Apple 160gig iPod's

Discussion in 'iPod' started by DrWho, Dec 18, 2008.

  1. DrWho macrumors newbie

    DrWho

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2008
    #1
    Can anyone please try to help me understand why they pulled the 160gig models off the shelve
     
  2. hexonxonx macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    Location:
    Denver Colorado
  3. Tallest Skil macrumors P6

    Tallest Skil

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2006
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
  4. DrWho thread starter macrumors newbie

    DrWho

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2008
    #4
    so if you do not need that much space, than why do they sell the 120gig and why did they sell the 160 in the first place. was there any official statement in regard to it being taken off of shelves. I am glad at least that I got one before they all were gone but I wanted to understand more.
     
  5. Tallest Skil macrumors P6

    Tallest Skil

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2006
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #5
    You don't need 160. You can need 120.

    Honestly? It didn't sell well. People apparently don't want that space.
     
  6. hexonxonx macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    Location:
    Denver Colorado
    #6
    I needed 160GB and have had it filled up many times. I also now have a 120GB and have it filled up many times. I have enough content to fill many 160GB iPods. I'm sure I'm not alone.
     
  7. Tallest Skil macrumors P6

    Tallest Skil

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2006
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #7
    The point here is:

    The iPod classic is dead. This will probably be the last update. Eventually NAND flash will get the capacities needed to rival it, but until then, this is obviously what we're stuck with.
     
  8. SactoGuy18 macrumors 68020

    SactoGuy18

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2006
    Location:
    Sacramento, CA USA
    #8
    The people who fill up a 160 GB 6G iPod classic are not that common outside of enthusiasts who frequent forums like MacRumors. I have an 3G iPod nano (8 GB) and only about 4.6 GB is filled because I listen to a lot of podcasts that can last over a hour just for a single podcast.

    If I had the money, I'd get myself the 120 GB "6.5G" iPod classic, mostly because by encoding my entire CD collection at 256 kbps VBR data rate AAC, I can cram almost my entire CD collection in my player. :) The nice thing about 256 kbps VBR AAC encoding done at home is that the sound quality is so good that to tell the difference from the original CD, you need a stereo system that very few of us could afford in the first place.
     
  9. jampat macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2008
    #9
    Supposedly, 120gig is the largest single platter hard drive. The 160 gig was a dual platter, so the case had to be thicker. They wanted to drop to only one case design, so the 160 had to go. I think apple has said that size upgrades may happen as the density improves, but I could be wrong.
     
  10. shivapashupati macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    #10
    I was looking forward to 250 GB, 320 GB and 500 GB iPods!

    I have filled my 160 GB iPod a few times and I was looking forward to bigger models, like 250 GB, 320 GB and 500 GB hard-disk iPod models. I also believe that we will see RAM-based iPods with 64, 128 and 256 GB capacity in the eventual future. But at the same time I realize that most iPod users may not be huge music afficionados after all, and this could be the reason why large capacity players may not prove to be so popular with the average consumer. Only time will tell.
     
  11. Tallest Skil macrumors P6

    Tallest Skil

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2006
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #11
    I doubt that Apple will make any larger HDD based iPods. Probably because they've stopped making 1.8" HDDs any bigger.
     
  12. Tallest Skil macrumors P6

    Tallest Skil

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2006
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #13
    Came out before the current iPod. Dual-platter. Unless they make it single, it won't show up in the HDD iPods, and in that case we'll have to wait for NAND to catch up.
     
  13. SactoGuy18 macrumors 68020

    SactoGuy18

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2006
    Location:
    Sacramento, CA USA
    #14
    I personally think we'll see in September 2009 (the next iPod hardware refresh cycle) a new touchscreen iPod in two versions, one with 128 GB flash memory with less functionality aimed at people more interested in media playback and one with 64 GB flash memory and full iPod touch functionality, both in the same case design (but the Touch model has an antenna for Wi-Fi). We'll likely see a "4.5G" nano with 16 and 32 GB storage capacities also.
     
  14. Kashchei macrumors 65816

    Kashchei

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2002
    Location:
    Meat Space
    #15
    I'm afraid you may be close to the truth here. Steve's omniscience is starting to wear thin
     
  15. teflon macrumors 6502a

    teflon

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    #16
    It's unlikely that Apple would do away with the click wheel so soon. As nice as the touch screen is, it is not necessary if you're primarily interested in listening to music. The click wheel is still much better for that purpose, as you can operate it without looking.
    Also, no matter how much the price of flash memory drops, 128gb is still going to be more expensive than 120gb HD. The touch screen also costs more than a normal screen + click wheel. People who are interested in the iPod Classic are interested primarily in its large capacity, and would be unwilling to pay extra for no significant increase in capacity and a possible decrease in usability.
     
  16. isonoise macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2008
    #17
    Along with other reasons, I'm guessing it's due to the fact that (a) they wanted to go with one size fits all; and (b) if a study was done of the typical iPod user, I'd guess that a great majority don't come remotely close to filling 160GB. I rip to lossless and .wav, and I have a rather large CD collection, so I need the space, and would gladly buy a 250GB Classic (or larger) if they made one. As it is, I can't come close to fitting my whole collection on the 160GB Classic. That all said, I know that we 160GB-fill-it-uppers are far from typical.

    Like someone else said, I wouldn't be surprised if the 160GB is the largest iPod we see for the foreseeable future, but I hope I'm wrong.
     
  17. mosx macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2007
    #18
    The big difference between the current 120GB and the previous 160GB is that the new one is sporting a single platter HDD. The previous 160GB was dual platter and the "thicker" model as a result.

    And as Steve Jobs said, nearly everyone bought the "thin" cheaper model, the single platter drive. So the "thick" dual platter model was phased out because nobody bought it. It wasn't a matter of capacity being too much. It was a matter of sales being near dead for the more expensive model. So they bumped the cheaper model up to the largest single platter drive available at the time.

    But the iPod classic isn't going anywhere soon. I think we'll probably see at least a bump to 160GB single platter next September.

    The iPod classic still sells enough for Apple to keep making it. They'll keep making them as long as people keep buying them. Despite how people talk on forums, there are more people out there who just want a ridiculously large music player and the iPod and Zune are the only ones that give it to them.
     
  18. iParis macrumors 68040

    iParis

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2008
    Location:
    New Mexico
    #19
    Actually, I need 210GB's to hold all my iTunes media.
    Of course I don't need a 160GB iPod, I want a 160GB iPod.

    I believe one of the reasons they didn't sell both is because there is only a 40GB difference between 120 and 160.
    When they sold the 80GB and 160GB there was an 80GB difference.
    Therefore that wouldn't make too much sence to sell a 120GB and 160GB.
     
  19. iParis macrumors 68040

    iParis

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2008
    Location:
    New Mexico
    #20
    Or until the iPod touch's capacity catches up.
     
  20. darklighter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2008
    #21
    I think the ipod classic and even the ipod shuffle may have one update left in them next September.

    The combination of falling flash prices, oversaturated ipod market and the trend towards all-in-one devices (ipod touch, iphone, blackberries) that also play MP3s will be the final nails on the ipod coffin.

    I would not be suprised if 2 years from now, the Nano and touch are the only ipods left possibly at 16, 32, 64 and 128 GB flash sizes.
     
  21. SkyBell macrumors 604

    SkyBell

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    Texas, unfortunately.
    #22
    Which at the current rate, will take 3+ years. So the Classic isn't going anywhere for a while.
     
  22. Chundles macrumors G4

    Chundles

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    #23
    I reckon we'll eventually see:

    iPod shuffle 1GB & 2GB
    iPod 16GB & 32GB
    iPod touch (32GB, 64GB & 128GB)

    Not for a couple of years of course but the classic will go away - all those people who need to take everything with them at all times will have to suck it up.

    The iPod will take on the nano form factor (whatever that is by then) with the click wheel and the old interface with the touch taking over at the top end.
     
  23. HiFiGuy528 macrumors 68000

    HiFiGuy528

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    #24
    Should have bought it when it was available. If more people did, Steve wouldn't have killed it. Now people are crying about its death. Forget about it and just buy a new one when you still can. Once stock runs out, you'll be sorry you didn't.
     
  24. Chundles macrumors G4

    Chundles

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    #25
    We've got about 10 silver ones sitting out the back gathering dust - they just never sold.
     

Share This Page