Makes sense, really
and a pretty good way for Tim Cook to draw a line under Jobs-era Apple to boot
The iPod will be ten years old next month, but despite that, the much-loved music player is facing extinction. That's according to online speculation that points towards the player's steady decline, both in sales and popularity, and concludes that with no iPod announcements scheduled this year, it could finally be the end of …
and a pretty good way for Tim Cook to draw a line under Jobs-era Apple to boot
I'd best pick up one of those 160GB classics then. I have a 30GB Video that I one day intended to upgrade to a higher capacity classic. This one has lasted me a long long time with no issues and I really prefer non-touch for my iPod.
I suppose I'd better buy one before they go then. Wasn't planning to do so but I'll need a replacement sometime. The Classic does all I need it to do, stores all my music, Podcasts and audiobooks and plays them.
You can sell both apps_and_ music to iphone.istabslab.ifanbois.
Non touch not profitable 'enough' Id suggest & probably freeing up memory for bigger things too.
All about the money with apple, all about the money.
"All about the money with apple, all about the money."
Well, that's the point in a capitalist economy isn't it.? Company's aren't there for philanthropic reasons. They're there to make make money for the shareholders. A board that doesn't do that gets fired. Well not if they are called Sun (nods to Matt "Slowaris"/ "Snoreacle" Briant ;-) )
Not saying it's right but that's the way it is
As opposed to which hardware vendor?
What a load of old pony...
Can you name another publicly traded company that is not concerned first and foremost about money?
In fact apple are one of the more forward looking companies. They make these decisions precisely because they don't see a _long_term_ future for the product and consider it best to cut while the iron is hot so to speak.
Compare them to the panicked flailing about over at HP who spent billions on Palm only to throw the baby out with the bathwater within weeks of launching their first product and purely on the basis that it didn't sell immediately due to the insane pricing that their idiot management saddled it with from the outset.
A friend works for a charity that says they feed needy children, but I think they really raise money. That seems to be what they do most, with spreading guilt a distant second.
because they got them from expansys
Think about it for just a moment, iPod sales are still worth several hundred million $ per annum to Apple, and any other company with such a turnover on mp3 players, and profitability of those devices wouldn't be thinking about abandoning them.
Despite Apple's huge turnover, and this being a tiny minority of the money, it's still big money.
So why bother capping them when you are making money on them? Capping them makes even less sense.
iPhone 4S on the 4th October. Fanbois have to wait 'til next year for the 5.
Not that it'll stop the deafening squueeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Thank you Mr AC for that secret information. How clever of you to tell us something that very few people in the world actually know.
If you're not interested - then why read and then comment on it? Oh yeah... it makes you feel better to moan.
Umm, where was I moaning? I'm always interested in new technology but FWIW I do enjoy winding up fanbois.
No. I use every scrap of the space in my 160 classic. Until they can offer me the storage and the battery life of my Classic they can keep their damn touch.
Even if they did, "and they don't" I'd end up carrying what amounts to TWO iPhones. Not gonna happen.
If this goes down, all I can do is hope someone fills the empty space.
If you're running windows, get yourself one that mounts as a generic volume and use itunes agent to sync from a playlist in itunes. Sorted ;)
If you can suggest another MP3 player, that has 100+GB of storage.
My 80gb classic is on its way out, and I've been trying to work out what to do for some time. Don't want a Touch, as that would have to be the 64gb, which is far too expensive, and duplicates too much functionality of my iPhone, also, not enough storage......
I predict that the iPod Touch will increase in size until it's a direct competitor to the 7"-ish Android tablets and there won't be any more iPods... Just iPhones and two different sized iPads.
Some guy from the late-night cleaning crew?
Apple are moving away from local storage, and have been for a while now. With the rise and rise of 3G, 4G and Wifi hotspots, it's getting harder to justify stuffing masses of flash memory into every consumer electronics device Apple make. I'm sure they'd rather have that flash memory in their laptops instead.
On the other hand, wireless communication isn't as ubiquitous as many IT fanatics appear to believe.
Another issue is the availability of suitable 1.8" hard drives for the iPod Classic. At this point, I suspect Apple are pretty much the only customer ordering them in large numbers, so there probably isn't much of a future for this mechanical technology. Flash is winning the war in this sector. Pragmatically, it makes little sense to keep the Classic model.
So, there are two possible scenarios for the upcoming launch:
1. Apple are planning to beef up their flash-based devices—e.g. a 128GB iPod Touch—and kill off the Classic to avoid having the two products compete with each other.
2. Apple want to launch iCloud with a bang, and try to push customers over to a cloud-based music system instead. (Remember, iOS 5 will likely be launched at the upcoming launch, as well as a new iPhone.)
It wouldn't surprise me if Apple decided to do both.
(Also: ditching the Shuffle makes sense too. It's an aberration given Apple's usual focus on high-margin markets. There are plenty of cheap MP3 players to choose from at that price range; Apple don't _need_ to compete there.)
Compact fluorescent light bulbs.
The iPod touch.
In each case, the thing they replaced worked better. Progress? What progress?
"So why bother capping them when you are making money on them? Capping them makes even less sense."
Rather than selling the ifans a 160GB classic for £178 Apple can sell them a 64 GB touch for £296. (Amazon prices.)
Humm I am in two minds about this I love my 160GB Classic, and I am not really a fan of touch everything so I might wait till this is official and go out and buy a spare in case this one goes tits up or rush out and get one in the morning just incase.
I hope they don't kill it off, it's a nice device.
It makes sense that the "touchless" iPod will dwindle out. The Shuffle does the job, but the Nano which is the same size with a touch interface outshines it, but at a premium.
The Shuffle is a cheap and cheerful iPod, I have one that I use at gym and when cycling. It's almost industrial, it also takes life's knocks and drops with ease, quite water resistant and operating it is simple asI don't have to gawk at it to increase volume or move between tracks. I also have a 30Gb Video and that docks directly into my VW's armrest and allows me to control it from the car's radio and steering wheel controls.
Another factor is that almost everyone buying a smartphone of any variety gets a decent MP3 player by default, although some, myself included prefer "stand alone" MP3 players because as great as a phone based MP3 players are, MP3 playback does chew into one's battery life.
It would be sad to see the end of the clickwheel based iPods as so many great devices were based around them, like my VW audio system and my Philips alarm clock which docks and charges my 30GB iPod Video, but has my iPhone whinging that "charging is not supported by this device" when docked into the Philips radio/alarm/iPod dock gizmo
Well, technology moves on and I will always cherish my beloved 1Gb Shuffle and 30Gb Video, they've certainly not outlived their "usefulness" just yet.
I also use my ipod in the gym and in the car, the controls are simple and the music playback and battery life is fine.
I can only imagine how much more difficult it would be to use a smartphone in such a situation, not to mention illegal in the car (unless it docks with the cars head-unit, but that would mean having an up-to-date headunit and compatible phone)
We've had various iPods over the years and recently got our first Touch. It's a great little computer but a compromised music player. In the car or on the move I can use the clickwheel without needing to look at a screen.
Since I've got an Android phone, I don't need the extra functions of a Touch and the current Nano is godawful to use. I'm with the 'buying a Classic the moment the clickwheel's axed' brigade. Either that or hope that Sony or Microsoft bring a good dedicated media player that I can switch to.
You had me until you mentioned Microsoft.
The zune 80gb has always been a far superior mp3 player than the iPod classic of similar capacity, but then apple released the iPod touch and Microsoft decided to follow them down that route whilst ignoring the market for market for large capacity devices. So they ended up with a technically superior piece of kit that couldn't compete with the touch for apps and functionality or with the iPod classic for capacity. Why should people bother with it then?
My 160GB Classic is fine, but I do have app envy. Recently I aquired an iPad, so that takes care of the app envy! Before that I was hanging on for a 128GB iPod Touch as I have ~50GB of stuff at the moment, and 64GB doesn't offer much expansion.
Though as Sean Baggaley also states the forthcoming iCloud could usher in deliberately capped storage on iPods/iPhones.
So I'll just wait and see what happens next week, though even if they do release a 128GB iPod Touch I think I might soldier on with the Classic for another year.
But honestly, even with "4G" (whatever that means) around the corner, your music is not going to be in the cloud unless magical battery and infinite bandwidth (or spreading codes for WCDMA) appear.
The air interface ain't got the capacity.
I've got a classic (160) - love it to bits. More on there than any of the other players could take (90GB or so of music plus other stuff). When the battery runs flat (which takes a **long** time) the phone is still working... Which is nice.
I do hope apple aren't considering this, seems to me they've got the classic 160 pitched in just the right place to keep a share of a diminishing Market - but a valuable one. Hey ho, I guess it'll all go where the masses decide it will, so who knows? I'll just have to save some pennies and buy another classic.
If it comes true though, get yourself stocked up on spares and offer repair services. Great business in these recessionary times. Recase, rebattery, redrive... New iPod!
....unless they can come out with a Touch with similar capacity. Like other people who have commented, I have a 120gb classic and it is full of my fave music. I love just putting it on 'shuffle' and being surprised by what it finds.
There is no other manufacturer producing high-capacity devices and I just don't trust the cloud....
a) to always be there
b) to be free (ie me not being charged for using it) once I have paid for the music itself.
If Apple abandons it I hope someone else (Creative Labs? iRiver?) fills the obvious void they leave behind.
Bizarre story. You talk about how the iPod is facing extinction but then go on to say the iPod Nano will become the bottom end product. So, in fact, the iPod isn't disappearing at all - there'll still be the iPod Nano and the ipod touch. A desperate non-story if I ever saw one. Does the Reg have an Editor?
The report is gently ribbing the online rumour mill. Not making any claims on our account.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017