Creative CEO says Zen NX “better looking” than iPod | iLounge News

News

Creative CEO says Zen NX “better looking” than iPod

At a press briefing, Creative’s CEO, Sim Wong Hoo said the Nomad Zen NX is “better looking” than the iPod. Am I the only one here who thinks that they copied the iPod’s design?

“Unveiling the company’s new strategy yesterday at a briefing on its financial results, Mr Sim said it has successfully made inroads into the PDE market with its Nomad line of MP3 players.

Holding up one of its latest models - the Nomad Jukebox Zen - he proudly declared the slim, silver aluminium pocket-sized device was ‘better looking’ than rival Apple Computer’s pert but pricier iPod.”

« New 50Cent video features new iPod

15GB iPod: $364 Shipped TODAY Only »

Related Stories

Comments

61

Does any one care about music quality? Should audio quality be the first comparison point?

Posted by ZZ on August 11, 2003 at 11:40 AM (PDT)

62

My $0.02:

1. Don’t choose your device based on the USB 2.0 / Firewire argument.  Both are plenty fast and the speed differences don’t really matter, unless you transfer your entire music collection every single time you synch, or you’re just REALLY impatient.

2. I’ve heard from many knowledgeable people that Firewire is usually faster than USB 2.0 under real-world usage, for the various reasons already stated.  But if you think that makes one device significantly better than the other, see my Point #1.

3. I have a REALLY hard time believing that’s titanium on the back of my 3G iPod.  Where did this info come from?  Seems like plain-old polished stainless steel to me.  Sure scratches like it.

Posted by bslenter on August 11, 2003 at 11:59 AM (PDT)

63

You are an ignorant fool, Guru…

i’m not saying that we should throw out speed ratings completely… but you CANNOT take them for face value. 480 > 400, but these represent peak speeds in a theoretical environment…

I’ve done nothing but provide sources from REAL WORLD tests… Guru, you have alot of nerve. Can you provide one real world test?

Marketing has ALOT to do with with everything when it comes to speed, size, whathave you… here are some other examples.

1. A hard drive’s capacity is represented in GB… but if you take a 200 GB hard drive and put it into a computer, the formatted capacity will be less than 200 GB… why? The hard drive makers consider 1 GB to be 1000 MB… however, the computer, being binary in nature, considers a GB to be 1024 MB because 1024 is a power of 2. Therefore, the useable capacity is less than marketed. MARKETING… because of MARKETING, the box uses 1000s of MB for GB instead of 1024 MB which would be more accurate.

2. Wireless networks. 802.11b and 802.11g are advertised to work at 11mbps and 54 mbps respectively… but in real world situations, even at extremely close range, the best you could do would be 4 or 5 mbps for 802.11b and 20 mbps for 802.11g. 11 mbps and 54 mbps are THEORETICAL, and in the real world, rarely does it reach that…

I have a question for you. Suppose you had SCSI at 80 MBps versus ATA/100. Which do you suppose would be faster? Based on your naive reasoning, the ATA would be, but i’m willing to bet that the SCSI has much higher sustained speeds than ATA/100.

Same way with Firewire vs. USB 2.0. You cannot take the speed ratings you get from manufacturers at face value… have you been reading ANY of the real world links people have been putting here?

Looking at this comment page… i see link after link to articles showing tests where FW edges out USB 2.0, but NONE that show it the other way around. All you have to cling to is what Intel tells you is the speed…

Here’s another real world benchmark…
http://www.barefeats.com/fire26.html

here’s the guy’s conclusion, “USB 2.0 is much faster than USB 1.1 but it is much slower than FireWire”

USB 2.0 is marketed very well… and they are in lots of devices, and its good that the iPod has support, but given the choice of both to connect my iPod to the computer, i’d pick Firewire.

Posted by Benson Leung on August 11, 2003 at 12:41 PM (PDT)

64

bslenter, i think firewire gives the iPod an edge because it means just one cable going to the iPod to charge it and transfer songs at the same time.

On the iPod, if you want to use USB 2.0, you have to deal with a 2nd cable to charge the iPod. Using firewire alone, it works with just one.

Posted by Benson Leung on August 11, 2003 at 12:45 PM (PDT)

65

Oh Benson…

I am glad you posted that because your ignorance came to light:

1-  You ACTUALLY have to post something regarding the 1000 vs 1024 issue??  You’re a joke

2- You are asking which is faster Wide Ultra2SCSI or ATA100?  What is that supposed to mean?  Your question makes no sense.  Sustained speeds are attained by the devices you connect via ATA100 or SCSI.  Then again…..There are IDE ATA100 drives with burst rates higher than some U160 SCSI drives and vice versa.  What is your point?  Your comparison is meaningless and completely irrelevant in this case.

Go back to bed.

Posted by Guru on August 11, 2003 at 7:19 PM (PDT)

66

Well, whatever the speeds I think firewire is much cooler smile  Go FW400!

Benson:

SCSI protocols speeds are expressed in MB/s.  So when you talk about SCSI 80Mbps I have no idea what you are talking about.  80MB/s SCSI protocol is the Wide Ultra2SCSI like the previous poster pointed out.

Also…..there are ATA100 drives that are FASTER than some Ultra320 SCSI drives that operate on 320MB/s SCSI…....

.....so I don’t really see what your point is.

Posted by iPod lover on August 11, 2003 at 7:59 PM (PDT)

67

OMG!

This is one of the most entertaining threads ever!

My favourite is the one with the guy trying to sound all technical and smart and actually citing 1GB=1024MB as an example!

hahaha…the discovery of the century

Posted by Twisted on August 11, 2003 at 8:06 PM (PDT)

68

“there are ATA100 drives that are FASTER than some Ultra320 SCSI drives that operate on 320MB/s SCSI”

Individual drives are tuned for different environments. Some are faster for typical desktop use, others for Servers. There are also issues with OS support - many patchlevels of Win2K and WinXP ignore SCSI write-throughs, for example.

Go here, you might learn something:

http://www.storagereview.com/php/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=FastestDrive

Posted by "faster" on August 11, 2003 at 9:14 PM (PDT)

69

Faster:

Whether a drive is faster at desktop use or server use level is irrelevant to the discussion.  There are indeed faster ATA100 IDE than some U160/U320 SCSI drives.  I think you are the one who needs to learn something about SCSI instead of merely invoking the Storagereview.com Leaderboard.  How lame.

Posted by Drives on August 12, 2003 at 4:49 AM (PDT)

70

1st SCSI was pseudo SCSI1 on Apple Mac back when PCs only had RLL.

Now using U320 and fibre channel. I do know a lot. Packetization rule.

Remember one disadvantage of classic SCSI topology is all devices share same bus so 320 MB/s bandwidth split between 10 or 20 drives is limiting for burst transfers.

Newer Serial Attach SCSI will be the biggest driver of future SCSI adoption.

Posted by fasterharderbetterlonger on August 12, 2003 at 8:57 AM (PDT)

71

I love my iPod. I know it doesnt sound as good as Zen. The difference lies in the sucky 90 db SNR as compared to 98db of Zen.  Also Zen has 4 band custom graphic equalizer.

Alright, I know iPod is overrated, overproced and under featured, BUT what the heck? It is the sexiest gadget ever made. Who cares about sound quality anyway? You gotta look good, right?

Posted by IloveMyIpod on November 5, 2003 at 10:03 PM (PDT)

72

Blimey, isn’t this all just subjective anyway???  I have a Zen Xtra and i love it, but i only got it because i managed to destroy 2 ipods in 2 days just by plugging it into my pc.  I can’t afford to keep buying equipment just to get a device to work, i got through 2 firewire cards as well and still no luck, not to mention the fact itunes slowed my pc to a snail…  In this world you have to accept that people will always have differing opinions and that sometimes functionality over form, swings it…  if i had had a mac it might have been a different story, but i’m not going to buy a new machine to run an ipod…

Posted by Mark on February 10, 2004 at 2:02 AM (PDT)

73

My 2 cents on a couple of things:

1) FW vs USB: how many times are you guys going to transfer such huge amounts of data?!?!?!  I have over 600 CD’s, I started them transfering and went to bed.  When I woke up the next morning, my collection was in my player.  Who cares if it stopped at midnight or 1 AM?  When I add each new CD I buy,  it takes 10 minutes or so to rip and encode, who cares if it takes 5 minutes vs. 6 minutes to upload?  Are you people really emptying and re-filling the whole hard drive on a regular basis?  Maybe you should have spent your money on the Nomad with the bigger hard drive and just have your whole collection with you wink

2) you have all overlooked a huge advantage of the Nomad acting as an external hard drive.  I can carry photos and documents and anything else I want in it.

3) for alot of people price is a real factor.  When I went to the store to pick out my MP3 player, I had researched them some and was on the fence.  But when I saw the 40 Gig Nomad for $229 (after a $50 rebate) vs. a 15 Gig iPod it was a no brainer, almost 3x the capacity for 3/4 the price!

4) if you like iTunes so much use it to do everything for the Nomad except the transfer, then transfer your files drag and drop (remember the Nomad looks like a hard drive you your PC?)

5)  I agree: the carrying case with the Nomad (at least the Zen Xtra I bought) STINKS!  No window to see the screen!?!?!?  The strap to close it covers the power connector?!?!? What was Creative thinking?

6) Regarding the debate about the interface:  I used an iPod (standard, not mini) side-by-side with the Nomad in the store and I didn’t see much of a difference other than the Nomad’s larger easier to read screen.

Posted by rpmendez on May 17, 2004 at 9:16 AM (PDT)

Page 4 of 4 pages « First  <  2 3 4

If you have a comment, news tip, advertising inquiry, or coverage request, a question about iPods/iPhones/iPad or accessories, or if you sell or market iPod/iPhone/iPad products or services, read iLounge's Comments + Questions policies before posting, and fully identify yourself if you do. We will delete comments containing advertising, astroturfing, trolling, personal attacks, offensive language, or other objectionable content, then ban and/or publicly identify violators.

Commenting is not available in this section entry.
Sign up for the iLounge Weekly Newsletter

Email:

Recent News

Recent Reviews

Recent Articles

Sign up for the iLounge Weekly Newsletter

Email:

iLounge is an independent resource for all things iPod, iPhone, iPad, and beyond.
iPod, iPhone, iPad, iTunes, Apple TV, Mac, and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc.
iLounge is © 2001 - 2014 iLounge, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy