NewSc2 said:
We heard something really similar to that when every other company released video-playing mp3 players before Apple did, and Jobs said he didn't see anybody wanting to have portable video. Well, Apple bit its tongue and released it, calling it "innovation".
You know what, Steve never said Apple would NEVER do a video iPod. What he said was that video just didn't make sense at the time. For one thing, he said that there was practically zero demand from iPod users for video. Then he qualified his statement by saying that the situation might be different in the future, but the media being what it is, his comment was reduced to the overly simplistic (but easy to report), "APPLE WILL NEVER MAKE A VIDEO IPOD."
And for your information, the release of the video iPod was innovative because Apple launched it in conjunction with $1.99 music videos and TV shows on the iTunes Store. Less than a year later, there are like 250 TV shows you can buy on iTunes, from the latest hits like Grey's Anatomy to old classics like Knight Rider.
I always get a little peeved that people are so easily dismissive of the iTunes piece of the iPod pie. iPod wouldn't be where it is today without iTunes and the iTunes Store. If it took Apple 18 months to convince the music companies to sell their music for $0.99 on iTunes, then don't you think Apple made the right decision by waiting to launch the video iPod simultaneously with iTunes video offerings? iPod is nothing without content and Steve clearly believes that iPod should never lack for legal music/video content, ever.
I, for one, know from an Apple iPod engineer that Apple had a working video iPod in the labs more than 2 years ago, but it's quite clear that Steve had the patience and foresight to wait until the time was right for video, instead of launching a product into a vacuum. History is full of products that - while technical marvels - utterly failed because they were before their time. Newton was one. The Tucker automobile was another.
NewSc2 said:
I'm a big iPod fan (i've purchased 3) but wireless capabilities is the way of the future. I don't see ourselves in 10 years still being limited by wired headphones and such. Maybe it'll be easier than the Zune (haven't seen the demo) but the idea of beaming a song for somebody else to download/hear is pretty cool to me.
Glad you are such a big fan of the iPod.
I own 4 iPods myself.
Your prediction about wireless isn't necessarily wrong, but what Steve understands is 1) timing is important and 2) technology in context is even more important. Microsoft never understood this - they're all about feature bullet points and will enthusiastically push out new tech that ends up being poorly implemented and doesn't even end up solving the problems that consumers face in using technology.
Zune is wireless for the sake of wireless. It's wireless crap. Having wireless will not make Zune a better device - in fact, I think most people will soon come to the conclusion that it's crap because there will be no other Zune users within 100 miles to "squirt" each other with.
What people seem to forget is that Apple isn't stupid. It's like all the bruhala that erupted last year when geeks of every stripe claimed iPod would finally be killed because the music cell phone would be the killer product. What's funny is how these people assume Apple suddenly sent all its engineers home and decided, "Well, we've sold 50 million iPods. Time to call it day. No new iPods, ever."
As is now all but certain, Apple has been working on an iPod phone for a while. So much for music phones killing the iPod - maybe this year's iPod, but Apple is not a company to stand still.
Same thing with wireless. What people seem to forget is that Apple already has shown the way in terms of wireless. I'm talking about the broadcasting features already built in to iTunes via Bonjour networking. If you go to any college dorm or library, you'll notice a few to a dozen iTunes music libraries that will show up in your iTunes. People are already streaming their music for free, direct from iTunes, over 802.11.
iTunes Sharing has already been doing the "music community" thing for a long time now.
So it seems quite obvious to me that a wireless iPod will be able to pick up these local iTunes streams like a Mac or PC running iTunes can already do.
If Apple wanted to push the technology a bit, then iPods would be able to stream music iPod-to-Mac(s), iPod-to-PC(s), and iPod-to-iPod(s). None of these limited point-to-point crap like Zune. No slow, time-bomb file transfers. Instead, we'll see
live streaming from one iPod to many iPods, PCs, or Macs. No music file will actually be transferred, just as in iTunes sharing, which allows Apple to avoid the messiness of wrapping files in DRM like with Zune. A wireless iPod could tune in simultaneously with many different streams at the same time, and it'd be instantaneous because no transfers actually occur.
Sure, you won't be able to take the streams with you, but wireless iPod with iTunes Sharing would be infinitely more usable and fun than some geeky, slow, unworkable Zune model.
So I say just wait. I mean, can you imagine how badly Zune will blow up after Microsoft has launched the product (when they've committed to expensive manufacturing and the R&D is finished) and Apple launches a wireless iPod that actually works like a wireless device is supposed to?
Remember - just think "iPod with iTunes Sharing" and compare that to Zune, and realize with a smile that Microsoft is rushing forward into one of the biggest trainwrecks in music history. Apple's just waiting for them to build up momentum so the spectacle will be spectacular when the tracks get cut out from under them!
