iWatch May Ultimately Replace iPod, No iPod Updates Expected in 2014

[AppleScruff1]

Yes, but how will Apple interpret that message? We stop buying the iPod Touch because we're waiting for them to update it, and instead Tim interprets that as evidence that no one wants it anymore.

We have five iPods in our family—more than any other Apple product category. Over the years we've been reasonably frequent iPod updaters too… but of course there's no possibility of upgrading when there are no upgrades!

Quite true. The problem is the iPod has become an afterthought to Apple and they will kill it if sales drop off. I guess it's a double edged sword for the iPod lovers, if you keep buying it, Apple won't upgrade it, if you stop buying it, they will stop making it. But then again, to many companies, $5 billion a year in sales on one product would be something to be happy about, but not for Apple.

 

[xmichaelp]

Well...


iPod Classic with a 256GB SSD, please?


Please?

That would be awesome.

My Classic's HDD died and i'm not willing to fork out the money to replace it yet. Although prices are getting lower.

As for replacing the iPod with a stupid smart watch... awful idea. Obviously people still want iPods are else they wouldn't make them, it's quite the stretch to assume all those people would jump over to a watch. Plus what would it use, wireless earpods? What about higher end headphones with cords?

 

[fordyingseasons]

Not when you have kids who can't afford data plans using iPod Touches for gaming.

I would hope that Apple scraps all the iPods but the touch. And if they increase capacity to up to 256 GB, people might be able to accept the death of the iPod classic just a bit easier.

 

[willcapellaro]

And people are still buying like 9 or 10 M iPods a year, right?

No point in raining on a parade if there's no one to witness it.

It would be a relatively straightforward project to update the iPod Classic with 128/256 flash storage options, lightning port. Knowing this makes the fact that we'll never see it even more poignant.

 

[havit]

It is said that iWatch replaces iPod,But what the funtions iwatch has ! It can listen to music?

 

[iZac]

the iWatch *IS* the new iPod.

I can also see this happen to replace the functionality of the nano / shuffle and presumably Classic sales have dropped off the cliff.

It would be nice for Apple to make an SSD version of the classic just as a swan song for the device that made them rich. Presumably the iPod touch will remain in the product cycle - up until they can / are willing to bring an iPhone in at the iPod touch price points.

As for the earphone / headphone issue - I'll leave that to smarter men to solve

 

[xmichaelp]

Exactly. I cannot see Apple ditching the iPod Touch. As small as a slice of the Apple pie that the iPod business is, the iPod Touch still serves effectively as a notable gaming competitor to traditional handhelds. I think the Touch has it's place in the Apple ecosystem.

Classic, Nano, and Shuffle? Not so much. The iWatch could certainly serve to fill those gaps.

I'm curious as to how you think a watch could replace a high capacity iPod. I got the Classic because I wanted/needed a lot of space, why would a device with 16 or 32 GBs replace that?

 

[maxwelltech]

I am expecting the iWatch to replace the iPod nano (given that a main feature of the 6th gen iPod nano was being able to clip onto watch wrists), but I really don't see it replacing the other iPods. iPod shuffle should be discontinued because it is too expensive for what it offers (a SanDisk Sansa Clip with a color screen and 4GB storage costs less than it), and the iPod classic can be discontinued by simply putting 128GB flash storage into an iPod touch, like what they have done with the iPad.

At that point the iPod touch can just be renamed as iPod and become a part of the iPhone product line.

 

[Peruna]

$5 Billion ain't bad.

You're telling me in 5+ years the iPhone has only canibalized $3 billion from the iPod leaving still a healthy $5 billion in 2013 sales? That's pretty damn good retention!

While I could see an iWatch replacing the shuffle and perhaps the nano. And while the classic may well be end of life, the touch is still a vibrant market, especially for kids as it has replaced four decades of hand held gaming from the first Mattel Football game to the PSP and DS3DXL.

No, the touch is not going anywhere soon. Although I could see a merger of lines and rebranding as the only real difference between a touch and an iPad is screen size.

 

[jkichline]

Because it can't, that's why.

A technologist would keep Touch current until it is no longer relevant.

That's all well and good, but if you made an iPhone 5s ($650-$700 16GB) without the cell antenna, how much would it cost exactly? $500? Right now you can get an iPod Touch for $229. Why? Because it doesn't have the latest and greatest whiz bang technology because it CAN'T, or people couldn't afford it. But it has an amazing amount of functionality for the price.

 

[dannyyankou]

Come out with a larger capacity iPod touch/iPhone, then discontinue the Classic.

 

[7thson]

Not without wireless EarPods it won't.

I posted about this a few months back, it's something Apple could easily implement or just buy this company:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/hellobragi/the-dash-wireless-smart-in-ear-headphones
Additionally, Apple has filed to patent headphones that track health and fitness:
http://www.theverge.com/2014/2/18/5422066/apple-fitness-health-tracking-headphone-patent
Considering this, wireless ear pods are not out of the question.

 

[Illusion986]

$5 billion in sales is too little apparently.

2013 was $5 billion, 2008 $8 billion....sales are declining, few years later could be much less, and then "apple is not innovating" people start to complain! And we know how annoying that is...

 

[jonyive4]

What's the issue?

Believe it or not, people exist who want more than 16 GBs of storage.

enjoy carrying a second device with your phone around after syncing 250GB of music instead of using Spotify/Google Play/or iTunes Match.

 

[jkichline]

Brought to you by analysts

For people who only look at money and their own buttholes all day, this idea makes sense. But to the rest of the world, it's idiotic, especially because we have no idea what the iWatch will be. Regardless, we do know it's NOT going to be an iPod strapped to your wrist. that would be called a "Dumb Watch", or more appropriately known by it's brand name, Galaxy Gear.

My thoughts are this... no we won't see an update to the iPod Classic, Nano, Shuffle or even Touch. Well... touch may get a processor spec bump and that's about it.

However, I believe that this 5.5" mystery iPhone will not be a phone at all, but a new category of handheld media and gaming devices. Basically put the power of an Xbox One or Playstation 4 into a handheld device powered by an A7 chip that integrates directly with a TV for mobile or living room entertainment. The iWatch becomes a "key" device... enabling personalization to your computer, phone, TV, games... everything seamlessly... probably via iBeacon technology. Probably the ability to control physical environments with your hand and do other things that are hyper personal, you know like tell time

So my predictions...
iPhone 6 - 4.7", A7 processor hopefully starting at 32GB, TouchID.
iWatch - Personal tracking, time, personalization of physical objects like TV.
Apple TV - Brand new machine, A6/7 processor... games, AirPlay streaming, app store, camera for FaceTime...
New iPod - 5.5" media and gaming device targeted for kids for Christmas.
iPod Touch - Basically a slimmed down version of the iPhone meant to be cheap.

By the way, as far as launch schedule... I think we will see the iWatch and Apple TV at WWDC, perhaps even an updated iPhone 6... iPod Touch refresh anytime, but the iWatch and Apple TV wouldn't be available until September or October... maybe... with the iPod available just before Black Friday.

We shall see...

 

[xmichaelp]

enjoy carrying a second device with your phone around after syncing 250GB of music instead of using Spotify/Google Play/or iTunes Match.

I don't have a phone so I'd only be carrying one device. Also, I still prefer listening on an idiot than paying for some streaming service and paying for all that data. Not everyone uses devices the same as you. Enjoy being a condescending tool. rolleyes

 

[highdough]

I have a 12 year old (as well as a 9 year old) and I recently let her buy an iPod Touch with her own money (that she got instead of birthday and Christmas presents). Now, there's absolutely no way she's getting a phone, and what she wanted was an iPod that would be able to work as a camera, as well.

An iWatch will not fill this niche.

If they stop making iPods and only make iWatches, then they will lose a pretty big market.

Now, I also have an iPod Touch and don't have a cell phone at all, but I realize I'm an exception. There are lots of kids around my daughter's age or younger who are too young to have phones, but still want some of the elements of the iPhone.

 

[acslater017]

Poor pitiful Apple. Only 5 billion. Oh the greed of it all. I see folks everyday using their iPods, especially in the gym. Most of my children (ranging from 33 to 43) and most of the grandchildren have iPods. I use my iPod Nano with my bluetooth headphones and wear my Polar fitness watch when working out. My wife uses her's in her car. I personally could not care less about the iWatch. I have some classy watches that I prefer over an electronic gizmo, no matter how revolutionary it may be. Just my opinion.

Let's revisit this comment in 12-24 months.

Hmm...gym...working out...you know this thing is rumored to have a huge health/fitness focus, right? And who says it won't have many of the same functions as your family's iPods, and more? With respect, it sounds like a lack of imagination. 6 years ago, were you saying, "Who needs a fancy ApplePhone? I've got an iPod Mini for my music and a great Nokia phone that holds 100 contacts!"?

 

[luckydcxx]

Not without wireless EarPods it won't.

i just picked up a pair of JayBird bluetooth wireless headphones for the gym and they are fantastic. I love not having any wires.

http://www.amazon.com/Jaybird-Freed...=1398230420&sr=8-3&keywords=bluetooth+earbuds

 

[MacLC]

Caso says Apple has production targets of 5-6 million units, but believes the iWatch will "essentially replace the iPod in the consumer portion of AAPL's product lineup"

Caso is wrong. You don't throw away a $5,000,000,000 (Billion) product line. The iWatch doesn't replace the functions for which I use an iPod. Our family has five iPodTouches. No iPhones because #1) the absurd cost of it being a phone - not needed, #2) we don't have cellular service out where we live. There are large swaths of the USA and the world which don't have cell service. The high cost of the monthly or annual phone subscription plans is an unnecessary expense. We have five iPods but I would never replace them with five iPhones for these reasons.

iWatch is not an iPod.

Absolutely. The iPod is what you might call a "cash cow". A mature product that has been around a long time. It needs no advertising or discounts to sell itself. Sales are declining but profit margins remain insanely high, especially considering lack of associated promotions and R&D expense.

Apple needs to update the iPods from time to time while accepting a slow sales decline. Rejecting any updates at all and killing off the line (a la the Mac Mini?) would be a tremendous waste of profit.

 

[jicon]

I have a 12 year old (as well as a 9 year old) and I recently let her buy an iPod Touch with her own money (that she got instead of birthday and Christmas presents). Now, there's absolutely no way she's getting a phone, and what she wanted was an iPod that would be able to work as a camera, as well.

An iWatch will not fill this niche.

If they stop making iPods and only make iWatches, then they will lose a pretty big market.

Now, I also have an iPod Touch and don't have a cell phone at all, but I realize I'm an exception. There are lots of kids around my daughter's age or younger who are too young to have phones, but still want some of the elements of the iPhone.

In the same boat.

I'm more than happy with my 32GB iPod Touch rather than a phone and have been since the first gen. Thinner device. So long as I have wifi, I can get and make calls. No monthly payments.

That said, my wife insists on having a cell phone, and her CDMA phone just bit the bullet. Bought an unlocked 32GB 5S, and she's using a very, very limited $30 a month plan.... Just an ever losing game for cell phone plans in Canada, even if the phones are off contract.

Now to try and sell her 32GB 5G iPod Touch Product RED.
I'll have to see what used ones go for these days.

 

[the8thark]

iWatch is not an iPod.

iPad is not netbook either. But it was invented to do everything a netbook can do and better.

In that vein the iWatch could replace some of the iPods. And be designed to do a better job. I can see the iWatch replace the nano and shuffle. The touch is a tough cookie and I think it'll still exist. And the classic will die as soon as it's sales drop. I'm not sure enough people want what the classic offers anymore.

 

[GregA]

I can see the iPod shuffle being replaced by something that might be an iWatch but not the complete iPod line. No way.

The shuffle and Nano might be replaced by a watch with a touch screen easily enough.

Even if Apple leaves the iPod nano and shuffle to die like the classic, I have a hard time believing that they'll abandon the touch.

I agree they won't get rid of the iPod Touch.

But if they increase the screen size of the iPhone screen, perhaps they'll increase the iPod Touch screen size too and rename it an "iPad Nano".

 

[Icaras]

I'm curious as to how you think a watch could replace a high capacity iPod. I got the Classic because I wanted/needed a lot of space, why would a device with 16 or 32 GBs replace that?

You're right, no I don't think a watch could replace a iPod Classic. Sorry if my post was unclear. I had a post earlier before that saying that I think the iPod Touch should replace the Classic. 128GB on the Touch is inevitable, so I see that as the replacement right there. As another poster mentioned, at that point, the iPod Touch should just drop the "Touch" part of it's name and just become the iPod. Back to basics would be good for the iPod business IMO.

So to clarify again, if the iWatch were to replace any member of the iPod family as suggested by this article, I believe it would be both the Nano and shuffle. And as for the Classic, I believe the iPod Touch would be the sole successor. In any instance though, I just hope Apple doesn't decide to drop the entire iPod brand.

 

[Cyborg21]

Apple, keep iPod Touch and make it for kids.