Neverside

Creative Zen range vs. Apple IPod range...

IMO, all IPod oweners are paying for is the name. It's like buying something from Abercrombie & Fitch or Hollister (and the like). Trendy is all it is. If it weren't for a mostly audio/visual illiterate society and Apple's massive marketing campaign, the IPod would have never sold. Oh, and may I mention Apple's alliances with everyone under the sun? How and why? Because they had the money and couldn't survive just on computer sales alone whole trying to push the IPod.
I'm a Zen Micro owner IPods seem to me like a big rip-off of the Zen Touch series. And numerous people have tried to make the case that Apple was just "improving on existing technology." They haven't done anything to the existing technology except used it in a round shape and make the clicker louder. Also, the display is pretty much exactly the same (technology-wise, not concerning size).
Furthermore, those who assume I know nothing about audio/visual technology and that they know everything (all of this after only reading an issue of Crutchfield or Audio Advisor) attempt to deem Apple's DAC as better than Creative's DAC. They assume that since Creative's DAC is cheaper it must also be of lower quality. Not true. It has been stated time and time again that Creative has the most quality DAC out there as of yet (iRiver coming up VERY close, maybe not if already on par). I have tested this out on my own time, playing the same song, same bitrate, with the same headphones (Sennheiser EH150s...casual listening pair in my case),along with no equalizer settings (neutral) on both players. Creative won out when I listened and when I put both players under a desk, used the same pair of headphones I used, and blindly surveyed four of my friends upon sound quality.
I could care less if I can't mod my Zen Micro as easily as an IPod or IPod Mini. The only reason I would think of modding something like this is because it lacks what I need in the first place. Neither have any "secret" features that can only be accessed through modding that will drastically increase the product's performance. No matter how much you mod it it still does the same thing: It plays music. Or in other cases, shows photos and videos (both Creative and Apple have player with these capabilities). Anyhow, if I needed to get anything else out of it I would have bought a seperate tool for the task, since it would do the job so much better as it was dedicated for that use.

Sorry this turned into a rant, but this whole issue just gets me so riled up!

And you guys think...? Tell me! I want to hear it!

___________________

Signature Guidelines

wow, talk about passionate...or maybe just angry. anyway, they look cool, but i like the touchpad on the ipod, it's much more simplified with a few buttons as opposed to buttons all over the place. for me personally, an ipod shuffle works great. i didn't see an equivalent creative version. and for a $99, i don't feel like i was ripped-off. it's all a matter of perception too. what you think is expensive, might not be for someone else. still, if you're happy with you've got, great, but so am i.

___________________

I fix ugly logos / inBlogs.org Ad-Free Aggregator

I own a creative mp3 player. It is one of the little Nomad 128mb players that are about the size of a matchbox.

I would take an ipod or one of the newer creatives over that, but then I would probably just sell it for paintball stuff... I'm crazy like that

___________________

Oh, yes, this is going to be wild.

The main reason I prefer the ipod is just how easy it is to use. The navigation is very intuitive and makes it really easy to get to the folder you want. Since the main function of the device is to listen to music, accessing which artist/song you want to listen to as fast as possible is pretty important.

When I tried using a zen micro, the navigation seemed weird, and the scrolling was too sensitive when trying to scroll through songs slowly. On the ipod, scrolling goes slow if you are moving your thumb slowly, but it speeds up exponentially when you are trying to move through a list quickly.

Mostly, though, the way that the ipod control is arranged, with the controls arranged in a circle pattern, with the most used button in the center is easier to use than the squareish layout of the Creative controls, which means move finger movement when navigatiing through the menus.

A lot of this may seem nitpicky, but If i used this thing all the time every day, I want it to be as easy to use as possible.

___________________

Hello. I am Joe Shoop's Portfolio

I own the Cowon iAudio x5 20Gb......

___________________

Neverside - In Development. Expected Release: Unknown.
Tortustudios.com - In Development. Expected Release: Summer 2006.( You can visit it now)

I totally agree. I dont see the point in spend a bomb on an ipod when the whole point of mp3 players is to listen to music. Any damn mp3 player would do. That doesn't mean I would buy an cheap mp3 player from a make I've never heard of. Personally I feel the ipods are just simple a rip off. Also I believe that itunes music file can only be use on ipods hence a way of making much more money as some prefer to download it off the net.

Last edited by schoi, February 16th, 2006 04:33 PM (Edited 1 times)

I'd get an iPod. This is not a "follow the trend" thing, I'm thinking **** out for myself.

See, the navigation on every single mp3 player I've ever seen is absolutely horrendous. Vile, awkward, weird buttons. Every time I look at a non-iPod mp3 player, I slap myself and say "No, it may have more space (I don't need features other than the ability to read text files and listen to music - video is just a bonus), but look at that damn navigation".

iPod me up hombres.

I own an iPod Nano and plan on getting a Zen Vision M for my longer trips when I could do with the extra space and battery. The Zen Vision M comes in fun colours which is why I want one of them (Unless Apple bring out something that beats the colours for me).
Reason I got an iPod Nano. It looked good. It is small, thin, smaller than the Micro in the important ways (imo anyway). Ok it does cost a little more (Not for me though, gotta love tax free buying from Jersey!) but the difference in price for what is purely a taste issue was reasonably. The Micro is good, yes, may have better sound if you happen to be one of those people with perfect pitch hearing (I've listened to both and although they sounded slightly different neither was perfect enough to be better. Mirco had better bass but vocals seemed clearer on Nano for me), sure, but it's simply not a better piece of kit. It's simply a level alternative. And for a Gadgetwhore like myself there was no real choice, you look at the two and it's obvious which one induces the 'ooh shiny' response.

I honestly believe that those who buy Creative instead of Apple for the reason of it being Creative instead of Apple are like those who listen to the 'Alternative Pop' and slag off normal 'Mainstream Pop'. They have to be different but don't really know how. No offence intended to anyone there.

Originally posted by Saska:

I honestly believe that those who buy Creative instead of Apple for the reason of it being Creative instead of Apple are like those who listen to the 'Alternative Pop' and slag off normal 'Mainstream Pop'. They have to be different but don't really know how. No offence intended to anyone there.

I'm not of the group that buys by brand. That's why I included the example of brand names such as Hollister or A&F. I wasn't about to outright say "And I don't buy Creative products just because It's made by Creative" simply because that would leave me open to "Oh yes you do -- you're just saying you don't" attacks. But as I see it I'm open to comments such as this since, of course, this is DEBATE COURT

I appreciate your feedback greatly, Saska, and you've demonstrated my point further than I could have alone. The "ooh shiny" response is what I feel Apple bases their sales on. That's fine that they do that, but it also means their product is more prone to becoming a fad than a consumer favorite.

Apple could have done much better, IMO. Their computer systems are amazing. If it weren't for the dependency on so many other things (most not suitable to name here, i.e., illegal operations) then I would have bought an Apple a long time ago. But as far as their music players go, their design could have been more intuitive. The reason so many people find the Creative players so difficult to use is because most have used iPods beforehand. It's like trying to find the drinking glasses in someone else's kitchen. They're just not familiar with the design. Once they learn it, they've got it. It's so tired how Apple pushes iTunes to support the iPod since it seems like that's all the player has going for it. It's not the capabilities of the player they make appealing, it's the music store. If your player isn't braggable, then why market it in the first place? Why even produce it?

(Sorry if I rambled on and went off on some tangents...I'm at school )

___________________

Signature Guidelines

The iPod won't become a fad anytime soon. Simple reason for this is that it isn't all pretty looks.

As a music player, it does work and works well. To the average person it sounds as good as anything else and it's as easy to use as anything else (I personally have no problem using Creative, Apple or any other make of music player once I try. They're all pretty much the same to me). The fact that is holds it's own technically while shining through on aesthetics makes it the consumer favourite to the majority. The only benefits of others players are slightly better specs which isn't enough to beat the aesthetic pull, wider range of supported formats but this relies on people knowing of said formats, most don't and lastly, a different style which is better for some than the iPod style. Problem with the last one is that Apple did their homework. Shiny is good, black and white are better. Mix the two and you have a formidable combination.

Oh, let's not forget the rather extensive range of iPod accessories. That's always a large factor.