More on Flash Based iPods? [Archive]

MacRumors

Oct 30, 2004, 12:02 AM

News.com provides (http://news.com.com/Apple+shares+barrel+past+50+on+iPod+juice/2100-1041_3-5431078.html?tag=nefd.top) more hints at an upcoming Flash-based iPod coming from Apple. Flash-based iPods were previously rumored (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2004/10/20041001170829.shtml). One analyst even gives an expected price:

Milunovich said a recent meeting with Apple executives left him with the impression that more is in store for Apple, including a flash memory-based iPod that could start selling early next year in the $149 price range, $100 less than Apple currently charges for its 4GB iPod Mini.

Mac Boy-Canada

Oct 30, 2004, 12:04 AM

Anyways, this sounds like it is good news; I hope there is more speculation as to the capacity of this device. Anything less than 1GB might not suffice.

HiRez

Oct 30, 2004, 12:10 AM

I would definitely pay $150 for flash-based, 1 GB iPod. What I can't decide on is the size. Something really small like a keychain/pack of gum/medallion device would be cool, but then you'd lose the great iPod interface and screen. It seems like the Mini form-factor is about as small as they can go there, and if that's the case I'm not sure the proposition is so attractive (might as well just pony up for a Mini in that case).

TrenchcoatJedi

Oct 30, 2004, 12:12 AM

It'll probably be the same iPod mini with a 1-2GB flash drive.

Porchland

Oct 30, 2004, 12:13 AM

melgross

Oct 30, 2004, 12:29 AM

It'll probably be the same iPod mini with a 1-2GB flash drive.

It would surprise me if it were 1 Gig. 2 Gig is out of the question. The price is simply too high.

If they come out with one, it might be as high as 512 Meg.

If Apple is to sew up the market for players, they need one using flash to cost closer to $99 than $149. 512 still holds about 8-9 albums of music.

If Apple could grab 75% of the flash market, they would hold about 85% of the whole market. If they could maintain that, they would get perhaps 85% of the downloads as well. That would cement their hold, if they can maintain their lead in player purchasing psychology.

But, in the rest of the world the iPods don't have that same lead. They have to grab it there as well. It's almost nowhere in China, for example, where cheaper players are growing sales. They have to get in there as well.

swissmann

Oct 30, 2004, 12:33 AM

I definitely see a market for this. Everyone who follows the latest craze (tons of people) like the iPod are trying to get one. I bet a lot of those people stop when they see the price tag. Call it iPod something and make it cheaper and it will sell.

Lancetx

Oct 30, 2004, 12:38 AM

Anything with less than 1GB of capacity would end up tossed in the drawer and never used (to roughly paraphrase Steve Jobs). I wouldn't be in the market for one as the current 4GB mini is as low as I could ever go, but if Apple truly believes there is a large enough market for an even smaller capacity iPod, then they should go for it.

zakee00

Oct 30, 2004, 12:40 AM

meh, i don't like flash players for my purposes, but if apple did it right (like they would), i can see alot of people springing for a flash based iPod with anywhere from 512mb-1gb of space.
on one news post on this subject, it said that apple had been confirmed to buy the flash CONTROLERS. this could mean either a) flash based ipod, or b) new flash controllers for reg. ipods, prolly more flash memory built in.
the new ipod photo has 17 mins of skip protection as opposed to the 25 of the regular ipods (and mini). what is up with that, does anyone know?

edit: another thought, apple just had a music/ipod event. it's getting close to christmas, don't you think they would have released the "flash ipod" there along with the ipod photo/u2 ipod?
strange, i doubt they are making a flash ipod anytime this year.

MacinDoc

Oct 30, 2004, 12:42 AM

It would surprise me if it were 1 Gig. 2 Gig is out of the question. The price is simply too high.

If they come out with one, it might be as high as 512 Meg.
I agree with you that a Flash-based iPod would have no more than 512 MB of Flash for $149 at this time.

Koodauw

Oct 30, 2004, 12:45 AM

But the real question... Will it be compatible with the new announced iPod Socks?

jdang

Oct 30, 2004, 12:58 AM

dont listen to the Milunovich. he also said that they wouldnt release a Photo iPod this year. he needs to brush up on this analysis.

jm

QCassidy352

Oct 30, 2004, 01:06 AM

AirUncleP

Oct 30, 2004, 01:12 AM

Many People. Maaaannnnyyyyy People!, don't need to load their entire music collection on a music player. All they want to do is load created albums for the days run, workout, train trip, ....etc.

$99 iTunes compatible 1G device would jump off the shelfs.

unsigned

Oct 30, 2004, 01:15 AM

I really truly believe apple will never make a flash ipod with less than 4gb. They will, however, integrate the iPod experience with other products. If apple is developing iPod software that can operate using flash memory, it's not for a standalone player. It's for a cell phone, or some other application.

There's just no point. The price difference between flash memory and the 4gb mini hard drive is going to evaporate as soon as the holidays are over.

If not price, what is the advantage? The mini's hard drive is already a compact flash form factor. It's not what drives the size of the mini. A flash ipod wouldn't be significantly smaller, or significantly cheaper, but it would have significantly less storage.

An iPod, with less than 4gb, and without any other functionality, just doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense, when the mini's hard drive is going to plummet in price. Hard drives have historically always been cheaper per megabyte than RAM and there is no reason to think that's going to change without some major breakthrough in ram technology.

I'd put the smart money on a 4gb mini at $199 or even $179, and a 6gb mini at $249, at macworld in january.

A better speculation: How will sony's PSP affect the ipod's perceived value? For $195 it plays mp3s (not as well, granted) plays games as good as a ps2, plays movies, has a color screen, has wifi...

evilgEEk

Oct 30, 2004, 01:18 AM

All they want to do is load created albums for the days run, workout, train trip, ....etc.
I completely agree. There's a huge market for this. I've talked about this to a few of my friends and they all said they would buy a flash iPod as fast as they could because they don't want/need the huge amounts of storage regular/photo/mini iPods provide.

I think it could do very well.

Elan0204

Oct 30, 2004, 01:19 AM

$99 iTunes compatible 1GB device would jump off the shelfs.

Apple is never going to release a 1GB flash iPod at $99, at least not until 1GB flash cards cost like $20. You'll be lucky if Apple even gives you 512MB for $99, but I could see them charging $149.

I too would love a flash iPod, because I really don't need my whole music collection with me. Plus, I know a bunch of people that want an iPod, but can't afford the $249 and up it costs to get one. A flash iPod priced at $99 would sell like crazy.

MacinDoc

Oct 30, 2004, 01:19 AM

broken_keyboard

Oct 30, 2004, 01:30 AM

Steve Jobs was just dissing flash based players in a speech a few days ago. I strongly doubt there will be a Flash based iPod...

Yvan256

Oct 30, 2004, 01:41 AM

It's curious that Apple's not rushing this out the door for Christmas, since there's going to be a lot of first-time purchasers in the market. This Christmas is going to be huge for market share as more and more people are falling on either Apple side or the everyone-else side of the player market.

Either Apple couldn't get the flash player to market or they're sufficeintly satisfied with iPod's traction in the market to go with what they've got.

If they use the same casing for the 1GB Flash and the 4GB HardDisk, and can barely keep up with demand with the 4GB (what if it's not the harddisk, but everything else that's in short supply?), that's one reason not to introduce the 1GB right away.

They WILL lose people to "the other side", but really, how many? And of those, how many will buy music on-line and "commit" to another format?

I'm sure they all planned this out and this is the best course of action they can do for now.

Jaz

Oct 30, 2004, 01:42 AM

I doubt it.

It just doesn't fit in with what Apple strategy is and also what Jobs says. Apple never competes on price ... never! It killed them in the desktop for many years until the iMac arrived as a compelling price/performance option.

With a consumer good like the iPod, when you move 2 million units a quarter at full price (no rebates, discount etc) why would you want to cannabilise that until there is at least a 20% fall of per quarter. Right now Apple sells more each quarter than the last, with Xmas yet to come.

Maybe in a year I'd guess, when they could do a 4Gb flash version without killing the price. Much better battery life and thinner would be the main selling point.

Yvan256

Oct 30, 2004, 01:47 AM

It would surprise me if it were 1 Gig. 2 Gig is out of the question. The price is simply too high.

If they come out with one, it might be as high as 512 Meg.

If Apple is to sew up the market for players, they need one using flash to cost closer to $99 than $149. 512 still holds about 8-9 albums of music.

Flash prices hav gone down (a LOT) in the last few months. In fact, I'm quite sure that for Apple, the price difference between 512MB, 1GB and 2GB must be around ~20$US each.

A 512MB iPod would seem weird, especially since a lot of players are 128/256/512MB. Very few are 1GB, and Apple would stand out if only for that.

Of course, there's the nitro at 1.5GB but I think it's HD-based... costs the same as a 4GB mini. :rolleyes:

---

iPod mini/flash, 1GB, 129$US. February 2005.

snahabed

Oct 30, 2004, 02:02 AM

I cannot see Apple ever doing this.

Since when do they put out low end, cheap stuff? Jobs was just putting flash players down!

ericdano

Oct 30, 2004, 02:17 AM

It would surprise me if it were 1 Gig. 2 Gig is out of the question. The price is simply too high.

If it was somehow removeable, it would make more sense. I just bought a 2 gig flashcard for $135. If they sold a barebones player with removeable flash, it would be a sweet thing....

aswitcher

Oct 30, 2004, 02:32 AM

News.com provides (http://news.com.com/Apple+shares+barrel+past+50+on+iPod+juice/2100-1041_3-5431078.html?tag=nefd.top) more hints at an upcoming Flash-based iPod coming from Apple. Flash-based iPods were previously rumored (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2004/10/20041001170829.shtml). One analyst even gives an expected price:

Yeah, if its a gig...thats like $220 AUD...about $150 AUD less than the iPod mini which can be found for about $370 AUD...

I hope its out soon and in huge numbers or else we will be facing another 7 month delay fiasco.

HiRez

Oct 30, 2004, 02:39 AM

There's a huge market for this. I've talked about this to a few of my friends and they all said they would buy a flash iPod as fast as they could because they don't want/need the huge amounts of storage regular/photo/mini iPods provide. The way I listen to music is to have a single mix of 30-100 songs that I listen to continuously. When I get new songs I'll mix them in and delete some of the ones I'm getting tired of. Maybe I'll throw in a few older tunes just for variety. Perhaps I'd even want to keep one or two complete CDs on there that I just bought. I have 40 GB of music but I just don't need to have all of it available at all times in a portable format. 1 GB would be perfect for my purposes, 512 MB is a little thin. The 4 GB (or 5 GB) Mini doesn't appeal to me because it's kind of in that neither here nor there territory: far too much space (and size and expense) for just my current mix, far too little to hold my entire library. I guess if all my music was in a very high bit rate that might be useful, but it's not. A tiny, 1 GB, flash-based iPod for $150 or less would be just perfect. They could probably do it for $100 if they really wanted to flood the market with them: go with a smaller screen, even USB 1.1 instead of FireWire or USB 2.0 would probably be ok since you aren't transferring that much data. No, they wouldn't make much profit on them, but it would ensure continued AAC/Fairplay domination in the face of the M$ challenge, growth of the iTMS, and most likely lead to increased sales of the larger iPods as well as people upgrade or suggest to/buy them for other friends and family members who have the need for more storage space and photo capabilities.

NovacaineX

Oct 30, 2004, 03:02 AM

Not everyone has huge 40gb music libraries. I could easily fit my music library onto 1gb. And if it was the cheapest ipod thatd the one i'd buy, no need for all that storage whe n iwont use it, even if it is a better deal. I'd buy a 1gb one for 150 in a flash.

stephenli

Oct 30, 2004, 03:36 AM

I still havent own a portable music player in my life (CD / MD / Flash....)
However I will be glad to pay if the new flash based device is $150, and of course, immediately.
Hello! iPod Micro <---would it be call like this?

HiRez

Oct 30, 2004, 04:08 AM

iPod Micro <---would it be call like this?That's exactly what I was thinking. Or maybe iPod Express?

asif786

Oct 30, 2004, 04:38 AM

I can see Apple doing this, but there's two ways I think they could do it..

1) Only put like 128Mb of memory in it, and then market it as something that can hold your workout playlist or your driving playlist or whatever. They could emphasize the fact that it's designed for playlists, not entire libraries..

Fairly Unlikely, but then again, we dont know what Apple can do :)

2) A 1Gb Player. Carry 250 Songs in your pocket. I suppose it could work.

Name: iPod Express. Your Music. To Go. (<--catchy apple tagline :D )

russed

Oct 30, 2004, 04:43 AM

i think a mini ipod mini would be great. basically apple are wanting to take the full market of music downloads. to do that they need to reach all people. ... so they bring out a very cheep one to get the last third of the market in portable players, then they have wrapped up the download market.

the other day there were those runors about some new form of aac? like super compressed but still good quality. possibly this whould work with a 1gig flashed based player so enableling more tunes to be stored?

AmigoMac

Oct 30, 2004, 04:48 AM

it must be 1GB, no less, at $149? they can... iPod micro...

MacSlut

Oct 30, 2004, 05:41 AM

Kerruk

Oct 30, 2004, 05:42 AM

Flash based ipods? Never.

But think of this:
The photo ipod lacks a way to download pictures (I know there's the slow Belkin' way) directly from a camera or any memorycard. I think you all can fill in the rest. :p

Poff

Oct 30, 2004, 06:16 AM

I've been waiting for this rumour since the terrible tuesday we just had!

Apple probably figured that a lot of the Christ-mass presents this year destined to be iPods, would end up as iPod flash instead.

When this thing comes out, I'll definitely buy one. 1GB for $149 is definitely out of the question at the moment. Maybe they're waiting till they can actually do that, which I guess will be somewhere in the beginning of 2005. (Flash prices go down all the time! I think Samsungs goal is to double the capacity and sell for same price each year.)

Edit: For all of you people talking about finding your $60 1GB flash-card on the net, know this:

The internals of the iPod cost quite a bit, even when you remove the drive.
Apple likes to have a huge profit-margin on their products.
Research-costs have to be paid with iPod sales, aswell as salaries.
Sony just released a 1GB flash-player. They didn't manage to price it lower than $200, though.
Their 512MB player, however, got priced at about $130 or $140. There you've got at least a $60 difference between 512MB and 1Gb allready. (This does, of course, include a little extra for the shareholders of Sony aswell.)
Cheap flash-memory means cheap quality!

iGary

Oct 30, 2004, 06:39 AM

Not.Happening.Ever.

gorkonapple

Oct 30, 2004, 07:53 AM

Apple is never going to release a 1GB flash iPod at $99, at least not until 1GB flash cards cost like $20. You'll be lucky if Apple even gives you 512MB for $99, but I could see them charging $149.

I too would love a flash iPod, because I really don't need my whole music collection with me. Plus, I know a bunch of people that want an iPod, but can't afford the $249 and up it costs to get one. A flash iPod priced at $99 would sell like crazy.

If your a careful shopper, you can get a 1 GB SD Card NOW for 20. I'd imagine if Apple was buying thousands of them they could bring it in for a price less then that.

verces

Oct 30, 2004, 09:12 AM

Jobs never openly said "No Flash iPods". His emphasis was on Video iPods. Which are ridiculous even to my petty knowledge.

However, as I said, 1GB with $149 Flash iPod is highly possible. Extending a new range obviously, iPod micro. They can't integrate this into the iPod mini brand. If they do, then they'll need to find a way to somehow put the mini price down but they can't and don't need to do that since the minis are currently flying off shelves.

iPod micro 1GB $149. This Christmas.

Yvan256

Oct 30, 2004, 09:45 AM

[...] A tiny, 1 GB, flash-based iPod for $150 or less would be just perfect. They could probably do it for $100 if they really wanted to flood the market with them: go with a smaller screen, even USB 1.1 instead of FireWire or USB 2.0 would probably be ok since you aren't transferring that much data.

Oh,believe me, you DON'T want to use USB1 to transfer your music, even if only for 1GB... If you have to wait over 12 minutes to fill up your iPod, it's not "user friendly".

I still think that NOT doing a new iPod (design, development, production) would keep the iPod mini/flash price down. Use the already existing iPod mini, put flash memory in it instead of a HD (if it's at all possible).

After all, Steve Jobs never complained about flash players because they were flash-based, but because they didn't have enough capacity to be useful.

Two months ago, my whole library could've fit onto an iPod mini, so perhaps a 1GB iPod would still be ok for other people (that's still 250 songs, or about 25 CDs at 10 songs each). 512MB just wouldn't be enough (125 songs, 12 CDs just doesn't sound right for marketing numbers are too low... But 250/25 for the 1GB sounds perfect, just like 1000/100 for the 4GB!)

The 1GB would also be nice for those huge playlists for on-the-go such as gym, rides, etc. After all, 1GB = 250 songs/25 CDs = more than 4 hours of music.

No, they wouldn't make much profit on them, but it would ensure continued AAC/Fairplay domination in the face of the M$ challenge, growth of the iTMS, and most likely lead to increased sales of the larger iPods as well as people upgrade or suggest to/buy them for other friends and family members who have the need for more storage space and photo capabilities.

Agreed, this should be their next focus (which, frankly, I thought would happen before/at the same time as the iPod photo). Even at zero profits (or barely), this should be their target.

It can cost more than the other players (say, 149~179$US instead of sub-100$US) but the iPod brand, iTunes integration, ITMS (if available) and superior 1GB capacity (instead of 128/256/512MB) would be enough to justify spending that ~50-80$US extra to get the iPod instead of a cheaper player.

That is, if they were planning on getting a *really* cheap flash player, since most Rio players already are at 149+$US for 128-512MB! :eek:

In which case, the price of the 1GB iPod would actually favor Apple! (for once) ;)

cube

Oct 30, 2004, 09:52 AM

This guy is known for talking crap. He is known a "Miloonovich", or just "The Loon".

Yvan256

Oct 30, 2004, 09:57 AM

Don't forget about AAC+

A search on Froogle yields CF cards as low as $60 for 1GB and $140 for 2GB. This is for single unit retail. Apple of course would be getting wholesale bulk pricing for huge volumes. With AAC+ these units would be more than sufficient for many users.

They would appeal to people not only with small collections, but people like me with collections so large they would need a 250GB+ iPod, but would settle for something cheap, fast and easy that they could refresh songs on.

- Consumer prices support the possibility (at the very least for a 1GB iPod)
- AAC+ would "upgrade" all iPods capacities (by 30% if I read that correctly, by 126% if I read that wrong)
- iPod 1GB would fit, strangely enough, people with ~25 CDs libraries *and* people who can't even fit their libraries on a 40/60GB iPod/photo.

It seems it all depends on the cost of the iPod mini "shell" (all minus the HD) and Apple's willingness to enter the market.

Two things could happen at the introduction of the iPod micro:

iPod micro, 1GB, 129$US
iPod mini, 4GB, 199$US

or

iPod micro, 1GB, 149$US
iPod mini, 5GB, 249$US

I'm hoping for the first case, since both models cost less. :D

Edit: they *could* use the same shell for the mini and the micro, all they have to do is make another (single) color for the micro to differentiate the "brands". Make it.... I dunno... beige or grey. :D

After all, didn't they use that method back in the iMac G3 days? A specific color meant a model/speed? (I'm talking *after* the basic model with 5 colors, around the iMac DV era I think).

BornAgainMac

Oct 30, 2004, 10:01 AM

A strongly disagree from some of you that think that 1 GB is too small. If you go running with it then an hour of your favorite music is fine. You want it to be small, no movings, no skipping, and if it falls on the group that it doesn't break. Sometimes I just have it loop thru my favorite song or two anyways so I only need a fraction of that 1 GB.

If you need more than 1 GB, then use a harddrive-based player. The flash-based one isn't for you.

Freg3000

Oct 30, 2004, 10:07 AM

Definitely not before Christmas. Apple has set their iPod lineup, and they are not changing it with less than 2 months to go. iPods will fly off the shelves, flash iPod or not, so why intro it now? Wait until MWSF 05 and spur 1Q sales, which last year were better than 4Q Christmas sales. :eek:

scottkle

Oct 30, 2004, 10:25 AM

It would surprise me if it were 1 Gig. 2 Gig is out of the question. The price is simply too high.

Also remember something very important, while Steve has said it's all about the music --- and now about the photos -- remember what else is most popular these days: Little flash-based drives that you carry everywhere.

If Apple goes through with a 1GB iPod, even for those who think that's not enough for music, they can carry it around -- smaller than the current minis, I would think -- and use it also as a flash based drive. Those keychain ones are everywhere, but they aren't the status symbol that a mini-mini iPod could be. Has anyone thought of that? I wouldn't need it for music, but I'd be first in line for one as a tiny storage device.

Jovian9

Oct 30, 2004, 10:37 AM

It sure would, considering that you pay nearly that much for 1GB of flash without the iPod.

I'm not completely sure....but weren't the 4GB drives used in the iPod Mini's more expensive than the minis themselves when they were first introduced. I seem to recall reading about people buying minis just to rip the drives out.

Fat_Tonie

Oct 30, 2004, 11:01 AM

FallPod

Oct 30, 2004, 11:08 AM

"It's curious that Apple's not rushing this out the door for Christmas,"

Not really. With the new photo ipods and with the minis finally available in mass quantities Apple doesn't want to over load the market and compete against itself.

No,it will wait til Spring when everybody has invested in another ipod/mp3 player and then introduce the flash player to the frustration of many. :rolleyes:

I bet spring brings a new ipod product...like the flash player...then summer sees a G2 mini. Fall, another tweak to the 4G family (how about a black 20GB w/ color screen and 15-18 hr battery for $325 to blow away any remaining competition?).

DavidLeblond

Oct 30, 2004, 11:30 AM

If they announced a flash based iPod, I'd preorder it the second after it was announced even if it was $150 for a 128 mb iPod.

Ok maybe thats a little extreme, but still... I want an iPod but not for $250.

DavidLeblond

Oct 30, 2004, 12:08 PM

AirUncleP

Oct 30, 2004, 12:33 PM

Just throwing this out.

How about a iPod shell that I could plug in my 1G compact flash card that I bought for my digital camera? Now that would be cool.

MacPhreak

Oct 30, 2004, 12:59 PM

The iPod mini is nothing more than a flash player. The storage in it is a 4 gig compact flash card. Why do you think they were flying off the shelves? Photographers were buying it because that same card that is in there cost like $400 at the time by itself. If they bought the iPod mini it saved them $200.

I remember reading a story written by a fellow who had bought a mini for the drive, dissected it, and then couldn't get anything other than the mini to recognize the card.

Found it:
http://www.ipodlounge.com/articles_more.php?id=3059_0_8_0_C
"I was rather surprised to discover that the drive is actually a CF card! I tried to mount it in my Lexar FireWire CF Card Reader but with no luck. My Canon Digital Rebel didn't recognize it either."

pgwalsh

Oct 30, 2004, 01:02 PM

ccrandall77

Oct 30, 2004, 01:21 PM

Everyday I bring to work a Nokia 6620, Sharp Zaurus SL-C760, my work issued pager, and my big 4G 40GB iPod (soon to be upgraded to a 60GB iPod Photo). That's a lot of crap to strap to my belt and stuff in my pockets. So, I've been stealing the mini I bought my girlfriend and it's been working out great. And, since it's more durable and smaller than my 40GB iPod, it's great to take to the gym.

However, I don't really need a full 4GB iPod and I really don't want to spend another $249 for a second iPod. A 512MB-1GB mini in the $100-$150 would be perfect. Hopefully it'll be out before Xmas since my girlfriend says she's buying me a mini and I'd rather she save the $100-$150.

A flash-based mini, though, would definitely need to keep the same formfactor of the current mini. Any smaller and it just wouldn't be the same experience.

The problem I see, though, is that a 1GB iPod might kill the market for their already successful 4GB iPod mini market. I think so many people who are buying the mini buy it because it's small, and more affordable than the larger models. A good share of those people and people like me will have no need for an a big-mini.

So, unless they upgrade the larger mini (like a color screen?, FM radio?) or come out with a far less functional flash device, I'm skeptical that this iPod is going to be released.

corywoolf

Oct 30, 2004, 02:01 PM

It's curious that Apple's not rushing this out the door for Christmas, since there's going to be a lot of first-time purchasers in the market. This Christmas is going to be huge for market share as more and more people are falling on either Apple side or the everyone-else side of the player market.

Either Apple couldn't get the flash player to market or they're sufficeintly satisfied with iPod's traction in the market to go with what they've got.

apple doesn't rush things out the door, that would be microsoft ;)

they hardly ever release their products at the expected times anyways. i wish they'd do more giveaways though, i liked the pepsi giveaway. although it didnt help them much... my bet is late summer for the flash ipod.

frozenstar

Oct 30, 2004, 02:16 PM

I don't know if this has already been said, but Milunovich, the Meryll Lynch analyst quoted as having been given the impression that we'll see flash-based iPods soon, is the same analyst who, the day before the iPod Photo was released said Apple won't release an iPod Photo until the first quarter of 2005. So I don't know how this got to be a Page 1 story. This guy is 90% speculation. I don't think he does much research.

Arn, care to comment?

corywoolf

Oct 30, 2004, 02:20 PM

alfismoney

Oct 30, 2004, 02:32 PM

these things would sell at any price and apple knows it. just think, an ipod you could drop while you were working out and not ruin the hard drive? a 1gb drive was already voted to be the 'ideal' size in consumer surveys which could be a good indication of the size of the chips. If we can buy 512 chips for $16.99 off the internet i'm sure apple can get a 1gb chip for a reasonable enough price to stick them in a $149 machine. as for form factor, apple seems to enjoy skinny devices with large faces, meaning there's no reason why we'd lose the nice ipod interface. who thinks they'll release something the size of a credit card and about 5mm thick? make the media hot-swappable and i'll pay $199 for it. of course, knowing apple's terrible sense of timing it'll be in january, 5 minutes before they pull the lid off of a big computer release at the expo...

thatwendigo

Oct 30, 2004, 03:21 PM

Tontoa4

Oct 30, 2004, 03:38 PM

Apple will not go below $149 and they will not go below 1gb.

I can see a flash-based iPod soon with a $149 pricetag, with a 2gb capacity. All of you that believe Apple won't make any money... you're dead wrong. My guess is the iPod line will be as follows:

1 or 2(more likely) GB iPod Flash - 149 (Rule of thumb - take market selling price for a similar card, divide it by 4 and you've got Apple's cost.)

5GB iPod mini - 249 (Seagate is manufacturing these 5GB microdrives)
20GB 4g - 299
40GB 4g - 399
Photo 40 - 499
Photo 60 - 599

I'll make a bet with anyone that challenges me.

Yvan256

Oct 30, 2004, 04:09 PM

Kingston 2GB CP USB2.0 Flash drive - $225. (http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=20-189-017&depa=1)
Kingston 1GB CP USB2.0 Flash drive - $135 (http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=20-189-016&depa=1)
Kingston 512MB CP USB2.0 flash drive - $75 (http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=20-189-015&depa=1)

Need I say more?

First of all, you choose the most expensive ones on purpose:
Lexar Media JumpDrive Pro 2.0 512MB Portable USB Drive - $58 (http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=20-191-124&depa=1)
Lexar Media JumpDrive Pro 2.0 1GB 80X Portable USB Drive - $95 (http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=20-191-125&depa=1)
(didn't find a 2GB from Lexar on that website, but you get the point)

Second, USB flash drives are more expensive than other formats:
Sandisk 2GB Compact Flash Card - $132 (http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=20-171-074&depa=1)
Dane-Elec 1GB CompactFlash Card - $69 (http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=20-160-051&depa=1)
Sandisk 512MB Compact Flash Card - $42 (http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=20-171-072&depa=1)

Please note that I was able to cut your prices nearly in half on the same website you quoted.

And third, those are *consumer* prices. Commercial prices are much, much lower (since they buy in 100,000+ quantities). I'd be really surprised if Apple paid more than $40 for a 1GB CompactFlash card. Let's say the "shell+internals" of the iPod mini cost around $50, Apple could pull it off at $129 for a 1GB flash iPod mini. They would literally destroy the competition.

Need I say more? :rolleyes:

A 1GB Flash iPod mini is possible for $149 US or even lower. It's certainly not the price of the storage media that's stopping Apple (or else their 4GB iPod mini would sell for $349 US, not $249 US)

iMeowbot

Oct 30, 2004, 04:17 PM

Commercial prices are much, much lower (since they buy in 100,000+ quantities).
Yes, it's worth remembering that each new iPod model has sold for less than the retail price of the hard drives inside them!

aswitcher

Oct 30, 2004, 05:49 PM

Yes, it's worth remembering that each new iPod model has sold for less than the retail price of the hard drives inside them!

Yeah, this is very true.

I think if they do a flash then $99 US would be the sweet point - less than $200 AUD. I guess $149 US / $200-220 AUD would work but then I feel the iPod mini is pretty close (but then the mini is pretty close the the 20 gig).

:confused:

blogo

Oct 30, 2004, 06:04 PM

What about putting 3 2GB memorymodules in one iPod and sell it for 249$ completly replacing the old mini?

MacPhreak

Oct 30, 2004, 07:23 PM

What about putting 3 2GB memorymodules in one iPod and sell it for 249$ completly replacing the old mini?

I would think that would increase the size to somewhere between the mini & white iPod. The drive in the mini is the same size as a CF card, and it's already cramped in there...

coldspot

Oct 30, 2004, 08:05 PM

I prefer to buy a CD-RW with 700 MB of space and put my stuff into it. Just $1 ;)
I'd never buy an iPod 1 or 2 Gig for 149 dollars.

Poff

Oct 30, 2004, 08:09 PM

Yes, it's worth remembering that each new iPod model has sold for less than the retail price of the hard drives inside them!

People talk about this all of the time, but with flash it is a whole other reality. To get an idea of what prices Apple would have to charge for a flash-player, you'll have to look at other flash-players, just as you can look at other harddrive-players and find an approximate price of the same capacity iPod. This is currently $200 for 1GB, but it will hopefully be $150 for 1GB in Q1 2005.

Poff

Oct 30, 2004, 08:10 PM

I prefer to buy a CD-RW with 700 MB of space and put my stuff into it. Just $1 ;)
I'd never buy an iPod 1 or 2 Gig for 149 dollars.

If size doesn't matter to you, then go ahead. Nothing is better!

coldspot

Oct 30, 2004, 08:16 PM

An "iPod Micro" with 1 GB of space for $99 would be interesting...

Doctor Q

Oct 30, 2004, 08:27 PM

When we talk about the low-end market, we should also keep in mind that some consumers would settle for lesser sound quality, so a smaller capacity iPod could be set to use more highly compressed music by default, giving it a higher "number of songs" for marketing purposes, even thought the tradeoff (capacity vs. quality) remains the same.

DavidLeblond

Oct 30, 2004, 08:35 PM

I prefer to buy a CD-RW with 700 MB of space and put my stuff into it. Just $1 ;)
I'd never buy an iPod 1 or 2 Gig for 149 dollars.

Yeah but if you want to take it with you, you can't listen to your purchased songs.

Now what if Apple made a portable CD player that read the encrypted songs...

dejo

Oct 30, 2004, 09:02 PM

An "iPod Micro" with 1 GB of space for $99 would be interesting...

... but highly, HIGHLY improbable. With many other flash-based players of 512 MB selling for around $200, what would possess Apple to do something like this? Nothing.

Poff

Oct 30, 2004, 09:33 PM

albinogoldfish

Oct 30, 2004, 10:06 PM

In predicting future Ipod releases the two most important things to think about are:

1) Apple's existing margins on the Ipod and Ipod Mini
2) iTunes market share

Apple gets around 30% margin on what it sells. That means it makes about $100 per iPod and $75 per mini. Any flash player would have to be priced to get a margin of at least 30%. I think that if Apple can make a 1GB flash player for around $100 dollars they would price it around $170-$190. I think that is very possible. (Spot market for 1Gb flash is ~$10, http://www.aice.com.tw/price.asp)

Apple probably recognizes that its dominance in music download service locks in Ipod customers and vice versa. Therefore, if they see market share drop on either side they might take the hit on margins to retain market share. However, as iPods are selling faster than the Soxs beat the Cardinals, I would not hold my breath.

Yvan256

Oct 30, 2004, 11:06 PM

I prefer to buy a CD-RW with 700 MB of space and put my stuff into it. Just $1 ;)
I'd never buy an iPod 1 or 2 Gig for 149 dollars.

Well, if your primary consideration is the price, your MP3 CD player + one CD-RW combo is extremely hard to beat (especially if you carry many CD-RWs around to have more music).

But that CD-RW takes longer to write than Flash and the size of the MP3 CD player is not even nowhere near a regular iPod, which is much smaller. And the iPod mini is way smaller than the regular iPod. Now, add another CD (because even at only 1GB, the iPod mini/flash would require you to compare with two CDs for your setup) and the resulting size is even worst.

I've gone through MP3 Flash 32MB, CD-MP3, iPod 3rd gen. 10GB, and I'm telling you I'd rather go back to Flash/32MB (even encoding songs at 48kbps especially for it) than CD-MP3 (at 128kbps), because the flash player is just so much easier to carry around, and updating songs is extremely fast.

A CD player is just too bulky once you're used to small flash players and iPods.

Yvan256

Oct 30, 2004, 11:11 PM

People talk about this all of the time, but with flash it is a whole other reality. To get an idea of what prices Apple would have to charge for a flash-player, you'll have to look at other flash-players, just as you can look at other harddrive-players and find an approximate price of the same capacity iPod. This is currently $200 for 1GB, but it will hopefully be $150 for 1GB in Q1 2005.

Here we go again... Just go read the prices I quoted earlier in this thread.

If we could really "look at other harddrive-players and find an approximate price of the same capacity iPod", the iPod would either have a lower price or a bigger hard disk *and* a higher capacity battery.

Just because someone sells his 1GB flash player for $200 doesn't mean Apple can't come up with a 1GB flash player for $149 or even less.

Yvan256

Oct 30, 2004, 11:15 PM

Apple gets around 30% margin on what it sells. That means it makes about $100 per iPod and $75 per mini. Any flash player would have to be priced to get a margin of at least 30%. I think that if Apple can make a 1GB flash player for around $100 dollars they would price it around $170-$190.[/url])

Maybe I'm not good at either maths or economics (or both), but shouldn't 30% profit on a $100 product means a selling price of $130?

coldspot

Oct 30, 2004, 11:18 PM

Well, if your primary consideration is the price, your MP3 CD player + one CD-RW combo is extremely hard to beat (especially if you carry many CD-RWs around to have more music).

But that CD-RW takes longer to write than Flash and the size of the MP3 CD player is not even nowhere near a regular iPod, which is much smaller. And the iPod mini is way smaller than the regular iPod. Now, add another CD (because even at only 1GB, the iPod mini/flash would require you to compare with two CDs for your setup) and the resulting size is even worst.

I've gone through MP3 Flash 32MB, CD-MP3, iPod 3rd gen. 10GB, and I'm telling you I'd rather go back to Flash/32MB (even encoding songs at 48kbps especially for it) than CD-MP3 (at 128kbps), because the flash player is just so much easier to carry around, and updating songs is extremely fast.

A CD player is just too bulky once you're used to small flash players and iPods.

Do you think 300 MB of more space and some inches less worth 100 dollars? With that money I could buy the JBL Creature II Speakers... ;)

FallPod

Oct 31, 2004, 12:11 AM

The ipods serve the person who wants to not only carry thier whole collection with them,but also archive and back-up thier music.

The mini serves the person who does not have those needs but would like enough variety so to not have to update every 3 days.

What serves the guy who only needs 50-200 songs for the bus/train ride downtown..or the gym? The guy who is on his PC every night anyway and is ok having to update often? The guy who can't spend much more than $150 on a player? The guy who wants the style and function of an ipod but w/o the massive storage he'll never use and hefty price? The guy who travels light and finds even a ipod too bulky?

Enter ipod flash.

I'm thinking 1GB...maybe a horizontal layout (turn the mini clockwise).
$149.00. 3 colors white,black or purple.

es2mac

Oct 31, 2004, 01:09 AM

$150... I don't like the spacing of the prices!
difference between 40g and 20g is 100
between 20g and mini is 50
another 50 difference... $199 for a 1GB flash iPod makes much more sense to a math student me. :cool:

MacinDoc

Oct 31, 2004, 01:30 AM

$149 for 512 MB, $199 for 1 GB.

JonGraves

Oct 31, 2004, 01:37 AM

Kind of a wacko idea, but I have been lusting after an iPod without a HD that functions as a remote for accessing your library over ethernet or airport. If Apple can get an iPod micro out for $150 that could pull double duty.......

Jon

thatwendigo

Oct 31, 2004, 01:43 AM

First of all, you choose the most expensive ones on purpose:

Yes, I did, and with good reason.

Kingston is reliable, dependable, and something that Apple has been known to either use or certify in the past. The cheap prices that people keep mentioning are the no-names and knock-offs that I wouldn't trust if a mere $10 depended on it (let alone my life). Also, I pointed at flash drives because that's merely one aspect of what an iPod does - it's compact storage without an external power source. Just a flash device with an interface that's not some proprietary nonsense, like CF cards, is more expensive than what people are quoting.

Go look at reputable audio dealers and see what their prices look like on 1GB flash players. Hint: They're all in the $180-250 range and they're not as good as the iPod.

Please note that I was able to cut your prices nearly in half on the same website you quoted.

Please note that Dell and others can sell loss-leaders, too. It doesn't mean they're turning a profit or it's admirable.

And third, those are *consumer* prices. Commercial prices are much, much lower (since they buy in 100,000+ quantities). I'd be really surprised if Apple paid more than $40 for a 1GB CompactFlash card. Let's say the "shell+internals" of the iPod mini cost around $50, Apple could pull it off at $129 for a 1GB flash iPod mini. They would literally destroy the competition.

Please explain to me why there are no reputable companies doing this already, then. After all, the iPod is the player to beat, but you don't see much that can hang with the mini, let alone "destroy" it.

Poff

Oct 31, 2004, 07:24 AM

Here we go again... Just go read the prices I quoted earlier in this thread.

If we could really "look at other harddrive-players and find an approximate price of the same capacity iPod", the iPod would either have a lower price or a bigger hard disk *and* a higher capacity battery.

Just because someone sells his 1GB flash player for $200 doesn't mean Apple can't come up with a 1GB flash player for $149 or even less.

..but Apple has a tradition of pricing their products above the competitors. Because they can.

ASP272

Oct 31, 2004, 07:28 AM

I still think it's going to be 1GB for $149, and that would just be awesome. Apple will then take everyone out of the mp3 player business. Schweeeet! :D

a_iver

Oct 31, 2004, 07:32 AM

...because they can and because often it seems their product is worth more than their competitors. Apple is not a fast food joint, they provide high end products.

Blue Velvet

Oct 31, 2004, 07:33 AM

What serves the guy who only needs 50-200 songs for the bus/train ride downtown..or the gym? The guy who is on his PC every night anyway and is ok having to update often? The guy who can't spend much more than $150 on a player? The guy who wants the style and function of an ipod but w/o the massive storage he'll never use and hefty price? The guy who travels light and finds even a ipod too bulky?

Enter ipod flash.

I'm thinking 1GB...maybe a horizontal layout (turn the mini clockwise).
$149.00. 3 colors white,black or purple.

Well, this girl would buy one like a shot, in a flash (ho-ho).

As I'm on my Mac every day, it wouldn't be a prob to change the tunes and I'd appreciate having something small that doesn't take up too much space in my bag. Also, something that uses a conventional battery rather than a rechargeable custom one...

But not purple... 3 colours: white, black & silver... no wait... make that red!

coldspot

Oct 31, 2004, 11:41 AM

Doctor Q

Oct 31, 2004, 11:52 AM

Why buying a Flash 512 MB player for 149 dollars when you can get an iPod HD 4 GB for 249 dollars?When you only have $150 to spend. I'm not kidding. Many people can't afford to get the better deal, just as with the iPod Mini. That's why there's a low-end market. Not the best deals, just the cheapest prices.

zelmo

Oct 31, 2004, 12:17 PM

People, forget about the Flash iPod. Why buying a Flash 512 MB player for 149 dollars when you can get an iPod HD 4 GB for 249 dollars? It looks insane to me.

I think Apple will decrease the iPod mini prices, because they are very close to the iPod 20 GB prices (only 50 dollars of difference)

By that logic, why would anyone buy a mini at $249 when they can get an iPod with 5 times the capacity for only $50 more?

The iPod mini has a niche - namely for people who want something small and stylish that doesn't need to hold every piece of music they own. I never thought it'd sell as well as it does, but I was wrong.

Likewise, a flash iPod also has a niche that none of the current iPod's can fill - a low-cost iPod. I know a lot of people who want an iPod, but cannot justify the expense of even a mini. Having talked to several of them, they are unanimously in favor of a 1GB or 2GB micro, selling anywhere from $149 to $199. These people don't need more than a couple of hours worth of tunes on hand, just enough for workouts, jogging, shorter commutes.

I think we'll see the mini go to either 5GB or 6GB at $249 when Apple announces the micro at $149 for 1GB, along with a 2GB model for $189. And they will sell. I wish they'd be out in time for Christmas, but spring is a good time, too. Lots of kids graduating in the springtime.

Poff

Oct 31, 2004, 12:41 PM

People, forget about the Flash iPod. Why buying a Flash 512 MB player for 149 dollars when you can get an iPod HD 4 GB for 249 dollars? It looks insane to me.

Why? $100 isn't a good enough reason?

sjpetry

Oct 31, 2004, 01:26 PM

I could never imagine needing/wanting anything smaller than an iPod Mini, and I could never see myself paying $50 less for 25% of the memory. :confused:

FallPod

Oct 31, 2004, 01:45 PM

"I could never imagine needing/wanting anything smaller than an iPod Mini, and why would anyone pay $50 less for 25% of the memory."

No,but there are people who do go for the smallest possible. As for why anybody would pay $50 less...if you are 17 years old..heck...14 years old....every penny might count and I know at that age 'only $50' was huge.

Not everybody wants 1000000000 songs with them. Bigger isn't always better.

Many folks are plenty satisfied only have 100-200 songs with them.

My Dad wants an mp3 player. He only listens to country. He has maybe 300 songs in his collection. An ipod mini would even be overkill.

Now,alot of my Dad's music is the music in my own collection...but it's in AAC.

I can't load any other mp3 player for my dad....and I can only burn 15-20 songs to a cd-r.

If Apple made a $150 player my Dad could fill it up with my country aac files and be all set to go.

Plus, $100-150 is about his budget.

I think the point "well,I'd never need or use one' is misguided. In that case,this product isn't for you and thats cool. I find it funny how people who have little use for a certain product think it shouldn't be made.

Music is different things to different people. I can see many having use for the Apple flashpod.

~Shard~

Oct 31, 2004, 08:53 PM

Why buying a Flash 512 MB player for 149 dollars when you can get an iPod HD 4 GB for 249 dollars?

Funny, I remember hearing the exact same argument when the iPod mini's price point was announced, in comparison to the 15 GB iPod - and look how those minis sold... :cool:

~Shard~

Oct 31, 2004, 08:55 PM

I could never imagine needing/wanting anything smaller than an iPod Mini, and I could never see myself paying $50 less for 25% of the memory. :confused:

You couldn't, but some people could - just as some people didn't see logic and the need for the iPod mini when it was introduced. Likewise, I'm sure there are some people out there asking why on Earth you would need a 60 GB iPod photo, and yet others out there who would love to have more space. Different strokes for different folks... :cool:

coldspot

Oct 31, 2004, 08:59 PM

I think Apple should stop to create new iPod models and wire a new designer to repair that horrendous iMac G5. That computer is the most ugly thing I ever saw in my entire life.

JGowan

Oct 31, 2004, 09:43 PM

If it's less than a gig, SJ is going to look like a fool (after his comments about flash drive players sitting in drawers). The whole point of the ipod, from the start, was the ability to take your entire music collection with you. A 512 MB player would make a mockery of that idea.BS... The idea that the existing flash players are lying unused isn't necessarily because of their capacity,... could it be for, oh I don't know, because they're lame -- hard to use -- ugly -- use WMA or SONY ONLY flash memory -- pick one...

I think the guy that STEVE FORBES (you've heard of him, right?) thinks would be PERFECT as the new CEO of Disney isn't going to "look like a fool" for a long time to come. It could be as simple a introduction as "you asked for them and we listened."

Listening to the customers... sounds like good business sense to me.

gastroboy

Nov 1, 2004, 01:17 AM

If Apple is to sew up the market for players, they need one using flash to cost closer to $99 than $149. 512 still holds about 8-9 albums of music.

If Apple could grab 75% of the flash market, they would hold about 85% of the whole market.

I agree, Apple is missing out big time by not giving these people what they want.

I am one of them. I'd love to have one of these with Apple's interface and the ability to store AAC Audiobooks (they're bookmarkable unlike MP3 files).

However if I get an alternate product in the Xmas sales, Apple will have lost me as a customer forever.

XForge

Nov 1, 2004, 09:51 AM

If they come out with one, it might be as high as 512 Meg.

Bah; if it doesn't hold as much as an MP3 CD that I can play on my $29 Panasonic discman, it ain't worth the hassle.

Surreal

Nov 1, 2004, 11:20 AM

they really should just make a new line.

think about it.

then 512...or less would SEEM acceptable...

ipods are big...*new line* are not....powerpod...errrr ipod... theydhave to figure that out LoL

but it would make sense to simply have a line for low end if they dip in at all./..i don't see them needing to....but i suppose the fact that i have not bought an ipod yet is proof otherwise (price mostly...but i want line in recording for the love of eggs and ham)

they should NOT make another ipod....4....just makes me say...."why not have a different line? milking the ipod name? (they arent...but still)

goodwill

Nov 1, 2004, 12:16 PM

I think it would be wise to make the new ipod/photo with a camera built in just like that of cell phones. The ipod is already the same size, can hold photo's now and has the memory. I think it would help make the photo purpose of the ipod more functional since you would be able to take pictures with it and have it on the ipod immediately, rather than going home uploading pictures then putting them on your ipod. I think you should be able to both, take pictures with it and upload your digital camera pictures onto it. I am copyrighting that right this second. Let me go get my patent.

rjstanford

Nov 1, 2004, 05:42 PM

A strongly disagree from some of you that think that 1 GB is too small. If you go running with it then an hour of your favorite music is fine.Quite a few runners (myself included) run for 3-4 hours at a time. A 1gb flash based player would be ideal. Are we a large segment of the population? Nope, but a large enough one that there are already tons of niche products aimed right at us. A one hour playlist just wouldn't cut it.

appleface

Nov 1, 2004, 05:48 PM

melgross

Nov 1, 2004, 05:59 PM

Bah; if it doesn't hold as much as an MP3 CD that I can play on my $29 Panasonic discman, it ain't worth the hassle.

That's just plain silly. I assume you meant it to be. Besides, after seeing dozens of people over the years dropping their CD players, and breaking them, I don't see it as a real solution anymore.

Also, about margins, Apple has about a 32% GROSS margin. This comes out to about a 5% NET margin. They stated that they make about 11% on an iPod. Net or gross, I don't know. But it's the net that matters in the end, as it includes marketing etc.

Remember that Jobs made the joke about how the case makers made more on their products than Apple was making on the iPods.

awal

Nov 1, 2004, 06:08 PM

Quite a few runners (myself included) run for 3-4 hours at a time. A 1gb flash based player would be ideal. Are we a large segment of the population? Nope, but a large enough one that there are already tons of niche products aimed right at us. A one hour playlist just wouldn't cut it.

Which is the exact reason that I own an iPod and a flash-based Rio (actually have owned 3 of them, and they keep breaking, but that's a different story). I would buy a flash-based iPod in a second.

On a related note, I have requested several times that Apple increase the flash cache inside the big iPods. It seems like 32 megs is a pretty skimpy amount for this day. If that were the case, it would be more possible to run with an iPod without it constantly crashing whenever it has to access the hard drive.

melgross

Nov 1, 2004, 06:09 PM

when people say "flash," i think "complact flash." am i way off base? am i out in left field? am i striking out on this one?

apple will never release a 512 mb ipod. i would be shocked if apple releases anything less than a 4gb ipod. can't the new mini be built around compact flash (which is cheaper than the drives which are currently being used)?

here's the call
March 8th announcement:
smaller, lighter, longer battery life, longer skip protection, better color collection, ipod mini. now you can hold 1,000 songs in your pocket for $199.

If, and it's a big if, they do come out with one, it might not have removable memory. That's what the fuss is all about.

I just got a LEXAR 1GB compact flash card from Buy.com for $46.50 after a $30 rebate. Pretty cheap. Of course, it's a 4 speed card. Too slow for my big camera, but fast enough for my daughters' Nikon 5700. It's fast enough for a music player as well. But the removable cards make a player bigger. Thats why the older ones used Smartmedia cards. I guess they could go to SD cards instead. Now that they are getting so cheap, it might pay.

I saw a 512MB SD card on sale today in the email I get from Buy.com for $29.99 after rebate. Here's the page:

http://www.buy.com/retail/product.asp?sku=10370495&adid=17070&dcaid=17070

Palador

Nov 1, 2004, 09:26 PM

I think the point that we're all trying to make here is that Apple certainly can make a decent ~$150 iPod with 512mb of storage, maybe even a gig if prices on flash memory keep falling like a rock. Other companies are doing it that have much less resources than Apple.

It would really fill a huge market niche of people who 'want to be cool' and have an iPod but cannot afford them now the way they are. As lame as those people are, I feel like if Apple had something in the lower price range... they'd hold an even bigger part of the mp3 player market share.

~Shard~

Nov 1, 2004, 10:23 PM

It would really fill a huge market niche of people who 'want to be cool' and have an iPod but cannot afford them now the way they are. As lame as those people are, I feel like if Apple had something in the lower price range... they'd hold an even bigger part of the mp3 player market share.

True, but some people are just out of luck if they can't afford an iPod - you can't please everyone, and you'll never succeed if you try. What's next then, the hobo on the street who could only afford a $10 iPod? Better give him one too Apple, go on, address that need and that market niche! I realize there market for these people who can't quite afford an iPod is larger of course, but you see my point. There are lots of people who would "want to be cool" and would love it if Ferrari made a lower end $20,000 model to address that market niche, but it ain't gonna happen. :cool:

If Apple does indeed release a lower-end flash-based player, it won't be "just cuz people want them" - there are lots of things people want - it'll be for a number of right reasons, otherwise it won't happen.

zelmo

Nov 1, 2004, 11:31 PM

True, but some people are just out of luck if they can't afford an iPod - you can't please everyone, and you'll never succeed if you try. What's next then, the hobo on the street who could only afford a $10 iPod? Better give him one too Apple, go on, address that need and that market niche! I realize there market for these people who can't quite afford an iPod is larger of course, but you see my point. There are lots of people who would "want to be cool" and would love it if Ferrari made a lower end $20,000 model to address that market niche, but it ain't gonna happen. :cool:

If Apple does indeed release a lower-end flash-based player, it won't be "just cuz people want them" - there are lots of things people want - it'll be for a number of right reasons, otherwise it won't happen.

There is really only one reason, IMHO, for Apple to consider releasing a flash iPod - market penetration. A $149 (or so) iPod puts Apple's iTMS in the hands of more people than they can reach with the current line-up. That helps Fairplay broaden the base, and if DRM survives, that is a good thing for Apple.
I know a lot of people who would be very interested in this product. Keep a very similar form factor to the mini (same size but horizontal layout?), give it a few bright colors (purple, please) with the finish of the current G5 iMac and iPod, not the metallic sheen of the mini. Sit back and watch it sell like crazy.

Yvan256

Nov 2, 2004, 01:58 AM

here's the call
March 8th announcement:
smaller, lighter, longer battery life, longer skip protection, better color collection, ipod mini. now you can hold 1,000 songs in your pocket for $199.

If Apple can sell an iPod mini with a 4GB CompactFlash Hard Disk in it for 249$US, there's no way they'd sell a 512MB Flash version for 199$US. I'd see them dropping the current iPod mini's price by 50$US, and releasing a 1GB Flash iPod mini for about 99-129$US.

aswitcher

Nov 2, 2004, 02:19 AM

Hey, its Tuesday in the USA... ;)

Poff

Nov 2, 2004, 02:13 PM

here's the call
March 8th announcement:
smaller, lighter, longer battery life, longer skip protection, better color collection, ipod mini. now you can hold 1,000 songs in your pocket for $199.

Yes, normal microdrives are more expensive than those in your iPod mini, but Apple still doesn't get to buy them any cheaper than all the other companies making microdrive-based mp3-players.

Truth is the same for flash. What in the world makes you think Apple will get to buy flash-memory much cheaper than all the other mp3-player makers? 1GB flash mp3-player normally retails for between $200 and $300, with makers like "Jens of Sweden" topping out at about $400. Why would Apple get to buy flash so much cheaper than everybody else?

iGen

Nov 3, 2004, 05:37 AM

January at MWSF '05

iPod mini
1GB - $199
5GB - $249

Poff

Nov 3, 2004, 06:03 AM

January at MWSF '05

iPod mini
1GB - $199
5GB - $249

Now, this I can believe. (But lets hope for 6GB, and that time is right for a price-bump on flash so that they get to make 1GB for $149 or $169 or something.)

Daveway

Nov 3, 2004, 04:35 PM

Forbes reported today that the ipod lost 5% market share in Sept. due to increased sales of flash based players. So, we just may see some flash players at MWSF.

zelmo

Nov 3, 2004, 04:43 PM

Forbes reported today that the ipod lost 5% market share in Sept. due to increased sales of flash based players. So, we just may see some flash players at MWSF.

Better late than never, although I hate to see Apple missing the boat on the holiday buying season. I really wish they had put out a flash iPod now and held back on the pPod until MWSF.

appleface

Nov 3, 2004, 05:05 PM

apple will not release an ipod that holds less than 1,000 songs.

i mean, the sox won the series, so i guess apple might release a pod with less memory. however, i would bet (if i was a betting man) 5:1 that they will never release an ipod with less than 4gb of memory.

Poff

Nov 4, 2004, 11:01 AM

1GB iPod mini, 250 songs, $199, first half of 2005. Mark my words!

(ok, I really don't know a thing..) :)

Wash!!

Nov 4, 2004, 11:48 AM

Better late than never, although I hate to see Apple missing the boat on the holiday buying season. I really wish they had put out a flash iPod now and held back on the pPod until MWSF.

The 5% they lost against the hp+ipod model so in fact they gain even more market I love it when so call experts do selecting data analysis....what ever it takes to take a stab at Apple remember Forbes is been saying for years that Apple is going out of business....

zelmo

Nov 4, 2004, 11:56 AM

The 5% they lost against the hp+ipod model so in fact they gain even more market I love it when so call experts do selecting data analysis....what ever it takes to take a stab at Apple remember Forbes is been saying for years that Apple is going out of business....

Is it reasonable to assume that your comment refers not to my opinion [which you quoted], but to the post I was quoting when my opinion was presented? Otherwise, I don't understand what "info" you are refering to. :confused:

Wash!!

Nov 4, 2004, 12:09 PM

Is it reasonable to assume that your comment refers not to my opinion [which you quoted], but to the post I was quoting when my opinion was presented? Otherwise, I don't understand what "info" you are refering to. :confused:

Sorry I got side track you know the been at work gets is the way of more important things :D

to quote : "as the apple turns" web site:

"There is a silverish lining, however, which is that of the 4.7 percentage points Apple lost in the hard drive player market, 3.6 of them went straight over to Hewlett-Packard and the Apple iPod + hp. In other words, the iPod still holds over 90 percent of that market, although Apple shares it with HP now. (The better news is that HP's 3.6 percent market share actually lands it in second place; Rio's in third with 2.8 percent, Creative took fourth with 2.6 percent, and iRiver grabbed fifth with 1.5 percent. And Dell and Sony are splitting a pizza in Nowheresville.)"

zelmo

Nov 4, 2004, 12:14 PM

Sorry I got side track you know the been at work gets is the way of more important things :D

to quote : "as the apple turns" web site:

"There is a silverish lining, however, which is that of the 4.7 percentage points Apple lost in the hard drive player market, 3.6 of them went straight over to Hewlett-Packard and the Apple iPod + hp. In other words, the iPod still holds over 90 percent of that market, although Apple shares it with HP now. (The better news is that HP's 3.6 percent market share actually lands it in second place; Rio's in third with 2.8 percent, Creative took fourth with 2.6 percent, and iRiver grabbed fifth with 1.5 percent. And Dell and Sony are splitting a pizza in Nowheresville.)"

Cool. The iPod now holds the top two positions :)

dejo

Nov 4, 2004, 02:17 PM

Forbes reported today that the ipod lost 5% market share in Sept. due to increased sales of flash based players. So, we just may see some flash players at MWSF.

Others have said it elsewhere but I'll repeat the sentiment here. Blaming the 5% drop on flash-based players is inaccurate and misleading, since the 5% drop is in the hard-drive-based player market, which of course flash-based players are not part of.

Poff

Nov 4, 2004, 03:11 PM

The 5% they lost against the hp+ipod model so in fact they gain even more market I love it when so call experts do selecting data analysis....what ever it takes to take a stab at Apple remember Forbes is been saying for years that Apple is going out of business....

From the Mac Observer web-site:

Combining flash-based and hard drive-based players together, Apple continues to have a commanding lead over every other player maker. Apple remains in first place with a 58.6% share, down from 65.8% in August. Second was Rio with 7.1%, up from 6.4%, iRiver at 6.2% from 5.6%, Digital Way at 4.4% from 4.2%, and Creative at 3.2%, unchanged. HP was seventh in the combined group with a 2.4% share.

Wash!!

Nov 4, 2004, 04:43 PM

From the Mac Observer web-site:

So.... they lost a little market share I pointed that out in the post above already.... old news and it was going to happen sooner or later...

the fact is Apple ipod are on top of either one of the market segment you want to look up HD base or flash base. If apple is going to introduce a flash base ipod (if ever) they will do it after the holiday season is over. and own all of these segments.

Also during the presentation of the ipod photo he said that people buys those but never get use and I for one and my daughters are good samples of that fact, I have a RCA lycra 512 or what ever it is now collecting dust in a drawer somewhere used for one week gave to my daughter used it for an hour and that was the end of it...she now uses my 1G ipod and she is never going back btw she is 12 years old...even my 9 years old use the player and toss it after a 1/2 hour now she wants a mini..

I'm sure I'm not the only case there must be thousand if not millions of people that this has happen sure they buy the cheap flash player and then they found that is as useful as a pet rock....
;)

zelmo

Nov 5, 2004, 08:19 AM

So.... they lost a little market share I pointed that out in the post above already.... old news and it was going to happen sooner or later...

the fact is Apple ipod are on top of either one of the market segment you want to look up HD base or flash base. If apple is going to introduce a flash base ipod (if ever) they will do it after the holiday season is over. and own all of these segments.

Also during the presentation of the ipod photo he said that people buys those but never get use and I for one and my daughters are good samples of that fact, I have a RCA lycra 512 or what ever it is now collecting dust in a drawer somewhere used for one week gave to my daughter used it for an hour and that was the end of it...she now uses my 1G ipod and she is never going back btw she is 12 years old...even my 9 years old use the player and toss it after a 1/2 hour now she wants a mini..

I'm sure I'm not the only case there must be thousand if not millions of people that this has happen sure they buy the cheap flash player and then they found that is as useful as a pet rock....
;)

Tons of these flash players have sold because people like the idea of a small, inexpensive portable music player. The reason they don't get used is because they are pieces of crap, and that is where Apple steps in. Apple doesn't invent so much as it innovates and improves upon what is out there already. The original iPod improved upon the HD-based player, and Apple can and should do the same thing with the lower end, IMHO.

Yvan256

Nov 5, 2004, 10:13 AM

Tons of these flash players have sold because people like the idea of a small, inexpensive portable music player. The reason they don't get used is because they are pieces of crap, and that is where Apple steps in. Apple doesn't invent so much as it innovates and improves upon what is out there already. The original iPod improved upon the HD-based player, and Apple can and should do the same thing with the lower end, IMHO.

Indeed, the capacity is not the only thing going for a portable music player. Do those flash players have an iPod interface? Do they integrate with iTunes? And lastly (but not that important when compared to the other two factors) do they play ITMS-purchased music?

Give me the choice between a "60GB Dell jukebox" (whatever the real name is) and a 20GB iPod (any generation), and I'll take the iPod any day (because of the interface and iTunes integration).

iPod Flash mini, 1GB, 149$US, December 6th (are we taking bets on the capacity/price/release date?) :D

Why 1GB?
1. Steve Jobs never ridiculed 1GB Flash players (he said 512MB, if I recall).
2. It makes for "250 songs in your pocket", which is a nice number.
3. The cost difference between 512MB and 1GB is very small.

Why 149$US?
1. The iPod mini 4GB costs 249$. "There's no way a Flash iPod would only cost 50$ less than the iPod mini" (insert reference between iPod and iPod mini here). If it's 199$, it'll be 2GB (The cost difference between 1GB and 2GB is not that big).
2. It makes the iPod Flash mini a step-up choice for those looking for a 99$ Flash player.
3. It quickly grows the userbase of people using AAC/iTMS.

Why December 6th?
1. It's a tuesday.
2. It's just in time for the last-minute buyers.
3. No release is planned for december (except maybe a new eMac?)

And please people, stop saying Apple can't sell a 1GB Flash iPod mini for 149$ if the other companies sell their 512MB ones for 199$! We proved again and again that flash is NOT that expensive, and it does NOT make up most of the cost of the units (unless the rest of the part really are dirt-cheap, sub-50$ total).

So I'll say it again:
- iPod Flash mini, 1GB, 149$US, December 6th.

aswitcher

Nov 5, 2004, 05:42 PM

iPod Flash mini, 1GB, 149$US, December 6th (are we taking bets on the capacity/price/release date?) :D

So I'll say it again:
- iPod Flash mini, 1GB, 149$US, December 6th.

I think that too late...if its going to happen then anytime now is best, not a few weeks before Christmas.

dejo

Nov 6, 2004, 12:12 PM

And please people, stop saying Apple can't sell a 1GB Flash iPod mini for 149$ if the other companies sell their 512MB ones for 199$!

Maybe they CAN, but WOULD they? If other 512MB players are selling for $199 (and the iPod brand is still the one consumers "desire"), what would possess Apple to sell an iPod with more capacity at a cheaper price than the competition? That is not something Apple is known for.

zelmo

Nov 6, 2004, 02:02 PM

Maybe they CAN, but WOULD they? If other 512MB players are selling for $199 (and the iPod brand is still the one consumers "desire"), what would possess Apple to sell an iPod with more capacity at a cheaper price than the competition? That is not something Apple is known for.

True, Apple always charges a premium for their brand, and it's one I gladly pay.
Best Buy is advertising a 512MB mp3 player for $99 in next week's circular, along with a 1GB mp3 w/FM tuner for $179. Apple can play in this park if they want to, with a 1GB iPod micro (or whatever) at $179-199. I think they ought to do it, and it ought to be announced no later than the Tuesday before Thanksgiving, to get it out there before Black Friday and beat the competition on the single biggest shopping day of the year.

freiheit

Nov 6, 2004, 05:26 PM

zelmo

Nov 6, 2004, 11:23 PM

I'll just throw in my agreement that a REMOVABLE flash card format, coming with maybe 512MB or 1GB card standard, for $149 would be awesome. That way a user could increase the capacity if they wish (2GB, 4GB, heck I've even seen 12GB CompactFlash cards on the market -- expensive, but they do exist). I'd be much more likely to buy a (Compact)Flash based iPod at under $200. I worry too much about damage to the hard drive in an iPod or iPod Mini -- Flash based would eliminate those concerns. Expandability is always a good selling point, too.

I think the only way Apple delivers a flash iPod is if it does NOT have a card slot. Apple would be better served if they put out something in this market to get people hooked on iPod, then have them move up to a mini or regular iPod if they want/need more storage down the road. A player that had an upgradeable card slot would undercut the rest of the iPod line-up, and Apple will not do that.

gastroboy

Nov 11, 2004, 03:03 AM

A player that had an upgradeable card slot would undercut the rest of the iPod line-up, and Apple will not do that.

I think not. The two styles of MP3 players are not directly competitive. Flash and HD each have virtues and flaws that will find different users, some may even have one of each. In fact give the public a taste of Appl's better UI and they will want more.

A cheaper flash drive with an iPod interface would be one killer product!

I want one NOW !!!