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

The Beat Goes On: Nano, Touch, Beatles, Wireless?

Status
Not open for further replies.
If new ipod does have wifi...how likely it is that they will sell both wifi and non wifi versions?

Toshiba has a player out, same model with wifi and no wifi. No wifi is 50 bucks less. That will be best case scenario for people that worry about having wifi will have an option not to have it. People that would love to have wifi (like me) can have that too.
 
Zukum said:
What are the possibilities that a touch-pod would lack enough hardware featured on the iphone that they can get rid of the chin and forehead? Just 100% screen.
Click to expand...

It's possible...............if the thickness of the product is increased instead.
 
I think it's a strong possibility. This way the low-end model doesn't induce sticker shock, and the high-end model will have all the bells and whistles for those who want it.

nirvana06 said:
If new ipod does have wifi...how likely it is that they will sell both wifi and non wifi versions?

Toshiba has a player out, same model with wifi and no wifi. No wifi is 50 bucks less. That will be best case scenario for people that worry about having wifi will have an option not to have it. People that would love to have wifi (like me) can have that too.
Click to expand...
 
Some very good points onion guy- ;)

onionperson654 said:
The debate over the next generation high-end ipod (primarily the WI-FI debate, as most people expect widescreen and multi-touch (without this, it wouldn't be much of an update) gravitates toward two areas. First, the discussion over cannibalizing the iphone, which is very hard to handicap because of a) uncertainty in the manufacturing costs b) ignorance of Apple's long-term strategies and c) the personal preferences of high-level apple executives.
Click to expand...

We have incomplete info in terms of product costs and design, but we do have the benefit of some of these rumors. From the rumors we can try to put pieces together, and see what might fit.

The one argument that doesn't hold water when speculating on Apple's actions is, "Well, they've never done it before so they won't do it now." The reason being, when Apple is exploring internally what new products and features they might develop, I don't think Steve Jobs answer is ever, "We shouldn't do that, because we've never done it before." They would rigorously discuss the pro's and con's, then decide.

Secondly, however, is the debate over what the ipod should be, and this is where a new generation of ipods could change everything (although the reference to a new product in 2008 is intriguing). The ipod is, even with video capabilities, first, foremost, and almost exclusively a music player. It has evolved from that and is optomized for playing and managing (with itunes integration and the click wheel) music. For a music player, a widescreen would add a larger list of songs (not a huge bonus) and the ability to touch one's music (ok, that IS big, but not a real upgrade in terms of functionality). When it comes to have a small unit for exercising (nano, for some a shuffle) or a large music carrying device for one's library (standard ipod), then one has to admit that apple has fairly come up with a top of the line product. Sure, additions such as bluetooth for headphones, smaller sizes, and more storage would enhance the player even more (there is much more room to grow), but for the purpose of playing music there is only so much functionality that you can have in a portable device, and thus, only so much room to expand. Apple will have to focus on making its devices smaller, have larger capacity, and have more and better extras to enhance the music listening experience, but technology has opened the door to something more (ipad, inex, ipro (good name for an Apple PDA) ipex, ijoin, ijust, iconnect, (just trying to stake my claim)...
Click to expand...

I agree that a widescreen adds little to music playback, and potentially hurts it in certain aspects (by eliminating the clickwheel controller.) Obviously it provides for better video playback. Is that alone worth it?

The touch screen has gotten a lot of raves, and some implementation would be needed without the clickwheel. The UI for a touchscreen iPod is also a question. Some have suggested a virtual clickwheel (indeed Apple has at least 1 patent regarding this), and many point at the iPhone interface. The iPhone UI is wonderful because it manages so many tasks so well. For simply music and video playback, the versatility of a touchscreen interface seems less of a benefit. It's great eye candy, but how much value does that actually add given that such a device will inevitably cost more than the current 5.5G?

In 2001 when Apple introduced the ipod, it was a major, scratch that, huge step for the music industry (as Steve said in that keynote). You could listen to large amounts of music everywhere you went with good quality and battery life. But everyone is used to that now. With the rise of the Web 2.0 and the miniturization of electronics new avenues such as portable video, mobile internet access, and on-demand multimedia, new niches have opened up, and Apple has done very little to exploit them. Apple got into the iphone business for two powerful reasons: 1) current phones pretty much suck at doing anything more than calling (it took years for text messaging to even get decent) and 2) The cell phone market is not only HUGE, but necessary to many people (I suppose some people's ipods are necessary to them as well), and Apple did a great job with the iphone, but Apple has danced around nearly every aspect of one relatively new area...

...the Portable Media Player (PMP). They have personal music players (also pmps, but ipod has taken over the mp3 player name), computers (multi-media device), the leading media store and program, and even a home media center device. The iphone is not a pmp (although it does a great job as one) because it comes from a demand for music players one one end and a demand for cell phones and data (internet, email, etc.) business on the other. One strong piece of evidence is the capacity, which leaves little room for video. Another is the lack of additional support for media on either the itunes/ipod end (no wireless synching) or on the mobile platform end where, except for youtube, it has little additional access to multi-media. Companies such as Archos, Cowon, Verizion, and now Nokia have done much more to bring media access to portable devices, and some have done a fairly good job.
Click to expand...

The main question here is what is the size of the user base for portable music vs. portable video. I do think the PMP market has been somewhat underserved by current products. Most have small screens (like the 5.5G), or are too big to fit comfortably in a pocket (IMO the cutoff for truly portable devices.)

The more interoperability you add, the greater the utility for video playback IMO. Some people will rip DVD's, others will sync TV shows and video podcasts, others will watch YouTube and other streaming video, others could stream video to a TV set or to AppleTV, etc. If you add all those little applications together, then I think the market for video playback increases (especially in a pocketable form factor like the iPod/iPhone.)

What this means for ipod is that it can use its ipod leverage much as it did with the iphone and make the stubby (or perhaps nano) the top of the music player line, as they do all of the music (with the possible exception of storage size, but in the next year or so we should see that difference disapear) interaction as well as the large ipod. THEN, use the ipod touch (perhaps a new name after "ipod") to branch into a new market. Widescreen (which in a year could get 720/480 resolution, much like the Archos 605) with the high contrast quality and ease of use of the iphone would make it a media device, but it wouldn't end there. WI-FI would be essential for a Personal Media Device (if only because so many competitors have it) because of the ability not only to synch with itunes but to access media off of itunes and, through Safari, the rest of the internet. All of the world's video and music on seamless (that's the Apple key that they have shown with itunes) demand, with the profits going to Apple.
Click to expand...

I completely agree with the scenario of a flash-based 5.5G successor, that slots between the Nano and the new iPod Touch. There are a significant number of users who primarily listen to music, and it seems smart to have a big iPod that still focuses on that. The existing Nano cannot be increased in size, as that totally goes against the development of portable devices- they get smaller, not bigger. There's no reason to eliminate the Nano form factor, which is Apple's best seller.

And because media is no longer just about a picture or song or video, make it truly multi-media by allowing full integration with other media. A USB port, so one can download pictures directly from a phone or show pictures on a computer screen, tv, or projector (or even use the WI-FI or Bluetooth). A built-in (albeit lower resolution) camera to record media (eventually upgradable to video or VOIP enabled). A Voice recorder (seriously, how cheap would that be to add-on) to overtake that entire market in one fell sweep. A platform for showing slideshows (powerpoint/keynote) and other buisiness related multi-media. A device that would link with (and perhaps evolve to replace) Apple TV and DVRs to make television mobile and facilitate streaming to and from TV sets, with the ability to pass the floundering HD-Disc market. The list doesn't stop there, and with widespread implimentation of PMPs, new possibilities that have yet to be concieved would become reality. Even PMA/Office functions such as calendars, email, widgets, and beefier applications would fit under the multi-media umbrella.
Click to expand...

All of these applications are either already here, or are coming sooner or later. This is true whether or not Apple has them or not. Those who argue that Apple will never include wifi in an iPod need to consider the rest of the market. If you believe some feature simply isn't useful, then that's one thing. But Apple can't ignore adding useful functionality simply to avoid sales cannibalization (which simply isn't an issue since the closer 2 products are to each other, the closer the pricing, and thus the closer the profit margins.)

In a very real sense, I don't even consider the iPod and iPhone as 2 different product lines. They are both mobile, portable devices. The question is, how does Apple maximize profitability in this market AS A WHOLE? Some overlapping is not bad (in fact it is inevitable), if the total pie is bigger.

Best of all, everything in the above list Apple HAS ALREADY DONE, and with much of it on the ipod, we know the technology is there. The software exists on computers, and this leaves Apple the opportunity to do what it does even better than software and hardware, the integration of the two. For some (such as video, VOIP, and powerpoint/keynote), they’re not quite there in a mobile device, but for most if not all of these areas they can get a powerful start.

...

And, if that market merges with the phone market coming from another direction, then they will really have the opportunity (I think it is important to say that with a limited size and the chokehold that the phone service companies have on their market, iphone is not a directed attack at the PMP market, but rather, as stated above, at an extremely large market with dismal hardware capabilities (seriously, who uses their phone to search the internet/check email/listen to music?)) to dominate. From MP3 player to PMP to cell phone to laptop, Apple with either dominate or have a sizable and secure market share, something NO other company can attest to, which makes APPLE THE KING OF CONVERGENCE.

So sure, Apple could ignore this market), or make only a feable attempt at it by ignoring all of the interoperability that WI-FI and more technologies and partnerships have to offer, but that very interoperability is Apple’s strongest point, and who wouldn’t love seeing Apple bring-it-all-together?. We’ve seen the hardware, OS X mobile opens the door for software, and so even if their strategy doesn’t include PMPs, why not take a bite off of them anyways for the cost of a WI-FI module and some software updates? Next Wednesday, Apple has to decide whether it will wait (why?) or get on board, because if it does it soon, it can be in the driver’s seat in no time.
Click to expand...

Apple is the king of convergence. Many people argued against adding video playback prior to the 5G iPod intro, saying it would make the iPod too complicated. That argument makes no sense whatsoever. It's one extra item in the iPod menu called 'Video', how complicated is that? Oh the agony!

The same goes for other added functionality too. While the benefit of other apps of course varies and must evaluationed individually, the 'complexity' of adding new apps to the iPod is simply a non-issue. Has anyone belabored the fact that the iPhone does too much? Does an extra launcher button for Safari or YouTube induce confusion among users? Of course not- the UI of the iPhone is what truly sets it apart from other phones (the feature set is actually similar and in many cases less than competing phones.)

There's little reason to use the iPhone's rich multitouch UI (along with the extra CPU, display hardware, rotation sensors, etc.) that is optimized for multiple applications and features, if you're only going to ever use it for media playback. It adds too much to the cost of the iPod. You can't expect to strip out a couple of wireless radios from a $600 product, and suddenly expect Apple to be able to sell it profitably for $299.
 
This may have already been addressed, but does anyone know if Macrumors will be doing live coverage of the September 5th event? Any other outlets?
 
What exactly is the appeal of wi-fi on the iPod? Lots of people seem to want it, but I personally don't get it. Assuming a lack of rich Internet capability for now (and I am indeed assuming this), what's the appeal? Did the Zune utilize its wi-fi for anything apart from its ridiculous sharing feature, which is obviously a non-starter with DRMed media? Buying music directly from the iPod holds zero appeal for me, as does wireless computer-to-iPod transfer. Can someone enlighten me as to why we need wi-fi on the iPod?
 
Bimmi said:
What exactly is the appeal of wi-fi on the iPod? Lots of people seem to want it, but I personally don't get it. Assuming a lack of rich Internet capability for now (and I am indeed assuming this), what's the appeal? Did the Zune utilize its wi-fi for anything apart from its ridiculous sharing feature, which is obviously a non-starter with DRMed media? Buying music directly from the iPod holds zero appeal for me, as does wireless computer-to-iPod transfer. Can someone enlighten me as to why we need wi-fi on the iPod?
Click to expand...

I'm assuming that if it has WiFi it will have a browser. Or eventually will get one through updates or a hack.

I want wifi to browse the net not so much buy music on the go. We'll see a lot of different applications that can use wifi , like instant messaging programs and maybe VOIP.
 
That's a warrantless assumption, given that the rumors are for a iPod very similar in hardware to an iPhone. If the new iPod has a touchscreen and runs OS X, including Safari, YouTube, even iChat is rudimentary for Apple since it has already done the development (except for iChat).

The Zune was based on an old Toshiba player, and obviously didn't run an advanced OS capable of something like Safari. Plus MS would have had to develop a new browser from scratch for it. I agree song sharing is not much to get excited about, especially since Apple would also need to implement some sort of DRM. And wireless synchronization doesn't hold too much appeal to me, since I'd rather be docked and charging the battery. Wireless streaming is different, as it might be cool to stream music from your larger computer iTunes library.

Anyway, IF Apple includes wifi, you have to consider all the possibilities before drawing any conclusions. They may or may not have certain features, but why assume it from the get-go?

Bimmi said:
What exactly is the appeal of wi-fi on the iPod? Lots of people seem to want it, but I personally don't get it. Assuming a lack of rich Internet capability for now (and I am indeed assuming this), what's the appeal? Did the Zune utilize its wi-fi for anything apart from its ridiculous sharing feature, which is obviously a non-starter with DRMed media? Buying music directly from the iPod holds zero appeal for me, as does wireless computer-to-iPod transfer. Can someone enlighten me as to why we need wi-fi on the iPod?
Click to expand...
 
ksz said:
The argument rests on price. Cost of purchase and cost of ownership are always a differentiating factor between products. The iPhone has a higher cost of purchase and a considerable cost of ownership, neither of which an iPod suffers from. Some will be swayed towards the iPod and only the iPod because of price, and will buy a zero-dollar mobile phone elsewhere.
Click to expand...

The total cost of ownership for a wifi iPod (prob. in the 400-500 dollar range) and any normal cel phone plan is about on par with the iPhone. I don't see how what you say is relevant. You assume too much in your arguments. A wifi iPod will hurt iPhone sales.
 
OldTimey said:
The total cost of ownership for a wifi iPod (prob. in the 400-500 dollar range) and any normal cel phone plan is about on par with the iPhone. I don't see how what you say is relevant. You assume too much in your arguments. A wifi iPod will hurt iPhone sales.
Click to expand...

Sure it will hurt iPhone sales, but the iPod and the iPhone are in the same department, so why would Apple care? Either way, they are making a whole lot of money. It costs 250 to make an iPhone. They charge 600 for it. Pretty sure they are making enough money.
 
ksz said:
Those who want a phone will buy a phone, iPod notwithstanding. Those who don't want a phone will consider only the iPod. I don't think iPods dip into iPhone sales, but vice-versa.
Click to expand...


I WANT a phone, but I already HAVE one. Anyone with enough money for an iPod probably has a cel phone plan, at least in this country.

What I want is an iPod/Phone/PDA, of which the iPhone IS NOT...it is an iPod Nano/Phone/PDA. Even if I bought an iPhone, i'd still take a 30G or higher iPod anywhere i go.

If the iPod has WIFI, then I don't need the iPhone, because if it is OSX based, and has WIFI, the iPod will meet my: iPod/PDA needs, and my Nokia 6030 will meet my phone needs.

If it doesnt, then I'll trash my current celphone, get an iPhone, and keep my iPod 5G!!!

You're just not thinking about it. EVERYONE has a cel phone already...these aren't two separate markets here...there is considerable overlap.

therefore,

A WIFI iPod will dip into iPhone sales. Probably more than the iPhone has dipped into iPod sales. People who want an iPhone already have a phone! They just want the iPhone because of all the xtras it affords them. People with iPhones are constantly in places with wifi. EDGE is too slow for most real-life web use. If they need EDGE then they will get an iPhone...if they want more than 8GB of space, AND wifi, and don't need EDGE, they will get WIFI iPod! Right now, their only option is iPhone+a 5G iPod. With a wifi iPod, all the people (LIKE ME) in this category will have another option:

either: iPhone + 5.5G ipod

or: wifi iPod + normal cel phone

sign me up for the latter...

It's common sense.
 
cammo427 said:
Sure it will hurt iPhone sales
Click to expand...

THANK YOU...this is all i am saying...i hope it has WIFI btw...


cammo427 said:
but the iPod and the iPhone are in the same department, so why would Apple care? Either way, they are making a whole lot of money. It costs 250 to make an iPhone. They charge 600 for it. Pretty sure they are making enough money.
Click to expand...

I don't know if they care...and I don't really care if they do or not...but it is a factor. Perhaps not a big enough factor (i hope) to stop them from releasing a WIFI iPod...but a factor nonetheless.
 
OldTimey said:
People with iPhones are constantly in places with wifi.

iPhone + 5.5G ipod, or, wifi iPod + normal cel phone

sign me up for the latter...

It's common sense.
Click to expand...

exactly. In the next few years wifi is going to be everywhere. you will be able to pick up free hits from any mid sized town. Sitting at my kitchen table in a suburban neighborhood I already get 12+ hits, many of which are unlocked. an iPod with wifi means everyone will have some sort of use for them.

honestly what teenager uses the home computer for anything but the internet and instant messenger? maybe games, but hardcore gamers aren't going to be running on a mac anyway. if the ipod had wifi parents wouldn't have to buy a computer for their kid, they could buy a 400 dollar iPod and their kid could do everything they wanted with it, and the parents could keep their computer.

10-15 year olds, iChat and their blog (myspace or xanga)
16-22 year olds, facebook, email, news, youtube
23-30 year olds, email, stocks

the list goes on. an iPod with wifi means a happier world.
 
I already have an iPhone and a Nano. So what ever Apple introduces doesn't make a whole lot of difference to me. I am more interested in new content introduction for the iPod that is applicable to the iPhone. I am particularly hopeful that they will introduce an ebook reader for both platforms.
 
One opinion.

Pocket space is valuable. People want the internet everywhere they go now. Apple will not be left behind on this new trend. Archos, Nokia, Creative, are already moving in that direction.

And I find the cannabilizing of iPhone sales statement funny. Apple built the iPhone exclusively for AT&T (in the US). Apple knows we ALL cant goto AT&T, dont want to goto AT&T, and maybe dont particullary like the iPhone. Apple is not AT&T. AT&T wants you to buy iPhones, I dont think Apple cares if you buy an iPhone or an iPod, as long as you buy something. Heck, they could charge $400 for a touch iPod, and probably make more profit per unit than the iPhone.

Think about this logically. They dont give us full screen, touch iPod (in order to save face on the iPhone), and hence they sell an additional 500k iPhones over the next year. Or they release a 6g touch iPod, and sell 5 million of those in a year.

Apple will keep its deal with AT&T. Whats to stop them from making the 6g iPod 100x better than the iPhone. AT&T might cry, but Apple will LOL all the way to the money store.
 
Am I the only person who remembers Apple's wonderful patents for various gestures :
http://images.appleinsider.com/patent-mtsd-070802-1.jpg
http://www.slashgear.com/gallery/data_files_old/4/apl_060203_patent1BIG.jpg
http://regmedia.co.uk/2006/02/13/apple_ui_2.jpg
http://regmedia.co.uk/2006/02/13/apple_ui_1.jpg
http://images.appleinsider.com/patent-mtsd-070802-2.jpg
http://www.myitablet.com/gallery/files/5/2/2/Apple_MultiTouch_Gesture_Directory_Patent_2.JPG
http://www.engadget.com/media/2006/02/apple_tablet_patent.jpg

I mean... It was all over the blogs many months/about a year ago I recall? Do people suffer from short term memory loss?

So, touch screen IPOD? I think that is the least of our worries....

Ease of use when screen isn't visible? I think so..
==> Next (slide two fingers to left)
<== Previous (slide two fingers to right)
Reverse just to throw people off .. haha
.... That's if gestures are implemented... which ...I mean ....Come on?

If the patents are there and you and I can think of perfect solutions dont you think the people at apple did and implemented it?

This **** is gonna be hot !!! The only question is, will it have wifii (802.11 b,g,n)?. <- that will seal the deal for me...

Otherwise .. Currently selling my 5.5 gen in anticipation and will be reverting back to my 4th gen until apple gets their act together and gives the consumer what they want.. NOt some half arsed device to protect another product of profits....

- Something for the forum to chew on :
Google : apple gesture patent
 
OldTimey said:
If anyone isn't making business sense, it is the crazies on this board that blindly believe that a wifi iPod won't hurt iPhone sales. Maybe it makes more 'business sense' to release a wifi iPod, thereby selling more iPods in the process and a few less iPhones...but at this point I am not arguing that, because it is 100% speculation, and you nor I have any idea what Apple's numbers are on this.
Click to expand...

Yes, this is true, this is ALL speculation for the most part. But I think there is a far greater argument that a wifi iPod will maximize Apple's overall revenues vs. non-wifi iPod. Or in other words, Apple sells a few less iPhones, but makes up the difference with greater iPod sales.

Think about your post about it making too much sense. In the long run, a business will make more money by trying to directly address the needs of its customers, than by forcing them down arbitrary solutions (i.e. you can't have wifi unless you also sign up for 2 years of cell phone service.) Because in the long run, competition will try to fill the gap.

I think it's 50/50 at this point, if I had to guess I might say Apple will skip wifi (and the associated goodies) this time around. But I think in the long run it is inevitable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back