The folks over at CNet have held a “prizefight” between the Microsoft Zune 120 and the Apple iPod 120. They staged the “fight” in 5 rounds and declared a winner at the end.
Round 1 focused on navigation using the controls and menus. I fully expected Apple to win this round, because they’re known for slick, easy to use interfaces. I was wrong. The CNet staff found the Zune to have better overall navigation features than the iPod. The click wheel was described as “tetchy” and “dated” compared to the touchpad on the Zune.
Round 2 focused on the “sexiness” of the player. Although the Zune garnered praise for its large screen, but described its look as “utilitarian”. The iPod, expectedly, win this round reasonably decisively.
Round 3 focused on compatibility. The reviewers all trashed the Zune for not having sync software for the Macintosh platform, and praised Apple for having both Windows and Mac flavors of iTunes. They also docked (pun intended) the Zune for not having the wealth of accessories the iPod does. Surprisingly, none of them discussed how the iPod locks users into iTunes while the Zune allows for use with other music services. That should have been worth a little in my book.
Round 4 focused on the “sound and science” of the player. The Zune really devoured the iPod in this round. It was said to sound better despite having no equalizer, have a nicer, bigger screen, FM Radio, WiFi, and other features the iPod didn’t.
,
Round 5 talked about the “wallet factor” (cost) of the player as a whole. The Zune won this round because of all the technology packed into it, for the same price as the iPod. Surprisingly, they didn’t discuss the value of the Zune subscription model (though the subscription option was discussed elsewhere in the article).
All things considered, it seemed a reasonably fair comparison, though I think the scores for compatibility took a bigger-than-fair hit because some of the reviewers were Mac users who deducted significant points for the lack of a Mac sync option. I would have docked the iPod for its lack of compatibility with subscription sites like Rhapsody and Napster, and for Apple’s refusal to provide compatibility with more file formats.
In the end, the Zune’s victory over the Classic was relatively slight, but clear. This goes to show that Microsoft is learning from its experiences and improving the player based on the feedback it’s getting. Meanwhile, the Classic seems to be languishing from a lack of significant (hardware) feature updates and less-than-optimal sound. If Apple doesn’t refresh the iPod Classic line soon and “step up the coolness factor” Microsoft may beat them more decisively with the next generation Zune.
December 5th, 2008 at 1:17 pm
OK, you know I don’t like to nitpick
but… “the iPod locks users into iTunes”?
If you’re talking about the software client then, yes, you may have a point. I’ve no idea if Microsoft and 3rd parties give you multiple options for getting songs onto the Zune.
If you’re talking about buying music, then I think you’re totally wrong. You may as well say the Zune locks users into the Zune Market Place. There are many music service you can buy iPod compatible music from (eg. Amazon). The iPod may not support .wmv files, but I’d be surprised if any site still offers them to the exclusion of MP3 or AAC files. And since the Zune doesn’t (officially?) support “plays for sure” DRMed tracks, it doesn’t even have that advantage over the iPod.
But I agree that the Classic is starting to look old. I doubt it will be around for much longer, with Apple moving the iPod Touch up as the flagship model.