Noooooooo. The click wheel is the only real "touch" interface, it is far superior in an iPod to the supposedly touch interface that requires sight to be operated.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple to Discontinue iPod Classic and iPod Shuffle?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No:
- Shuffle is about 1/3 the cost
- It's ligther
- It doesn't have a screen that can break while working out / hard use
- Faster to change songs with physical buttons
I think Apple is now not so excited about iPods as they used to be. Even their October event is about iPhones, not about iPods. They haven't done much to the iPod Classic in a while, and the once most popular iPod, the Nano, turned into a somewhat dumbed down and smaller device, similar to the shuffle. The Shuffle is great in my opinion, but obviously most people prefer to have a screen and maybe even iOS so I'm thinking that Apple only sees the iPod Touch as a good iPod, but then it makes sense to mention it alongside the iPhone since they're so similar.
Too Much Time...
I'm already spending too much time checking/unchecking, deciding what will sync to the 160. We need more GB!!! Don't kill the Classic, instead make it solid-state....
I'm already spending too much time checking/unchecking, deciding what will sync to the 160. We need more GB!!! Don't kill the Classic, instead make it solid-state....
The iPod classic is dead in Europe anyway. I bought every iPod until the EU volume cap came along, and now the devices simply don't produce enough volume to be usable. I won't buy another one.
It's one thing stopping me from damaging my hearing (which I am capable of looking after myself, thanks), but when I can't hear quiet passages in classical music on full volume while walking up a street with traffic, there's something wrong.
In fact any music which wasn't mastered particularly well can be almost inaudible. So that's most of my late sixties and early seventies collection then.
The older iPods have plenty of power available in those situations, and pandering to the EU cap rather than adding some kind of compression has ruined a once great device.
The iPod touch does not suffer the EU cap, and is presumably classed as a different type of device and thus exempt. This is, to coin a phrase, beaurocracy gone mad!
It's one thing stopping me from damaging my hearing (which I am capable of looking after myself, thanks), but when I can't hear quiet passages in classical music on full volume while walking up a street with traffic, there's something wrong.
In fact any music which wasn't mastered particularly well can be almost inaudible. So that's most of my late sixties and early seventies collection then.
The older iPods have plenty of power available in those situations, and pandering to the EU cap rather than adding some kind of compression has ruined a once great device.
The iPod touch does not suffer the EU cap, and is presumably classed as a different type of device and thus exempt. This is, to coin a phrase, beaurocracy gone mad!
And thats exactly why apple has been such a success under Steve, the ability to admit you were wrong is something very few companies/CEOs do
I'm glad I bought my shuffle when I did then. For running the Nano is nowhere near as good - I want physical buttons for skipping tracks without having to look at the thing. Add in the HUGELY different price point and the shuffle was an easy choice.
Your needing to get decent cans boy. My Beats by Dre rock the ***** out of Mozart.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; nl-nl) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)
Am I the only one who thinks the shuffle does have a market? I want one of those for the only purpose of running with music which makes it great imo. It's super small, speech controlled, low capacity (no one runs 6 hours anyway) and very cheap (you don't want to drop your expensive touch or even Nano). I was waiting for it to be updated but will grab an old one if it's discontinued.
Am I the only one who thinks the shuffle does have a market? I want one of those for the only purpose of running with music which makes it great imo. It's super small, speech controlled, low capacity (no one runs 6 hours anyway) and very cheap (you don't want to drop your expensive touch or even Nano). I was waiting for it to be updated but will grab an old one if it's discontinued.
It's nice to read the outpouring of love for the iPod. Especially when so many of us were anything but smitten when the device was first announced.
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/apples-new-thing-ipod.500/
If this truly does mark an end to the "classic" iPod design, well, it was a fantastic trip.
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/apples-new-thing-ipod.500/
If this truly does mark an end to the "classic" iPod design, well, it was a fantastic trip.
Touch is a fad. Maybe not a fad by the strictest definition but it is definitely over-hyped.
It is laughable in comparison to what one could do with a keyboard and mouse (mostly keyboard as mouse is limited if it doesn't have extra buttons on it).
Touch is very obnoxious, I recently took my 64GB iPod Touch to work with me and was very disgusted the amount of time it takes to operate the device when doing music. The lock screen, pulling out of the pocket all the time is dreadful as a music player. Its size isn't optimal as a music player either. (though the classic really isn't either)
Add a 128GB model iPod Touch with some seek buttons by the home button and I'd actually use it as a primary music player. As it stands now the Classic is superior as a music player both in capacity and navigation.
I also hate how the touch is a me-too device to the iPhone, I wish they'd break the products apart even further in appearance and function.
The classic serves a purpose (gigantic capacity), but I think the nano and shuffle overlap (especially now that the current nano is almost the same size as the original shuffle, and either is easy enough to clip on yourself and forget about it). The nano could use a downward price adjustment, but other than that...
EU iPods have had volume caps since 2003. EU iPod Touches have always had the cap
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; nl-nl) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)
Sadly he was stubborn in many (most) other cases.
Flash: I walk into flash sites unusable with iPad daily and it drives my wife crazy. Android proofs that flash is no problem at all on tablets. I love HTML5 and gambled that they could force the net into it fast. It's not happening...
Blu-ray: sure physical media is dead but for serious movie makers it isn't. The quality is far superior then any HD download available from iTunes. Besides that, people who make HD home movies: how to show them at their place? iDVD stupidly only supports DVD (well not stupid as there is no blu-ray anywhere). I understand that you don't want these players in you MacBook but seriously the Mac Pro and top iMacs should at least have an option.
Steve is/was wrong with these. But then again he is only human.
Avj said:
Sadly he was stubborn in many (most) other cases.
Flash: I walk into flash sites unusable with iPad daily and it drives my wife crazy. Android proofs that flash is no problem at all on tablets. I love HTML5 and gambled that they could force the net into it fast. It's not happening...
Blu-ray: sure physical media is dead but for serious movie makers it isn't. The quality is far superior then any HD download available from iTunes. Besides that, people who make HD home movies: how to show them at their place? iDVD stupidly only supports DVD (well not stupid as there is no blu-ray anywhere). I understand that you don't want these players in you MacBook but seriously the Mac Pro and top iMacs should at least have an option.
Steve is/was wrong with these. But then again he is only human.
Discontinuing the 'Classic' makes sense from a product-evolution point of view. Apple want people to use iCloud, so the obvious thing thats going to happen is that the iPod Touch will get 3G for data services, and the user will stream/download whatever music they wish from "the cloud", as per the original intentions. Means Apple spend less on hardware, products can be cheaper/slimmer with less onboard memory.
The only downside to this move is that iCloud stores music at a maximum of 256kps, so those who enjoyed higher bit-rates on their iPod Classics would obviously have to look elsewhere.
Pity, but its not exactly the first time they've axed products.
The only downside to this move is that iCloud stores music at a maximum of 256kps, so those who enjoyed higher bit-rates on their iPod Classics would obviously have to look elsewhere.
Pity, but its not exactly the first time they've axed products.
They better be fixing the iPod app then
Unless Apple does some serious bug fixing on their iPod app(or puts a really rocking CPU in addition to large amounts of flash in the touch which would be expensive), there is no way that music lovers are going to embrace the iPod touch. On my 3gs I have about 6000 files(mostly small audio files for learning a language), and the thing just chokes, I mean chokes. Crashes every 3rd time I open it up(which is an improvement from before, where it crashed every other time I opened it up), lots of random delays(takes about 20 seconds to respond to a pressed key in some instances) etc. The thing is just not designed to handle large libraries. People with classics have much bigger libraries than even I do just in terms of song size.
If they kill the classic, then even with a 128 gb touch those people will probably not be happy, unless they just love dealing with bugs.
Unless Apple does some serious bug fixing on their iPod app(or puts a really rocking CPU in addition to large amounts of flash in the touch which would be expensive), there is no way that music lovers are going to embrace the iPod touch. On my 3gs I have about 6000 files(mostly small audio files for learning a language), and the thing just chokes, I mean chokes. Crashes every 3rd time I open it up(which is an improvement from before, where it crashed every other time I opened it up), lots of random delays(takes about 20 seconds to respond to a pressed key in some instances) etc. The thing is just not designed to handle large libraries. People with classics have much bigger libraries than even I do just in terms of song size.
If they kill the classic, then even with a 128 gb touch those people will probably not be happy, unless they just love dealing with bugs.
No, you just have to understand Jobspeak and Corpspeak and also understand that Apple never talks concretely about the future of it's products, only the present. Apple had no immediate plans to kill the iPod Classic back in March. Indeed it's nearly Oct and it's still around. But things change. Jobs didn't say Apple would never discontinue, only that *in March* Apple had no plans too.
The classic has been unchanged for a few years now. If you that enamored with it buy a couple for "back up" and it will be like nothing has changed. I'm sure the batteries will be available from 3rd parties for years to come.
Silly to call the Classic "crap." It's an icon and changed the way society interacts with computers. Hardly crap. It did exactly what it was suppose to do, but it's lived out its practical usefulness for the vast majority of consumers. That's all.
My guess is they'll keep the nano unchanged & lower the price. It won't be as inexpensive as the shuffle but it will be more useful. It's clear Apple is moving away from non-App Store compatible players and wants to consolidate the traditional iPod line.
There may be a market for the shuffle but if Apple K.O.s it then it obviously was not a profitable enough one to justify keeping it on the current product list.
That's not much use to those of us who play a lot of music away from home. My classic is playing music from 8:00am until 5:00pm everyday while I'm at work.
I'd blast through my entire monthly data allowance on the morning of the first day of the month if I was streaming. I'll stick with my classic thanks.
I just bought a Shuffle, it's a great, cheap, small, light player for cycling. I don't need a screen, let alone a colour screen, when I'm cycling; all it does is suck battery capacity. Then again, I may be the odd one out, because I don't particularly need buttons, either, on a Shuffle: just turn it on and it shuffles songs. I would have been fine with the previous generation Shuffle, too.
If the iPod Classic is getting axed, I'll buying a new one for sure, since my 80GB 5G is starting to run low on storage space. The iPod Touch is more than a music player, and that's not what I want in a music player. My iPhone has nowhere near enough storage to hold my music library, and I really don't want to decide in the morning what music choice I will limit myself to in the afternoon, because I simply don't know that far ahead what I feel like hearing later in the day. The Classic fills a need because it is a simple music player than can carry your entire music library and run for ages on a battery charge.
.tsooJ
If the iPod Classic is getting axed, I'll buying a new one for sure, since my 80GB 5G is starting to run low on storage space. The iPod Touch is more than a music player, and that's not what I want in a music player. My iPhone has nowhere near enough storage to hold my music library, and I really don't want to decide in the morning what music choice I will limit myself to in the afternoon, because I simply don't know that far ahead what I feel like hearing later in the day. The Classic fills a need because it is a simple music player than can carry your entire music library and run for ages on a battery charge.
.tsooJ
In a time where limited data plans and service outages are persistent, I just see no reason to make myself dependent to iCloud. I use cloud technology for simple but essential tasks like calendar, bookmark (MobileMe) or notes (Evernote) syncing. But beyond that, I don´t see much usage.
Sticking to my Classic too.
Sticking to my Classic too.
I think it would be acceptable if Apple got rid of the classic if they came out with a 128GB iPod touch. There's been 64GB iPod touchs since Sept. 2009.
I said back in Nov. 2008:
I'm still with my my 2007 16GB iPt and I sure do think it's finally time they make the jump to 128GB... hopefully.
I said back in Nov. 2008:
I'm still with my my 2007 16GB iPt and I sure do think it's finally time they make the jump to 128GB... hopefully.