Yes. With iPhones and the Touch maxing out at 32GB (rumored for 64GB in Sept.), tell me how to fit my 100GB+ music collection on a flash-based iPod.
And please don't say, well, pick and choose. No thanks. I like carrying my full library with me on my 160GB Classic wherever I go. Never know when the mood to hear some Replacements will hit ya...
Whether the rumor proves true or not, any potential upgrades to the iPod classic this fall would likely be the last for Apple's sole remaining hard-drive-based media player. Flash memory has become less expensive and more reliable in recent years, and is now the standard on the remainder of Apple's iPod lineup.
And I would say you have no clue how different the groups are that buy these different devices.
One group is trying to get the largest storage space possible, which is not financially feasible using flash memory right now. Therefore, for this group, if Apple cares about them at all, they will not drop hard drive based iPods. If they don't care about them, they will drop these. At this time, they are still selling a significant amount of them.
Don't look at percentages. Apple isn't. They are looking at profit margins and how many they are selling. Right now this group still brings pretty good money (don't compare percentages) to Apple.
Don't look at percentages. Apple isn't. They are looking at profit margins and how many they are selling. Right now this group still brings pretty good money (don't compare percentages) to Apple.
Well nothing could be more profitable than the HDD iPod Classics. One drop and its over- you have to buy another one.
I wouldn't say "prosumer" as that implies someone who is ahead of the curve in all respects. Ripping your media to unnecessarily large sizes and carrying it all around with you is not that rational.
A similar "prosumer" on the picture taking side would be someone who habitually carries every picture they ever took, and also stores them in RAW format on a ginormous computer/viewer that they lug around with them.
No one would ever call that person smart or professional.
Hmm... time for a math lesson young padawan -
MP3s ripped to 192kb, cbr, are, for some, marginally acceptable quality-wise. For a DJ in a club, I'd say barely adequate, but for my needs, it'll do.
Now, take 20 years worth of music collecting, roughly 100 - 150 CDs a year, and encode 'em @ 192kb. What do you get? My collection...
... which does NOT fit on a 160GB Classic. Not even close.
Now... take a DJ... who may have twice the amount of music (factor in remixes, limited releases, edits, etc) - again, one device won't even begin to accomodate. How are you supposed to manage that? Figure out ahead of time what to play? That's not how DJs work - they decide what to play based on the vibe of the crowd on the dancefloor, in the moment, not beforehand, therefore, having all music available on each device is critical. Apple clearly dropping the ball here (they did this last year).
I wouldn't dare call a DJ dumb or unprofessional...
But don't be surprised if classic = touch + a hard drive.
I take it that iPhone OS was designed to run on a flash-based environment. The HD-based iPod was dubbed 'Classic" because they intend to halt its development. Apple's flash memory orders reflect that down the road, its true replacement is the touch.
The heart of Apple's iPod business lies with the low capacity Nano crowd. There is no reason not to upgrade to an iPod Touch if a 128GB model becomes viable in a year.
If the Touch gets a camera, can I assume that it will be like the iPhone and also do video, therfore getting a built in microphone, and therefore providing me all I need for a WiFi Skype phone, therefore getting me a little bit closer to being able to tell the telcos that $50/mo. for a phone for people who only use a phone when they actually only have something to communicate besides mindless chatter, is to much and I don't have to pay that anymore?
I wouldn't say "prosumer" as that implies someone who is ahead of the curve in all respects. Ripping your media to unnecessarily large sizes and carrying it all around with you is not that rational.
A similar "prosumer" on the picture taking side would be someone who habitually carries every picture they ever took, and also stores them in RAW format on a ginormous computer/viewer that they lug around with them.
No one would ever call that person smart or professional.
I feel as though I can say this because I am one, but prosumers are often irrational about particular things in their attempts to compensate for being neither a typical consumer nor a professional. Audiophile prosumers DO rip unnecessarily large tracks and demand they have many weeks worth of consecutive music on demand at their fingertips. Reasonable music professionals would likely not use an iPod at all for their profession.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColeSQ
I think you guys are missing the point. Apple alienates (or doesn't alienate) customers at the time and place of its choosing - history has loads of examples of this, the most recent being Firewire, matte screens, and (my non-alienation example) just keeping the AppleTV around as a hobby.
Apple is not afraid to make decisions that potentially alienate users because they have the confidence they won't lose those same customers based on their limited competitive alternatives.
Having said that, they're more than happy to sell low rev products until development and production costs overtake the margin value target Apple has chosen. Classic's been back before, it'll likely be back again. But don't be surprised if classic = touch + a hard drive.
And of all the hobbyist/prosumer things I've bitched and moaned about (no xMac, no headless iMac, no DVR funtionality in AppleTV, etc.) Apple has continued to not care. Companies need to follow markets, else they end up like the American automotive industry... Real prosumers take things into their own hands... like getting an anti-glare mask for your MacBook, hacking your AppleTV (there's LOTS of great hacks out there) or getting a firewire card for your Mac Pro. Sure there isn't always a solution, but you have to learn to adapt to where the market moves.
I take it that iPhone OS was designed to run on a flash-based environment. The HD-based iPod was dubbed 'Classic" because they intend to halt its development. Apple's flash memory orders reflect that down the road, its true replacement is the touch.
The heart of Apple's iPod business lies with the low capacity Nano crowd. There is no reason not to upgrade to an iPod Touch if a 128GB model becomes viable in a year.
The Classic is just a stopgap.
Agreed... and increasing the capacity of the Classic during this refresh would make replacing it even more insurmountable. That said, I do not anticipate a capacity bump before the unit is cut altogether.
A recurrent problem on these forums is Egomaximalism, where people with large egos think that their modes of usage or feature needs define the maximum possible requirements for all possible users.
Egomaximalists are always wrong, every time, with no exceptions. Every time one of them pronounces that no one could possibly have a use for firewire, matt screens or more than 32gb in an iPod, a veritable deluge of people turn up to prove them wrong.
On a cost per GB basis, flash is still about 100 times more expensive than HD. Wishes will not change that reality.
My music collection is roughly 500GB. At some point I'll re-rip as lossless. In addition I have tons of videos. If Apple made an iPod/iPhone measured in Terabytes, I would fill it up.
Some day, it will happen.
But for now, the capacity limit changes my behavior. For a lot of people, the existing line-ups fit within their media collections. For many people they're coming close. For those of us where we have to change our behavior, the difference in capacity isn't as relevant as the interface, features and form factor.
Thus, despite my large collection, I rarely used my 80GB iPod once the 8GB iPhone came out. Now with the 32GB iPhone, I don't use that 80GB iPod at all, nor would I consider a larger one.
From Apple's perspective, this is good. Apple would rather have the behavior modification such that we then buy into a platform that allows it to sell apps, as well as to create app-lock-in instead of DRM-lock-in.
The iPod Classic is going to die, maybe not this September, but soon. It will be telling to see if the a new iPod Classic comes out and if it exceeds 120GB. Next year, we can expect a 128GB iPod touch, while the iPod Classic would need to add a platter to get past 120GB.
I bet iPods will get larger flash memory which is very near to the Classic's hard disk capacity.
With the touch screen and app store, even the Touch without camera beats Classic (with camera) any day.
Classic is analogous to the White MacBook.
I don't know about anyone, but I sure would. I was hoping for a 240 GB Classic (you telling me you could get a flash iPod with that much storage?). But please NO CAMERA on the Classic. My car stereo has an iPod input, and for long drives there's nothing better than having a lot of music feeding in (shuffle by album).
A recurrent problem on these forums is Egomaximalism, where people with large egos think that their modes of usage or feature needs define the maximum possible requirements for all possible users.
Egomaximalists are always wrong, every time, with no exceptions. Every time one of them pronounces that no one could possibly have a use for firewire, matt screens or more than 32gb in an iPod, a veritable deluge of people turn up to prove them wrong.
On a cost per GB basis, flash is still about 100 times more expensive than HD. Wishes will not change that reality.
I can only assume you're targeting this at me since I was the one suggesting we move on from these wishes... but did I say or imply that those technologies were obsolete? No. Of course matte screens and firewire are useful. I use them. They're just not the direction Apple is going, and we prosumers need to find ways to circumvent Apple's over-eagerness to oversimplify all their products.
Instead of complaining about it and berating those who don't understand your need for technology that Apple has abandoned, try directing your efforts towards creating a solution. Whining doesn't help anybody...
Here's what I don't understand... I don't understand why people care if the Classic dies or not. The Touch has a neat interface. The Classic has tactile controls and large capacity. Very different animals. Some people prefer one or the other or both for different reasons. Who cares? As long Apple can get good margins on both and both are selling... why should they drop either? Just because you don't think the Classic is "cool"?
In the advent of a 64+ gig iPod Touch, the iPod Classic has become the "prosumer" model of iPod line... used by the few audiophiles who have huge libraries, and could care less about the aesthetic appeal and reliabilty of the device.
-Clive
Audiophiles don't listen to mp3's. It's either virgin vinyl or FLAC. Purely talking about music quality, mp3's are the worst thing that could ever happen to music.
Comments
Now this is taken too far...
Why would anyone buy an ipod classic?
Just because it has a larger memory?
Yes. With iPhones and the Touch maxing out at 32GB (rumored for 64GB in Sept.), tell me how to fit my 100GB+ music collection on a flash-based iPod.
And please don't say, well, pick and choose. No thanks. I like carrying my full library with me on my 160GB Classic wherever I go. Never know when the mood to hear some Replacements will hit ya...
Whether the rumor proves true or not, any potential upgrades to the iPod classic this fall would likely be the last for Apple's sole remaining hard-drive-based media player. Flash memory has become less expensive and more reliable in recent years, and is now the standard on the remainder of Apple's iPod lineup.
And I would say you have no clue how different the groups are that buy these different devices.
One group is trying to get the largest storage space possible, which is not financially feasible using flash memory right now. Therefore, for this group, if Apple cares about them at all, they will not drop hard drive based iPods. If they don't care about them, they will drop these. At this time, they are still selling a significant amount of them.
Don't look at percentages. Apple isn't. They are looking at profit margins and how many they are selling. Right now this group still brings pretty good money (don't compare percentages) to Apple.
Don't look at percentages. Apple isn't. They are looking at profit margins and how many they are selling. Right now this group still brings pretty good money (don't compare percentages) to Apple.
Well nothing could be more profitable than the HDD iPod Classics. One drop and its over- you have to buy another one.
I wouldn't say "prosumer" as that implies someone who is ahead of the curve in all respects. Ripping your media to unnecessarily large sizes and carrying it all around with you is not that rational.
A similar "prosumer" on the picture taking side would be someone who habitually carries every picture they ever took, and also stores them in RAW format on a ginormous computer/viewer that they lug around with them.
No one would ever call that person smart or professional.
Hmm... time for a math lesson young padawan -
MP3s ripped to 192kb, cbr, are, for some, marginally acceptable quality-wise. For a DJ in a club, I'd say barely adequate, but for my needs, it'll do.
Now, take 20 years worth of music collecting, roughly 100 - 150 CDs a year, and encode 'em @ 192kb. What do you get? My collection...
... which does NOT fit on a 160GB Classic. Not even close.
Now... take a DJ... who may have twice the amount of music (factor in remixes, limited releases, edits, etc) - again, one device won't even begin to accomodate. How are you supposed to manage that? Figure out ahead of time what to play? That's not how DJs work - they decide what to play based on the vibe of the crowd on the dancefloor, in the moment, not beforehand, therefore, having all music available on each device is critical. Apple clearly dropping the ball here (they did this last year).
I wouldn't dare call a DJ dumb or unprofessional...
But don't be surprised if classic = touch + a hard drive.
I take it that iPhone OS was designed to run on a flash-based environment. The HD-based iPod was dubbed 'Classic" because they intend to halt its development. Apple's flash memory orders reflect that down the road, its true replacement is the touch.
The heart of Apple's iPod business lies with the low capacity Nano crowd. There is no reason not to upgrade to an iPod Touch if a 128GB model becomes viable in a year.
The Classic is just a stopgap.
I wouldn't say "prosumer" as that implies someone who is ahead of the curve in all respects. Ripping your media to unnecessarily large sizes and carrying it all around with you is not that rational.
A similar "prosumer" on the picture taking side would be someone who habitually carries every picture they ever took, and also stores them in RAW format on a ginormous computer/viewer that they lug around with them.
No one would ever call that person smart or professional.
I feel as though I can say this because I am one, but prosumers are often irrational about particular things in their attempts to compensate for being neither a typical consumer nor a professional. Audiophile prosumers DO rip unnecessarily large tracks and demand they have many weeks worth of consecutive music on demand at their fingertips. Reasonable music professionals would likely not use an iPod at all for their profession.
I think you guys are missing the point. Apple alienates (or doesn't alienate) customers at the time and place of its choosing - history has loads of examples of this, the most recent being Firewire, matte screens, and (my non-alienation example) just keeping the AppleTV around as a hobby.
Apple is not afraid to make decisions that potentially alienate users because they have the confidence they won't lose those same customers based on their limited competitive alternatives.
Having said that, they're more than happy to sell low rev products until development and production costs overtake the margin value target Apple has chosen. Classic's been back before, it'll likely be back again. But don't be surprised if classic = touch + a hard drive.
And of all the hobbyist/prosumer things I've bitched and moaned about (no xMac, no headless iMac, no DVR funtionality in AppleTV, etc.) Apple has continued to not care. Companies need to follow markets, else they end up like the American automotive industry... Real prosumers take things into their own hands... like getting an anti-glare mask for your MacBook, hacking your AppleTV (there's LOTS of great hacks out there) or getting a firewire card for your Mac Pro. Sure there isn't always a solution, but you have to learn to adapt to where the market moves.
I take it that iPhone OS was designed to run on a flash-based environment. The HD-based iPod was dubbed 'Classic" because they intend to halt its development. Apple's flash memory orders reflect that down the road, its true replacement is the touch.
The heart of Apple's iPod business lies with the low capacity Nano crowd. There is no reason not to upgrade to an iPod Touch if a 128GB model becomes viable in a year.
The Classic is just a stopgap.
Agreed... and increasing the capacity of the Classic during this refresh would make replacing it even more insurmountable. That said, I do not anticipate a capacity bump before the unit is cut altogether.
Egomaximalists are always wrong, every time, with no exceptions. Every time one of them pronounces that no one could possibly have a use for firewire, matt screens or more than 32gb in an iPod, a veritable deluge of people turn up to prove them wrong.
On a cost per GB basis, flash is still about 100 times more expensive than HD. Wishes will not change that reality.
Some day, it will happen.
But for now, the capacity limit changes my behavior. For a lot of people, the existing line-ups fit within their media collections. For many people they're coming close. For those of us where we have to change our behavior, the difference in capacity isn't as relevant as the interface, features and form factor.
Thus, despite my large collection, I rarely used my 80GB iPod once the 8GB iPhone came out. Now with the 32GB iPhone, I don't use that 80GB iPod at all, nor would I consider a larger one.
From Apple's perspective, this is good. Apple would rather have the behavior modification such that we then buy into a platform that allows it to sell apps, as well as to create app-lock-in instead of DRM-lock-in.
The iPod Classic is going to die, maybe not this September, but soon. It will be telling to see if the a new iPod Classic comes out and if it exceeds 120GB. Next year, we can expect a 128GB iPod touch, while the iPod Classic would need to add a platter to get past 120GB.
Now this is taken too far...
Why would anyone buy an ipod classic?
Just because it has a larger memory?
I bet iPods will get larger flash memory which is very near to the Classic's hard disk capacity.
With the touch screen and app store, even the Touch without camera beats Classic (with camera) any day.
Classic is analogous to the White MacBook.
I don't know about anyone, but I sure would. I was hoping for a 240 GB Classic (you telling me you could get a flash iPod with that much storage?). But please NO CAMERA on the Classic. My car stereo has an iPod input, and for long drives there's nothing better than having a lot of music feeding in (shuffle by album).
A recurrent problem on these forums is Egomaximalism, where people with large egos think that their modes of usage or feature needs define the maximum possible requirements for all possible users.
Egomaximalists are always wrong, every time, with no exceptions. Every time one of them pronounces that no one could possibly have a use for firewire, matt screens or more than 32gb in an iPod, a veritable deluge of people turn up to prove them wrong.
On a cost per GB basis, flash is still about 100 times more expensive than HD. Wishes will not change that reality.
I can only assume you're targeting this at me since I was the one suggesting we move on from these wishes... but did I say or imply that those technologies were obsolete? No. Of course matte screens and firewire are useful. I use them. They're just not the direction Apple is going, and we prosumers need to find ways to circumvent Apple's over-eagerness to oversimplify all their products.
Instead of complaining about it and berating those who don't understand your need for technology that Apple has abandoned, try directing your efforts towards creating a solution. Whining doesn't help anybody...
-Clive
Yeah, my 120B is fabulous for my car. Can't live without it. Couldn't imagine a Nano (too small) or a Touch (too fancy) performing that role.
Imagine trying to use a Touch while driving! Has everyone seen the teens texting while driving ad?
Well nothing could be more profitable than the HDD iPod Classics. One drop and its over- you have to buy another one.
I've dropped my 160 GB classic more than once, including onto asphalt from about 5', and it still works fine. Did put a ding in the case though.
In the advent of a 64+ gig iPod Touch, the iPod Classic has become the "prosumer" model of iPod line... used by the few audiophiles who have huge libraries, and could care less about the aesthetic appeal and reliabilty of the device.
-Clive
Audiophiles don't listen to mp3's. It's either virgin vinyl or FLAC. Purely talking about music quality, mp3's are the worst thing that could ever happen to music.
I've dropped my 160 GB classic more than once, including onto asphalt from about 5', and it still works fine. Did put a ding in the case though.
Good for you- I broke 2 out of 3 from drops, have one 80 GB left that still works. Both were in cases.