Other than the wireless feature, which is admittedly a few months ahead of its time, the specs are all very standard for a device that's trying to compete with the monstrously successful iPod. Alternative portable audio players have been around long before everyone knew what an iPod was, but it was Apple's device that ended up defining the market with its slick marketing and easy-to-use interface.
So here comes Microsoft with its own entry, nearly half a decade after the fact, and it just makes me wonder: What exactly is it trying to prove? The very existence of the Zune is baffling to me. Does Microsoft actually think it has a chance at significantly eroding Apple's nearly 80 percent market share? Is it pride? Is Microsoft just trying to prove that it can play the same game as Apple? The only new feature it's bringing to the table is wireless connectivity, which can be used to synch with your computer or swap files with friends. Beyond that, why would anyone want to buy a Zune over an iPod or any other mp3 player on the market?
Personally, I think Microsoft is wasting its time with the Zune. It's simply a fairly unremarkable media device. More importantly, it seems to me that the thought processes that led to its inception are an all-too-common source of stagnation and misdirection at Microsoft. It often seems that Microsoft is content with just taking an existing "fresh" idea, improving upon it slightly, and releasing it as their own. Some may call this progress, I call it lazy. This sort of thinking puts them in the business of constantly playing catch up and, in such a place, innovation is dead.
It just takes a quick glance at Microsoft's upcoming projects to see just how "fresh" they really are: Windows Live (www.live.com) is their response to Google's search, mail and personalized home page. A new and improved Windows Mobile software may finally make them competitive in the smartphone market where Blackberry leads. They'll be taking a dip in the social networking scene with "Windows Live Spaces" with sights aimed at the MySpace crowd. And MSN will be getting Internet video à la YouTube and Google Video. While they do need to stay competitive in some respects, one would think the biggest software company in the world would be setting standards instead of merely adapting to them.
So why didn't Microsoft figure out the YouTube or Gmail formula for success before their competitors? The answer lies in innovation. Perhaps it's because it's just too big, or maybe the newer tech companies are more eager to succeed-whatever the case, it seems that Microsoft is severely lacking in innovation today. The only solution to this is a shakeup in the administration that forces the company to seek out innovation as if its very existence depended upon it, because it may just as well.
With software genius Ray Ozzie (creator of the once-popular Lotus Notes) taking over from Bill Gates as chief software architect back in June, Microsoft may already be on its way towards a modernized era of software design. According to the October '06 issue of Wired, Ozzie seems focused on making the company less of a lumbering giant and more directly competitive with its younger rivals.
While this will entail moving the company away from its current safety zone and guaranteed revenue, it's a gamble that may mean more for Microsoft than any amount of profit. Hopefully, this means no more playing catch up.
E-mail Devindra at dahardawar@amherst.edu and perhaps he'll make you a mixtape of his favorite tunes.