BusinessWeek Looks at Walkman vs. iPod Capacity Claims
BusinessWeek Looks at Walkman vs. iPod Capacity Claims
by , 10:30 AM EDT, July 20th, 2004
In an editorial at BusinessWeek, Cliff Edwards looks at capacity claims, and the sound quality issues relating to that, between Apple's iPod and Sony's Walkman NW-HD1. At issue is the methodology used by Sony to claim that its 20 GB Walkman can hold more music than Apple's 20 GB iPod, something only possible by using different bit rates to make one's comparison. Mr. Edwards examines those issues. From the piece:
That's the logic Apple used to attack Sony's new player. The creator of the iPod notes that to jam those 13,000 songs onto its player, Sony would have to compress music files to a bit rate of 48 -- well below the default 128-bit rate Apple uses. "Clearly, they are trying to use a little marketing trickery," says Apple Executive Vice-President Philip W. Schiller. Moreover, Sony's default bit rate for the new player will be 68. But Sony says its compression technology is superior to Apple's and can maintain quality even at lower bit rates. "Listen to it yourself," says Todd Schrader, a Sony Electronics vice-president. "I don't have a golden ear, but it sounds great."
For now it's impossible to verify Sony's claims, since experts have yet to conduct tests on its music player. In a decidedly unscientific test, one BusinessWeek writer and two friends listened to Frederic Chopin's Etudes Opus 10 and Opus 25, compressed from a store-bought compact disc to a 48-bit rate using Sony's technology. Then they compared it with the original CD. Guess what? They couldn't tell the difference.
There is more information on these issues in the full story, which we recommend as an interesting read.
The Mac Observer Spin:
Mr. Edwards referenced test is anecdotal, at best, but he raises a lot of very interesting issues in his piece. Most non-geeky consumers are likely to fall victim to any company's marketing claims on capacity, and this is exacerbated by the fact that most of those same folks couldn't tell the difference between different bit rates if their lives depended on it.If that's the case, what matters purist arguments about methodology? After all, the geeks and audiophiles already know the what's what on these issues. Should the FTC regulate the issue, requiring capacity comparisons to be at some sort of standardized bit rate? That would be a disaster, too, as different compression technologies do provide drastically different results, and the technology is subject to dramatic changes.
The solution is likely to remain buyer beware.
In the meanwhile, discussion of this issue in mainstream outlets like BusinessWeek, and before that, the San Francisco Chronicle, helps raise its profile, and provides more publicity for both the iPod and the Walkman.
Observer Comments
Tue Jul 20, 2004 11:03 am Subject: Sent a letter off to them...
...indicating that while Edward may be right in his analysis of filesize, sound, and such being within the ear of the beholder, that he doesn't cover a larger issue: the Walkman doesn't allow playback of any format except Sony's own.
As of right now, I can only find information saying the Walkman will play ATRAC and ATRACPlus format compression. It won't even allow MP3, and Sony has chosen not to expand its scope by buying into Microsoft's WMA protected scheme. The iPod, on the other hand, plays MP3, AAC, protected AAC (from the iTunes Music Store), and several others.
Now this may be an oversight in Sony marketing, but Sony Marketing has never been stupid, so I doubt it. What's going to happen when someone gets their cool, cheapo Walkman home and tries toput their ripped MP3s on it? Yikes!
In all reality, Sony is messing this one up pretty royally. Their player may fit more and cost less, but those are the exact same two arguments, verbatim, that people said about the DJ when it was released. They're forgetting all the subjective reasons people are buying iPods. Like UI, or iTMS selections, or ease of use, or reliablity. It is on this last one I'm most fearful for Sony. Let's not forget this is the same company that made PlayStations people had to play on their sides and upside down beaucse the drive motors were garbage. Apple doesn't have nanything to worry about yet.
I'm sorry, but if you listen to ANYthing - a Chopin etude, Nelly, Van Halen - at 48Kbps and can't hear the difference between that and a CD, you are too dense to operate an MP3 player anyway.
I mean COME ON, I hear all manner of "cascading" and "waterfalls" in 128Kbps - especially in the cymbals.
This was a decent article up to that point, where it just lost all credibility.
I'm VERY surprised that a 48-bit Atrac3 file can be considered equal to a AAC 128-bit file. Granted they're different codecs and I will have to listen to them myself before I pass judgement, but from these tests conducted less than two months ago comparins the codecs at 128-bit, AAC was clearly the better codec. And at 48-bit you're taking out even more data. I'm very surprised.
http://www.rjamorim.com/test/multiformat128/results.html
Tue Jul 20, 2004 11:39 am Subject: Why do I feel...
Why do I feel like we're seeing the start of another "Megahertz Myth" syndrome?
"Well yes, iPods hold less songs, but you need to look at the compression rate of..."
It's the same story again. Someone can ALWASY win in the numbers game by coming out with something that cuts corners. NOTE that I am NOT saying the Sony bit-rate is bad...we'll see, it MAY be just fine!
My point is that Apple goes for quality first and when you produce something with quality you RARELY have the best numbers. You CAN'T have both.
I think Apple just needs to ignore this fight. I don't think the NUMBER of songs is the biggest reason people buy iPods. I mean, isn't that why the mini was supposed to fail? Look at it...1000 song capacity and they're selling like hot-cakes. THAT's why you haven't seen a 60 GB iPod yet. Everyone's scratching their heads trying to find out why people buy iPods and all they can tell is that "number-of-songs" isn't the magic bullet that cures all.
I think hard drive sizes matter more on geek-boards like this and less to consumers. This entire argument is a very minor part of why MOST people decide to buy one player over another. Apple only comes off looking defensive over it so they should just ignore it. I don't think that it matters enough to fight over.
Tue Jul 20, 2004 11:48 am Subject: How about 48kbps AAC?
BusinessWeek's test subjects couldn't tell the difference between CD audio and 48-kbps ATRAC (Sony's format). Okay, I can believe that some people can listen to something once and not tell the difference. But a much better way of testing Sony's claims would be to run the same test with 48-kbps AAC. Does ATRAC really sound better? If so, then Sony's claim has at least SOME merit. If not, then it really is marketing trickery.
Even if ATRAC is better, Sony's claims are still questionable, because, as the article states, the default bitrate for encoded content is 68 kbps (I think they probably mean 64, but...I dunno). What's more, music downloaded from Sony's Connect music service is encoded at 132 kbps, which is larger than what Apple sells. So the Walkman can actually store FEWER legally-downloaded tracks than the same-size iPod.
You could certainly encode decent AAC files at less than 128 kbps. I hope this marketing war doesn't lead Apple to use similar tactics, because I for one appreciate the honest numbers Apple has been giving. Apple fully expects people to use the bitrate used in their advertisements, and they use it themselves. Sony, on the other hand, clearly considers the bitrate is uses for its advertising claim to be sub-standard and expects users to use higher bitrates, as is shown by their default settings and music store offerings. So I do think Sony's claim is at least a little underhanded.
But hey, this is marketing we're talking about. Underhandedness comes with the territory.
Tue Jul 20, 2004 12:12 pm Subject: It's really not important
When the iPod came out with 5GB only Sony could have taken advantage of this. Now the "cheap' iPod is 20GB, with double that for $100 (plus a dock thrown in.)
The iPod has therefore moved to a position where most people will be able to put in ALL of their music (and the CDs that borrow from friends) and still have room. I just ordered a 40GB (replacing my 5GB) for the simple reason that it allows me to use it as a backup HD when traveling on business. The 20Gb would have been fine for music.
Sony is only 2 years late. I think it is a dud and a salesman wanting to push an iPod will only have to ask, "How many CDs do you own". There is a market place for Sony, however, in that it will give a retailer something to sell when they are sold out of iPods and are waiting for a backorder to be filled . . .
QuoteBilly K wrote:
I'm sorry, but if you listen to ANYthing - a Chopin etude, Nelly, Van Halen - at 48Kbps and can't hear the difference between that and a CD, you are too dense to operate an MP3 player anyway.
I mean COME ON, I hear all manner of "cascading" and "waterfalls" in 128Kbps - especially in the cymbals.
Most likely, that depends on what you're using to listen to them. A high-end stereo, certainly, will faithfully reproduce all the flaws of the input. But take a portable music player with earbud-for-pity-sake headphones, and I would not be surprised to find it hard to tell the difference.
QuoteGuest wrote:
first, the new player DOES support MP3 and WMA. get your facts right.
second, though I already am an iPod owner, I know for sure that in my experience, no other brand has ever beaten Sony when it comes to audio video quality.
Hey everyone - the Sony plant is here! Thanks for joining the fray, Mr. Sony-guy.
And no - YOU get your facts straight - the NW-HD1ABCD123 does NOt support MP3. It won't play them. Sonic Stage (that's the software that comes with it) does.
Nyah.
Dirt Road - I still just can't imagine 48Kbps sounding "as good as a CD," regardless of the output device. For the record, I listen to my iPod with the standard earbuds and through an iTrip in the car. I SAW a Bang & Olufsson (sp) once. In a magazine.
Quoteactually, i believe sony's portable players do NOT support anything but altrac. however, sony's syncing software does convert mp3s into altrac. not the same, imo. you're degrading the audio quality even further by encoding the music a second time.Guest wrote:
the new player DOES support MP3 and WMA. get your facts right.
Tue Jul 20, 2004 1:03 pm Subject: Business Week's test subjects
Tue Jul 20, 2004 1:10 pm Subject: Editorial
QuoteAyaSofya wrote:
From what demographic did Business Week choose their test subjects, subscribers, "business people"? I wonder how the two players would been rated had the test subjects come from a music orientated magazine. A trained musician can pick out things in sound that I can not detect.
Well it said it was "two firends." But hey, it's NOT "Business Week" that did any tests. It's an editorial. It's not an article. He's NOT a reporter. He's writing an opinion piece based on his life experience.
So ther's nothing WRONG with how this was done...The real issue is why anyone should take product-reviews from an editorial page seriously.
Tue Jul 20, 2004 1:47 pm Subject: My Name
QuoteKircle wrote:QuoteThe same could be said about your name, Small White Car.Small White Car wrote:
The real issue is why anyone should take product-reviews from an editorial page seriously.
Well the difference is that no one wrote an article about ME that people are posting about.
Anyway, at least I know what my name means. What's a "kircle?" Is it just a misspelled circle or is there more to it than that?
Lets be honest a player like this as indeed a car environment will certainly obscure whatever quality is there to start with which is why Sony can make this claim. They are desparate to try to find a selling point over the iPod so anything in a storm eh. But at the end of the day its a great argument for simply sticking with MP3's I would have thought and why not take it further still why bother to try to improve the potential sound quality of products at all. Its amazing actually how many people do want quality and numbers in a product which they will never really experience. Personally I think potential sound quality will beat potential number of songs any day for most people.
Tue Jul 20, 2004 3:07 pm Subject: This guy has it right.
To quote Small White Car :"I think Apple just needs to ignore this fight. I don't think the NUMBER of songs is the biggest reason people buy iPods. I mean, isn't that why the mini was supposed to fail? Look at it...1000 song capacity and they're selling like hot-cakes. THAT's why you haven't seen a 60 GB iPod yet. Everyone's scratching their heads trying to find out why people buy iPods and all they can tell is that "number-of-songs" isn't the magic bullet that cures all.
I think hard drive sizes matter more on geek-boards like this and less to consumers. This entire argument is a very minor part of why MOST people decide to buy one player over another. Apple only comes off looking defensive over it so they should just ignore it. I don't think that it matters enough to fight over. " End Quote.
Thank you sir! Right on! I bought a 15GB simply beacuse I wanted an iPod and I wasn't willing to wait for the Mini to come off back order. Yes Dell, Sony, Creative, etc. your 900 Terabyte player can hold fifty six bajillion songs. Who cares? My 15GB has enough storgae to hold around 648 hours of music. But I can only play eight of it before the battery dies and I have to plug it in to a computer! So lets say it only held eight hours of music! Then, every time the battery died, I would merely load on new songs. Besides, who actually owns twelve thousand three hundred songs?
Tue Jul 20, 2004 3:08 pm Subject: Bit rate is the BLAST processing of the music war
Back in the day I recall Nintendo and Sega getting into this whole numbers game about bits and bytes and throwing numbers around - confusing the consumers. In the end Sega through out some marketing term 'blast processing' which was supposed to illustrate the superiority of the Sega Genesis to the Nintendo hardware. While it was clear to people who actually spent 5 minutes to look at the spec that the Nintendo system was better - the average consumer was being bombarded with marketing nonsense and actually believed Sega.
I can bet you that people will take to these raw GB numbers the same way they get confused by 16-bit, 32-bit and 64bit and its benefits. Apple will have to do the consumer marketing piece, they cannot rely on the consumer to figure it out as Nintendo did.
My iTunes library of 130 CDs takes up about 5GB. So I could encode them in ATRAC3 and they would take up about 2GB. Then I'd have 18 GB HD space left on my HD instead of 15GB. So even if what Sony is saying about sound quality is true (which it probably isn't) it's just not a major consideration when choosing what model to buy whereas ease of use and simplicity is.
Sony's advertising gimmick isn't going to help them much. I don't think the iPod is popular solely because you can carry all your music collection on it:
Just to remind you, these are the reasons Apple's baby is doing so well:
1) Ease of use
2) The cool factor
3) Very few buttons
4) The PDA functionality - addresses, schedule, alarms, notes (can't input on the iPod though)
5) Games
6) iTunes is the most advanced and easy to use among its class - remember Airport Express?
Sony will have to work really hard to top these.
It's is possible for music encoded at lower bits to sound exactly as one encoded in higher bits if the music encoded in lower bits uses a superior compression technology. That's the obvious. Here is another obvious, it's possible that Apple does not use the best compression technology. Here is a third not as obvious. It's possible somone can create better sounding music than apple at lower bit rates. Now, now people. Stop frothing at the mouth. Apple fanatics are the worst and i'm an apple fanatic, but you people give apple fanatics a bad name. No one has even considered that's it's possible.
Sat Jul 24, 2004 11:35 pm Subject:
Nobody has said it isn't possible. However, listening tests have not shown the Sony ATRAC compression method to be superior to the offerings currently available on the iPod, especially at the bitrates that Sony quotes (if 48kbps is so great, how come Sony Connect sells at 132kbps?). And no, I'm not going to post the links again. They have been posted numerous times on multiple threads.
BTW, Apple didn't create any of the compression methods used on the iPod (except possibly the lossless codec). They are all open standards.
Why so hostile?
Mon Jul 26, 2004 7:05 pm Subject: Maybe Sony's codec is great.
But I use itunes...and it is swEET! Before that I used winamp. On both you can hear the sound quality go down as the bitrate does. Anything below 128 is pure crap! Normally a song at 48 bit rate you may as well throw away.
But the points made previously about storage capacity are true...people just don't care!!! 20-40 gigs at ANY bit rate is more than enough for 99% of users. And besides that people will usually chose style first. Look at the ipod mini. And if the trolls claim of quality issues was true...We would hear about it all over the place. You know we would, (apple fans are very picky and are loud when disappointed, (plus our enemies would not overlook this), I have heard nothin sept some sad attempt to smear ipods. Go to circuit city and read consumer rateings on the mini...there 95% good giving it a 4.7 out of 5 average. And they can't keep'em in stock more than a few hours at a time.
WHAT!! no other company has beaten sony at video or audio quality!!?? Is this a joke? and Sonys build quality and is clear to anyone that has owned a Sony product in the last 5 years. Sony is not the company that they used to be. Sony is only stil around because of the fluke of the playstation, which was originaly developed by Nintendo not Sony eventhough Sony stil takes all the credit. Lets remember that sony are moving into apples playground of computering and digital music now and Sony are hardly experianced. 48kbps, Sony wake up. Do you realy think that such a low bit rate will even compare to a higher bit rate? The ipod has embarrest almost every other mp3 player around, to your supprise i do not own an iPod but i am not even going to consider a network walkman. 13,000 songs, but they all sound crap, why would anyone want that? If you buy a Sony you pay for the name, if you buy and ipod you pay of quality. Apple and Iriver make the mp3 players to own.
Comments are currently closed. Please email the author instead.
Recent Headlines - Updated November 22nd
- Fri, 7:07 PM
- Games - Soccer Sim Championship Manager 2010 Released for Mac
- 6:47 PM
- Games - EA Publishes Original Monopoly for iPhone
- 6:15 PM
- News - Original Apple I on Ebay for $50K, w/Letter from Steve Jobs
- 6:11 PM
- Games - New iPhone Games: Secret of the Lost Cavern Ep 1, New DJ Nights, More
- 5:47 PM
- Games - Star Trek D-A-C Game Headed to the Mac Next Month
- 4:57 PM
- Product News - TidBITS Releases “Take Control of Syncing Data in Snow Leopard”
- 4:26 PM
- John Martellaro's Blog - Particle Debris (week ending 11/20) Stationery Pads Go Poof
- 2:59 PM
- Free on iTunes - Musée du Louvre, Art Lite, SketchBook Mobile X and More.
- 1:50 PM
- Deal Brothers - Acer P215H bmid 21.5” Widescreen LCD Monitor: $139.99
- 11:24 AM
- TMO Appearances - Jeff Gamet Shares More Holiday Gift Ideas on MacJury
- 10:43 AM
- Product News - Cocktail 4.5 for Leopard Adds QuickLook Cache Clearing
- 10:06 AM
- News - Hack Enables Mac OS X 10.6.2 on Netbooks
The Mac Observer Reader Specials
- TypeStyler For Mac OS X is Now Shipping! Download The Free Fully Functional 60 Day Tryout at www.typestyler.com
OWC: Get the Right Memory / Ram for your Mac. Top Quality, Competitive Prices, Lifetime Warranty. Expert Support and Video Installation Guidies too! 4.0GB Matched Sets from $87.99, Options up to 32GB. Click here
If you're using a Mac, then you've gotta check out Full Tilt Poker for Mac. This Full Tilt Poker bonus code does the unthinkable, it actually rewards!For the latest Apple products use Ciao, a price comparison website, to find laptops like MacBook Air. Then find the best prices on MP3 players and use our comparison tool to evaluate mobile phones like the Apple iPhone.
Laptop Hardware Provided by TechRestore - Overnight Mac & iPod Repairs.
