Maybe Apple will be Toshiba or Samsung's big buyer come this September. As has been posted before, I see one more upgrade in the Classic. 240/250GB, but I wouldn't be surprised if they did it at 160GB.\
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.
iPod Classic's Future in Doubt Due to Shrinking Market for 1.8" Hard Drives?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I laughed as I read this post while listening to my 60GB 5G.
I actually have a 5G and a 32GB Touch, and find that I use the Touch a lot more. It's not the quantity of music on it that keeps me using it, it's that it does so much! It's nearly a laptop replacement. The Classic is very limited in what it does. That said, if all you use it for is a media player, the Classic is hard to beat.
It all depends on what you use it for.
That's why I have both and often have both on me.
I hope we get classics with an SSD, that can also be used for data... no point giving them a screen when most people also have an iPhone these days.
The classic lives in the car patched into the head unit, the iphone carrys the current music interests for the daily train commute to work.
I know many people who have a similar setup, and if the classic dies, we will go to USB head units and use self powered USB HDD's
Create a playlist with only the tracks you actually listen to. Carrying 120GB of music and video with you means that you have more media with you than you could ever hope to consume. Also, carrying all that media with you makes shuffle next to useless, since it will suggest songs that you have no interest in listening to.
Seriously, don't be a pack-rat, and trim the library you carry with you. I have 80+GB iTunes-library, and I have no issues using my library with my 16GB iPod touch. Quality above quantity.
GIANT CAPACITY Rules!
I am sick of these people who "can't imagine" why anyone would want anything more than 32 Gigs and feel the need to post like they are superior. That's because they are iPod Amateurs, plain and simple. I rushed and got one of those 160s before they did away with them for the 120. It still isn't even close to what I need or want. My music and audiobooks alone are over 300 Gigs. I'd love to see a Touch with 500 Gigs or even a Terabyte but these Amateurs are too small-minded to know why. Until then, the Classic is quite necessary. It is not "old technology" it is PROVEN technology. Hard Drives are reliable, cheap, fast and provide jaw-dropping amounts of memory for pennies. Old technology my ass. This is tech you dream of.
I am sick of these people who "can't imagine" why anyone would want anything more than 32 Gigs and feel the need to post like they are superior. That's because they are iPod Amateurs, plain and simple. I rushed and got one of those 160s before they did away with them for the 120. It still isn't even close to what I need or want. My music and audiobooks alone are over 300 Gigs. I'd love to see a Touch with 500 Gigs or even a Terabyte but these Amateurs are too small-minded to know why. Until then, the Classic is quite necessary. It is not "old technology" it is PROVEN technology. Hard Drives are reliable, cheap, fast and provide jaw-dropping amounts of memory for pennies. Old technology my ass. This is tech you dream of.
Provided that NAND flash continues its current pace of expansion, next year there will be a 128 GB iPod touch. The year after, a 256 GB. 2012, 512 GB.
I, too, have a huge library; mainly video. I cannot wait until I can have the touch's 3.5" screen in front of my entire library.
The classic will live two years more at best.
I wonder if Apple have considered SDXC technology.
http://www.geek.com/articles/news/new-sdxc-storage-card-has-up-to-2-tb-storage-2009017/
Now I'd love an iPod using that. Uses Nand too.
TBH I'd like spinning disks to die but then Im a tech freak.
http://www.geek.com/articles/news/new-sdxc-storage-card-has-up-to-2-tb-storage-2009017/
Now I'd love an iPod using that. Uses Nand too.
TBH I'd like spinning disks to die but then Im a tech freak.
If you value quality above quantity so much you should buy a portable CD player! Seriously the whole point of technology is to make our lives easier and my 160gb ipod make it possible to carry my whole music library in high quality which allows me to choose pretty much what music I want to listen to at any given time. If i wanted to carry a small selection of music i would buy a shuffle, Nano or Touch whatever size is appropriate. However I want all my music so i have the CHOICE of listening to what I want not wasting time making a playlist then finding out the one song/album i don't have on the list is what i want to hear!
I find it unlikely that the iPod Classic will be replaced by the iPod Touch forever. Especially when the iPhone already exists in the market. Trust me - Apple wants people to buy iPhones AND iPods - but who would buy an iPod Touch if already having an iPhone? Or the other way round, for that matter?
However - Apple might discontinue the production of Classic for a while, i.e. until they can fit inexpensive 200 GB SSDs into a device with the current design. My guess is that Apple will keep upgrading the iPhone and iPod Touch, only to re-lance the iconic iPod Classic (with SSD) when the market is saturated with iphonesque devices. Those who recently bought the upgraded iPhones - happy about the good news - will then buy the iPod Classic, while those who bought the latest upgraded iPod Touch even though they preferred the design of Classic, will kick themselves.
However - Apple might discontinue the production of Classic for a while, i.e. until they can fit inexpensive 200 GB SSDs into a device with the current design. My guess is that Apple will keep upgrading the iPhone and iPod Touch, only to re-lance the iconic iPod Classic (with SSD) when the market is saturated with iphonesque devices. Those who recently bought the upgraded iPhones - happy about the good news - will then buy the iPod Classic, while those who bought the latest upgraded iPod Touch even though they preferred the design of Classic, will kick themselves.
People who say that a large capacity ipod is not necessary are plain stupid. How does making a playlist with "only the music you need"(quote from someone in this thread) make any sense? The beauty of having a large library is that you can listen to a large variety of things whenever you want. If you are just going to make a playlist with the music you "need" then why even bother to have a large library? Think about it.
Nobody is really saying high capacity iPods are not necessary, and I doubt many "cannot imagine" why somebody would want one. But like many of the high capacity fans, my media library has outsized Apple's largest capacity offering from the time the first 5GB iPod was released. I expect that will continue to be the case particularly with video and higher quality lossless audio filling up space. My iTunes media library is over 700GB...should I really expect that an iPod of such size will be available any time soon?
I'd argue that the "iPod amateurs" are those who refuse to use the power of iTunes smart playlists to develop constantly updating and revolving sets of songs that keep a representative subset of your music on a smaller capacity device. If you have such a humongous library, it already does and will likely always outsize the latest and greatest iPod, so learning to do this is essential. My 10GB "Perfect Mix" on my 32GB iPhone feeds off 7 other smart playlists in my 80GB iTunes library that rotate through my favorite artists, 5-star songs, tracks that haven't been played in over a year, new additions to the library, cover songs, oldies, etc. I've always got a fresh mix and plenty of choice.
iTunes tells me it would take 41 days to play all the music in my library. I am rarely away from home/resyncing for more than 12 hours, and probably listen to about 2 hours worth of music each day while commuting. Yet I can still have 8 days worth of music on my iPhone. I never feel limited by my "CHOICES"...could you really fill a 160GB with your own music and not find something you like? I cannot recall a time when there was something I just needed to hear so badly that wasn't with me. And if that ever did happen, I'll be home in a few hours and I can listen then. Hardly a tragedy of life-altering proportions.
I do understand the desire to have a multi-TB or even virtually infinite capacity iPod. I'd love to have my entire music and video library with me all the time. But that's just not realistic right now, so learn to take advantage the tools that let you compensate for the shortcomings of modern drive capacity. What I actually expect from Apple as the future unfolds is NOT larger and larger capacity iPods, but continued perfection of the presently clunky streaming technology like Simplify Media that would allow an iPod with no capacity to play your entire iTunes library from anywhere.
There is no need for Apple to pre-emptively discontinue the Classic line in order to push other products. It serves its own niche, so the sales numbers will determine its fate in the short term.
In the long term, its days are obviously numbered since at some point even the iPod Nano will have 32 to 64 GB of memory, and the Touch even more.
One nice thing about the HD-based iPods is that transferring songs and data onto them is much faster than the flash-based iPods. Although I guess even that difference will decrease over time.
In the long term, its days are obviously numbered since at some point even the iPod Nano will have 32 to 64 GB of memory, and the Touch even more.
One nice thing about the HD-based iPods is that transferring songs and data onto them is much faster than the flash-based iPods. Although I guess even that difference will decrease over time.
I use my 160GB Classic just for playing music. It's got a decent capacity, fantastic battery life (40+ hours) and I much prefer the controls (for playing music) over those on my iPhone.
When they can make a nano with the same capacity and similar battery life for the same money, I'll take a look. I've zero interest in a 128GB iPod touch that will end up costing over £400.
I love the classic design as much as anyone else. I am an iPod fanatic (see signature) but honestly, it's time to let go.
The nano can handily replace the classic in all but its capacity, and even that's up for debate as this thread shows. I predict we'll have a 32GB nano later this year and I expect and a 64GB touch. Apple will keep the classic around in its current 120GB capacity for one more year to stay at the top of the capacity spectrum. Then next year we'll see a 64GB nano and a 128GB touch -- and no more classic.
The nano can handily replace the classic in all but its capacity, and even that's up for debate as this thread shows. I predict we'll have a 32GB nano later this year and I expect and a 64GB touch. Apple will keep the classic around in its current 120GB capacity for one more year to stay at the top of the capacity spectrum. Then next year we'll see a 64GB nano and a 128GB touch -- and no more classic.
re: 1.8" drives in netbooks
There's no interest in this because the little 1.8" hard drives fail prematurely under heavy use. They're designed for intermittent use, the way a media player utilizes them (spinning it down most of the time, until a memory buffer is nearly empty - and then spinning it up momentarily to load the next MP3 file or chunk of video into the player's memory again).
People who started partitioning their hard-drive based iPods so they could boot and run an OS from them via USB or firewire (or who regularly run applications from them, using them as an external hard drive) were having a higher than normal number of drive failures.
And yes, I do believe they still top out at 4200RPM too. Again, they don't need faster rotational speeds because their goal is power saving and only sporadic writing or reading of data.
There's no interest in this because the little 1.8" hard drives fail prematurely under heavy use. They're designed for intermittent use, the way a media player utilizes them (spinning it down most of the time, until a memory buffer is nearly empty - and then spinning it up momentarily to load the next MP3 file or chunk of video into the player's memory again).
People who started partitioning their hard-drive based iPods so they could boot and run an OS from them via USB or firewire (or who regularly run applications from them, using them as an external hard drive) were having a higher than normal number of drive failures.
And yes, I do believe they still top out at 4200RPM too. Again, they don't need faster rotational speeds because their goal is power saving and only sporadic writing or reading of data.
Netbooks are huge sellers, so I'm surprised that 1.8" format drives aren't doing so well. One would expect all of the netbooker makers would be clamouring to offer a 250GB netbook...
Do 1.8" drives still top out at 4200RPM? Maybe that's the problem - perhaps instead of concentrating on higher capacity, the manufacturers should concentrate on higher performance. If 1.8" drives could reliably run at 5400RPM (or even 7200RPM!), just imagine the impact on notebook computers.
Apple has slowly increased the cache for some time but it should still be stuck at 64 MB.
I've seen disclaimers as well for using your iPod as a boot drive mention the lack of cooling and dampening is going to put your drive at risk.
You clearly don't understand. For many people, having a small amount of music with them is fine because that's what they listen to. But then there are people like us, who have large collections and love having that music with us because we have music in our heads all the time. We get a bit of "song x" in our head and suddenly need to hear it. I grab my 160 and most likely it's there. If I had to live solely on what's on my Iphone, it would be like the old days where I had to carry dozens and dozens of CDs with me (and, yes, I DID do this - hundreds, in fact, in those big fat notebooks that you slid the discs into the sleeves.) And all this doesn't take into consideration the fact that many of us are "album people" - we listen to albums, not songs. Outside of very popular music, albums are far more satisfying than "just a bunch of songs" to many of us.
You can't just say that everyone needs to slim down their portable collections to what is necessary. It works for you and that's great. I wish it would work for me. I wish I could live with just my 16gb Iphone. It works great for me going to the grocery store, but it doesn't suffice for a day at work where I'm liable to pass through several completely, totally, wildly different moods and genres that I couldn't possibly have guessed when setting up the stuff I wanted on my Iphone earlier that day or the night before. That's why we are hurt seeing the 160, and even the 120gb Classic on the chopping block.
Good stuff - well said
My classic is also my main source of music at home as well as on the move.
According to my iTunes stats, I play 78 songs per day on average and have played 66,000 songs since Feb 2007.
That would be a lot of unnecessary work to keep a 32GB iPod 'fresh' over that period. I prefer to just play whatever music takes my fancy, when it takes my fancy.
A single smart playlist of 32GB of songs that have not been played in the past 12 months would refresh itself every time you dock to iTunes. That's not much work to stay "fresh".
I keep several such smart playlists synced to my iPhone based on criteria such as newly added items, 5-star rating, not played in a year or low playcount, favorite artists, classic rock, cover songs, etc. Stays fresh, every song eventually gets a turn, but the mix is "weighted" towards songs that meet certain criteria.
iTunes Statistician tells me I play an average 32 songs per day, played 49493 songs since March '05. The only work I've done is creating and occasionally tweaking the playlists, and docking my iPods/iPhones daily.
Again I totally get the appeal of carrying your whole library, and had a brief period years back when I owned the first 60GB iPod when I could actually do it, but for many of us it's already not possible and our libraries are likely to continue outpacing storage capacities with video and lossless audio. iTunes is very powerful in allowing you to create a representative but weighted subset of your music on even the itty bitty Shuffle in order to accomodate enormous libraries on small devices.
I do use smart playlists on my iPhone, the 60GB iPod photo I use in the car and an old iPod mini I still occasionally use. I know other people might get on ok using them for their main player but it's not the way I like it. I just prefer having my collection at hand when I want it and I know a lot of other people feel the same way.
It just seems the typical Apple way, they cater for your needs while it suits them then just toss you aside. Hopefully, my classic will last a few more years and I've still got 12.7GB of free space for new albums.
Thanks genius. So is cable; maybe we should just all throw out our cable modems? GTFO.
How are you gonna know ahead of time what you will feel like hearing?
Maybe you listen to the same 10 songs over and over and over and over again.....
I'm always pretty sure I'll feel like hearing something that I chose to put in my own iTunes Library.
Syncing a smart-rotating 10GB of my 80GB Library to my iPhone assures there's plenty I'll want to hear, and based on the criteria I've set I'll never hear the same song any sooner than 30 days (and only if it's a 5-star), except for new items I've added within 30 days which stay in heavy rotation. Genius really helps too, as I might suddenly be in the mood for "Classic Rock" or "Disco" after hearing a certain song, and one touch throws me into whatever I have that is similar.
Do you also bring a suitcase full of all your clothes with you every day, in case you don't feel like wearing what you put on in the morning?
Suffice to say everyone has different listening habits. 99% of the time I play on Shuffle, so for me, as long as I have enough songs for my commute it really doesn't matter if I have 100 or 10,000 that have been smartly rotated and synced. A few months ago I was on a Nirvana kick so I just synced a playlist of all their albums until I got sick of it then dumped them.
I've just tried to point out several times that as our iTunes Libraries have grown larger than the largest capacity iPod available, it would benefit the "I need my whole Library with me" crowd to learn how to use smart playlists to bring along a good representative mix and maybe even save you some $$$ from buying the next biggest capacity. I stopped at the 60GB when I recognized my listening pattern was better suited to a smart-rotating playlist than always trying to have the capacity to sync everything.