It runs iOS and it has an app store
He's saying you can't load music onto the Apple Watch. The Apple Watch will be the middle man between you and your iPhone, which he's right.
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 Shuffle Shipping Times Worsen as Retail Stores Run Out of Stock
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
He's saying you can't load music onto the Apple Watch. The Apple Watch will be the middle man between you and your iPhone, which he's right.
The current shuffle is woefully under specced and overpriced, and hasn't had an update for about 4 years.
You can buy a decent brand mp3 player with twice the shuffle's 2Gb storage for half the price, and if the clip-on form factor is the reason for buying it, you can get a clone with a slot for a 16 Gb micro-sd card for literally a tenth the price.
I expect Apple will aim to kill off the Pono with a refreshed shuffle by keeping the price and form factor but bumping the memory to 16Gb and adding support for 24bit/192Khz files.
You can buy a decent brand mp3 player with twice the shuffle's 2Gb storage for half the price, and if the clip-on form factor is the reason for buying it, you can get a clone with a slot for a 16 Gb micro-sd card for literally a tenth the price.
I expect Apple will aim to kill off the Pono with a refreshed shuffle by keeping the price and form factor but bumping the memory to 16Gb and adding support for 24bit/192Khz files.
I had a 5th gen ipod nano for work out (till it died in a basement flood last month) and just got the latest one, it's so light, never even notice it's in my pocket + I get a lot more functionality out of it. Maybe Apple will lower the price of the Nano
Agreed. I used a shuffle for running for years and had no complaints, but then decided I wanted to try a 7G nano, so I bought one a few months back. It's so light that I cannot even feel it bouncing around in my basketball shorts pocket, I can use the remote buttons so I don't need to look at the screen unless I want to, and I can track my workouts with the integrated Nike+. On top of all that I can listen to different playlists or artists or whatever without being at the mercy of what the shuffle feeds me, and I have 8 times the storage.
All in all the nano 7G is a superior device, even for working out - it really isn't any heavier or more obtrusive than a shuffle. Apple can kill the shuffle, I personally won't miss it.
It may not be the clearest explanation, but if the demand for the Classic is low (at least as far as Apple standards go) then the price for all the components go up.
The iPod Classic and the MacBook Pro were the last two devices that Apple shipped with physical hard drives in them. Besides, it's not too hard to image a "New Classic" device that has 160 or 256GB flash storage on it.
Imagine you don't need very fast flash storage for a music only device, but it's not inconceivable that the iPod Touch or iPod Nano start picking up higher storage options.
Of course, honestly, who needs 40k songs in their pocket. At some point you're just compensating.
If the Apple Watch were to allow playback of music through Bluetooth (directly, without a phone involved beyond the transfer), there would be no need for Apple to keep the shuffle around.
Just have HealthKit trigger a genius playlist that it thinks you need/want (or pick your own), transfer that in a minute or two (using a slightly more lossy compression since you won't notice), done. Apple will make it so simple its just hypnotic
Apple knows you'll all pay the extra money. Even if it takes a few years till "I had to cave in and get this stupid Apple watch because they don't make the shuffle anymore" (ignoring the fact that eBay probably has tons for dirt cheap, because you had to buy new)
One of us.... One of us...
Just have HealthKit trigger a genius playlist that it thinks you need/want (or pick your own), transfer that in a minute or two (using a slightly more lossy compression since you won't notice), done. Apple will make it so simple its just hypnotic
Apple knows you'll all pay the extra money. Even if it takes a few years till "I had to cave in and get this stupid Apple watch because they don't make the shuffle anymore" (ignoring the fact that eBay probably has tons for dirt cheap, because you had to buy new)
One of us.... One of us...
Last edited:
Perhaps, but if the Watch requires the phone to play music, then that eliminates the desire of people to leave their phones behind when exercising.
We know this really means one of three things: Discontinued, Updated or Back in stock.
It has been awhile since the entire iPod line has been updated, 485 days for the Shuffle, but the prior update was over 1100 days, so who knows. I'm thinking we'll see an update to the shuffle and nano. If Apple can get the nano price down to ~$79, then perhaps that'll be close enough to get rid of the shuffle all together.
Like so much regarding the watch all up in the air at the moment. I can't imagine much storage though? 8GB, maybe 16GB at a push? And good question about battery life when playing music - looking forward to the next keynote when we find out more.
Without GPS it's really not for me though. I still carry my iPhone 6 (via a holder/strap) when running - not ideal - but at least I get both music and run tracking.
Price isn't the only raison d'être of the Shuffle: size and weight is. You can't clip a Nano to the hem of a t-shirt or the pocket of a pair of shorts.
----------
The $350 Apple Watch might have a different market than the $50 Shuffle.
kill this line off, as it was the line that launched them into popularity :/
Yes, a "standalone mode" for the watch depends heavily on many factors, but I feel Bluetooth is fast enough these days to transfer 40-50 re-encoded songs (about 3MB each) in a short enough time to be practical (135MB would take about 2 minutes on BT4 @10Mbit [BT4 does go to 24Mbit]). The watch was rumored to have its own storage (4 or 8GB I think) which would be plenty to store a few hundred songs for dispensing over a BT headset.
The two big questions (admittedly):
1. Would Apple allow it?
2. Would people give up wired headphones for bluetooth when exercising. (I know I already have, but I think I'm the only one in my neighborhood)
I think it is about time for an update or retirement of the Shuffle. I can't imagine the sales volume of the shuffle being too high so they might wind down their production to an almost JIT level this early (if they were going to announce an update to the shuffle with the watch).
A $79 nano would be an appealing replacement for many, but sadly not all.
----------
Yes, the watch does have a different market, for now. But when it's the only choice for an exercise companion at that size/convenience in Apple's lineup...
I can see the screen being a point of failure, but you can control iPod nano without interacting with the screen. The side has a dedicated play/pause button. Sleep/wake button at the top can be configured to skip to the next track when double clicked. Previous track is the only thing you cannot do with a physical button, although EarPods as well as many third party headphones/earphones will let you do that as well.
I do, for the convenience of use while running. It's wonderful! More convenient than iPhone 6. I carry both actually; one for distance tracking, the other for music playback. It's much easier to control the music on the iPod Shuffle's mini-clickwheel than the tiny controls on Apple earPods. And the Voiceover feature that tells you the name of the song, and other features useful and intuitive once you get used to them.
Long live iPod shuffle!
Attachments
Then a whole lot of people will simply not buy one from Apple, because they are in totally different price classes. That isn't going to change.
To most people, there's a huge difference between spending $50 on a piece of tech, and spending $350. And Apple understands this, setting their price points as part of the product development process. They set the price of the iPod Touch at $199, then figured out what specs to include at that price (which is why the original model didn't have a camera). They set the price of the 13" MacBook Air at $999, then determined how much RAM and SSD and which CPU to put in it. And as time goes on they adjust the specs to try to keep the prices the same. So they aren't going to pull a $50 device out of their line-up expecting a $350 to replace it. If they pull it, it's because they've decided to get out of the low-end MP3 player business, not because they think people will buy watches instead.
Have you read the many replies already posted? Running, hiking, winter sports, the list goes on. It's the perfect device when you need something simple, rugged, very compact, and with no distractions other than the content that's on the device.
I've seen a lot of other comments in this discussion that have me shaking my head.
Some folks say "Why not carry your iPhone?" If you're going for a 30-min run, this might work for you. But there are those of us that run for hours, where we need to carry lots of other things such as food and drinks (and a myriad of other things). A tiny little device like the Shuffle that clips onto the hem of your shirt is superior. And you can control it and listen to the content without even looking at it. Aside from all of this though, many of us want to get away from the distractions of texts, alerts, and Facebook. I don't need that crap when I'm running. Running is a time for me to organize my thoughts and then settle into a state of flow, where nothing else matters but the present moment.
Other folks on here have said that you can't control what you're listening to, which is not true. You can organize your files on the Shuffle into Playlists and then move to the Playlist of your choice with VoiceOver. It's very easy to setup and use. Just yesterday, during a 7 hour run, I listened to trance, two podcasts, a mellow beat mix, and listened to 60 mins of a book...all when I wanted to...and I never ever looked at my device. All of these changes were made while I continued to run.
I know the amount of running I do is not the norm, but as I mentioned before, I run...alot. (100 miles per week is the norm.) The Shuffle is the ideal tool for me and it is perfect for many other people too. I really hope Apple does not discontinue it. I will buy 5 more if they do.
Bryan
I think you got that backwards... You're thinking like an engineer (logically). Apple thinks like an "artist" and a "marketeer".
Apple looks at how the portfolio of products look, find a gap based on market size potential, position the new products so that there is an expected amount of "upgrade cannibalization" to existing/established products, then decide how much profit margin they need to make things come out roses on the other side. Then they meet that margin by spec'ing the components to "just barely what the user needs to survive" without sacrificing the "form".
If they thought like you laid out, 4GB of RAM upgrade shouldn't cost the consumer $100...
Think about it, lately Apple either creates a new market (first/only one there), or waits till the market grows enough that it can't be ignored anymore (then creates a product with potentially fewer flaws or a "new spin" on it than anyone in that market currently). They don't ever seem to say "Hey we can enter that market and create real value for consumers there".
I fully expect Apple to think their watch will replace a $50 music player, if it can actually play music over BT. Yes, people will go out and get a different mp3 player, then find they can't get songs onto it nearly as easy. They will come back... and buy the watch (and get a HR monitor too!)
I can see the shuffle retired, and make an updated iPod nano their entry level and cheapest iPod. maybe start it at $89-99. new iPod nano would still comes with its own water downed OS, but this time it will have a dedicated beats and/or iTunes radio app for those close enough to wifi. no wifi? then it will act just like the old shuffle
