Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Media (Apple) Media Businesses Handhelds Music Apple Hardware

Inside Hardware Design - Competing Against the iPod 454

Posted by Hemos from the a-hard-battle-to-fight dept.
ihatewinXP writes "FastCompany.com has a behind the scenes article detailing Rio's (and others) attempts to differentiate hardware and compete in the digital music market against the iPod juggernaught. From the article: "We decided that we had to be radically different from Apple. Where Apple was sort of the ivory tower, we were going to be the dark rebel. Where Apple was very geometric, we were going to be smooth and curvy. Apple was so enamored with absolute pure, minimalist design that some designers may argue that ergonomics were compromised.""
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Inside Hardware Design - Competing Against the iPod More

Inside Hardware Design - Competing Against the iPod

Comments Filter:

  • You'll know they've got it wrong when... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ackthpt ( 218170 ) * on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:16PM (#12922762) Homepage Journal
    "We decided that we had to be radically different from Apple. Where Apple was sort of the ivory tower, we were going to be the dark rebel. Where Apple was very geometric, we were going to be smooth and curvy. Apple was so enamored with absolute pure, minimalist design that some designers may argue that ergonomics were compromised."

    You'll know they've got it wrong when...

    • They silhouette the player instead of the dancer.
    • They mix metaphors like 'ivory tower' and 'dark rebel'
    • They use words like 'synergy', 'user experience', 'radical' or 'extreme' to describe features.
    • It's got a remote control.
    • The player, software and services are heartily endorsed by the RIAA
    • They actually make a better product and price it competitively.
    • It doesn't look like a piece of tacky plastic jewelry.

    • Re:You'll know they've got it wrong when... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Alex P Keaton in da ( 882660 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:17PM (#12922781) Homepage
      unparalleled cool quotient
      How do you create this? Much time and $$ is spent on Madison Avenue trying to make a product cool... The Ipod is a great product in my opinion, but coolness has little to do with greatness...
      • How many people in love with their iPods have tried other MP3 players? I'm curious because there doesn't seem to be anything particulary ground-breaking about them - they play music and have a nice clean shiny white plastic case. The premium you pay for an iPod versus another player helps to pay for the marketing that makes it cool, and that seems to be the primary difference right there.

        • Re:Its all about the marketing. (Score:5, Insightful)

          by pootypeople ( 212497 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:31PM (#12922941)
          Actually, I've used other players alot because friends think I'm stupid for having spent so much on my iPod; that is, until they use the iPod next to their player. I think the best example is the Creative Zen Micro. I cannot figure out how to use the darn thing. It's got touch-sensitive controls, but the buttons don't click- it's like tapping a mouse pad, which I never did to begin with. There's some good features with the zen (a removable batter cover would be nice on a ipod, but would screw up the whole "look" of the player) but the usability makes it just plain unfun. Most of the other players remind of me of this. The click wheel is *the big feature* of the iPod. It's a great interface for scrolling through long lists, and it's so easy to use that ANYBODY (and I mean anybody - my grandfather included) can just pick up an iPod and get down. That's user-friendly, and that's Apple. Until somebody else comes up with a better idea (and so far, no luck), the iPod is going to continue its dominance.
          James
          • My iPod 3G has a similarly terrible interface. No buttons: just sensitive zones of a touch pad. I wish I had a dollar for every time I hit "next track" when I meant to hit "pause." The center "button" is just as bad: with zero tactile feedback it's impossible to know whether you've actually pressed it -- and with zero UI feedback it's impossible to know whether the iPod is "thinking" (spinning up the HD) or just waiting for a button press.

            Apple switched to the click wheel because people have learned to
        • They are easy to use and look pretty. That's why they are popular. I have used the iPod, the Rio Karma, and various Creative Labs players. The Rio Karma is the best of the bunch by far. The iPod is pretty but nowhere near as efficient to use as the Karma, nor does it have the feature set of the karma. The Creative players have decent feature sets but are very much lacking in the UI department (with their software being absolutely abysmal).

          In short, Karma > iPod > Creative (any player)

          Of course,
          • > "I'm tempted to downgrade the iPod to the bottom because the only format they support that's not proprietary is MP3 "

            What? Have you ever heard of something called AAC?
          • The Karma plays both flac and ogg, fine, but it is NOT a mass-storage device, so you either need to bring around a special app for transfer, OR connect it to a network connector so you can access the web interface so you can access a java version of a special app. And don't get me started about the harddrives... The warranty is fine (For Europeans anyway, in the US I heard it is 90 days), but are you unlucky (as quite a few are), your Karma will spend most of its time travelling back and forth between you a
        • Maybe the big reason why iPod is popular because it looks very cool and yet in same time - very simple. People JUST want to listen to the music. Nothing more. Nothing less.

          • People JUST want to listen to the music. Nothing more.

            Are you kidding? If the design ethic of 95% of the various mp3 players out there says anything, it says that people want something that looks like it popped out of an anime movie. Case in point. [digitalnetworksna.com] Obviously, people will pay $40 more than a similar "size" shuffle because unlike the shuffle, it looks like this one will play music, tune radio, and shoot 300 meters of wire to the next highrise so you can slide down and rescue the babes.

            Oh wait. Pe

        • It's all about the apple-player-haters (Score:4, Interesting)

          by Scrameustache ( 459504 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:47PM (#12923151) Homepage Journal
          How many people in love with their iPods have tried other MP3 players? I'm curious because there doesn't seem to be anything particulary ground-breaking about them - they play music and have a nice clean shiny white plastic case. The premium you pay for an iPod versus another player helps to pay for the marketing that makes it cool, and that seems to be the primary difference right there.

          How many people who keep saying "it can't possibly be a superior product, trendy people like it, therefore it's GOT to be 100% marketing" have actually tried it?
          Tried it and it's competitors? The whole "try": Getting tracks on it, using it, charging it?

          I have a first gen iPod, I had an iPod before the iPod became popular (yeah, yeah, people always say shit like that, but keep in mind it means I have the BIG iPod now, without the cool dock and extra games), and I didn't want it because it was marketed in a shiny way: I wanted it because I hated my MP3 player and this one was offering me a better way to have music on the go.

        • I have (Score:5, Interesting)

          by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) * on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:59PM (#12923278)
          I've had other MP3 devices, like watch players. Also tried PDA MP3 playing and a few friends devices like rios.

          I have the earlier 5GB iPod and frankly nothing else is as pleasant to use. I actually didn't like the control system of the later ones with the controls moved to the top, but now they are back around the wheel they are doing good. I just bought a Mini for my GF and she loves it - because it's so, so easy to use. The feature that can pitch-shift audio books is worth the whole price alone, if you ever want to listen to podcasts or speeches or seminar recordings.

          A lot of people seem to think that people buy into the iPod because of marketing. But I think that's secondary, and the real success of the iPod lies in amazing word of mouth from actual users who really do end up becoming semi-evangelists because when something works decently well it sticks out like a sore thumb in a world of consumer electronics that are half-crap. When I tell people I'm still using an MP3 player I bought years and years ago without a drawer full of others strewn along the way, people go "wow!". When people can get off the upgrade mill and get something that's more reliable and friendly it makes them very happy.
        • For me, it's not about marketing, and it's not about cool. It's about function. I have a 40GB iPod and it works great, holds a lot of music, and has a huge aftermarket.

          I listen to music so much that I picked up an iPod dock for my car, and the Bose iPod dock for my office stereo. I get in the car, slip the iPod in the dock, it works, I get to work, put it in the Bose dock, it works. All of it is a really nice, clean, easy to use package.

          Show me any other device out there that has that going for it.

        • How many people in love with their iPods have tried other MP3 players?

          Probably about as many people who are in love with their Porsches or Bentleys who have tried Kias, Hyundais, Zils, and Yugos.
        • it is not just about marketing. I have a 4B Creative Muvo2 - It feels like a $1 platic toy, with lose buttons etc. The no moveable external parts is one of the things that makes the iPod feel solid, to be the great player it is.

          Also has an el-cheapo player, and my mother has another of those. She can't figure out how to use it.

          Remember, the iPod is more than the player. It is also iTunes, the syncing etc.

          The other makes a player - and then remembers that they need to get some software hacked together as
    • Im just waiting for apples latest invetntion... iSophagus http://www.sluggy.com/daily.php?date=050622 [sluggy.com]

    • Apple was so enamored with absolute pure, minimalist design that some designers may argue that ergonomics were compromised.

      Let me guess, those designers would be.... Rio's?

      Eric
      Read my AdSense blog [make-easy-...google.com] (goes with my new book for non-techies)

  • Ergonomics? (Score:5, Funny)

    by RevengeOfPoopJuggler ( 872968 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:17PM (#12922773) Journal
    Apple was so enamored with absolute pure, minimalist design that some designers may argue that ergonomics were compromised.

    I'm sure the head of the iPod department will really give two shits about ergonomics when he goes for his daily swim in his pool filled with crisp $100 bills...

    • Re:Ergonomics? (Score:5, Funny)

      by American AC in Paris ( 230456 ) * on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:25PM (#12922871) Homepage
      I'm sure the head of the iPod department will really give two shits about ergonomics when he goes for his daily swim in his pool filled with crisp $100 bills...

      Exactly.

      He'll probably be thinking something more along the lines of "Oh dear GOD! It's like TEN THOUSAND TINY LITTLE RAZOR BLADES! OH, GOD, IT BURNS! AAAAAAAGH!!!"

      In closing, always use old, crumpled $100 bills in a swimming pool.

    • Re:Ergonomics? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Paradox ( 13555 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:27PM (#12922895) Homepage Journal
      Apple was so enamored with absolute pure, minimalist design that some designers may argue that ergonomics were compromised.
      I'm sure the head of the iPod department will really give two shits about ergonomics when he goes for his daily swim in his pool filled with crisp $100 bills...
      Common misconception, "More Features Means More Value." Maybe one day people will crave a PDA that is also a phone and an MP3 player. That day has yet to come.

      The iPod is so popular in part because it is a simple, no-frills solution. For most people, the world of players is confusing, riddled with complex features that they don't understand or need. Apple realized this, simpified the approach, and people love it. They then went on to simplify the whole music acquisition process. iTMS is so good that it competes with illegal downloads.

      It may not be very geeky, but it's this kind of clarity that the vast majority of novice computer users appreciate. Customization is something experience and confident users will do, and the simple truth is that the vast majority of modern computer users never reach that level of confidence and knowledge.

      • *ding*ding*ding*ding*

        We have a winner!

      • Re:Ergonomics? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Sandor at the Zoo ( 98013 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:34PM (#12922993)
        Maybe one day people will crave a PDA that is also a phone and an MP3 player.

        You mean like the Treo 650 [google.com]?

        The thing's been getting great reviews. I have one, and it kicks butt. It's not the ideal phone, or the ideal PDA, but it's a very good combo device.

        • Re:Ergonomics? (Score:4, Funny)

          by feloneous cat ( 564318 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @02:36PM (#12923813)
          Screw ergonomics! My Nintendo thumb be damned! Here is my list of MUST-HAVE'S:

          1. Clock (if it has power, it HAS to have a clock)
          2. MP3 player
          3. Phone
          4. GPS (I'm sick and tired of saying "I'm at the Krispy Chiken" I want the goddamn phone/pda/mp3 player to tell them for me)
          5. PDA - no wait, I mean PDS - personal digital secretary. That means if I'm screwing around on my wife, I want the goddamn thing to LIE for me.
          6. 1600x1200 resolution. I'm sick of these dinky screens.
          7. Surround sound. It's in the works. I want it now.
          8. Stapler. I don't have one. The ankle-jerks here are too damn cheap to buy me one. I don't need one, but everyone else has one.
          9. Alarm clock. A GOOD alarm clock. Not one of those dinky little "weee weee" ones that only wake you up if the fucker is glued to your ear.
          10. CD/DVD player. Look, if you can put the damn 1600x1200 screen in, the CD/DVD should be a freakin' piece of cake.
          11. It should fit in my pocket. No, not one of those giant coat pockets, but my shirt pocket.

          Now, I'm not asking for ALL of these in the first version (except for the PDS - man, I gotta get somethin' that will lie like a mother for me).

          12. Encryption. What the fuck is it that we have lameass encryption on phones? I want something better than the NSA can crack. Shiiit.
      • From TFA: Apple was so enamored with absolute pure, minimalist design that some designers may argue that ergonomics were compromised. And from the parent poster: It may not be very geeky, but it's this kind of clarity that the vast majority of novice computer users appreciate. Customization is something experience and confident users will do, and the simple truth is that the vast majority of modern computer users never reach that level of confidence and knowledge. It's true. All the bloviating on Slashd

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by account_deleted ( 4530225 )
        Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • I dunno, Jon Rubenstein [apple.com] doesn't seen the money-swimming type.

  • Try the coral (Score:3, Informative)

    by QuantumRiff ( 120817 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:17PM (#12922782)
    Already getting slow...
    Try the coralized link [nyud.net]

  • Same As It Ever Was (Score:5, Funny)

    by American AC in Paris ( 230456 ) * on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:18PM (#12922784) Homepage
    Where Apple was sort of the ivory tower, we were going to be the dark rebel.

    ...so basically, try to do exactly what Apple did to you back when they released the iPod.

    • Re:Same As It Ever Was (Score:5, Interesting)

      by BewireNomali ( 618969 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:33PM (#12922967)
      Ipod is to DAPs what Google is to search. In popular culture its tough to separate the two.

      I freelance in the film industry. a couple of weeks ago I was going to this reception for an independent film premiere here in NY. there was a rush at the door, a bottleneck as invitations were checked. I was there with a friend of mine who does OK with the ladies, but has a Rio (notice I said BUT, as in it is not a good thing to socially own a Rio DAP). Earbuds are in... so he bumps into a rather attractive girl who turns and looks receptive. She notices him so he takes out his rio to turn down the volume. She's like, "What's that? Your Ipod?" He responds, "No, It's a Rio, it's just like an Ipod..."

      It doesn't matter what he said after that. Her face slackened, any interest she might have had was gone. It was such a crushing blow that I went and got myself an Ipod the next day.

      Never underestimate the power of popular culture. The IPOD will not be unseated. The WALKMAN was never unseated as the premiere mobile music player in the 80s and that's despite the million clones that came thereafter. Sony lost footing because they couldn't anticipate portable CD players. Any DAP company needs to invest in the next gen device, the next evolution in the movement of personal music.

      Don't throw rocks at the throne. Build your own throne; people will come and worship.

      • Re:Same As It Ever Was (Score:5, Funny)

        by snorklewacker ( 836663 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:41PM (#12923080)
        "Next time some hot chick asks you, is that your iPod, YOU SAY YES!"

        (Apologies to Winston, the lesser-known Ghostbuster)

        So basically, either he deflected some shallow and vapid chick, or she sensed he was about to launch into some babble about his product choices. I think that Rio did someone a favor, I just don't know who.

      • Re:Same As It Ever Was (Score:4, Insightful)

        by gstoddart ( 321705 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @02:20PM (#12923570) Homepage
        Earbuds are in... so he bumps into a rather attractive girl who turns and looks receptive. She notices him so he takes out his rio to turn down the volume. She's like, "What's that? Your Ipod?" He responds, "No, It's a Rio, it's just like an Ipod..."

        Reminds me of Mystery Men ...

        "It's a Harley. Compatible. It's a Harley compatible. Basically, the same
        engineer."

        While I seriously doubt not having iPod will affect how much play you get from the Hunnies or not, the likelihood that someone was about to start to explain the technical differences between a Rio and an iPod was probably far more distressing.

        Imagine that one ...

        "Is that your iPod?"

        "No, it's a different player which can play ogg files because ... (insert drivel here) ..."

  • Heh... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Otter ( 3800 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:20PM (#12922797) Journal
    I liked the Archos CEO's comment: "I do not share the opinion that Apple's design for the iPod is any good. That's because I define great design in terms of fantastic machinery. And if you look inside the iPod's technology, it's quite common and unimpressive. It isn't anything special."

    Like Archos' players are powered by dilithium crystals! The one company (besides Apple) that does do something technologically novel in their MP3 players, although it's not to my taste, is Neuros.

    • Re:Heh... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Concerned Onlooker ( 473481 )
      I liked the Archos CEO's comment: "I do not share the opinion that Apple's design for the iPod is any good. That's because I define great design in terms of fantastic machinery. And if you look inside the iPod's technology, it's quite common and unimpressive. It isn't anything special."

      Now there's a CEO that should be an engineer instead of running the company. Consumers are not geeks. They don't care if the technology inside is "special." They care that the product works well, does what they want it t

    • Re:Heh... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by cowscows ( 103644 )
      Yeah, so he's saying that Apple is selling common and unimpressive technology for a premium and in numbers that his company can only dream of, and he wants us to think that he doesn't consider that something good? And he's a CEO? It sounds to me like he's awfully jealous.

      The average person isn't that impressed by bigger, stronger, faster anymore when it comes to our high tech gizmos. Simply put, in the consumer world, there's more to technology than just technology. Apple knows this, and they've exploited

  • That page format was like a breath of fresh air (Score:4, Insightful)

    by 3770 ( 560838 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:20PM (#12922802) Homepage
    Wow!

    I've gotten so used to articles on the web having 12 pages with 15 sentences on each page so that page was like a breath of fresh air.

    I wish all articles were like that.

  • compromised ergonomics (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jcsehak ( 559709 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:20PM (#12922808) Homepage
    Apple was so enamored with absolute pure, minimalist design that some designers may argue that ergonomics were compromised.

    I thought the exact same thing the first time I saw those earbud headphones. They look like a couple primitive shapes stuck together. Come to find out, they're the most comfortable earbud headphones I've had, even without the foam.

    I hate to be an Apple apologist, but I can't think of anywhere they've sacrificed ergonimics for design. I think they just eschew curves and stuff that look ergonomic, but don't actually make the thing easier to use.

    • We have to draw a line between usability and ergonomics. Note the definition of ergonomics: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=ergonomi c [reference.com].

      While poor ergonomics will ultimately detract from the item's use, it only focuses on the fatigue or discomfort.

      The iPod may be very easy to use, but if some ergonomics expert (which I am certainly not!) says it lacks ergonomic design, it may be lacking in the comfort / endurance department. I'd certainly agree that ergonomics has become associated with "cu

    • Apple vs. the competitors.
      I finds apples designed to be extreamly well made vs. the competors who just look like it was well designed. It reminds me of a Corvette vs. a Supped up Honda. While both my perform the same. But if you get passed by a Corvette you will go Wow that is a nice car. If you are passed by a Mighty Honda you go man that is an obnoxious car.

    • Re:compromised ergonomics (Score:4, Insightful)

      by poot_rootbeer ( 188613 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @02:03PM (#12923323)
      I hate to be an Apple apologist, but I can't think of anywhere they've sacrificed ergonimics for design.

      Well, there's those disc-shaped mouses they (used to?) ship with Macs, that are of improper size to be used by any hands larger than a kindergartener's...

      They looked nice on a brocure, the transparent plastic was sleek, and the whole body of the mouse serving as a mouse button were all great design elements, but the thing just wasn't comfortable to use in the manner in which I was accustomed to using a mouse.

  • Great Buisness Plan (Score:5, Funny)

    by Quick Sick Nick ( 822060 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:22PM (#12922829)
    We decided that we had to be radically different from Apple.

    Because, hey, iPods aren't really selling that well.

  • Ivory Tower (Score:5, Funny)

    by syntap ( 242090 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:22PM (#12922836)
    Where Apple was sort of the ivory tower, we were going to be the dark rebel.

    Why would anyone say those so soon after everyone saw Gandalf defeat Sauron?

  • To Archos CEO (Score:4, Funny)

    by TobyWong ( 168498 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:24PM (#12922862)
    Don't be a player hater... it doesn't suit you. :x

  • Pimp-up (Score:3, Funny)

    by anandpur ( 303114 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:25PM (#12922867)
    I can pimp up apple iPod with all sort of bling-bling. There is not enough bling available for any other mp3 player.
    http://www.apple.com/ipod/accessories.html [apple.com]
    If you are virgin here is help
    pimp-up is kind of upgrade
    bling-bling is accessories

  • Better/Cheaper iPods with REAL competition (Score:5, Interesting)

    by stuver ( 783106 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:26PM (#12922886) Homepage
    Personally, I would like to see real competition with the iPod. I love mine and wouldn't give it up for the world, but there are plenty of things I would like to see included but Apple really does not have any motivation to do so.

    First off, I would like to see an AM/FM tuner included. If they really want to make that something special, they could include a TV/weather band tuner as well.

    Also, I would like to be able to replace the battery myself without having to pay a crapload of money for them to do it or risk damaging my iPod if I do it myself.

    One of my biggest complaints, and I think just about everyone with an iPod would agree with me on this one, is that if you are into the whole minimalist thing, the iPod looks beautiful right out of the box. However, use it even once and the shiny chromed back is already getting scratched up and if you do not do something to protect the screen, within a year the screen is almost unreadable.

    All that being said, real competition would be the motivator for Apple to make the iPod even better and cheaper. And at $300 or so a pop, they had better do something or risk losing their corner on the market.
    • I'm listening to Dave Brubeck on my iPod Shuttle right now and what I like about it is that is was $100.

      (What screen? :-) As for getting 'bling' to protect their iPods, there is an aisle in their store dedicated to it. If you were too cheap to buy one, to quite a friend of mine, "Suffer Bee-atch."

      Apple's already making the iPod in Asia (so production costs can't get cheaper) and charging what their market will allow. I don't anticipate ever seeing an iPod down at Costco or Wall*Mart for $19,95. Sorry but

    • Re:Better/Cheaper iPods with REAL competition (Score:4, Interesting)

      by nickgrieve ( 87668 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @06:35PM (#12926683) Journal
      One of my biggest complaints, and I think just about everyone with an iPod would agree with me on this one, is that if you are into the whole minimalist thing, the iPod looks beautiful right out of the box. However, use it even once and the shiny chromed back is already getting scratched up and if you do not do something to protect the screen, within a year the screen is almost unreadable.

      Ah... no... Here is the deal. If you have an iPod, and you polish it keep it in its "skin" fawn over it... then you you don't own it. It owns you. Treat it as you would your wallet, car keys, cell phone. Use and abuse it... because then you free your self from it possession of you. Mine is scratched and has little rubber feet stuck on it to stop it sliding around when I pile it on my powerbook and relocate around the house. There is a cool factor here... who is cooler, the guy that turns up in a brand new 2005 BMW and polishes it every day so it looks immaculate and shinny, or the guy that turns up in the same car that is dirty, scratched and says to the world... I am so cool, and so rich, that this thing of great beauty is Just Another Car, it serves ME, I don't serve IT.

      2c

  • The tricky bit (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:26PM (#12922887)
    The tricky bit in designing a device to compete with the ipod is going to be user interface. Not just the interface on the device itself, but the software used in transferring files to the device from the computer. Apple has done a superb job on both ends and it will be tough to do as well or better.

    This I think is what makes building an ipod competing device so much more difficult than a walkman knockoff cd or tape player. With the cd or tape player, the interface is just a matter of a few buttons. Designing a quality mp3 player is a whole different challenge.

  • Reasoning? (Score:3, Funny)

    by paulschroeder ( 757739 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:28PM (#12922910)
    "We decided we had to be radically different from Apple"
    Because, hey, contrarian thinking just for the sake of being different (or possibly out of spite) always works.

  • sack the marketing department! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by intmainvoid ( 109559 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:30PM (#12922927)
    We helped them beat Apple to market on a mini-hard-drive player by a year with the Nitrus.

    The Nitrus????? huh? has anyone else heard of that before? No good having a great product if no one knows about it. And then there's sony:In March, we introduced nine flash-based players to the Network Walkman lineup, which includes last year's 20-gigabyte HD3.

    Nine flash-based players? How are you going to get a strong message out about nine different players?

  • Honestly, its iTunes that makes iPOd so great. The complete package is what I think is successful, not Itunes or the Ipod as separately.

    Have you tried music match. UGH, its just terrible and slow. I had to use this originally with my Ipod, and it couldn't even sync properly. Musicmatch had to re-copy the entire library to do an update.

  • Sony Electronics: Laughable (Score:5, Insightful)

    by zuvembi ( 30889 ) <I_charge_100USD_ ... e@unixbigots.org> on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:31PM (#12922951) Homepage
    At Sony, we believe What customers really want is choice. How we deliver that is a collaborative process between designers, engineers, and marketers.


    Tranlsation:

    The engineers at Sony would love to make a good open product. However, we keep getting slapped around like a red-headed stepchild by the lawyers and the content (Movies/Music) division of the company. As a result we'll keep throwing out sucky DRM'ed products that never take off because of that. But, we'll keep doing it. No matter how much it hurts us.

  • 2nd, but a long long way behind (Score:5, Interesting)

    by intmainvoid ( 109559 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:32PM (#12922963)
    Sim Wong Hoo, 49, an engineer by training, founded Creative in 1981. It comes second only to Apple in total market share for MP3 players.

    2nd sounds pretty good, till you realise Apple has about 80% market share, so second place is what, 10% market share?

  • Not gunna do it. It's the marketing power of Apple. And to a lesser extent, the software (both firmware and iTunes). Good competitive hardware's been around for quite a while.

  • Ironic (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ptomblin ( 1378 ) <ptomblin@xcski.com> on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:33PM (#12922983) Homepage Journal
    The Sony guy blabbing on about their customer focus and listening to the customer and all that shit, when the main reason they didn't have a competitive player 5 years ago is that they insisted that everything had to be stored in that same crap format they used in the minidisc player. What was it called? Atrac or something like that? And when they did bring out a player, they called it an MP3 player but what it really was was a player that played their proprietary format, and software that converted MP3s to their format.

    That's really customer focused. Boy oh boy. I can hear the teeming millions saying "what I want from an MP3 player more than anything else is the inability to play MP3s".

  • Anyone else find this a little backwards? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Formz ( 870969 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:35PM (#12923000)
    "Unlike Apple, however, we are not going to spend our money trying to convince people that we are good. We are going to spend our money telling people what we offer. At Creative, more is better. Our products are packed with more features -- an FM tuner and voice recorder, for example -- and we're able to deliver this at a lower price. That's where we can win." If people don't know about the product (and the majority of the world does not thanks to their lackluster marketing) how are they going to demonstrate those wonderful features? Walk before you can run...
  • Apple's main point of sale is Job's salesmanship. Don't get me wrong - they have great products. But great products don't sell themselves (Which RIO is explicitly trying to do). The iPod is the shit because Job's wants you to believe it is. You can't beat that with a sack of wet noodles (aka better products).
  • Where Apple was very geometric, we were going to be smooth and curvy.
    In what country are smooth curves not understood in terms of geometry?

  • Sour Grapes (Score:5, Insightful)

    by wedding ( 618458 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:41PM (#12923087)
    Every one of the interview subjects sounded like a mouthful of sour grapes. Why is it so hard to admit that you got your ass kicked, and are noew attempting to do something to come back?

    Every single one of them had some dig at the iPod, and then a marketing spiel about their own POS product that's in the clearance bin at Sam's. Tell us something NEW and we'll consider your product.

    • Re:Sour Grapes (Score:3, Insightful)

      by phriedom ( 561200 )
      I thought the most entertaining denial of reality came from the Archos guy, who basically said that since they had been doing audio players for 3 years when the iPod came out, they had been there, done that, and have moved on to cooler stuff, like A/V players. I guess the implication is that the customers are all wrong and his stuff is much better than the iPod and is really what people want if only they weren't insane.

  • Missing the point... still (Score:4, Insightful)

    by inkswamp ( 233692 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:46PM (#12923135)
    Where Apple was sort of the ivory tower, we were going to be the dark rebel. Where Apple was very geometric, we were going to be smooth and curvy.

    Everyone accuses Apple of being obsessed with looks, but it's always other companies and critics of Apple who focus on that. And ironically, that's only part of the picture. Apple really does understand design is a way that other tech companies just don't... and design goes way beyond looks. If that's all Apple had, they would be a lost cause. But as evidenced by the products Apple produces and the interviews with him I've read, Jobs really understands that design is how something works--looks being a side-effect of that.

    I'll admit that I didn't RTFA, but it sounds like the same story yet again. Until these companies figure out that it's the combination of the iPod and iTunes and the iTunes Store that have all been designed to work seamlessly together and in a way that makes sense to people, competitors won't stand a fighting chance. It's not the looks. It's not the price. It's not the file format. It's the way it was designed with the user in mind. That's what Apple does best.

    I'm a fan of Apple's products so I couldn't give a rip either way, but it's amazing to me that so many companies just can't figure this basic concept out.

  • Actually, the next piece on the page was ... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by crovira ( 10242 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:46PM (#12923138) Homepage
    interesting.

    The person at Sony said what customers really want is choice. Actually, most customers don't want choice, or at least they don't want to begiven choices that just get in their way.

    What most customers really want is something that will do the job and get out of the way. For most the journey is not destination.

    Steve Jobs understands this. Most Linux sellers don't.

    They both provide an OS (or an iPod) and while the former says "Here is OS X and Aqua and iTunes and you can hook it up to your iPod and stuff and it just works." the later say "Look at all the configurations you can run this under, you have a __choice!__. But of course that implies you are smart and knowledgeable enough to make a choice."

    At which point most people run screaming for an exit because they want anything but choice.

    They just to do something and not be bothered with all the geeky stuff. They want to know nothing about how it works under the skin. They just want to enjoy it.

    Apple is able to 'get away with "foisting their decisions on the world"' because they select components that do their work and then 'hide'.

    • Ding! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by solios ( 53048 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @02:28PM (#12923693) Homepage
      Linux users are the computing equivalent of car enthusiasts. They want the spoiler, the tricked out stereo, the racing stypes, the hand-tuned carburator (sp), the custom muffler, the racing tires, the bling rims, etc, etc, etc - car enthusiasts crack open a parts catalogue and drool.

      Most people only give a shit about their vehicle when it breaks. Most people want to just turn the key and GO. They don't want to have to worry about engine timing or oil pressure or RPMs or torque or rather their car parts are metric or imperial because absolutely NONE of this has ANYTHING to do with running down to the store to get groceries.

      The failing of linux is that you've got a bunch of hotrod enthusiasts trying to sell The Last Of The V8 Interceptors to people who really just want a commuter coupe - and these hotrodders just can't see that the rest of the world gets absolutely NO pleasure from fucking with things that should Just Work Already.
    • Apple also spends an enormous amount of time, effort, and money on making sure the choice(s) they provide to consumers are the best ones available.

      I realized the other day that if you name a foreign car brand, I think I can name their entire line. Or in some cases, the only difference in the line are some numbers. But name a U.S. car brand, and I don't think I can name the entire line.

      Apple does this too. There's only a few choices. And they're all good choices, just different. I remember the huge number

    • Re:Actually, the next piece on the page was ... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Peyna ( 14792 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @02:53PM (#12924012) Homepage
      The person at Sony said what customers really want is choice. Actually, most customers don't want choice, or at least they don't want to begiven choices that just get in their way.

      They want to feel like they made a choice. That way they made the decision. If there is only one manufacturer of a product, they feel like they had no choice but to buy that one product. If there are 5 to choose from, even if they buy the same product, they've still made a "choice" and are happier about buying it.

      Think about it, if you're at the grocery store and you want to buy ketchup, you're probably going to buy your favorite brand, but wouldn't you feel a little weird if that was the only brand of ketchup anyone carried?
  • Give me the following:

    1. 100gig drive

    2. Easily swappable batteries (each with a pretty impressive life themselves)

    3. If you are going to bill it as a photo viewer, provide a decent size screen with a protective eacily replaceable cover

    4. Good menu system, a nice jog wheel like on the Canon 20D would be great for scrolling. But have a switch that "locks" the control functionality so it's not getting pressed in your pocket while walking

    5. Allow for the drive to be an "external" drive and plug in via USB
  • ...is seamless integration with iTunes.

    Otherwise, no sale.

  • Compromised Ergonomics? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by joelsanda ( 619660 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @01:59PM (#12923277) Homepage

    Apple was so enamored with absolute pure, minimalist design that some designers may argue that ergonomics were compromised.

    How in the world can anyone claim this?

    I can perform the following actions with one hand holding the iPod and my thumb controlling it:

    • Turn on/off
    • Select a playlist/composer/performer
    • Adjust volume
    • Read notes
    • View my calendar
    • Fast forward/rewind/pause

    And that's compromising ergonomics? The iPod probably makes the fewest ergonomic assumptions than any other product I own/have owned.

    Well, alright, it assumes you are a homo sapien with at least one opposable thumb on one hand. But even with that assumption anyone belonging to the homo genus can use the iPod.

  • Quotes (Score:3, Interesting)

    by augustz ( 18082 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @02:04PM (#12923344)
    "The Carbon is the second-best-selling midsized player, behind only the iPod mini."

    "Early reviews of Sony's newest set of flash-based players say it's a strong contender to take on the iPod shuffle."

    "The Gmini 400, launched last September, has outsold the Apple iPod in the 20-GB category in Europe."

    "It comes second only to Apple in total market share for MP3 players."

    Amazing, they are all beating or close to beating apple it in various ways, or at least that's what the quotes imply. I suspect that apple still ships a ton of players and makes more bucks doing so.

    I headed over to one site to find it supports lots of WMA music, which no doubt comes with loads of DRM attached. And it reminded me.

    Apple's ipod succeeds because of iTunes, and access to a large library of music that has reasonable DRM for most users. Yahoo is busy shipping Yahoo Messenger with their offering. The subscription WMA offerings were so painful when I tried them ages ago, though I'm sure they are better now.

  • Beating the iPod? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mveloso ( 325617 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @02:29PM (#12923708)
    Let's face it, the iPod is pretty much entrenched as the de-facto standard for mp3/DAPs.

    It doesn't matter why, or how, or if it sucks, or if it's cool. The fact is, it's #1, and it's got a ridiculous amount of momentum. I mean, they're making car adapters for the freaking thing. They make stereos with iPod adapters that cost more than the iPod itself.

    It's hard to beat that kind of momentum.

    In general, you can go high or you can go low. With the iPod, you can't really go low, because of the shuffle. I mean, how can you beat the shuffle? It's cheap, it works, and it's got the iPod brand.

    Go high? How? What kind of ridiculous stuff could you put on a DAP that would make it more expensive than an iPod? How could you sell enough of them to make any money?

    The fact is, the iPod may be dominant enough that all the other players get killed off...except at the low end, where one-feature USB players might squeak out a living as giveaways. Nobody's making the kind of money that Apple is in the mp3 player market. That trend will likely continue.

    From a business point of view, well, the other player manufacturers can see their trends, and they're trending downwards. Would you rather get out now while you're making money, or wait until you start losing money?

    Where does that leave the midrange players? Niche verticals?

    One thing is they have to change the game, or they'll get squished. Apple has successfully straddled every price point from $100 to $450. There's not a lot of room left for pricing. There's not a lot of room left for features, either.

    Maybe the subscription stuff will work out. But one FairPlay subscription license from Apple would kill that whole market dead. Maybe that's what they're waiting for?

    One interesting side-effect of on-line music stores is that it makes pricing transparent. For example, a FairPlay DRM'd song is worth $1. A subscription-DRM song costs, well, pennies or less, depending on your plan. A non-DRM'd song costs about $2 (buy the CD). A radio version is free. A Sirius/XM is free. Makes it hard to sue for damages, doesn't it?

  • Get a dictionary. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by sveiki_neliels ( 870930 ) on Monday June 27, 2005 @02:55PM (#12924048) Homepage
    Apple was so enamored with absolute pure, minimalist design that some designers may argue that ergonomics were compromised.

    Ergonomics means designing equipment, or modifying a workplace to fit the workers (or users) rather than the other way around. This includes things like:
    • Comfortable work environments (chairs, desks, etc);
    • Intuitive UI design for electronic and mechanical equipment (fax machines, even things like placing a light switch by all doors rather than on an opposite wall);
    • Uses of products to increase efficiency. Basically letting the workplace equipment do tedious work, freeing the worker to move on to more important things (like a printer that hole punches or staples automatically).
    A little bit of personal research above and beyond the stupid buzzwords people use would give a good idea as to why Apple's iPod is, in fact, much more ergonomic than most players.
    • A smooth, compact surface means slipping an iPod into your pocket is a lot easier than some rubber-coated monstrosity;
    • When you accidentally jerk the earphones out of the jack, the freakishly well-designed iPod pauses your tunes until you can get it back in;
    • When you plug in a set of earphones, obviously with the intent of listening to music, the iPod turns itself on (usually I'm about to run off somewhere, so the design concept here was to fit the use of an iPod better into my routine, with minimal impact);
    • A touch-sensetive scroll-wheel that allows scrolling at slow speed and increasing to fast speed the more you scroll (no more repetitive strain push-button motion);
    • Simple interface that combines a reduced number of buttons for ease of use, implementing commonly-used features like scrolling, volume control and track control on the same surface.
    • The list really does go on...

    I really challenge anyone to give a list of reasons why some other player is superior that consists of items beyond "it's comfortable to hold in your hand." Anyone who thinks that ergonomics means how something feels in their hand really needs to think why THAT is their central criterion.

Slashdot Top Deals

In the long run, every program becomes rococco, and then rubble. -- Alan Perlis

Close