When it launched, was Google Search that much better than Yahoo Search? Was Google Maps that much better than MapQuest?
I'd say the leap from a Discman to an iPod was a bit bigger. Suddenly, you didn't have to choose which music to take with you, it was already all there in the device. Suddenly, you could take your music player when you went jogging, because the music would never skip. Suddenly, you wouldn't have to worry about damaging your CDs, you would always have a copy. You wouldn't even have to think about changing batteries or charging -- the battery would charge while you synced your iPod to iTunes.
> was Google Search that much better than Yahoo Search? Was Google Maps that much better than MapQuest?
Dear God yes. It was night and day better. MapQuest back then was clunky as shit, and nothing gave better and faster results than Google when it came on the scene, and certainly the speed and clean interface were unmatched. Suddenly you could find anything you wanted on the internet, easily and without hassle.
The iPod, by the way, was not the first MP3 player.
Its unfortunate that some people didn't see, or don't remember, this transition. It was literally going from something that just plain didn't work, to magic.
The memory that stands out in my mind was typing in 3 or 4 words from a song I heard on the radio, appending "lyrics" and having Google know what I was talking about. It stands in my mind as one of those "this is the future" moments. We take it for granted now, but this new normal of never missing out on information, because you can just google it, really did start with Google in my opinion.
When Google started out, I could get way more relevant results from using a combination of Yahoo, Hotbot and AltaVista.
Later on, Google got better and I switched because I could get satisfactory results from just one search engine. You didn't have to think about which search engine to use for which query -- Google was good enough.
Nowadays, I wouldn't miss Google Search if it disappeared; I get more relevant results from DuckDuckGo.
I think it is disingenuous to suggest there was a "leap" from the Discman to the iPod considering that mp3 players were around for at least 4 years prior to the iPod's introduction.
Apple certainly nailed the modern mp3 player in terms of what the mainstream user was looking for (easily usable UI, music store integration, etc), but they hardly "leaped" from the Discman/portable CD to the iPod.
Grandparent was talking about how different technologies improved people's lives.
The vast majority of consumers didn't go from a Discman to a Flash MP3 player or a 3.5" HD music player to an iPod. They went straight from a Discman to an iPod. The Flash MP3 players at the time had very little storage space (128MB or less) which wasn't any better than using a MP3 CD in a Discman, and the 3.5" HD players were bulky and expensive. I doubt that anywhere near 1 million 3.5" HD players were sold, while more than 300 million iPods have been sold.
Plenty of people went from playing mp3s on their desktops and/or laptops to playing them on an iPod. That leap is also a lot smaller than the leap from a Discman.
I'd say the leap from a Discman to an iPod was a bit bigger. Suddenly, you didn't have to choose which music to take with you, it was already all there in the device. Suddenly, you could take your music player when you went jogging, because the music would never skip. Suddenly, you wouldn't have to worry about damaging your CDs, you would always have a copy. You wouldn't even have to think about changing batteries or charging -- the battery would charge while you synced your iPod to iTunes.