iPod 2007 Lineup
A number of comments have asked me for my take on the iPod announcements. Important to stress that I’m presenting my impressions/opinions only; nothing official from Zune here! Also, they’re just my opinions and I could be wrong, so I’m going to sit on my hands and let the comments fly without much response lest I spend the next week arguing with passionate Apple fans!
I thought the new iPods themselves were interesting, but more incremental than I'd expected. The shuffle is of course not very revolutionary (new colors) but it’s only one year old so that’s to be expected. The new iPod Nano is interesting; they chose the “fatty” look to incorporate video, which imo will divide users. If you think it’s primarily a music device, you may well like the old “tallboy” formfactor better because it lends itself to lanyard headphones and armbands better. If you’re really excited about video on a small screen, you will like the tradeoff. I’m also not certain what it’s going to feel like to use the scrollwheel when it’s positioned on a square device this way – looking forward to trying it out.
The iPod classic is a necessary but not very interesting product. Apple couldn’t make a flash touch iPod work for below $399 (it’s interesting they didn’t opt for a HDD based touch, but I suspect it would be too thick for their aesthetic), so they had to fill the prices between Nano and Touch, and did so with minimal effort. Smart compromise - they’re good workhorse products, but won’t drive many upgrades from the old ones.
The iPod Touch is…the iPhone without the phone. It presents early adopter enthusiasts with a tough choice – to get touch/wifi/etc., you must accept small storage. I'll look forward to seeing how it sells.
Oh yeah – wifi. I’ve got a unique perspective here; I’m not actually all that excited about buying music from my portable device. Yeah, yeah, I know, a lot of you folks really want this, but I personally think it’s a good demo feature but not really all that useful. Browsing on the device is compelling – when you’re connected to a hotspot.
A good lineup, but not an ideal situation. They have lots of skus and some consumers are presented with tough choices, but I think Apple made the most of two tough tradeoffs. The first was the gradual transition to flash as the main storage on mp3 players. This will play out over the next 3 years or so as prices drop, but for now they stretched to offer a high end flash product. The second tradeoff was touch. I have been using an iPhone a bunch recently, and while I think touch is cool, I’m not sure it’s actually better than the scrollwheel. In some ways is not as good. I think this year gives them a chance to introduce it, see how folks react, and make it better without risking the heart of the line.
The challenge they’ll face is that I don’t think this lineup will drive upgraders very aggressively. If you own a 2G Nano, do you feel you must buy a 3G? If you have an ipod 30GB, I’m sure you don’t want a classic. Do you want a touch? Maybe, but it’s a lot of money for smaller storage. It’ll be interesting to watch the next year unfold and see how this lineup does.
16 Comments:
For me, the most unappealing prospect of buying music over a small screen is the navigation/sync issues... on the other hand, subscription music, radio feeds, etc. over wifi is a very attractive idea - and could even lead to Micro-Brodcasted radio stations. Lots of potential...
Totally agree. Syndicated downloads onto a portable device are very powerful and interesting.
the ipod touch is essentially a restricted pda. one of the many reasons its not fair comparison to zune and the majority of daps. a pda-like device, is the only one that a wireless download service seems feasable.
personally i would like the zune to do some interesting things with the wifi, not the obvious route of purchasing music and browsing the web, but i really liked that 'DJ' idea that was floating around before the zune was released. that would totally help 'the social'. just sharing tracks isnt quite enough. though i do imagine it would be quite taxing on the battery life and difficult to engineer features such as this.
The one thing that apple is in a good position to do with this lineup is monopolize another aspect of the industry. Once consumers decide that they want touch as their primary interface, they will equate touch music devices with ipods. Sometimes it's all about perception and being to the market first with important products, and you can't argue that that's what the ipod touch is all about.
With the right "discovery" service they wouldn't even have to be formally subscribed to in the way we think of current syndication technologies... it could be a much more ambient experience. I know the zune team knows that... but for the others...
The DJ concept that jake mentions would do the job... then walk into a theater and suddenly trailers are available... walk into a Starbucks, and suddenly you get a coupon for 50cents off a large coffee (instead of that medium you always buy)... etc. etc.
Forget those "membership cards" this offers much more to the retailers (even without micropayments) and it could become even more attractive to consumers if they could, for example, gain Microsoft Points for "opting" to listen to commercials (delivered via wifi) between their own tracks... (not to mention what it would do for MS's ad sales...)
All possible with the infrastructure these places already have... and of course made easier with the help of the MS's development tools. Availability of these tools to the enthusiast community would lead to lots of other interesting developments... like viewing home security cameras... etc.
really like what you said tdm. i wouldn't mind listeing to a couple commercials for a song or two. it would be more than just a 'media' experiance, that would just be amazing.
Ok, let's say that zune has wi-fi 1 year before ipod... do you think wi-fi was used the right way on zune?
I mean... in this year ipod has reached zune and let it at the start line introducing wi-fi, touch and browsing.
Microsoft guys I think you should get a move...
"The iPod Touch is…the iPhone without the phone. It presents early adopter enthusiasts with a tough choice – to get touch/wifi/etc., you must accept small storage. I'll look forward to seeing how it sells."
The 16 gig model (more than enough for most buyers) is already the top selling mp3 player at Amazon.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/electronics/172630/ref=pd_ts_e_nav/105-3008013-9734806
As an iPod owner and a Mac owner I agree with David's assessment of the 2007 iPod lineup -- this isn't a line-up that will entice too many 5G Ipod owners or 2G Nano owners to upgrade.
Before the iPod came along, the major issues with portable music were slow sync times, no convenient way to buy music, and horrible user interfaces on both the client software and the dap. The iPod solved all of those problems.
Apple definately wants to both expand the market for portable video and to position itself in the portable video business the same way it has position itself in the portable music business. The major issue with current portable video devices (and iPods until last year) are horrible battery life. The PSP and the Zune only last 3.5 hours. The 80GB iPod, the Nano and the iPod Touch have a battery life of 5 hours for video, the 160GB ipod has a battery life of 7 hours for video. I don't see how Apple could have gotten reasonable battery life out of the Touch if they had used a hard drive.
Expanding the market for video and keeping up with the competition also explains the reason for the Nano gaining video capabilities. The Nano is still really small and as a gym rat, I definately will get one.
P.S., David I do have to compliment you on your unbias posts when it comes to discussing the competition. I enjoy reading your posts and the comments. I'm hoping the Zune becomes competitive with the iPods just to keep Apple on its toes.
i don't know that i agree with you about "If you have an ipod 30GB, I’m sure you don’t want a classic." there are many of us with large libraries who would love to be able to carry them around with us all the time. i don't need more than 80GB, but i would very much like that amount, especially for video content.
i myself have never been a big fan of apple, and while i was very excited when i first got my 4g ipod, i quickly learned to hate the scrollwheel and itunes. it's difficult to express just how much i prefer the zune in those respects. that said, the ipod touch just has a cool factor that is touph to not find attractive. i don't personally own an iphone, but i have played with one, and i really like it. i'm just not willing to pay for the data plan yet. for me the ipod touch gives me most of the things i like about the iphone (assuming that most of the iphone apps will eventually make their way to it) without the thing i care least about, namely the phone. i'm constantly near hotspots, so this would be great for me. except, of course, for the storage. 16GB is just far too small for me.
i'm waiting for the zune 2 to see what it offers. i hope it's impressive.
"The challenge they’ll face is that I don’t think this lineup will drive upgraders very aggressively."
Even it's that's true, it's even more true that few current iPod owners are going to upgrade from their current nano or iPod video to a Zune or other competitor. They'll keep using what they have. If they do upgrade, it would be to an iPod touch (which is far, far from an "incremental" upgrade).
And for new users (not upgrading), Apple is likely to get the sale the same as before. This lineup is strong and the prices will make it very difficult for other players.
"Apple couldn’t make a flash touch iPod work for below $399"
The iPod Touch 8GB is $299. 8GB is more than enough for most people.
You're right about one thing though... This is Apple moving away from the touch wheel interface to the multi-touch interface. I'd guess the next nano and the next iPod will also be multi-touch.
have few questions. Its pretty general so you might be able to answer:
1. Do you see iPod Touch as a separate category of product from iPod classic? In other words does the iPod Touch take away customer from hard drive based models of iPod and Zune?
2. A lot of features are not actually used by customers. For example very few customers use the iPods to watch movies. However does the fact that they have the option to do so affect their buying decision? In that case even if they do not use the iPod nano to watch video the fact now it has wider screen might impact their purchasing decision.
Thanks, good post.
Like other people day, I think Wifi comes into its own with a subscription service. The amount of local storage becomes less of an issue if you are connected most of the time. That 'if' being a big one.
I think there's a lot more that could be done with community and collaboration. Rating music and matching tastes is a great way of discovering music (see Netflix). And connecting and sharing music without being in local range (i.e. over a connected Wifi point) would also make that peer sharing useful.
David,
Great to see you back.
I think another compromise Apple had to make in their lineup, was in failing to offer a widescreen, high-capacity model. I guess there are battery concerns and form factor issues with that combination, but it strikes me as a market void.
Harvey / Zunerama
I was a little disappointed with the announcement. I recall when the iPod Nano pics were leaked to Gizmodo weeks ago and everyone screamed "No way! Not true! Apple would never do that!" But, they did.
I love the thin form-factor of the previous generation of Nanos and I wish they would have kept it the same and simply stretched the screen down the body or something along those lines. However, I'm sure Apple designers know more than I do why they made such decisions.
iPod Classic: Meh... not interested.
iPod Shuffle: I'd rather have a Creative Zen Stone, personally. I hate searching blindly for songs.
iPod Touch: This is interesting! I'd be willing to pay money for this one quickly! Granted, I tend to damage gadgets easily and this isn't great for my morning runs (perhaps that appearing/disappearing click-wheel would've been a better idea, after all).
What I noticed in the Apple Store, though, is that the Nano and Classic UI runs SLOWER and that was not good at all. May have just been me, though.
Overall, I think it was an OK announcement. Definitely a step up from their iPod announcement last year, but nothing for me to write home about.
Post a Comment
<< Home