Support NeoGAF

[Chittagong]

Total letdown after all the secrecy

At an invitation only event Apple has released their new MP3 player called the iPod. iPod is the size of a deck of cards. 2.4" wide by 4" tall by .78" thick 6.5 ounces. 5 GB HDD, 10 hr battery life, charged via FireWire. Works as a firewire drive as well. Works in conjunctions with iTunes 2. Here are Live updates". No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame

Ok, I guess I'll be the first to make the obligatory bad pun.
Will people who enjoy using this be iPod People?

I have to agree this is a let-down. For all the secrecy and even Steve Jobs promise of something "revolutionary", as an Apple fanatic I am unimpressed. I was expecting something quite a bit cooler then an MP3 player.

So, basically, destroy all its advantages and turn it into an Archos MP3 player.

Apple would do this...why?

Its cool...but its not that cool...

It'll be tough wearing them alongside the "rose-colored" glasses that you will need for this to seem like a worthwhile product.

What a let-down, geez!!

I agree. When I heard that the Apple invitations to the press conference read "This coming Tuesday, Apple invites you to the unveiling of a breakthrough digital device", I was expecting at the minimum practical speaker independent voice recognition, and at the extreme, some kind of direct neural interface. This is such a letdown. There is nothing "breakthrough" about streamlining an interface, reducing the size and upping the bandwidth on what have basically become commodity items. The size is cool and so's the design and all that. IMO, they should have released this before the new PB's. Now, _THAT_ got me excited. I had a really hard time keeping my credit cards in my pocket last week. WHEW! The only reason I don't have one of them 133Mhz monsters right now is I decided to wait for the DVD/CDRW combo drive. After all that frenzy last week, this iPod thing sort of lets the air out of my Apple tires, so to speak.

Poor UI

Agree with the article poster - Lame. Not only is this a lackluster MP3 unit (which by virtue of being firewire will be limited to Apple Mac owners), but it has virtually no UI wizardry that might define it as an Apple product.
A total waste of time.

Steve Jobs is a disaster choice for Apple

The ex-NCR exec who had (fairly successfully) cleaned house at Apple after its disastrous slide in the early nineties (during which it had been so close to bankruptcy it had to take investment from Microsoft!) saw Jobs coming, was unable to prevent his return, and split.

My understanding is that Jobs inherited the iMac/G3 from Amelio - he did not create them. But he was happy to take credit for them anyway. Depending on how you interpret Pixar, Jobs has a consistent track record for failure. Regardless of what you think of Jobs, Apple's glory days were over before Regan left office.

Sales potential, close to zero

Raise your hand if you have iTunes ...

Raise your hand if you have a FireWire port ...

Raise your hand if you have both ...

Raise your hand if you have $400 to spend on a cute Apple device ...

There is Apple's market. Pretty slim, eh? I don't see many sales in the future of iPod.

Want portable Music? Get a MiniDisc.

Well let's see here.... I think I can tell you why iPod is iLAME. Here's why I won't be buying one.. Out of the four computers in my house...

None of them are Macs.
None of them have Firewire.
This means that none of them can run iTunes.
This also means that none of them can charge the thing.

You want portable music? Get a portable MiniDisc player.

You can get 5 hours of music on 1 MiniDisc and 1 MiniDisc costs 1.50 (using MDLP mode).

*And* I can record to it from my stereo, my Wintel box *or* my Linux box. *AND* it's full digital recording from a CD-player or computer with a digital audio output.

http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?threshold=1&mode=flat&commentsort=0&op=Change&sid=22940

DUNNO ABOUT U GUYS, SEEMS LIKE A STILLBORN TO ME

 

[teiresias]

Just because something sells doesn't mean it's technically a good product or a better product than the competition.

I own an iPod, just pointing out the fallacy in your reasoning for mocking the comments.

 

[Oldschoolgamer]

The amount of people owned is astounding. Still though, their are some better products out there, from what I gathered.

 

[Borys]

:lol

That brings back the memories of the infamous HALO 2 SALES CROW THREAD.

I'll bet you $20 bucks. No way Halo2 will OUTSELL Halo. Are you on drugs? The numbers and reality are against it. HALO is cheaper. Halo is already out there and impossible to surpass (if anything, new gamers will also buy HALO after playing 2 or before playing 2)

and finally there wasn't modchips when HALO was released :ZING!:

you paypal me the money.

OKTHXUBYE

Come on people, PayPal him the monies :lol

 

[Manics]

The amount of people owned is astounding. Still though, their are some better products out there, from what I gathered.

Debating whether or not the iPod is the best mp3 player is not the point. The point is Apple did something revolutionary by bringing the mp3 player to the mainstream and all those idiots back in 2001 were owned.

 

[Macam]

133Mhz monsters!

Truth be told, outside of the title, that was the only give away that this was an older collection of comments; otherwise, I would've just presumed this was just another iPod hating thread from GAF.

 

[pnjtony]

aren't iPods USB now though?

 

[GhaleonEB]

:lol

That brings back the memories of the infamous HALO 2 SALES CROW THREAD.

That's was a great, great thread.

Those comments above are classic. :lol

 

[pinkatrophe]

Just because something sells doesn't mean it's technically a good product or a better product than the competition.

I own an iPod, just pointing out the fallacy in your reasoning for mocking the comments.

Yeah, but the amount of their belief that was constituted simply by tech specs without any consideration of other selling factors is still laughable. It just shows how you can't always depend on hardcore fanbases to predict what will sell to the masses.

 

[Beer Monkey]

Apple had to listen to the geeks and drop the firewire and add PC support.

 

[terrene]

Um, the v1 iPod *was* a piece of shit, and an overpriced one at that. They sold like shit for the first year, and with good cause:

 

[sonicfan]

I will say I was skeptical at the time. I had assumed that they were going to try and use more of the gaming console model, not make much money on the hardware (or lose money), but try to make it on the software (music downloads). I just didn't see how people, especially back in the Napster days, were going to pay 99 cents to download a song. And even there, the music company would get most of the profits, not Apple. I just didn't expect the whole "fashion" aspect of it, and that they would actually make money selling the hardware.........

Sooooo, I guess I might have been wrong then, eh?

 

[Slurpy2k20]

Message-boarders are always so wrong about everything, because they are so out of touch.

 

[Lo-Volt]

aren't iPods USB now though?

Yes.

 

[AtomicShroom]

Well these arguments might have stood still if the iPod wasn't now using USB (along with FireWire), and wasn't now also compatible with PCs.

Really, if it had stayed FireWire-only and Mac-only, it would have bombed.

 

[Afro Thunder]

Message-boarders are always so wrong about everything, because they are so out of touch.

Irony?

 

[Danj]

Irony?

"It's like goldy and bronzy, only it's made of iron"

/baldrick
//I own an ipod too

 

[medrew]

Message-boarders are always so wrong about everything, because they are so out of touch.

Or maybe because there are so many 'messge-boarders' that they are going to be people wrong about everything.
Hindsight often makes even the smartest people look stupid because of the uncertainty of events. Be it great products doing poorly, or bad ones doing well.

 

[shantyman]

Um, the v1 iPod *was* a piece of shit, and an overpriced one at that. They sold like shit for the first year, and with good cause:

Uh, no it wasn't a piece of shit. It was Mac only for over a year, which obviously limited its sales potential. Windows users were making hacks to get them to work with PCs before iTunes for Windows was released. The gen1 iPod works as well as a music player as any current model.

It was expensive, yes, but it was the first one released. What did you expect? It was the first HD based music player that was that small and used the 2.5" drives.

 

[shantyman]

Well these arguments might have stood still if the iPod wasn't now using USB (along with FireWire), and wasn't now also compatible with PCs.

Really, if it had stayed FireWire-only and Mac-only, it would have bombed.

To follow up on my other response- it did not bomb before it was on Windows- it was a very successfult product with a niche saized market (Mac Users). It needed Windows to cross over to the real mainstream and become the ubiquitous item it is today.

 

[levious]

I agree. When I heard that the Apple invitations to the press conference read "This coming Tuesday, Apple invites you to the unveiling of a breakthrough digital device", I was expecting at the minimum practical speaker independent voice recognition, and at the extreme, some kind of direct neural interface.

Awesome, reminds me of that late-night Ginger/It thread we had with people debating the feasibility of a teleportation device.

 

[Beer Monkey]

The amazing thing is that after all these revisions the feckwads at Apple still haven't implemented gapless playback even though Rockbox proves that it can be done. Listen to Dark Side of the Moon and it sounds like somebody took scissors to it.

(60GB Video owner)

 

[Triumph]

:lol

That brings back the memories of the infamous HALO 2 SALES CROW THREAD.



Come on people, PayPal him the monies :lol

Oh sweet comeuppance!

I've saved some choice quotes for use in about 3-4 years about the Wii's sales potential. "#1 in Japan, easily." Shit like that, it makes me chuckle.

 

[jarosh]

Oh sweet comeuppance!

I've saved some choice quotes for use in about 3-4 years about the Wii's sales potential. "#1 in Japan, easily." Shit like that, it makes me chuckle.

what if this very post of yours will become a 'choice quote' one day?

 

[jenov4]

It's always fun to go back and read these things, but hindsight is always 20/20.

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

The amazing thing is that after all these revisions the feckwads at Apple still haven't implemented gapless playback even though Rockbox proves that it can be done. Listen to Dark Side of the Moon and it sounds like somebody took scissors to it.

(60GB Video owner)

Besides Rio, what other player has gapless? I have a Rio Karma, and it does gapless, and it's awesome, but who else does it?

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

One interesting thing to note:

Those who doom it to failure generally are making the same mistke: Looking at the short-term here-and-now limitations, and not the upside potential, should the bugs be worked out.

Yeah, $400 for 5GB of music that you need a Mac to use is likely to fail. But those things (price, capacity, compatibility) are not core to the concept and were all changed shortly. Not to mention that the biggest innovation-- HD MP3 palyback at pocket size-- was widely imitated almost immediately. The Nomads went from CD-shaped to pocket-shaped based on the iPod's vision, I would guess.

Now, apply that fallacious-thinking model to videogames, and you can see why Sony, Nintendo or MS could all end up successes in the next generation. The price and currently-known software are the most transitory of elements of the systems. The Wimote, the online, and the media-center functions could all take off.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

Besides Rio, what other player has gapless? I have a Rio Karma, and it does gapless, and it's awesome, but who else does it?

Anything you can put Rockbox on, potentially (iPod, Archos, iRiver). But that's 3rd party firmware.


PS: I use rockbox, and love it. www.rockbox.org

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

Anything you can put Rockbox on, potentially (iPod, Archos, iRiver). But that's 3rd party firmware.


PS: I use rockbox, and love it. www.rockbox.org

Yeah, I used Rockbox bach when I had an Archos player and it was nice, but the OP that I was responding to was complaining that Apple didn't release an iPod with gapless play, but to my knowledge, Rio is the only ones to do that so far. I know iRiver was planning on releasing firmware with gapless for some of their players at one point, but not sure if it was ever released, and I seem to recall reports that it was buggy as hell in the beta firmware. So, I'm still wondering. Who has released a player with gapless with official firmware, other than Rio?

 

[The Faceless Master]

Um, the v1 iPod *was* a piece of shit, and an overpriced one at that. They sold like shit for the first year, and with good cause:

:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

original poster owned!

o'reilly like spin on the first post didn't pass scrutiny...

sure it sold eventually, but the ipod that sold so well wasnt the one announced as mac only and firewire only that everyone was mocking!

 

[CurseoftheGods]

 

[Beer Monkey]

Besides Rio, what other player has gapless? I have a Rio Karma, and it does gapless, and it's awesome, but who else does it?

I had a Karma for two years and then it shit the bed. Um, there's a Sony that does gapless ATRAC. I'm not sure what else is gapless out there. But how does that excuse Apple? There is no excluse for a 2006 MP3 player missing playback functionality that a primitive 1982 CD player had. We aren't talking about rare obscure music here, bands like Pink Floyd, Primus, Zappa, Beatles, INXS, Who, Green Day, RHCP and a ton more have albums that segue. This is basic playback functionality.

If all of Apple's unpopular friends decide to jump off a bridge, should they as well?

I do use Rockbox some but it eats battery like hell. Hopefully the release version around November addresses this and some other issues.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

sure it sold eventually, but the ipod that sold so well wasnt the one announced as mac only and firewire only that everyone was mocking!

Yeah, becuase releasing a *cable* and porting iTunes to make it PC compatible was something nobody could anticipate....

Nope. Those original naysayers were 100% correct until Apple pulled the completely unexpected move of adding PC support. Who would have ever thougth they'd want to expand their market like that!? With such a huge hurdle (a cable, software) to overcome!?

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

I didn't mean to excuse Apple's lack of gapless playback (I think that sucks), merely to mention that anybody who wants it could use rockbox on one of those players.

The battery life on the iPod version is bad-- I think it'll get better once it's out of beta. But the battery life on the other versions is supposed to be as good as their native firmware.

 

[shantyman]

Now, apply that fallacious-thinking model to videogames, and you can see why Sony, Nintendo or MS could all end up successes in the next generation. The price and currently-known software are the most transitory of elements of the systems. The Wimote, the online, and the media-center functions could all take off.

Where does Sony fit in?

:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

original poster owned!

o'reilly like spin on the first post didn't pass scrutiny...

sure it sold eventually, but the ipod that sold so well wasnt the one announced as mac only and firewire only that everyone was mocking!

And the difference is? Oh wait, the wheel was different from 1st to 2nd gen iPod? When iPods first came out for Windows, they were firewire only. Don't try to look so foolish.

 

[Beer Monkey]

I didn't mean to excuse Apple's lack of gapless playback (I think that sucks), merely to mention that anybody who wants it could use rockbox on one of those players.

The battery life on the iPod version is bad-- I think it'll get better once it's out of beta. But the battery life on the other versions is supposed to be as good as their native firmware.

To be clear, the only reason I bought an iPod when my Karma died was the option to run Rockbox. I need the 60gb of storage, that's why I didn't go with another Rockbox-ready player. I'm sure they'll get the power management issue addressed at some point.

 

[djkimothy]

The post about "No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame" was made by CmdrTaco on Slashdot and he will never live that down. Classic.

I just gave my old G1 iPod with the 5 GB HDD to my girlfriend and got myslef the 4 GB Nano. Smaller capacity but man it's beautiful.

Why is this posted? Are we gearing up for a new iPod? I'd be pissed if that were true!

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

To be clear, the only reason I bought an iPod when my Karma died was the option to run Rockbox. I need the 60gb of storage, that's why I didn't go with another Rockbox-ready player. I'm sure they'll get the power management issue addressed at some point.

Yeah, I went iPod for storage and phyisical size, not becuase it was an Ipod. So when I found rockbox a couple of months ago, I was happy to try it.



Shantyman: Sony-- media center (featuring Blu-Ray)

 

[The Faceless Master]

nd the difference is? Oh wait, the wheel was different from 1st to 2nd gen iPod? When iPods first came out for Windows, they were firewire only. Don't try to look so foolish.

and the difference is the chart that owned you and the OP, they didn't sell until they made those so called minor changes...

spin spin spin spin spin


:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

I had a Karma for two years and then it shit the bed. Um, there's a Sony that does gapless ATRAC. I'm not sure what else is gapless out there. But how does that excuse Apple? There is no excluse for a 2006 MP3 player missing playback functionality that a primitive 1982 CD player had. We aren't talking about rare obscure music here, bands like Pink Floyd, Primus, Zappa, Beatles, INXS, Who, Green Day, RHCP and a ton more have albums that segue. This is basic playback functionality.

If all of Apple's unpopular friends decide to jump off a bridge, should they as well?

I do use Rockbox some but it eats battery like hell. Hopefully the release version around November addresses this and some other issues.

I'm not saying that Apple shouldn't implement, it would be a nice function, but you have to understand that there is nearly zero demand for such a feature, it does hit the battery hard, and when no one else is doing it either, there is probably a pretty good reason for it.

Oh, and lets be clear. 1982 CD players did not "do gapless". There simply weren't gaps on the CD. Implementing the same thing with an MP3 player is a lot more difficult technically speaking.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

Faceless: I think the point is that anybody who believed they wouldn't overcome those issues was an idiot, as time has proven.

I don't see anybody in those quotes saying "man, what a great idea if they can expand it beyond Mac users, which seems inevitable and fairly easy to do."

 

[djkimothy]

Well apple didn't release a windows iPod till 2002 and it didn't really help their sales.

According to the graph, iPod sales didn't pick up till 2003, ding ding! That's when the iTunes Music Store opened up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPod

 

[AlanHemberger]

the iPod still is a waste of time.

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

the iPod still is a waste of time.

Do you feel this about just the iPod or all MP3 players in general?

I still use my Karma a lot, but I'm planning on upgrading to the next gen iPod version when available, and I must say the iPod is one nice music player, greatly enhanced with it's connection with the iTunes Music Store and all the accessories available for it.

 

[Beer Monkey]

I'm not saying that Apple shouldn't implement, it would be a nice function, but you have to understand that there is nearly zero demand for such a feature, it does hit the battery hard, and when no one else is doing it either, there is probably a pretty good reason for it.

Oh, and lets be clear. 1982 CD players did not "do gapless". There simply weren't gaps on the CD. Implementing the same thing with an MP3 player is a lot more difficult technically speaking.

Bullshit, re: it hitting the battery hard. The Karma had better-than-iPod battery life with gapless. The battery issue with Rockbox on the iPod has nothing to do with the gapless, it has to do with the fact that they aren't addressing the power-management features of the hardware. The battery issue is present regardless of whether or not you even have gapless enabled.

And it isn't that hard to do, hobbyist developers have done it with stuff like Rockbox, MPD for Linux, other media players, and plugins for Winamp. With all their resources Apple could do it in no time if they wanted. The fact is that in the DMP business, that Apple doesn't give a shit what their customers ask for because they hold the majority of the marketshare. They are kind of the Microsoft of the music player business.

 

[shantyman]

and the difference is the chart that owned you and the OP, they didn't sell until they made those so called minor changes...

spin spin spin spin spin


:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

You obviously can not read. Look what I wrote above:

To follow up on my other response- it did not bomb before it was on Windows- it was a very successfult product with a niche saized market (Mac Users). It needed Windows to cross over to the real mainstream and become the ubiquitous item it is today.

No one was owned. Net nerds and geeks blasted it when it was announced and it went on the become the top consumer electronics device of thae past 5 years. Why does it matter that it took Windows support to do this? Let me think here... it doesn't. Your logic is poor and it exposes you as an Apple/iPod troll.

 

[terrene]

Uh, no it wasn't a piece of shit. It was Mac only for over a year, which obviously limited its sales potential. Windows users were making hacks to get them to work with PCs before iTunes for Windows was released. The gen1 iPod works as well as a music player as any current model.

It was expensive, yes, but it was the first one released. What did you expect? It was the first HD based music player that was that small and used the 2.5" drives.

Yes, it was a piece of shit. $400 for a 5gb player in 2002 was outrageous. Particularly since you couldn't even change the ****ing battery. That was the year I paid $300 for a 20gb Creative Zen. That was right about the time they announced the 10gb for $500 FU*KING DOLLARS.

Oh, also, they started selling them for Windows that year. Nobody bought them until 2004, two years later.

Fiscal year iPods sold
2002 381,000
2003 939,000
2004 4,416,000
2005 22,497,000
Total 28,233,000

Yeah, it was short-sighted to dismiss the iPod out of hand, but it *was* a ridiculous piece of shit in the beginning.

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

Bullshit, re: it hitting the battery hard. The Karma had better-than-iPod battery life with gapless. The battery issue with Rockbox on the iPod has nothing to do with the gapless, it has to do with the fact that they aren't addressing the power-management features of the hardware. The battery issue is present regardless of whether or not you even have gapless enabled.

And it isn't that hard to do, hobbyist developers have done it with stuff like Rockbox, MPD for Linux, other media players, and plugins for Winamp. With all their resources Apple could do it in no time if they wanted. The fact is that in the DMP business, that Apple doesn't give a shit what their customers ask for because they hold the majority of the marketshare. They are kind of the Microsoft of the music player business.

I seem to recall some early Karma tests that showed a marked difference in using gapless for playback as to having it turned off. They claimed that it required more caching to make it work or something. Perhaps it was ironed out some on later firmware editions, but regardless, the Karma has great battery life, I'll grant you that, and a feature set that is mostly unmatched to this day in music players.

I'd contend that there are very few people actually asking for gapless playback however, which is why it isn't a priority to most people. It's a fun feature for people who are really really into their music, but for the average person, it's a non-factor. Hell, most people don't even have any CD's to take advantage of it anyway. I write this as someone who does like gapless on the Karma, and have enjoyed a number of concert CD's played back gapless btw. I just think it's a silly feature to hammer on Apple about when it's not done all that often in all the DAP's released, and is mostly a gimmick for an extremely small share of the market.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

Terene: Agreed, but as I noted, the dismissals all focus on the transient aspects of the device, not the core concept. That's what makes them idiots. The biggest problems with the iPod were battery life and price, both of which dramatically improved.

You may ask yourself why the iPod has beaten out the Zen family for so long (I owned one, too, btw) and it's not becuase "people are idiots." It's becuase Apple knows better than armchair analysts what people want.

 

[Beer Monkey]

I'd contend that there are very few people actually asking for gapless playback however, which is why it isn't a priority to most people. It's a fun feature for people who are really really into their music, but for the average person, it's a non-factor. Hell, most people don't even have any CD's to take advantage of it anyway. I write this as someone who does like gapless on the Karma, and have enjoyed a number of concert CD's played back gapless btw. I just think it's a silly feature to hammer on Apple about when it's not done all that often in all the DAP's released, and is mostly a gimmick for an extremely small share of the market.

Hanging around at the Lounge and other sites I've never seen a single feature that was more requested. Hell, there are petitions for chrissakes. If you think it's a gimmick then we aren't going to see eye to eye on this at all, so there's probably little point in continuing the discussion. Thousands of albums were conceived and engineered to be listened to without gaps, and that's not even bringing classical and jazz into the picture, or even stuff like techno/dance mix discs. Those who download live jam band music, geez, they may as well forget about it.