September will go down as the month when technology writers were beamed to earth from a parallel universe. It’s still English, but what they write doesn’t make sense. Apple scared to the core?

That makes for a great headline, a contentious premise but falls short on reason, support, and less opinion than headline baiting. The Jackass of the Weekend appears to be Mike Elgan writing in Computerworld:

”Opinion: Why Microsoft’s Zune scares Apple to the core.” Isn’t that a compelling headline? Or rubbish?

Unfortunately, tech writers these days just make up articles with catchy headlines, rather than do a little research and present a topic of value to readers.

Have you ever wondered why the 24-hour news networks, and major TV networks report so much on government activites?

It’s just easier to do. There’s no need to travel around the country looking for real news. It’s all right there in the government buildings.

So it has become with technology writing these days. No need to do homework, just make it all up.

Apparently, Apple is scared of Microsoft’s Zune, says the parallel universe writer Elgan.

Again, the same route is traveled. Start off with obvious facts, to bring the article’s premise into your confidence.

“Every pretender to the media player throne—and there have been hundreds—has been thoroughly smacked down by Apple and its untouchable iPod.”

See? Everyone who follows this part of Apple’s business knows that all the iPod Killers have been killed. This holiday season it’s Microsoft’s turn. The big, bad wolf is at the door, huffing and puffing, and about to cave in the iPod mansion of straw.

Now, once your confidence has been gained with real world facts, it’s time for our parallel universe tech writer to appeal to your eclectic Apple sense of pride.

“The secrets of iPod’s success appear obvious: beauty, simplicity and “extreme coolness”—three characteristics Microsoft has never achieved in any product.”

That’s the setup. Pride. It’s just a matter of time before you believe anything written about Microsoft’s forthcoming iPod Killer. More facts about Zune; it’s size, configuration, pricing of music, and so on. These are all story pieces we’ve heard before.

Come on, get with it, Mike. What? I have to click to a Page 2 just to get this-- ”So why is Apple so scared? Five reasons:

Before clicking on to Page 3 of what’s becoming four slices of digital baloney, how about telling me why you know Apple is scared?

The #1 reason Microsoft’s iPod Killer will work is because, well, Microsoft XP, Vista, Xbox. A perfect storm of imperfect marketing might. Strangely, Microsoft’s been pushing iPod competitors for five years with zip success. That’s fact.

The second big reason Apple is scared is because Zune is social and viral-- you know, like MySpace.com. They’re social, they’re cool, Zune is social, Zune is cool.

The third big reason for Apple fear is ”Zune may have more programming.” Or not. Apple already has more programming; music, TV shows, movies. Microsoft’s Zune has, oh, um, how much programming? None. How deep is the embedded player market? Uh, zero. Apple’s? 60-million.

The fourth big reason is Zune’s screen is better for movies. I love this one:

“The Zune’s screen is just as good—and larger than the iPod’s. More importantly, it can be turned sideways for a wide-screen movie experience, which is vastly superior to watching movies on an iPod.”

When did Mike get his free Zune to review? OK, quickly to the #5 reason iPod Killer #87b will scare Apple and topple iPod:

“Zune is actually pretty cool.”

I have to keep reminding myself that this is an opinion piece that Mike wrote. Still, a premise requires some supporting evidence. The premise is that Apple is scared. IS scared. But there’s not any supporting evidence; just a lot of conjecture, and speculation. Where’s the quotes from Apple insiders about Zune’s potential to disrupt the media player market? Where are the quotes from industry pundits saying Zune is cool, iPod will fall in 10?

Finally, and just so you see where Mike is coming from:

“Microsoft has the money, the clout, the partnerships, the mind share and the market share to drive Vista, Soapbox, Xbox and Zune into lives of hundreds of millions of consumers.”

When I first read that, I thought, “so?” Microsoft’s had five years to do something about iPod and in that time they haven’t even been able to ship Longhorn Vista or get all the portable music players to Play for Sure.

Who is this Mike Elgan and why is he saying such bad things about Apple and such good things about Microsoft, when the former is undeserved and the latter is undeserved?

He’s a technology writer and a former editor of Windows Magazine. What else can I say?

Oh, those pesky facts keep getting in the way.

“Apple fans are overconfident in the iPod because Apple once commanded 92% of music player market share, a number that has since fallen to around 70%. About 30 million people own iPods.”

Uh, actually, there’ve been about 60-million iPods sold in the past five years, about 75-million before Zune ever hits the streets. 92%? No, sorry. In the US that’s Apple’s share of the hard drive portable music player market. Combine hard drive iPods and flash iPods, and it’s about 75%. Nothing has fallen except Mike’s argument.

You get the idea. Adnauseum, of course. Click to Computerworld for more nauseum.

It’s an opinion article, Jeff, so the writer can’t be held accountable for fact checking, supporting evidence, and logical thinking. He has, as Kate said in her recent expose of the Jackass-writers, an ax to grind as a Windows buff. What I like about Walt Mossberg is that he takes a very independent approach to technology and still loves Macs.

This article is just a very tired replay of the “Microsoft is invincable” theme. If you accept that axiom, the rest follows. My reactiion, what a bore.

The Zune has not even been released, so touting it as an iPod killer, or saying that it will even sell well, is nothing more than speculation. He must wait and see how the Zune does after it is released.

As far as Apple being scared, if there is anything for which they have given any indication of being preoccupied about, it is Windows Vista. Really, what is it with all the bashing of Vista going on in Steve Jobs keynotes?

Speaking about “Top Secret Features” that you will not show because you do not want Microsoft to copy them? That sounds more like an excuse that there was just nothing else to show.

dit

Actually, the Zune has been out and failed already. In a former life, it was the Toshiba Gigabeat. And apparently, the Zune is not part of the Play For Sure club that was created by MS to get some volume users of their own DRM.

I don’t know all the details, but since they haven’t even bothered to engineer their own player, relying on a failed product instead, it hardly inspires confidence.

It wouldn’t be the first time MS threw money away on hardware. The XBox is selling but they lose money on every single one of them. Probably close to $100. Their media center strategy has struggled because it’s an expensive PC kluge that’s been watered down so it does nothing well. Note that Apple’s forthcoming iTV is NOT a kluge, but an elegant wireless device that will stream videos, music and other digital data from a Mac to our TVs. You don’t need two PCs to perform that function.

When I think about the big MS picture, I can’t put the disparate chunks together to form a cohesive digital media strategy. If there is one, I can’t piece it together. Seems like a lot of flailing in the dark, throwing buckets of money after one thing or another, hoping something hits a chord with the consumer.

bugsnw - 02 October 2006 03:34 AM

I don’t know all the details, but since they haven’t even bothered to engineer their own player, relying on a failed product instead, it hardly inspires confidence.

Most companies just built upon something else. Think iTunes and SoundJam, or OS X and NeXT OS or Konfabulator and Dashboard. So im not sure why this should be a problem.

Their media center strategy has struggled because it’s an expensive PC kluge that’s been watered down so it does nothing well. Note that Apple’s forthcoming iTV is NOT a kluge, but an elegant wireless device that will stream videos, music and other digital data from a Mac to our TVs. You don’t need two PCs to perform that function.

Surely you are aware of Media Center Extenders no? Even the Xbox 360 can work as one. Both are elegant wireless devices that stream videos, music and other digital data from a PC to your TVs. You do not need two PCs for that now. Apple is entering the market now, Microsoft has been on it for a while already. Just like the Zune, Microsoft is entering that market now, whereas Apple has been in it for a while.

More importantly, it can be turned sideways for a wide-screen movie experience, which is vastly superior to watching movies on an iPod.”

Okay, I’m really getting sick of this. First, Zune’s default screen format is a 3:4 aspect ratio. It’s taller than it is wide. Then (in a user interface nightmare) you have to turn the entire player sideways to watch video content in normal, “full screen” 4:3 aspect ratio. There is no magical LCD screen stretching going on that gives you a widescreen. I’m getting tired of seeing many blogs report this as a widescreen device.

See this blog for comparison pictures with the 5G iPod.

Most companies just built upon something else. Think iTunes and SoundJam, or OS X and NeXT OS

Right. You said ‘built upon.’ I don’t think copying counts. You have to bring something to the table. OSX is not NeXT, although it is built upon that foundation. Had Apple just copied, OSX would be a lot less interesting than it is today.

I wasn’t aware of a successful, elegant solution for wireless transfer (and other possible features such as purchase) of digital media from a Computer to a TV. I’ve read reviews of various products but nothing seems to have caught on with the consumer. Elegance, style and ease of use are what separate Apple from its competitors. The concept sounds simple, but it’s hard to emulate. It’s directly responsible for the iPod’s success and has yet to be duplicated. The iTV is yet another Apple-designed addition to their overall digital hub strategy and even though it might appear the same as other products out there, we’ll have to wait and see if it has Apple’s magical fairy dust sprinkled over it. One thing is for sure, there is nothing out there like iLife for creating and editing the personal content that iTV users are going to be proudly showing friends and family.

To quote Daniel Eran of Roughly Drafted: “Apple’s media, delivery, and store technology are all factors that demonstrate the company’s lead in providing on-demand content. The content is already there in the archives of movie studios and TV networks; the challenge, the value to be added, is finding a way to get it to consumers at a sustainable profit.

Of course, Apple’s already doing that, and it’s announced the iTV as a roadmap of its future plans.”

I don’t think Apple has anything to fear from the Xbox (which is a watered down PC).

bugsnw - 02 October 2006 07:58 PM

Right. You said ‘built upon.’ I don’t think copying counts. You have to bring something to the table. OSX is not NeXT, although it is built upon that foundation. Had Apple just copied, OSX would be a lot less interesting than it is today.

Interesting that you left out Konfabulator. Surely you do not think that Apple does not copies anything from anyone? Apple does its fair bit of copying and yes, from Microsoft too(!). The addition to iTunes to browse by album cover is extracted directly from Media Player 11. And that is just one example of many that could be given. Now, I agree that Microsoft also copies from Apple, but the reverse is also true.

I don’t think Apple has anything to fear from the Xbox (which is a watered down PC).

Maybe just like the iTV is a watered down MacMini?

I’ve used and enjoyed Konfabulator and I like Widgets much better. Apple has borrowed ideas from others and improved on them greatly. And by the way, there is much debate on how far back the concept of konfabulator goes and who copied who. It really doesn’t matter. Most people don’t know the full history of Apple and its various OSes and technologies. On top of that are the myths that get tossed about, such as Apple ‘copying’ from Xerox. Steven Levy does a great dissection of that myth in his book Insanely Great. Concepts and broad principles are ‘stolen’ if they’re great. And I don’t think that’s necessarily a bad thing. Apple users freely admit that their is much cross-pollination in this industry. We merely defend that the vast majority of innovation comes from your favorite fruit company.

So no, I didn’t leave out Konfabulator on purpose. Widgets are enough different that they qualify as an Apple feature. They’ve certainly made them more useful, easier to program and use, and integrated them nicely into the OS.

Oh, and stop calling me Shirley.

bugsnw - 02 October 2006 10:34 PM

I’ve used and enjoyed Konfabulator and I like Widgets much better. Apple has borrowed ideas from others and improved on them greatly. And by the way, there is much debate on how far back the concept of konfabulator goes and who copied who. It really doesn’t matter.

Yah, im aware that there was some similar stuff to konfabulator back in the “early” days, can´t remember what it was called. But if we are to rely on that, we can say the same holds true for Microsoft´s Active Desktop apps and Active Channels. Which can be seen as early incarnations of Gadgets and RSS feeds.

So no, I didn’t leave out Konfabulator on purpose. Widgets are enough different that they qualify as an Apple feature. They’ve certainly made them more useful, easier to program and use, and integrated them nicely into the OS.

This may have been corrected by now, but last time I used them, Widgets could not be left on the desktop, forcing you to bring up the dashboard to use them. There was also the fact that if you used the Dictionary Widget, for example, you could not copy the definition of a word to past it inside TextEdit or Word. That was hardly useful.

I heard the Toshiba Gigabeat was dismissable by virtue of its short battery life even if it’s just audio (5.5 hrs vs. 21 hrs for iPod audio only play), plus the 60GB model is $50 more than the video iPod 80GB. It also has a klutzy interface. I don’t doubt MS would repackage a low-value product and try to foist it on its audience. That’s nothing new for them.

VicStevens - 03 October 2006 03:20 AM

I heard the Toshiba Gigabeat was dismissable by virtue of its short battery life even if it’s just audio (5.5 hrs vs. 21 hrs for iPod audio only play), plus the 60GB model is $50 more than the video iPod 80GB. It also has a klutzy interface. I don’t doubt MS would repackage a low-value product and try to foist it on its audience. That’s nothing new for them.

For sure. If anything, this points out the cat and mouse game going on between Apple and Microsoft. In recent years, it’s been Apple as cat, and Microsoft as mouse. Of course, they’re a large, lumbering, stumbling, angry and dangerous mouse, but Apple’s been the nimbler of the two.

Apple’s timing on product roll outs has been wonderful. Microsoft’s first media player won’t be as cool as an iPod, and by this time next year we’ll have another generation from Apple that does even more, including an Apple cell phone.

WooT!

It always struck me as a little bit short of pathetic MS should copy Apple so blatantly; you’d think they’d have some shame. I’m sure they’re working from the position that they can do better, but that has proved false as they miscalculate time after time. However, their mistakes are purchased by Windoze faithful. Some people never learn. Then again, there are plenty of Apple orphans out there. The iPod is such a winner, however, the copy-cat thing should be left alone for the sake of MS’s dignity. Or is that an oxymoron?

VicStevens - 06 October 2006 05:27 PM

However, their mistakes are purchased by Windoze faithful. Some people never learn. Then again, there are plenty of Apple orphans out there. The iPod is such a winner, however, the copy-cat thing should be left alone for the sake of MS’s dignity. Or is that an oxymoron?

You nailed it. That’s as close to an oxymoron as you can get without poking yourself in the eye and going blind.

That reminded me of a recent string of Dilberts. Image enclosed below…

The Zune is already out for many people. They have beta versions out in many places. The Ellen show gave one to everyone in the audience one day. Engadget has used one, etc. The dude used to work with MS magazine, so maybe he HAS seen one. The 4:3 aspect ratio is much better for widescreen than the 3:4, which is what many players use, making it a widescreen, in that it’s wider than it is long… apparently…
The 360 is pretty amazing, beautiful, simple, sweet, and dripping with power.
The 360 loses quite a bit of money per system: True.
The 360 games cost less than 10 bux to make, meaning MS gets about 45 bux per game sold: True
300/45=6 and 2/3.
controllers are 50 bux. Think it costs that much to make? no.
memory units, harddrives, and even faceplates are making money.
Old games produced by Atari are making games through Live!Arcade. Those cost M$ 0 dollars. At 3.50 a game, times the over 1 million sold, that’s making up for consoles. Over all, they didn’t lose that much on the original xbox, even with the 300 dollars per system loss. The 360 has already sold better than the xbox. Think M$ is gonna keep losing money? yeah right.

M$ does not plan to take market share from Apple: Yet. They said so. they said for now they will compete with other “iPod killers” for the rest of the market, and will be testing the waters for what people want. Then they’ll go after apple. Apple has to step up, or deal with M$ later.
The Zune will eventually be PlayForSure. M$ explained it not being playforsure on the first day that was brought up: PlayForSure and Zune are different departments. PlayForSure is already working on an update for the Zune. Don’t you worry your precious little head.