iPod Update was Lame
So a few random points about Apple's lame show/announcement yesterday:
1)They needed 1 hour and live coverage of this event to introduce a few minor features to 2 iPods? I bet the reporters are wondering why they were begged to attend. I bet the audience wondered why they paid admission and/or even attended.
2)The Nano update added really 1 feature, the accelerator thingy that if you shake it will make it shuffle. Nice idea, too bad Apple didn't come up with it...it's been around for over a year with some cell phones being shaken to tell you how much batter life is left. Moreover, is such a feature even necessary? Is it that hard to use your fingers or use their new over-priced headphones that control a few functions? It's cool, but adding significant size jumps would have been better (in addition to essentially bringing back the older style which I like).
3)The Nano update to 16gig was the biggest flop (next to the Classic and iTouch which I will rant on next). That's it? 16gig? I've been waiting for some type of flash device from Apple that is 32gig, 64gig, or larger for over a year now. Sure, I can still buy the old $499 32gig iTouch or the new $399 iTouch but those are overpriced for a MUSIC FAN.
4)On to the Classic...so they killed the 160 and 80 and made a 120g. Ok. That's it. Lovely. With the physical size of the Classic they couldn't have made it flash at 120g? Sure they could have...I can buy 32gig Flash sticks for $45...and that's RETAIL...if Apple bought 100,000 of those or more to stuff 64gig or 128gig in the Classic, surely Apple's price would have been much lower than $45. Yes, I know there are technical differences between all flash media but let's not get into the weeds and nanoseconds. So all Apple did was make it 120g and drop the price a bit (which in effect is the same price).
4a)I think Apple has a feeling that the Classic does not sell well...well, it's probably because it's still the heaviest iPod, it's hard-disk which is not as fast as the flash based iPods, and the battery doesn't really last that long. Apple probably thinks it doesn't sell well "because who needs 160gigs?". I do! And others do! It's because I have a large music collection. It's also because other's out there may have large VIDEO collections.
5)Moving on to the iTouch (which is what I really wanted to buy after the announcement), what a totally lame update. I can play some buggy games? Boy, sign me up. Apple didn't increase the memory size (and they have plenty of physical space to do so) but did drop the price a bit.
Apple seems to be having an identity crisis with the iPod line. Over the past few generations, names have changed often (iPod, iPod Video, iPod Classic), some (iTouch) are seemingly trying to become gaming devices, some (Nano) radically change shape every generation.
My biggest beef is that there were no sizeable increases in memory storage. Apple touts being able to play all your wonderful music and videos (oh, and now games) on your iPod _____ but the sizes are barely enough to do any of that.
I own (yes, own) over 2000 cds. All ripped I have just under 20,000 192k mp3s. I know I am the minority here, but that eats up about 120gigs. Sure, I don't listen to every single song, but I also DO NOT WATCH videos. Therefore, if you were to give my 160gig Classic to an average MUSIC fan but an ABOVE average VIDEO fan, that fan is going to fill the unit more with video.
I was hoping to see:
-iTouch go to 64gig or larger (I would have stood in line the next day to buy)
-Classic to go Flash at 100gig or larger (would have raced to the store)
-Nano to go to 32gig (might have gotten one as a 2nd iPod just for fun)
Now I guess I have to wait (and pray) until March or so (it's been over a year since the iPod family were last updated).
Was anyone else as bored with yesterdays announcement as me?
-Eric
