I’m thoroughly mystified by the dozens of bloggers out there raving about the iPod. I’m beginning to write it off as the tendency we humans have to mindlessly follow each other like livestock. Call it the “sheep factor.”

Yes, the iPod’s very pretty (though I’ve never been fond of white on any accessory), and yes, it’s tiny. But that’s it. Those are the only two things I can come up with that set the Apple apart from several other available options, most notably Creative’s Zen Xtra.

Subjective preferences (looks, user interface) aside, let’s compare for a moment the most obvious differences between the two (all specs taken from CNET):

Storage capacity (highest model):
iPod: 40GB
Zen Xtra: 60GB
Winner: Zen

Battery life:
iPod: 8 hours (reported); actual: ~6.5 hours (from iPod Lounge)
Zen Xtra: 14 hours (reported); actual: ~10 hours (from Nomadness Forums)
(And, since we all know that lithium ion batteries don’t last forever, the Zen’s is easily replaceable)
Winner: Zen

Size:
iPod: 4.1″ by 2.4″ by .73″ and 6.2 oz
Zen Xtra: 4.4″ by 3″ by .9″ and 7.2 oz
Winner: iPod

File types supported:
iPod: MP3
Zen Xtra: MP3, WMA, WAV
Winner: Zen

Transfer interface:
iPod: FireWire
Zen Xtra: USB 2.0
Winner: iPod

Accessories available:
iPod: Almost anything you can think of
Zen Xtra: Not even a remote (though there is a non-”Xtra” 60GB Zen available with a remote AND recording capability for the same price)
Winner: iPod

Cost (largest storage capacity model):
iPod: $499
Zen Xtra: $399
Winner: Zen

Now, a mention about the more personality-driven differences:
I know I’m against popular opinion here, but I really prefer the Zen Xtra’s aluminum shell to iPod’s white one, which I mentioned above. As for user interface, I concede that as Apple is known for ease-of-use, the iPod is probably user-friendly for just about anyone. But I also believe that once you learn and get used to an interface it’s pretty damn easy to work with it. But these are both so subjective that I’m not even considering them in this not-so-scientific comparison. I also threw out “sound quality” since both are superb.

Of course, when it comes down to it, Apple wins where it counts:
Marketing. The iPod is everywhere, from Hollywood product placement to Oprah’s list of favorite things. Call it “iPod envy,” the sheep factor, or whatever else you want. The point is, everybody has, or wants, an iPod.

But… what’s so great about being like everybody else?

Bottom line, how can you justify paying more money for less disk space and battery life, just to save a single ounce and a total of 1.07 inches? That and the option for a remote, among other “non-essential” perks like games. (Who the hell wastes an MP3 player’s battery to play games? Probably the same people who use cell phones to play games… .)

As far as I’m concerned, it’s a no-brainer. The hard numbers of more GB for your $$$ (plus battery life and file-type flexibility) are too obvious to ignore. Most of iPod’s strong points are related more to image than performance, while Xtra’s good stuff is less about looks and more about music… kinda like me.