I've just been introduced to covering spaces, and one of the examples I've been shown is that $p: S^{1} \to S^{1}$, $p(z)=z^{n}$ is a covering map for every $n$.
My question is: why would you care? It's trivial that $S^{1}$ covers itself with the identity - why would you try and do this in many ways? Is it advantageous to have different ways to cover one space by another?
It is interesting because these coverings have different degrees. They correspond to different subgroups of the fundamental group of $S^1$: the map $z \mapsto z^n$ corresponds to $n\mathbb{Z} \subset \pi_1(S^1) = \mathbb{Z}$. This shows that for different values of $n$, these coverings are not isomorphic, i.e. there is no homeomorphism $f : S^1 \to S^1$ such that $f(z)^n = z^m$ for nonnegative integers $n \neq m$.
And in fact you can show that, together with the universal cover $\mathbb{R} \to S^1$, these are all the connected coverings up to isomorphism. In other words, as soon as you have a connected cover $X \to S^1$, then either $X \cong \mathbb{R}$ and the covering is isomorphic to the exponential map, or $X \cong S^1$ and there exists a unique $n$ such that the covering is isomorphic to $z \mapsto z^n$. If such a classification result is not interesting, I don't know what is!
IMO it's a bit like asking
Well these two groups are fundamentally different: they're not isomorphic. And you can show that up to isomorphic, these are the only two groups with four elements. Well, it's the same thing with the coverings of the circle: the power $n$ coverings are all different (not isomorphic), and together with $\mathbb{R} \to S^1$ you've completely exhausted all the possible coverings.
If I can phrase it yet another way: in a covering $E \to X$, the space $E$ is not all that matters; the map $E \to X$ matters too, in the same way that giving a group $G$ is not just giving a set, it's also giving a multiplication map. Sometimes you can take the same set but give it different multiplication maps that yield non-isomorphic groups.