I do not understand why Apple fell out of love with the iPod? It could be another gateway to Apple Music? I can see the iconic iPod brand coming back in the not so distant Future.*
I hope they keep something "nanoesque". I keep an 8GB nano in my car at all times. Out of site and always connected to the factory radio. My music is always there and I don't waste my phone battery or charge it unnecessarily because it's connected. Only have to bring it once in a while to update the music.
Personally I'd be sad to see the demise of the iPod. My first ever Apple purchase was a Nano and then the Touch. The Touch is a great device for people who don't need cellular capability and I see a lot of parents getting them for their teenage kids.
Of course "everyone likes progress, but almost no one likes change"
Upd: I just checked the Apple iOS app and the iPods are still very prominently displayed. Is this story another attempt at creating news?
Kind of.
I agree that the edit is minor, and the iPods are still selling, but the future is streaming. Ironically, Apple's iPhone (which also triggered the build-out of high speed wireless networks like LTE) was key to making services like Pandora and Spotify possible and popular. So Apple Music is Apple catching up with the disruption to its own iTunes business triggered by its own disruption of mobile computing.
I don't wax nostalgic for the iPod. It was built for the old music paradigm, whereas the always-connected iPhone is built for the new one. There's no way I'd go back. Ironically the Watch is as network-enabled as a music player as the iPod Touch, only with less storage & battery life.
I have a tiny 8 gb iPod Nano that's who knows how old, and I can definitely use an updated 64 or 128 gb iPodTouch that's reasonably priced. I have an iPhone 6 and an iPadAir 1 (both 64 gb), but I don't want to bog down those two devices with my 8200+ iTunes library.
Oh, to have the convenience of having ALL my music in my hand on the go all the time without having to pay for services like iTunes Match or Apple Music, without chewing through my cellular data, be stuck at home with my wifi connection to access my library, or have to remember which songs I might want to listen to and load them onto my iPod before I leave the house.
I have a third generation iPod 10GB (Dock connector) from 2003. It still holds a charge and still works fine after 12 years.
I have a first generation 4GB iPod that works (albeit noisily) as well. I loaded all the Beatles music I have on to it via the original FireWire. Kinda nostalgic.
Oh, to have the convenience of having ALL my music in my hand on the go all the time without having to pay for services like iTunes Match or Apple Music, without chewing through my cellular data, be stuck at home with my wifi connection to access my library, or have to remember which songs I might want to listen to and load them onto my iPod before I leave the house.
Or conversely, oh to have the convenience of not having to BUY all that music in my library in the first place. It's the new "sharing, not ownership" economy thingy...
Just semantics, but Apple didn't throw things out there to see what sticks.
It just took 14+ years, but the iPod has failed. /s
You know, I wasn't thinking that way, but I can see how similar language is employed, disparagingly, to competitors... and justifiably so.
What I meant was, it was almost like a public-facing design lab. By no means did I mean to imply slipshod. I would be proud to own ANY of the Nano iterations, for example (I own gens 2 and 4).
I certainly wouldn't mind a second tier of Apple watches that only had iPod and health tracking (plus watch) functions. It could look like the Sport watch, but be priced closer to an iPod.
I certainly wouldn't mind a second tier of Apple watches that only had iPod and health tracking (plus watch) functions. It could look like the Sport watch, but be priced closer to an iPod.
The Apple watch probably started as an iPod. Remember when the iPod nano was smaller and had watch faces? Watch faces! Crazy to look back at it now. You know that had to be when Tim and Johnny and company said, this would make a good watch, look at how well pebble is doing, and removed it from the market first chance they got. I remember tech sites frustrated that the iPod lost its small form factor because they liked the watch direction. Well, here we are now, and the iPod had finally got its watch transformation. I guess we know what they were doing all that time now.
Maybe if Apple wasn't so stingy with memory in their products, the iPod would still be relevant. iPods have always been prohibitively expensive commensurate with the amount of memory installed.
Ok. Old man rant. Why, apple, why? I still have four ipod classics that i use all the time. They are marvelous devices, almost perfect for many of us, especially for in the car, or at remote locations where i have no online access. One plugs permanently into my car stereo, one is parked on my Polk Audio sound system in the living room, one is a knock around for me wherever i go, and one connects to my sound bar at my weekend cabin where there is no internet available and rely on downloads for tv and music. I have great sounding music from my extensive library under virtually all circumstances. The combination of iTunes, iPod, and an Apple 30-pin AV cable lets me enjoy video or audio in excellent quality on the road or at home. I have a nice altec lansing speaker dock that fits in a suitcase easily for other travel. It all works marvelously and keeps me very happy. Out-of-date, who cares? Obsolete (by modern standards), who cares? I think a lot of people still want a music player that isn't their damn phone. Apple, if you are giving up on iPod, then sell it off to someone who will continue to make them. Sony and Creative and others are still trying to design something a fraction as good, and they obviously believe they can make money on a music device.
Maybe if Apple wasn't so stingy with memory in their products, the iPod would still be relevant. iPods have always been prohibitively expensive commensurate with the amount of memory installed.
Apple, if you are giving up on iPod, then sell it off to someone who will continue to make them. Sony and Creative and others are still trying to design something a fraction as good, and they obviously believe they can make money on a music device.
Why would Apple sell it off? You can get other MP3 players but the writing is on the wall. Apple shouldn't keep things around for nostalgia.
Exactly. Not for nostalgia. If Apple cant make enough money on making them, license it out to Sony. They apparently think there is a market. Apple could divest itself and make a few dollars but the product could be produced by someone for whom its return would be worthwhile. That is my point. These companies are still trying to make something as good as the ipod. They know there is a market.
Exactly. Not for nostalgia. If Apple cant make enough money on making them, license it out to Sony. They apparently think there is a market. Apple could divest itself and make a few dollars but the product could be produced by someone for whom its return would be worthwhile. That is my point. These companies are still trying to make something as good as the ipod. They know there is a market.
But why would Apple want to sully its brand by licensing?
The Nano is an odd product, yes, it's smaller than the Touch, but only $50 cheaper. Unless you really needed tiny or wanted FM radio, I'd get the 16GB Touch over it. So I think either a pricing or product move needs to be made.
I hope that the nano does not go away, athletes who have isolation before competitions can't use the touch or iPhone - the the Nano is very popular in that specific demographic.
Also, it is a good way to give children access to music in their room without worrying that they are texting their friends late at night (or being woken up by texts).
I do not understand why Apple fell out of love with the iPod? <span style="line-height:1.4em;">It could be another gateway to Apple Music? I can see the iconic iPod brand coming back in the not so distant Future.*</span>
Decisions in this area are based on consumer demand. If it just isn't there, or if it's being superseded by greater demand (for something more interesting), or if Apple sees a better proposition for their bottom line by pushing folks to another product that can fill that need and do more (and make them more money), then iPod development/production will be reduced.
Agree. I'd love to give my daughter, 7, a new iPod. But the current hardware will not stand the test of time. So now she has to wait 4 years until she is ready for a phone? And will I really buy her an $ 600 iPhone? Doubt it.
Don't buy her an iPhone, give her your old one - without a contract.
Comments
Just semantics, but Apple didn't throw things out there to see what sticks.
It just took 14+ years, but the iPod has failed. /s
I do not understand why Apple fell out of love with the iPod? It could be another gateway to Apple Music? I can see the iconic iPod brand coming back in the not so distant Future.*
(*) Streaming music will be free one day. The Family Plan is just the first step. (Wired)
Kind of.
I agree that the edit is minor, and the iPods are still selling, but the future is streaming. Ironically, Apple's iPhone (which also triggered the build-out of high speed wireless networks like LTE) was key to making services like Pandora and Spotify possible and popular. So Apple Music is Apple catching up with the disruption to its own iTunes business triggered by its own disruption of mobile computing.
I don't wax nostalgic for the iPod. It was built for the old music paradigm, whereas the always-connected iPhone is built for the new one. There's no way I'd go back. Ironically the Watch is as network-enabled as a music player as the iPod Touch, only with less storage & battery life.
I have a tiny 8 gb iPod Nano that's who knows how old, and I can definitely use an updated 64 or 128 gb iPodTouch that's reasonably priced. I have an iPhone 6 and an iPadAir 1 (both 64 gb), but I don't want to bog down those two devices with my 8200+ iTunes library.
Oh, to have the convenience of having ALL my music in my hand on the go all the time without having to pay for services like iTunes Match or Apple Music, without chewing through my cellular data, be stuck at home with my wifi connection to access my library, or have to remember which songs I might want to listen to and load them onto my iPod before I leave the house.
I have a third generation iPod 10GB (Dock connector) from 2003. It still holds a charge and still works fine after 12 years.
I have a first generation 4GB iPod that works (albeit noisily) as well. I loaded all the Beatles music I have on to it via the original FireWire. Kinda nostalgic.
Oh, to have the convenience of having ALL my music in my hand on the go all the time without having to pay for services like iTunes Match or Apple Music, without chewing through my cellular data, be stuck at home with my wifi connection to access my library, or have to remember which songs I might want to listen to and load them onto my iPod before I leave the house.
Or conversely, oh to have the convenience of not having to BUY all that music in my library in the first place. It's the new "sharing, not ownership" economy thingy...
Just semantics, but Apple didn't throw things out there to see what sticks.
It just took 14+ years, but the iPod has failed. /s
You know, I wasn't thinking that way, but I can see how similar language is employed, disparagingly, to competitors... and justifiably so.
What I meant was, it was almost like a public-facing design lab. By no means did I mean to imply slipshod. I would be proud to own ANY of the Nano iterations, for example (I own gens 2 and 4).
?NanoWatch
The Apple watch probably started as an iPod. Remember when the iPod nano was smaller and had watch faces? Watch faces! Crazy to look back at it now. You know that had to be when Tim and Johnny and company said, this would make a good watch, look at how well pebble is doing, and removed it from the market first chance they got. I remember tech sites frustrated that the iPod lost its small form factor because they liked the watch direction. Well, here we are now, and the iPod had finally got its watch transformation. I guess we know what they were doing all that time now.
Maybe if Apple wasn't so stingy with memory in their products, the iPod would still be relevant. iPods have always been prohibitively expensive commensurate with the amount of memory installed.
Why would Apple sell it off? You can get other MP3 players but the writing is on the wall. Apple shouldn't keep things around for nostalgia.
But why would Apple want to sully its brand by licensing?
The Nano is an odd product, yes, it's smaller than the Touch, but only $50 cheaper. Unless you really needed tiny or wanted FM radio, I'd get the 16GB Touch over it. So I think either a pricing or product move needs to be made.
I hope that the nano does not go away, athletes who have isolation before competitions can't use the touch or iPhone - the the Nano is very popular in that specific demographic.
Also, it is a good way to give children access to music in their room without worrying that they are texting their friends late at night (or being woken up by texts).
Decisions in this area are based on consumer demand. If it just isn't there, or if it's being superseded by greater demand (for something more interesting), or if Apple sees a better proposition for their bottom line by pushing folks to another product that can fill that need and do more (and make them more money), then iPod development/production will be reduced.
Don't buy her an iPhone, give her your old one - without a contract.
Apple would rather cannibalize then see customers turn to alternatives from other companies.
So they won't buy $300 Android devices.