iPod The iPod is dead.

[Scepticalscribe]

And when it wore out, or we lost it in a fire, or we sold it... our rights ended then and there. We owned the object (do you want paper or plastic?), not the words or sounds imprinted upon it.

No need to blame iTunes, it's just a recent example. Copyright holders (and patent owners) have been selling limited-rights licenses with no physical object attached going back centuries - the right to perform in public, the right to include a song in a movie soundtrack, the right to print an edition in another language, the right to play on the radio or show on TV...

When you couch the debate in terms like "music ownership," yeah, the download/subscription model seems a tough pill to swallow. You pay all that money, and what do you have to show for it? Thoughts and emotions; mind and spirit.

From my perspective, I never owned it, so nothing changes. To me, it's little different than a concert or theater ticket; gone when you leave the hall. The music belongs to the composer, the words stay with the author, the performance is the performers'.


From the standpoint of a person who lost his black vinyl in a divorce, much of his print library in various downsizes and moves, and has worn out multiple copies of The Lord of the Rings... I actually like this future - it's far cheaper than re-acquiring what I used to "own" and replacing what's been damaged... and then there's my endless musical bucket list.

$9.99/month to use the musical equivalent of the Great Library of Alexandria? Compared to a single movie ticket or $99 for a day at Walt Disney World? Compared to my phone bill, cable TV, rent, car payments? It's cheap. And on top of that, I get an off-premises backup of all the CDs I own, and the convenience of having that entire library available wherever I go (regardless of the capacity of whatever device I'm using).

How does any of this fit into the supposed demise of iPod? Everything on Apple Music can be downloaded to iTunes and synced onto iPod, and if it's a Touch, you can also stream live whenever you have a Wi-Fi connection. Nothing changes, no new equipment is needed. The only difference is, if you want to download a song, it won't cost you $1.29 - you're now on the all-you-can-eat plan. iPod owners are all potentially Apple Music subscribers, especially if they currently spend more than $9.99/month on iTunes. If Apple pulls the plug on iPod it'll be because people have stopped buying iPods in favor of other Apple devices that include a music player (is there an Apple device that doesn't have a music player?). End of story.

I love the……utter certainty that accompanies disagreement in online debate.

'End of story'. No, that story has not ended, instead, is constantly evolving. It is just that some of us have different preferences in how we choose to consume music. If Apple no longer chooses to meet the needs of this market, fine, that is their decision, but I disagree - profoundly - with them, and still use my iPod daily - above all, - when I am travelling.

For my part, as I love music, I still desire a device which will carry my entire music collection and be able play that easily. and nothing else.

Personally, I have never downloaded any music - it is not a model that appeals to me. Actually, I still buy CDs, and am currently debating buying a turntable for my vinyl collection.

I'm sorry you lost your vinyl collection in a divorce, and that you lost your books in downsizes, - few pleasures equal opening the pages of a book - the Kindle is convenient, but the pleasure of physically reading a book is unequalled. Good luck with your baggage free existence.

As for myself, I like the physical side of using and reading and listening to things such as books, or CDs.

 

[Mac 128]

This is the future that Apple is chasing, and is - to my mind - the real reason that the iPod is being discontinued and starved of resources for further and future development.

I don't disagree in general that Apple is pursuing a subscription model over downloads. But let's face it, if you download something it doesn't come with a self destruct mechanism to wipe it from your hard drive when Apple decides your lease is up. You "own" that sound file for all practical purposes. What's on the cloud is a bit more complicated.

But I would contend that Apple wants to purge any device that can't connect to iTunes and allow a customer to buy music on the fly. The only ones left are the Shuffle and the Nano (and technically the watch). If the nano stays, it will be upgraded with a wifi connection, but I see that as the least likely scenario. The shuffle is still much cheaper than the watch for fitness purposes, and now that the watch is out, I can almost see them merging the nano and shuffle for something similar to the old square nano, with a wifi and Bluetooth antenna, and selling it for $99. Who knows, maybe they will even offer a fitness only watch with sensors, and iTunes/wifi/BT, but nothing else -- no phone integration, for $149. That's still a lot more than the shuffle, but then it offers a lot more.

What's interesting is that the watch requires BT headphones. So it will be interesting if this is a trend for Apple, and we'll see the 1/8" audio jack eliminated from all their devices. That Jack takes up a huge amount of room in a product, and BT is at the point where it's good reliable connection that rivals a cord.

 

[Jessica Lares]

Does no one around here tag music with the radio app on the Nano like I do? You have the radio on, it picks up info from the RDS, you tag it, you plug the iPod to sync in iTunes, and it adds all those tagged songs in a list that links to stuff in the iTunes Music Store.

That's the main reason why I don't see them killing it off before the Shuffle, because it's designed to be used with various content you can buy in the store, and for you to look at it while using it. The Shuffle is transparent in comparison.

 

[sracer]

Does no one around here tag music with the radio app on the Nano like I do? You have the radio on, it picks up info from the RDS, you tag it, you plug the iPod to sync in iTunes, and it adds all those tagged songs in a list that links to stuff in the iTunes Music Store.

Apple doesn't sell many Nanos. The number of Nano owners who do that is even lower. You and I may do that but we represent an insignificant percentage of Apple's customers. And in the context of subscriptions (vs. purchases) this feature is irrelevant.

That's the main reason why I don't see them killing it off before the Shuffle, because it's designed to be used with various content you can buy in the store, and for you to look at it while using it. The Shuffle is transparent in comparison.

Apple is no longer interesting in pushing sales of music... the future is subscriptions. One reason is that subscriptions is a steady income stream. The moment one stops paying for the subscription, the music literally stops.

I'm an old dinosaur, and I prefer to buy physical media (CDs, Tapes, Vinyl) and digitize them, but I can see where things are going.

The Nano is not long for this world. The Shuffle will be around for quite a while because there's little customer support required from Apple's perspective.

 

[0000757]

I don't think the iPod name is dead.

What I can see happening in the future is the "death" of the iPod shuffle and iPod nano, and the rebranding of the iPod touch as simply "iPod". It would focus on its integration with iTunes and Apple Music and may possibly run a limited version of iOS, remove the app store, or run an iOS-like OS (like on the Nano). It'll come in 64, 128, and 256GB sizes, and possibly include some expandable slot (probably microSD) in place of the SIM tray.

 

[bniu]

In due time, the apple watch price will probably come down and increase capacity as well. That would render the iPod nano and shuffle redundant. With the end of cell phone subsidies, I see the price of iPhones probably coming down as well, which would render the iPod touch redundant. In the end, there's just simply no more room for the stand-alone iPods to exist.

 

[Traverse]

Apple doesn't sell many Nanos.

Can I ask where you get this? I'm not denying it, but do you have any sources?

---
The nano is my favorite iPod. I had a 5th Gen, then the 6th gen. I won the 6th gen and it's only 8GB. I am tempted to get a new Nana, but the clip was the best thing they did for workouts, I'm said to see that gone from the Nano line. I also think the current Nana is too high for 16GB. If they either lower the price or bump it to 32GB i'd be sold.

My libraries currently 12.35 GB (I know, tiny compared to some here ) with 2500 songs, but that number has grown by about 3GB in just the past year. A 16GB iPod won't hold my library a year or so from know. The iPod Touch is a poor MP3 player, but a wonder multimedia player.

 

[sracer]

Can I ask where you get this? I'm not denying it, but do you have any sources?

---
The nano is my favorite iPod. I had a 5th Gen, then the 6th gen. I won the 6th gen and it's only 8GB. I am tempted to get a new Nana, but the clip was the best thing they did for workouts, I'm said to see that gone from the Nano line. I also think the current Nana is too high for 16GB. If they either lower the price or bump it to 32GB i'd be sold.

My libraries currently 12.35 GB (I know, tiny compared to some here ) with 2500 songs, but that number has grown by about 3GB in just the past year. A 16GB iPod won't hold my library a year or so from know. The iPod Touch is a poor MP3 player, but a wonder multimedia player.

I don't have any hard data readily available, but it is commonly accepted that, relative to the other Apple portable devices they sell, the iPod Nano and Shuffle don't sell anywhere near the volume of the others.

The Nano is my favorite too. I have 3rd, 6th, and 7th gen models and use them all. I miss the clip of the 6th gen, but there are plenty of slim cases for the 7th gen that provide that.

Once your library exceeds the highest capacity players you learn to be creative with playlists. Once that is done, then even lower capacity players can be used effectively.

 

[Traverse]

I don't have any hard data readily available, but it is commonly accepted that, relative to the other Apple portable devices they sell, the iPod Nano and Shuffle don't sell anywhere near the volume of the others.

The Nano is my favorite too. I have 3rd, 6th, and 7th gen models and use them all. I miss the clip of the 6th gen, but there are plenty of slim cases for the 7th gen that provide that.

Once your library exceeds the highest capacity players you learn to be creative with playlists. Once that is done, then even lower capacity players can be used effectively.

I'm actually in the process of reevaluating all of my music and creating multiple playlist and several smart playlist. Are you happy with your seventh generation iPod nano? How is it compared to the sixth and the third generation?

 

[sracer]

I'm actually in the process of reevaluating all of my music and creating multiple playlist and several smart playlist. Are you happy with your seventh generation iPod nano? How is it compared to the sixth and the third generation?

The 7th gen is my favorite "nano media player". Video playback returned with the 7G. I'm one of those oddballs that enjoys watching videos on small devices. It is why I had to settle on the Space Grey model... it is the only one with a black bezel. I sit the Nano on a business card holder as a stand on my nightstand and I can watch videos without disturbing my wife. Having physical volume/playback buttons is helpful. Sound quality is excellent. It still has crossfade.


The 3G "fatty" is the only of my iPods that has a click-wheel so that makes it unique. The 6G gets regular use as watch (I rotate that with my "normal" watches)

 

[Traverse]

The 7th gen is my favorite "nano media player". Video playback returned with the 7G. I'm one of those oddballs that enjoys watching videos on small devices. It is why I had to settle on the Space Grey model... it is the only one with a black bezel. I sit the Nano on a business card holder as a stand on my nightstand and I can watch videos without disturbing my wife. Having physical volume/playback buttons is helpful. Sound quality is excellent. It still has crossfade.


The 3G "fatty" is the only of my iPods that has a click-wheel so that makes it unique. The 6G gets regular use as watch (I rotate that with my "normal" watches)

That's funny because I use my six generation iPod nano as a watch too and I've gotten many compliments over the years and several people asking if it was the Apple Watch. The idea of using a cardholder as a stand is pretty clever, I have a few of those.

And people under estimate the physical control button on iPods. The ability to skip, pause, rewind, etc. music without looking at the device is huge. I know you can do the same thing with certain headphones, but it's nice to have it on the device too.

 

[Dark Void]

Reading some of the comments here has inspired me to dig out my old 160GB classic. It still works, has about 134 GB free, and I want to update it with my current music library and some DVD rips in the near future. This thing is trusty, and has many battle scars.

I don't use Apple Music and have zero plans to as I'm more of a physical media guy and could care less about streaming and things like Cloud storage. I purchase downloads but I immediately burn albums or playlists to CDs for personal use and keep them stored away.

The only thing that really bothers me about the non-iOS iPods are the lack of customization, unless I'm doing it wrong. I wish I had the option to at least add a background or anything beyond editing the Main Menu. It's more space than I need as well but that's my own fault of course - it was the only model at the time and I wanted something dedicated for music with awesome battery life and I liked the aesthetics and form factor of the design.

I only need ~20GB for music (I use an iPod Touch 5G atm) and I tried the Nano 7G around the time that I had the classic and while the capacity made more sense for me the battery life was horrendous - not sure if I got shipped a bad unit or what but I stuck with the classic after that, and it has been sitting idle since I got my iPod Touch.

Perhaps I should let go of it and attempt to sell it, but what a gem.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Reading some of the comments here has inspired me to dig out my old 160GB classic. It still works, has about 134 GB free, and I want to update it with my current music library and some DVD rips in the near future. This thing is trusty, and has many battle scars.

I don't use Apple Music and have zero plans to as I'm more of a physical media guy and could care less about streaming and things like Cloud storage. I purchase downloads but I immediately burn albums or playlists to CDs for personal use and keep them stored away.

The only thing that really bothers me about the non-iOS iPods are the lack of customization, unless I'm doing it wrong. I wish I had the option to at least add a background or anything beyond editing the Main Menu. It's more space than I need as well but that's my own fault of course - it was the only model at the time and I wanted something dedicated for music with awesome battery life and I liked the aesthetics and form factor of the design.

I only need ~20GB for music (I use an iPod Touch 5G atm) and I tried the Nano 7G around the time that I had the classic and while the capacity made more sense for me the battery life was horrendous - not sure if I got shipped a bad unit or what but I stuck with the classic after that, and it has been sitting idle since I got my iPod Touch.

Perhaps I should let go of it and attempt to sell it, but what a gem.

Excellent post and very well said.

My position is somewhat similar, and, in common with you, I rather like the idea of physical media (CDs and so on) being ripped to my iTunes. My Music Library is not too far off 90GB, and so, for obvious, reasons, I am rather partial to the iPod classic.

In common with your post, I have little interest in the newer models of music ownership, such as the Cloud, or streaming, as I like physical albums and the older model of purchasing the right to play the music.

 

[Dark Void]

Excellent post and very well said.

My position is somewhat similar, and, in common with you, I rather like the idea of physical media (CDs and so on) being ripped to my iTunes. My Music Library is not too far off 90GB, and so, for obvious, reasons, I am rather partial to the iPod classic.

In common with your post, I have little interest in the newer models of music ownership, such as the Cloud, or streaming, as I like physical albums and the older model of purchasing the right to play the music.

Great to know our thinning ranks still have a few members. I just have never been interested in anything beyond owning music. I obtain legally as well, and even though the suits get most of the money I like to try and support artists by purchasing their music. I'm not against torrenting - I just don't do it.

With that said I wish I still had most of my actual albums. I discarded all of them when I planned on going digital (still nothing Cloud or stream based, but just purchasing downloads as opposed to a CD at a store) and while I have stuck with that as my purchasing method, I really wish I had my originals in the cases with their artwork. 3/4 of my current library was imported through CDs, and I burn the music I have to blanks just to have something stored away (almost like keeping a physical HDD backup of your computer) that I can use with different playback methods. I'm thinking about investing in a nice CD changer. I really enjoy discs for some reason. I used a CD player until I was a senior in high school, and that may not sound like much but if I were to mention that was in 2011 then it starts to label me as a wannabe geezer.

I'll reiterate that I don't care much for clouds or streaming. I understand it, don't get me wrong, and my generation is all about it, but I could care less. I don't fancy not owning something and paying for subscriptions or rentals. I have used Spotify before via their extensive free trial. I get it. It's cool - just not for me. I'm a dork I guess.

I can't fathom 90GB of music/media without torrents. I am poorer than poor lol. I can see why you are keen on the classic though - nice to have all your stuff physically in one location. I only have it for its battery life and build aesthetics as I mentioned - I could never fill the capacity unless I was being unnecessary and loading it up with DVD rips that I probably wouldn't even watch on its tiny screen.

Do you use yours for video? If so, how is the playback with the mechanical drive?

Thanks for the response, it's cool to chat it up with fellow CD plebs. That is to be taken lightly of course!

 

[Jessica Lares]

They started putting in new security measures into the iPod firmware right after the iPod Video. I used to customize my Video with all the theme hacks out there, it was pretty great.

You should use it anyway. If my 3rd gen iPod was in good shape, I'd be using it! But it's in pretty bad shape now, even the port connector plastic bits have torn off.

 

[tdale]

Perhaps it may come as a surprise to you to learn that - for music - I am not interested in an iPhone. At all. Except for use as a phone, at some stage, and maybe some of the bells and whistles the world has been talking about for quite a few years.

Now, I don't doubt that the day will come when I shall probably have to succumb and buy an iPhone - for phone purposes, or those funny messages that appear - but it hasn't arrived yet, and this is not why I would ever contemplate buying an iPhone…..

For one thing, the memory is too small. I want to be able to carry all (and I mean all - I have almost 100GB of music on my iTunes, all of it ripped CDs, mine…..) on one device. For now, the iPod classic (with 160GB of memory) allows me to so that.

For another, I simply want to be able to play music - and nothing else on that device. Nice and uncomplicated. For a third (reason), I have never heard of anyone lauding the iPhone merely as a music player; perhaps it is superlative, but this is not what it was designed to do, and this is not what I suspect it is really good at.

Besides, at the end of the day, if Apple - having revolutionised how the world sees, plays, markets, sells, buys, consumes and stores - music, have decided to head elsewhere for the provision of an audio device that simply plays music (superbly), then, with regret, I'll do the same.

By profession, I trained as a historian; that means, I am rather good at research. Questions and research have told me that Astell & Kern (and similar companies) make superb audio devices which play music, allow you to transport your entire music collection in one fell swoop, and which are wonderfully portable and very solidly made and look great.

You know, - much though it may pain me to admit to this - but Apple are not the only company in the world to make great audio players. Now, I'll readily admit that if it were not painfully clear that they intend to assassinate the iPod classic (a superb and genuinely historically important and incredibly revolutionary transformational device in the context of the development of technology, and concepts of music acquisition, consumption, purchase, and ownership - a tech icon, no less) - then, I would never have looked outside the Apple eco-system.

But my love of music, my dislike of the 'rentier' model of musical ownership, my distrust of the Cloud, (I'm kind of attached to hard drives…), my unease with the murder of the iPod classic (a device that has accompanied me, literally, across the globe), the fact that I live and work quite often in strange, dysfunctional countries where rapid, reliable internet connections are a longed for fantasy rather than a mundane reality, my desire to transport all of my music in one, sturdy, elegant, non-high-maintenance device……all of this has predisposed me to feel a lingering warmth for the iPod classic, and some considerable disdain for some of the alternatives offered.

If the Touch or Classic is a good music player, so is an iPhone. iPhone just does more then play music, that doesn't make it a second rate music player. get a 128GB iPhone, use it for music and calls only, sorted

 

[Scepticalscribe]

If the Touch or Classic is a good music player, so is an iPhone. iPhone just does more then play music, that doesn't make it a second rate music player. get a 128GB iPhone, use it for music and calls only, sorted

For music, I just want a music player. Simple. Just a piece of equipment that plays music, one that can hold my entire music library, (which means decent capacity) has an excellent battery and plays music.

As for phones, well, my current phone is an antique Nokia. For that matter, I expect that I will not be able withstand the encroaching tide of modernity, and may have to succumb and obtain some manner of iPhone, but not now and nt just yet.

Besides, if and when I do, the task of that device will be communication. And, maybe taking photographs of wine bottle labels, when I attend wine tastings….

However, there are places I like to go where I don't wish to bring a phone; the ubiquity of these portable and always-on menaces irks me.

 

[Dark Void]

You should use it anyway. If my 3rd gen iPod was in good shape, I'd be using it! But it's in pretty bad shape now, even the port connector plastic bits have torn off.

I can't seem to justify not selling it. The battery life is great and it works well but given the capacity it makes more sense to just use the Touch, plus I can customize that all I would like.

I could use both I suppose, but given my somewhat slim music library there would have to be a purpose to it over my 32GB Touch, which could be stored mobile video.

I could justify it by ripping video onto it, but I'm not so sure how great the playback experience would be on the classic. I guess the only way to find out is to try.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Great to know our thinning ranks still have a few members. I just have never been interested in anything beyond owning music. I obtain legally as well, and even though the suits get most of the money I like to try and support artists by purchasing their music. I'm not against torrenting - I just don't do it.

With that said I wish I still had most of my actual albums. I discarded all of them when I planned on going digital (still nothing Cloud or stream based, but just purchasing downloads as opposed to a CD at a store) and while I have stuck with that as my purchasing method, I really wish I had my originals in the cases with their artwork. 3/4 of my current library was imported through CDs, and I burn the music I have to blanks just to have something stored away (almost like keeping a physical HDD backup of your computer) that I can use with different playback methods. I'm thinking about investing in a nice CD changer. I really enjoy discs for some reason. I used a CD player until I was a senior in high school, and that may not sound like much but if I were to mention that was in 2011 then it starts to label me as a wannabe geezer.

I'll reiterate that I don't care much for clouds or streaming. I understand it, don't get me wrong, and my generation is all about it, but I could care less. I don't fancy not owning something and paying for subscriptions or rentals. I have used Spotify before via their extensive free trial. I get it. It's cool - just not for me. I'm a dork I guess.

I can't fathom 90GB of music/media without torrents. I am poorer than poor lol. I can see why you are keen on the classic though - nice to have all your stuff physically in one location. I only have it for its battery life and build aesthetics as I mentioned - I could never fill the capacity unless I was being unnecessary and loading it up with DVD rips that I probably wouldn't even watch on its tiny screen.

Do you use yours for video? If so, how is the playback with the mechanical drive?

Thanks for the response, it's cool to chat it up with fellow CD plebs. That is to be taken lightly of course!

Thanks for the nice, long, enjoyable reply.

No, I don't use mine for video - I have only ever used it for music from my iTunes library which has thousands of pieces of music - from hundreds of CDs - ranging from medieval, through Baroque, and various forms of classical music, through jazz, trad, rock & roll, Latin, pop, easy listening, and so on.

Actually, if you are a music lover, (as I am) and have a library built up over a few decades, it is quite easy to amass hundreds of CDs and thousands of songs. But no torrents, or videos, ever.

Ah, in 2011 you were a Senior in High School?

Well I left my equivalent of High School (I'm not from the US) a few decades ago. When I left my version of High School, the CD had yet to be invented……..so, I very much doubt you'd be classed as a 'wannabe geezer' quite just yet.

But I agree entirely about the business model of renting rather than owning. It is something I have massive reservations about, and am most reluctant to embrace it under any circumstances.

 

[nightlong]

I dread the day my iPod classic dies. I was, for a long time, a music reviewer and I have a massive collection of vinyl and CDs, including a lot of rare stuff picked up in travels over the years, a lot of which is unlikely to ever been available to rent from apple. Even my 160gb iPod can't fit all that, but it has many favourite things plus audio books, mostly for use in my car.

I live in rural area with only 3G, streaming is not an option. apple assumes that everyone lives in a major city with fast unlimited internet, and so the forced IOS downloads annoy me as well as everything being forced more and more to Cloud and streaming. I think these developments are great for people who can use them, it is the forced part that annoys me. I also don't trust Cloud storage and like to own my music.

 

[Dark Void]

Thanks for the nice, long, enjoyable reply.

No, I don't use mine for video - I have only ever used it for music from my iTunes library which has thousands of pieces of music - from hundreds of CDs - ranging from medieval, through Baroque, and various forms of classical music, through jazz, trad, rock & roll, Latin, pop, easy listening, and so on.

Actually, if you are a music lover, (as I am) and have a library built up over a few decades, it is quite easy to amass hundreds of CDs and thousands of songs. But no torrents, or videos, ever.

Ah, in 2011 you were a Senior in High School?

Well I left my equivalent of High School (I'm not from the US) a few decades ago. When I left my version of High School, the CD had yet to be invented……..so, I very much doubt you'd be classed as a 'wannabe geezer' quite just yet.

But I agree entirely about the business model of renting rather than owning. It is something I have massive reservations about, and am most reluctant to embrace it under any circumstances.

Thanks for sharing your experiences. I have been getting CDs for the longest, and really want to get something that can utilize them directly instead of just treating them like a physical storage option. I would like a nice old-school quality CD playback system.

I was in 2011, yes, I'm 22 currently. Back then it had more of a purpose because a lot of my friends had cars without many playback options beyond CDs, so I would lend my burns to those with similar music taste.

The geezer thing was just me teasing - I often am referred to as "old school" given that I still use CDs as someone in his early 20s in 2015 where the digital world is being realized. I just never cared for it. I like physical media, just like I prefer paperbacks over ebooks.

I can see what you mean as far as accumulation - but even since getting CDs for the last 10 years or so I still have only amounted to ~20 GB of music. I'd like to have more - it just gets pricey.

It doesn't help that 2015 is booming with new releases from all of my favorite bands and such. Curse the music industry.

 

[shawndc1]

I actually use the ipod for its purpose, i have 0 music on my iphone except this u2 album that seems to pop up after ive deleted it. It Saves memory on my iphone, nor would i buy an old phone for IPODS purpose, i dont get the point

 

[Scepticalscribe]

I dread the day my iPod classic dies. I was, for a long time, a music reviewer and I have a massive collection of vinyl and CDs, including a lot of rare stuff picked up in travels over the years, a lot of which is unlikely to ever been available to rent from apple. Even my 160gb iPod can't fit all that, but it has many favourite things plus audio books, mostly for use in my car.

I live in rural area with only 3G, streaming is not an option. apple assumes that everyone lives in a major city with fast unlimited internet, and so the forced IOS downloads annoy me as well as everything being forced more and more to Cloud and streaming. I think these developments are great for people who can use them, it is the forced part that annoys me. I also don't trust Cloud storage and like to own my music.

So many well made points here. Agreed, I don't trust the Cloud, either and much prefer the concept of owning my own music.

Yes, I, too, have a great many rare and unusual stuff picked up on my travels, stuff that cannot be replicated elsewhere; and, while my musical tastes are pretty eclectic, there are a great many things I like which are not remotely mainstream.

Actually, I am the sort that if I see a band, or group, or musician, playing music on the street, an, if they happen to be pretty good (or better still, extremely good) I will almost always buy a CD from them. Talented musicians deserve to be supported, and I have gotten some amazing gypsy music, Russian music, Balkan music, Japanese music, South American music, piano music, guitar music, flute music, strange and incredible music composed by the guys and women playing it - I have bought it all.

Years ago, a few years after I had bought my iPod, I remember paying a visit or two to the the Apple iTunes library, and looking long and hard for the sort of obscure music I like, or particular tracks, or albums. The problem is, I don't like popular music, for the most part, and the sort of stuff that I do like, is not what makes markets quiver with excitement in anticipation of a record dividend yield.

The point is the first few times I visited the Apple library - granted, this was years ago - there had nothing that I wanted to buy, and the stuff that did interest me, they didn't have.

And your point about connectivity is well made. Apple does indeed assume that everyone lives in a first world city with superb connectivity; most of my work over the past decade has been in countries that have been anything but that, where internet connections are unreliable and erratic.

I actually use the ipod for its purpose, i have 0 music on my iphone except this u2 album that seems to pop up after ive deleted it. It Saves memory on my iphone, nor would i buy an old phone for IPODS purpose, i dont get the point

Very well said.

 

[Dark Void]

I live in rural area with only 3G, streaming is not an option. apple assumes that everyone lives in a major city with fast unlimited internet, and so the forced IOS downloads annoy me as well as everything being forced more and more to Cloud and streaming. I think these developments are great for people who can use them, it is the forced part that annoys me. I also don't trust Cloud storage and like to own my music.

I'm glad you brought this up. I just recently moved to an area where connection speeds aren't exactly great - I'm in the KBs in terms of upload. My download is doable but much slower than what I came from.

There is nothing I can do about it, but it is good to note that I just came from a more popular area where I had a much faster download speed that allowed for more bandwidth. I had the ability to hone my opinions on streaming on the better connection but even if I wanted to jump ship now it just isn't practical.

I agree with you as far as being forced but one thing I am glad for is the fact that I use OS X instead of Windows even more so now. If I were to use Windows on this download speed I probably would have thrown my computer out of the window by now due to the constant updates.

 

[Jessica Lares]

"Wannabe Geezer"? LOL. Don't look at my iTunes library, just even my most Recently Added makes me look out of touch for a 26 year-old!

I used to watch videos on my iPod. I've watched them on my Nano. If I was serious about it, I'd rather the iPod Touch/iPad/or just use the computer for playback.