Just 'cos some moron expands VRAM to virtual RAM doesnt mean anything. Ill take Apples use of standard industry acronyms at face value ( vram => video ram ) any day.
Hey, I'm just reporting what I've read. The problem is that there are NO official specs for it on Apple's site, as far as I can tell. It's not one of the models listed on the iMac hardware page, and there are no specs at all for any iMac G5 under the Support->Specifications, as of midnight EST last night.
I just did a quick scan of CF 2GB prices...retail prices averaging around $150.
Assuming (correctly) that OEM/wholesale prices are cheaper, and that Apple could swing a big dicsount on quantity, etc. Apple MIGHT be able to do a $149 iPod Mini Mini (2GB...500 songs in your pocket). But we have to remember the other components too. If Apple shoots for a gross margin of like 15% on these guys, total cost has to be $126 (or less)...and that includes the drive/card, display, case, chips, packaging.
Now Apple does appear to have the clout to be able to get suppliers to do what they want right now on the iPod. So chances might be better than I think.
That said, I don't know why anyone (except techo-geeks and "spec whores") cares what the technology inside the thing is (I don't)...just that it works...and works well.
Well, I already knew I was a "Techno-Geek". Just proving it now,<venting>/ because if I didn't care what was inside the box ... I wouldn't care about the technology the device was capable of using. Take, for instance, Sony's misguided attempt at an iPod using their proprietary "ATRAC3" format (which doesn't have the quality or the open standard of the AAC format), and Sony Ericsson's Flash player I mentioned before (it uses Sony's proprietary memory stick technology that doesn't have the capacity of CF cards). <kinda sounds like MS ploys for world domination, huh>
So you might say that you don't care what's inside, but if you want the device to do certain things, or utilize certain existing equipment that you already own, then you actually do. Maybe it is better said that some people have to have certain brand names and the latest greatest in technology, just for bragging rights.
Price is important. If you're Apple, you won't sacrifice quality for the lowest possible $$ though. On the other hand, if you're Dell ... who cares, there are more customers out there who don't know about equipment, don't care about what's inside, and prefer to remain ignorant about the technology (heh, keeps me employed). As has been voiced time and again on these forums, Apple does charge more, and have higher margins. If Apple was as large as Dell, they wouldn't have to, but they're not and therefore have a more difficult time lowering prices. I don't agree with all they do, but I at least understand some of their reasons for it. /<venting>
BTW, the views above aren't targetted at anyone in these forums, your points just reminded me of the folks that I've had to support and deal with over the years.
The Flash Media Music Player Arena (I'd like to call Apple's, iPod Micro) has more competition in it, but like has been said ... for Apple to do well, the value is going to have to be there with the typical Apple Innovation.
Take, for instance, Sony's misguided attempt at an iPod using their proprietary "ATRAC3" format (which doesn't have the quality or the open standard of the AAC format), and Sony Ericsson's Flash player I mentioned before (it uses Sony's proprietary memory stick technology that doesn't have the capacity of CF cards)....if you want the device to do certain things, or utilize certain existing equipment that you already own, then you actually do.
Perhaps it is only a matter of semantics, but it seems to me that these concerns are less about what is inside than what it can do. For example, "If I buy the SONY device and have my music in the ATRAC3 format, I won't be able to play it on any other device, and I don't like that very much." (A trait shared by the protected AAC files of the iTMS BTW.)
Another example is "SONY's product uses a memory stick device that I cannot use with any of my other devices...and vice-versa. I don't like that very much."
These talk about capabilities.
The issue of whether the closed/sealed iPod has CF, a hard drive or a really tiny elephant (with great memory) shouldn't matter much to consumers. Similarly, issues of price and quality matter. If you wish to buy a cheaper device and it craps out after 6 months, instead of a "more expensive" device that lasts for 2 years. These are all factors that can be stated in simple, non-technical terms. I don't care if the iPod (or whatever) is made of the finest plastic, metal, etc. known to mankind. I care that it works and works well.
Now, one can say that knowing some things (i.e., the use of titanium vs. plastic) would likely lead to more durability, helps, but there are limits to this. I don't know that CF vs. hard drive matters much to me (or anyone for that matter). What matters to me is functionality, quality and price (which can all be summarized in the single word "value"). How the vendor (Apple or whoevere) achieves this is of very little consequence to me.
I'm in agreement w/you. And you're right about the "semantics", To me ... the capabilities are defined by what's inside (because I'm a technogeek and I want to learn, strangely enough I'm that way about physics and other things as well). To the average user, you're right, they only want to know what it's used for (not why ... they don't want to learn). Hence my comment about keeping me in a job (one of my jobs).
I also appreciated your picking up on my use of the word "value", it was intentional and I thought about explaining it when I wrote the post, but opted not to. It feels good to know that some else was on the same wavelength!
No I'm not. I've considered buying one several times, but I always give up the notion when I look at the bottom line. I don't need even 1 GB of space (never mind 20 or 40 GB), and I won't pay even close to what they are selling the cheapest iPod for.
You're right, I don't care if the device has CF or an HD (aside from standard technology geek curiosity). What I do care about is price and quality. If by not including a hard disk Apple can slice off a big chunk of the cost then I'll buy one.
No I'm not. I've considered buying one several times, but I always give up the notion when I look at the bottom line. I don't need even 1 GB of space (never mind 20 or 40 GB), and I won't pay even close to what they are selling the cheapest iPod for.
Okay. So the prices is too high for YOU. But the price is not too high in general (for the market).
Well, this might be a little unfair. I think he's saying he'd like much of the niceties of the iPod without so much of the capacity or cost. I am certain that Apple is trying to figure out ways to address the entire entire spectrum of customers.
I think you're both right. The iPod is too expensive. Hence me and Programmer not buying one when we'd really like to. Apple would sell tons more if they could lower the entry price...
However,
If Apple is selling them as fast as they can make them anyway, there's no reason to lower prices until demand falls off or they can manufacture more.
If I remember right, the rumor was that the iPod mini would settle down to around $200 after production ramped up, but since they still can't keep the iPod mini in stock, why bother?
In short, for the sake of me and Programmer, please quit buying iPods.
edit: And I just realized that that's what Chris just said... lol
I use my iPod almost always for less than an hour at a time. I would love to have a 'gym iPod' or a 'I don't care that much if it's stolen iPod' in addition to my current bigger and more expensive iPod. A lot like keeping an old car around that you don't car who bangs up in the parking lot.
I agree there is space for an iPod with a different target audience.
A lot of commuters use an iPod for a couple of hours a day, at most. Flash would also use less power.
Imagine using your iPod for an hour or 2 (on the train to work, at the gym, going for a walk... whatever...), then when you get home your iPod automatically "reshuffles" the songs on your iPod. So you've got an iPod playlist that's got more songs than the iPod fits, but during sync it removes the songs you've listened to (or skipped) since the last sync and puts some new ones on.
Add to this wireless/Airport sync? - as soon as you're home it updates your songs. Or iPod radio? I think there are possibilities.
1) Flash-based iPod means simpler electronics (no need for buffer memory), and more reliability (no hard drive crashes anymore).
2) iTunes is the big picture here. Whether you like it or not, there is an aboundance of different cheap mp3 players that will play the wma files of the other online music stores. You need to make sure that people won't get used to buying from them, but will rather use iTunes. Since iTunes will only work with iPods (at least, until Apple licenses Fairplay), you need a cheap iPod to sell to those people that will never pay the high prices that an iPod commands right now.
While (a) is true, (b) isn't necessarily. Apple didn't make PowerMacs until they stopped selling and then switched to iMacs.
Yes, but you must consider three things: a) two totally different products (iPod and Mac), b) iMac and PM serve different customers where iPod is pretty homogenous comparatively speaking and c) the demand curve for PM might have been lowering, and Apple saw this and made their move at the right time, even though it didn't look like they waited until demand had dried up.
Still, Apple seems to be playing its cards w.r.t iPod very deftly. I expect lower priced models, but almost certainly not until after the new year. Especially if they expect to sell everyone they can make (regular and Mini) at their current prices for the Christmas shopping season.
Yes, but you must consider three things: a) two totally different products (iPod and Mac), b) iMac and PM serve different customers where iPod is pretty homogenous comparatively speaking and c) the demand curve for PM might have been lowering, and Apple saw this and made their move at the right time, even though it didn't look like they waited until demand had dried up.
Still, Apple seems to be playing its cards w.r.t iPod very deftly. I expect lower priced models, but almost certainly not until after the new year. Especially if they expect to sell everyone they can make (regular and Mini) at their current prices for the Christmas shopping season.
(a) Fine, go out into the market (ANY market) and look at product lineups. There are high end products and there are low end products, and they are usually from the same company.
(b) I don't think so -- the music player market is much more diverse than the market for Macintoshes. Everybody listens to music, but only a tiny percentage want a Macintosh.
(c) Nonsense, Apple has had a high-end / low-end strategy since 1987. And the low end came first.
There is plenty of room in the market for Apple to have a low cost, low capacity unit based on removable flash media. The resistance to the "jiggle factor" others have mentioned is just a bonus. And the sooner they establish their dominance in that segment of the market, the better. Otherwise bigger fish will come along and gobble it up.
Comments
Originally posted by mmmpie
And Ive got a bridge to sell you.
Just 'cos some moron expands VRAM to virtual RAM doesnt mean anything. Ill take Apples use of standard industry acronyms at face value ( vram => video ram ) any day.
Hey, I'm just reporting what I've read. The problem is that there are NO official specs for it on Apple's site, as far as I can tell. It's not one of the models listed on the iMac hardware page, and there are no specs at all for any iMac G5 under the Support->Specifications, as of midnight EST last night.
Originally posted by Programmer
The key is price. The existing iPods are too expensive
I'm sorry, but you are wrong.
Assuming (correctly) that OEM/wholesale prices are cheaper, and that Apple could swing a big dicsount on quantity, etc. Apple MIGHT be able to do a $149 iPod Mini Mini (2GB...500 songs in your pocket). But we have to remember the other components too. If Apple shoots for a gross margin of like 15% on these guys, total cost has to be $126 (or less)...and that includes the drive/card, display, case, chips, packaging.
Now Apple does appear to have the clout to be able to get suppliers to do what they want right now on the iPod. So chances might be better than I think.
That said, I don't know why anyone (except techo-geeks and "spec whores") cares what the technology inside the thing is (I don't)...just that it works...and works well.
So you might say that you don't care what's inside, but if you want the device to do certain things, or utilize certain existing equipment that you already own, then you actually do. Maybe it is better said that some people have to have certain brand names and the latest greatest in technology, just for bragging rights.
Price is important. If you're Apple, you won't sacrifice quality for the lowest possible $$ though. On the other hand, if you're Dell ... who cares, there are more customers out there who don't know about equipment, don't care about what's inside, and prefer to remain ignorant about the technology (heh, keeps me employed). As has been voiced time and again on these forums, Apple does charge more, and have higher margins. If Apple was as large as Dell, they wouldn't have to, but they're not and therefore have a more difficult time lowering prices. I don't agree with all they do, but I at least understand some of their reasons for it. /<venting>
BTW, the views above aren't targetted at anyone in these forums, your points just reminded me of the folks that I've had to support and deal with over the years.
The Flash Media Music Player Arena (I'd like to call Apple's, iPod Micro) has more competition in it, but like has been said ... for Apple to do well, the value is going to have to be there with the typical Apple Innovation.
Originally posted by MacJedai
Take, for instance, Sony's misguided attempt at an iPod using their proprietary "ATRAC3" format (which doesn't have the quality or the open standard of the AAC format), and Sony Ericsson's Flash player I mentioned before (it uses Sony's proprietary memory stick technology that doesn't have the capacity of CF cards)....if you want the device to do certain things, or utilize certain existing equipment that you already own, then you actually do.
Perhaps it is only a matter of semantics, but it seems to me that these concerns are less about what is inside than what it can do. For example, "If I buy the SONY device and have my music in the ATRAC3 format, I won't be able to play it on any other device, and I don't like that very much." (A trait shared by the protected AAC files of the iTMS BTW.)
Another example is "SONY's product uses a memory stick device that I cannot use with any of my other devices...and vice-versa. I don't like that very much."
These talk about capabilities.
The issue of whether the closed/sealed iPod has CF, a hard drive or a really tiny elephant (with great memory) shouldn't matter much to consumers. Similarly, issues of price and quality matter. If you wish to buy a cheaper device and it craps out after 6 months, instead of a "more expensive" device that lasts for 2 years. These are all factors that can be stated in simple, non-technical terms. I don't care if the iPod (or whatever) is made of the finest plastic, metal, etc. known to mankind. I care that it works and works well.
Now, one can say that knowing some things (i.e., the use of titanium vs. plastic) would likely lead to more durability, helps, but there are limits to this. I don't know that CF vs. hard drive matters much to me (or anyone for that matter). What matters to me is functionality, quality and price (which can all be summarized in the single word "value"). How the vendor (Apple or whoevere) achieves this is of very little consequence to me.
P.S. I am a techno-geek too.
I'm in agreement w/you. And you're right about the "semantics", To me ... the capabilities are defined by what's inside (because I'm a technogeek and I want to learn, strangely enough I'm that way about physics and other things as well). To the average user, you're right, they only want to know what it's used for (not why ... they don't want to learn). Hence my comment about keeping me in a job (one of my jobs).
I also appreciated your picking up on my use of the word "value", it was intentional and I thought about explaining it when I wrote the post, but opted not to. It feels good to know that some else was on the same wavelength!
Thx,
Jedai
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
I'm sorry, but you are wrong.
No I'm not. I've considered buying one several times, but I always give up the notion when I look at the bottom line. I don't need even 1 GB of space (never mind 20 or 40 GB), and I won't pay even close to what they are selling the cheapest iPod for.
You're right, I don't care if the device has CF or an HD (aside from standard technology geek curiosity). What I do care about is price and quality. If by not including a hard disk Apple can slice off a big chunk of the cost then I'll buy one.
Originally posted by Programmer
No I'm not. I've considered buying one several times, but I always give up the notion when I look at the bottom line. I don't need even 1 GB of space (never mind 20 or 40 GB), and I won't pay even close to what they are selling the cheapest iPod for.
Okay. So the prices is too high for YOU. But the price is not too high in general (for the market).
Originally posted by Programmer
I don't need even 1 GB of space (never mind 20 or 40 GB),
It's not an iPod you want then.
Originally posted by krispie
It's not an iPod you want then.
Well, this might be a little unfair. I think he's saying he'd like much of the niceties of the iPod without so much of the capacity or cost. I am certain that Apple is trying to figure out ways to address the entire entire spectrum of customers.
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Okay. So the prices is too high for YOU. But the price is not too high in general (for the market).
Its not too high for the market that is buying the iPod, but that doesn't mean there aren't a whole lot of people like me out there.
Originally posted by Programmer
Its not too high for the market that is buying the iPod, but that doesn't mean there aren't a whole lot of people like me out there.
This is a dead certainty.
But you're unlikely to see lower prices until a) Apple can do so profitably, and b) they stop selling all of what they can make at the current prices.
However,
If Apple is selling them as fast as they can make them anyway, there's no reason to lower prices until demand falls off or they can manufacture more.
If I remember right, the rumor was that the iPod mini would settle down to around $200 after production ramped up, but since they still can't keep the iPod mini in stock, why bother?
In short, for the sake of me and Programmer, please quit buying iPods.
edit: And I just realized that that's what Chris just said... lol
Originally posted by Tuttle
I use my iPod almost always for less than an hour at a time. I would love to have a 'gym iPod' or a 'I don't care that much if it's stolen iPod' in addition to my current bigger and more expensive iPod. A lot like keeping an old car around that you don't car who bangs up in the parking lot.
I agree there is space for an iPod with a different target audience.
A lot of commuters use an iPod for a couple of hours a day, at most. Flash would also use less power.
Imagine using your iPod for an hour or 2 (on the train to work, at the gym, going for a walk... whatever...), then when you get home your iPod automatically "reshuffles" the songs on your iPod. So you've got an iPod playlist that's got more songs than the iPod fits, but during sync it removes the songs you've listened to (or skipped) since the last sync and puts some new ones on.
Add to this wireless/Airport sync? - as soon as you're home it updates your songs. Or iPod radio? I think there are possibilities.
I can't imagine how light this thing would be without a hard drive! Finally an iPod that you can TRULY go running/hiking around with.
1) Flash-based iPod means simpler electronics (no need for buffer memory), and more reliability (no hard drive crashes anymore).
2) iTunes is the big picture here. Whether you like it or not, there is an aboundance of different cheap mp3 players that will play the wma files of the other online music stores. You need to make sure that people won't get used to buying from them, but will rather use iTunes. Since iTunes will only work with iPods (at least, until Apple licenses Fairplay), you need a cheap iPod to sell to those people that will never pay the high prices that an iPod commands right now.
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
But you're unlikely to see lower prices until a) Apple can do so profitably, and b) they stop selling all of what they can make at the current prices.
While (a) is true, (b) isn't necessarily. Apple didn't make PowerMacs until they stopped selling and then switched to iMacs.
Originally posted by Programmer
While (a) is true, (b) isn't necessarily. Apple didn't make PowerMacs until they stopped selling and then switched to iMacs.
Yes, but you must consider three things: a) two totally different products (iPod and Mac), b) iMac and PM serve different customers where iPod is pretty homogenous comparatively speaking and c) the demand curve for PM might have been lowering, and Apple saw this and made their move at the right time, even though it didn't look like they waited until demand had dried up.
Still, Apple seems to be playing its cards w.r.t iPod very deftly. I expect lower priced models, but almost certainly not until after the new year. Especially if they expect to sell everyone they can make (regular and Mini) at their current prices for the Christmas shopping season.
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Yes, but you must consider three things: a) two totally different products (iPod and Mac), b) iMac and PM serve different customers where iPod is pretty homogenous comparatively speaking and c) the demand curve for PM might have been lowering, and Apple saw this and made their move at the right time, even though it didn't look like they waited until demand had dried up.
Still, Apple seems to be playing its cards w.r.t iPod very deftly. I expect lower priced models, but almost certainly not until after the new year. Especially if they expect to sell everyone they can make (regular and Mini) at their current prices for the Christmas shopping season.
(a) Fine, go out into the market (ANY market) and look at product lineups. There are high end products and there are low end products, and they are usually from the same company.
(b) I don't think so -- the music player market is much more diverse than the market for Macintoshes. Everybody listens to music, but only a tiny percentage want a Macintosh.
(c) Nonsense, Apple has had a high-end / low-end strategy since 1987. And the low end came first.
There is plenty of room in the market for Apple to have a low cost, low capacity unit based on removable flash media. The resistance to the "jiggle factor" others have mentioned is just a bonus. And the sooner they establish their dominance in that segment of the market, the better. Otherwise bigger fish will come along and gobble it up.