Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Tim Cook on iPod Classic: 'We Couldn't Get the Parts Anymore'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Still have my classic from 2007, still use it on a regular basis. I like to pack it full of video, and that takes up a lot of space.
Still, it's not as spry as it once was, I know I'll be replacing it soon. Even if it were still in production, I wouldn't get a new one. I'm opting to replace it with an iPad.
I'm thinking a lot of Classic users are like me... they enjoyed the device for what it was, but today offers a different set of options and the Classic isn't necessarily the best of the rest.
I did love that thing, though.
Still, it's not as spry as it once was, I know I'll be replacing it soon. Even if it were still in production, I wouldn't get a new one. I'm opting to replace it with an iPad.
I'm thinking a lot of Classic users are like me... they enjoyed the device for what it was, but today offers a different set of options and the Classic isn't necessarily the best of the rest.
I did love that thing, though.
I'm not like you, I still think the 160GB classic was the best high capacity music player that Apple have ever made and there isn't currently anything in their range that is a suitable replacement (for my usage). I'd probably pick up a good condition second hand one if mine ever packed in.
Same. Nothing beats the functionality of the iPod Classic. I too have the 160GB Classic.
I bought a 128GB Mini thinking that I could stop using the Classic in my car. I used it for about six months in my car through BT but got tired of it. Yes, I could control it's playback functions through my cars stereo but it required pressing the menu button to hit function and then pause or play.
With my Classic, I just hit the number 4 button to play or pause and I get whats playing displayed on the screen unlike with BT.
It´s ridiculous to blame poor sales to the discontinuation of the device.
They were not marketing it and they didn´t upgrade it in a long time.
Consumers arent stupid, they expect old devices to get upgraded over time or at least they expect the price to go down if they don´t do so.
Device upgrade rotation is so common, that people stop buying altogether expecting new versions.
Poor iPod Classic, Apple forgot about it or didnt cared for it and the problem is that the devices is not selling ¿?
If the iPhone would suddenly be removed from the front page and no new versions would come out or be mention in Keynotes for over a year people would stop buying them also.
Cook´s a real *******.
They were not marketing it and they didn´t upgrade it in a long time.
Consumers arent stupid, they expect old devices to get upgraded over time or at least they expect the price to go down if they don´t do so.
Device upgrade rotation is so common, that people stop buying altogether expecting new versions.
Poor iPod Classic, Apple forgot about it or didnt cared for it and the problem is that the devices is not selling ¿?
If the iPhone would suddenly be removed from the front page and no new versions would come out or be mention in Keynotes for over a year people would stop buying them also.
Cook´s a real *******.
This is where the major loss for me comes in. Rather then carrying an external drive that serves no purpose other than to sit packed up till I get to the location I get to the iPod Classic has served as an ideal external drive for for music library, my raw video footage, edit files, raw audio, unrendered CG files and honestly without having the touch screen flipping out with any light touch or any twist the Classic has been a nicely stoic companion.
Aside from that the iPod Classic represents the perfect footprint and UI device for mass market dissemination for young people as a high capacity companion for beats headphones if updated with stylish front covers priced at $79 and lower. The iPod Classic would make for a great remote control for every product Apple makes through a single interface widget it could control.
Since Samsung has displaced Apple in the phone market the iPod Classic is the type of device again that would be a bridge back to Apple products for a lot of people if priced below $90. Apple buys so many SSDs it's absurd to believe that they wouldn't be able to negotiate exceptional pricing on high capacity SSDs for the iPod Classic.
You may not have interest in continuing the conversation, but I never said Cook did or didn't "please" me, nor am I trying to start a flame war. I was just responding to your comment that Cook wasn't talking straight in what I took to mean this specific situation.
I genuinely would like to understand what Cook could have said relative to why they discontinued production of the iPod Classic that would have satisfied you in terms of clarity. I'm not asking that rhetorically--what should he have said to explain his decision satisfactorily? Is it just that you think he's lying about the reason, or does it have to do with the way he phrased it?
I'm asking that out of pure curiosity--I get that not everyone's brain works like mine, and there are many ways to view a situation, and I like to understand where people who disagree with me are coming from. Maybe it turns out I'm the one looking at it wrong or not getting it.
Just for reference, the longer quote, sans interviewer half:
Regardless of any of Cook's other public statements, that particular bit seemed pretty straightforward to me; they couldn't buy parts for the current design anymore. Not enough people want to buy one to make it worth the engineering work (read: cost) to change the design. He, personally, thinks there are "reasonable" alternative products available anyway.
Obviously there will be disagreement with his opinion on that last bit, since his definition of a "reasonable alternative" is almost certainly not the same as that of Classic fans, but I'm wondering what he should have said (other than "we're bringing back the Classic") to explain the business decision.
Because the engineering changes required to do that would cost more than Apple would make from the few that they will still sell.
I am not now and never have been an iPod Classic customer/owner.
You are correct. I have no desire to continue this conversation with you. There are others on the thread who clearly did not agree with you. Why not chat with them?
I'm finished.
I meant pre-iPhone. When the iPod Classic was the thing to have. Many people got the reference....
True, iPods functionality can be a bit scarce these days. The only reason I could think that anyone still use iPod is for jogging or at the gym. They don't need to worry about sweating or dropping it because it's relatively low cost (by Apple standard). In which case iPod Touch also has a difficult position because it's mostly as big and cumbersome as iPhone 5/5s to be tied around. Nano or Shuffle would be the ultimate choice for that.
Other than that, I can't find any other reason people would stick with an iPod Touch. They just could get along with WiFi iPad Mini which offers same functionality, larger display and better internals.
Yeah yeah iPod had its glorious moments. But really I can't deny that its days are numbered.
I have an MBA in business ops and certified in Sigma and ISO.))))
Then tell me, how do you convince a supplier to continue supplying you a key component at the same price level but at a much lower volume? Tooling costs money. Production lines cost money. Suppliers like to turn a profit as well. Sure, Apple could continue to sell the classic, jack up the price. And a few diehard fans would continue to buy it, but at the volumes they'd move the product it's not even worth keeping in inventory.
I still use mine daily for none of those reasons.
Yeah well maybe because you are an Apple veteran who uses Apple products for a long time. Long enough to remember iPod golden days, which gives you some nostalgic moments or reasons to keep enjoying and using the iPod.
But for new Apple customers, especially teenagers, they would just pick WiFi iPad Mini for the same purpose as iPod Touch, it has bigger screen, better internals and recently, Touch ID. It plays music just fine and when they in dire for some capacity, now it's available in 128GB.
Well, iPod sales number proves that.
Nothing nostalgic, I just like music and own a lot of it, which I like to carry around with me. My only criticism of the iPod classic is the HD isn't big enough.
On which planet has Samsung displaced Apple in the phone market?
Apple makes more money with phones than the whole Samsung company makes.
----------
Where exactly is he lying? Can you buy 1.8" single platter hard drives that fit into an iPod classic, except a few used ones on eBay?
I have read the entire thread, and have been following this discussion with interest.
First up, to briefly clarify my own position, which I have posted about elsewhere (i.e. other threads in the iPod and Community sections of this forum); I am a long time classic owner and a huge fan of this particular device.
Actually, I am one of those with a very large music library, who simply wished to have one neat (and portable) device which would carry my entire iTunes library in one device, and play it. Nothing else interested me - I love the interface, the click wheel, and the capacity of the classic - although I will readily concede that the imperfect HDD was its Achilles heel - three of mine died over the years (and yes, were replaced as the device in question was still under warranty).
Re Tim Cook's statement, I think he is being a little disingenuous, in that I suspect that the reasons he has given for discontinuing the production of the classic are not the real reasons the device has been killed off.
Yes, sales are falling, but they were still healthy enough to justify having the product on shelves without doing anything else, as people like me will continue to buy it as long as it is available.
The real reason I suspect that the classic has been discontinued is that in a way, it has been too successful in doing what it does; it rips, stores and plays music and nothing else. Apps cannot be downloaded on it, nor stuff uploaded from it - design wise, it is its own cul-de-sac.
Now, I love that; I am old school, in that I still buy CDs - and rip them onto my iTunes library, and then, onto my iPod. For what it is worth, I have never bought music from iTunes and I have never used the Cloud to store or access music or other content. It is not that I dislike 'progress'; it is that I have huge 'issues' of trust re storage (and access to same).
Moreover, I subscribe to the idea that once I have bought music (say, a CD), that music is then mine to play, as often as I like and when I like, rather than having to pay further rental on it in order to gain access to it.
Furthermore, I have long worked in places where rapid and reliable internet connections were not by any means a given - so streaming is a most frustrating and not at all a reliable exercise.
The upshot of all this is that there is no way to make money out of me - on an ongoing basis - once the initial purchase of the iPod has been made, and that, I think, is the key question of the cul-de-sac design nature of the iPod classic.
It is not a cash cow, it is not an ongoing revenue generator and therefore cannot be linked into any Apple economic ecosystem, or universe (unlike other areas or products such as iCloud, iWatch, iPhone) where ongoing and continuing purchases on the part of the consumer are built into the default model.
Design wise, (and ultimately, economically) the classic stands on its own.
However, I suspect that when it was first unveiled and produced, it was probably intended not just to test whether such devices could be made, but whether people would buy into virtual music stores in a new way which bypassed the record companies and dramatically altered the whole concept of the market in music. So, the classic utterly transformed how music was stored, how it was consumed, and - ultimately - how it was bought; it destroyed the stranglehold and power of the old music industry - such as the record companies, - and it changed beyond all recognition the way music was marketed.
If successful - and it was highly successful - these models of production, storage and consumption could then be transferred to other areas……...
Re other iPods, I suspect that the Touch was designed as a trial run for the iPhone, to see whether customers would like the touch screen (it was known that they would buy it for its music playing capabilities) and be prepared to use it; these days, it is an iPhone without the telephonic aspects, which can be used as a music player, but this is not how it is marketed.
For myself, I think - the imperfect HDD aside (and I would have loved to see a stable SSD drive of 128 GB or 256 GB in the iPod classic, and would happily have paid for such - the SSD is a lot more stable, and reliable than the old HDD) the classic was a work of utter design perfection for a specific period in time; it met the needs of the music lovers with large music libraries, but, while it met our needs, it served to show Apple where future paths of revenue might usefully and profitably be mined, which is where Apple is now heading.
Seriously, I don't think that the issue is that the iPod classic does not make any - or much - money for Apple; it does and it did. I think the issue became one of whether it generated enough profit for Apple, (in a world where many other products - which they see as the future - generated more) and the answer clearly was that it didn't.
----------
I still use mine daily for none of those reasons.
Nothing nostalgic, I just like music and own a lot of it, which I like to carry around with me. My only criticism of the iPod classic is the HD isn't big enough.
All of these posts are pretty much my position, too, and I use mine daily, too, and love the idea of being able to carry my entire iTunes library with me in one, neat, portable and attractive device.
Actually, I expect that I shall have an iPod classic (I took the precaution of buying a spare one a few months ago, and managed to order another recently) as long as mine continue to work.
Totally understandable. There was a time, not that long ago, I was like that too. There was a time people like that were the majority of iPod users. That time is gone.
I'm really sorry this product is going away, because I know some people will be left out.
Do you think that the cost of hard drive technology (or SSD) has remained the same over the past few years?
Just to offer actual numbers, the 160GB 1.8" hard drive Apple was using in the Classic retailed for a list price of $160; it obviously cost much less that that for Apple in bulk, but Apple also needs to factor in their own margin, and retail markups on the iPod itself, so using list price works to get a rough idea, and when comparing proportionally.
$/GB of rotating storage is obviously much cheaper now, but Toshiba hasn't manufactured a 1.8" hard drive for years and volume isn't going to be high enough to get them to build out a factory line just for iPod Classics, so SSD is the obvious replacement--we'll look at mSATA since it's a similar form factor to 1.8" hard drives, though Apple would probably have built the chips straight onto the main board of the product.
A 120GB TLC mSATA drive from a tier-1 manufacturer lists for $150; a 250GB one lists for $260.
So basically, replacing the drive with a 120 or 128GB of flash memory would have hypothetically kept the price more or less constant, leaving engineering costs and the cost of re-tooling a factory line out of the picture, and the list price would have gone up somewhat to keep the storage at least the same, probably by at least $100 if the cap went up to 250GB+.
I expect, given the use case, iPod Classic fans would have been glad to pay this.
First, thank you for taking the time to reply and explain in more detail at least one of the differing opinions; I appreciate it. Whether I agree with you or not, there is a logical foundation to your opinion so I can see why you hold it.
In a nutshell, if I understand correctly, you don't believe Cook; you think that the problem isn't that they won't make some money from selling Classics, it's that they won't make enough (particularly when factoring in after-market selling of apps and music).
You should check your timeline on this; the iPhone was released in June 2007, while the Touch didn't debut until September of that year, so it DEFINITELY wasn't a trial run for the iPhone--the phone was first.
[Edit: In fact, if you remember the original iPhone announcement, Steve made a big deal out of the fact that it was "a widescreen iPod with touch controls, a revolutionary mobile phone, and an Internet communicator". At the time it was announced, it was very much framed as being the next iPod evolution.]
Last edited:
I imagine something could be done to continue the line if Apple found it worth it. At this point it's likely not worth the trouble or extra costs to do so. It is too bad for those who really liked this model. Of course people can still grab old stock for awhile.
Nothing nostalgic, I just like music and own a lot of it, which I like to carry around with me. My only criticism of the iPod classic is the HD isn't big enough.
Well you can always upgrade your classic storage with CF drive. It's up to 256GB and it will be lighter and less prone to damage (no more moving parts).