'iPod Father' Tony Fadell Comments on Discontinuation of iPod Classic

[wilsonlaidlaw]

Deletion of Classic an error?

I note that prices of new iPod Classics on Fleabay and Amazon market are already starting to climb. This is because people are stocking up on them. The alternative of internet streaming just does not work in so many environments. So, if you have a large music library, especially when it is kept in ALAC format, the Classic is the only answer. The iPod touch at 64GB is too small for me and the touch screen plus apps, an unnecessary added expense. I have bought an extra Classic Gen 7 for when my Gen 6 dies, although it and my Gen 5.5 are still going strong. I use them when travelling and in my cars. As I use my cars constantly in various countries in Europe, the data costs of streaming would be horrendous, unless I had a SIM and data plan for each country, which would also be cumbersome and expensive.

I suppose in due course, a smaller maker like Archos might come out with an SSD equivalent to the classic but it would have to be iTunes library, apple connector and iTunes device compliant to be of any interest to me.

 

[highvoltage12v]

In the Apple Store, the iPod Touch you can buy still advertises iOS 7. That means, IMO, that in October the line will be re-vamped. The Nano's may get a storage bump, but not much else will change. The iPod Touch will move to iOS 8, and may see a few other improvements, probably to iPhone 5S cameras. And a storage bump to 128 GB. The big question is whether it will get a 4.7" screen.

If there is an iPod Touch with a 5.5" inch screen, will they call it an iPod Macro ?

iPad nano? And remove the iPod lineup completely. Its a bit sarcastic but I wouldn't be that surprised if they made the iPod touch look like a smaller mini and call it the iPad nano.

 

[gnasher729]

Maybe iPod sales is a 'declining industry' due to lack of updates and high prices. I'm not saying that the iPod is likely to be a large part of Apple's market, but to expect consumers to pay 2014 prices for 2010 tech and then claim people aren't buying them for another reason is a little insulting.

So if it's all due to Apple keeping prices high, where are the other companies selling cheaper music players? Surely there would be a great opportunity here? But there are none. Go to Amazon and have a look. There are no big capacity music players (apart from used models built in 2010 or 2011).

----------

Not really. The total cost of ownership for an iPhone is WAY higher than that of an iPod. The device itself costs $650 or more, plus (typically) 2 years of monthly carrier charges.

You can obviously get it without any carrier charges. At least in the UK. All you need is a pay-as-you-go SIM card to activate, which you can even take from another phone and put back after activation.

----------

The old limit was 25,000 songs in your library excluding purchases, not 25,000 songs uploaded (non-matched). Maybe they changed it. On Apple's page, it says:

"iTunes Match is limited to 25,000 songs."

but it doesn't say if that's non-matched or matched.

I'll find out in a year or two

 

[DeanL]

I happen to be in the same camp as you. But I am afraid the future for masses is streaming. Heck, if you are on T-Mobile, you even get unlimited streaming with some of the popular streaming services.

For many folks, the notion of paying just $10/month or $100/year for most of your music needs can be extremely appealing and convenient.

As for Apple not renewing Classic, if Apple slaps in modern UI, bigger flash storage, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, amazing DAC, etc., the sales will definitely pick up initially, but it's not going to reach beyond that core market.

It is truly sad to see Classic disappear into the sunset, but the future has spoken. I am just hoping Apple will release 128GB iPod nano for last remaining music listeners like me before sunsetting that product too.

I am all about streaming services like Beats Music; as long as I can keep a local copy on my device! I would never have subscribed to Beats Music if it didn't have the offline mode.
Yeah, carriers like T-Mobile offers unlimited streaming, but just to remember you that it drains battery like hell.
I don't have any problem on having a "in the cloud" music library on my iMac at home, but when it comes to my mobile devices, I need them all on the actual device.

There's nothing stopping you from copying your entire library to your iPhone via cable or wifi, and using streaming for discovering new music.

I use Spotify's offline features to cache a similar amount of music. I also have a few curated playlists that update automatically when I'm on wifi (such as top charts and fresh tracks). This gives me instant access to high quality music that I enjoy wherever I am.

That is the edge the iPhone has over the Classic.

Did you read my whole comment? I want a DEDICATED device for music.

Huh?

There's this thing called an iPod touch that currently weighs just over half as much as an iPod Classic, is available with up to 64GB of flash storage, and has bluetooth and wifi. It will also do anything a somewhat older iPhone will do other than place cellular phone calls, vibrate, and use GPS signals, including take decent photos and video, play games, video, browse the web, and make audio or video FaceTime calls. It costs less than half what an iPhone does, and requires no contract or cellular signal, and if all you ever want to run on it is the music app, you can do that.

In fact, until the iPhone 6, I think it was the coolest device Apple sold, all-around. That the 6 looks much more like it than the 5s is I think indication that Jony Ive thinks so, too.

Now, if you have a 120GB+ library, like a few people, and must have the entire thing with you at all times, then sure, you can pine for a 160GB iPod classic, or if you have a 220GB+ library you can wish that a 250GB model existed. Apple, however, knows exactly how many 160GB iPod Classics they've been selling since 2009, so I have a feeling they knew what they were doing when they cancelled the thing.

Regardless, you can complain that Apple should produce a massive-storage music device that they don't, but if you only need 20-60GB of music storage it's not like Apple hasn't kept up the iPod line with modern features like bluetooth and flash storage. It just doesn't have a clickwheel anymore.

Why would I have an iPod Touch when I have an iPhone? Besides I want a music player. A device that was built to play music first, not an iPod Touch (that has a maximum of 64GB, with lossless music probably coming, music is going to be even more heavy).
Plus, yeah, I want my whole library with me. Do you know what the shuffle mode is? Because I don't only listen to recent music.

And there's no reason why you shouldn't, but the reality is that most people don't want to carry multiple devices; sales of dedicated portable media players have dramatically dropped over the last few years, as have the sales of point-and-shoot cameras, handheld consoles, GPS systems, and so on. It's hard to blame Apple for dropping a product that doesn't sell.

The thing is I feel like they didn't even try to make it sell (like by refreshing it).

Well... you need to stream 20 GB of your music library if you where to hear it all at once. Otherwise, you just use exactly what you need to hear an specified song. And that is not very expensive.

You do realize that some people like to play the shuffle mode?

I believe you can always buy the iPod touch. They can be configured with up to 64gigs of flash memory to carry around your music with.

It seems to me is that what Apple did was to simply get rid of the click wheel and the physical hard drive. When you have a library that exceeds 12,000 songs, like I do, the click wheel is just not that practical. The touch screen interface makes more sense. And the move away from the physical hard drive makes sense.

For Apple this consolidates them down to a standard design and interface across their products which also makes sense.

Like I said, they could have made an iPod Nano with 128GB of storage on a single chip since this is what the iPad has. 128GB on a single chip.

 

[Gasu E.]

Well, the Touch is a fully capable iOS device so it really should be more properly categorized with the iPad and iPhone. In fact, an early criticism of the iPad was that it was basically a giant iPod Touch.

As for the other two, it seems likely their days are probably numbered as well — especially with the Apple Watch coming out. Now that a bunch of other devices can handle music storage and playback, the market for a dedicated device that ONLY plays music is shrinking rapidly.

Price, my friend; price.

----------

I note that prices of new iPod Classics on Fleabay and Amazon market are already starting to climb. This is because people are stocking up on them. The alternative of internet streaming just does not work in so many environments. So, if you have a large music library, especially when it is kept in ALAC format, the Classic is the only answer. The iPod touch at 64GB is too small for me and the touch screen plus apps, an unnecessary added expense. I have bought an extra Classic Gen 7 for when my Gen 6 dies, although it and my Gen 5.5 are still going strong. I use them when travelling and in my cars. As I use my cars constantly in various countries in Europe, the data costs of streaming would be horrendous, unless I had a SIM and data plan for each country, which would also be cumbersome and expensive.

I never understood the "64GB is too small for me, and I can't stream position". Maybe, if you live in the middle of the Amazon. Do you mean to tell me you can't divide your collection into two piles, your favorite 64GB that you must have with you; and 64GB that you rarely access and can stream for laughs when you get back to civilization? I have only about 60GB myself, but frankly even with that "minuscule" amount, maybe a third of that is stuff I'm remotely likely to want to listen to spontaneously.

 

[FaustsHausUK]

Price, my friend; price.
I never understood the "64GB is too small for me, and I can't stream position". Maybe, if you live in the middle of the Amazon. Do you mean to tell me you can't divide your collection into two piles, your favorite 64GB that you must have with you; and 64GB that you rarely access and can stream for laughs when you get back to civilization? I have only about 60GB myself, but frankly even with that "minuscule" amount, maybe a third of that is stuff I'm remotely likely to want to listen to spontaneously.

The lion's share of my music listening takes place away from Wi-Fi. Verizon data prices are extortionate, and service is patchy as hell on my commute. Streaming isn't a reliable, affordable option for me. Not to mention streaming eats up way more battery than playing from memory.

I can and do pare the music I store on my device down to what I anticipate listening to because storage is so minimal, but you bet I would dig out rarely listened to classics more if they were always with me. A 256GB iPhone, at the right price, would be a godsend for me.

 

[Applefiberpoop]

I don't understand buying phones outright. Just get a contract like a normal person.

1) Contracts are not popular in many parts of Europe

2) Locked phones are terrible, I would like a phone that I can use on any carrier I like

3) You are still eating the cost of the phone anyway, whether you choose to pay it all at once or over the course of 24 months. Why not pay all at once and just have a lower monthly bill as a result? It boggles my mind that people think a smartphone magically becomes cheaper just because they signed a 2 year contract. Perhaps that's why the carriers do contracts here in the US, because the average American consumer is dumb enough to think being tied to carrier x for 2 years while paying an extra $25-30 for that phone they couldn't afford every month is a great deal.

 

[preyan]

I don't think the iPhone killed it. It's a lack of innovation on side that killed it! I think there can still be a place for the iPhone and iPod classic. But the latter needs what the former has....innovation, additions, new inventions

 

[wilsonlaidlaw]

Price, my friend; price.

----------



I never understood the "64GB is too small for me, and I can't stream position". Maybe, if you live in the middle of the Amazon. Do you mean to tell me you can't divide your collection into two piles, your favorite 64GB that you must have with you; and 64GB that you rarely access and can stream for laughs when you get back to civilization? I have only about 60GB myself, but frankly even with that "minuscule" amount, maybe a third of that is stuff I'm remotely likely to want to listen to spontaneously.

Maybe I just have more catholic tastes than you and want to access a larger variety of music. I don’t want the inconvenience of swapping between iPod touches. Also two iPod touches comes out more considerably expensive than one classic. With their screens they are also more fragile. Wireless streaming, as you drive through Europe, ranges from poor to very poor, with many areas having no GSM coverage at all, let alone 3 or 4 G, so streaming is a non-starter. You don’t need to be up the Amazon to have poor GSM coverage. The assumption that everyone has access to 3 and 4G is a very urban-centric view.

 

[Mak47]

Yes, Apple do seem to have a habit of confusing their visions of the future with the here-and-now reality. I'm not sure why they're so convinced that every man and his dog now streams all of their music - my real world experience would seem to suggest that despite the growth of streaming services, everyone I know still stores their music locally. Unfortunately, such is (was?) the market influence of Apple that what they think will happen tends to become a self-fulfilling prophecy anyway.

I don't think they're convinced of that at all, at least not right now. They just know they're not selling enough of these devices to justify their existence.

Apple is all about economies of scale. Niche products don't work for them, and that's what the iPod Classic has become. Their production capacities and logistics just aren't built for it.

If it turns out that there is still a market for a product like this, someone else will develop it and meet that need.

----------

I don't think the iPhone killed it. It's a lack of innovation on side that killed it! I think there can still be a place for the iPhone and iPod classic. But the latter needs what the former has....innovation, additions, new inventions

But it's had that...

Consider the following additions, innovations & new inventions:

WiFi
Bluetooth
Multitouch display
Cellular connectivity
Flash Storage
Bigger screens
Games & Apps
PC Free Access to iTunes

How to you evolve the iPod Classic over 10+ years without it simply turning into the iPhone--which is exactly what happened.

 

[b_scott]

1) Contracts are not popular in many parts of Europe

2) Locked phones are terrible, I would like a phone that I can use on any carrier I like

3) You are still eating the cost of the phone anyway, whether you choose to pay it all at once or over the course of 24 months. Why not pay all at once and just have a lower monthly bill as a result? It boggles my mind that people think a smartphone magically becomes cheaper just because they signed a 2 year contract. Perhaps that's why the carriers do contracts here in the US, because the average American consumer is dumb enough to think being tied to carrier x for 2 years while paying an extra $25-30 for that phone they couldn't afford every month is a great deal.

You don't get a lower cost per month if you bring your own phone, at least in the US. So it's moot. I don't plan on switching carriers so what's the point of not being on a contract? I need a phone, so it makes no difference

 

[bsolar]

You don't get a lower cost per month if you bring your own phone, at least in the US. So it's moot. I don't plan on switching carriers so what's the point of not being on a contract? I need a phone, so it makes no difference

It depends on whether you need a contract in the first place and how expensive it is compared to e.g. a pre-paid card (which are very popular in many European countries).

If you have limited needs a pre-paid card could be enough and much cheaper over 2 years than a contract. If the difference is higher than the subsidy on the phone, it's cheaper to pay the phone full price and avoid the expensive contract.

 

[Applefiberpoop]

You don't get a lower cost per month if you bring your own phone, at least in the US. So it's moot. I don't plan on switching carriers so what's the point of not being on a contract? I need a phone, so it makes no difference

Perhaps if you're on AT&T, Verizon, or Sprint. But don't say "get a contract like a normal person" or that "my point is moot" when there are cheaper, BYOD contract-free options are out there.

Ok, so a contract works for you. Well guess what? It sure doesn't work for me and a lot of people. I bought my phone unlocked online, and pay T-Mobile $50/month for service that I can cancel at any time with no penalty. Oh, and I live in the US, so that shoots your "You don't get a lower cost per month if you bring your own phone, at least in the US" theory out the window.

You are most likely paying more for the phone in the long run by buying on contract instead of unlocked. An unlocked iPhone 6 base model is $649. AT&T and Verizon wanted me to pay the phone back in $30ish/month payments. So after 2 years, I would have paid over $720 for a phone that was only worth $649. No thanks.

The other 3 major carriers are offering lower prices for postpaid plans in response to T-Mobile. Maybe you should crunch some numbers and actually research if you can get a better deal with your carrier (or another) instead of assuming you're already getting the best deal.

 

[kaielement]

The 128 GB iPhone 6/6 Plus essentially replaces it now.

I wish that were true for me. I have way to much music plus my apps to fit on 128gb phone. Plus I don't want to run my phone battery down to nothing juts because I was listing to music all day. So for now I will keep my iPod Classic and iPhone as two separate devices. But for most people even 128gb I could see being enough.

 

[Yoshi Yogurt]

I wish that were true for me. I have way to much music plus my apps to fit on 128gb phone. Plus I don't want to run my phone battery down to nothing juts because I was listing to music all day. So for now I will keep my iPod Classic and iPhone as two separate devices. But for most people even 128gb I could see being enough.

Also I really do not want to pay $900 for a 128GB device.

Ipod classic 160gb $200

Iphone 4s 16gb $80 (used)

They really should "Bring back" the classic in a year or 2 with a 500GB SSD and lightning charger, along with bluetooth for wireless stereos etc.

 

[Bregalad]

I disagree strongly with the folks saying the 128gb iPhone6 replaces the classic. Nothing had the immediate tactile feedback of the scroll wheel. I've owned iPods with scroll wheels, then tried iPod touches to hate the lack of tactical buttons - strongly disliked them. I was here foolishly dreaming they would update the classic with quicker software and a smaller size. But no more. The buttons are gone, and that to me, sucks.

Buttons easily found and activated without needing to look are a superior UI. Say you want to skip a song.

On the Classic you simply reach for the device, let your fingers locate the appropriate button and click it.

On a touch screen device you first have to pull the device out of your pocket/purse/etc so you can look at it. Then you need to perform some swipe/tap actions and then put it away again.

I understand users who want a music device that will last for many years instead of a phone that will be outdated and need replacing much sooner. I also understand people who don't want music to drain the battery on their phone. Not wanting your music device to ring is also valid.

I was probably in the target market for the iPod Classic because I prefer the tactile UI and would like to have all my music with me at all times, but I was never convinced that the little hard drive was durable enough.

 

[Sy7ygy]

The 128 GB iPhone 6/6 Plus essentially replaces it now.

Yes because a 4.7-5.5" £600-£800 multimedia device replaces a £200 dedicated music player.

This is the logic of the current Apple fan base - in fact, NO logic.

I hate humanity.

 

[/V\acpower]

I wish that were true for me. I have way to much music plus my apps to fit on 128gb phone. Plus I don't want to run my phone battery down to nothing juts because I was listing to music all day. So for now I will keep my iPod Classic and iPhone as two separate devices. But for most people even 128gb I could see being enough.

Apple advertise 40 hours of music playback for iPhone 5, 5S, even more on the 6 and 6 +

Let's say 30 hours in realistic case scenario (lots of music skipping, not always optimal music format, etc.)

That mean that simple music playback doesn't have a lot of impact on the battery. It's probably the thing that you can use your iPhone for that really don't need you to think about battery.

 

[xEODGuy]

I had an Archos Jukebox back in 2001 or so. I thought 5GB of music in my pocket was incredible back then.

I had an Archos as well...2002. And it was 20GB when that was just about as big as you could get them then.

 

[leroypants]

The 128 GB iPhone 6/6 Plus essentially replaces it now.

Yeah, with the 128gb I can store most of my music as long as I don't have a single app...or a single video...or a single photo....

 

[exodiusprime]

I had an Archos as well...2002. And it was 20GB when that was just about as big as you could get them then.

Image

The Jukebox 5000 I used to use was my favorite player till I got the Jukebox Multimedia in December 2002. I'd spend hours converting videos just so I could watch them on the tiny screen

 

[Casstiel]

1) Apple wants customers to but music on iTunes and have their purchases stored in iCloud. They want customers to move from the practice of buying and ripping CDs to the iTunes/iCould/iDevice ecosystem.

2) Apple wanted to retire the 30-pin dock connector.

For the above reasons, combined with the fact that it would take a new iPod classic to incorporate the Lightening connector, they killed it.

 

[cox-orange]

Battery life

The 128 GB iPhone 6/6 Plus essentially replaces it now.

...as long as there is a power outlet nearby, I agree. If not, I am happy if my iPhone survives two days (switched off at night and various features deactivated in order to save battery life). Should I reduce my iPhone's battery life even more by using it as an iPod? Well, I do from time to time, but this is definitely no satisfactory iPod replacement.

 

[b_scott]

Perhaps if you're on AT&T, Verizon, or Sprint. But don't say "get a contract like a normal person" or that "my point is moot" when there are cheaper, BYOD contract-free options are out there.

Ok, so a contract works for you. Well guess what? It sure doesn't work for me and a lot of people. I bought my phone unlocked online, and pay T-Mobile $50/month for service that I can cancel at any time with no penalty. Oh, and I live in the US, so that shoots your "You don't get a lower cost per month if you bring your own phone, at least in the US" theory out the window.

You are most likely paying more for the phone in the long run by buying on contract instead of unlocked. An unlocked iPhone 6 base model is $649. AT&T and Verizon wanted me to pay the phone back in $30ish/month payments. So after 2 years, I would have paid over $720 for a phone that was only worth $649. No thanks.

The other 3 major carriers are offering lower prices for postpaid plans in response to T-Mobile. Maybe you should crunch some numbers and actually research if you can get a better deal with your carrier (or another) instead of assuming you're already getting the best deal.

you're talking about "Edge" on VZW for instance. That's a ripoff, no one should do that unless they NEED a new phone every year. I've crunched for a long time on that to make sure.

You buy a $199 phone on Verizon. You pay your $199 and that's it. For 2 years. You pay your data fee per line monthly, and your voice fee. Plus tax. That's it.

----------

I had an Archos as well...2002. And it was 20GB when that was just about as big as you could get them then.

Image

Ha I used to sell those at Best Buy in 2000.

 

[choiaj]

I hear people saying "Well buy a 64GB or 128GB iPhone".
Well guess what: there's also people like me who prefer a device dedicated to music.

I'm pretty sure that the iPod Touch 64GB could also be a device dedicated to music though. And I bet they'll release a 128GB model with the next refresh too.

Why would somebody want a spinning hard drive in their pocket in 2014?