As many have said, the Shuffle was perfect for runners who don't want to carry around a phone or other larger device. I use a shuffle for music and a Garmin GPS watch. Maybe by the time these poop out on me I'll be ready to move on to the Apple Watch. It's just nice to have options like the Shuffle that don't cost hundreds of dollars when you just want something simple and don't want to pay for all the additional things the watch can do. Here's my question though as I consider where the technology is at for whatever I have to do in the future. A while back I actually considered making the switch to a more all in one device. I needed a new GPS watch (I accidentally left mine sitting on the top of my car and it fell off in the road and got ran over...oops) so I got the Tom Tom Spark which has built in music and bluetooth headphones. After the first run I packaged it up and returned it. The music kept cutting out due to signal loss from my wrist swinging while running. This was with the expensive headphones that were part of the Tom Tom bundle I got. So, do lots of people run with the Apple Watch and bluetooth headphones and find that audio quality is just fine? Does it require expensive headphones that can add another $200+ to the overall cost? Another thing is the battery life when using GPS. It's rated for 5hrs when using the GPS which is limiting for ultra distance running. Most of my running right now is under 2hrs but I've definitely done more than 5 in the past and have plans for 5+ hr runs in the future. My current Garmin has 8hr GPS battery life and there are other higher end models with even higher GPS battery life. I guess though if you're serious enough to be doing all day running the best option would be to just invest in one of those specialized devices. Anyway, hopefully my shuffle hangs in there for years to come, but when it finally goes maybe the lack of a replacement will finally give me the push to move on to something different. Maybe by that time the Series 2 (or even a newer model to come) will be the old gear and I'll be able to find a closeout deal or buy used to save some cash.
The iPod Shuffle was the perfect device for working out and running. Apple's decision to eliminate it makes little sense. On going development costs must be near 0, and at $59 margins are high. This is a perfect cash cow. If space at stores is a premium, make it available only on the website. I'm really sad to see this go, as I use my Shuffle every day, and no other Apple product is an option for me.
You'd have to assume they consulted the accounting department to determine how much of a cash cow it was. They reported iPod revenues until 2014:
Sales dropped nearly 75% in just 4 years and iPhone sales grew at the same rate as it fell, a lot of people were just obsoleting their iPods with iPhones:
Not only this, they reported unit sales, which in 2014 were 14.3m units compared to 169m iPhones. The total sales can't be more than a few million at this point and revenue is likely under $1b.
Some of what contributes to this is how long they last. A Shuffle is a pretty durable product, it would probably last about 8 years without being replaced and this results in low sales.
The best replacement for the Shuffle for sports is the headphones that have built-in music playback, like these as there's no cable:
Apple could add storage to the Airpods at some point or in the Beats wireless products. The Watch has a few million buyers so that will have a similar effect as the iPhone. It's not necessarily that people who have iPods would be drawn to those products, it's more that people are drawn to the products and then they don't need the iPods any more.
In terms of cost, you can pick up an old iPhone 4 on eBay for $60. Cars often have SD card slots or USB ports, just get a card and load it with music. There are loads of options for getting a cheap music player.
This is something Apple has always done, they get rid of products that people aren't buying any more or more importantly wouldn't be buying any more in a few years. They look at sales trajectories and typically follow the ones that go up. Chasing ones that go down is going to be short-lived anyway.
Has it ever occurred to you that a significant contributing factor to the drop in sales is because they haven't been updated in years?! If you stuck a wifi chip in the nano, upped its storage capacity, and updated its OS then I'm sure sales would bounce back.
As others have said, there's still a market for v small, light and inexpensive MP3 players for fitness workouts. The Apple Watch is over-designed and too expensive for that market. I'm sure sales are dwarfed by their other big products, but that's a given. They sell plenty of items that have relatively low sales figures compared to the iPhone, yet continue to sell them.
The iPod Shuffle was the perfect device for working out and running. Apple's decision to eliminate it makes little sense. On going development costs must be near 0, and at $59 margins are high. This is a perfect cash cow. If space at stores is a premium, make it available only on the website. I'm really sad to see this go, as I use my Shuffle every day, and no other Apple product is an option for me.
You'd have to assume they consulted the accounting department to determine how much of a cash cow it was. They reported iPod revenues until 2014:
Sales dropped nearly 75% in just 4 years and iPhone sales grew at the same rate as it fell, a lot of people were just obsoleting their iPods with iPhones:
Not only this, they reported unit sales, which in 2014 were 14.3m units compared to 169m iPhones. The total sales can't be more than a few million at this point and revenue is likely under $1b.
Some of what contributes to this is how long they last. A Shuffle is a pretty durable product, it would probably last about 8 years without being replaced and this results in low sales.
The best replacement for the Shuffle for sports is the headphones that have built-in music playback, like these as there's no cable:
Apple could add storage to the Airpods at some point or in the Beats wireless products. The Watch has a few million buyers so that will have a similar effect as the iPhone. It's not necessarily that people who have iPods would be drawn to those products, it's more that people are drawn to the products and then they don't need the iPods any more.
In terms of cost, you can pick up an old iPhone 4 on eBay for $60. Cars often have SD card slots or USB ports, just get a card and load it with music. There are loads of options for getting a cheap music player.
This is something Apple has always done, they get rid of products that people aren't buying any more or more importantly wouldn't be buying any more in a few years. They look at sales trajectories and typically follow the ones that go up. Chasing ones that go down is going to be short-lived anyway.
Has it ever occurred to you that a significant contributing factor to the drop in sales is because they haven't been updated in years?! If you stuck a wifi chip in the nano, upped its storage capacity, and updated its OS then I'm sure sales would bounce back.
As others have said, there's still a market for v small, light and inexpensive MP3 players for fitness workouts. The Apple Watch is over-designed and too expensive for that market. I'm sure sales are dwarfed by their other big products, but that's a given. They sell plenty of items that have relatively low sales figures compared to the iPhone, yet continue to sell them.
I'm sure he knows there would be an uptick in sales if Apple did a major overhaul to an iPod product line, but you need to consider the CBA. I'm certain Apple did and then came to the conclusion that it's not worth it. It also wasn't worth it to run more batches of their current design whose R&D was long paid for. Perhaps they ran out of a particular component that would be too costly to buy now or perhaps they need those assembly lines, people, and overall factory space at Foxconn so they can focus on other growth areas. Do you really think Apple made this decision willy nilly? I don't.
The iPod Shuffle was the perfect device for working out and running. Apple's decision to eliminate it makes little sense. On going development costs must be near 0, and at $59 margins are high. This is a perfect cash cow. If space at stores is a premium, make it available only on the website. I'm really sad to see this go, as I use my Shuffle every day, and no other Apple product is an option for me.
You'd have to assume they consulted the accounting department to determine how much of a cash cow it was. They reported iPod revenues until 2014:
Sales dropped nearly 75% in just 4 years and iPhone sales grew at the same rate as it fell, a lot of people were just obsoleting their iPods with iPhones:
Not only this, they reported unit sales, which in 2014 were 14.3m units compared to 169m iPhones. The total sales can't be more than a few million at this point and revenue is likely under $1b.
Some of what contributes to this is how long they last. A Shuffle is a pretty durable product, it would probably last about 8 years without being replaced and this results in low sales.
The best replacement for the Shuffle for sports is the headphones that have built-in music playback, like these as there's no cable:
Apple could add storage to the Airpods at some point or in the Beats wireless products. The Watch has a few million buyers so that will have a similar effect as the iPhone. It's not necessarily that people who have iPods would be drawn to those products, it's more that people are drawn to the products and then they don't need the iPods any more.
In terms of cost, you can pick up an old iPhone 4 on eBay for $60. Cars often have SD card slots or USB ports, just get a card and load it with music. There are loads of options for getting a cheap music player.
This is something Apple has always done, they get rid of products that people aren't buying any more or more importantly wouldn't be buying any more in a few years. They look at sales trajectories and typically follow the ones that go up. Chasing ones that go down is going to be short-lived anyway.
Has it ever occurred to you that a significant contributing factor to the drop in sales is because they haven't been updated in years?! If you stuck a wifi chip in the nano, upped its storage capacity, and updated its OS then I'm sure sales would bounce back.
As others have said, there's still a market for v small, light and inexpensive MP3 players for fitness workouts. The Apple Watch is over-designed and too expensive for that market. I'm sure sales are dwarfed by their other big products, but that's a given. They sell plenty of items that have relatively low sales figures compared to the iPhone, yet continue to sell them.
'Has it ever occurred to you...' What a dumbass, condescending way to start a nothing post.
'If you stuck a wifi chip in the nano, upped its storage capacity, and updated its OS...' If only Apple had considered that before dropping it and the Shuffle without a thought.
'...then I'm sure sales would bounce back.' That's gold right there. Apple is leaving tons of money on the table. How careless of them. And if they sold them for $99, they fly off the shelves, no doubt.
They sell plenty of items that have relatively low sales figures compared to the iPhone, yet continue to sell them. I have no words for that leap of 'logic'.
Since we're in the area of gross, unsubstantiated speculation, I'll play too. I think that Apple saw the lack of ROI in updating the nano. But Apple doesn't do loss leader. It may make little profit on something like the Apple TV, but if it believes there's potential, they'll support it. If not... And as previously mentioned, there's no path to Apple Music. I think that was a very real consideration for Apple. A nano with BT would be one less reason to buy an Apple Watch, which is being marketed as fitness kit, among other uses.
I will miss the nano. I've got a 6th Gen that still works, but when the battery finally dies— it's dead, Jim. There'll be no second coming. Having an Apple Watch with AirPods does take considerable sting out of the passing. I don't miss cords at all.
Just because there's a small demand doesn't mean there's a market. If there is, someone will fill it. It's just not worth Apple's participation, apparently.
nano (and Shuffles?) can still be had, so grab one/another soon, before eBay is the only source.
Comments
Here's my question though as I consider where the technology is at for whatever I have to do in the future. A while back I actually considered making the switch to a more all in one device. I needed a new GPS watch (I accidentally left mine sitting on the top of my car and it fell off in the road and got ran over...oops) so I got the Tom Tom Spark which has built in music and bluetooth headphones. After the first run I packaged it up and returned it. The music kept cutting out due to signal loss from my wrist swinging while running. This was with the expensive headphones that were part of the Tom Tom bundle I got. So, do lots of people run with the Apple Watch and bluetooth headphones and find that audio quality is just fine? Does it require expensive headphones that can add another $200+ to the overall cost?
Another thing is the battery life when using GPS. It's rated for 5hrs when using the GPS which is limiting for ultra distance running. Most of my running right now is under 2hrs but I've definitely done more than 5 in the past and have plans for 5+ hr runs in the future. My current Garmin has 8hr GPS battery life and there are other higher end models with even higher GPS battery life. I guess though if you're serious enough to be doing all day running the best option would be to just invest in one of those specialized devices.
Anyway, hopefully my shuffle hangs in there for years to come, but when it finally goes maybe the lack of a replacement will finally give me the push to move on to something different. Maybe by that time the Series 2 (or even a newer model to come) will be the old gear and I'll be able to find a closeout deal or buy used to save some cash.
As others have said, there's still a market for v small, light and inexpensive MP3 players for fitness workouts. The Apple Watch is over-designed and too expensive for that market. I'm sure sales are dwarfed by their other big products, but that's a given. They sell plenty of items that have relatively low sales figures compared to the iPhone, yet continue to sell them.
'If you stuck a wifi chip in the nano, upped its storage capacity, and updated its OS...' If only Apple had considered that before dropping it and the Shuffle without a thought.
'...then I'm sure sales would bounce back.' That's gold right there. Apple is leaving tons of money on the table. How careless of them. And if they sold them for $99, they fly off the shelves, no doubt.
They sell plenty of items that have relatively low sales figures compared to the iPhone, yet continue to sell them. I have no words for that leap of 'logic'.
Since we're in the area of gross, unsubstantiated speculation, I'll play too. I think that Apple saw the lack of ROI in updating the nano. But Apple doesn't do loss leader. It may make little profit on something like the Apple TV, but if it believes there's potential, they'll support it. If not... And as previously mentioned, there's no path to Apple Music. I think that was a very real consideration for Apple. A nano with BT would be one less reason to buy an Apple Watch, which is being marketed as fitness kit, among other uses.
I will miss the nano. I've got a 6th Gen that still works, but when the battery finally dies— it's dead, Jim. There'll be no second coming. Having an Apple Watch with AirPods does take considerable sting out of the passing. I don't miss cords at all.
Just because there's a small demand doesn't mean there's a market. If there is, someone will fill it. It's just not worth Apple's participation, apparently.
nano (and Shuffles?) can still be had, so grab one/another soon, before eBay is the only source.
That has not happened in decades.