Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iPod Turns 10 Years Old Today

Just wish the Nano would go up to more GB's, I don't want a Classic and I don't want a Touch since I have an Iphone.

I don't want to out all my music on my phone because I don't like bringing my phone out when I'm on the bus or train, I rather carry my Nano.
 
KnightWRX said:
The current Nano is much more than a touch screen shuffle. And like I said, I don't see it as a downgrade, I see it as an upgrade. The Nano was becoming a monster with the camera (useless, yet another camera, the digital clock of the 00s) and the video support (on such a tiny screen). It was a mess. The 6th gen Nano brought back the whole reason to have a Nano to begin with. A very small and competent music player.

It's usefulness was upgraded in my eyes with the 6th generation. It's the one that finally justified the cost for me to drag around a separate music player instead of relying on my cellphone.
Click to expand...

I agree that the camera was useless but pictures and videos were definitely usable on the 2.2" screen. The 1.5" screen doesn't allow anything other than music, don't understand in what sense you call it an upgrade unless you consider touchscreen as an "upgrade"...
 
KnightWRX said:
My point was that the original iPod release was not a runaway hit. That's all. It took a few concessions and changes for Apple to make it so.

And how hasn't the Mac taken off ? It's selling quite nicely and Apple is one of the big OEMs for consumer PCs.
Click to expand...

When I say 'relative terms'; yes it's selling nicely (better than ever before) but the Mac still isn't the runaway success. I didn't say it hasn't taken off, it doesn't command the 75% market share like the iPod. It's still at that slow start like the iPod in its first year.
 
KPOM said:
The iPod is what eventually got me back into the Mac fold. I purchased it in December 2001, even before it officially worked with Windows. I remember XPlay, Ephpod, and other "hacks" to get it to work with Windows. I even purchased a Firewire PCI card for my Windows XP desktop to get it to run. Of course, I managed to mess up the drive the first time, and took it to one of the brand new Apple stores 40 miles away, where the Genius Bar representative happily restored it.

I do remember the early criticism. In some respects, it was like the reaction to the iPhone 4S. Apple products in many ways fail to meet the hype but then greatly exceed the hype at the same time, if that makes any sense. People are "disappointed" that whatever they release didn't meet some wild speculation, but then realize that it's a great product. It happened with the iPod, the iPhone, the MacBook Air, and the iPad. All were roundly criticized by many "experts."
Click to expand...
While I do agree with your sentiments, its actually the case that Apple's first gen products tended to be underwhelming. But enough people were intrigued that they bought them, giving Apple the funds to unveil great second gen products. Happened with the iphone (didn't have 3g), the MBA (poor performance, with little ports), the ipad ( less features than the iphone, and only ran upscaled iphone apps). I think the first ipod hit it on the nail though with the wheel navigation. It was the game changer for Apple.
 
qtx43 said:
Note to self: edit old stupid comments so I don't get quoted in ten years. But seiously, if it were so easy to predict a product's success, everyone would be doing it. It's easy to call Jobs brilliant in hindsight.
Click to expand...

It's not about whether it is easy or not to predict success. When I went to that thread from the past I looked at those comments and the certainty these people wrote with. I can understand the comments about not wanting to buy-in because of the price, but those comments bashing Steve Jobs for thinking the product was not revolutionary I don't understand.

They spoke as if it was easy to predict a product's failure.
 
tigres said:
Got one as a gift from someone special.

In a safe unopened for the next 10 years or so.
Click to expand...

I think it will take much longer to increase in value.
But imagine it´s a DOA-product and you just don´t know it yet! :D
Just crossed my mind, I do not wish this to happen.
 
jmpnop said:
I agree that the camera was useless but pictures and videos were definitely usable on the 2.2" screen. The 1.5" screen doesn't allow anything other than music, don't understand in what sense you call it an upgrade unless you consider touchscreen as an "upgrade"...
Click to expand...

In the sense that the new form factor is much more versatile and that the "back to its root" software design turned it back to what its name implies : Nano.

And the 6th gen most definitely supports pictures, just not video, which frankly is not something I want to do on a nano, ever. The hardware required for it was compromising the form factor.

----------
CrackedButter said:
When I say 'relative terms'; yes it's selling nicely (better than ever before) but the Mac still isn't the runaway success. I didn't say it hasn't taken off, it doesn't command the 75% market share like the iPod. It's still at that slow start like the iPod in its first year.
Click to expand...

The Mac is far from the slow start the iPod had in its first year. The first year iPod was very much niche (Firewire, requires a Mac). The Mac is mainstream nowadays, much more than a niche product.
 
Cougarcat said:
If the iPod hadn't dropped the price, FireWire requirement, and Mac exclusivity, then it wouldn't have taken off.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and if they had made it out of cheese, you could've spread it on crackers.
What's the point in talking about what might have happened in an alternate universe?
 
Last edited:
FireWire was the only choice.

Had it been released with USB 1.0 the device would have sucked. Most of the early adopters would have been Mac users as there target market. Windows support took less than a year and was still only FireWire as USB. 2.0 was hardly available. If I remember correctly USB 2.0 started coming out in 2003. My dell Inspiron 8500 was one of the only dell laptops to have USB 2.0 and that was the spring of 2003. I'm pretty sure the most early adopters had a Mac or a pc with FireWire.

Had apple made some priparitory connector, then it would have been a fail. The few month delay for windows support was also acceptable. Apple back then was small and did not have the resources they have today. Notice that the apple tv 2 supported windows from the beginning!!!
 
My first iPod from 2003:

gtMwo.jpg


Still have it and love the design. It's unique.
 
I remember getting my first iPod, and to this day I think I've owned around 10. Love em! Such a staple of my childhood.

Wonder if it'll get some tenth anniversary love?
 
Judas1 said:
While I do agree with your sentiments, its actually the case that Apple's first gen products tended to be underwhelming. But enough people were intrigued that they bought them, giving Apple the funds to unveil great second gen products. Happened with the iphone (didn't have 3g), the MBA (poor performance, with little ports), the ipad ( less features than the iphone, and only ran upscaled iphone apps). I think the first ipod hit it on the nail though with the wheel navigation. It was the game changer for Apple.
Click to expand...

You're misinformed about the technology. Apple does release products preemptively compared to the maturity of the technology.

1. iPhone: 3G wasn't as mature when the iPhone was released. The networks weren't ready, it wasn't as widespread and it drains batteries worse than it does today. Sure, people wanted it on 3G, just like people wanted the 4s to be 4G. It just wasn't the right time.

2. MBA: The processors it used aren't the same as used in the regular macbooks.The CPUs were custom in the first-gen models because what Apple wanted didn't exist. Apple (as well as other mfgrs) created a market for low-power CPU's. That is why it is a successful core-i3 based product today.

3. iPad: If memory serves, it had over 200 ipad-apps ready at launch. And I am guessing the "less features" was the lack of phone. Go ahead. Hold one up to your head.

You need to remember, not every product is instantly understood. The "first gen products tended to be underwhelming" statement is just uninformed FUD.
 
snebes said:
You're misinformed about the technology. Apple does release products preemptively compared to the maturity of the technology.

1. iPhone: 3G wasn't as mature when the iPhone was released. The networks weren't ready, it wasn't as widespread and it drains batteries worse than it does today. Sure, people wanted it on 3G, just like people wanted the 4s to be 4G. It just wasn't the right time.

2. MBA: The processors it used aren't the same as used in the regular macbooks.The CPUs were custom in the first-gen models because what Apple wanted didn't exist. Apple (as well as other mfgrs) created a market for low-power CPU's. That is why it is a successful core-i3 based product today.

3. iPad: If memory serves, it had over 200 ipad-apps ready at launch. And I am guessing the "less features" was the lack of phone. Go ahead. Hold one up to your head.

You need to remember, not every product is instantly understood. The "first gen products tended to be underwhelming" statement is just uninformed FUD.
Click to expand...

Good points all.
 
iPod

Happy birthday iPod! I still love my iPod classic, not generation 1, I was still using CDs back then, actually took me awhile to make the full digital jump. It certainly was not the best design in the iPods, but what a start! I still love my classic, holds a ton of music, and works perfectly.
 
snebes said:
2. MBA: The processors it used aren't the same as used in the regular macbooks.The CPUs were custom in the first-gen models because what Apple wanted didn't exist. Apple (as well as other mfgrs) created a market for low-power CPU's. That is why it is a successful core-i3 based product today.
Click to expand...

i5 and i7, you mean. ;) It's because of Apple that Intel launched the Ultrabook specification, and has committed to reducing the power output of the Ivy Bridge and Haswell mobile chips. By the time Haswell comes around, the mainstream chips will have the same TDPs as today's ULV chips. Somehow I don't see Dell or HP having this kind of influence over Intel.
 
I've had 4 iPods over the years since the mini came out, love them all but there's this persistent battery issue with iPods. After 1-2 years of use, a full charge wouldn't last more than hour of use. I guess that's just about the life span of an iPod.
 
KnightWRX said:
And they are still selling them. I said "warrant a refresh". Does it really need a refresh anyway ?
Click to expand...

A bit of a refresh. I could see maybe a bigger HDD, but other than that, there isn't a whole lot you can do with it. The spinning hard drive limits design choices. If they add a touch screen or go to flash memory, it would jack up the price. Plus, I actually like the scroll wheel. Of course, at this point, I wonder if any of the hard drive manufacturers are even developing new models for this form factor.

Sequin said:
The classic seems a lot smarter money wise to me. I've had my iPod classic for at least 5 years. At the time $250 seemed like a lot, but it's definitely been worth the price considering how long the product lasts. People that use their iPhone as their music player are probably still spending money by upgrading when new models come out. Touch is a waste in general if you have the iPhone. Nano only holds enough for playlists. I also like playlists and all, but in general I find that I shuffle all of my 4,000 or so songs at once. I don't like listening to the same things over and over and it's nice to be like HEY I FORGOT ABOUT THIS SONG.
Click to expand...

It is by far the best price as far as storage space per dollar, which is why I love it and hope they keep it around. I have a phone for all the internet use and apps, so I want my mp3 player to just play music (well, and podcasts). Mine usually stays in my car, except for long flights.
 
Pretty amazing to think how many people you see today with an iPod, yet ten years ago nobody had one. Cracking product by a great company. :apple:
 
jmpnop said:
Really sad to see Apple not paying attention to one of the best products - Nano is pretty useless (compared to 5th gen), Touch didn't get any update, Classic is dead in Apple's eyes:(
Click to expand...

+1 - The fifth generation iPod Nano is much better than the 6th gen. It was stupid to try and put a multitouch screen on a device that small. Plus they got rid of the video camera and the scroll wheel to do it :(
 
guch20 said:
Yeah, and if they had made it out of cheese, you could've spread it on crackers.
What's the point in talking about what might have happened in an alternate universe?
Click to expand...

It puts the predictions about the first iPod in perspective. It wasn't a runaway hit, not nearly, and the second-guessing of those comments based on what happened years later is disingenuous.

----------
snebes said:
I am guessing the "less features" was the lack of phone. Go ahead. Hold one up to your head.
Click to expand...

I'm willing to bet he was talking about the lack of cameras.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back