HP To Offer iPod mini and iPod shuffle

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

According to electronics site Engadget.com (http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000217041975), HP is expected to release rebadged versions of both the iPod mini and iPod shuffle by June 12. If that date is missed, the next expected release date is July 3.

Both devices should be the same as current offerings from Apple, with the HP logo attached in similar fashion to the current Apple iPod from HP (and new iPod photo).

[MacsRgr8]

Hmm....

Any idea how well the HP iPods sell?

[PlaceofDis]

if it sells more iPods cool

haha i wonder what would happen if apple let HP sell re-branded Macs....

[ImAlwaysRight]

I don't get how HP can sell the iPod. Does Apple allow this? Does Apple want this? :confused:

[AoWolf]

Good for apple but, I really didn't want them to touch our mini. Oh well lets just hope they don't do any thing crazy to it.

[yvovandoorn]

I don't get how HP can sell the iPod. Does Apple allow this? Does Apple want this? :confused:

Yes Apple knows this.

See the press release for last year when HP originally decided to sell iPods.

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2004/jan/08hp.html

[GilGrissom]

I don't get how HP can sell the iPod. Does Apple allow this? Does Apple want this? :confused:

Ah yes Apple wanted this. Its a totally mutual agreement. At one stage it was rumored HP would turn them blue to suit their colour scheme more, but that didnt materialise. Then it wasn't going ahead and was to be stopped as Apple weren't giving HP enough iPods and then sales were slow.

Who knows how well it really does and what other hidden gains both sides get, apart from the extra sales and advertisement etc.

I think it may have something to do with a return to HP from preinstalling iTunes on all their machines (and thus making it the default player over windows media player). This has seemed vital in certain areas, and kinda gets one over on Dell!! Do they have their own iPod??!! (or a successful ipodkiller??!!) ...If u can't beat the iPod, join it!!

[PlaceofDis]

I don't get how HP can sell the iPod. Does Apple allow this? Does Apple want this? :confused:


Apple wants this, it allows them to use HP's huge ditribution network and allows the iPod to reach a wider audience, while HP doesnt have to worry about having a flop of an MP3 Player

[GilGrissom]

if it sells more iPods cool

haha i wonder what would happen if apple let HP sell re-branded Macs....

Interesting point!! :)

But I doubt it!!

[PlaceofDis]

Interesting point!! :)

But I doubt it!!

i doubt it as well, but just think about it, the computer is the same, same OS still, but its sold through HP and is marketed by HP, i just wonder if that would expand Apple marketshare...

[usarioclave]

Apple wants this, it allows them to use HP's huge ditribution network and allows the iPod to reach a wider audience, while HP doesnt have to worry about having a flop of an MP3 Player

Wider audience? How?

The estimates I've read say that HP has about a 3% contribution to the iPod market. That's not very big, really.

You can buy iPods are everywhere.

The only channel I can think of that HP has access to and Apple doesn't is Wal-Mart. That would change, if Apple wanted it to.

<shrug>

Maybe it's a convenient way to remove a potential competitor from the market...and show that there is a licensee for both the iPod and iTMS.

[puckhead193]

if it sells more iPods cool

haha i wonder what would happen if apple let HP sell re-branded Macs....

I was thinking that when i read the title. Just imagine buying a mac only its not a Mac..... :rolleyes:
Do you think apple will ever sells HP computers. and have them in the stores and have them crash all the time so people will buy Macs.... ;)

[bdkennedy1]

I still don't get this. Apple is already the Mercedes of hardware. What the hell is putting an HP label on it going to do?

[iMeowbot]

Hmm....

Any idea how well the HP iPods sell?

At the end of last (calendar) year, HP was believed to be responsible for about 7% of iPod sales, not too shabby really. I haven't seen newer numbers, only some predictions that by now if would be lower since HP haven't picked up any of the newer models.

[russed]

is it just me who doesnt get the point in hp ipods?

[BanditBill]

Hopefully HP bundles the iPods with their computer with an iPod Dock.

I wish Apple would do the same with the Mac Mini and put out a dock model (that still looks good).

[GilGrissom]

I still don't get this. Apple is already the Mercedes of hardware. What the hell is putting an HP label on it going to do?

Could be a matter of reaching into the PC market more. If you think about it in one sense HP could help sign their death warrant by doing this if the ipod "halo effect" realy does begin to damage PC sales (but thats an arguement on its own!). I think theres much more behind it than iPods here. iPods, iTunes & iTMS, halo effects, expanded markets, etc etc...the list could go on.

True Apple can be seen as the mercedes of hardware (i like the analigy!!!) but some people don't like mercedes!!..they prefer BMW, or Audi!!...enter HP!!

Better HP than Dell I say!!

Someone raised a good point when they said that it means one less competitor to Apple. If you can stop your enemy eating away your sales great, if u can turn them into your allie and make them cotnribute to your success thats one hell of a business achievement!!

[emulator]

The only channel I can think of that HP has access to and Apple doesn't is Wal-Mart. That would change, if Apple wanted it to.
Staples, OfficeMax RadioShack, etc...

[slidingjon]

The store I work at sells both apple iPods and HP iPods. Well....we carry both... NO ONE buys the HP iPods. They can't get AppleCare on it.

[appleface]

can i infer that the date will coinside with ipod mini and shuffle revisions?

[dornoforpyros]

eh personnally I look at it like this

"Average normal PC user walks into megastoreX and is looking at iPods. He see's the apple iPod and thinks "oh wait, is this compatible with my system?" then he see's the HP iPod and is like "well I have an HP printer so I KNOW this one is compatible"

Of cource this is a very ignorant thought process but there are alot of PC users who still think Mac's arean't compatible at all.

[Brandon Sharitt]

This could be a good thing to help get shuffles into the hands of the Wal-Mart WMA flash player buying public. At the local Wal-Mart here they already have the regualr HP iPod and sell a lot of accessories.

[TheMasin9]

I still don't get this. Apple is already the Mercedes of hardware. What the hell is putting an HP label on it going to do?


basically nothing, just let it keep goin, if hp wants to slap thier logo on em and sell em let em go for it, not like its selling any better than the reg ipods.

[tamtam]

I don't see how they came up with a marketing plan on this to make a profit or generate market share.

[Brandon Sharitt]

I've heard that the HP iPod has a better warranty and better tech support than Apple has. Is that true? If so, it should still work fine on a Mac even though I have to download the software(software update wanted to install it any way even before I had an iPod) instead of install from the disk.

[Dagless]

is it just me who doesnt get the point in hp ipods?

nope, it isn't just you. iPod is synonymous with Apple, and as far as i know most are sold via the web from the apple.com website. I live near manchester, but all the iPod owners on my course do not get their iPods from Selfridges or any other designer or computer shop, but online.

do HP even do a student discount? or a simple non-VAT option? are they even sold in the UK? i've yet to see one. i don't think any of the shops i frequent sell them.

[tex210]

Wider audience? How?

The estimates I've read say that HP has about a 3% contribution to the iPod market. That's not very big, really.

3% of 100 isn't much... 3% of iPods sold is a much larger number.
Just think about all those people who point and laugh at Apple's supposed market share, then think about how many computers that actually adds up to. It's kinda like that.

[rockthecasbah]

The store I work at sells both apple iPods and HP iPods. Well....we carry both... NO ONE buys the HP iPods. They can't get AppleCare on it.
I wouldn't buy an HP iPod, why? They have an ugly and Huge HP sign on the back, but are identical with the Apple iPod the other way. I'm sure the resell value is worse, too since the 5 people that bought the HPs are still using theirs..

I don't really care about the Apple care. In this situation, extended warranties are just ways to squeeze extra $$$$$$$ out of the consumer. For a laptop or something you'll beat around that is quite expensive sure, but on an iPod, nah.

[nagromme]

HP is just one more way to sell iPods--a unique one in that it will sell to some people who shy away from Apple but trust big-name PC brands. No, it doesn't double iPod sales, but it's another outlet to move iPods through and that's a good thing.

I think an HP Mac Mini would be an interesting experiment :) Since the Mini can be viewed as a PC peripheral for some people.

I somehow thought HP's new CEO wouldn't continue the iPod thing since it seems to help Apple more than HP. Guess it's worth it to HP too!

[Tulse]

Just imagine buying a mac only its not a Mac..... :rolleyes:
...but instead a Motorola Starmax (www.lowendmac.com/moto/index.shtml), or a DayStar (www.lowendmac.com/daystar/index.html), or a Radius (www.lowendmac.com/radius/index.html), or a Umax SuperMac (www.lowendmac.com/supermacs/index.shtml), or a Power Computing (www.lowendmac.com/power/index.shtml) machine (I actually owned one from these folks).

Yep, some folks forget the dark days of the clones...

As for HP selling iPods, this is anything but new. And frankly, if HP is willing to promote a competitor, more power to them. Apple loses nothing with this arrangement, and gains penetration in areas where Apple might not be considered for purchase.

[JesterJJZ]

I think the idea is pretty much to let people know that you can use ipods on PCs. I come across people all the time that think you need a mac to use one.

"Hey you should get an ipod."

"I can't, I don't have a mac."

:rolleyes:

[Frisco]

...but instead a Motorola Starmax (www.lowendmac.com/moto/index.shtml), or a DayStar (www.lowendmac.com/daystar/index.html), or a Radius (www.lowendmac.com/radius/index.html), or a Umax SuperMac (www.lowendmac.com/supermacs/index.shtml), or a Power Computing (www.lowendmac.com/power/index.shtml) machine (I actually owned one from these folks).

Yep, some folks forget the dark days of the clones...


We need Mac clones back. That is the only way Mac OS will survive. Apple can still survive as a computer company without the Mac, but what's the point.

It's all about Marketshare. If we don't get a lot more marketshare the Mac will be oblivious to developers. Surf the web--everything is Windows!

[FlyNolJ]

I think the idea is pretty much to let people know that you can use ipods on PCs. I come across people all the time that think you need a mac to use one.

"Hey you should get an ipod."

"I can't, I don't have a mac."

:rolleyes:

All of my friends that are in the market for a MP3 player say "I don't have a Mac." I just laugh and say that they don't have a brain. ;)

[ScubaDuc]

I think an HP Mac Mini would be an interesting experiment :) Since the Mini can be viewed as a PC peripheral for some people.

I somehow thought HP's new CEO wouldn't continue the iPod thing since it seems to help Apple more than HP. Guess it's worth it to HP too!


Thats exactly why I want to buy a Mac Mini: to add an Apple to my home network but then, why buy it from HP? In truth we all got so many computers laying around (including a Slowsilver) that I am not sure the "switch" argument holds anymore since a wi-fi network is so easy and cheap to set up.

I have waited to get the mini for Tiger but now that it is just out a post on macOSrumors points to new minis with updated videocard and extra RAM....
Back in parking ???? I would not really care for the minor speed upgrade but the videocard is another story, although I somehow doubt Apple would re-design the MB so soon after release, but hey, I would not be complaining if they do...

[Object-X]

if it sells more iPods cool

haha i wonder what would happen if apple let HP sell re-branded Macs....

I believe that this is going to happen. Though, according to
Paul Thurrott (http://www.windowsitpro.com/windowspaulthurrott/Article/ArticleID/46230/windowspaulthurrott_46230.html), a Windows guy, rumors were flying at last week's WinHEC that OS X is about to be ported to Intel. Not too start that discussion, but it is a rumor floating around the PC crowd. Personally, I think a rebranded Mac is more likely, but you just never know. After reading the news (or lack thereof) about Longhorn, perhaps Microsoft's demise is becoming more apparent.

Microsoft is in full blown damage control. They say Longhorn will be out in December 2006, but that is a misleading statement; what they are really saying is that OEMs will have but the general public won't get it until 2007! Mark my words, they will not release in 2006 and their claims now are only to begiule people into thinking they are closer than they are. Tiger has already delivered what Longhorn is promising.

I think Apple may take a more cautious approach and let HP, Sony, and others (?) sell a rebranded Mac. But, now is the time to strike and go for blood. Apple should release Tiger to x86 and let the superiority of their OS sell itself. These discussion have to be going on in Apple's board meetings. This OS could take them all the way. If they did this (it's a long shot to be sure), but if they did this, it would change the computer industry over night. Apple could be over 50% market share before Longhorn ever saw the light of day.

[swissmann]

I wonder how much Apple makes off of each HP iPod sale as compared to the Apple iPod? How much does HP make?

[Tulse]

according to
Paul Thurrott (http://www.windowsitpro.com/windowspaulthurrott/Article/ArticleID/46230/windowspaulthurrott_46230.html), a Windows guy, rumors were flying at last week's WinHEC that OS X is about to be ported to Intel. Not too start that discussion, but it is a rumor floating around the PC crowd.
I think that's more an indication of how desperate the PC side is for decent hardware and innovative software. There is still no good economic argument for Apple to move to x86 chips. Apple makes its money on hardware -- why should it let generic whitebox makers get a slice of that?

Besides, Paul Thurrott has a lousy reputation for rumours (and is generally considered an unreflective shill for Microsoft).


We need Mac clones back. That is the only way Mac OS will survive.
The same argument regarding moving to Intel applies to PowerPC-based clones as well. When the experiment was tried previously, the explicit purpose was to let clone makers produce low-end machines to expand the user base while Apple produced its higher-end, more expensive models. In reality, the clones didn't expand the Mac marketshare, but instead ate into Apple's existing userbase. Apple's response was to kill cloning, and take on the low end themselves, first with the iMac, and now with the Mac mini.

Given that Merril Lynch and others are predicting sizable increases in Apple's computer marketshare over the next year, it sure looks to me like Apple made the right call regarding the clones.

[iJWC]

QUOTE=Object-X "After reading the news (or lack thereof) about Longhorn, perhaps Microsoft's demise is becoming more apparent. "



LOL...I've heard it all now. MS just posted something like 2.9 Billion with a B NET profit in one quarter.

[sw1tcher]

I've heard that the HP iPod has a better warranty and better tech support than Apple has. Is that true?

Nope. The warranty is still 1 year regardless if it's Apple or HP branded. As for tech support, I doubt it. Apple's tech support is/has been top notch IMO.

[cgundlach]

They killed HP-UX, PA-RISC, and Alpha, so they could sell Windoze, Red Hat and Intel processors. HP needs to change its motto from Invent to Resell.

[sw1tcher]

We need Mac clones back. That is the only way Mac OS will survive.

When Mac clones were allowed, they actually were hurting Apple's sales. Apple would have to charge an arm and a leg (and a kidney) for the OS if they are to thrive on it alone. Clones now would be a bad idea.

Besides, the Mac mini is already helping Apple's marketshare. I wouldn't worry too much about marketshare.

[Object-X]

LOL...I've heard it all now. MS just posted something like 2.9 Billion with a B NET profit in one quarter.

A little enthusiastic hyperbole. However, my underlying point is I don't think Longhorn is ever going to see the light of day; so, it might take over two years for OS X to reach that percentage, but they could before Microsoft could ever produce a "new" OS. I honestly don't think Microsoft can deliver it; it's going to wind up being an addition to XP/2003. So, selling a rebranded Mac won't put a dent in that number, but porting OS X to other proccessors would.

[iJWC]

I honestly don't think Microsoft can deliver it; it's going to wind up being an addition to XP/2003. So, selling a rebranded Mac won't put a dent in that number, but porting OS X to other proccessors would.

Were off topic here but never underestimate your opponent. I don't see MS as evil as most Mac users. There are a lot of smart people employed by Redmond as well and I think they will deliver Longhorn. In what form, that is too be seen. MS isn't showing all of their cards so what you read on the net may not be the true facts. They will deliver because they know they have too. The computer industry needs some shaking up and Apple is finally applying some pressure.

[evilbert420]

This isn't about the iPod (although getting the iPod into stores that aren't "good" enough to carry Apple products is a good thing).

This is all about iTunes: Making it the default music player (and therefore music store) on millions of mass-market PCs.

Halo-effect people. Halo-effect. :cool:

[Object-X]

We need Mac clones back. That is the only way Mac OS will survive. Apple can still survive as a computer company without the Mac, but what's the point.

First of all, Apple is not the same company it was 5 years ago. Apple is quickly getting to the point where it will no longer needs computer sales to be profitable. That is not the case yet, but it will be soon. They are sitting on a potential gold mine with iTunes; they claim it doesn't make them a lot of profit, but don't believe that BS. The potential there is unbelievable. Job's is also eyeing the movie and video industry; expect very big things to come from this new H.264 codec. Apple is in the midst of a major transition, but Jobs is trying very hard to keep this reality from being fully known; by playing his cards tight, I believe Apple is going to make a massive move that is going to stun this industry. All of the pieces need for this are being put in place.

Apple has been slowly but surely transforming itself into a software company. Think of the profits they could make by selling OS X to the rest of the world for half the price of Windows, and iLife software, iWork, all the pro software, ect.

Why is HP rebranding Apple hardware? Are they making a profit on it? It has everyone scratching their heads, but we accept it because, hey, it's sells more iPods...it must be good. I'm telling you, this is just the tip of the iceberg. Expect much more of this and other companies too.

Does Apple want to remain at less than 5% market share? Can IBM chips alone take them higher? Industry moves are not just about products, they are also driven by timing. Apple needed to finish OS X and establish it before they could ever dream of selling it outside thier installed base. They have done that. So now what? A rebranded Mac sold by HP and others? Perhaps, but think bigger.

Everyone sees Microsoft as this huge Goliath. But little ol' Apple with it's puny David 3% market share, what can they do? OS X is the stone my friend, and Apple is about to let it fly.

[GilGrissom]

Hopefully HP bundles the iPods with their computer with an iPod Dock.

I wish Apple would do the same with the Mac Mini and put out a dock model (that still looks good).

Hmmm yes, interesting. I do not think that will happen as standard, but could be proven wrong! Maybe as an optional extra when ordering online, such like on the Apple site. Rumors about HPs built in dock to its PCs eventually materialised into some very kewl new silver PCs with docks!!! Who knows!!

(PS: Thanks to the moderator who deleted one of my blank threads, it got posted twice for some reason so i made it blank!) :)

[Object-X]

Were off topic here but never underestimate your opponent. I don't see MS as evil as most Mac users. There are a lot of smart people employed by Redmond as well and I think they will deliver Longhorn. In what form, that is too be seen. MS isn't showing all of their cards so what you read on the net may not be the true facts. They will deliver because they know they have too. The computer industry needs some shaking up and Apple is finally applying some pressure.

Actually, we're not off topic. We're talking about HP rebranding Apple hardware. I'm suggesting that HP's rebranding of Shuffles and iPod minis as evidance of more to come. They rebrand iPods why not a Mac Mini or more? As Apple becomes less dependent on hardware sales this kind of thing makes more sense to them and is better than clones. So, with respect to this particular rumor, I believe it is indicitive of more to come and evidance of Apple's changing position in the market place. You can't have a discussion about Apple allowing the rebranding of their hardware without speculating as to why and where it is leading them.

So, I am thinking much bigger than this. But this rumor is evidence to me that Apple is about to change, and the real issue isn't HP selling iPods or iMacs, but Microsoft being extrememly vulnerable and OS X having what it takes to destroy Microsoft's dominance. The fact that Apple is allowing their hardware to be sold under the name of anther company shows that they are not as dependent on their identity as a computer maker; their increased activity in software development, the type of software they are developing, and the utter superiority of their software suggest they are not just trying to sell macs with it, but have far grander plans; Apple's move into transforming music distribution portends financial reasons for not needing hardware sales to be profitable (thus freeing them to allow rebranding of their hardware); and all of these things together suggest to me they are going to go for the whole enchilada.

[MacsRgr8]

At the end of last (calendar) year, HP was believed to be responsible for about 7% of iPod sales, not too shabby really. I haven't seen newer numbers, only some predictions that by now if would be lower since HP haven't picked up any of the newer models.

Cheers.

That figure is much higher than I had anticipated.

I wonder though, if that 7% would otherwise have been Apple iPod sales.
And if it were, I wonder if Apple would mind.

[dotdotdot]

The HP iPod and regular iPod are the same except for HP has a better warranty and has crappy looking packaging. HP iPods and regular iPods cost the same but regular iPods sell better as everyone knows Apple makes iPods, not HP.

Also, the original idea was Blue iPods, no?

[makey]

I don't get how HP can sell the iPod. Does Apple allow this? Does Apple want this? :confused:

I think it is a way to introduce iPods into the mainstream market. I guess Apple thinks that more people can relate to HP.

[rockthecasbah]

I think it is a way to introduce iPods into the mainstream market. I guess Apple thinks that more people can relate to HP.
No, that is not the reason. Apple has a contract with HP that allows them to rebrand iPods in exchange for installing iTunes on every computer they manufacture and make it the primary media player, instead of Windows Media Player.

[rhpenguin]

The store I work at sells both apple iPods and HP iPods. Well....we carry both... NO ONE buys the HP iPods. They can't get AppleCare on it.

HP offers a better warranty than Apple does anyway on the iPod.. HP also offers extended service plans too.

HP's standard warranty offers 1year of phone support and 1 year of hardware support at no extra cost to the customer.

Apple offers 3 months of phone support, 6 months of free hardware support and after that you have to pay shipping to Apple plus a diagnostic fee (unless you buy applecare.).

[CompUSA-Guy]

So what's the difference between Apple's iPod and HP's branded iPod?

Well, first off, it's not a HP iPod, but Apple iPod+HP. Yes, it does get annoying saying that over and over, but that's the correct term for it and it makes our Apple ASC's (reps) happy.

Same iPod with HP's label on the back. HP does tech support and warranty for thier version. Mac users, though it may work on a mac, will not be able to get support for it.

You can not buy applecare on it.

Some consumers don't buy iPods because Apple makes them. They are more willing to buy something not as popular instead. Having HP brand thier own, does help add some extra sales to the mix for Apple.

Secondly, why would HP waste time and money developing thier own music player when NO ONE has come close to "killing" the iPod? Just sell what sells.

As far as Mac clones go....why? Apple currently does everything from scratch...hardware, software, to support. Cloning will lead to a decline in thier reputation, or worse a bad experience to a new switcher, because they won't have control over these matters.

My view and understanding of Apple is that they are a R&D company, not just another computer company. I think this would change thier business direction.

The only way I see this happening is that Apple will have the cloners on a very thight leash and can kill the deal anytime if they don't meet certain reqs on hardware and support.

[dontmatter]

now, I know that we apple fanatics have VERY little ground to stand on when talking about getting products out on time.... but how, exactly, could HP miss a release date here? I mean... oh no, we forgot to order the stickers! They aren't releasing something, the're slapping their logo on it....

weird.

And, may I ask, how will the finnancials work, here? We know it's apple's baby, the ipod, and we know it's made by some anonomous corporation in east asia, not apple or HP, so... who makes the dough?

[virividox]

yeah i like hps warranty!!!

[budugu]

So what's the difference between Apple's iPod and HP's branded iPod?

You can not buy applecare on it.

Secondly, why would HP waste time and money developing thier own music player when NO ONE has come close to "killing" the iPod? Just sell what sells.

As far as Mac clones go....why? Apple currently does everything from scratch...hardware, software, to support. Cloning will lead to a decline in thier reputation, or worse a bad experience to a new switcher, because they won't have control over these matters.

My view and understanding of Apple is that they are a R&D company, not just another computer company. I think this would change thier business direction.




First -> i like the tatoos they offer :D; HP care is approxmately (if not exactly) the same price. It is easier to get HP support.

Second-> HP was too busy getting rid of their CEO and people felt that it has come too far away from its stronghold (printing). If they can enter Camera business with hell a lot of competition then they can enter the music player business and might just end up selling more of them than the HP+ipod itself.

Third -> quality is generally pretty high these days anyway. Just take RAM no name kingmax ram works just as good as any other apple or crucial that is twice as costly (i have used their ram over couple of years in all denominations from 256 to 1 GB modules). So that bad experience due to quality is total crap.

Bottom line is PROFIT! apple makes a huge profit by holding all keys to all doors!

they do innovate and probably less than HP/IBM itself. they have better contracts with the industrial design team and spend more. Apple (or its maniac fans) taunts every small innovation as some thing path breaking (not that they have not shown originality!). So apple at best is a company that pays more money to industrial design houses + borrow obscure research from various places and markets them well (required for the fanatics who want some stupid "tech" names to taunt all over the place with out understanding any of it :p )!

Finaly why do they get away with all this (aside from fanatics), they donot have to run arround with backward compatibility! (10.1 - 2 -3 -4 - i can vouch for the fact that 50% of them will not work! and does not support the previous OS in couple of years - that is not even the avg adoption time in industry. So it will never (unless it changes this) into business.

[budugu]

No, that is not the reason. Apple has a contract with HP that allows them to rebrand iPods in exchange for installing iTunes on every computer they manufacture and make it the primary media player, instead of Windows Media Player.

I hate how apple is forcing me to install itunes with quicktime. when EU is asking MSFT to unbundle stuff ... why not apple unbundle their own stuff too. Anyway WMP is a video player and itunes is just audio. I doubt any one other than who buy music at iTMS use it!

[stephenli]

yes. Apple won.
They get pre-installation of iTunes on its huge pool of PC.
and more ppl prefer an apple logo then HP logo.
nothing to loss.

[sinisterdesign]

they do innovate and probably less than HP/IBM itself. they have better contracts with the industrial design team and spend more. Apple (or its maniac fans) taunts every small innovation as some thing path breaking (not that they have not shown originality!). So apple at best is a company that pays more money to industrial design houses + borrow obscure research from various places and markets them well (required for the fanatics who want some stupid "tech" names to taunt all over the place with out understanding any of it :p )!

Finaly why do they get away with all this (aside from fanatics), they donot have to run arround with backward compatibility! (10.1 - 2 -3 -4 - i can vouch for the fact that 50% of them will not work! and does not support the previous OS in couple of years - that is not even the avg adoption time in industry. So it will never (unless it changes this) into business.

can someone provide a translation for those last two paragraphs? i think it has something to do w/ Apple and their "it's our way or the highway" approach to the iPod?

as for the HP co-brand.....meh, whatever. it's not HURTING Apple's sales, they ARE Apple hardware. so if it's not hurting, then it can only help. who cares if it's a tiny fraction of the overall sales. that's sales that they may not have had otherwise. AND it gets iTunes on a buttload of PCs. that's no small deal. if you get a new HP, rip all your music into iTunes, which music player are you going to go buy?

more HP's w/ iTunes = less PCs w/ Windows Media Player being used = less crappy WMA files floating around = better chance of AAC as being the next defacto standard = good for all of us that love Apple :D

[Dagless]

First of all, Apple is not the same company it was 5 years ago. Apple is quickly getting to the point where it will no longer needs computer sales to be profitable. That is not the case yet, but it will be soon. They are sitting on a potential gold mine with iTunes; they claim it doesn't make them a lot of profit, but don't believe that BS. The potential there is unbelievable. Job's is also eyeing the movie and video industry; expect very big things to come from this new H.264 codec. Apple is in the midst of a major transition, but Jobs is trying very hard to keep this reality from being fully known; by playing his cards tight, I believe Apple is going to make a massive move that is going to stun this industry. All of the pieces need for this are being put in place.

Apple has been slowly but surely transforming itself into a software company. Think of the profits they could make by selling OS X to the rest of the world for half the price of Windows, and iLife software, iWork, all the pro software, ect.

Why is HP rebranding Apple hardware? Are they making a profit on it? It has everyone scratching their heads, but we accept it because, hey, it's sells more iPods...it must be good. I'm telling you, this is just the tip of the iceberg. Expect much more of this and other companies too.

Does Apple want to remain at less than 5% market share? Can IBM chips alone take them higher? Industry moves are not just about products, they are also driven by timing. Apple needed to finish OS X and establish it before they could ever dream of selling it outside thier installed base. They have done that. So now what? A rebranded Mac sold by HP and others? Perhaps, but think bigger.

Everyone sees Microsoft as this huge Goliath. But little ol' Apple with it's puny David 3% market share, what can they do? OS X is the stone my friend, and Apple is about to let it fly.

That was very poetic. so well put. and it has changed my view, i do believe OS X will come out on intel hardware, i do believe something big is going to happen from Apple. Longhorns increasing delays will be Microsoft's downfall, there will be a huge gap of people wanting this new OS, but going out for PC versions of Tiger or 10.5 instead.
i think everyone knows that Linux will never destroy windows, as brilliant as it is i just cant see it happening. but OSX on intel... yep. thats so likely i probably would put money on it.

[Dagless]

yes. Apple won.
They get pre-installation of iTunes on its huge pool of PC.
and more ppl prefer an apple logo then HP logo.
nothing to loss.

hah especially when Microsoft can longer bundle Windows Media Player with their OS.

[m4r71n1]

Why is apple's most successful product so successful? Well this just answers it.. its most versatile.. think about it.. more people sell it.. more money.
simple equation.
Of course this cant be done with hardware or OS's. But apple should sell iLife.. even tho im switching soon.. it looks so good.. i just want it! Why hasnt any other company come up with something so good?

I cant see why this is a bad thing.. maybe some hardcore apple-ers want to be special!... do you want apple to live? then let it contribute to others. I luv my ipod and i love its availability, i love the fact that other people have them. I think color helps make them special (a blue version would rule).. the U2 version was cool... but i actually didnt want U2 signatures at the back. And remember when apple offered free engraving.. Heyyy how about apple does wat Falcon PC does... get someone to paint (specialized) stuff on ur ipod to make it more original
they could charge for the paint job... apple should also move from the white ipod like the minis have.. the ipod isnt just black and blue (Screen).. it has colours.. the ipod should have COLORS!! okayyy

cheers,
ini