iPod, apart from the Click Wheel itself, what has changed about the way you interact and use the player? Actually very little, when you think about it.
Re:The shuffle won't stay the way is it. (Score:3, Insightful)
Think about mobile phones. Practically every mobile phone today has a camera in it. If you want a decent mobile phone, you have to buy one with a camera.
I don't want a camera. So when I buy a $120 phone with a camera, I feel ripped off. How much less could they have sold the phone for if they didn't put the stupid camera in it?
Apple knows that most people don't want a portable radio. They know that for two reasons. First, they know that historical
They still don't get it... (Score:5, Insightful)
I know that iTunes integration is something only Apple can do, but if you can get the ease-of-use going, then you can at least sport Microsoft integration. And somehow, nobody gets the ease-of-use thing working. They keep thinking that they can beat Apple on price, which isn't really relevant now that Apple has a $100 iPod. Sure, you can make another MP3 player for $50 or $75, but it doesn't take long to compare features and decide the extra $25 or $50 is worth it.
Get it right, manufacturers -- your target is ease-of-use, not price or size. The iPod has proved that there are enough people who will pay for quality (and fashion, I'll admit it) to make it worth catering to them.
How could I forget (Score:2, Funny)
With the iPod it's almost understandable how the Mac faithful believe all harddrive based players revolve around the iPod (while being years late, it did introduce harddrive players to a more friendly form factor).
With shuffle there is no excuse other then pure cult thinking. Thumb
NO! Here's their REAL shuffle competition (Score:5, Insightful)
clicky [sonystyle.com]
Rock it? (Score:2)
Just my opinion (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't see this as an improvement, if radio had any quality programming we wouldn't need iPods.
What's the price? (Score:2)
From BBC:
So what's the price? The first quote makes it sound like it's about twice the cost of the Shuffle's $150, then about $300. The sceonds says that it should be around $150.
What's the price??
This comes from a proud own
Why have a tuner? (Score:2)
This may force Apple into the music business (Score:2)
Apple may have to buy or build a record label to compete.
And, realistically, portable music players better than the iPod will be in blister packs in WalMart for $49 within two years. It's going to be like HP and their great high-end calculators.
...and here's why it will fail. (Score:3, Interesting)
It all looks pretty reasonable, sexy OLED display *on* the actual device, and then you get to this part:
While it connects via USB, the player appears to have a non-standard connector, so it won't connect directly to a PC's USB port, just the bundled cable. (From The Register [theregister.co.uk])
Just like the iPod photo, which needed a special cable to connect to TVs to show photos, it will fail (iPod photo is Apple's slowest seller) - nobody wants to carry around a cable for basic functionality.
Imagine the scenario, you're at a client site, or at a friend's house, and need to move a file from one computer to another - and because the network is down, you have to use your USB stick. But no, you forgot to bring the cable. Brilliant.
Not exactly competitive pricing... (Score:5, Informative)
NW-E405 512M -- $130
NW-E505 512M+FM -- $150
iPod Shuffle 1G -- $150
NW-E407 1G -- $180
NW-E507 1G+FM - $200
iPod Mini 4G -- $200
Is the software free? (Score:3, Insightful)
If someone spends a lot of time living with a certain piece of music management software, when the time comes to choose a player, they're going to lean towards the one that integrates best with what they have. If they can't see or use the software without buying the player, that will impact the decision in a negative way.
All other things aside, cool players (Score:3, Interesting)
And these things look goooood. If they're as good as iPods in sound and ease of use (conveniently NOT thinking about iTMS and iTunes) they should sell quite well. And battery life of 50 hours with thingies you can buy in just about every store won't hurt either.
Of course, as a mac user, I think I'll have to pass, I don't see them make it mac compatible, the bastards
imo the first real competition. Strange, how the consumer space works, no?
For the non-marketing sheep: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm well aware that some consumers are obsessed with the iPod "cool factor", but I expect more out of the clear thinkers among us. Why buy a flash-based player that won't let you upgrade the flash memory when a HUGE component of the price is the memory itself, and when you'll be able to upgrade the capacity to iPod Mini size within 2 years for less than $100? It's a vehicle to deliver music, not an expression of who you are.
These players are competively priced. (Score:3, Insightful)
The EW-104(512MB) is $99 and EW-105(1GB) is $150. Atop that, these players offer a display and can use interchangable batteries (AAA).
The 512MB EW-405($130) and 1GB EW-505 ($180), cost $30 more than a comparative iPod Shuffle but offers OLED and better battery life (the FM cost $20 extra on each version).
Slashdot's Apple-bias approaches the illogical, these new players offer more key features for a comparable price. Imagine if Sony made the iPod Shuffle, people would be bashing them for not being able to know what song you're playing, and locking them into a single DRM-ridden service. People can show their product devotion without bashing other products (be it Sony, iRiver, or any other flash player); especially if the product offers healthy competition to the market segment.
Re:FM Tuner? (Score:5, Funny)