June 29th...Its Yours!

GO TO ADMIN PANEL > ADD-ONS AND INSTALL VERTIFORO SIDEBAR TO SEE FORUMS AND SIDEBAR
Joined
Nov 15, 2004
Messages
13,238
Points
36
Age
48
Location
Toronto, Canada
Website
www.ilounge.com
Surf Monkey said:
Good lord. Not this again? 8GB may be enough for a phone, but there's no way to draw a direct comparison between Nano sales figures and capacity requirements for other devices. People need to stop doing that because the comparison is meaningless at its core.
Actually, as strange as it may sound, on this point I somewhat agree with you.

If the iPhone were just providing an audio player, there might be a point, but as a video player, 8GB is woefully inadequate, particularly since I expect video size to increase with this generation, since Apple has to produce a portable device that can keep up with the Apple TV (so they can provide a single set of content that will play back on both devices).

Of course, since the iPhone is primarily a phone, 8GB is more than reasonable. This alone is why we're not going to see a convergence of the two devices.

Again, people are looking at the cool and sexy interface and expecting this device itself to be the next great iPod thing, when in reality its primary function is as a phone, and Apple has chosen to provide a few iPod features with the phone aspects.

Mind you, this is another reason why the next-generation iPod has to catch up with this interface. The iPhone is not an iPod, but they're not going to leave an iPod interface that sophisticated on an 8GB phone.

Hardly. If anything, iPhone is already behind the curve. It's primary advantage is the elegance of the interface but in terms of raw features, other phones have as much or more right now. A year from now iPhone's feature set will look even weaker.
This is also true. However, there is very little Apple has done in recent years even with the iPod that is particularly revolutionary from a spec sheet point of view when compared with the competition. Apple sells the iPod because of its ease of use, tight integration with an excellent desktop software solution (iTunes), and a certain "everyman" appeal.

The iPhone is going after the same sort of market, and will therefore certainly appeal to some people who are looking for a sophisticated yet easy-to-use smartphone-esque device. How much success Apple has with this strategy remains to be seen, but I do see the iPhone appealing to a certain demographic.... That being the young urban professional end user who is currently saddling themselves with a device like a Treo, but doesn't fully understand how to use it.

The reality is that the iPod fanboys who just have to have the next coolest device are in fact not Apple's target for the iPhone.
 

Surf Monkey

New member
Joined
May 13, 2003
Messages
3,566
Points
0
Age
56
Location
The City of Roses
Website
www.dvdinmypants.com
jhollington said:
The reality is that the iPod fanboys who just have to have the next coolest device are in fact not Apple's target for the iPhone.

Exactly, and that's why there's already a great deal of confusion and frustration in this very forum. People are having a very hard time understanding that iPhone is not an iPod. It doesn't help that Steve Jobs has a nasty habit of calling it "our best iPod yet" because even he knows that it's not an iPod. His statement about it is simply marketing hype. Once people get it through their heads that iPhone is a phone and iPod is a media player, they'll come to a better understanding of what Apple is trying to do here. Until then we'll see plenty of the same sort of posts as we've seen in this thread.
 

kylo4

New member
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
1,662
Points
0
Location
Ontario, Canada
Surf Monkey, what you said is exactly right. It also doesn't help either that in the new advertisements it extensively mentions the iPod function "there's never been an iPod that does this." They want people to buy it for the iPod feature because that's what it has going for it. But in a few months it will be just another over hyped product.
 

loramarthalas

New member
Joined
Feb 3, 2007
Messages
65
Points
0
Surf Monkey said:
Once people get it through their heads that iPhone is a phone and iPod is a media player, they'll come to a better understanding of what Apple is trying to do here. Until then we'll see plenty of the same sort of posts as we've seen in this thread.

This is just utterly wrong. What is it about an iPod that makes it an iPod? The clickwheel? The size of the hard drive?

They are the only things that the iPod has the iPhone doesn't. Whatever an iPod can do, an iPhone will do better. Browsing a library will be quicker with a touchscreen. Audio quality will be as good if not better. Watching movies will be twice as good on a widescreen. You have Cover Flow to view you music. It beats the 5g iPod in every department.

The iPhone is the true media player.

Of course it is the best iPod ever.
 
Joined
Nov 15, 2004
Messages
13,238
Points
36
Age
48
Location
Toronto, Canada
Website
www.ilounge.com
blkchiney said:
i think theres gunna be a lot of complaints when the iphone comes out
Hi and welcome to iLounge, but could you perhaps expand on what sort of complaints you think we may be seeing with the iPhone?

Surf Monkey said:
It doesn't help that Steve Jobs has a nasty habit of calling it "our best iPod yet" because even he knows that it's not an iPod. His statement about it is simply marketing hype.
Yes, it's marketing hype, but there's a germ of truth in it, and a foreshadowing of things to come. The iPod side of the iPhone is the best iPod yet in terms of being new, flashy, and high-tech.

In reading between the lines, I see this as the fact that the iPhone is not necessary the "best iPod yet" but the iPod design that is included in the iPhone is.

kylo4 said:
It also doesn't help either that in the new advertisements it extensively mentions the iPod function "there's never been an iPod that does this." They want people to buy it for the iPod feature because that's what it has going for it. But in a few months it will be just another over hyped product.
Some will buy it for those features, but I also think it's fair to say that they're largely targeting the current MP3-player cell phone crowd.... The people who do want an integrated device are in essence being told, "Now you don't have to sacrifice iPod functionality just because you want your MP3 player and your phone as a single device. With the iPhone, you can have the best of both worlds."

Yes, it's marketing hype, but that's what they're trying to prove more than anything else.

Other than rabid fanboys and gadget freaks, nobody is going to actually go out and buy an iPhone just because they want the cool new iPod features, unless they also need a phone and like the features the iPhone offers in that area.

loramarthalas said:
This is just utterly wrong. What is it about an iPod that makes it an iPod? The clickwheel? The size of the hard drive?

The iPhone is the true media player.
No, the iPhone is a phone first, with a really great media player added on.

One of the things that makes an iPod an iPod is that it's a standalone device that can be used by anybody who is looking for just a dedicated media player. The fact that you can use it as just a media player and don't have to be saddled with a phone. The iPhone may have the best iPod features yet available, but that doesn't make it an iPod. It's a phone with excellent iPod features.

Of course it is the best iPod ever.
No, Steve Jobs said it is the best iPod yet. That is going to change when the 6G comes out... It pretty much has to.

Apple is holding back the 6G simply to ensure that the iPhone makes as big of an impact as possible, and that it is seen as the cool new revolutionary device. Were there already a 6G iPod that did most of what the iPhone does on the iPod side, the iPhone itself would be much less interesting to both the public and the press, and Apple can't possibly afford to let this device get lost in the shuffle.

In a few months, when all of the iPod-side features are available on a dedicated media player, nobody will be confusing the iPhone for an iPod any more.
 

loramarthalas

New member
Joined
Feb 3, 2007
Messages
65
Points
0
Alright, but you haven't answered my main question. What is it about the iPod that makes it special?

I absolutely cannot see anything meaningful to distinguish the iPod from the iPhone. Ok, memory size. Ok, the clickwheel. But compare the iPhone to the Nano, and the iPhone wins in every department. Plus you have the added ability to make calls and surf the net which does not in any way detract from the iPod features on the iPhone.

Whatsmore, it is misleading to say that the iPhone is a phone first and media player second. The Motorola phones with iTunes were phones first and media players second. The iPhone was designed from the ground up to do everything equally well. It is a multimedia device, not a phone. It's the 5g iPod that had video functions crowbarred into it, not the iPhone.

Sure, I agree that when the 6g iPod comes out, then we can talk about the differences meaningfully. Until then the iPod has been totally superseded by the iPhone and it is pointless to argue that current iPods are superior somehow.
 
Last edited:

Surf Monkey

New member
Joined
May 13, 2003
Messages
3,566
Points
0
Age
56
Location
The City of Roses
Website
www.dvdinmypants.com
You're making the fatal assumption that everyone shares your priorities when it comes to buying these devices. They don't. iPhone serves a different market than the Nano.

In YOUR estimation the iPod may be "totally superseded by the iPhone" but that's just your personal opinion. An opinion that doesn't take into account people who don't want their media player to be a phone, who don't want their media player to be an Internet browser, who don't want to have to pay a hefty monthly fee for phone service when all they want is a device for playing music and maybe a video or two.

So, in the final analysis, you're completely wrong. iPhone is not an iPod. iPhone is a phone with a media player built in. Big difference.
 

loramarthalas

New member
Joined
Feb 3, 2007
Messages
65
Points
0
Surf Monkey said:
So, in the final analysis, you're completely wrong. iPhone is not an iPod. iPhone is a phone with a media player built in. Big difference.
And it is plain and simple wrong to call the iPhone a 'phone with a media player built in'. Why would a 'phone' need a 3 inch colour screen? Why would a 'phone' need Cover Flow? It doesn't. Like Walt Mossberg said the iPhone is a category killer. Forget your old labels like 'phone'. That doesn't apply to the iPhone. It is a true multimedia device, closer to a UMPC than a mobile phone.

Granted, the Nano is smaller and more durable than the iPhone. But that's it. Apart from these things, iPods are inferior in EVERY WAY. There is no way Apple will continue with a product line so totally out dated like the 5g iPod.

Nano has advantages of size and shape, but the 5g iPod has got nothing on the iPhone's basic design. The 6g iPod will be very similar to the iPhone because the design is an improvement over the iPod. Of course, the 6g iPod will be cheaper than the iPhone and there will be no monthly fee either.

Maybe people don't necessarily need the video functions or the widescreen or the touchscreen, but they are improvements and they do add value to the iPod design so most people will be excited about them and will want them.
 
Last edited:

Germansuplex

New member
Joined
Jul 10, 2006
Messages
1,060
Points
0
loramarthalas said:
And it is plain and simple wrong to call the iPhone a 'phone with a media player built in'. Why would a 'phone' need a 3 inch colour screen? Why would a 'phone' need Cover Flow? It doesn't. Like Walt Mossberg said the iPhone is a category killer. Forget your old labels like 'phone'. That doesn't apply to the iPhone. It is a true multimedia device, closer to a UMPC than a mobile phone.

Granted, the Nano is smaller and more durable than the iPhone. But that's it. Apart from these things, iPods are inferior in EVERY WAY. There is no way Apple will continue with a product line so totally out dated like the 5g iPod.

Nano has advantages of size and shape, but the 5g iPod has got nothing on the iPhone's basic design. The 6g iPod will be very similar to the iPhone because the design is an improvement over the iPod. Of course, the 6g iPod will be cheaper than the iPhone and there will be no monthly fee either.

Maybe people don't necessarily need the video functions or the widescreen or the touchscreen, but they are improvements and they do add value to the iPod design so most people will be excited about them and will want them.
It's primary function is making and recieving calls, and any and all features that are built into the iPhone are built with that in mind, that includes the iPod features.

Why don't you wait until the 6G iPod comes out, compare the products and then see if the iPhone is truly a better or iPod or not? You are basing this on the current 5g and nanos vs. the iPhone, and that's not really fair. And even with that considered, there's still an arguement to be made that the iPhone is not as good as a current gen iPod in regards to being a multimedia device.

First of all, the iPod offers in-pocket tactile controls. The iPhone has a heck of an iPod built in, but how do you fast foward, pause, etc. without looking at the screen? These are things that will most likely be resolved with a true 6G touch screen iPod should one be made.

What about battery life? Sure, Apple is touting strong hours for audio playback, but there are so many other factors they're probably not telling us that the 16 hours or whatever figure it is probably is skewed when you factor in the phone features.

What if you're a kid who works at McDonalds and loves having an iPod to take to work with you? Do you think they need google maps, stock widgets, email, and just about every other non-iPod feature?

The iPhone is a phone, and any and all other features of the iPhone are built with that in mind, and that includes the hardware and the iPod features. If Apple wants to use multi-touch and the form design of the iPhone in a new iPod, several changes will have to be made, and I think that if that's the route Apple goes, we will end up seeing a device that beats the iPhone as being a multimedia device. And it should be better: after all, shouldn't a device that focuses on one thing (media playback) be better than a device that has it built in as a side feature (the iPhone)?
 

Surf Monkey

New member
Joined
May 13, 2003
Messages
3,566
Points
0
Age
56
Location
The City of Roses
Website
www.dvdinmypants.com
loramarthalas said:
Granted, the Nano is smaller and more durable than the iPhone. But that's it. Apart from these things, iPods are inferior in EVERY WAY. There is no way Apple will continue with a product line so totally out dated like the 5g iPod.

You're just flat out, dead wrong about that. I agree with the post above this one and I'll just add again: not everyone who wants a media player wants to also pay a monthly telephone/data fee to a carrier. Apple doesn't want to lock every potential iPod buyer into also buying a contract with ATT. Many people already have phones they like. Many people are locked into contracts with other carriers for the next couple of years. Many people won't be able to use iPhone because it won't interface with their corporate network or won't work correctly in the countries they travel to and so forth and so on.

Even the most cursory thinking about iPhone shows in stark terms that it's not a replacement for iPod and never will be. You can go on about it being a "category breaker" and how it's "better than the 5G in every way" but you're still completely and totally off base. iPhone is a phone. Plain and simple. iPod is a media player and never the twain shall meet. Apple is not going to lock people into buying a phone when all they want is a media player. End of story.
 
Joined
Nov 15, 2004
Messages
13,238
Points
36
Age
48
Location
Toronto, Canada
Website
www.ilounge.com
I think we're looking at the issue in two different ways here, which is probably the source of some confusion.... There's product positioning and there's product capabilities.

Technically speaking, yes, the iPhone has a very capable iPod feature set, and could be used exclusively as an iPod if somebody really wanted to do this. It's not just some throw-in media player, and that's rather the point. There's a full iPod feature set in there, with the only significant limitation being a lack of tactile control buttons and a lack of proper capacity to take any real advantage of video playback.

In that sense, the iPhone is as much an iPod as it is a phone. From a technical point of view.

However, from a product marketing and positioning point of view, this device is primarily a phone. Other than a few "gotta-have-it-now" early adopters with deep enough pockets, nobody is going to rush out and buy the iPhone as "the next big iPod." Anybody with even the slightest bit of clairvoyance knows that a 6G iPod is around the corner, and will probably greatly enhance the iPod side of the device for its use as a media player.

So, marketing-speak aside, Apple is not positioning or selling the iPhone as an iPod. The very fact that you can't buy it without a cellular service contract proves that. If Apple were really trying to position it as an "everyman" device, they would have found a way to sell it to anybody, and then let the end user decide whether they want to sign up for a contract to use the phone features, or simply use it as a standalone iPod.

Debating about whether the iPhone is a capable iPod device is irrelevant... Of course it is, and that's not really the point. The point is that this is not the intention of Apple in producing such a device, nor is the average iPod consumer representative of their target market.

The way I see it, Apple has basically incorporated their next-generation iPod interface into the iPhone in order to make as big of an impact as possible with the device, and because the iPod side of things is the one area in which they have a lot of product experience and strength. Had the iPhone had a 5G-style iPod interface, or no iPod capabilities at all, I"m sure it would not have made the psychological impact that it has.
 

kylo4

New member
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
1,662
Points
0
Location
Ontario, Canada
Jesse, the guy is stating that the iPhone is an iPod killer and they will no longer make iPods. At least that's what I (and I think Surf Monkey) got out of it. It is first and foremost a phone. This is idiotic to think that it can replace a Nano or a full sized iPod because its an "all in one device". That was the fanboy statement of the year.
 
Joined
Nov 15, 2004
Messages
13,238
Points
36
Age
48
Location
Toronto, Canada
Website
www.ilounge.com
"...the guy is stating that the iPhone is an iPod killer and they will no longer make iPods"

Actually, I've seen that claim made in other threads, by other people, but I'm not seeing it in this one. What I'm seeing loramarthalas saying is that "There is no way Apple will continue with a product line so totally out dated like the 5g iPod" which is different from saying that Apple will stop making standalone iPod devices, since they go on to acknowledge that there will be a standalone iPod and it will have a very similar interface to the iPhone, something that I think is completely obvious. Whether Apple chooses to make it the 6G or create a new separate line is certainly more debatable, but I can't see any possible way that they would not bring this interface to a standalone dedicated iPod.

It's a semantic discussion to debate whether or not the iPhone works as an iPod, since of course it does. Further, from many people's perceptions, the technology of the iPod features in the iPhone are far beyond what any other iPod offers today.

So while it's lunacy, IMHO, to suggest that Apple would not make a 6G, choosing instead to position the iPhone as the next iPod, it's not unreasonable to suggest that the iPhone itself is in fact an iPod-capable device. It's just that this is its secondary function.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 15, 2004
Messages
13,238
Points
36
Age
48
Location
Toronto, Canada
Website
www.ilounge.com
Actually, maybe you should go back and re-read post #47, since that's not what I'm reading. As far as I can tell, loramarthalas is making a technical argument. From a technical (ie, "spec sheet") point of view, the statement that until the 6G comes out "the iPod has been totally superseded by the iPhone and it is pointless to argue that current iPods are superior somehow" is not incorrect.

Of course, that statement misses the fact that the Nano still has it's target market, and even the 5G iPod has its target market (although as we've discussed elsewhere, I believe that market is going to shrink, since the advantages will be far less significant as compared to a 6G device).

So yes, the iPhone is a cooler and more sophisticated device, and is technologically superior to the Nano or 5G iPod. That's a pretty obvious blanket statement.

At the same time, the poster is making it fairly clear that they acknowledge that there will be a 6G, which to me does not suggest that the iPod line is going to die and be replaced with the iPhone.
 

Surf Monkey

New member
Joined
May 13, 2003
Messages
3,566
Points
0
Age
56
Location
The City of Roses
Website
www.dvdinmypants.com
Point taken. However, this statement:

"...the iPod has been totally superseded by the iPhone and it is pointless to argue that current iPods are superior somehow."

Is where I think people, myself included, are having issues. The assumption is that a completely different product, in a completely different category, aimed at a completely different market, somehow completely obsoletes the iPod simply by the fact of its existence. There's a flaw in that thinking and it boils down to the notion that iPhone is an iPod. It's not. It's a phone. Therefore, no matter how whizz bang it's features are, it can never obsolete the current iPods because IT'S NOT AN iPOD. The only thing that can make the current iPod obsolete is a new generation of iPods, no a phone, no matter how cool it is.
 
Joined
Nov 15, 2004
Messages
13,238
Points
36
Age
48
Location
Toronto, Canada
Website
www.ilounge.com
Counterpoint also taken, and I happen to agree with you on that note.

However, it does go to show why Apple is marketing this in the manner that they are... They definitely have a lot of people enthralled with the "iPod" aspects of the device. This was why it was pretty easy to predict even a few minutes after the MacWorld Keynote that we wouldn't be seeing a 6G until well after the iPhone makes its debut.

Again, the iPhone iPod interface is technologically superior to the iPod in terms of its bells and whistles. However, it's not the replacement device, but rather a foreshadowing of better things to come.
 

loramarthalas

New member
Joined
Feb 3, 2007
Messages
65
Points
0
Surf Monkey said:
You're just flat out, dead wrong about that.
Even the most cursory thinking about iPhone shows in stark terms that it's not a replacement for iPod and never will be. You can go on about it being a "category breaker" and how it's "better than the 5G in every way" but you're still completely and totally off base. iPhone is a phone. Plain and simple. iPod is a media player and never the twain shall meet. Apple is not going to lock people into buying a phone when all they want is a media player. End of story.
Never the twain shall meet? Dude, the twain have met.

The iPhone is an iPod more fully functioned than any iPod currently available incorporated into a UMPC that happens to have phone capabilities. Why do you think that a phone can't be a media player? Why does that idea threaten you so much?

'iPhone is phone plain and simple', ahhh no. The phone on my touchphone on my wall at home is a phone plain and simple. Your Nokia or whatever you use is phone plain and simple. The iPhone is a multimedia device. I has an OS, for god's sake. It has MAC OS. That is the very definition of a multimedia device.

Whatsmore, AT&T will not be locking people into contracts. If you want to buy the iPhone prepaid, you will be able to. No lock-in contract, just a regular user agreement.

I am not saying - nor have I ever said - that the iPhone is an iPod replacement. It clearly isn't. What I have said, and am saying again now, is that iPhone's design and interface and functions are totally superior to the iPods. These design elements will replace the clickwheel and the tiny screen. There is absolutely nothing controversial about this idea. In that sense, it has made the current iPods out dated. That's all I'm saying.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 15, 2004
Messages
13,238
Points
36
Age
48
Location
Toronto, Canada
Website
www.ilounge.com
loramarthalas said:
'iPhone is phone plain and simple', ahhh no. The phone on my touchphone on my wall at home is a phone plain and simple. Your Nokia or whatever you use is phone plain and simple. The iPhone is a multimedia device. I has an OS, for god's sake. It has MAC OS. That is the very definition of a multimedia device.
Well, in that sense it's in the same general league as any number of other smartphones out there. A whole slew of devices run Windows Mobile. Of course, these are not "phones plain and simple" but they're not media players either.

Also, just to clarify, the iPhone does not run Mac OS X, it merely runs OS X. While this may seem a semantic discussion, I think it's an important thing to note. There won't be an Aqua interface on the iPhone, or any of the other things that make OS X the desktop platform for the Mac. What they're really saying is that the underlying OS for the iPhone is Darwin BSD Unix, which is the underpinnings of Mac OS X on the desktop.

Marketing-spin aside, the reality is that this is "OS X Mobile", in the same way as "Windows Mobile."

Whatsmore, AT&T will not be locking people into contracts. If you want to buy the iPhone prepaid, you will be able to. No lock-in contract, just a regular user agreement.
Actually, we don't know that for certain. Rumours and speculation abound, but there is no definitive information as to what plans and options will be available when the iPhone is released.

I am not saying - nor have I ever said - that the iPhone is an iPod replacement. It clearly isn't. What I have said, and am saying again now, is that iPhone's design and interface and functions are totally superior to the iPods. These design elements will replace the clickwheel and the tiny screen. There is absolutely nothing controversial about this idea. In that sense, it has made the current iPods out dated. That's all I'm saying.
As I mentioned above, this is clearly a semantic discussion, and I think some people are getting riled at even the hint of a suggestion that the iPhone would ever replace the iPod. I realize that is not what you're saying, and I happen to agree that the iPhone's iPod interface has defined where Apple is going to go with the next-generation of iPods.

However, it's also not inaccurate to suggest that the iPhone is still a phone first, and a media player second, no matter how well-designed and advanced the iPod side may be. Very few people other than obsessive gadget freaks are going to buy the device solely for its iPod functions unless they also want a phone with the iPhone's particular feature-set, style, and design.
 
Top