PDA

View Full Version : iPod Mini in the Media and on TV?


MacRumors
Jan 12, 2004, 10:30 PM
A week after the introduction of the iPod Mini's, the initial furor appears to be dying down. While several have argued concerns about the price, one Wall Street Journal Column (Paid) (http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB107324444870586100,00.html?mod=gadgets%5Fprimary%5Fhs%5Flt) offers an alternative perspective:

We don't want to sound like some annoying old relative, but these critics missed the rather elementary fact that different people care about different things. For every buyer of an MP3 player who cares about capacity, there's another one who cares about size. Or style. Or both.
.....
And for plenty of music fans there's no real difference between 1,000 songs and 3,750 -- they're both "enough." As one Slashdotter who saw the light wrote, some people "can't justify $299 just for space, but might justify $249 for style."

Apple does appear to be committed in promoting the new Mini which will be appearing in several television shows in the next 6 to 8 weeks, according to sources.

Regardless, time will tell if Apple has further success with the iPod Mini. Readers are reminded that negative initial reactions are common. Some quotes from the initial iPod Release in October 2001 (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=500):

- "I still can't believe this! All this hype for something so ridiculous! Who cares about an MP3 player?"
- "All that hype for an MP3 player? Break-thru digital device? The Reality Distiortion Field™ is starting to warp Steve's mind if he thinks for one second that this thing is gonna take off."
- "Better bring that price down or you wont sell any of these babies"

jwhitnah
Jan 12, 2004, 10:33 PM
Score 5 stars. Insightful.

yoman
Jan 12, 2004, 10:35 PM
this is why i enjoy visiting macrumors

MGnards
Jan 12, 2004, 10:43 PM
I love this topic... Those three reviews on the bottom made me laugh out loud-especially considering all of the posters probably have iPods by now...
Definitely good points raised... those of us who need space for a few thousand songs can be happy with our iPods, and go on our merry way. But 249 for everything the mini offers is a hell of a good deal, compared to everything else out there.

andyduncan
Jan 12, 2004, 10:44 PM
28,567th sign of the apocalypse: a slashdot comment makes it into the WSJ.

Score -54: troll

ibjoshua
Jan 12, 2004, 10:45 PM
Originally posted by MGnards
I love this topic... Those three reviews on the bottom made me laugh out loud-especially considering all of the posters probably have iPods by now...
Definitely good points raised... those of us who need space for a few thousand songs can be happy with our iPods, and go on our merry way. But 249 for everything the mini offers is a hell of a good deal, compared to everything else out there.

ditto
i_b_joshua

~Shard~
Jan 12, 2004, 10:50 PM
Yep, I agree - it's funny to read those 3 posts on the original iPod, and then realize that so many simliar comments have been made so far about the iPod minis. Oh well, time will tell. I for one never expressed any negative feelings towards the minis, and from the get-go I thought that they were pretty cool. But, different strokes for different folks, just as the article says - diifferent people have different priorities and different tastes, and I appreciate that.

fearless
Jan 12, 2004, 10:53 PM
Dead right. The iPod mini is a music product with a side job as a file storage device, pure and simple. People will decide, and if they want it, they'll buy it. They won't be worrying about whether the big one holds another 3,000 songs, nor will they be strapping a 120GB drive to their backs and jogging with that because it holds their music, their girlfriend's music, their friend's wedding video, and 5 eps of The Simpsons at a lower price per GB. Unless you're crossing the Antarctic, 1000 songs take longer than I care to exercise most days.

And as long as they have iTunes, they won't be listening to Microsoft bleating about their standards being the only universal ones. They'll be happy at $249 or a bit less - as they've been with anything MS put on their PCs, because it was there and it seemed to work OK. If I add up the money I've spent on lost 128MB USB keydrives, a strap-on iPod is a bargain. It's cool, it'll sell.

pyrotoaster
Jan 12, 2004, 11:00 PM
Boy, can you believe Apple bothered making an mp3 player? Like that would ever catch on?! It's been two years and what do they have to show for it? Just a 30% market share with 2 million devices sold?! Come on! ;)

NavyIntel007
Jan 12, 2004, 11:13 PM
If you look at the market, the ipod mini is priced competitively. Unfortunately, right now it doesn't look good in the line up at that price point. $199 would have been better but then again there are mac fanatics that would buy anything new Apple comes out with even if they hated it (you know you're one of them).


I would still like to see a small removable SD flash AAA powered ipod that I can take to the gym for $99.

punter
Jan 12, 2004, 11:14 PM
Originally posted by pyrotoaster
Boy, can you believe Apple bothered making an mp3 player? Like that would ever catch on?! It's been two years and what do they have to show for it? Just a 30% market share with 2 million devices sold?! Come on! ;)

very funny! Yeah the mini ipods are a solid product. Although they are more expensive then I'd like to pay, as my boss always says "after you set the initial price, it can only go down from there".

Lets hope that by next ski season they are 50 or 80 bucks cheaper, and then i'll own one for sure!

PS good work arn. I echo the posts above.

ChrisH3677
Jan 12, 2004, 11:18 PM
The story of Apple's life....

- "I still can't believe this! All this hype for something so ridiculous! Who cares about a <<Insert product name>>"
- "All that hype for a <<Insert product name>>? Break-thru <<Insert Technology type>> device? The Reality Distiortion Field™ is starting to warp Steve's mind if he thinks for one second that this thing is gonna take off."
- "Better bring that price down or you wont sell any of these babies"

Two things never change: Steve hitting the mark and fools predicting he's missed it.

:D

idkew
Jan 12, 2004, 11:24 PM
Originally posted by NavyIntel007
I would still like to see a small removable SD flash AAA powered ipod that I can take to the gym for $99.

This os offered by several other companies, why does Apple need to make it for you? iTunes (at least it used to) has support for 3rd party mp3 players, so I don't see the point. (unless you have a lot of iTMS songs...)

The new miniPod (as I like to call it) is in a very roomy niche at the moment, unlike the dense flash based mp3 player market. This will allow it to easily dominate the niche. An Apple branded flash mp3 player might have a harder time breaking through all the clutter.

Tulse
Jan 12, 2004, 11:30 PM
Although I thought the mini was interesting, I didn't see the appeal until I really read the specs. Then it hit me:

The mini is roughly the size of a credit card.

The mini is the thickness of 16 stacked credit cards, or 8 pennies.

So tiny, and yet it can hold 1,000 songs.

That is the appeal of the mini.

Brock
Jan 12, 2004, 11:30 PM
Originally posted by ChrisH3677
The story of Apple's life....

- "I still can't believe this! All this hype for something so ridiculous! Who cares about a <<Insert product name>>"
- "All that hype for a <<Insert product name>>? Break-thru <<Insert Technology type>> device? The Reality Distiortion Field™ is starting to warp Steve's mind if he thinks for one second that this thing is gonna take off."
- "Better bring that price down or you wont sell any of these babies"

Two things never change: Steve hitting the mark and fools predicting he's missed it.

:D

Haha, I agree with you guys, but Steve Jobs is not untouchable you know, Apple has made plenty of mistakes in their time. And just taking a look at the keynote, you could see that the iPod mini is no where near the brilliance of the original.

For those of you who watched the expo: Steve jobs lined up the stats of the mini against a comptative mp3 player. everything was good (16 x the music/space, better interface, etc) untill he got to the bottom and said "and its only $50 more". If he had said "and we are offering it at the SAME price." it would be unstoppable, but that $50 makes a big difference. Most of the mac enthusiasts ive spoken to without ipods or with first generation ones say they would rather spend another 50 to get the 15 gig.

But i havent said anything htat hasnt already been said 1000 times, so forgive me.

NP3
Jan 12, 2004, 11:36 PM
Originally posted by Tulse
Although I thought the mini was interesting, I didn't see the appeal until I really read the specs. Then it hit me:

The mini is roughly the size of a credit card.

The mini is the thickness of 16 stacked credit cards, or 8 pennies.

So tiny, and yet it can hold 1,000 songs.

That is the appeal of the mini.

Very true. Those 10 foot high posters really do it a disservice. Even the apple.com pics threw me at first.

steve is still way ahead of all of us :)

excellent job macrumors.

G4scott
Jan 12, 2004, 11:43 PM
Although I haven't seen them in person, I can imagine the appeal of the iPod Mini. If you have a normal sized iPod, you know that although it's small, it doesn't exactly fit in a front shirt pocket very comfortably (or at least for me it doesn't...) Just as Steve said, pocket space is very valuable, and every tiny bit they can shave off is worth it. Although the iPod mini doesn't have the biggest amount of space, no HD MP3 players get near the size of the Mini, and any flash player with the capacity would cost over $1000, and I doubt it would still be as small...

The iPod Mini is almost a completely different product. I'm thinking about getting one to replace my 10 gig Gen 2 iPod. Even though my iPod is completely full, I would be willing to organize my playlists so I could scale down to 4 gigs of space, just because I like the size of the iPod Mini... It's smaller than my cell phone. I really see the market for this thing. Sure, it's be great if it costed less, but to me, at least, it seems like a good deal for something that size...

vitaboy
Jan 12, 2004, 11:54 PM
Apple needs to have ads showing people holding the minis. Maybe they can use J.P. Prewitt (the world's most famous hand model from the movie Zoolander). :P

Matrix9180
Jan 12, 2004, 11:55 PM
(this post is -1 Offtopic)
I guess the iPod Mini answers the question "Where'd all the colors go" M&M is asking... Apple stole 'em.

Daschund
Jan 13, 2004, 12:00 AM
Finally somebody got it... The iPod is for people that want storage. The iPod mini is for the rest of the world. People don't seem to remember that not everybody is a computer geek that needs 40Gb of space. And that is probably 90% of the people out there. The other 10% can choose from the other 3 iPod models... :D

Daschund

ChrisH3677
Jan 13, 2004, 12:03 AM
Anyone who is prepared to criticize the iPod mini better check out the reaction to the original iPod first.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=500

Have a read, it is quite funny to see how sure people were it would flop. Timek where are you now??!!

Yes Steve has had some failures:
The Cube....ummm... Lisa...others?

Successes:
Apple II series
Mac
iMac
iBook
iPod
OSX
iLife apps
FCP/FCE
TiBooks/AlBooks

etc

I'm sure in 12 months mini iPod and GarageBand will be on that list

arn
Jan 13, 2004, 12:09 AM
Originally posted by ChrisH3677

Yes Steve has had some failures:
The Cube....ummm... Lisa...others?


Apple III ? (not sure Steve's involvement in that)
NeXT as a hardware company...

But I think it's a big short-sighted to attribute everything to one man (successes or failures)... it takes a town to raise... oh wait... takes a whole company. ;)

arn

DTphonehome
Jan 13, 2004, 12:13 AM
Wow, those posts on the original iPod thread are hilarious! I would love for some of the naysayers to let us know what they think now. $150 million in profit later...

I think the mini has it's place...I thought it when I saw how small it was. The WSJ article is right on. Just because a device with a higher capacity is available, doesn't necessarily mean that everyone will want it. If that were the case, the only iPod that would sell at all is the 40GB, because if you're spending 299, you may as well pay the extra 100 bucks for the carry case, remote, dock, and extra capacity. And if you're already paying 399, you may as well go ahead and pay the extra 100 bucks to get double the capacity.

With the clip, and included USB cables, and after the edu discount, the 229 mini is a great buy. It has its market. And after it gets a foothold, you can be sure Apple will introduce a lower price, higher capacity model to increase the mini's value.

--DT

frankly
Jan 13, 2004, 12:15 AM
Originally posted by Brock
Most of the mac enthusiasts ive spoken to without ipods or with first generation ones say they would rather spend another 50 to get the 15 gig.

1) People without iPods haven't bought one at all so why would they buy the larger one now??? Yeah, that's the people's opinions that make a whole heck of a lot of difference.

2) Those with first generation models paid $399 for 5GB of storage space and yet they wouldn't pay $249 for 4GB of space??? Yeah, that makes a whole bunch of sense as well.

Later, Frank

Count Blah
Jan 13, 2004, 12:26 AM
Originally posted by Macrumors
...For every buyer of an MP3 player who cares about capacity, there's another one who cares about size. Or style. Or both. ...

I'd like to see a statistical source for that. If Apple is trying to get the high end flash market, then what is their appeal? They can't claim it's the HD size, since their approach seems to be what this quote is saying. Can they claim the physical size? There are smaller MP3 players out there. Is it the ability to work out with it? Flash based MP3 players are MUCH better for working out(no moving parts). They are selling their Name and the iPod name, and they are charging a premium. Sure, some will buy. But you can just turn Apple's own argument around to buy other MP3 players(either classic iPod or smaller flash based players that are better for working out). Obviously Apple wants you to go the iPod route, so they priced the iPod mini so that you would be an idiot to buy the mini versus the classic.

If you are going to compete against something(high end flash market) it helps to be in the same market(<= $199).

I said it before and I'll say it again - Instead of Apple going after the middle third of that keynote piechart, they just made their 95% of the high end market($250+) go to 97% with the iPod mini.

dashiel
Jan 13, 2004, 12:26 AM
Originally posted by Brock
For those of you who watched the expo: Steve jobs lined up the stats of the mini against a comptative mp3 player. everything was good (16 x the music/space, better interface, etc) untill he got to the bottom and said "and its only $50 more". If he had said "and we are offering it at the SAME price." it would be unstoppable, but that $50 makes a big difference. Most of the mac enthusiasts ive spoken to without ipods or with first generation ones say they would rather spend another 50 to get the 15 gig.


same exact thing happened when steve intro'd the ipod originally, he compared them to flash players and the then current crop of crappy HD based players, it was the same comparison list, and the ipod was $50-$100 more than the comparable hard drive player at the time. people said then exactly what they're saying now.

it'd be funny how much history is repeating itself, if it wasn't so sad that so many mac users have such knee jerk reactions.

sushi
Jan 13, 2004, 12:31 AM
Originally posted by ChrisH3677

Yes Steve has had some failures:
The Cube....ummm... Lisa...others?

Name one very successful person who hasn't?

There are none that I know of.

Sushi

Nebrie
Jan 13, 2004, 12:34 AM
Originally posted by Count Blah
I'd like to see a statistical source for that. If Apple is trying to get the high end flash market, then what is their appeal? They can't claim it's the HD size, since their approach seems to be what this quote is saying. Can they claim the physical size? There are smaller MP3 players out there. Is it the ability to work out with it? Flash based MP3 players are MUCH better for working out(no moving parts). They are selling their Name and the iPod name, and they are charging a premium. Sure, some will buy. But you can just turn Apple's own argument around to buy other MP3 players(either classic iPod or smaller flash based players that are better for working out). Obviously Apple wants you to go the iPod route, so they priced the iPod mini so that you would be an idiot to buy the mini versus the classic.

If you are going to compete against something(high end flash market) it helps to be in the same market(<= $199).

I said it before and I'll say it again - Instead of Apple going after the middle third of that keynote piechart, they just made their 95% of the high end market($250+) go to 97% with the iPod mini.

You need to get out more.

jwhitnah
Jan 13, 2004, 12:35 AM
After reading those old posts, I'm glad we're not running Apple! I'll bu the mini when they get it up to 10GB.

bdkennedy1
Jan 13, 2004, 01:08 AM
Hell, I'm considering selling my 15gb iPod and getting a mini. I thought it would be awesome to store thousands of songs on my iPod, but the truth is I haven't even listened to a 1/4 or them and my iPod is only 1/4 full. I'd sacrifice capacity for size.

jwhitnah
Jan 13, 2004, 01:12 AM
Originally posted by bdkennedy1
Hell, I'm considering selling my 15gb iPod and getting a mini. I thought it would be awesome to store thousands of songs on my iPod, but the truth is I haven't even listened to a 1/4 or them and my iPod is only 1/4 full. I'd sacrifice storage space for capacity.

My personal library exceeds what my 1stG iPod can handle but all I really need it what I put on my play lists. 95% of my iPods use is in the gym. For a long trip, I could use a bigger iPod.

arn
Jan 13, 2004, 01:18 AM
Originally posted by Count Blah
They can't claim it's the HD size, since their approach seems to be what this quote is saying. Can they claim the physical size? There are smaller MP3 players out there.

Yes, there are smaller players... but they have _much_ less storage.

Yes, there are higher capacity players... but they are physically larger.

There are/will be competitors... the Rio Nitrus 4GB (http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040106/sftu015_1.html) was just announced at $249.

However.... look at Rio's smallest physical sized player (128mb)

http://www.digitalnetworksna.com/images/rio/report/90260467_product.jpg

128MB, $99
Dimensions: 3.5" x1.5" x 0.7" => 3.675 cubic inches

iPod Mini

http://a772.g.akamai.net/7/772/51/5cd70dc263735e/www.apple.com/ipodmini/images/index_size01062004.jpg

4GB, $249
Dimensions: 3.6" X 2.0" X 0.5" => 3.60 cubic inches

The iPod Mini is smaller! (in volume) with 32X the storage. :) The volume is probably not technically smaller... since the Rio tapers... but still... you get the idea. For what it offers... the iPod Mini is small.

arn

starboard
Jan 13, 2004, 01:21 AM
Originally posted by fearless
...1000 songs take longer than I care to exercise most days..

1000 songs = 5days (give or take a few hours) of exercise, non-stop. :)

actually the best promo at MWSF would have been to print up image of the mini on business cards with specs on the back and handing them out to everyone. That would have really emphasized the size. And this could roll out at the retail stores.

nagromme
Jan 13, 2004, 01:47 AM
Some people look at the mini and the 15 and say the mini looks bad...

Is it just me who looks at that comparison and instead sees the 15 looking GOOD?

There's nothing wrong with the mini pricing, at current component costs. And for another $50, the 15 GB iPod is a great buy too, if you want bytes instead of slimness.

I don't need the extra bytes, so of course I'll save the $50 and choose something more portable. Not to mention it will match my AlBook. (But I will wait for Rev B--and that may well come with a price drop.)

Did everyone see the pie chart from the mini intro? Here's the current music player market:

31% iPods. Apple already dominates HD players.

7% ALL other HD players combined!

And two markets Apple might target:

31% low-end flash players, cheap but only hold 30-60 songs and often "get thrown in a drawer and forgotten" or else upgraded (in price and capacity) to become a high-end flash player

31% high-end flash players, 120 songs for about $200

That's right, high-end flash players are as big a market as the iPod. And now, for another $50, those folks can choose a mini and get 1000 songs instead of 120, keep the slim/lightweight size they like (are any others as thin as .5"?), and gain a much better interface.

So... which of those two flash markets should Apple target? Should they make a cheap device that can hardly hold any songs, and disappoints those who buy it? Or should they go after the high-end Flash market with the far-superior mini, priced the same as other new 4GB HD players--ones that lack the iPod's reputation, ease of use, and color choices?

The mini's capacity and pricing is perfect to take on the market segment Apple wants. The segment they are about to take, I predict!

Prediction: Flash player sales will decline: low-end units because people will realize they aren't very useful, and high-end units because ultra-compact low-end HD players hardly cost more anyway. So a new ultra-compact HD market will emerge to replace the bulk of flash player sales. And who will dominate the ultra-compact HD market? Apple. First at $249, and later on even cheaper.

neutrino23
Jan 13, 2004, 01:49 AM
After going to the exhibits and handling the mini iPod I got a very different sense of it. It is so light and small you don't hardly feel it at all. It seems to float in your hand. In the booth the Apple staff had these strapped to their upper arms. You could easily do that to listen while doing most sports.

I think the pricing was just about perfect. As was pointed out above, once you set the price it never goes up, it only goes down. From this price Apple has room to launch discounts, promotions and bundles to improve sales on an as needed basis.

Remember last fall when Apple sold a 10GB iPod for $200 off if purchased together with a computer? How about a similar deal this summer ( or whenever sales slow down). Get $150 off on a mini iPod if purchased together with any laptop. That would certainly get some attention.

Ge4-ce
Jan 13, 2004, 01:52 AM
I can only adress successes to Jobs! Yeah.. the cube.. hmmm.. I know several people who died for getting one! The cube was just a matter of taste. Although it wasn't a real sales-succes, I thought it was really cool.

No, Jobs Real mistake is the Mouse!!! Like 95% percent of the people who I know of working with Pro Apps go and buy a new mouse with 3 buttons and a scroll wheel. Some apps really NEED that! I think it's quite weird to throw in another extra 30 bucks for a mouse when you've just spent 3000 on a new Powermac..

jnasato
Jan 13, 2004, 01:54 AM
Haha! The comments on the iPod...

I guess this shows that we should all be careful about what we think about new product releases, because Apple and its market analysts, etc., might actually know what they're doing!

Cap'n Hector
Jan 13, 2004, 01:56 AM
Originally posted by arn
Apple III ? (not sure Steve's involvement in that)
NeXT as a hardware company...

But I think it's a big short-sighted to attribute everything to one man (successes or failures)... it takes a town to raise... oh wait... takes a whole company. ;)

arn

The Apple III failed because Steve made the case size too small and so it heated up and had issues with badly seated chips coming lose.

The Cube has been mentioned…

NOT releasing a new version of the Newton might be a failure…

The Lisa flopped pretty hard, and Jobs was in charge of that project.

Jobs has had some near-miss flops, also, where others saved his butt…

The Macintosh 128K was made expandable (not easily, but it was expandable) to 512K against Jobs' orders…which extended the life of the machine when the Fat Mac was released.

Also, when Apple was making one early computer (I think it was the 128K) Jobs wanted Apple to make their own floppy drive…a very difficult engineering feat. The engineers negotiated with Sony in secret until the non-workability of Apple's drive became apparent. Oddly enough, Sony was happy to supply drives…

elgruga
Jan 13, 2004, 02:15 AM
MMMM! I must have that Rio thingy. Its so ugly!

Its great to see the 'competition' for the mini - that rio thing is dusgusting - it looks like a rectal thermometer or some similar piece of medical equipment.

The important thing for me is that I feel that Apple is really moving forward and I will not have to run Windoze or clunky linux (yes, I know its great, but I want my computer to do the work, not me) because Apple is SOLID.

OSX Panther, iPod, 64 bit chips, XServe, all the iApps, Final Cut, ITMS (when it comes to Canada), etc.etc
Are we doing good or what!?

My TiBook hasnt been off since I loaded Panther - no crashes. Sleeps all night, works all day.

Are we doing good or what!!!!!!

Yes, I am going to get a miniPod, since you ask.....Why?

Small and beautiful, like a woman I know!

BTW, great site you guys - always fun and educational on MacRumors. Thanks.

chinamac
Jan 13, 2004, 02:44 AM
My three teenage daughters and teenage neices and nephews are arguing over the color of the mini they want.

They don't care about the 11G difference to the iPod. They are not "addicted" to all the detailed specs that people on these and other boards talk ad nauseum about that don't mean much to most people anyway.

Umm........ I think they might actually represent a larger market share than those that worry about G capacity. Of course this means I gotta get ready to be hit with 750 bucks plus tax in the very near future.

On a more serious note, when the timing is right (I believe its only a question of timing as the product is probably ready to ship), Apple will ship "home on the iPod) where the masses of geeks and the like will see added value in the original iPod- carry your home folder whereever you go! Wow! Whether it is truly necessary, thats a different question. But surely buyers will then see additional value in the original pod and the differentiation with the mini will be more pronounced.

For the folks who lamented the price differential with the iPod 15G is too small, they will be looking at the original anyway, because they would be the ones interested in the other values that this would bring. For those who are wowed by the fab form factor of the mini, they will go and are going the mini.

desdomg
Jan 13, 2004, 02:59 AM
I think MacRumors are off base on this one. The "initial negative reaction" was actually ALL about the price and nothing to do with the feature set or size - which everyone was very happy with.

All the press will be doing is trying to keep a very popular story going by showing a new angle, regardless of how valid that angle is. A bit like how MacRumors are now running the told you so angle. It is fair comment but not an accurate reflection of what is going on. Bad reporting.

arn
Jan 13, 2004, 03:03 AM
Originally posted by desdomg
I think MacRumors are off base on this one. The "initial negative reaction" was actually ALL about the price and nothing to do with the feature set or size - which everyone was very happy with.
........
A bit like how MacRumors are now running the told you so angle. It is fair comment but not an accurate reflection of what is going on. Bad reporting.

Price is intrinsically tied to feature set/size:

$249 for a 200GB iPod the size of the iPod Mini
vs.
$249 for a 1GB iPod the size of a Bookbag

I'm not sure what you mean regarding the "told you so angle"... as that wasn't the intention of the article.

arn

desdomg
Jan 13, 2004, 03:09 AM
Originally posted by desdomg
I think MacRumors are off base on this one. The "initial negative reaction" was actually ALL about the price and nothing to do with the feature set or size - which everyone was very happy with.

All the press will be doing is trying to keep a very popular story going by showing a new angle, regardless of how valid that angle is. A bit like how MacRumors are now running the told you so angle. It is fair comment but not an accurate reflection of what is going on. Bad reporting.

PS, if you want to compete on price in a sensitive sub $200 market it is usually a good idea to offer your product with a sub $200 price tag. Also, I do not see the sub $100 market being insignificant either. Eventually it will be THAT segment which accounts for most sales., not the $250 - $300 segment which Apple is now in.

el gringo
Jan 13, 2004, 03:16 AM
LOL :D

Agree with everyone...but...I think/hope we'll see a price drop OR a 2 GB version within shortly (6 months) at 199 USD.

The response from my PC-buds are overall more positive regarding the iPod mini...than us folks ;)

Originally posted by fearless
People will decide, and if they want it, they'll buy it. They won't be worrying about whether the big one holds another 3,000 songs, nor will they be strapping a 120GB drive to their backs and jogging with that because it holds their music...

nagromme
Jan 13, 2004, 03:17 AM
Exactly. The low-end market will be key for Apple eventually. Not now, when low-end means a disappointing 30-song experience. Right now, the best selling music player is the iPod, a high-end choice.

One day Apple will be able to offer 1000 songs under $200. Then under $100. That's not the reality today, and it won't stop people from buying every one Apple can make for some time.

Sabenth
Jan 13, 2004, 03:41 AM
I have to admit the first thing that i did and said when i saw that freak was. Oh goodie candy sticks. But now having time to adjust to the colour the size wasnt an issue The Price . Yes the price can go down but comparing it to flash i think Apple did get it right after all...


Clap Clap FOR STEVE AND THE GUYS AND GIRLS AT Apple

splashman
Jan 13, 2004, 03:41 AM
Originally posted by Cap'n Hector
The Lisa flopped pretty hard, and Jobs was in charge of that project.

Actually, he wasn't. He fought tooth-and-nail against the release of the Lisa (he wanted to keep it internal, as a test bed for what was to become the Mac). It was released anyway at the board's insistence, but Steve was successful in the long run, because he priced the thing so high no one could afford it ($10,000). And he eventually pulled it from the market and dumped almost 20,000 Lisas in a landfill because they were competing with his precious Macs.

(My dad was on the Lisa's software development team, so I know what I'm talking about. We had a prototype at our house in mid-1979, when I was 14 years old. How's that for a privileged childhood!)

Isn't it ironic? The Lisa, back in 1979, had full preemptive multi-tasking, virtual memory, full integration between all apps, instant app switching, and a host of other features that the Mac wouldn't get until many, many years later. And it's only since OSX that we've regained the PMT.

I've got a souvenir in my office: a 1-megabyte RAM board from a Lisa. It measures about 9 inches long by 6 inches high, and is absolutely crammed with chips on both sides. How things change.

tduality
Jan 13, 2004, 03:41 AM
Originally posted by yoman
this is why i enjoy visiting macrumors

Exactly. Nice quotes. :D

dekator
Jan 13, 2004, 03:46 AM
Guys, you don't know how lucky you are -pricewise- in the USofA. Yeah, $200 would've been even cooler but look at European prices: The iPod mini is rumoured at €299 (at least one web store advertises it at €289). Those prices are for Germany and they include 16% VAT. Now, let's do the math: $249 are currently (roughly, actually a little less) than €195. Add to that 16% VAT = €226.
That means we're paying 60 - 70 Euros more than the price in the US! That's up to $ 90 ! Not nice.

Krizoitz
Jan 13, 2004, 03:48 AM
Honestly, some people just don't get it. The whole intent of the one button mouse was so that anyone can learn to use a computer with the minimal amount of work. You could literally watch someone for a couple minutes and you could use the computer just like they did. You didn't have to wonder which mouse button they were pressing for what or anything.

Ok, so people know all about mice now, so give us the new mouse you say. What kind? Two button? Three? Scroll wheel?

First I'd like to point out that by only providing a basic mouse Apple is allowing the user to choose an alternative that best suits his or her needs. Have you looked at the third party options for mice? You can have them in any shape or size you want these days. I personally use a trackball.

By providing a basic mouse Apple allows the computer to be used out of the box. But whats to stop you from buying the exact one you want. Why should Apple waste money on new mouse when there are allready great ones out there. Its the same reason they aren't doing a PDA because the market is full, why bother. Plus it gives third parties a great opportunity to make revenue and best of all it gives us CHOICE. Choice is a good thing right?

So choose to let go of the one button mouse attack and enjoy a nice Kensington, Logitech, etc super mouse!


Originally posted by Ge4-ce
I can only adress successes to Jobs! Yeah.. the cube.. hmmm.. I know several people who died for getting one! The cube was just a matter of taste. Although it wasn't a real sales-succes, I thought it was really cool.

No, Jobs Real mistake is the Mouse!!! Like 95% percent of the people who I know of working with Pro Apps go and buy a new mouse with 3 buttons and a scroll wheel. Some apps really NEED that! I think it's quite weird to throw in another extra 30 bucks for a mouse when you've just spent 3000 on a new Powermac..

splashman
Jan 13, 2004, 03:56 AM
Full disclosure: I was one of those who didn't believe Apple would release the mini at just $50 less than a current product -- it didn't seem like there would be enough differentiation to bother with. So Apple surprised me there.

But the vehemence displayed in so many posts following the mini's release was very surprising to me. So many angry, angry people. It was as if everyone thought they had a constitutional right to a mini at $149. "How dare they . . ." I'm guessing most of these folks had bought into their own hype.

Anyway, in this thread, I'm surprised I haven't seen more whiners popping up, rehashing their reasons for why the mini will flop and Apple along with it. Do you suppose they've stepped back, taken a deep breath, and admitted the possibility that Apple might actually have a clue?

No, me neither.

york2600
Jan 13, 2004, 04:01 AM
I know a few other people have said it, but I want to stress this. Don't knock it till you see it in person and pick it up. During the Keynote I was kind of dissapointed. On the screen is looked big and well stupid. You see it and you instantly assume it's the size of the normal iPod. Take out a business card. That's how big it is. The thing is crazy tiny. Wait till it shows up at an Apple store and go see it. You might just leave the place thinking it's not 1/2 bad. I left wishing they made a 15 gig model. If they did I would trade in my 2G 10gig in a second.

splashman
Jan 13, 2004, 04:12 AM
Originally posted by Krizoitz
Honestly, some people just don't get it. The whole intent of the one button mouse was so that anyone can learn to use a computer with the minimal amount of work. You could literally watch someone for a couple minutes and you could use the computer just like they did. You didn't have to wonder which mouse button they were pressing for what or anything.

And it's still true. I could give you several examples of people I know -- perfectly intelligent people who have never been taught and have never figured out what the right button is for. The other day, I saw my brother-in-law surfing, and he got stuck on a site -- it wasn't responding. He was clicking and double-clicking on everything in sight, and then he said to himself, "Oh, maybe this is where I'm supposed to use the other button." He proceeded to right-click and double-right-click on everything in sight.

I had to stifle a laugh, but that's what it can be like in the real world of non-geeks. A lot of computer users will never, ever use that right button.

I'd like to point out that by only providing a basic mouse Apple is allowing the user to choose an alternative that best suits his or her needs. Have you looked at the third party options for mice? You can have them in any shape or size you want these days. I personally use a trackball.

I agree with you 100%, but you have to admit it's a marketing problem. The average consumer generally wants a complete solution-in-a-box, and having to buy a 3rd-party mouse for a brand-new system isn't exactly confidence-inspiring. Sure, if you have a competent salesperson right there, they can talk their way out of it, but it's still a problem. I'm not advocating Apple doing anything differently -- I'm just acknowledging the down-side of their strategy.

hokka
Jan 13, 2004, 04:30 AM
Originally posted by splashman
Full disclosure: I was one of those who didn't believe Apple would release the mini at just $50 less than a current product -- it didn't seem like there would be enough differentiation to bother with. So Apple surprised me there.

But the vehemence displayed in so many posts following the mini's release was very surprising to me. So many angry, angry people. It was as if everyone thought they had a constitutional right to a mini at $149. "How [B]dare[B] they . . ." I'm guessing most of these folks had bought into their own hype.

Anyway, in this thread, I'm surprised I haven't seen more whiners popping up, rehashing their reasons for why the mini will flop and Apple along with it. Do you suppose they've stepped back, taken a deep breath, and admitted the possibility that Apple might actually have a clue?

No, me neither.

One of the most sensible posts I've seen since the release of mini. Good insight Splash!

To all the whiners compain about the price, and speak of market-share and such - now please, with a cool head (or as Splashman said: stepped back, taken a deep breath) - now, look into the mirror and say with me (slowly):

"what do I really know about the market?";
"I surely didn't do any real market research";
"everything I spilled out of my mouth is really based on hearsay (rumors) or assumption or figures and prices used by SJ in his presentation - therefore I tried to disapprove somthing I have no fricken idea in the first place (or at least not until a few days ago that I only saw the finished product with a price-tag)"
"I should just keep my mouth shut instead of making a fool of myself (in a few years time ;) trying to say the product is over-priced when really it's just that I can't afford it (yet), no one is forcing me to buy it. Matter-of-fact no one, but my own envy and lust"
"I'm just very jugemental and a hot-headed person and maybe I could use that energy on something more productive like Folding, or learn a new App or even go outside and enjoy the real world"

feel better now?

>So much pain, so much suffering<

Bengt77
Jan 13, 2004, 04:35 AM
Originally posted by nagromme
One day Apple will be able to offer 1000 songs under $200. Then under $100.

Well, one song costs you ¢99, so 1000 songs will cost you $990, not anywhere near $200. So $100 is way out of leage.

:D

el gringo
Jan 13, 2004, 04:53 AM
regarding mouse-issue - there is a simple solution - make it possible to order without mouse...(BTO)

Originally posted by splashman

I agree with you 100%, but you have to admit it's a marketing problem. The average consumer generally wants a complete solution-in-a-box, and having to buy a 3rd-party mouse for a brand-new system isn't exactly confidence-inspiring. Sure, if you have a competent salesperson right there, they can talk their way out of it, but it's still a problem. I'm not advocating Apple doing anything differently -- I'm just acknowledging the down-side of their strategy.

mactarkus
Jan 13, 2004, 04:53 AM
I still must make it clear that it could have been cheaper. I would have liked $10-$20. Yes, I think Apple should have sold it for that. Actually, it would have been better for the iPod Minis to be packaged and given away in boxes of cereal. Why didn't they do that? Sometimes I really wonder what the folks in Cupertino are smoking. ;)

MattG
Jan 13, 2004, 04:54 AM
The mini is cool, but I'd be lying if I didn't say I think it's a bit overpriced. Apple really should've included the dock and the arm-band with it at least. When you figure you add those two things to your shopping cart in addition to the mini, you ARE paying about what you'd pay for a 15gb iPod...that's something to think about before making your purchase.

Ge4-ce
Jan 13, 2004, 05:05 AM
Ok... if an extra button is that difficult to learn.. boy ow boy.. I don't know. a keyboard has a lot of buttons! Does that scare people? Or should we go with a windows keyboard containing 3 buttons 'ctrl-alt-delete' ??

My point is that Apple will not sell less Mac's if they ship it with a 3 button mouse. Nor will anyone complain 'OH NO, that's too difficult!' Now! There are people that DO complain because they have to throw the single button mouse on the shelve and buy another one before they can work with some Apps!

Honestly.. would a person go to wintel because Apple ships Mac's with a multibutton mouse? Come-on...

el gringo
Jan 13, 2004, 05:08 AM
as I said earlier - make it possible to buy without mouse/keyboard. BTO.

Originally posted by Ge4-ce
Ok... if an extra button is that difficult to learn.. boy ow boy.. I don't know. a keyboard has a lot of buttons! Does that scare people? Or should we go with a windows keyboard containing 3 buttons 'ctrl-alt-delete' ??

My point is that Apple will not sell less Mac's if they ship it with a 3 button mouse. Nor will anyone complain 'OH NO, that's too difficult!' Now! There are people that DO complain because they have to throw the single button mouse on the shelve and buy another one before they can work with some Apps!

Honestly.. would a person go to wintel because Apple ships Mac's with a multibutton mouse? Come-on...

Ge4-ce
Jan 13, 2004, 05:12 AM
Agree on that! BTO is a better Option.. however.. Every computer ships with a mouse.. They have to handle that with good marketing.. something like.. it comes with a mouse, but if you insist not wanting a mouse, you get a 50 bucks discount. not the other way around! Then people would be like: "gees... don't buy a mac! it doesn't even come with a mouse! you have to buy that seperate!" and that's not great marketing..

hokka
Jan 13, 2004, 05:14 AM
Originally posted by Ge4-ce
Honestly.. would a person go to wintel because Apple ships Mac's with a multibutton mouse? Come-on...

Huh? did you even think before you tried to ask a rhetorical question? I think you meant:

"would a person go to wintel because Apple ships Mac's with a Singlebutton mouse?"

See how that one actually made sense and hence proved your whole argument were wrong?

instantypo
Jan 13, 2004, 05:20 AM
Hey, am I the only one who wants to see the new mini dial on the bigger iPods?
The 4G white iPods will probably be a bit smaller losing the 4 separate buttons above the dial. What about 20 GB, 40 GB and 60 GB. That's my wish. Anyone else?

splashman
Jan 13, 2004, 05:24 AM
Originally posted by Ge4-ce
Ok... if an extra button is that difficult to learn.. boy ow boy.. I don't know. a keyboard has a lot of buttons! Does that scare people? Or should we go with a windows keyboard containing 3 buttons 'ctrl-alt-delete' ??

My point is that Apple will not sell less Mac's if they ship it with a 3 button mouse. Nor will anyone complain 'OH NO, that's too difficult!' Now! There are people that DO complain because they have to throw the single button mouse on the shelve and buy another one before they can work with some Apps!

Honestly.. would a person go to wintel because Apple ships Mac's with a multibutton mouse? Come-on...

Sorry, dude -- you're one more geek who doesn't get it. Try a momentary venture out of your silicon cocoon and take a look at how non-geeks actually use a computer.

You're right that Apple won't sell less Macs if they ship a 3-button mouse. But they recognize that ease-of-use is one of their biggest draws, and single-button mice have been shown, in study after study, to be less confusing than multi-button mice for new and novice computer users.

Apple rightly figures they can't make everyone happy, no matter what their choice. Most of the geeks I know (including me) would replace the Apple mouse with their favorite 3rd-party mouse no matter what, so your complaint about having to throw away the Apple mouse doesn't hold much water.

Apple is protecting their ease-of-use advantage without having much negative impact on the geek population. Sounds reasonable to me.

splashman
Jan 13, 2004, 05:31 AM
Originally posted by MattG
The mini is cool, but I'd be lying if I didn't say I think it's a bit overpriced. Apple really should've included the dock and the arm-band with it at least. When you figure you add those two things to your shopping cart in addition to the mini, you ARE paying about what you'd pay for a 15gb iPod...that's something to think about before making your purchase.

Here's something to think about next time you're at McDonalds: If you super-size your Big Mac value-meal, you'll pay about the same as the regular-size Crispy Chicken value-meal. But if you go for the Crispy Chicken, you won't get the quart-size soda and two pounds of fries.

Translation for the analogy-impaired:
For about $300 you can either get a mini with dock and arm-band, or a 15gig with no dock and no possibility of an arm-band. It's your choice, but it's an apples-and-oranges choice, not a "duh" choice as you implied.

desdomg
Jan 13, 2004, 05:36 AM
Originally posted by splashman
Full disclosure: I was one of those who didn't believe Apple would release the mini at just $50 less than a current product -- it didn't seem like there would be enough differentiation to bother with. So Apple surprised me there.

But the vehemence displayed in so many posts following the mini's release was very surprising to me. So many angry, angry people. It was as if everyone thought they had a constitutional right to a mini at $149. "How dare they . . ." I'm guessing most of these folks had bought into their own hype.

Anyway, in this thread, I'm surprised I haven't seen more whiners popping up, rehashing their reasons for why the mini will flop and Apple along with it. Do you suppose they've stepped back, taken a deep breath, and admitted the possibility that Apple might actually have a clue?

No, me neither.

Splashman, I don't know what you have been reading but I do not recognize the Mac community reaction in your description.

All I saw was a lot of people who were disappointed at the pricing of the iPod minis because they felt it was priced too high. I was one of those people and still am. I don't think many people within that group were predicting that the iPod mini would fail however, that is your spin on events and I think it is wrong. What I did see expressed was the belief - and yes anger at times - that Apple may have missed an opportunity to totally clean up with a lower, sub $150 or $200 priced product.

The overall message coming out of the various boards was that for $50 more it was more practical to buy the 15 gig.

Apple have now acknowledged that the pricing may be out and that they may reduce it in future.

http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/main_news.cfm?NewsID=7627

I don't understand the point of this MacRumors thread though. It starts of saying that that "A week after the introduction of the iPod Mini's, the initial furor appears to be dying down." and goes on to say "Regardless, time will tell if Apple has further success with the iPod Mini. Readers are reminded that negative initial reactions are common. Some reader comments from the initial release ..."

Which to me at least gave the impression that there are legions of doubters or "whiners" as some have put it, who say the iPod mini will fail. Where are they? I have not seen any. The original MacRumors blurb makes no reference to any. All people have expressed here and elsewhere over the past week is their dismay at the pricing, and the perhaps missed opportunities it entails.

rdowns
Jan 13, 2004, 05:53 AM
Originally posted by Krizoitz
Honestly, some people just don't get it. The whole intent of the one button mouse was so that anyone can learn to use a computer with the minimal amount of work. You could literally watch someone for a couple minutes and you could use the computer just like they did. You didn't have to wonder which mouse button they were pressing for what or anything.

Ok, so people know all about mice now, so give us the new mouse you say. What kind? Two button? Three? Scroll wheel?

First I'd like to point out that by only providing a basic mouse Apple is allowing the user to choose an alternative that best suits his or her needs. Have you looked at the third party options for mice? You can have them in any shape or size you want these days. I personally use a trackball.

By providing a basic mouse Apple allows the computer to be used out of the box. But whats to stop you from buying the exact one you want. Why should Apple waste money on new mouse when there are allready great ones out there. Its the same reason they aren't doing a PDA because the market is full, why bother. Plus it gives third parties a great opportunity to make revenue and best of all it gives us CHOICE. Choice is a good thing right?

So choose to let go of the one button mouse attack and enjoy a nice Kensington, Logitech, etc super mouse!

Yes, choice is good. Give buyers a choice of what mouse they buy with their system; at least on the higher end ones like iMac and PM. No reason Apple couldn't manufacture 2 or 3 choices and make some extra margin. Sucks to pay for a mouse (they sell them for $49 retail) that many of their users will not use.

Apple used to sell the KB separately and you chose the regularl one or the extended one. I see no reason Apple couldn't go back to doing this with a mouse.

ChrisH3677
Jan 13, 2004, 05:57 AM
des

I've seen many people on these forums and elsewhere questioning the price and asking/wondering how it could possibly succeed at that price.

Arn was not doing any "I told you so's" by starting this thread. He was merely showing that many people had the same issue with the original iPod yet things worked out just fine for it.

And contrary to what you said, many of those posts back then had issues besides the price. For example, several questioned why Apple was entering a new market and not sticking to the computer market.

Arn did the right thing. We can all learn from that thread that we, despite what we think we know, probably have little idea at all, compared to Apple.

Furious Tiger
Jan 13, 2004, 05:59 AM
Just saw it on News Channel 4 here in NYC. Did not know that there was a Apple presence at CES. Then again HP did make the announcement.

splashman
Jan 13, 2004, 06:29 AM
Originally posted by desdomg
Splashman, I don't know what you have been reading but I do not recognize the Mac community reaction in your description.

All I saw was a lot of people who were disappointed at the pricing of the iPod minis because they felt it was priced too high. I was one of those people and still am. I don't think many people within that group were predicting that the iPod mini would fail however, that is your spin on events and I think it is wrong. What I did see expressed was the belief - and yes anger at times - that Apple may have missed an opportunity to totally clean up with a lower, sub $150 or $200 priced product.

The overall message coming out of the various boards was that for $50 more it was more practical to buy the 15 gig.

Maybe we're not talking about the same thread. I'm talking about this one:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=53929&perpage=25&pagenumber=1

It contains approx. 675 posts (is that a record?), most of which were not congratulatory notes to Apple. Yes, I exaggerated for effect by saying they were predicting Apple's doom, but the overall tone is amazingly negative, as if Apple is run by idiots who are deliberately making our lives miserable.

For your reading pleasure, here's a few snippets:

--I think it's a dead-in-the water product, but it will cause Rio 4gb shoppers to think twice and then upgrade to a 15gb iPod.

--Who in their right mind see's value in 50.00 less for almost 75 percent less the capacity of the next model Ipod. 75 percent less capacity and it's only 50.00 cheaper.

--What the Heck is Apple Thinking??? I am shocked beyond belief that Apple has so greedily priced a 4GB iPod at $249.

--HUGE MISTAKE FOR APPLE AFTER THEY WERE GOING SO STRONG WITH THE IPOD!!!!

--Wow, wow, wow. Profoundly ignorant move. There isn't a shred of logic behind that pricing. What a flop. My only hope is that Steve is trying to milk high end customers and that in a month, citing the "success" of the iPod mini, they will lower prices or introduce a new model. If not, then Apple made its first major screwup in the music arena. Wow, amazingly poor idea to price it like that. I'd like to see what it does to the share price. Lord.

--As others have stated, nobody in their right mind would buy one of these at this price point. They really screwed up on this one.

--somebody in marketing at Apple headquarters is getting fired right now, as we speak.

--it looks like they are killing thier iPod-mini market by pricing it only $50 away from the real thing. with 11 gigs more.

--I have never seen anything like this; Everyone is obviously disappointed. Apple really messed up with the 249.00 mini-pod. C'mon people; this is a monumental failure!!!!

--why do some many people give a ***** about apple making money, they sure as hell dont seem to care about u saving any.

--very dissappointing. i feel like they dropped the ball big time. hopefully it will bomb and they will reposition the price.

--Steve doesnt wanna sell the mini iPods. He pisses people off, but spreads the 50 off rationale. He is trying to sell more 15 gig normal iPods.

--i must echo the thoughts of everyone else in saying that $249 is totally absurd. what in the world is apple thinking? i couldn't believe my eyes when i saw it. hopefully that will be corrected by the next macworld, and the will put out the pb g5 to make up for the this sillyness

--When Steve said the price you could have heard a pin drop, people there were like all excited, anticipating a REALISTIC price like $149 or $199 maybe high end, but NOOOO!!! Typical Apple, more proof Jobs doesn't get it, most consumers don't have $249 lying around, then again, if you're given lear jets money isn't a concept. And yeah some people blah blah profit margin blah, believe me, they were already making as much as 50% margin/mark up on the previous iPods, these things are probably that or more, this price is joke. HEAR ME APPLE, YOUR PRICE FOR THIS IS A JOKE!!! $199 would have been a bit much, good though, good enough. $249... phaw!

--$249 - For a lousy 4GB?! Apple is making a big mistake and this will flop with the intended market.


And all of that is on the first few pages. It goes on and on and on . . . Maybe it's just me, but these posts seem a bit more harsh than "Apple may have missed an opportunity".


Apple have now acknowledged that the pricing may be out and that they may reduce it in future.
http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/main_news.cfm?NewsID=7627


Nice try. You might have caught a clue from the fact that this article was from MacWorld UK. It addresses only the UK price, which is somewhat higher than the current exchange rate would justify. It doesn't address US pricing at all.

tazznb
Jan 13, 2004, 07:24 AM
Originally posted by Ge4-ce
Ok... if an extra button is that difficult to learn.. boy ow boy.. I don't know. a keyboard has a lot of buttons! Does that scare people? Or should we go with a windows keyboard containing 3 buttons 'ctrl-alt-delete' ??

My point is that Apple will not sell less Mac's if they ship it with a 3 button mouse. Nor will anyone complain 'OH NO, that's too difficult!' Now! There are people that DO complain because they have to throw the single button mouse on the shelve and buy another one before they can work with some Apps!

Honestly.. would a person go to wintel because Apple ships Mac's with a multibutton mouse? Come-on...

Why not have Apple start selling three-button mouses ONLY! Then everyone that wants the classic mouse can purchase it from a 3rd party vendor; end of Problem....!

ChrisH3677
Jan 13, 2004, 07:25 AM
Splash - well said

Incredibly, all those quotes were mirrored in the thread re the original iPod. The original was gunna struggle for all the same reasons. Deja vu! People just like to put their foot in their mouth!

I think the mini will be a winner for all the reasons others think it won't.

ganryu
Jan 13, 2004, 07:33 AM
Originally posted by desdomg
I think MacRumors are off base on this one. The "initial negative reaction" was actually ALL about the price and nothing to do with the feature set or size - which everyone was very happy with.

I think arn's point is that macrumors readers aren't very good at judging the future success of apple products. And from the original ipod thread, it seems that way.

ganryu
Jan 13, 2004, 07:36 AM
Originally posted by dekator
Guys, you don't know how lucky you are -pricewise- in the USofA. Yeah, $200 would've been even cooler but look at European prices: The iPod mini is rumoured at €299 (at least one web store advertises it at €289).

After this whole "wut it's $249 not $200? apple sUx0rs" mess, you figure people would learn their lesson about believing rumored price points...

ganryu
Jan 13, 2004, 07:50 AM
Originally posted by desdomg
What I did see expressed was the belief - and yes anger at times - that Apple may have missed an opportunity to totally clean up with a lower, sub $150 or $200 priced product.

You know, I bet if Apple sells them at only $100, it would clean up even more.. or better yet, give them out for FREE! Or BETTER yet, bundle $100 Apple Store Gift Certificates with those free iPod Minis... I bet they'll be flying off the shelves! Apple will dominate the market for sure!!!

Sometimes I wonder if you guys think Apple picks these iPod Mini's off trees and sell them for $249 of pure profit. There's no evidence Apple is pricing it too high, since their direct competitor, the 4GB Rio Nitrus, is selling at the exact same price.

Or maybe you're one of those that still believe:
1) sell at a loss
2) gain mindshare/marketshare
3) ????
4) profit!

btw desdomg, the dotcom companies called, and they want their business model back!

splashman
Jan 13, 2004, 07:57 AM
Originally posted by ganryu
btw desdomg, the dotcom companies called, and they want their business model back!

Heh heh. Good one.

uv23
Jan 13, 2004, 07:59 AM
Some random early morning blatherings:

Apple should sell two mice - a 1-button mouse with their consumer products and a multi-button mouse with their pro products. If someone buys a G5 and doesn't know how to use a multi-button mouse, they shouldn't be buying a G5 in the first place, they should be buying an iMac. By leveraging the consumer/pro differentiation, Apple can easily introduce a new mouse.

Mini iPod: I was one of the complainers and still am. Not necessarily because of the product itself but because of what it is competing with. Lets not forget (as much as Apple apologists want to) that the Mini iPod has half the battery life of an equivalently-sized Rio. Now, that fact aside, I'd rather have a 1 or 2 gig mini iPod that included the arm band and dock for $249 than a barebones 4 gig. Even 1 gig would be more than enough for the gym, the car, or anywhere else I might use such a device. So it's not the device itself that fails in my book, it's the overall package.

These are my opinions, worth roughly $0.02CDN ($0.014US and rising). If you can't deal with opinions other than your own, get off the internet.

XForge
Jan 13, 2004, 08:00 AM
Well, they *still* better "bring that price down" as far as I'm concerned. 300-500 bucks for a doodad that plays music? I don't think so; I can get a different doodad wot plays MP3 CDs for 40 bucks!!!

el gringo
Jan 13, 2004, 08:13 AM
No - your not alone ;) I think the new "mini"-dial is great - hopefully it works great in real life also :rolleyes: and will be adapted on the next iPod as well...

Originally posted by instantypo
Hey, am I the only one who wants to see the new mini dial on the bigger iPods?
The 4G white iPods will probably be a bit smaller losing the 4 separate buttons above the dial. What about 20 GB, 40 GB and 60 GB. That's my wish. Anyone else?

splashman
Jan 13, 2004, 08:14 AM
Originally posted by uv23
Some random early morning blatherings:

Apple should sell two mice - a 1-button mouse with their consumer products and a multi-button mouse with their pro products. If someone buys a G5 and doesn't know how to use a multi-button mouse, they shouldn't be buying a G5 in the first place, they should be buying an iMac. By leveraging the consumer/pro differentiation, Apple can easily introduce a new mouse.

That's the first reasonable solution I've heard. I wish I'd thought of it.

Mini iPod: I was one of the complainers and still am. Not necessarily because of the product itself but because of what it is competing with. Lets not forget (as much as Apple apologists want to) that the Mini iPod has half the battery life of an equivalently-sized Rio. Now, that fact aside, I'd rather have a 1 or 2 gig mini iPod that included the arm band and dock for $249 than a barebones 4 gig. Even 1 gig would be more than enough for the gym, the car, or anywhere else I might use such a device. So it's not the device itself that fails in my book, it's the overall package.

These are my opinions, worth roughly $0.02CDN ($0.014US and rising). If you can't deal with opinions other than your own, get off the internet.

Opinions are fine, and you've stated yours in a respectable fashion. Thank you.

If it wasn't clear before, my hackles are only raised by folks who claim exclusive access to the wisdom of Megacoinius, the Greek god of marketing. :)

el gringo
Jan 13, 2004, 08:14 AM
Well put :D

Originally posted by uv23
If you can't deal with opinions other than your own, get off the internet.

splashman
Jan 13, 2004, 08:20 AM
Originally posted by XForge
Well, they *still* better "bring that price down" as far as I'm concerned. 300-500 bucks for a doodad that plays music? I don't think so; I can get a different doodad wot plays MP3 CDs for 40 bucks!!!

And I can get a bike for $100 that will drive me down the very same street as the guy in the Lexus.

1macker1
Jan 13, 2004, 08:26 AM
Those inital comments were right on point.

DWKlink
Jan 13, 2004, 08:44 AM
I think its important to look at how the mini fits in to apple's whole scheme now - especially with the announcement of the HP partnership. The iPod is now a mainstream device that is being positioned to be bought anywhere. The mini has become the premium device, that can only be bought from apple. It is becoming the future for them.

When the iPod was originally introduced, it had a capacity of 5gigs. Give it another few years, and the mini will be at 40gigs, and you'll be able to buy an "old" iPod for $100 at any electronics store. The mini is the new direction of the iPod line - its the future. Just some thoughts...

XForge
Jan 13, 2004, 08:45 AM
Originally posted by splashman
And I can get a bike for $100 that will drive me down the very same street as the guy in the Lexus.

'Kay, valid point. I think a better analogy would've been "you can get a Toyota Camry for 1/8 the cost of a Lexus" though. The MP3 CD player still holds a bunch of music, still randomly selectable, the sound quality is *exactly* the same, and whoa! the media's interchangeable, what a novel idea. (grin)

splashman
Jan 13, 2004, 08:52 AM
Originally posted by XForge
'Kay, valid point. I think a better analogy would've been "you can get a Toyota Camry for 1/8 the cost of a Lexus" though. The MP3 CD player still holds a bunch of music, still randomly selectable, the sound quality is *exactly* the same, and whoa! the media's interchangeable, what a novel idea. (grin)

Funny how that works. I was perfectly happy with my Discman a year ago. Now it seems like a stone axe.

Progress, eh?

sabbath999
Jan 13, 2004, 08:54 AM
Originally posted by arn
Apple III ? (not sure Steve's involvement in that)
NeXT as a hardware company...

But I think it's a big short-sighted to attribute everything to one man (successes or failures)... it takes a town to raise... oh wait... takes a whole company. ;)

arn

NeXT as a hardware company was only a partial failure, Arn. I have two Color Turbo NeXTStations which are in use to this day. They were so far ahead of their time. Steve invented and inovated with the hardware SO much. I would NEVER have considered switching to a mac until the OS was switched to something good... and OSX is VERY good... Panther is the only thing I have ever seen that is better than my beloved NeXT Mach 3.3 (Jaguar was about a pick-em).

Kanada
Jan 13, 2004, 08:55 AM
Those comments were funny, as someone who bought the iPod 2 weeks after it came out and tried to tell everyone I knew about it, I feel like i was on the cutting edge for a second:)

I also bought a Cube 3 months prior to buying the iPod and told everyone about that to, it was my first home computer, first Mac too.

Well 1 for 2 ain't bad, I still love my cube though, writing this on now.


GO APPLE, YOU ROCK!!!!!!!!

Currently waiting for a smaller, quiter G5, one like the Cube :)

iggyb
Jan 13, 2004, 08:59 AM
I was just wondering...now that HP has partnered with Apple to bundle iTunes with all of their machines, and sell re-branded iPods.....do you think it's possible that they might be able to produce a flash-based player for $99 or $149 that will work with iTunes?

Apple has no interest in pursuing this market. Yet, I think there would be a good demand for such a product. Let HP sell 128MB or 256MB flash players and then there would be players of all sizes and styles that would work with iTunes.

I own a 40GB iPod, but would love to buy a small cheap player for either me or my fiance to go to the gym...

mullmann
Jan 13, 2004, 08:59 AM
Originally posted by bdkennedy1
Hell, I'm considering selling my 15gb iPod and getting a mini. I thought it would be awesome to store thousands of songs on my iPod, but the truth is I haven't even listened to a 1/4 or them and my iPod is only 1/4 full. I'd sacrifice capacity for size.

Bingo. I am considering doing the same thing, as I am in the same boat with my 10-gigger. I've been making that point repeatedly among people who assume that $249 is a stupid price point for the mini, since everyone will "automatically" pay "only" $50 more to get 11 more GB. It's not a good deal if you don't need all of that space!

Jerry Spoon
Jan 13, 2004, 09:01 AM
Originally posted by Tulse
Although I thought the mini was interesting, I didn't see the appeal until I really read the specs. Then it hit me:

The mini is roughly the size of a credit card.

The mini is the thickness of 16 stacked credit cards, or 8 pennies.

So tiny, and yet it can hold 1,000 songs.

That is the appeal of the mini.

Reminds me of what people were saying about the cube. Style was key. Unfortunately for Apple, the cube didn't take off as they had hoped, partially because of the price point (among other things). I hope the iPod mini doesn't meet the same end, not because I'm loving the product, but because I want to see Apple be successful.

frankly
Jan 13, 2004, 09:04 AM
Originally posted by Ge4-ce
Ok... if an extra button is that difficult to learn.. boy ow boy.. I don't know. a keyboard has a lot of buttons! Does that scare people? Or should we go with a windows keyboard containing 3 buttons 'ctrl-alt-delete' ??

My point is that Apple will not sell less Mac's if they ship it with a 3 button mouse. Nor will anyone complain 'OH NO, that's too difficult!' Now! There are people that DO complain because they have to throw the single button mouse on the shelve and buy another one before they can work with some Apps!

Honestly.. would a person go to wintel because Apple ships Mac's with a multibutton mouse? Come-on...

Everyone that complains about the one button mouse needs to get a grip. The same people that find it necessary to replace the mouse that comes with their Mac would most likely replace the mouse that comes with a PC. It doesn't matter that the PC mouse could have two buttons and a scroll wheel. It still wouldn't be the same quality and size, shape, and comfort that a third party mouse provides.

People aren't buying less Macs because they don't like the mouse that comes with it either.

To those saying they should offer BTO without the mouse, how much do you think they would take off the price? $5, $10??? I mean really, the mouse and keyboard are an insignificant cost of the computer.

Most PCs come with total crap keyboards and mice. That is why their is a huge third party market. Also, if Apple included a super cool Apple three button mouse with their computer how long do you think it would be before third party vendors stopped releasing Mac compatible software for their mice???

Later, Frank

P.S. Sorry for being off topic but I felt this discussion was getting carried away by those who all thought Apple was wrong on this old, dead issue.

mullmann
Jan 13, 2004, 09:05 AM
Originally posted by desdomg
PS, if you want to compete on price in a sensitive sub $200 market it is usually a good idea to offer your product with a sub $200 price tag. Also, I do not see the sub $100 market being insignificant either. Eventually it will be THAT segment which accounts for most sales., not the $250 - $300 segment which Apple is now in.

It's not necessarily all about sales, which make for good pie charts but not necessarily good business. Would you rather sell a million $99 widgets that you made $1 apiece on or 250,000 $249 widgets that you made $20 apiece on?

iggyb
Jan 13, 2004, 09:10 AM
Everyone that complains about the one button mouse needs to get a grip. The same people that find it necessary to replace the mouse that comes with their Mac would most likely replace the mouse that comes with a PC. It doesn't matter that the PC mouse could have two buttons and a scroll wheel. It still wouldn't be the same quality and size, shape, and comfort that a third party mouse provides.

I guess I'm one of those that needs to get a grip. First off, it's dumb that Apple has this wonderful OS that takes advantage of a multi-button mouse, and yet they don't include one. Yes yes, we can use the Ctrl button, but c'mon....it's easier to use a right-click. Also, I truly believe that more people would switch if a multi-button mouse was included. It's a perception thing. All other computers include multi-button mice. To some (even some of my friends) the fact that Apple has a one-button mouse makes it look less functional. And my response being "But you can hold down the Ctrl key and get the same result" doesn't impress them.

wilco
Jan 13, 2004, 09:11 AM
Originally posted by uv23

These are my opinions, worth roughly $0.02CDN ($0.014US and rising). If you can't deal with opinions other than your own, get off the internet.
:rolleyes:

splashman
Jan 13, 2004, 09:17 AM
Originally posted by sabbath999
NeXT as a hardware company was only a partial failure, Arn. I have two Color Turbo NeXTStations which are in use to this day. They were so far ahead of their time. Steve invented and inovated with the hardware SO much. I would NEVER have considered switching to a mac until the OS was switched to something good... and OSX is VERY good... Panther is the only thing I have ever seen that is better than my beloved NeXT Mach 3.3 (Jaguar was about a pick-em).

I'm sure Arn meant that Next's hardware business was a business failure. No need to get defensive -- we all know Next is awesome . . .

frankly
Jan 13, 2004, 09:19 AM
Originally posted by iggyb
Also, I truly believe that more people would switch if a multi-button mouse was included.

Now that is funny! :)

iggyb
Jan 13, 2004, 09:25 AM
Originally posted by frankly
Now that is funny! :)

Perception is reality, "frankly". It might strike you as funny, but I've read too many posts from people who find the one-button mouse a joke in itself. I'm not talking huge marketshare gains by switching the mouse, but I do think at the margin you'll find people on the fence moving over.

frankly
Jan 13, 2004, 09:37 AM
Originally posted by iggyb
Perception is reality, "frankly". It might strike you as funny, but I've read too many posts from people who find the one-button mouse a joke in itself. I'm not talking huge marketshare gains by switching the mouse, but I do think at the margin you'll find people on the fence moving over.

Right, and the reason that I find it funny is because it is what YOU THINK. I'm sure that you feel that you have a handle on the computer market as a whole and you know exactly what Apple needs to do in order to gain market share.

However, they have entire departments of people that have degrees and experience in this exact area. Don't you think that if gaining more users were as simple offering a different mouse (or no mouse) they would have done it??? That is why it is funny.

You can hate the mouse all you want. I don't disagree with you on that point. I have a third party mouse on ALL of my Macs. It is when you start attaching the decision making process of those thinking about switching to the Mac to the mouse that I have to laugh and laugh hard.

Later, Frank

splashman
Jan 13, 2004, 09:44 AM
Originally posted by iggyb
Perception is reality, "frankly". It might strike you as funny, but I've read too many posts from people who find the one-button mouse a joke in itself. I'm not talking huge marketshare gains by switching the mouse, but I do think at the margin you'll find people on the fence moving over.

I find your assertion funny as well. Maybe you didn't catch the earlier posts that pointed out that just about everybody who gives a rip will replace their mouse no matter what kind was included in the box.

Apple's strategy, whether you agree with it or not, revolves around ease-of use. They are not going to change that strategy merely to suit buyers whose multi-thousand-dollar decision would be swayed by a mouse.

Don't make the mistake of assuming that irate posters on web forums are somehow representative of Apple's target market.

(Edit: Whoops -- Frankly beat me to it. Dang!)

iggyb
Jan 13, 2004, 09:52 AM
Originally posted by frankly
Right, and the reason that I find it funny is because it is what YOU THINK. I'm sure that you feel that you have a handle on the computer market as a whole and you know exactly what Apple needs to do in order to gain market share.

However, they have entire departments of people that have degrees and experience in this exact area. Don't you think that if gaining more users were as simple offering a different mouse (or no mouse) they would have done it??? That is why it is funny.

You can hate the mouse all you want. I don't disagree with you on that point. I have a third party mouse on ALL of my Macs. It is when you start attaching the decision making process of those thinking about switching to the Mac to the mouse that I have to laugh and laugh hard.

Later, Frank

First off, I've stated it's what I think, and not stating this as absolute fact. I have anecdotal evidence at best. You don't seem to get that.

That said, those same entire departments of people with degrees and experience produced the Cube, which was a financial failure. How about those Titanium Powerbooks that had poor wireless reception? Oh no, that can't be! They have teams of professionals, therefore they can never make that mistake!

You have third-party mice on ALL your Macs. I have a multi-button mouse on mine. The majority of my Mac-using friends use them too. That doesn't tell you something?

Again, anecdotal evidence, so don't take this as a statement that I believe all people are like this....but I was in CompUSA, a sales rep was showing this lady a 17" iMac (when it was brand new). When she was giving it a test drive in Word, she asked the employee, "where's the scroll wheel?". The rep then said there wasn't one, and proceeded to talk about the good design of the one-button mouse. However, she seemed to lose interest. Now, did she walk out of there saying "I won't ever buy a Mac, because it only has a one-button mouse!"? Doubtful. But her experience was not what she would have wanted. That's what I'm talking about.

In any case, I don't have evidence that they're losing sales, and you don't have evidence that they're NOT losing sales. Again, it's what I THINK.

BUT - I'm not an entire department filled with experts and degrees. I guess using that logic, I should never criticize government decisions, or my favorite football team for questionable draft choices. DON'T QUESTION THE EXPERTS! ;)

Count Blah
Jan 13, 2004, 09:52 AM
Originally posted by splashman
Full disclosure: I was one of those who didn't believe Apple would release the mini at just $50 less than a current product -- it didn't seem like there would be enough differentiation to bother with. So Apple surprised me there.

But the vehemence displayed in so many posts following the mini's release was very surprising to me. So many angry, angry people. It was as if everyone thought they had a constitutional right to a mini at $149. "How dare they . . ." I'm guessing most of these folks had bought into their own hype.

...

Uhhhh, did you ever think that some people are bitching is because they wanted to see Apple dominate for once. It's not that we believe we have a "constitutional right" to a cheaper iPod mini, it's that we wanted to see Apple become an unbeatable dominating force.

gekko513
Jan 13, 2004, 09:53 AM
Originally posted by Tulse
Although I thought the mini was interesting, I didn't see the appeal until I really read the specs. Then it hit me:

The mini is roughly the size of a credit card.

The mini is the thickness of 16 stacked credit cards, or 8 pennies.

So tiny, and yet it can hold 1,000 songs.

That is the appeal of the mini.

Last summer a colleague of mine (who had gotten a glimpse of my iPod) asked me if I could recommend an mp3 player for his wife. She wanted one to use for her daily walks. She had a mini-disc player, but she thought it was too big.

I let him see my iPod, but since it is comparable in size to a mini-disc player he was not convinced.

Storage capacity was not the main priority, nor was the price. She just wanted a small player.

Now I wouldn't hesitate to recommend the iPod mini, but last summer I had no choice but to recommend some flash-player I had seen ads for.

beg_ne
Jan 13, 2004, 09:53 AM
I think the iPod mini will sell well to the people who Apple is selling it to, that being people looking at the high end flash based players, those people are looking at spending a base of $200.

I think with the feature set, size and iPod name Apple can get a lot of those people.

I wouldn't doubt that the iPod mini could drop by $50 or so in 6 months then Apple can scoop up some of these other people.

phantompigger
Jan 13, 2004, 09:59 AM
I love the concept of the iPod mini. It's small, light and has a respectable capacity. I have one of the original iPods (5GB), and I've never filled it completely. I rarely transfer my entire music library to it; instead, I just bring over certain playlists. As a result, I have little interest in a 40, 20 or even a 15GB iPod.

That said, I cannot help but compare the iPod mini's price to that of the 15GB iPod. Just $50 difference. That's all. Even if I don't need the 11GB, I can clearly see the value in it. It's worth the extra $50.

This same reaction has been voiced by many, many consumers. I don't think that comparisons to the reaction to the original iPod are all that appropriate; after all, the product line consisted of a single model at that time. It was priced prestigiously, and that may have been part of its appeal.

It's much different today. There are four models, and it's just normal compare the price of each model within the product line. Clearly, the iPod mini is the odd one out.

Apple is asking consumers to pay a premium for aesthetics, and to some degree, that's just fine. It's been doing it for years. The catch is that it's asking for a premium for a product already available in its own product line. The last time the company tried this, it was a dismal failure. The Power Macintosh G4 Cube was a poor value when compared to other available Macs, and so very few people bought it.

$249 is out of the range of "impulse purchase" for most consumers. I'm quite sure that if people have $249 to spend on something as self-indulgent as an iPod, they can come up with the extra $50 to buy a 15GB iPod. And while I love the size and shape of the mini, the standard model is not ugly and it's not bulky. I can't imagine anyone saying "There's no way in hell I will be seen in public with that white and chrome crapfest!"

Apple's likely engaging in price skimming with the mini. It will capitalize on the lust factor of the mini, collecting $249 a pop from those with bottomless pockets. And then once sales taper off, they'll lower the price to $199, putting the mini within reach of those of us on a budget (and/or those of us with a bit more brains).

Hey, if money was no object, I'd be buying these babies for everyone in my family. Unfortunately, I can't afford to pay a premium for prettiness.

pp

splashman
Jan 13, 2004, 10:00 AM
Originally posted by Count Blah
Uhhhh, did you ever think that some people are bitching is because they wanted to see Apple dominate for once. It's not that we believe we have a "constitutional right" to a cheaper iPod mini, it's that we wanted to see Apple become an unbeatable dominating force.

Bitching about not getting what you want is one thing. Proclaiming Apple to be a company full of idiots BECAUSE you didn't get what you want is quite another, IMHO.

nagromme
Jan 13, 2004, 10:04 AM
Someone suggested that even the full iPod is too expensive because a CD player costs less.

It also has a capacity of 650 MB of MP3s. CD players are not going to kill the iPod--the sales figures are already in on the iPod's success!

And for those who think Apple will fail to dominate the new compact HD market because they are pricing the mini the SAME as competitors instead of lower.... Why should they undercut and give up revenue, when they dominate the high end without having to do so? And then, when many people inevitably see the 15 for $50 and get that instead.... how exactly is that hurting Apple?

I don't think all the angry posts really come from people looking out for Apple's own good. They come from people who believe rumors ($100 iPods!!!) and then blame Apple for the fact that they were rumors.

I never believed the rumors so I'm not disappointed.

Luckily, Mac rumor followers are a micro percentage of people, so this "backlash" is insignificant outside of forums like this. Certain wintel-centric press will gladly seize upon any such noise, though, to proclaim Apple a failure yet again :)

splashman
Jan 13, 2004, 10:06 AM
Originally posted by iggyb
First off, I've stated it's what I think, and not stating this as absolute fact. I have anecdotal evidence at best. You don't seem to get that.

Oh, I think it was always quite clear you were basing your opinion on anecdotal evidence. We got it. That's why we argued.

Nobody, not even Apple, will state anything as absolute fact, but you can bet they based their marketing decision on more than anecdotal evidence.

And nobody here is claiming Apple doesn't make mistakes. We're just saying Apple's got a teensy bit more credibility than you.

rjwill246
Jan 13, 2004, 10:08 AM
Apple has overpriced this device. It will still sell. Shortly, its price will drop. It will sell more. The newer greater capacity model will be $249. Apple will bundle them... ? $150 for the current model, who knows. It will sell more again. This sets the stage for the introduction of the next round of players as Apple will have a clear sense of what style people are going for, etc, etc. This item is not likely to be a loser and we need about a year to see if this is true.
I still cannot believe the anger in some of these posts. What's THAT about?

the_mole1314
Jan 13, 2004, 10:11 AM
Just read this and found it hilarious...

Any way you spin this it is:
1. Not revolutionary. Big capacity mp3 players already exist. With Creative Labs' entrance into the firewire arena, future nomads will have similar specs and better prices.
2. A bad fit. This product is outside Apple's core competancy - computing devices. When many are calling for a pda, they release an MP3 player.
3. Without a future. This Christmas you will see mp3 players be commoditized. Meaning that the players from Korea will be way less expensive tha iPod. The real money is in DRM and distribution (ala Real Musicnet). If Apple were smart they would be focusing on high gross revenue from services rather than a playback device.

Ironic, no?

iggyb
Jan 13, 2004, 10:15 AM
Originally posted by splashman
Oh, I think it was always quite clear you were basing your opinion on anecdotal evidence. We got it. That's why we argued.

Nobody, not even Apple, will state anything as absolute fact, but you can bet they based their marketing decision on more than anecdotal evidence.

And nobody here is claiming Apple doesn't make mistakes. We're just saying Apple's got a teensy bit more credibility than you.

Well......duh! :D

Of course they have more credibility. And I'm sure I'm biased on the mouse issue. But I'll stand by my statements. That's it.

Don't mistake me for an Apple-basher, though. It's only my opinion, nothing more.

digitalbiker
Jan 13, 2004, 10:19 AM
I think the success or failure of the mini will stem from it's durability or lack thereof.

Being smaller, I suspect that the average mini buyer will want to be more active with the device. If the mini hard drive crashes, skips, or locks up, when jiggled around a little bit, it will get a bad reputation and fail as an mp3 player.

It really is competing against the smaller flash players which have no moving parts and can be tossed around and still literally not miss a beat!

We have yet to find out, just how well this new mini hard drive functions under those conditions.

D*I*S_Frontman
Jan 13, 2004, 10:32 AM
I just reread those initial iPod release rumor threads. They are hysterically funny in hindsight!

Same dimensions as a few credit cards stuck together, sleek yet familiar design, same interface, very useable size HD--yeah, Apple is going to sell millions of these, at $249. mind you, not the pollyanna price drop everyone here is whining for.

As for the comparisons to the Cube, remember that the biggest selling point of the Cube was its aesthetics--small form factor, gorgeous casing--and aesthetic flaws like molding cracks ruined the effect. I would argue that if Apple could have produced the polycarbonate case flawlessly and kept the perceived razzle-dazzle fashion-chic undiluted, they could have sold a LOT of Cubes at their inflated price. Even today Cube owners love their units and have figured out how to jam better videocards and processor upgrades into those cases. Heck, Powerlogix offers an aluminum replacement Cube case, don't they?

Minis are a home run. Apple could have 50-60% of the entire player market by the end of calendar 2004. That should crush the competing online stores pretty effectively. If Apple is telling the truth that iTMS really only breaks even on its own @ its current volume, then imagine the red ink its competitors will be bleeding if they have to maintain the same huge warehouse of music without the corresponding traffic.

For those upset that the Minis are $249. rather than $199., remember that if they sell a million of these babies Apple will have an additional $50 million to spend on R&D to keep their G5s near the top of the performance heap, which many of us will ultimately benefit from when we buy new systems in the future. And rest assured that with their marketing genius, Apple will indeed sell MILLIONS of these units.

Remember: Apple technology makes Minis aethetically beautiful, user-friendly and reliable--Apple marketing makes them indispensibly cool. And "indispensibly cool" means people will pay whatever you ask, within reason, to buy a piece of that "coolness." Branding 101.

anthonymoody
Jan 13, 2004, 10:35 AM
All the people still making the "Gee for $50 more I could get another 11gigs capacity" and "that's a no brainer" arguments truly make me laugh.

Silly fools - open your eyes. Did it ever occur to you that despite similarities, these products are aimed at completely different consumer wants/needs? These people don't wake up in the morning and say:
-I want a HD based MP3 player, which one will I get?

They wake up and say:
-I want a portable music player that meets *my* needs for the uses *I* will find for it

Then they make their assessment.

I suppose you would also criticize someone for buying a BMW M3 when for *less* money they could have a bigger, larger, higher capacity, 4-door 530i. Please. Open your eyes fools.

TM

estevan2737
Jan 13, 2004, 10:38 AM
Does anyone know what Apple's profit margin is on the iPod? Somewhere in the neighborhood of 30%?

If that is close then it would be safe to assume that the costs associated with the mini run in the range of $175 per unit.

If that is accurate than the $149 price tag is out of the question as Apple is not in the habit of selling at a loss. The $199 price tag would only equate to a 12% profit which is far lower than Apple has gone after in the past.

As manufacturing costs lower, it seems reasonable that the price will follow but as Apple ramps up production of this new product, I don't see how they can sell it at a much lower price.

Yes, the 15gb iPod is a better value for myself and many of you...but it is far too big for my wife's purse and doesn't come in green so I'll be buying her a mini.

tbutler
Jan 13, 2004, 10:50 AM
Originally posted by splashman
Oh, I think it was always quite clear you were basing your opinion on anecdotal evidence. We got it. That's why we argued.

Nobody, not even Apple, will state anything as absolute fact, but you can bet they based their marketing decision on more than anecdotal evidence.

And nobody here is claiming Apple doesn't make mistakes. We're just saying Apple's got a teensy bit more credibility than you.

Heck, iggyb, if you want anecdotal evidence, how about this:

I'm the Mac geek for our company. My boss wanted a mouse for his PowerBook, so I got him a nice Logitech Wheel Mouse Optical, same one I use at home. Within a week, he'd given it to me and bought himself an Apple Pro Mouse.

All of the people at my office (besides myself) use the Apple mouse. They didn't like the puck we got with the G3 B&W/early G4's, but they love the current mouse.

How's that?

Now that we've got our personal stories out of the way... You think that, just maybe, actual usability studies - you know, from people who've dealt with more than a small group of family/friends/co-workers - might be a little bit more credible?

[Edit - sorry about the credibility jab, iggyb, saw your reply after I sent this.]

splashman
Jan 13, 2004, 10:52 AM
Originally posted by estevan2737
Yes, the 15gb iPod is a better value for myself and many of you...but it is far too big for my wife's purse and doesn't come in green so I'll be buying her a mini.

Geeks, take note of the above. That is the mini's market. Not you.

Spades
Jan 13, 2004, 10:55 AM
My problem is that I was lead to believe I would soon be buying an affordable iPod, and instead I was given yet another product outside my price range.

A week ago I was hoping to spend $150 on a new iPod, but was ready to go up to $200. When Jobs said they were going after the high-end flash player, priced from $100 to $200, I was ready to whip out the credit card. And then, he announced the $249 price. So much for the afforadble iPod. My problem is that we were promised a competitor to high-end flash players, but delivered something in a completely different niche. I'm no marketing expert, but the flash market strikes me as very much a price sensitive market. This makes me doubtful that the mini will make a large dent in the high-end flash market. It'll grab people from the $200 players, but at that level price is less of a concern. That still leaves most of that $100 to $200 range untouched.

The mini looks good. The specs look good. I think it's going to do fine. I'm just doubtful it will touch more than 5% of that 31% Jobs claims they're after.

peejay
Jan 13, 2004, 10:55 AM
Originally posted by digitalbiker
Being smaller, I suspect that the average mini buyer will want to be more active with the device.

I'm sorry about your size, and all, but maybe that's more information than we needed to know about you. Or did you mean to say that the average mini buyer was smaller. Perhaps the iPod mini is Apple's attempt to be ADA compliant and provide music devices for the size-challenged.

iggyb
Jan 13, 2004, 10:56 AM
Originally posted by tbutler
Heck, iggyb, if you want anecdotal evidence, how about this:

I'm the Mac geek for our company. My boss wanted a mouse for his PowerBook, so I got him a nice Logitech Wheel Mouse Optical, same one I use at home. Within a week, he'd given it to me and bought himself an Apple Pro Mouse.

All of the people at my office (besides myself) use the Apple mouse. They didn't like the puck we got with the G3 B&W/early G4's, but they love the current mouse.

How's that?

Now that we've got our personal stories out of the way... You think that, just maybe, actual usability studies - you know, from people who've dealt with more than a small group of family/friends/co-workers - might be a little bit more credible?

tbutler, if you read my earlier post you would know that I already conceded that Apple may be a little more credible. I only offer anecdotal evidence and my perspective on the issue. Nothing more. Geez....I suppose the puck mouse was a thing of beauty as well? Oh, right, nobody at your office liked them. We can all agree that Apple has more credibility than little ol' me. I'm just stating that I disagree with the one-button mouse.

PS - sorry about my jab about the credibility. :p

splashman
Jan 13, 2004, 10:59 AM
Originally posted by digitalbiker
I think the success or failure of the mini will stem from it's durability or lack thereof.

Being smaller, I suspect that the average mini buyer will want to be more active with the device. If the mini hard drive crashes, skips, or locks up, when jiggled around a little bit, it will get a bad reputation and fail as an mp3 player.

It really is competing against the smaller flash players which have no moving parts and can be tossed around and still literally not miss a beat!

We have yet to find out, just how well this new mini hard drive functions under those conditions.

As an Apple fan, I sure hope they did their homework, because you're right -- if there's any buzz about lack of durability/reliability, Apple will be making major contributions to California's landfills.

splashman
Jan 13, 2004, 11:01 AM
Originally posted by peejay
I'm sorry about your size, and all, but maybe that's more information than we needed to know about you. Or did you mean to say that the average mini buyer was smaller. Perhaps the iPod mini is Apple's attempt to be ADA compliant and provide music devices for the size-challenged.

heh heh. Cute!

bobindashadows
Jan 13, 2004, 11:08 AM
I think it's appropriate to send away all the people who were hideously, hideously wrong about the iPod 2 years ago. I thought it was cool, but I wasn't a member here at the time.

I just love how some people on mac forums think they can run Apple better than Steve, some people on political forums think they'd be a better congressman, senator, president than the people who do it every day. People who think that studying something once, or even for years, actually compares to actually going out and doing it.

nagromme
Jan 13, 2004, 11:09 AM
Originally posted by Spades
My problem is that I was lead to believe I would soon be buying an affordable iPod, and instead I was given yet another product outside my price range.

A week ago I was hoping to spend $150 on a new iPod, but was ready to go up to $200. ... My problem is that we were promised a competitor to high-end flash players, but delivered something in a completely different niche.

Exactly, people are angry about the promise being broken... except... there was NO promise. Rumor sites made fanciful suggestions based on anonymous misinformation... and people took those rumors (which were simply impossible because hard drives cost too much) and turned them into "promises from Apple."

I'm no marketing expert, but the flash market strikes me as very much a price sensitive market. This makes me doubtful that the mini will make a large dent in the high-end flash market. It'll grab people from the $200 players, but at that level price is less of a concern. That still leaves most of that $100 to $200 range untouched.

Actually, at the mini intro Steve said they are going after the ~$200 high-end flash market ONLY. That market is already known to be 31% of all player sales. (Another 31% is $150 and down, and Apple's not going for that because you can't make a good player that cheap--they hold hardly any music.)

And if Apple is only after the $200 market, then for $50 people go from 120 songs to 1,000--plus numerous other iPod benefits. That's NOT a difficult sell.

PS, Look at buymusic.com and see a 1.5 GB player for $300 :)

(See also my market breakdown in boldface (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=55115&perpage=25&pagenumber=2) on page 2 of this thread--numbers from Apple.)

mrsebastian
Jan 13, 2004, 11:10 AM
Originally posted by D*I*S_Frontman
I just reread those initial iPod release rumor threads. They are hysterically funny in hindsight!...

As for the comparisons to the Cube, remember that the biggest selling point of the Cube was its aesthetics--small form factor, gorgeous casing--and aesthetic flaws like molding cracks ruined the effect. I would argue that if Apple could have produced the polycarbonate case flawlessly and kept the perceived razzle-dazzle fashion-chic undiluted, they could have sold a LOT of Cubes at their inflated price. Even today Cube owners love their units and have figured out how to jam better videocards and processor upgrades into those cases. Heck, Powerlogix offers an aluminum replacement Cube case, don't they?

Minis are a home run. Apple could have 50-60% of the entire player market by the end of calendar 2004. That should crush the competing online stores pretty effectively. If Apple is telling the truth that iTMS really only breaks even on its own @ its current volume, then imagine the red ink its competitors will be bleeding if they have to maintain the same huge warehouse of music without the corresponding traffic...

i still think a lower price point would make minipods even more accesible. why sell a million at [guessing] 30% profit when you can sell 5 million at 25%. as a stock holder and mac fanatic, i of course support apple and want them to succeed and we shall see.

on a cube side note, i would still love a cube, but there is absolutely no way i would pay about the same price for a less powerful/expandable machine -- as a pro user it just doesn't make any sense. that said, that's where i agree with you that minipod may work, because it's a consumer orientated product and in that market, design and the coolness factor usually wins against price.

nagromme
Jan 13, 2004, 11:14 AM
No need for us to "guess" on Apple's profits/margins on the minis... Apple's decision was based on the real numbers you may be sure :)

The miniaturized hard disks cost more per GB than the ones in the bigger ipods. The HD makers, and Apple, are betting that small physical size has value for some people. I agree.

agentkow
Jan 13, 2004, 11:15 AM
In addition to the when the first iPod came out, all this also reminds me of when we all realized that the 3rd generation iPod would have buttons ABOVE the scroll wheel.

Oh the horror! How could we ever reach those buttons so far away? (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=24152)

Anyway, my point is most people will get over it, and its funny to read old things.

frankly
Jan 13, 2004, 11:17 AM
Originally posted by iggyb
First off, I've stated it's what I think, and not stating this as absolute fact. I have anecdotal evidence at best. You don't seem to get that.

That said, those same entire departments of people with degrees and experience produced the Cube, which was a financial failure. How about those Titanium Powerbooks that had poor wireless reception? Oh no, that can't be! They have teams of professionals, therefore they can never make that mistake!

You have third-party mice on ALL your Macs. I have a multi-button mouse on mine. The majority of my Mac-using friends use them too. That doesn't tell you something?

Again, anecdotal evidence, so don't take this as a statement that I believe all people are like this....but I was in CompUSA, a sales rep was showing this lady a 17" iMac (when it was brand new). When she was giving it a test drive in Word, she asked the employee, "where's the scroll wheel?". The rep then said there wasn't one, and proceeded to talk about the good design of the one-button mouse. However, she seemed to lose interest. Now, did she walk out of there saying "I won't ever buy a Mac, because it only has a one-button mouse!"? Doubtful. But her experience was not what she would have wanted. That's what I'm talking about.

In any case, I don't have evidence that they're losing sales, and you don't have evidence that they're NOT losing sales. Again, it's what I THINK.

BUT - I'm not an entire department filled with experts and degrees. I guess using that logic, I should never criticize government decisions, or my favorite football team for questionable draft choices. DON'T QUESTION THE EXPERTS! ;)

First, I do get that you are providing anecdotal evidence which is why your post holds so little weight.

Second, when you speak of the Cube and Airport reception you are speaking of huge projects and grandious items. We were talking about a mouse and you seem to think that simply changing the mouse that comes with a multi-thousand dollar machine is going to increase Apple's market share. Again, ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

You forgot to include the biggest part of my point in your observation of who has third party mice. I have a third party mouse for my PC as well and so do ALL of my friends that have PCs. That is my point. Everyone that cares buys a third party mouse regardless of what their machine comes with.

Since you want to provide even more anecdotal comparisons let me respond. When Donovan McNabb was chosen in the first round for the Philadelphia Eagles five years ago he was booed by the fans in attendance and it was talked about as the most disappointing draft pick they could have made. The fans wanted them to pick running back Ricky Williams. Well, let's see. Donovan McNabb has led the Eagles to the NFC championship game 3 years in a row now and Ricky Williams has led his teams exactly nowhere.

I did not say that you shouldn't criticize. That is perfectly fine. Not only do I prefer a third party mouse but I actually don't like Apple's mouse even if I were using it for only one button. What I did say it that it is very funny when you claim that they would increase their market share by changing the mouse that comes with the computer. I think that is very funny.

Later, Frank

eazyway
Jan 13, 2004, 11:18 AM
Originally posted by Spades
My problem is that I was lead to believe I would soon be buying an affordable iPod, and instead I was given yet another product outside my price range.

A week ago I was hoping to spend $150 on a new iPod, but was ready to go up to $200. When Jobs said they were going after the high-end flash player, priced from $100 to $200, I was ready to whip out the credit card. And then, he announced the $249 price. So much for the afforadble iPod. My problem is that we were promised a competitor to high-end flash players, but delivered something in a completely different niche. I'm no marketing expert, but the flash market strikes me as very much a price sensitive market. This makes me doubtful that the mini will make a large dent in the high-end flash market. It'll grab people from the $200 players, but at that level price is less of a concern. That still leaves most of that $100 to $200 range untouched.

The mini looks good. The specs look good. I think it's going to do fine. I'm just doubtful it will touch more than 5% of that 31% Jobs claims they're after.

Why would you ever think Apple will produce low end products. The cannot afford to. With the design requirements of Apple product low end is not an option. Design is too important.

High end flash is from at least $169 up to $299. Thus the mini falls into the area. Be it at the high end. It has many pluses. But only 25 min skip protection. ( for 90% this is fine but those who run 10k + it is a little low)

Adding an extra 5 % to their market share is a large impact. That would amount to selling an extra 200,000+ iPod minis in the first year. I am sure any company would take that.

imtechr
Jan 13, 2004, 11:19 AM
I think by looking at all of this I've come to the conclusion that Apple is on the mark with the style and size of the mini. I know a LOT of people who would buy it "because its...(insert color here)". There are lots of companies who would never take such risks! They would just make a product that looked boring and then attempt to market it a a cool product. Conclusion: cool products just are, and this is a cool product.

frankly
Jan 13, 2004, 11:23 AM
Originally posted by phantompigger
I have one of the original iPods (5GB), and I've never filled it completely. I rarely transfer my entire music library to it; instead, I just bring over certain playlists. As a result, I have little interest in a 40, 20 or even a 15GB iPod.

That said, I cannot help but compare the iPod mini's price to that of the 15GB iPod. Just $50 difference. That's all. Even if I don't need the 11GB, I can clearly see the value in it. It's worth the extra $50.

Hey, if money was no object, I'd be buying these babies for everyone in my family. Unfortunately, I can't afford to pay a premium for prettiness.

pp

Did you even read what you wrote before you submitted this? You state in one paragraph that you do not even fill your 5GB model and have little interest in a 15GB iPod. Then, in the very next paragraph you say that even if you don't need the 11GB it is worth the extra $50. What?????????

Does that make sense to you? Even if you are not going to use the extra capacity paying extra money for it is worth it to you.

Then you say that you can't afford to pay a premium for prettiness. You wouldn't be paying a premium for prettiness. You'd be paying LESS

Yes, that's right, $249 is LESS than $299 and it is much LESS than the $399 paid for an original 5GB.

That is what I can't understand. Once you decide that capacity is not important to you the iPod mini is actually a better device with features that the iPod does not have and it costs less.

Later, Frank

ITR 81
Jan 13, 2004, 11:32 AM
Originally posted by eazyway


Adding an extra 5 % to their market share is a large impact. That would amount to selling an extra 200,000+ iPod minis in the first year. I am sure any company would take that.

Actually Apple would gain around 31% of the high-end flash market if it dominated.

I feel Apple will dominate the whole market in about 5 yrs.

2 yrs from now this same iPod mini could be selling for $99.99 or less.

frankly
Jan 13, 2004, 11:35 AM
Originally posted by Spades
My problem is that I was lead to believe I would soon be buying an affordable iPod, and instead I was given yet another product outside my price range.

Who led you to believe this???

Later, Frank

macmax
Jan 13, 2004, 11:47 AM
i only want it to use it as my stereo in my car.

What do i need???

Can i make it work with it so i don't use any more disks???

I don't want a mp3 stereo for the car, the Ipod or mini would give me great flexibility.

Thanks:confused: :D

iggyb
Jan 13, 2004, 11:50 AM
Originally posted by macmax
i only want it to use it as my stereo in my car.

What do i need???

Can i make it work with it so i don't use any more disks???

I don't want a mp3 stereo for the car, the Ipod or mini would give me great flexibility.

Thanks:confused: :D

Do you have a cassette player in your car? If so, grab one of those tape adapters, plug the tape in the deck, the jack into the iPod, and you're good to go!

If not, and you don't have a jack input for the car stereo, it may need some real tweaking...

geerlingguy
Jan 13, 2004, 11:52 AM
Originally posted by punter
very funny! Yeah the mini ipods are a solid product. Although they are more expensive then I'd like to pay, as my boss always says "after you set the initial price, it can only go down from there".

Lets hope that by next ski season they are 50 or 80 bucks cheaper, and then i'll own one for sure!

PS good work arn. I echo the posts above.

Remember the LCD iMac... original price $1699 (luckily I bought at this price), then one month later changed to $1799 (yikes!)

I'm not saying that the iPod mini will raise in price, but it is never an impossibility ;)

croasmun
Jan 13, 2004, 12:00 PM
I think Spades is right on here. Certainly within the flow of the keynote, the pricing of the mini made no sense. Jobs clearly defined the market they were going to enter and, it seems, with the $249 price-tag he missed it. Yes, the specs are clearly better than the other devices in that market. His presentation was quite successful in that regard. However, what Apple hates to admit is that quite often a purchase decision begins with a dollar amount. "I want a portable music player; I've got X number of dollars to spend on it." We can all wish that this weren't the case, but the fact of life is that consumers are looking for the best product at their particular price point, not the best product or even the best features-to-price ratio. The price point is usually the beginning of the search, at least once the consumer has some idea of what the field looks like. The disappointment at least for this Mac fan and keynote-watcher was that it seemed like Jobs set us up that he was targeting a particular market, which in my mind means a particular price point, and then delivered a product above the price point and therefore missing the market. It's not like the consumers in the high-end flash market have been saying "Gee, I'd buy an iPod, but the capacity is too darn big..." Maybe they have been saying "I'd buy an iPod, but the physical size is too big," but Jobs didn't list that in his feature comparison! From Job's own presentation it seemed like Apple was going to reach the mid-range market because it had reduced the feature set of it's high-end product--as if the consumers were waiting for a lower-end product, rather than a lower-end price...

That said, the mini may well succeed for all the reasons well-outlined in this thread. Perhaps the form-factor is the key aspect of the product that will make it sell. If so, from the keynote, it seems that Jobs will be surprised. He thought it was the reduced feature set and the $50 discount that was going to make them fly off the shelves.

I think it was the logic of Job's pitch that brought about the rash of early criticism from Mac geeks like us who watched his presentation.

My 2 cents... or maybe that was 3 cents.

macmax
Jan 13, 2004, 12:01 PM
Originally posted by iggyb
Do you have a cassette player in your car? If so, grab one of those tape adapters, plug the tape in the deck, the jack into the iPod, and you're good to go!

If not, and you don't have a jack input for the car stereo, it may need some real tweaking...

hey thanks , cool of you to reply so soon.
Well, yes i can get one.

I am coming back to Florida in march and i will be buying me a mini and that is gonna be it, no more cds, hehehheheh.
thanks again:D

phantompigger
Jan 13, 2004, 12:01 PM
Originally posted by frankly
[B]Did you even read what you wrote before you submitted this? You state in one paragraph that you do not even fill your 5GB model and have little interest in a 15GB iPod. Then, in the very next paragraph you say that even if you don't need the 11GB it is worth the extra $50. What?????????

Um, thanks for freaking out. I think I made it quite clear that although I don't need the extra space, I can see that the 15GB iPod provides much more bang for the buck.

Just because something is cheaper doesn't mean it's a better value.

Another thing to think about: The 15GB iPod will have a much better resale value. This is an important consideration for users who intend to sell it at some point to trade up for a new one.

pp

scottwat
Jan 13, 2004, 12:06 PM
I think alot of us, me included wanted to see a sub 200$ mini at any capacity. If you look at most consumer electronics this is a target pricepoint. What I would be interested in seeing is an AAC compatible device under this price point. With the move to legal downloads, and I am a huge supporter of legal downloads, the lack of a low price device to support the #1 music store is a bit of a barrier. When Apple entered the windows market which was extremely important for the future of legal music and I think culture in general, they have to deal with the culture of people that barely pay $249 for their computer. While I like the mini at this pricepoint, it does seem fair. There needs to be a step in the lower reaches to appeal to a broader array of consumers. Even a 1 gig would be fine. And really once a person gets hooked on iTMS it is hard to stop, they will upgrade, and give the 1Gig to there GF, Kids, Dog, etc.

phantompigger
Jan 13, 2004, 12:12 PM
Originally posted by scottwat
I think alot of us, me included wanted to see a sub 200$ mini at any capacity. If you look at most consumer electronics this is a target pricepoint. What I would be interested in seeing is an AAC compatible device under this price point. With the move to legal downloads, and I am a huge supporter of legal downloads, the lack of a low price device to support the #1 music store is a bit of a barrier.

I agree completely. Apple needs to get an inexpensive device out there to guarantee the continued succes of the iTunes Music Store.

A 2GB iPod mini at $149-$179 would be perfect. Once people get hooked, and once they fill up the mini, they'll want to upgrade to a bigger, badder iPod to maintain compatibility with AAC and the iTunes Music Store.

pp

iggyb
Jan 13, 2004, 12:14 PM
Originally posted by phantompigger
I agree completely. Apple needs to get an inexpensive device out there to guarantee the continued succes of the iTunes Music Store.

A 2GB iPod mini at $149-$179 would be perfect. Once people get hooked, and once they fill up the mini, they'll want to upgrade to a bigger, badder iPod to maintain compatibility with AAC and the iTunes Music Store.

pp

Since Apple seems to be uninterested in a low-priced, low-capacity player (by their own admission), perhaps they'll let HP create an iTunes-compatible player. :cool:

tiktokfx
Jan 13, 2004, 12:18 PM
I see a lot of people making claims along the line of

"If this were $200, even if it were smaller, Apple would sell x times more."

However, these same people are saying "Why pay $249 when $299 gets you ~4x more space?"

If Apple were selling, say, a 1GB player for $199, these people would most likely say "Why pay $199 when $299 gets you 15x more space?" or "Why pay $199 when a $249 Rio Nitrus gets you 4x the space?"

There's always going to be people who believe a product is grossly overpriced when compared to similar items.

And with regards to NeXT hardware being a flop (business-wise), that's true. However, that's more due to NeXT never being able to get much respect, ironically, for the software at the time. Note that NeXT had very little success selling software, despite significantly more advanced design than other operating systems of the time. Note that a NeXT Cube has probably the lowest depreciation value of any computer, ever. Find another system that has a 68030 or '040 that can still go for $500-1000.

ccuilla
Jan 13, 2004, 12:27 PM
Originally posted by phantompigger
Just because something is cheaper doesn't mean it's a better value.

This is true. JUST because something is cheaper does not make it a better value. However, iPod Mini isn't JUST cheaper...it offers some things that WILL be of value to some buyers (smaller, lighter, colored, scroll button/wheel design). But doesn't offer some things that may be of little value to some buyers (extra 11GB of storage).

One size does not fit all, and value cannot always be determined by simply two metrics (price and capacity)...and certainly not just one (price). Furthermore, value (like beauty), is often in the eye of the beholder.

ganryu
Jan 13, 2004, 12:34 PM
Originally posted by phantompigger
Um, thanks for freaking out. I think I made it quite clear that although I don't need the extra space, I can see that the 15GB iPod provides much more bang for the buck.

To quote a slashdot poster who totally trashes your point on how "price per GB" is the only and absolute metric:

Hey, for mere $3 a GB you can just cart around an Xserve RAID. You think i's got a headphone out and battery back yet?"

Count Blah
Jan 13, 2004, 12:36 PM
Originally posted by D*I*S_Frontman
I just reread those initial iPod release rumor threads. They are hysterically funny in hindsight!

...

As for the comparisons to the Cube, remember that the biggest selling point of the Cube was its aesthetics--small form factor, gorgeous casing--and aesthetic flaws like molding cracks ruined the effect. I would argue that if Apple could have produced the polycarbonate case flawlessly and kept the perceived razzle-dazzle fashion-chic undiluted, they could have sold a LOT of Cubes at their inflated price. Even today Cube owners love their units and have figured out how to jam better videocards and processor upgrades into those cases. Heck, Powerlogix offers an aluminum replacement Cube case, don't they?

...

So you are saying that the cube would have been a success if there were not little cracks in the casing!?!?!?!?!? WOW!!! You really missed the point of the whole cube experience then.

frankly
Jan 13, 2004, 12:42 PM
Originally posted by ccuilla
This is true. JUST because something is cheaper does not make it a better value. However, iPod Mini isn't JUST cheaper...it offers some things that WILL be of value to some buyers (smaller, lighter, colored, scroll button/wheel design). But doesn't offer some things that may be of little value to some buyers (extra 11GB of storage).

One size does not fit all, and value cannot always be determined by simply two metrics (price and capacity)...and certainly not just one (price). Furthermore, value (like beauty), is often in the eye of the beholder.

Exactly!!!

iggyb
Jan 13, 2004, 12:46 PM
Of course we'll wait and see what the sales response is for the iPod mini. For me, I was hoping for a lower-priced player...something in the $149-199 range. However, there are some that will find this a good value, given the size and style.

In either case, the number 2 and 4 slots of the top sellers in mp3 players are 128KB flash players (1,3, and 5 are the iPods). I would love to see a cheap player compatible with iTunes sometime down the road.

ganryu
Jan 13, 2004, 12:46 PM
Seriously though, for those of you who keep talking about "bang per buck" - why are you here? The Creative Nomad Zen 60GB sells for $399 retail. The 40GB iPod sells at $499. Clearly you should sell your iPod and get yourself a Nomad right? And head over to the Creative forum?

Oh wait, what's that? You like the design and size of the iPod? So it's not just about price per GB then. I believe this is where I clue you in on how the iPod mini is completely different in terms of design and size. Stop comparing different products based on price per GB, when the other specs are so different.

You guys are pretty funny though, I must say.

Count Blah
Jan 13, 2004, 12:47 PM
Originally posted by anthonymoody
All the people still making the "Gee for $50 more I could get another 11gigs capacity" and "that's a no brainer" arguments truly make me laugh.

Silly fools - open your eyes. Did it ever occur to you that despite similarities, these products are aimed at completely different consumer wants/needs? These people don't wake up in the morning and say:
-I want a HD based MP3 player, which one will I get?

They wake up and say:
-I want a portable music player that meets *my* needs for the uses *I* will find for it

Then they make their assessment.

I suppose you would also criticize someone for buying a BMW M3 when for *less* money they could have a bigger, larger, higher capacity, 4-door 530i. Please. Open your eyes fools.

TM

Did YOU ever concider that people are unwilling to spend over $200 for a foo-foo item? Parents don't want to spend over $200 for something little jonhy is going smash up while skateboarding. It's an MP3 players, not a computer, it's a shiny neet do-dad. And when you are dealing with the lower priced items(MP3 player, TV, monitor, etc..) you find people who will not go over a certain price.

For example, Apple plays the pricing game in it's computer lineup. It tries to get something out there for under $1000(emac/iBook) It tries to get something out there for $1999(G4/Powerbook). They just chose not to appeal to the "I wouldn't buy that if it was $1 but I'd buy it for $.99" crowd. They wanted to keep their super high profit margin, than win the contest outright for once. That is where I am coming from. A $199 2Gig iPod mini makes more sence to me than a $249 4Gig one because then you actually compete against the flash market.

phantompigger
Jan 13, 2004, 12:48 PM
Originally posted by ccuilla
One size does not fit all, and value cannot always be determined by simply two metrics (price and capacity)...and certainly not just one (price). Furthermore, value (like beauty), is often in the eye of the beholder.

I can't argue with that. People who choose the iPod mini at its current price point will certainly be making the decision based upon aesthetics.

My concern is that, like the Power Macintosh Cube, there just won't be enough buyers at this price point. Everyone I've talked to feels that $249 is too expensive for the mini. EVERYONE. Yes, that's anecdotal, but these consistently negative reactions should alarm Apple.

The consensus seems to be that Apple could have hit a home run at $199.

And for those of you who claim that the iPod isn't targeted at the faithful, I'd like to point out that in a recent Newsweek, Jobs claims that one of the "...biggest customers for the iPod mini is going to be current owners buying a second iPod."

One final thought: Do you think that the introduction of 15GB might have been ill-timed? Do you think that we'd all be more accepting of the $249 price point if the $299 continued to carry a 10GB HD?

pp

ganryu
Jan 13, 2004, 12:48 PM
Originally posted by iggyb
For me, I was hoping for a lower-priced player...

And for those of you who were hoping for a higher-priced player, please raise your hand?

Count Blah
Jan 13, 2004, 12:58 PM
Originally posted by ganryu
And for those of you who were hoping for a higher-priced player, please raise your hand?
Apparently those who say the mini is the best thing since sliced bread. They defend it like it's their first born. They make fun of people who think it's overpriced. They can't see the irony that the same arguments that Stevey used in the Keynot to buy the mini makes it look like a dog compared to the classic iPod. They think the leader bends over an poops nickels. They see the cube as a success, and blame the unwashed troglodyte masses for not buying, instead of seeing it as an overpriced headless G4.

I'm guessing these people would have been happy with a $199 mini, but they seem to REALLY love it as it is and REALLY love to make fun of others who didn't drink the kool-aid.

ganryu
Jan 13, 2004, 12:58 PM
Originally posted by Count Blah
Did YOU ever concider that people are unwilling to spend over $200 for a foo-foo item? Parents don't want to spend over $200 for something little jonhy is going smash up while skateboarding. It's an MP3 players, not a computer, it's a shiny neet do-dad. And when you are dealing with the lower prices you find people who will not go over a certain price.

And there are people unwilling to spend over $150 for a "foo-foo item". Or people unwilling to spend over $100 for the "foo-foo item". Frankly, I don't even know what a foo-foo item is, so I'm hoping someone will give it to me for free.

What you're trying to say (with out the foo-foos and doo-dads) is that there is an inherent elasticity in the price of a product, and if the product is lowered by $X, Y more people will buy it. It's one of the first concepts taught in Economics 101, so you're not really reinventing anything here.

To all you armchair theorists out there - do you seriously believe Apple hasn't considered the supply demand curve for the iPod? While most of you are just blindly guessing the sales, profit margins, target demographic of iPod Mini users, there are people at Apple who has real data for all those metrics. Not only that, they get paid to think about it everyday for work.

If Steve Jobs is driving the Apple gravy train, you guys are the worst backseat drivers ever.

ganryu
Jan 13, 2004, 01:03 PM
Originally posted by Count Blah
Apparently those who say the mini is the best thing since sliced bread. They defend it like it's their first born. They make fun of people who think it's overpriced. They can't see the irony that the same arguments that Stevey used in the Keynot to buy the mini makes it look like a dog compared to the classic iPod. They think the leader bends over an poops nickels. They see the cube as a success, and blame the unwashed troglodyte masses for not buying, instead of seeing it as an overpriced headless G4.

I'm guessing these people would have been happy with a $199 mini, but they seem to REALLY love it as it is and REALLY love to make fun of others who didn't drink the kool-aid.

Your incessant use of hyperbole isn't helping your argument. Especially when the anti-iPod Mini crowd is considerably more abusive in their complaints.

To get past my sarcasm, no one HOPES for a higher priced player. No one is going to cry how it's too cheap, if the iPod Mini comes out at $29.99 with a $50 rebate.

But there are some of us who find $249 to be an acceptable value. If you don't, then don't buy it, it's that simple.

kwtneo
Jan 13, 2004, 01:11 PM
Originally posted by eazyway
Why would you ever think Apple will produce low end products. The cannot afford to. With the design requirements of Apple product low end is not an option. Design is too important.

High end flash is from at least $169 up to $299. Thus the mini falls into the area. Be it at the high end. It has many pluses. But only 25 min skip protection. ( for 90% this is fine but those who run 10k + it is a little low)

Adding an extra 5 % to their market share is a large impact. That would amount to selling an extra 200,000+ iPod minis in the first year. I am sure any company would take that.

don't worry
this price point as always in apple's and other tech companies' history of product introductions is for the early adopters. the price will come down to about 199 in a few months....
(at least i think it will ;)

ganryu
Jan 13, 2004, 01:19 PM
Originally posted by kwtneo
don't worry
this price point as always in apple's and other tech companies' history of product introductions is for the early adopters. the price will come down to about 199 in a few months....
(at least i think it will ;)

I agree... The original price point was $399 for the 1G iPod. The cheapest iPod is now 15G for $299.

Once there's enough volume, they'll be able to bring down the price of the 4GB (and introduce higher capacity iPod Minis at the same $249 price)

QuiteSure
Jan 13, 2004, 01:24 PM
Originally posted by croasmun
However, what Apple hates to admit is that quite often a purchase decision begins with a dollar amount. "I want a portable music player; I've got X number of dollars to spend on it." We can all wish that this weren't the case, but the fact of life is that consumers are looking for the best product at their particular price point, not the best product or even the best features-to-price ratio. The price point is usually the beginning of the search, at least once the consumer has some idea of what the field looks like.

This statement is true, but overlooks a basic reality of buying: a purchaser will buy all his budget can afford, and then a little bit more.

A buyer walks into Best Buy with a $199 budget for a mp3 player. He sees those in the class, and then the salesman says "Here's an iPod mini for just $50 more." We presume that the buyer will drool and begin to figure out how he or she can afford the mini. This scenario is played out countless times a day in the auto and real estate markets. It will happen here too. It's simple human nature.

winmacguy
Jan 13, 2004, 01:25 PM
Originally posted by ganryu
And for those of you who were hoping for a higher-priced player, please raise your hand?

http://www.appleinsider.com/news/
iPod mini
Independent of recent reports circulating around the web, AppleInsider sources are confirming Apple plans to reduce the price of the new iPod mini by approximately $50 (US), as soon as humanly possible. While some reports have speculated that the reduction could take place sometime in the coming year, sources expect the miniatures to shed the cost in-time for Summer.

iPod
Believe it or not, Apple's newly formed alliance with HP may become one of potentially numerous agreements based around the same terms, sources said recently. The computer maker is rumored to have several potential partnerships in-line that would extend the iPod's dominance in the music industry by allowing Apple to manufacture the players for third parties. However, no specific details on likely contenders are yet available

rjwill246
Jan 13, 2004, 01:28 PM
It is amazing to read how many people assumed that Apple was the one suggesting the size and price of the minis in the preannouncement phase. That is why I cannot understand the 'frustration' and 'anger.' These folks should never read these posts... they get fantasy and reality all mixed up and then blow a fuse. Sorta funny in a diesel-brained kinda way?

phantompigger
Jan 13, 2004, 01:28 PM
Originally posted by ganryu
To quote a slashdot poster who totally trashes your point on how "price per GB" is the only and absolute metric:

Actually, I never stated that price-per-gigabyte is the only metric, although I can understand how that could be inferred.

I'm actually very, very conscious of aesthetics. They are extremely important to me, and they play a role in almost every purchase decision I make.

To be succinct, my point is that the aesthetics of the iPod mini are not enough of an enticement for most people to overlook its poor price-per-gigabyte value.

As far as price goes, there's always sweet spot where people's lust and logic meet. And judging from the rather negative reaction, it's not $249.

pp

tiktokfx
Jan 13, 2004, 01:37 PM
Originally posted by phantompigger
As far as price goes, there's always sweet spot where people's lust and logic meet. And judging from the rather negative reaction, it's not $249.

Hard to say, as people on here, for the most part, have not actually seen one in person and are basing their judgement solely on specifications.

ganryu
Jan 13, 2004, 01:37 PM
Originally posted by winmacguy
http://www.appleinsider.com/news/
iPod mini
Independent of recent reports circulating around the web, AppleInsider sources are confirming Apple plans to reduce the price of the new iPod mini by approximately $50 (US), as soon as humanly possible. While some reports have speculated that the reduction could take place sometime in the coming year, sources expect the miniatures to shed the cost in-time for Summer.

Ok, first of all, a lot of you are going to get your hopes up again if the price reduction doesn't take place by the summer.

Second, it's always known that the product costs more at its initial launch, to recoup the R&D costs and to wait for the economies of scale to improve. The price cut once production ramps up is really no surprise...

ccuilla
Jan 13, 2004, 01:40 PM
Originally posted by phantompigger
I can't argue with that. People who choose the iPod mini at its current price point will certainly be making the decision based upon aesthetics.

They will be making a decision based on the things THEY value. This MAY be aesthetics. It maybe other things.


My concern is that, like the Power Macintosh Cube, there just won't be enough buyers at this price point.


Valid concern. One Apple is likely aware of themselves. But we'll all see soon I suspect.


Everyone I've talked to feels that $249 is too expensive for the mini. EVERYONE. Yes, that's anecdotal, but these consistently negative reactions should alarm Apple.

$249 is too expensive when compared to what?

Everyone said the same thing with the original iPod. I think Apple knows what it is doing here.


The consensus seems to be that Apple could have hit a home run at $199.

Are you assuming that iPod Mini won't be $199..say in 4-6 months? After Apple has sold as many at $249 as it can?

ccuilla
Jan 13, 2004, 01:42 PM
Originally posted by phantompigger
To be succinct, my point is that the aesthetics of the iPod mini are not enough of an enticement for most people to overlook its poor price-per-gigabyte value.

How do you know this?

ganryu
Jan 13, 2004, 01:43 PM
Originally posted by phantompigger

I'm actually very, very conscious of aesthetics. They are extremely important to me, and they play a role in almost every purchase decision I make.

To be succinct, my point is that the aesthetics of the iPod mini are not enough of an enticement for most people to overlook its poor price-per-gigabyte value.


Most people? Most people on MacForums (who on average has much higher expectations than Apple can deliver), or most people that are in the market for mp3 players? If you're referring to the latter, please provide evidence to back up your statements.

Also, from the fact that 128mb players hold the 2nd and 4th best selling spot, unless they cost around $8, they have a poor price-per-gigabyte value compared to the Mini. So somewhere, your theory falls apart.

tbutler
Jan 13, 2004, 01:49 PM
Originally posted by kwtneo
don't worry
this price point as always in apple's and other tech companies' history of product introductions is for the early adopters. the price will come down to about 199 in a few months....

AppleInsider's saying today:

Independent of recent reports circulating around the web, AppleInsider sources are confirming Apple plans to reduce the price of the new iPod mini by approximately $50 (US), as soon as humanly possible.

I'm sure there are people who are going to seize this as justification (as they did the MacWorld UK report) and say "Ah-HAH! See? We TOLD you that they were too expensive." Completely ignoring the little qualifier 'as soon as humanly possible.'

I look at this and say, "Ah-hah! Apple knows that they would sell more at a lower price, but they can't afford to right now. In the meantime, they're going to sell as many as they can at the current price point to those who will buy them, until costs drop to the point where they can afford to drop the price - through higher volume, improvement in disk prices, or whatever."

As I understand it, the iPod mini's use the 1" mechanism also used in CF Microdrives; I couldn't find any 4 gig Microdrives in a quick web search, but the best price I found on the 2 gig models was $190. Doesn't look like there's a whole lot of room for pricing the iPod mini at $200, does it?

I've seen some people suggesting Apple should put that new 0.7" mechanism for $70 in there instead; but apart from the manufacturer being relatively new without much track record, the mechanism's limited to 2 gig in size, and I doubt it would be easy or simple to engineer the iPod mini's shell to work with both mechanisms. (IIRC, the 0.7" mechanism doesn't even use a standard ATA interface, so they'd need to have completely different electronics sets as well.) I think it made more sense for Apple's design engineers to go with a proven, stable form factor with a long history of improving price/performance, instead of a relatively new, untested mechanism that would require a redesign of the I/O circuitry in the iPod's system.

iggyb
Jan 13, 2004, 01:50 PM
In defense of phantompigger, I think he/she is just giving a prediction that the price point doesn't match its value. I seem to agree. But hey, we're all speculating here.

winmacguy
Jan 13, 2004, 01:50 PM
I seem to remember this issue cropping up in November/December last year so I Figure it must be all the new PC owners of iPods jumping up and down in the UK about the cost of getting their iPod batteries replaced. I havent spottted any additional posts on MacBytes or Mac rumours yet from PeeCee newbies complaining..

Ipod's battery life let down
Technology



Published: 12-Jan-2004
By: Samira Ahmed



It's considered sleek and savvy and fits into your pocket in a way the walkman never did.



The iPod, by Apple, can cost anywhere from £250 to £400 pounds - but now some users are finding that replacing the battery is so expensive, it's not worth the bother.



If you could get your hands on one, it was the hottest Christmas gift of the season. But the batteries are dying a lot faster than people thought.



And, it's now emerging that getting them replaced is neither easy or cheap.



The Apple iPod's fans are starting to turn nasty, flocking to websites, such as one call "ipdosdirtysecrets" to share their annoyance.



Channel 4 News rang Apple UK who transferred us to a supplier.



The supplier thought a replacement battery cost £100. But then, wasn't sure either of the cost or whether you could even buy them in this country.

the Article on Macminute does mention Apple's battery replacement program

ccuilla
Jan 13, 2004, 01:55 PM
Originally posted by iggyb
In defense of phantompigger, I think he/she is just giving a prediction that the price point doesn't match its value. I seem to agree. But hey, we're all speculating here.

But discussions of "value" are silly absent data about the buyers. For some people the current iPod Mini at its current price WILL be a good value. For some it won't. When it drops to $199 it will be an even greater value to those that thought it a good value at $249, and it will (now) be a good value for some new set of people (that didn't think it was a good value before).

Why do I feel like some basic courses in marketing, sales and economics are in order here?

totally_fly
Jan 13, 2004, 02:00 PM
All PC's come with a two-button mouse. Why would Mac users have a harder time figuring it out than PC users? Even if it is "hard to learn for non-geeks," they ought to learn and won't learn if Apple keeps shipping Macs with one-button mice.

The "action" button - what BS... get a two button mouse and you'll realize how much more effective they are.

macmax
Jan 13, 2004, 02:20 PM
Originally posted by totally_fly
All PC's come with a two-button mouse. Why would Mac users have a harder time figuring it out than PC users? Even if it is "hard to learn for non-geeks," they ought to learn and won't learn if Apple keeps shipping Macs with one-button mice.

The "action" button - what BS... get a two button mouse and you'll realize how much more effective they are.

i have a 3 button mouse and i wish Apple would sell them, they would be selling mouses like nothing else.
We all want a 3 button mouse , Apple!!!

Nicky G
Jan 13, 2004, 02:21 PM
First, I think a lot of the ANGER in these iPod mini threads come from people who REALLY wanted an iPod, but could never afford one -- they believed the $99 or $149 rumors, and are now really sad they STILL can't afford an iPod.

While I feel bad for them, they are wrong to think that this means NOBODY can afford a mini. Lots of people can, and will end up buying them.

I had to think hard about whether I wanted the 15GB iPod or the iPod mini. I settled on the mini because:

• It comes in GOLD! :-D

• 50-60 CDs is WAY MORE than I ever will need on my person at any given time, even for a loooong vacation. I can always swap playlists between my iBook and mini -- capacity is just not something I really was worrying about.

• The mini is simply COOLER -- it is small, it is colorful, the controls are WAY better than the 3G iPod IMHO -- THIS is what really sold me.

• It's small enough to take on a walk, jog, or hike. I don't jog more than 25 minutes straight, so the skip protection is just fine.

• It's CHEAPER than the other iPods by a decent margin, despite what some comments here would have you think. I'm still saving money, for the cooler iPod (remember, capacity was not my primary concern, 50 CDs worth of music is more than enough for me).

Everyone comparing it to the Cube is just wrong. If the mini were AS EXPENSIVE or MORE EXPENSIVE as the 15GB iPod, maybe it would be a fairer comparison. But it IS cheaper!

Better to compare it to -- the original iPod! It's more expensive than its peers on the market (compared to flash players -- it's just as expensive as other mini 4GB hard drive players). But it's WAY cooler. And this, folks, is why they are going to sell many more minis than some computer nerds on this forum would have you think.

NOT EVERYONE thinks in cost-per-Gigabyte only when shopping for a music player! Sorry!

phantompigger
Jan 13, 2004, 02:22 PM
Originally posted by ganryu
Most people? Most people on MacForums (who on average has much higher expectations than Apple can deliver), or most people that are in the market for mp3 players?

Actually, my argument is based on conversations I've had with dozens of friends and coworkers who use Macs. These people are not enthusiasts or experts; rather, they're just everyday users who would like to purchase an iPod.

And, of course, my argument is my opinion, and my opinion is based on my conversations with these people. It's obviously not a statement of fact, but I feel that it carries weight. I don't expect everyone to agree, and quite frankly, I'm surprised at some of the hostility here!

The iPod mini is small and sweet, but I find its price a bit hard to swallow. That's all.

pp

ganryu
Jan 13, 2004, 02:47 PM
Originally posted by phantompigger
Actually, my argument is based on conversations I've had with dozens of friends and coworkers who use Macs. These people are not enthusiasts or experts; rather, they're just everyday users who would like to purchase an iPod.

And, of course, my argument is my opinion, and my opinion is based on my conversations with these people. It's obviously not a statement of fact, but I feel that it carries weight. I don't expect everyone to agree, and quite frankly, I'm surprised at some of the hostility here!

The iPod mini is small and sweet, but I find its price a bit hard to swallow. That's all.

pp

Actually, you're wrong - the people socially connected to you is not an unbiased representation of the 2 million ipod customer base. No one I know ever considered the iPods (except for a few that went for the $299 model), but many of them are turning their heads towards the Mini. There are people in this world who doesn't need 1000 songs at a time, and doesn't find the hard drive size or price per GB to be a bragging right.

Frankly I'm more apalled at the hostility of the anti-Mini fans - the ones that bought the $200 rumor hook, link and sinker are now complaining Apple didn't meet their expectations.

Of course, there's also the arrogance of plenty of people who think they know what's good for apple, even though the only source of data they have is rumors.

tveric
Jan 13, 2004, 02:47 PM
After reading about the last 15 posts in this thread my head started to hurt, and I had to hit the reply button, and say "why would anyone continue to argue and argue online about this crap?" i mean, come on, try it, read the last 15 posts, and see if you don't get a headache. It's absurd.

Sir_Giggles
Jan 13, 2004, 02:48 PM
Originally posted by phantompigger
My concern is that, like the Power Macintosh Cube, there just won't be enough buyers at this price point.

My concern is that your logic regarding iPod mini to the Cube is flawed.

1) At which price point? ~$2000 compared to $249? Cubes didn't sell too well because the monetary risk is much higher since it's a premium machine. $249 isn't so much a risk, when you compare it to the standard iPod.

2) the iPod mini is not designed to be upgraded, which was lacking with the Cube.

3) there was no definable market for the Cube. For the iPod mini, it's targeted at high-end flash players.

Given just these 3 points of debate, I see no logic in your logic.

:rolleyes:

iChan
Jan 13, 2004, 02:56 PM
I would love to find out how many people writing positive things about the iPod Mini in this forum and guffawing at the poor unfortunates who wrote those negative things about the original iPod actually wrote negative things about the iPod mini when that was involved.

What is feel is a great acceptance of the fact that we are not going to get anything cheap from Apple, ever.

what is so sad is that afterall this time, it takes a site like MacRumors to put it straight.

rjstanford
Jan 13, 2004, 03:12 PM
Those talking about price do have a point, you know.

For example, I could easily afford to buy an iPod mini. I've got the 40gb iPod, and I have to say that it hasn't "revolutionized my life," or even my music. Its good for things like long flights, but that's really about it. Most of the time, I've either got a nice stereo (on which compressed audio is noticably bad and I prefer to just use CDs) or my laptop (which has all of my music on it anyway).

The mini would be good for working out - except that I prefer working out with friends. So 2/3 of my workouts I wouldn't be using it anyway. It would be good for running - except that these days I don't run with anything blocking my ears (too risky). Same goes for biking. And anywhere that I wouldn't be physically carrying it - on a desk or in the car or whatever - the conventional iPod provides a much better value/capacity without any negativity because of its slightly higher weight/size.

Now, with all that, if it had been under $200 I would probably go for the mini anyway, just to see if it ended up being more useful. For $150, I'd have bought it by now no question. But at $250, its just psychologically too much for a whimsical purchase.

So its not about features. Its about the perception of price/value. For me at least. And I'm really the only person I'm qualified to speak for :-)

-Richard

Spades
Jan 13, 2004, 03:14 PM
Are you sure about that? So this $50 iLife 04 thing is just a hoax? I think Apple is perfectly capable of pricing things cheaply. The big factor is their costs and how much of a profit margin they want.

I see this a lot, and being new to the Apple world, I may have missed something, so I'll ask now. Has Apple ever said they won't make cheap things, or have they said they won't make low quality things? If Apple's stated they're dedicated to making high priced items, then it's time for those of us disappointed with $249 to pack up and go home. If Apple is dedicated to making high quality items though, then there's no reason they can't create a sub-$200 except for their costs. If the 4 gig mini has to be $249, fine. I just want an even more slimmed down iPod that is under $200. Make it 2 gigs and cut out any extras but the cables.

Originally posted by iChan

What is feel is a great acceptance of the fact that we are not going to get anything cheap from Apple, ever.

rjstanford
Jan 13, 2004, 03:16 PM
Originally posted by frankly
You forgot to include the biggest part of my point in your observation of who has third party mice. I have a third party mouse for my PC as well and so do ALL of my friends that have PCs. That is my point. Everyone that cares buys a third party mouse regardless of what their machine comes with. Except for those of us who use laptops almost exclusively, and don't feel like sticking a mouse into them (ever tried to use a mouse on an airplane? Heh). At that point, its a real PITA that Apple won't add a second button, at least on the Powerbooks (ie: the pro line - feel free to keep the iBooks single-buttoned).

But this is a bit off topic, so I'll restrain myself to one post. Yeah, its not the preferred no posts, but its better than usual :-)

-Richard

phantompigger
Jan 13, 2004, 03:25 PM
Originally posted by ganryu
Actually, you're wrong - the people socially connected to you is not an unbiased representation of the 2 million ipod customer base.

Hooray! My opinion is wrong! That's cool.

And with that, I think my little adventure here is over. My head hurts.

pp

ganryu
Jan 13, 2004, 03:34 PM
Originally posted by phantompigger
Hooray! My opinion is wrong! That's cool.

And with that, I think my little adventure here is over. My head hurts.

pp

What a typical tactic - twist and distort the other person's argument, and run away as far as possible :D

Anyways, I was pointing out your assumption and logic was wrong. You are free to have your opinion, but don't let your arrogance cloud you with the belief "who I talk on a daily basis is an unbiased sample of the 2 million iPod buyers".

now run, skippy!

iggyb
Jan 13, 2004, 03:45 PM
Originally posted by ganryu
What a typical tactic - twist and distort the other person's argument, and run away as far as possible :D

Anyways, I was pointing out your assumption and logic was wrong. You are free to have your opinion, but don't let your arrogance cloud you with the belief "who I talk on a daily basis is an unbiased sample of the 2 million iPod buyers".

now run, skippy!

Ganryu, I don't think you have much argument at all. Phantompigger is giving his/her opinion on the price/value, and you're claiming there's no data to support it. First of all, IT'S AN OPINION! Second, there's no data to support that the price point will work, either. After all the research, it's an educated guess.

Debating the issue is one thing. But to say that Phantompigger is distorting your argument is a little childish.


Sorry if I'm launching salvos here, but I think there are some unfair attacks on people just because they don't agree with the pricing on the iPod mini.

ganryu
Jan 13, 2004, 04:07 PM
Originally posted by iggyb
Ganryu, I don't think you have much argument at all. Phantompigger is giving his/her opinion on the price/value, and you're claiming there's no data to support it. First of all, IT'S AN OPINION! Second, there's no data to support that the price point will work, either. After all the research, it's an educated guess.

Debating the issue is one thing. But to say that Phantompigger is distorting your argument is a little childish.


Sorry if I'm launching salvos here, but I think there are some unfair attacks on people just because they don't agree with the pricing on the iPod mini.

Before this turns into an ugly flame war:

1) I said his assumptions that "his circle of friends/coworkers of mac users is an unbiased sample of potential Mini customers" is wrong.
2) Phantompigger said I said his opinion that "the iPod Mini is not a good value" is wrong.

If you can point out to me where I said his opinion is wrong, please do. My opinion so far in this thread has always been that each person would have their own respective values for whether the Mini is worth buying, and Apple knows more than all of us because they have access to much more concrete data.

My other point (in reference to PhantomPigger) is that people who thinks their friends/coworkers represent the entire targetted customer segment of Minis are just plain silly.

billyboy
Jan 13, 2004, 04:11 PM
Originally posted by frankly
First, I do get that you are providing anecdotal evidence ...

You forgot to include the biggest part of my point in your observation of who has third party mice. I have a third party mouse for my PC as well and so do ALL of my friends that have PCs. That is my point. Everyone that cares buys a third party mouse regardless of what their machine comes with.

Later, Frank

My father bought three 3-button mice for his PC, but only because two wouldnt work and he doesnt like to complain about things he doesnt understand. :p

I don't know if anyone has mentioned this, but at $249, aren't Apple in a brilliant position to bundle iTunes vouchers with the iPodminis to maintain interest further down the line. They may never have to drop the price, just keep offering extra tracks, and seeing as they make a few cents on tunes anyway, it's not like they are going to go hungry whichever way.

And the iPodmini could well be a bigger, or is it niftier, Trojan horse. "New eMac madam with an iPodmini for $100? You know it makes sense."

For the first time Wall Street has said that Apple have got their act together and its buy buy buy Apple. They have struck that chord between innovation and a mega market winning potential.

I just hope their UK marketing team is on the ball and moving in to explain the article in the Times and on news broadcasts about iPod battery issues. A case of old news made to sound like bad news.

sanford
Jan 13, 2004, 04:15 PM
I very seriously considered getting an iPod mini has a secondary for my 3rd generation 30GB (I have about 22GB of music if you look at in terms of AAC files -- something around 600 CDs). You know, to use when I forgot to charge the 30GB and would be out and about for longer than the charge was left.

But then I realized that I was in a similar situation when I still had my 10GB 1st generation and the new 30GB. The 30GB went with me everywhere with all my music while the 10GB really just became something of a chore item, something to look after keeping charged to assure the battery stayed in good shape.

I'm still tempted -- it's always fun to get something new from Apple that doesn't cost $3,000 -- but I'm also pretty sure the iPod mini would just sit, charged when it was needed and never really used. It's smaller but not by far so much smaller that I'd ever say, Hey the 30GB is to big to carry where I'm going today, so I'll take the mini.

For Apple, I guess they may lose the iPod mini sale to me because of the 16th February release date. If I could run out to the Apple Store and get it now, now, now, I probably would finish this post and, hop in the car and go buy one. But by the middle of February things like logic and reason are likely to win the matter.

nagromme
Jan 13, 2004, 04:24 PM
Some general observations:

1. Some people seem to be running logic backwards: they start with a conclusion--I WANT an iPod for $199 (or $39 or whatever) and rumor sites got my hopes up, so I will just DECIDE that it's possible, and then work backwards to try to create reasons why it is.

2. Anger among (some) Mac rumor-forum members is very little reflection on the buying public as a whole. Reports of long backorders are very likely true! And this is BEFORE people are seeing these things in person--which seems to impress people with the mini even more.

3. The mini's benefits are not just aesthetic (not that color choice is a small thing at all). It's also smaller/thinner (more pocketable), lighter, has nifty new simpler controls, comes with a belt clip (the 15 doesn't), comes with the USB cable (the 15 doesn't--and FW is not universal on all the PCs sitting out there), and is more durable--I can vouch for this from owning an anodized aluminum PowerBook!

4. If people are so convinced that Apple can make a profit on a 1" HD at less than $200... then why are other 1" HD players priced the same? iLife can't be used as an example proving Apple's ability to price the mini cheaper. You see, Apple doesn't need to buy a 1" HD to put inside every iLife box :)

I'd love a $199 mini too, but it's not possible. Maybe it will be by the time I buy--but if the main thing the 15 has over the mini is GB, then I'll be saving money AND getting a better player by choosing the mini. 4 GB is plenty for some of us.

ChrisH3677
Jan 13, 2004, 04:25 PM
This thread will be way funny in 2 years when they release the too expensive super-mini-iPod for only $50 less than the super-successful mini-iPod which actually became the original iPod killer.

:D

rjstanford
Jan 13, 2004, 04:35 PM
Originally posted by nagromme
It's also smaller/thinner (more pocketable), lighter...I realize that all of this is true, but I am curious - how often is the size/weight of the current iPod a big deal? I'm comparing to my own usage (often have a support surface such as a table or a car console) and with my observations (usually the iPod is seen in a backpack or some other case where size is not that critical - the difference between the original and the mini wouldn't matter much. Same at the gym - most everyone I see using an iPod sets it on the treadmill just fine - people who use their players while lifting, etc, generally (90%+) have the tiny flash-based ones.

I see a lot of people running on the trails (good running here in Austin), and fairly few of them are using any kind of MP3 player - some are, with the iPod represented about 10-15% of the time. A couple of people I know with them won't run with them - not because of the size, but because of the expense if they break it (will probably still be an issue with the minis).

The new one is closer to celphone size, but I (again, I don't know about you) tend to keep my cel with me close on 100% of the time. I never know when an important call may come in. So there's a good reason for it to be pocket-sized. There are tons of times when I know I don't want to listen to music for hours - going out to lunch, in meetings, et cetera - where the reduced size won't make any difference and I won't have a mini in my pocket anyway.

So - yes, its smaller. And that counts for something as far as the "coolness factor" goes. But is it really a factor in actual usage? Honestly curious, and I'd like personal experiences if anyone has them of when the size would have made a difference.

-Richard

ChrisH3677
Jan 13, 2004, 04:39 PM
I don't own an iPod. If I did I wouldn't be rushing out to buy a mini.

If I was buying an iPod now, I would buy a mini without doubt. It's more stylish and comes in colors so can reflect who i am (a little). My iTunes has 220 songs in it from about 20 CDs (geez I coulda saved a fortune if iTMS existed here over the last 5 years).

And I would save the $50 for something else - maybe a dock which neither the mini or 15Gb comes with; or maybe iLife 04; or maybe 50 songs from iTMS (when it finally gets down under!)

50 bucks is 50 bucks and 11Gb is not worth that 50 bucks to *me* and, i suspect if Apple have done their research right - a lot of other people feel the same.



PS Just as the original iMac spawned a deluge of translucent plastic objects (from pencil cases to toasters), I bet you'll see the mini-ipod casing copied to death as well.

sanford
Jan 13, 2004, 04:42 PM
Originally posted by nagromme
I'd love a $199 mini too, but it's not possible.

I'd readily spend the $250; that's not the issue for me. And I agree that the mini is likely to be much more scratch resistant -- except for the screen -- as the clear plastic shell of the other generations gets scratched, period, and usually much sooner than later, practically when you walk out the door from buying it. Some soft cases and almost all hard cases scratch the other generations.

For me, the issue is, Will I use it avidly for a week, then put it away only to pull it out to charge it, while I carry my 30GB around with all my music on it? I don't mind spending the $250, I just don't want to spend $250 on something that will quickly become entirely superfluous for me, personally. Having one iPod is great. Having two -- unless you're a digital DJ or such -- is like having your neighbor's puppy you must feed and water; every week, not every day, but still a chore. And the puppy lives next door, so you never see it but to look after it.

nagromme
Jan 13, 2004, 04:47 PM
Well if your case is buying a SECOND iPod, that's a different story... I wouldn't do that myself :)

Regarding the screen--if it's not too O/T... is their hard plastic over the mini screen, or soft like a laptop? The reflections in photos make it look hard, just like the full iPod--only recessed a bit, preventing scratches even better.

On the general point of "is thin and light a big deal?".... well if you mean, is it a bigger deal than wasted GB, then yes, for some, it is. In fact, it's the main thing I want from an iPod. Thin and light. That doesn't mean the old iPod is bad in that regard--it's great. But the mini is better.

Spades
Jan 13, 2004, 04:50 PM
Well if 2 gigs is too much to ask for, how about 1.5? There are players with that much for $199, and they're sold for cheaper than that. 1.5 gigs will hold almost all of my collection.

Originally posted by nagromme

4. If people are so convinced that Apple can make a profit on a 1" HD at less than $200... then why are other 1" HD players priced the same? iLife can't be used as an example proving Apple's ability to price the mini cheaper. You see, Apple doesn't need to buy a 1" HD to put inside every iLife box :)

sanford
Jan 13, 2004, 04:52 PM
Originally posted by rjstanford
So - yes, its smaller. And that counts for something as far as the "coolness factor" goes. But is it really a factor in actual usage? Honestly curious, and I'd like personal experiences if anyone has them of when the size would have made a difference.

It's just not that much smaller or lighter. I pored over the specs pretty well. And that's compared to my 30GB, not the thinner and lighter 15s and 20s.

I still want one, but it's entirely an emotional thing, and not any kind of reason involved since I have the 30GB. Again, that being the case, if they were available right now, I'd buy one. If I didn't already have an iPod, I might readily opt for the mini -- although having all your music with you is actually kind of cool as there's never something you're just hit with wanting to hear, but it's not on your iPod.

We'll have to see when they arrive at stores and I can just walk out with one. I don't like to think I'm a spendthrift, but $250 is not a critical amount of money for me right now. But if I spend $250 for something I hardly ever use, opting instead for my 30GB all the time, I'll feel like a fool, a fool $250 lighter.

The extra scratch resistance is nice. But of course, you'll eventually scratch the screen. And the scratches don't affect the performance of iPod at all. Indeed, if it's not *your* iPod, you can't even really see the scratches.

sanford
Jan 13, 2004, 04:54 PM
Originally posted by nagromme
Well if your case is buying a SECOND iPod, that's a different story... I wouldn't do that myself :)

Then you see what I mean. Unless my iPod breaks or something it just makes almost zero sense to have a second. And as it is with 22GB of music, I'm not wasting space by owning my 30GB.

lustre
Jan 13, 2004, 04:55 PM
Came across this site:

would this be helpful to anyone?
we don't even know what the European price is going to be.
http://www.americangoodies.com/page/page/893379.htm

nagromme
Jan 13, 2004, 05:00 PM
Here' I'll trade something of value for an answer on the mini screen hardness :)

You CAN auto-sync a collection larger than 4 GB to a mini--without eliminating any songs from your life.

Just looking at the iPod manual I can see several ways to do this. The simplest:

1. Make playlist(s) of your favorite songs. (A smart list by rating, one by recently-added, plus some custom mix playlists, perhaps.) Your goal might be for these playlists to load, say, 600-800 songs or less onto your mini. These most important songs will ALWAYS be with you. How many is up to you.

2. But what about "the rest?" They'll fill the rest of the mini--not all at once, but in AUTOMATIC rotation: Just make a smart playlist of, say 200-400 songs--the LEAST-recently played. Exclude low-rated songs if you wish. Now every time you attach your mini to iTunes, any of "the rest of my songs" that has been played will automatically be dumped and replaced by another least-recently played song.

2. In iTunes preferences, tell iPod to auto-synch just those playlists. Yep--your iPod now holds less than the full library, yet requires no manual loading of music!

Result: no matter how big your library, your most important music will always be on your mini, PLUS an ever-changing selection of everything else in your library. Which after all is what you'd get from shuffle-playing the songs if they DID all fit.

So unless you are away from your iTunes for DAYS of solid music... you won't notice a lack of variety.

Customize the playlists of my method to your tastes and I think 1000 songs could go pretty far--AND retain the iPod's cool auto-synching.

(The second method that strikes me would give you ALL your playlists on the mini--but would semi-automatically "weed" them all down using whatever Smart Playlist(s) you created. How can you get a Smart Plalylist to EXCLUDE stuff from your iPod? Just make sure all songs are checked in your library (command-click any checkbox), then go to your "Exclude" playlist and COMMAND-uncheck any song--it gets them all. Then tell your other playlists [or your iPod?] to only take checked songs.)

tbutler
Jan 13, 2004, 05:18 PM
Originally posted by rjstanford
So - yes, its smaller. And that counts for something as far as the "coolness factor" goes. But is it really a factor in actual usage? Honestly curious, and I'd like personal experiences if anyone has them of when the size would have made a difference.

A bit rambling answer to your question...

First, I admit that capacity is important, because I like having essentially my entire library with me. I originally had one of the 5 gig iPods, but was able to sell it (to someone who didn't have nearly so much music, so that part holds! :) ) and move up to a 2nd gen 20 gig model, because this was important to me; I moved up to an HD-based player, after trying to use MP3 CD's with a laptop, in large part because I was tired of not having the song I wanted to listen to at the moment loaded - something that happened all too often. So I'm not likely to get the current-gen iPod mini for that reason alone.

That said, there are definitely times when I wish my 2nd-gen was smaller. While it does fit some shirt pockets just fine, it's big enough to stretch the fabric on other shirts; even the smoothly rounded edges on the 3rd-gen would be an improvement. The miniPod would be very nice from that standpoint, and that's not even counting the weight - on some shirts the 2nd-gen is heavy enough to make the shirt really sag.

But I think the classic example of where size matters for me is with FM broadcasting accessories. I often have to make a company drive on a few minute's notice; I take whatever random company vehicle's available, so I have to carry everything with me. In the time when I used an iRock FM transmitter, I often didn't take the iPod with me, because it was too much hassle to juggle all the parts. The Griffin iTrip, however, clips onto the top of the iPod and adds very little bulk; I can just drop the whole thing in a shirt pocket and go, and that makes a big difference in how much I use it.

So, given all this, I can easily see how the size difference could make a major usability difference for many people.

tiktokfx
Jan 13, 2004, 05:27 PM
Originally posted by sanford
It's just not that much smaller or lighter. I pored over the specs pretty well.

For you, possibly. Like many people, when I saw the graphic saying "$249," I thought "SMOOTH MOVE." Then a couple hours later after I'd calmed down (was waiting til after the keynote to put in my order for a 12" PB and was hoping to add on a $149 iPod), I reconsidered things. I'll most likely get a mini sometime soon.

Yes, it may seem like the size reduction isn't that much relative to the disk size. But then again... I have far more mp3s than even a 40GB iPod will take. I've got an external rack of disks on my Sun that stores all my mp3s.... it'd take a much larger iPod to fit my collection, so as long as I have to prune it down to fit on an mp3 player, why not spend half as much, have all the same functionality, but have a smaller device?

I carry my cellphone everywhere, in the watch pocket of my jeans. A normal iPod, while small, is too big to fit in there. I don't want it being jumbled around in my main pockets, which have to fit in a lot of stuff. A mini iPod, on the other hand, is SMALLER than my cell phone and will fit into the pocket just fine. WITH the cellphone in it, nice and tight and secure.

For me, a mini's the only way to go.

Spades
Jan 13, 2004, 05:45 PM
I just rewatched that section of the keynote to make sure. Indeed, Steve Jobs defines that 31% of high-end flash market as being priced from $100 to $200, not $150 to $200. He was talking about a market whose average price is $150. This put everybody on a high, expecting something at no more than $200. Then, he went and announced the $249, $100 more than the average price of the target market, and people came crashing down. There was no stated promise, but Jobs sure lead everybody to believe the price was going to be in the $100 to $200 range. Presenting it as he did and then pricing it so high was a psychological blow. The way it was presented was definitely a marketing mistake.

You're right that they're going after the $200 players. You're wrong, however, that $200 players are 31% of the market. 31% of the market is $100 to $200 players. Just the high end of the high end is logically less than 31%. I'd really like to know how much of the market they're REALLY targetting.

Originally posted by nagromme
Actually, at the mini intro Steve said they are going after the ~$200 high-end flash market ONLY. That market is already known to be 31% of all player sales. (Another 31% is $150 and down, and Apple's not going for that because you can't make a good player that cheap--they hold hardly any music.)

ganryu
Jan 13, 2004, 05:57 PM
Originally posted by nagromme
Some general observations:

1. Some people seem to be running logic backwards: they start with a conclusion--I WANT an iPod for $199 (or $39 or whatever) and rumor sites got my hopes up, so I will just DECIDE that it's possible, and then work backwards to try to create reasons why it is.

2. Anger among (some) Mac rumor-forum members is very little reflection on the buying public as a whole. Reports of long backorders are very likely true! And this is BEFORE people are seeing these things in person--which seems to impress people with the mini even more.

3. The mini's benefits are not just aesthetic (not that color choice is a small thing at all). It's also smaller/thinner (more pocketable), lighter, has nifty new simpler controls, comes with a belt clip (the 15 doesn't), comes with the USB cable (the 15 doesn't--and FW is not universal on all the PCs sitting out there), and is more durable--I can vouch for this from owning an anodized aluminum PowerBook!

4. If people are so convinced that Apple can make a profit on a 1" HD at less than $200... then why are other 1" HD players priced the same? iLife can't be used as an example proving Apple's ability to price the mini cheaper. You see, Apple doesn't need to buy a 1" HD to put inside every iLife box :)

I'd love a $199 mini too, but it's not possible. Maybe it will be by the time I buy--but if the main thing the 15 has over the mini is GB, then I'll be saving money AND getting a better player by choosing the mini. 4 GB is plenty for some of us.

AMEN.

Another note on point no. 2 - if the Mini is priced less, the increased demand might simply overwhelm supply. You can't just say "oh won't apple make up for profit by selling more cheap iPods?", because production capabilities of the new hard drives need ramping up, production capabilities of the actual Minis need ramping up as well. You can't just one day build a whole new factory to build new Minis, or suddenly change half of your production lines to build new Minis.

Not to mention that if you're selling at a higher volume, supply chain and product allocation becomes a MUCH bigger problem. How many do I allocate to California, and how many do I allocate to New York? If Minis are sold out in Oregon, and they're stocked up on the shelf in Florida, then Apple is losing money on the unsold inventory, while missing out on the potential sales in Oregon.

These are the very elementary questions that someone working at Apple have spent many days and weeks thinking of, and many Macrumors users that fail to think of (when they complain about the price).

tbutler
Jan 13, 2004, 06:05 PM
Originally posted by Spades
Well if 2 gigs is too much to ask for, how about 1.5? There are players with that much for $199, and they're sold for cheaper than that. 1.5 gigs will hold almost all of my collection.

I think this is getting into the distinction another poster made a while back, about whether Apple would make only 'quality' products. I think that's the big reason Apple did not and will not make a low-capacity player:

1) An important part of Apple (or Jobs') vision for the iPod is having a large enough 'hunk' of music available at once, so that you're not having to constantly swap to get a 'fresh' set of music and you can keep enough 'favorites' loaded to be happy. (Even a 700 MB MP3 CD wasn't really enough to pass this test for me, as I mentioned in an earlier post.)

2) The defining part of the iPod's interface really only shines when you're dealing with lots of songs; the trackwheel, easy browsing, etc. don't mean nearly as much with 60 songs as they do with 600. So an iPod with limited capacity has that much less to distinguish it from its competitors.

So I can see both vision-based and pragmatic reasons why Apple wouldn't introduce a low-capacity iPod. (And that's why I didn't give any credence to the rumors of a flash-based iPod; flash memory is a helluva lot more expensive than disk space, and a flash-based player with a decent capacity would be so high-priced that it wouldn't be funny. Creative just released a half-gig flash-based player, the Nomad Muvo TX... $499!)

1.5 gig would be pushing it in my opinion; that's somewhere around 350-370 songs, which is a lot more than a flash player but still enough to feel severely cramped. A hand-picked list of my vocal favorites is 349 songs, without including instrumentals, soundtracks, comedy sketches...

splashman
Jan 13, 2004, 06:23 PM
Originally posted by ccuilla
But discussions of "value" are silly absent data about the buyers. For some people the current iPod Mini at its current price WILL be a good value. For some it won't. When it drops to $199 it will be an even greater value to those that thought it a good value at $249, and it will (now) be a good value for some new set of people (that didn't think it was a good value before).

Why do I feel like some basic courses in marketing, sales and economics are in order here?

Um, and which Apple marketing execs do you propose to send to the econ courses?

Apple makes mistakes, no doubt about it, and it's always possible that they've just made another one. But it's pure, unadulterated arrogance (not to mention ignorance) to maintain that the pricing decision is so simple as you state. Apple is not run by idiots. They have made a decision that they think, in the long run, will maximize profits. You're free to disagree -- I happen to disagree myself -- but at least make an attempt to show an ounce of respect.

splashman
Jan 13, 2004, 06:27 PM
Originally posted by Count Blah
Apparently those who say the mini is the best thing since sliced bread. They defend it like it's their first born. They make fun of people who think it's overpriced. They can't see the irony that the same arguments that Stevey used in the Keynot to buy the mini makes it look like a dog compared to the classic iPod. They think the leader bends over an poops nickels. They see the cube as a success, and blame the unwashed troglodyte masses for not buying, instead of seeing it as an overpriced headless G4.

I'm guessing these people would have been happy with a $199 mini, but they seem to REALLY love it as it is and REALLY love to make fun of others who didn't drink the kool-aid.

Is this your application to Curmudgeons Anonymous?

Spades
Jan 13, 2004, 06:40 PM
The relationship between size and quality is subjective. I agree 1.5 gigs is pushing it, but I would still think it's acceptable. To give you an idea of where I'm coming from, my collection is currently 324 songs and 1.67 gigs. I'm definitely expanding that thanks to iTMS. :D

Now, how big would it have to be to still be high quality? I think a full waking day should do. If you're not going to store your entire collection on the device, then having a full day of music gives you a chance to change the playlist nightly. Creating a random playlist limited to 1500 MB in size gives me 20.3 hours of music. I don't sleep a full eight hours, but 20.3 still covers me just fine. As for the iPod interface being unnecesary, I think not. True, it doesn't shine as much with such a small collection, but that doesn't mean I don't need it.

I would still prefer 2 gigs, but 1.5 gigs appears to be feasible now. Only Apple knows the reason they aren't releasing a lower cost iPod.

Originally posted by tbutler
I think this is getting into the distinction another poster made a while back, about whether Apple would make only 'quality' products. I think that's the big reason Apple did not and will not make a low-capacity player:

ccuilla
Jan 13, 2004, 06:41 PM
Originally posted by splashman
Um, and which Apple marketing execs do you propose to send to the econ courses?


None. I am not presuming that Apple is the one in error here. Many people are, but failing to backup their assumptions with any HARD data ("I want the price to be lower." is the only reasoning they provide.)

My assumptions are that Apple has done (and is doing) market research on this product.

Seems a pretty safe assumption.

My assumption that the naysayers on these (and other) boards are NOT representative of the customer base Apple is targeting is probably also a safe one.


Apple makes mistakes, no doubt about it, and it's always possible that they've just made another one.

Of course they do. I didn't suggest any differently. However, many here are saying (flat out) that they HAVE made a mistake, but have failed to provide anything but (weak) anecdotal evidence and whining that they just want the thing cheaper.

But it's pure, unadulterated arrogance (not to mention ignorance) to maintain that the pricing decision is so simple as you state.

First of all, its probably not much more complicated than this. Secondly, it is the naysayers here that are being simplistic in their pricing theories. "Just sell it for $199, because me and my friends want it for $199 (or less)." Apple probably cannot (and still be profitable), that, and they have probably measured the market (correctly, I suspect) and found that this will work well for an introductory price.

Apple is not run by idiots. They have made a decision that they think, in the long run, will maximize profits. You're free to disagree -- I happen to disagree myself -- but at least make an attempt to show an ounce of respect.

Perhaps this is where the confusion (on your part) is. Perhaps you meant to reply to another post.

I DON'T think Apple is run by idiots. Quite the contrary. I also AGREE that Apple has made a pricing choice that they believe will bring them the greatest long term profits.

splashman
Jan 13, 2004, 06:58 PM
Originally posted by phantompigger
I can't argue with that. People who choose the iPod mini at its current price point will certainly be making the decision based upon aesthetics.

If that's true, the Rio Nitrus buyers must really be idiots, because they won't even be getting aesthetics for $249.

Personally, I'm not in love with the mini. I love my 3g 15gig, and if I were in the market now, I'd buy it again. But you have to see there's more appeal than just the aesthetics. The physical size alone is a huge draw, as it opens up markets dominated by the flash players. Even those who had a big budget bought ugly flash players because they were smaller/lighter. And then there's the "cool" factor . . .

The consensus seems to be that Apple could have hit a home run at $199.

Again, these forums are populated with geeks like you and me -- not representative of Apple's target market. So this "consensus" (seems to be plenty of people who disagree with you) is meaningless. If you're claiming a consensus in the general population, I'd ask what you know that Apple doesn't.

And for those of you who claim that the iPod isn't targeted at the faithful, I'd like to point out that in a recent Newsweek, Jobs claims that one of the "...biggest customers for the iPod mini is going to be current owners buying a second iPod."

I haven't heard anyone claim that. I and others have pointed out that Mac geeks like you and me are only a subset of "the faithful". The rest actually have a life. ;)

One final thought: Do you think that the introduction of 15GB might have been ill-timed? Do you think that we'd all be more accepting of the $249 price point if the $299 continued to carry a 10GB HD?

Heh heh. So, in other words, if Apple had maintained a worse $-per-gig ratio on their entry-level iPod, you'd be happier? Or you'd be happier if they raised the 15gig price to $399, so you wouldn't FEEL ripped off by the mini?

Based on what undoubtedly are very complicated factors, Apple set a minimum price point for the mini (i.e., "We don't want to sell cheap"). Everything else flows from that, including the pricing and capacity of the entry-level iPod.

I was one of those who claimed Apple would never release a mini at only $50 less than the iPod -- "No differentiation", I said. But the more I think about it, the more it seems an inspired decision. Talk about a tough choice -- a smaller, lighter mini, or a higher-capacity, iconic iPod. The very fact that it's a tough choice means Apple has nailed it.

splashman
Jan 13, 2004, 07:04 PM
Originally posted by ccuilla
Perhaps this is where the confusion (on your part) is. Perhaps you meant to reply to another post.

I DON'T think Apple is run by idiots. Quite the contrary. I also AGREE that Apple has made a pricing choice that they believe will bring them the greatest long term profits.

Hmmm. I apologize. I was certainly responding to your post, but I must have misinterpreted your point. It seemed that you were saying that Apple could have (and should have) opened up a wider market by pricing the mini at $199. Thus my response.

Sorry 'bout that . . .

Nicky G
Jan 13, 2004, 07:08 PM
I think it's funny that people will bicker here to no end, wasting hours of their lives -- but then will utterly fail to respond to a post like mine, where I laid out very matter-of-factly WHY I ordered an iPod mini. I have seen a few other folks lay out the exact same reasoning as to why they've ordered minis.

FUTURE iPOD MINI OWNERS DEMAND TO HAVE THEIR EXISTENCE ACKNOWLEDGED!!! :cool:

Considering there will be more of us than standard iPod owners soon, ya'll had better start to recognize!!! :p

D*I*S_Frontman
Jan 13, 2004, 07:09 PM
I think some well-considered self-restraint is in order here:

First of all, anyone posting here whose naysaying comments appeared on the original "they're-too-pricey-and-sure-to-flop" iPod thread should recuse themselves from any comment on the Mini.

Anyone who balks at the Mini's $249 pricetag should be REQUIRED to read that thread before ranting on and on about it.

Anyone who is let down for Minis not being sub $200 like the rumors lead them to believe should stop blaming Apple and fix the blame on the truly guilty parties--rumor sites and their own gullibility.

Anyone who thinks they understand Apple's entire situation well enough to condemn them for mispricing the Mini should be able to answer the following questions:

1) How many Minis are currently in the supply chain, awaiting shipment?
2) What are the per day and per month production figures?
3) What were the R&D and production setup costs that must be recouped?
4) Who are the third party partners in distribution, and what are the committed preorders to date?
5) What is the actual cost per unit now, and what are they anticipated to be in 3-6 months?


If you can't answer any of these, you can't possibly judge Apple for their decisions. Just because you can't afford one doesn't mean they priced it wrong. Heck, I can't afford one and I'm not complaining.

mvc
Jan 13, 2004, 07:34 PM
Everyone bickering here should be forced to use a sony walkman and lug around all the cassettes needed for 1.5 or 4 or 15 or even 40gb of music.

You'd need a truck and a forklift to scroll though your playlist.

Be grateful, any kinda iPod at any kinda price is a great thing by comparison.

Count Blah
Jan 13, 2004, 07:45 PM
Originally posted by D*I*S_Frontman


...

Anyone who thinks they understand Apple's entire situation well enough to condemn them for mispricing the Mini should be able to answer the following questions:

1) How many Minis are currently in the supply chain, awaiting shipment?
2) What are the per day and per month production figures?
3) What were the R&D and production setup costs that must be recouped?
4) Who are the third party partners in distribution, and what are the committed preorders to date?
5) What is the actual cost per unit now, and what are they anticipated to be in 3-6 months?


If you can't answer any of these, you can't possibly judge Apple for their decisions. Just because you can't afford one doesn't mean they priced it wrong. Heck, I can't afford one and I'm not complaining.

I call foul on this one. You are telling us we are not allowed to "Monday Morning QB" this one without having insider information? Give me a break. If you want, I'm sure we can find examples of Apple's rather large margin on products compared to the rest of the computer industry. I'm sure everyone will say that this is a given. So, we are simply saying - "How about making less per unit and DESTROY all competition" How about a 2Gig iPod mini for $199?

Personally, I just purchased a discontinued a NIB 10Gig iPod for a smidge less than the iPod mini, so I am happy as a pig in S$%#.

tbutler
Jan 13, 2004, 08:10 PM
Originally posted by Spades
Now, how big would it have to be to still be high quality? I think a full waking day should do. If you're not going to store your entire collection on the device, then having a full day of music gives you a chance to change the playlist nightly.

Depends on how you use it, I suppose. I tried going that way, both with MP3 CD's and the original 5 gig iPod, and it just didn't work for me. Part of the time I like listening to random playlists. Part of the time I want a specific song, or a specific album, because something I'm doing brings it to mind - and not having that song/album in the subset of music I've got loaded is intensely frustrating. That's why, when I upgraded the 5 gig, I spent more than I should have and went whole-hog to get the highest capacity model they had at the time.

I'm also not very good at this 'nightly synchronize' thing. :D I don't think I sync my Palm more than once every couple of weeks, on average; and even though I've got a couple of Smart Playlists based on playcount, I don't sync the iPod to update the playcount in iTunes more than every 3-4 weeks unless I have more music to add.

ccuilla
Jan 13, 2004, 08:48 PM
Originally posted by splashman
Hmmm. I apologize. I was certainly responding to your post, but I must have misinterpreted your point. It seemed that you were saying that Apple could have (and should have) opened up a wider market by pricing the mini at $199. Thus my response.

Sorry 'bout that . . .

Not a problem. I think Apple eventually WILL. But they are going about this this right way...in my ever-so-humble-opinion. :-)

ChrisH3677
Jan 13, 2004, 09:18 PM
many here keep saying Apple "shoulda" when you don't even know if they "coulda"

ganryu
Jan 13, 2004, 09:43 PM
Originally posted by Count Blah
[B]I call foul on this one. You are telling us we are not allowed to "Monday Morning QB" this one without having insider information? Give me a break.

Of course you're ALLOWED to. It's just that no one really would take you seriously, same way no one takes the Monday Morning quarterbacks seriously (or rambling homeless alcoholics on subways).

Originally posted by Count Blah If you want, I'm sure we can find examples of Apple's rather large margin on products compared to the rest of the computer industry. I'm sure everyone will say that this is a given. So, we are simply saying - "How about making less per unit and DESTROY all competition" How about a 2Gig iPod mini for $199?

How about a high school economics class for you? Supply and demand boy, supply and demand. What's the use of a $199 Mini if they can't meet demand? Less profit! This isn't rocket science.

Count Blah, you really should read your previous posts, because you keep repeating the same points that we've torn apart again and again.

splashman
Jan 13, 2004, 10:06 PM
Originally posted by Count Blah
I call foul on this one. You are telling us we are not allowed to "Monday Morning QB" this one without having insider information? Give me a break.
One more time, for everyone's benefit:

Express your opinions, no matter how far-fetched or unsupported. Opinions sound like this: "I think Apple should have . . ." "Seems to me, Apple would make more money if . . ." "Instead of product X, I really wanted product Y". Since nobody on these forums has any factual information to go on, all opinions are valid. However, not all opinions are equally well supported, and all opinions are open to challenge from people who believe their opinions are better supported. Example: an opinion like "I think Apple is going to drop the price of the mini to $49 in 2 months" is going to be respected less (and challenged more) than "I think Apple is going to drop the price of the mini to $199 in 2 months".

Judgments sound like this: "Apple is STUPID for doing . . ." "Only IDIOTS would want product X" "It's OBVIOUS Apple screwed up", etc. etc. When you judge Apple ("they are absolutely wrong, and/or I am absolutely right"), you're revealing your immaturity and inability to accept that Apple just might be privy to information that you're not.

To sum up: Keep the judgments to yourself. Keep the opinions flowing. :)

If you want, I'm sure we can find examples of Apple's rather large margin on products compared to the rest of the computer industry. I'm sure everyone will say that this is a given. So, we are simply saying - "How about making less per unit and DESTROY all competition" How about a 2Gig iPod mini for $199?
There you go -- you expressed an opinion without trashing Apple. Groovy.

Wouldn't you love to have been a fly on the wall while the Apple execs were debating the pricing? Just thinking about it gives me goose bumps. I'd love to hear all the nitty-gritty details. I'll bet some folks in those meetings got pretty hot.

Anyway, it will be interesting to see what Apple does in the next few months. I'd love to see them do exactly what you suggest -- a $199 price point, whether it's 2GB or 4GB. Given Apple's track record, though, my best guess is that they will milk the profits as long as they can. Then, when the competition starts nipping at their heels, they'll reconsider the pricing. Seems a bit short-sighted to me -- like you, I think Apple's got a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to grab marketshare with relatively little effort. Does this mean Apple thinks they can get the same marketshare at $249? Or does it mean that marketshare isn't their highest priority right now? If not, what is? Dang it all, I want to know!

Personally, I just purchased a discontinued a NIB 10Gig iPod for a smidge less than the iPod mini, so I am happy as a pig in S$%#.
Sweet!

Count Blah
Jan 13, 2004, 10:07 PM
Originally posted by ganryu
Of course you're ALLOWED to. It's just that no one really would take you seriously, same way no one takes the Monday Morning quarterbacks seriously (or rambling homeless alcoholics on subways).

And we are only supposed to take your point of view seriously?


Originally posted by ganryu

How about a high school economics class for you? Supply and demand boy, supply and demand. What's the use of a $199 Mini if they can't meet demand? Less profit! This isn't rocket science.


You are correct. If they can't build them, they can't maximize their profits. Just don't put a dress on a pig and expect me to take it to the dance.

How many iPods have been sold to this point? I believe Steve said that they have 1/3 of the ENTIRE market. So I'm guessing that they actually had to make enough iPods for 1/3 of the market. So Steve's "claim" of going after the $100-$200(middle third of the piechart) flash market was really a lie then. Because, and see if you can follow me, if you plan to take over a market, you have to actually make the product to do it. Call me silly, but I seem to remember that part from Econ 101.

You supply an overpriced item, and there won't be much demand. I understand it perfectly.

splashman
Jan 13, 2004, 10:12 PM
Originally posted by ganryu
How about a high school economics class for you? Supply and demand boy, supply and demand. What's the use of a $199 Mini if they can't meet demand? Less profit! This isn't rocket science.

Let's be a bit careful here. You're assuming that Apple couldn't meet demand at $199, and that this limitation is what dictated the pricing. Honest question: Is that assumption based on anything besides pure speculation?

doogle
Jan 13, 2004, 10:29 PM
boring...will someone start another thread that interest me. (yeah yeah i should go elsewhere but the other threads are worse)

sushi
Jan 14, 2004, 08:14 AM
Originally posted by rjstanford
I realize that all of this is true, but I am curious - how often is the size/weight of the current iPod a big deal?
I can think of many folks who would prefer the mini iPod over the iPod.

Japanese and European folks come to mind, and anybody else who regularly rides a train to work.

Anybody who wants to carry their music device in their shirt pocket. The iPod is too heavy. The mini iPod is much better since it is lighter and smaller.

Anyone who wants to carry/use it when wearing a suit.

Those who like to travel lightly. An ounce here, and ounce there, it all ads up.

I could go on, but I think I have made my point.

BTW, my bet is on these things selling like hotcakes in Japan. Already you can see many folks who are really interested in April (when they are available here) coming around. The small size. The colors. The weight. The cheap cost. Windows compatability. Lot's of positive interest out there.

Sushi

whooleytoo
Jan 14, 2004, 09:16 AM
People likely to buy the iPod Mini:

1) People on a budget (it's still the cheapest iPod).
b) People who want/need miniaturization.
iii) People who like the styling, and having colour options.
-) People who's music collection is likely to remain less than 4GB.

People not likely to buy an iPod Mini:

a) People on a tighter budget (250 is still a lot of money).
ii) People with a lot of music, and want to take it with them.
-) People who prefer the iPod Senior's styling.
4) People who value highly GBs per dollar/euro.
101) People called Mr. Fester... :D

Different strokes for different folks, the mini will interest some people and do nothing for others. Fighting about it is a bit like big endian / little endian arguments!

sushi
Jan 14, 2004, 10:30 AM
Originally posted by sanford
It's just not that much smaller or lighter. I pored over the specs pretty well. And that's compared to my 30GB, not the thinner and lighter 15s and 20s.
Uh, better look over them again!

iPod mini compared to iPod 15/20:

Volume --> ~41% Smaller

Weight --> ~36% Lighter

iPod mini compared to iPod 30:

Volume --> ~50% Smaller

Weight --> ~42% Lighter

So while you may think that that it isn't much, it is.

...and that folks, is why these mini iPods are going to sell like hotcakes. I already have a 10GB (G1 version) and will be getting at least 2-3 mini iPods. Now just to figure out the color we want.

Sushi

ganryu
Jan 14, 2004, 10:41 AM
Originally posted by Count Blah
And we are only supposed to take your point of view seriously?

Since I don't ignore replies like you do, people will take me more seriously than just someone trolling with the same points over and over again, especially when the horse is pretty dead from the beating.

Originally posted by Count Blah
You are correct. If they can't build them, they can't maximize their profits. Just don't put a dress on a pig and expect me to take it to the dance.

They probably ARE maximizing their profits from the amount they can sell.

Originally posted by Count Blah
How many iPods have been sold to this point? I believe Steve said that they have 1/3 of the ENTIRE market. So I'm guessing that they actually had to make enough iPods for 1/3 of the market. So Steve's "claim" of going after the $100-$200(middle third of the piechart) flash market was really a lie then.

They did make enough iPods for 1/3 of the market. But this is a different model, so production lines have to be changed, QA testing has to be more rigorous, etc etc..

Originally posted by Count Blah
Because, and see if you can follow me, if you plan to take over a market, you have to actually make the product to do it. Call me silly, but I seem to remember that part from Econ 101.

Going after a market has nothing to do with flooding the market with 700K ipod minis in 3 months. are you following me?

Originally posted by Count Blah
You supply an overpriced item, and there won't be much demand. I understand it perfectly.

Except for your tendency to treat your opinion of "iPod is overpriced" as a fact, yes, an overpriced item will have less demand.

ganryu
Jan 14, 2004, 10:57 AM
Originally posted by splashman
Let's be a bit careful here. You're assuming that Apple couldn't meet demand at $199, and that this limitation is what dictated the pricing. Honest question: Is that assumption based on anything besides pure speculation?

I don't honestly believe the pricing is solely based on supply/demand - I believe it has more to do with cannibalizing existing iPod sales, and recouping R&D costs.

however, while the elasticity is steep for the iPod buyers (due to store reports of people "settling" for more expensive iPods at $100-200 more), the next 1/3rd of the market for other mp3 players seems to be fairly price conscious, at least they're not willling to purchase a $300 music player. if you release a player that is priced not above, but AT the $199 price point, you're going to get a flood of buyers from that 1/3rd of the market, which is more demand than a new product can possibly ramp up for.

keep in mind the harddrives used for the Mini are just beginning production too.

splashman
Jan 14, 2004, 06:13 PM
Originally posted by ganryu
I don't honestly believe the pricing is solely based on supply/demand - I believe it has more to do with cannibalizing existing iPod sales, and recouping R&D costs.

however, while the elasticity is steep for the iPod buyers (due to store reports of people "settling" for more expensive iPods at $100-200 more), the next 1/3rd of the market for other mp3 players seems to be fairly price conscious, at least they're not willling to purchase a $300 music player. if you release a player that is priced not above, but AT the $199 price point, you're going to get a flood of buyers from that 1/3rd of the market, which is more demand than a new product can possibly ramp up for.

keep in mind the harddrives used for the Mini are just beginning production too.

You make fair points, and you're doing it in a less arrogant fashion than the poster I was responding to.

My point remains -- the number of additional buyers who will shell out for a $199 mini is a matter of speculation. The number of minis Apple can produce is a matter of speculation.

You could very well be right. If you have anything besides gut feel on which to base this speculation, I'm listening . . .

ganryu
Jan 14, 2004, 08:55 PM
Originally posted by splashman
You make fair points, and you're doing it in a less arrogant fashion than the poster I was responding to.

My point remains -- the number of additional buyers who will shell out for a $199 mini is a matter of speculation. The number of minis Apple can produce is a matter of speculation.

You could very well be right. If you have anything besides gut feel on which to base this speculation, I'm listening . . .

I am the poster you previously responded to :D

It's hard to speculate without real numbers or actually being in the meetings at Apple, really. All anyone can really offer to the conversation is rational and logical hypotheses why the Minis are strategically priced as such.

However, the REAL NEWS is:
The Apple earnings report. iPod Minis have a lower profit margins than regular iPods!

What a slap in the face for all those who thought Apple can afford to lower the price on the Minis. Ha!

yangchi
Jan 15, 2004, 12:34 AM
I think the new ipod mini is still too expensive for most of the people. It is just like 2 years ago. 5 GB for 400 is too much for most of us.

my 2 cents
There are two ways to do business (introducing new products)

1. set the price and try to reach that goal
2. build the product and sum all the cost+revenue

I just hope that apple will keep adding value into ipod mini like they did on ipod.
if that is the case, 2 years later, we will see an amazing produce with good price. well.. but not now.

ChrisH3677
Jan 15, 2004, 03:53 AM
You all may think that the mini iPod is too expensive, but if you noticed in the quarterly report, Apple had to cut their profit margin just to get it in at $249.

So I'm stuffed if I know how you experts reckon they could and should sell it for less.

:mad:

el gringo
Jan 15, 2004, 03:57 AM
I have reconsidered - and find the price 249 USD to be a good price point - especially considering the competition.

AND, the price will reach 199 within 6 - 9 months - my guess :)

look at sony/aiwa's player 2 GB, only PC, 329 USD - and less appeal!

Originally posted by yangchi
I think the new ipod mini is still too expensive for most of the people. It is just like 2 years ago. 5 GB for 400 is too much for most of us.

my 2 cents
There are two ways to do business (introducing new products)

1. set the price and try to reach that goal
2. build the product and sum all the cost+revenue

I just hope that apple will keep adding value into ipod mini like they did on ipod.
if that is the case, 2 years later, we will see an amazing produce with good price. well.. but not now.

dekator
Jan 15, 2004, 07:16 AM
Krizoitz wrote: Honestly, some people just don't get it. The whole intent of the one button mouse was so that anyone can learn to use a computer with the minimal amount of work

Honestly, I think you don't really get it. Everyone with an IQ of 50+ (or even lower) can use a 2 button mouse. The 1 button mouse doesn't facilitate using a computer, and it's certainly not something necessary for ppl to learn stuff faster. In fact, I think the contrary is true. While a 2 button mouse doesn't require more brain, a 1 button mouse constitutes an obstacle to efficient use of one's computer. Many apps require a 2 button mouse. Also, right-clicking is more convenient (and certainly not more difficult) than control+click.
There is no real reason for a 1 button mouse, and ease of use or convenience actually speak against it. It's just an obsolete tradition that wouldn't die...

the_dalex
Jan 15, 2004, 12:14 PM
It takes all of ten seconds to explain to somebody that the two buttons do different things.

I just tell them that the left button selects something, be it a block of text or an application icon for launching, and the right button gives you a list of all other things you can do with it besides select it. It's so much better than trying to get them to intuitively know which menu to search for that action...

I think we need to accept the obvious fact that computers are an integral part of our society. Treating your entire customer base as if they have never heard of a computer is just wrong these days, but had its place. I don't want anyone to take this the wrong way, but only older generations get confused by computers anymore, kids are all over it.

Can you give me one justification as to why their Pro line (Powermacs) come with the same one-button mouse? If Apple kept the one-button mouse on the consumer line, fine... but to claim that a dual 2-Ghz Powermac needs to be friendly to a person who has never used a computer before is a bit ridiculous.

the_dalex
Jan 15, 2004, 12:17 PM
One more thing... I don't agree with the school of thought that demands computers be able to do everything without the user having to learn a few things here and there. A computer is the most complicated tool humans have ever created, and to get full use of any tool you need to spend time with it and work to learn it.

doogle
Jan 15, 2004, 11:36 PM
http://infotyte.adc.rmit.edu.au/stuff/McPod.jpg


...look what I just saw at mcdonalds.com

splashman
Jan 15, 2004, 11:51 PM
Originally posted by doogle
...look what I just saw at mcdonalds.com

Okay, that's just plain scary.

ganryu
Jan 15, 2004, 11:53 PM
Originally posted by doogle
http://infotyte.adc.rmit.edu.au/stuff/McPod.jpg


...look what I just saw at mcdonalds.com

nice fake picture.. but why don't you link to mcdonalds.com, if it's really from there?

doogle
Jan 15, 2004, 11:56 PM
Originally posted by ganryu
nice fake picture.. but why don't you link to mcdonalds.com, if it's really from there?

...just enjoy the picture :p

splashman
Jan 16, 2004, 12:02 AM
Originally posted by ganryu
nice fake picture.. but why don't you link to mcdonalds.com, if it's really from there?

Yeeesh. Go buy a sense of humor.

ganryu
Jan 16, 2004, 12:20 AM
Originally posted by splashman
Yeeesh. Go buy a sense of humor.
actually for a second i really thought it's possible, given that the McDonalds 1 Billion Song giveaway rumor died down.

but yah, some ppl laugh at potty jokes too, and I don't feel bad for not appreciating those jokes.

FlamDrag
Jan 16, 2004, 03:10 PM
Originally posted by doogle
http://infotyte.adc.rmit.edu.au/stuff/McPod.jpg


...look what I just saw at mcdonalds.com

It should have "Drive-Thru" instead of the FF button, "SuperSize" instead of RW and "pay" instead of play. Menu is fine as is. :)

Nice color job though.

whooleytoo
Jan 19, 2004, 06:33 AM
Originally posted by doogle
http://infotyte.adc.rmit.edu.au/stuff/McPod.jpg


...look what I just saw at mcdonalds.com

Haha! I'm lovin' it!