• Windows 7 Wallpapers
• Vista Wallpapers
• Windows Wallpapers

And the Zune player takes a lot of cues from the iPod.

Microsoft learned the hard way that the top-down symbiotic relationship between the iTunes and iPod and its benefits are what made Apple so successful. Additionally, it understood the simplicity of the device itself and its user interface were of critical importance.

Thus, a lot of the Zune is -- for lack of a better word -- copied from Apple. However, the player's few differences are where Microsoft hopes to draw in the consumer. Microsoft wants to make digital music a social experience, and these features set it apart from the crowd.

But the question remains: Is the social aspect of the Zune enough to make it a viable alternative, or is this just yet another false alarm in a string of supposed "iPod killers" that barely left a scratch on the face of the seemingly unbeatable device?

At first look, Zune looks much like the iPod, although with a larger screen and smaller scroll wheel. The problem is the "directional pad" as Microsoft likes to call it doesn't scroll at all. Instead its used more like the navigation on an old Nintendo controller.

Even though the user interface on the Zune is probably one of the best available, and better than the iPod in my opinion, it is crippled by this shortcoming. I found the directional pad not very user intuitive, initially requiring guesses as how to get the device to do what I want.

A scroll wheel here or some equal function would have really set this apart. Instead, an archaic method of navigation cheapens a beautiful UI, and that's a shame.

Other decisions, such as the blocky look of the device and its weight -- about the same as a second-generation iPod, made in 2002 -- left me thinking that while the software itself may have been carefully thought out, the hardware seemed to be rushed in an effort to get the Zune to market. A questionable decision to say the least.

The Zune features a much larger screen than the iPod, three inches versus 2.5 inches, although both share a common resolution at 320x240. Microsoft's marketers claim the Zune's screen is better, but I could not see any appreciable difference that wasn't more a function of video encoding than display quality. Regardless, the bigger screen still made videos easier to watch - especially longer ones.

On the software side, the user interface works quite well, and album art is displayed much more prominently on the Zune screen than on the iPod. Whereas the iPod shows album covers in a small half-inch box, the cover art on the Zune takes up about 75 percent of the "now playing" screen.

There's a problem though. Microsoft isn't prepared here, and the album artwork used is resized-up, resulting in a blurred image. Apparently this is being fixed, but why not do it before you release the device?

Missing from the device UI are any extras. Only available were an FM radio, video support, pictures, and music. Compared with the iPod, it's missing podcast support, games, calendaring, notes, audiobook support, and the host of extras added with fifth-generation iPods.

I'm not sure whether this can be chalked up to the fancy transitions or less functionality requiring less memory, but one big positive for the Zune is it seemed to respond faster when loading videos, transitioning through menus, or listening to music.

Zune also seemed to perform better in producing bass then the iPod. I've noticed with the iPod that using the equalizer to produce better bass, in many tracks -- especially electronic -- distorts the response. The Zune seemed to handle this far better. I was very impressed with the overall audio quality of the Zune.