• With the number of recent threads from brand new users that we have observed in our Classifieds forum selling goods under questionable circumstances, we have instituted a new policy restricting new members of iLounge from posting new threads in the Classifieds forum until they have reached "Regular Member" status.

    New users become Regular Members once they have made 10 posts and been a member of the iLounge Forums for at least 7 days. Prior to this time, members may still read the Classifieds forum, and even respond to existing threads for items being sold by other members, but they may not create new threads advertising their own items for sale.

    This will hopefully help to protect our user community by discouraging fraudulent users from signing up and posting classified ads without having at least a very basic level of established membership in our forums.

    Obviously all users should still exercise due diligence when making use of our classifieds forums, but we hope that this restriction will help to decrease the number of blatantly fraudulent ads that we have been seeing in recent weeks.

    Please be sure to review our Classified Forum Policy for more information.

Why Apple Won't Make 6Gen Wide/Touchscreen

GO TO ADMIN PANEL > ADD-ONS AND INSTALL VERTIFORO SIDEBAR TO SEE FORUMS AND SIDEBAR

kylo4

New member
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
1,662
Points
0
Location
Ontario, Canada
I've been reading a lot here about a touchscreen iPod, and I just do not think it will happen right now, or in 2 years either. Why? I'll explain (and it is a neat feature)

1. Cars are being built in with iPod "stations" where you lock it in. If the iPod has a screen that takes the entire space up, it will get scratched with their design of putting the iPod in and it holds it all over, especially at the bottom (since some are already out like BMW) and it won't work. Plus the size wouldn't fit. Also, all of the accessories will have to be remade for it, and it isn't like a new iPod where its the same design but more space and smaller size.

2. The iPod is a portable music device that isn't treated the best, is stuck in bags, put in pockets, touched all over, and isn't like a phone where it isn't as cared about (iPhone). By making a large screen it is more prone to scratches, cracks, looking dirty, and being mistreated. You'd have to be careful all of the time with it, and it would be too much of a hassle for people who just want to use a music device.

3. The iPhone is coming out and Apple would not want people to confuse the two products by releasing something similar a few months later. They should be different, and possibly years apart. Plus they have to know how that design for the iPhone will work.

4. The iPod is iconic, and by making such a drastic change they could instantly lose millions of dollars. It is not something that is losing money and not selling, in fact each year they keep selling more and more, so why risk it all just to please video fanatics. People may now think its just like a PSP, not the click wheeled icon it always was.

So I hope those explain why I believe it won't happen for now. What is your opinion?
 

Code Monkey

New member
Joined
Jun 24, 2004
Messages
5,213
Points
0
Location
Midstate New York
kylo4 said:
1. Cars are being built in with iPod "stations" where you lock it in. If the iPod has a screen that takes the entire space up, it will get scratched with their design of putting the iPod in and it holds it all over, especially at the bottom (since some are already out like BMW) and it won't work. Plus the size wouldn't fit. Also, all of the accessories will have to be remade for it, and it isn't like a new iPod where its the same design but more space and smaller size.
You haven't dealt with Apple very long, obviously. Apple has zero problem making their entire product lines not just obsolete but completely incompatible with their own previous products; they certainly would never consider what car manufacturers were doing. When they switched from the 2G to the 3G, the iPods were incompatible with the majority of existing peripherals. They did the same with the switch from the 4G to the 5G. They did the same with the nano moving from the 1G to the 2G. They've done far, far worse with their operating system multiple times, leaving millions of customers faced with needing to replace 90% of their software or sticking with an older Mac. The "Classic" feature of OSX is the first time people with one generation of their OS had a more or less guaranteed upgrade with their software, but that is no longer the case with the Intel based Macs (yet, you can still run the majority of the stuff written for a IBM 386 just fine on XP if you wanted).

2. The iPod is a portable music device that isn't treated the best, is stuck in bags, put in pockets, touched all over, and isn't like a phone where it isn't as cared about (iPhone). By making a large screen it is more prone to scratches, cracks, looking dirty, and being mistreated. You'd have to be careful all of the time with it, and it would be too much of a hassle for people who just want to use a music device.
Right, because it's perfectly fine for a $500 smart phone to be completely destructible but not a $250 music player :rolleyes:. Either Apple has addressed the surface durability at last with the iPhone design, in which case an iPod based on its design will be fine, or, as usual, they simply do not care about the durability. The mini, nano, and shuffles are the only iPods that don't look like you didn't drop them in a gravel pit a week after you bought it without extreme care and/or protection. They've never cared that their products look like crap after you get home from the store because there's 10 million fanboys ready to praise their "sleek post-modern industrial styling that justifies never actually seeing it after you seal it in a $30 silicone condom".

3. The iPhone is coming out and Apple would not want people to confuse the two products by releasing something similar a few months later. They should be different, and possibly years apart. Plus they have to know how that design for the iPhone will work.
And that's what they said about making the nano's high end and the iPod's low end priced exactly the same, didn't stop Apple. You seem to think Apple actually considers these things, they don't. They are only concerned about making money. Nobody is waiting for the 5.6G iPod, they're waiting for the 6G iPod, and not going with something at least as cool as the iPhone interface will potentially cost them billions in lost revenue as people hold off for something worth upgrading to. Apple's sales strength comes from making you think there's something about the new version you must have, sticking with the basic iPod design is not that.

4. The iPod is iconic, and by making such a drastic change they could instantly lose millions of dollars. It is not something that is losing money and not selling, in fact each year they keep selling more and more, so why risk it all just to please video fanatics. People may now think its just like a PSP, not the click wheeled icon it always was.
Except that it's not iconic at all. It's a rectangle with a circle and another rectangle on it. That was the basic design of the majority of DAPs before the iPod, it's the design of a large percentage of DAPs since the iPod. Apple neither invented it, nor trademarked it. Considering that they got their biggest sales from the decidedly non-iconic mini, people aren't quite as married to the boring white (and black) rectangle as the fanboys claim.

The bottom line is that sales of the 5.XG iPods are weak next to the nano, and they genuinely need to do something exciting to kick the sales of the full sized iPod up a gear. Sticking with a variation on a theme isn't going to do that. They are much better off trying something new and returning to what works if it doesn't (c.f. the 1G vs. 2G nano) than going with a boring variation on the same theme we've seen since the advent of the first 4G. They gave us the clickwheel, then they gave us color and album art, then they, at last, gave us video. Short of sticking some of the internet features of the iPhone onto a 5.XG'esque design, there isn't much they can do at this point to create the "gotta have it" vibe they need except to radically change it.
 

kylo4

New member
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
1,662
Points
0
Location
Ontario, Canada
codemonkey, you make very good points and I agree with some of them (you were that good) but every iPod has maintained the same design pretty much. Even from the 3'th gen to the 4'th gen. They just made buttons different, they didn't change the entire design.

For car models I was talking about their deal with BMW. The nano is completely different. It looks the same except for the new paint job. It wasn't like the iPod shuffle change, which wouldn't cost them much since for retail the thing is $89 Canadian. Its not their golden star product.

The iPod is iconic as having that look, and the ads. It really is. That look gave the iPods so much money, and that's why it is used with the Nano's, the shuffle's, the video's, etc. Its everywhere. Other players may have used it before, and they still do, but that is what iPods are known for looking like. When you think of an iPod, that is what comes to mind...the device with a clickwheel with a screen on top and a glossy finish. Unless the the widescreen has a clickwheel that pops up on the screen that you use (which would be neat) I don't see Apple scrapping that component.

I have looked at Apple's changes. The mini was already small, so they offered the nano which is smaller and looks the same except for the finish.
They switched minor things like firewire to usb, like putting 4 buttons on one pad, and making the earbuds smaller. For Mac's they did completely change them, but the Macs weren't doing well for a long time.

The iPhone First gen is an experiment. If Apple gets 3 million complaints about cracked screens or "the touch sensitivity is not working" and then the product bombs like the Apple Newton which was also ahead of its time but pricey, than by putting out an iPod like that it could mean double losses. Pricing something the same is different than having two designs at one time. Would you like the nano to be the exact same size as the video iPod and store 8GB for the same price? That's the same thing. People are mainly buying the iPhone for the touchscreen iPod/coverflow/internet. By offering all of that for cheaper and minus the contract with the phone company, no one will buy the iPhone.

So if they release a wide/touch iPod, they will release a 6 Gen after they get feedback from the media and consumers for the way the iPhone works, and then release it in May of 2008. Not literally 4 months after the iPhone.
 

tom22n

New member
Joined
Oct 30, 2005
Messages
124
Points
0
Location
UK
the ipod IS iconic for being rectangular with scroll wheel, being white, etc as it was, and is, the iconic DAP. If you drew a sketch of your so called uniform DAP, im sure almost 100% would say ipod.

And as for the mini outselling the ipod, don't you think this was just due to price and what the majority of consumers wanted/needed. The majority of people tend to have music collections under 4-6gb so the mini addressed this. I believe little had to do with the design of the ipod itself....
 

bobb-mini

Insanely Sarcastic
Joined
Jul 8, 2005
Messages
6,997
Points
0
Location
Silicon Valley
I like previous posts where some predicts iPod will make a video-centric Pod with Touch Screen, and a 3rd Gen Nano music-centric with Clickwheel. Win-win, something for everybody. I like it, I'll stick to it. :)

But I like your iPhone testing-ground idea. Makes sense.

But Code Monkey is right, Apple is not afraid of making 180 degree turns. Most companies are run by bean counters, Apple is run by that guy Jobs.
 

paranoidxe

New member
Joined
Jan 14, 2006
Messages
3,316
Points
0
Most car manufacturers are using a audio jack for capatibility with the iPod, therefore if you can hook your headphones into the iPod you can use it in your car.

In fact I haven't seen a car that uses the bottom USB port for audio.

You may think sticking to the same formula will work with iPods, but it won't eventually there WILL need to be a drastic change to the design to keep it selling..people will get TIRED of the same old design...while I agree a touchscreen isn't the best solution..I still think something drastic needs to be done to keep the product feeling fresh...the iPod has remained the same basic design since it started.
 
Last edited:

kylo4

New member
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
1,662
Points
0
Location
Ontario, Canada
Still the iPhone testing the market is one of my main points as well as the iconography of the iPod. tom22n is right, I always think of iPods when someone says I have a portable music player. My dad said I had an iPod when I had a creative 512mb mp3 player because its that well known. What Apple would do is just kill that. They should change it when sales start declining, and use it as a tactic to bring them back more. That look is selling fine. All of the iPods look that way, even the shuffle because it has a little clickwheel looking piece to it. The idea just does not sit with me.

People want a device that they can easily click something to switch songs or choose that, not to use their finger on a screen after pulling it out of their pocket. It is different than the iPhone which is a phone and doesn't have songs being switched every 30 seconds sometimes. Plus while watching the keynote Jobs had the screen loaded with fingerprints.
 

bobb-mini

Insanely Sarcastic
Joined
Jul 8, 2005
Messages
6,997
Points
0
Location
Silicon Valley
paranoidxe said:
people will get TIRED of the same old design...
I personally think that's a myth. Created by marketing people.

Good designs, like most of Apple's, last. I mean why spend money for something new when the old player work just fine? I mean sure, the excitement, it makes news, it gives the pundits something to talk about, but if the new stuff doesn't work good, soon, after the initial hubbla, they not gonna sell that many. However, good designs like Apple attracts lasting cult following.

I hate most other companies, they seem to run on, oh next year we gotta come out with a new feature else we're yesterday news. True, that's bad for marketing, it's bad for the press, but as consumer I rather they spend extra time to make a product RIGHT. How many time we buy a gadget 'cuz of its newness, bring it home and find out it's a piece-of.... and takes so much effort to get it to work that pretty soon it just sits on the shelves?

I was excited about my Motorola V3i iTunes capability (call it the Motorola's iPhone), brought it home, found out the truth, and haven't downloaded a song into it since. Good thing I kept my iPod.
 
Last edited:

Code Monkey

New member
Joined
Jun 24, 2004
Messages
5,213
Points
0
Location
Midstate New York
tom22n said:
the ipod IS iconic for being rectangular with scroll wheel, being white, etc as it was, and is, the iconic DAP. If you drew a sketch of your so called uniform DAP, im sure almost 100% would say ipod.
Branding and the gross ignorance of consumers does not an icon make. The rectangle with a circle and a screen was the design of something like the second or third DAP ever made, and that was many years before there was an iPod. Just because I could show that "ancient" DAP to a majority of consumers today and have them think it's an iPod doesn't make it an icon, it just means Apple's advertising has been very successful and most people are borderline idiots when it comes to the attention they pay to the people trying to manipulate their perceptions.

And as for the mini outselling the ipod, don't you think this was just due to price and what the majority of consumers wanted/needed. The majority of people tend to have music collections under 4-6gb so the mini addressed this. I believe little had to do with the design of the ipod itself....
Right, and I suppose that's why Apple abandoned the classic iPod designed nanos for the mini designed nanos and watched sales soar. No, the majority of consumers simply don't care about the "classic" iPod look and prefer the durability/size of the aluminum body regardless of other factors. There is a very vocal group who think the iPod should look like X, but when the 4G came out, there was an even more vocal group who decried the abomination of the 4G and insisted that Apple was shooting itself in the foot for abandoning the style of the 3G. It's just a rectangle, there's nothing unique about its design whatsoever, just a bunch of people who imagine there is.
 

bobb-mini

Insanely Sarcastic
Joined
Jul 8, 2005
Messages
6,997
Points
0
Location
Silicon Valley
I immediately decided but buy a Mini, instead of a full-size Pod 2 yrs ago. I didn't even look at the price differential. Certain gadgets, to me, HAS to be of a certain physical size, I dunno why, but it just is. Plus the one-pice aluminum casing just "SPOKE" to me.

Dunn understimate imagination. Tell that to those people who pay $millions for "arts." U and me look at them and go huh? Marketing only work to the extend that it has to be backed up with a good product in the long run.
 

Bernardo Gaetani

New member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
98
Points
0
Location
Italy
We need remember price is a problemy, if a ipod costs more then US$350, nobody buy...

6generation need 60/120gbs hard-drives and widescreen.
 

brickwood

New member
Joined
May 9, 2007
Messages
15
Points
0
Location
Australia
g'day,

i'll try n be brief...

apple made an apple version of what creative was offering when they came out with the original ipod.. they put a complicated music device in a stunning apple style case, with a 'monkey(general public)'-proof UI as opposed to what the rest of the DAP market was doing with smaller sreens and user changeable batteries, etc. after that people didnt have to burn/buy heaps of cds to take with their discmans and they didnt feel the need to change batteries, jus chuck it on charge and plug in their ipod and let it sync itself with their music libraries. i suppose apple leap frogged creative in the design dept. and made sony's discmans redundant. this is why i reckon that apple will continue to provide newer model ipods to the standards people expect of them (and prob better), so that someone else doesnt provide them with that product at a time when it becomes technologically and economically viable for a smaller/less successful DAP producer to bring to it market. people have phones, and theres a huuge market for them.. not everyone needs the thouwwwzzands of extra little capabillities of the iphone either, so yeh id say apple will bring out a new ipod when people get TOO bored of the current 5th gen. if they dont, someone else will i spose.

theres prob heaps of other reasons i could think of.. but these seem to take priority and i gotta go hit up the toilet. so tell me wat u reckon bout wat i think too in response to my points if u can b bothered.. cheers!
 

mjmoonwalker

New member
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
3,406
Points
0
Location
Shangri-La
Website
eminemjamesuk.com
kylo4 said:
The iPod is iconic as having that look, and the ads. It really is. That look gave the iPods so much money, and that's why it is used with the Nano's, the shuffle's, the video's, etc. Its everywhere. Other players may have used it before, and they still do, but that is what iPods are known for looking like. When you think of an iPod, that is what comes to mind...the device with a clickwheel with a screen on top and a glossy finish. Unless the the widescreen has a clickwheel that pops up on the screen that you use (which would be neat) I don't see Apple scrapping that component.
If a company wants to stick to "icons" and sticking with the original designs, they will never get anywhere, and innovation stops there. That won't stop the world's most innovative company. Apple doesn't care what people think the iPod looks like. They don't care how popular the product is. The iPod mini was at the height of its popularity when it was pulled in favor of the new iPod nano. What do you call that?

People are mainly buying the iPhone for the touchscreen iPod/coverflow/internet. By offering all of that for cheaper and minus the contract with the phone company, no one will buy the iPhone.
Where are your statistics and facts to back this up? Or is this just "how you perceive it"? I think a good deal of people want to buy it for the actual phone part, hm? I don't think anyone would buy it just for the Coverflow of all things...

Not literally 4 months after the iPhone.
What's figuratively 4 months?

kylo4 said:
They should change it when sales start declining, and use it as a tactic to bring them back more. That look is selling fine. All of the iPods look that way, even the shuffle because it has a little clickwheel looking piece to it. The idea just does not sit with me.
Should, should, should. Why don't you go work for Apple?

People want a device that they can easily click something to switch songs or choose that, not to use their finger on a screen after pulling it out of their pocket. It is different than the iPhone which is a phone and doesn't have songs being switched every 30 seconds sometimes. Plus while watching the keynote Jobs had the screen loaded with fingerprints.
You keep saying people but I've never heard of any basis to back up what you're saying. Who are you to say what the mass majority of consumers want? When I was watching Steve Jobs with the iPhone, I didn't see the fingerprints, and frankly I don't care. Fingerprints are part of life. They're on everything you touch. As long as I can listen to my music and watch my movies, who gives a damn about fingerprints?
 
Joined
Nov 15, 2004
Messages
13,238
Points
36
Age
49
Location
Toronto, Canada
Website
www.ilounge.com
I think another point to consider is the positioning of the full-size 5G iPod line. Apple has had a huge success with the iPod nano, with it outselling the 5G series dramatically. The Nano is intended to be the "durable" unit, and if you're interesting in an iPod primarily for audio playback, then the only reason to get the 5G iPod is the increased storage capacity.

To put it an other way: Somebody who wants an audio-only device would generally be very happy with the Nano, which is already more durable than the 5G iPod (aluminum caes, no moving hard drive, much smaller size). For this person, the only reason to even consider a 5G iPod is the increased storage size, and I think the percentage of the population that carries around the entire music library with them is relatively small, especially when you factor in the ability to use smart playlists to rotate your music.

On the other hand, somebody who is looking for a more video-centric device, or a device to actually use a large music library will find the 5G to be of little advantage for music navigation, and woefully mediocre for video playback capabilities. These sort of people are going to leap at an iPod that is both better-suited for video playback (wider screen), as well as improves the music management experience (ala iPhone's iPod features).

Simply having a larger capacity music device that plays video as an afterthought is not enough justification for Apple to keep their high-end iPod lineup stagnant -- it simply doesn't offer enough of an advantage to the average consumer.

I don't think Apple spent two years of R&D just to produce a phone. The iPod interface on the iPhone is too advanced to not find it's way onto a future-generation iPod.

Lastly, the question about durability of a touch-screen iPod versus the existing 5G is a bit of a misconception as well.... While people toss the Nano and Shuffle around because they can take it, I don't think anybody would toss a 5G iPod in a gym bag or backpack without a proper case on it, and the same can therefore be said for the iPhone or other future iPhone-style iPod.
 

Surf Monkey

New member
Joined
May 13, 2003
Messages
3,566
Points
0
Age
57
Location
The City of Roses
Website
www.dvdinmypants.com
jhollington said:
Somebody who wants an audio-only device would generally be very happy with the Nano, which is already more durable than the 5G iPod (aluminum caes, no moving hard drive, much smaller size). For this person, the only reason to even consider a 5G iPod is the increased storage size, and I think the percentage of the population that carries around the entire music library with them is relatively small, especially when you factor in the ability to use smart playlists to rotate your music.

As usual, I think you VASTLY underestimate people's need for storage capacity. No hard drive, flash drive etc. is ever big enough. They get bigger and bigger all the time because people demand more space. Look at the size of average hard drives today compared to the five years ago for example. If Apple were to sacrifice higher capacity in order to abandon the flagship iPod to an iPhone-like model they'd lose a very significant number of customers. There's simply no way that the Nano can replace the flagship iPod unless the capacity is greater than 80 gig.
 

kylo4

New member
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
1,662
Points
0
Location
Ontario, Canada
Thank you Surf Monkey, thank you!

The nano right now holds 8GB, next gen I'm guessing will be 10 or 12GB at the rate Apple does it. 20GB for the large iPods, 2-4GB advance for the nano's. As someone who does have every album owned on the iPod, making it look more like a PSP would turn me right off. It would be too video oriented, when the iPod is a music device. It's like "people don't want to listen to cd's as much anymore so lets throw in a tiny screen to watch dvd's" on a Sony Walkman. It's just losing sight of the whole project.

I don't understand how mjmoonwalker can say that Apple doesn't care what their products look like and then refers to the mini/nano switch. They're basically the same, except one is smaller so it makes it more appealing. Just like how each gen iPod is smaller. It only made sense to make a mini than a nano, to wow people with the size.

Navigating through 1000 albums might be difficult using your finger. I also don't think cases would work well with a touchscreen product unless it is like a silicon cover, which takes away the aesthetic value. As said before, Apple can afford a minimal loss if something like the $80 shuffle bombed, but this is their high end luxury model, and all I see happening is 100GB and a smaller sized 5 Gen.

EA sports has been releasing the same damn hockey game for 6 years now and it still sells millions of copies. No one cares, they buy it for the name, how it looks and for what it does. Changing that might duel with fate.
 
Joined
Nov 15, 2004
Messages
13,238
Points
36
Age
49
Location
Toronto, Canada
Website
www.ilounge.com
Surf Monkey said:
As usual, I think you VASTLY underestimate people's need for storage capacity. No hard drive, flash drive etc. is ever big enough. They get bigger and bigger all the time because people demand more space. Look at the size of average hard drives today compared to the five years ago for example. If Apple were to sacrifice higher capacity in order to abandon the flagship iPod to an iPhone-like model they'd lose a very significant number of customers. There's simply no way that the Nano can replace the flagship iPod unless the capacity is greater than 80 gig.
True, but you probably vastly underestimate the majority of the iPod-buying public. Most people really don't need that amount of storage space, and the number of people who have an obsessive need to carry around their entire music library (of which I am one, to be fair :) ) is a relatively small portion of the iPod consumer base. The Nano is selling well because the majority of people don't need that kind of space for music, and in fact most wouldn't even know what to do with it (I still encounter people who buy an 8GB nano to carry around a dozen or so albums).

As a music-only device, 8GB is more than adequate for the average consumer right now, and of course the Nano capacities are only going to increase further (for those people who do want more capacity, either because they truly need it, or just think they do).

Just look at the number of people buying 8GB iPod nanos, even though it's the same price as the 30GB 5G iPod. If storage capacity were that much of a factor, then you'd think that Apple wouldn't have sold a single 8GB nano, since you can get 30GB for the same price, and yet they're selling better than the 5G iPods. The same thing happened with the iPod mini as well, which had even fewer advantages over the full-size iPod, since it wasn't that much smaller, and was still hard-drive based.

Most of the people I've spoken to who have bought a 5G iPod chose it over the Nano not because it offers more capacity, but rather because it offers more features, none of which are related to music playback. Features like video playback and gaming capabilities make more of a difference to the average person than the additional storage capacity.

And in reality, most people who need the extra space on the full-size iPod need it more for the video capabilities than the music side. I was more than happy with a 40GB iPod photo until the 5G came out, at which point even 60GB wasn't enough -- not for my music, per se, but for my videos, hence an upgrade to the 80GB when it became available.

Further, if you're carrying that large of a music library around, there are far better ways to manage the content. I find even my 40GB library unwieldy on my 5G iPod, to the point where I seldom touch about 80% of it. The clickwheel is still the best possible solution for a Nano-style device, but it's really not an efficient way to deal with a large library.

Again, it's not that there aren't people out there who want a large-capacity music player, but just that I don't think there are enough of them to justify keping the 5G iPod in its current form. Nor are we suggesting that going with an iPhone-style interface is going to eliminate its ability to function as a music player... It will probably lose some of the portability that the current 5G has (in that it would be slightly more fragile, perhaps less efficient to control in a pocket), but again, with the Nano as an available option, those issues are not enough to justify keeping the 5G design where it is, especially considering that it's going to look like an antique compared to the iPhone interface.

At the end of the day, it's a business decision for Apple, and the reality is that unless they have strong evidence that enough people would buy an existing 5G-style iPod instead of either a Nano or a new touchscreen-based iPod, there's no reason to continue to market that line.
 
Last edited:

kylo4

New member
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
1,662
Points
0
Location
Ontario, Canada
jhollington, I do value what you have to say here, but I disagree with the antique comment.

By releasing the 6'th gen iPod possibly 4 months after the iPhone is released and looking like the iPhone, that would be a huge mistake. Say if after two months critics and users alike go "it was fun at first but using this interface for 3 years? Forget it." Then bam, out comes the iPod and all the negative reviews taint that as well. It would be smarter to keep the 6 Gen like it is now, and make the 7'th gen like the iPhone. It wouldn't be good to have two products that look similar on the market at the same time. You can tell the difference between a 5gen, a nano and a shuffle, so why confuse people?
 
Joined
Nov 15, 2004
Messages
13,238
Points
36
Age
49
Location
Toronto, Canada
Website
www.ilounge.com
Well, nobody is saying that a 6G iPod is going to be a clone of the iPhone in apparance, as you're right that it would be fairly silly for Apple to do this. In reality, Apple probably has more than a few surprises up their sleeve in that regard, and they will certainly distinguish the product line in some significant way.

They could wait until the next generation, but I think the reality is that they're going to lose the "coolness" wave from the iPhone by doing so. Most people who have reviewed the iPhone's iPod interface agree that it's very slick, and there are going to be a lot of people who want an iPhone type of device, but don't want or need a phone (and certainly don't want to be held to a Cingular contract for two years).

As for waiting for the reviews, I think previous comments made in this thread about Apple not particularly caring are right at least in this area... Apple has proven with the iPod that they tend to do what Steve Jobs thinks is cool, and not care too much about whether or not the rest of the market place cares about it. They've had some success following this business model so far, so there's little reason to change it.

Even the iPhone itself is an example of this... You don't spend two years in secretive research and development on a product unless you either have some idea of how the public is going to receive it, or unless you just don't care. A lot of money and effort went in to the iPhone design, so this is more than just a "trial" of a new product and interface to see how it flies.... It strikes me more as a statement on where Apple is going.

Does this mean that Apple is right? Not necessarily. Apple has certainly had their flops in the past. However, this does reinforce the idea that Apple does what Apple wants, with less regard for critical acclaim than most other companies would have in a situation like this.

Again, if there really were a lot of people who buy the 5G iPod merely for its increased capacity, it would make a lot of sense to keep the 5G line largely as-is. My personal observations and experience, however, suggests that this is far too small of a customer base to justify that. Most people who are buying 5G iPods are doing it for the video capabilities, not for the capacity. Therefore, replacing it with a player that is more video-oriented would probably make the most business sense, and there has to be some marketing intelligence in these decisions, even if they're based strictly on Steve Jobs' Reality Distortion Field :)
 

Code Monkey

New member
Joined
Jun 24, 2004
Messages
5,213
Points
0
Location
Midstate New York
Surf Monkey said:
As usual, I think you VASTLY underestimate people's need for storage capacity.
I think you vastly ignore basic facts about what sales tell us. Minis and nanos would not have outsold their larger counterparts if there really was such a large segment of audio-only people who genuinely considered capacity of prime importance. As I've mentioned before, polls taken here on this site, which already skews towards the more music oriented and iPod fanatical than the general public, scream loud and clear that the overwhelming majority of consumers could fit their entire collection in less than 30GB of capacity. Yes, that less than 5-10% of iPod consumers who have large to massive collections might balk at losing an audio strongly-focused large capacity player, but they simply don't matter. If you keep a product line stagnant just to please only 5-10% of your existing customers, you're not going to grow and expand your market. The large capacity isn't going to go anywhere, it's just that Apple is going to give the average joe-blow something effective to do with the capacity beyond buying/pirating 2500 CDs worth of audio.
 
Top