Recent iPod Shuffle Shortages Due to Supplier Changes, Not Imminent Discontinuation

[D*I*S_Frontman]

Maybe it is because I lived through the 80's and the era of the Sony Walkman (the higher end ones costing over $200 back then!) that I still think an iPod Shuffle is absolutely awesome.

Two days worth of continuous digital music (no tape hiss, wow/flutter, nor skipping like a CD player) 10-12 hours of battery life, no moving parts, a housing strong enough to throw like a Chinese throwing star into the nearest gypsum wall and still not affect playback, and in a form factor that is smaller than a book of matches--all for $49?

Sure, smartphones can handle the job with ease now, but sometimes you DON'T want to be tethered to a phone when working out.

The only improvement or innovation that should be made with Shuffles, as mentioned in earlier posts, is doubling the storage every 18 months or so, in deference to Moore's Law. Beyond that it is pretty much perfect, IMHO.

 

[Rychiar]

Putting a screen on it would ruin it. The only benefit to the shuffle is the physical buttons so you can change songs without looking at the device.

That was the main detriment to the shuffle and the reason why most people never wanted one. It's a lame gimmick for people who don't really care about music and can just throw their top 40 hits into a device. There's no reason you can't hit buttons without looking at a nano as well and get the same results

 

[Supermule]

Yeah, this is still my go to device for running.

Physical buttons that require no looking still have a place in this world. Which is probably why the older gen Nanos were and still are popular with athletes.

And, yes, wish they threw in a tiny fm receiver.

Exactly. Most of time I run with the 5. gen Nano with at click-wheel. Works superb (and it has the radio).

 

[Porco]

"Supplier Changes", eh?

If only there was a single word for rearranging something in a less than elegant manner… oh well, I'm going to walk off in a small, lurching manner now.

 

[supersalo]

Actually ordered one Wednesday after seeing that story -- Apple quoted 2-3 weeks but just emailed that it's available for pickup today.

Same here. Ordered yesterday with a 7-10 business day shipping estimate.
Shipped last night and delivered today.

I'll hold onto it for a bit longer to see if it really was a supplier change causing the shortage or are they really being discontinued.

 

[nutmac]

Physical buttons that require no looking still have a place in this world. Which is probably why the older gen Nanos were and still are popular with athletes.

And, yes, wish they threw in a tiny fm receiver.

Current generation iPod nano (7th) actually have physical buttons for all but previous track/rewind. Sleep/wake button on the top can be programmed to skip to next track when double clicked and to the right side are volume up/down, and pause/play buttons. And of course, included EarPods and many third party headphones/earphones have all the buttons on iPod shuffle.

And it has larger storage (16GB vs. 2GB), screen for when you need it, USB integration with cars, FM radio, Bluetooth, pedometer, and twice the battery life. Of course, it is a bit larger and costs $100 more.

 

[ttss6]

I wish they'd add in the FM receiver to the IPhones. That is my favorite feature on my 6G Nano

 

[michelepri]

Like their new junk will make them better. Just lost an entire FCX Pro edit because instead of letting you save, they think they can do it better. Will not last long until everyone moves to premiere. They used to be good Iweb could have developed into a web publishing platform, but no. I miss Steve Jobs.

 

[Bryan Bowler]

Like their new junk will make them better. Just lost an entire FCX Pro edit because instead of letting you save, they think they can do it better. Will not last long until everyone moves to premiere. They used to be good Iweb could have developed into a web publishing platform, but no. I miss Steve Jobs.

What does this have to do with the iPod Shuffle?

 

[Eduardo Forneck]

for the price it cost, should be at least 4 GB, 20$ more for 8 GB

 

[Pakaku]

Minor aesthetic griping about shuffles and similarly colorful iPods: the button labels are gray instead of matching the device color. I don't know why, but that always irked me. Here's a completely necessary comparison GIF depicting my preference:

Image

It would cost too much money to print with different coloured inks. :O

 

[orioncrystalice]

I'd love a Nano that actually had competent space. as in 64 gb. ugh

 

[Rychiar]

I'd love a Nano that actually had competent space. as in 64 gb. ugh

why would anyone want 64gb of music on a device with no screen? how would you even organize and sift through that chaos

 

[selfsilent]

Why is it that, when other Apple product inventories fall, there is a redesign about to be released but with this particular model, it's just a supplier change?

Why could there not be a new one coming out?

 

[thekeyring]

Shouldn't have bought 100, hoping to sell them for a profit on Amazon

Good luck Dontt Amazon take like a 30% cut of sales? And there are people selling on their who's prices are simply set to be $1 less than the cheapest price from someone else.

----------

Like their new junk will make them better. Just lost an entire FCX Pro edit because instead of letting you save, they think they can do it better. Will not last long until everyone moves to premiere. They used to be good Iweb could have developed into a web publishing platform, but no. I miss Steve Jobs.

This is madness!
The development and release of FCP X and the decision to discontinue iWeb were both made when Jobs was CEO.

 

[Barrierfreeman]

You would think the iPod would always remain in their line up. After all, Apple always touts how music is in their DNA.

It is. Sadly that music is U2.

why would anyone want 64gb of music on a device with no screen? how would you even organize and sift through that chaos

The Nano has a screen.

 

[MH01]

no reason they couldn't sell this piece of junk with a screen at the same price these days. and wtf is the nano capped at 16gb for

Maybe the name of the product might give you a hint why it does not have a screen. And if you take away physical controls and replace it with a touch screen, it will be a piece of junk.

----------

Maybe it is because I lived through the 80's and the era of the Sony Walkman (the higher end ones costing over $200 back then!) that I still think an iPod Shuffle is absolutely awesome.

Two days worth of continuous digital music (no tape hiss, wow/flutter, nor skipping like a CD player) 10-12 hours of battery life, no moving parts, a housing strong enough to throw like a Chinese throwing star into the nearest gypsum wall and still not affect playback, and in a form factor that is smaller than a book of matches--all for $49?

Sure, smartphones can handle the job with ease now, but sometimes you DON'T want to be tethered to a phone when working out.

The only improvement or innovation that should be made with Shuffles, as mentioned in earlier posts, is doubling the storage every 18 months or so, in deference to Moore's Law. Beyond that it is pretty much perfect, IMHO.

I've gone back to using my tape Walkman now and than. The creation of a tape using current music was the most fun, old school.

Not sure you want that much storage with shuffle, going through the playlists would be painful, the controls are made for a device with limited music

 

[Tech198]

No... don't kill this..

You may be able to do more on a larger ipod, but its too big for something all u wanna do is listen to music on.

 

[satchmo]

Current generation iPod nano (7th) actually have physical buttons for all but previous track/rewind. Sleep/wake button on the top can be programmed to skip to next track when double clicked and to the right side are volume up/down, and pause/play buttons. And of course, included EarPods and many third party headphones/earphones have all the buttons on iPod shuffle.

And it has larger storage (16GB vs. 2GB), screen for when you need it, USB integration with cars, FM radio, Bluetooth, pedometer, and twice the battery life. Of course, it is a bit larger and costs $100 more.

True. I've considered the current nano. Usually during moments when I get impatient using the voiceover feature on the Shuffle.

The previous track would be nice, but not a deal breaker. But don't the EarPods handle that? I recall something like 3 clicks on cord controls to go back and 2 to go forward?

As for price, a 16gb Nano should be $99, 32gb at $129.
The Shuffle should be no more than $39.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

If anyone has not seen what iPod sales are these day, they are a blip. Ironically the iTunes Store which originally was a loss leader to sell iPods now grosses more revenue for Apple than the sum of all iPods sold each quarter.

We all know the reason -- smartphones killed the need for most people to carry a separate phone and music player. Then add in the rise of streaming services. iPods are now a niche item. I have a nano connected in my car and it stays there 24/7.

It's silly to think it would do Apple any good to lower the price or expand storage for the same price. It's letting these devices ride out until they are truly no longer worth selling. All it would do is lower Apple's margin on these items, accelerated there demise. Honestly, a $49 Shuffle goes to $29 or a $149 nano goes to $99. A stampede to the Apple Store will not occur. A few bucks is neither going to motivate once to buy or not buy at this point -- and they can frequently be found for less than list at non-Apple stores anyway.

 

[D3an.]

I am glad that they are still available

 

[Macist]

There's still a Shuffle?

I had no idea.

 

[Tech198]

A shuffle is smaller to carry round with you while u'r jogging than strapping a nano on your arm like a brick. That's the reason they came out.

Now, Apple realizes u can do just the same with thing, and more, with a bigger nano, some users may not want to have video when there out for a run, but do want something small when they wanna listen to music..


Give us the choice of both worlds...... not want Apple decides whats right for us.....

If the shuffle does discontinue, i could see a decline by uses who just want portable mp3 only player... However,the market will force us ... That's choice for ya Either that, or those users will just all flock to eBay, in the hope they can still get one.

 

[AlecZ]

Apple could at LEAST put some 2011-level flash capacity in these things. It's more like 2006 right now. Come on, 16GB USB 3.0 flash drives are $27 for a pack of 3 at Costco.

 

[x5tuu]

Maybe it is because I lived through the 80's and the era of the Sony Walkman (the higher end ones costing over $200 back then!) that I still think an iPod Shuffle is absolutely awesome.

Two days worth of continuous digital music (no tape hiss, wow/flutter, nor skipping like a CD player) 10-12 hours of battery life, no moving parts, a housing strong enough to throw like a Chinese throwing star into the nearest gypsum wall and still not affect playback, and in a form factor that is smaller than a book of matches--all for $49?

Sure, smartphones can handle the job with ease now, but sometimes you DON'T want to be tethered to a phone when working out.

The only improvement or innovation that should be made with Shuffles, as mentioned in earlier posts, is doubling the storage every 18 months or so, in deference to Moore's Law. Beyond that it is pretty much perfect, IMHO.

I totally agree with everything other than increasing the capacity, I genuinely don't think it needs changing at all ... and for some to suggest boosting it to >16gb ... totally idiotic