If SanDisk thought their iDon't campaign is going to make the 50 million or so iPod users switch to them, Bill Palmer's article should make them think twice. Bill Palmer of iProng.com wrote seven reasons as to why the iDon't campaign is not to be taken seriously. He admits to being an iPod user but insists that he tried his best to view the campaign on an objective level but still came to the same conclusion: "the 'iDon't' campaign is a joke".

Even if he was speaking from an iPod user's point of view, Palmer did point out some well-thought out arguments. He mentions that if the iDon't campaign was meant to be a "switch campaign", it has failed miserably for its attack on the iPod users. To quot:

"'iDon't' isn't the first time a tech company with a minority marketshare has launched a campaign to try to let users know that there's another choice out there. Apple has twice used such campaigns (first with 'Switch' and currently with 'Getamac') to promote its Macintosh computers in the face of the PC majority. But while Apple has never hesitated to insult the PC, it's always been careful not to insult users of the PC in the process."

Another good point that Palmer has raised is the iDon't websites use of 'disreputable' sources. One of the links that is supposed to evidence that iPod is bad was a website launched two years ago by an aspiring independent filmmaker who thought the best way to jumpstart his career was to document himself defacing Apple's streetside ads in Manhattan.

Also, the CNET review that SanDisk has linked to mention that the alternative Sansa e200 - which Palmer notes as "a device that looks like they blatantly copied the iPod nano and then ran over it with a pickup truck" - has buttons that are "difficult to press" and "low levels of system noise can heard through headphones at low or zero volume".

If all iPod users react to the iDon't campaign the way Bill Palmer does, then it's a clear indication that SanDisk's ad blitz is going down the drain.