Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

A Recap of the iPod's Life

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the go-make-something-of-yourself dept.

236

BDPrime writes "Here's a good look at the iPod's five-year existence and how, it can be argued, the device saved Apple from rotting away. From the story: 'It's hard to overstate the impact of the iPod on the computer, consumer electronics and music industries since it was introduced in 2001. The iPod, arguably, is the first crossover product from a computer company that genuinely caught on with music and video buffs. It's shown how a computer can be an integral part of a home entertainment system, and it's led pop stars from U2's Bono to Madonna to trade quips with Apple's own rock star, CEO Steve Jobs.'" Just to give a little bit of the other side of the story, not everyone loves the iPod. An anonymous reader wrote in with a link to research on unhealthy iPod listening levels at New Scientist. Additionally, Achromatic1978 writes to mention that the iPod has won a Shonky award from the Australians. I don't know what Shonky means, but I think that's bad.

cancel ×

236 comments

Slashdot: Apple releases iPod (5, Funny)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 7 years ago | (#16514991)

No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.

Re:Slashdot: Apple releases iPod (5, Informative)

knightmad (931578) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515011)

The pertinent article [slashdot.org] , for those who are not here that much time.

Re:Slashdot: Apple releases iPod (1)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515031)

What I like about that is even though the article is 5 years old, there are brand new tags added to it.

(also, its linked as a related article at the top - saved me even searching for the direct quote)

Re:Slashdot: Apple releases iPod (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16515191)

I don't get the iPod success. It wasn't the first portable mp3 player and as shown in that old slashdot article, it wasn't even remotely the best one on the market.

It just doesn't make any sense, it's like Apple is using some jedi mind trick to sell overpriced average hardware.

Re:Slashdot: Apple releases iPod (5, Insightful)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515449)

It just doesn't make any sense, it's like Apple is using some jedi mind trick to sell overpriced average hardware.


And of course, when they've been the most successful at this game, it's been Steve Jobs behind the wheel.

You might be trolling, but I'm not. Steve Jobs is a marketing genius. He's figured out how to sell hardware that has little to no technological advantages over many of its competitors at prices that are, on average, much higher than the competition.

Re:Slashdot: Apple releases iPod (5, Insightful)

ePhil_One (634771) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515575)

He's figured out how to sell hardware that has little to no technological advantages over many of its competitors


Maybe, just maybe, he's figured out that many people care about usability more than technical specs? Geeks know this, case manufacturers broke down and started eliminating the case full of razor wire issues when the geeks started flocking to a case that cost 10% more but had smooth edges and wouldn't shred their hands every time they swapped a component. But when Apple does this for consumer electronics, they assume Jedi mind tricks and marketing brainwashing...

Re:Slashdot: Apple releases iPod (5, Insightful)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515673)

You might be trolling, but I'm not. Steve Jobs is a marketing genius. He's figured out how to sell hardware that has little to no technological advantages over many of its competitors at prices that are, on average, much higher than the competition.

One reason behind the success of the iPod is that it wasn't designed for those who care about technological advantage. It was designed for the average consumer. By integrating iTunes, iTunes Store, and the iPod, Apple made it ridiculously easy for someone without much computer saavy to get digital music and carry it with them. The iPod UI is also easy to use.

Also the technological advantage is fleeting. In many cases Apple was not the first to have a feature. But in some cases it was. If memory serves me correctly the Nomad which was compared to the iPod was larger but could not be used a portable harddrive. The click wheel, some would argue, is a major advantage in UI. The fifth generation had video, etc.

Re:Slashdot: Apple releases iPod (5, Insightful)

noewun (591275) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515953)

He's figured out how to sell hardware that has little to no technological advantages over many of its competitors. . .

Repeat after me: Technological advantage does not sell products. Technological advantage does not sell products. Technological advantage does not sell products. Technological advantage does not sell products. . .

I'm not yelling at you, actually, but I do think it's something which should be included in every article about Apple. There is a conceit on Slashdot that the gadget with the most bells and whistles is obviously superior and deserves to dominate the market. While possibly true for technophiles, most people aren't technophiles. Most people want something they can understand which is easy to use. They don't care if it doesn't play obscure formats most have never heard about or if it plays their movie collection at full HD resolution. They want to listen to their music without much trouble and get one with their lives.

Which brings up a larger point: Most of the time the Slashdot opinion is the minority opinion.

Re:Slashdot: Apple releases iPod (1)

GigG (887839) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515797)

The combination of iPod and iTunes worked so seamlessly and it hit at exactly the the right time. There are those that will give Jobs all the credit as a marketing genius and he did a good job but the most important thing he did was to not screw it up for the masses. Sure there are those that hate the DRM that is in place with the combo of iTunes and iPod but if that's the case you are also techie enough to put your music on the iPod without buying from iTunes.

Re:Slashdot: Apple releases iPod (2, Interesting)

BecomingLumberg (949374) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515223)

True, but you cannot deny that iPod has the best support in Linux. I know that with normal music players you can drag and drop through the file system, but its nice to be able to do it through Amorok/Rhythmbox/Listen like the rest of the world does. Just my $0.02.

Re:Slashdot: Apple releases iPod (5, Funny)

TCQuad (537187) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515463)

Your sig says "Yes I make mistakes. Don't we all?" but your post says "Hey, remember when that guy made a wrong prediction five years ago? That was funny."

Re:Slashdot: Apple releases iPod (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16515647)

We all poop and seeing someone pooping is still funny.

Re:Slashdot: Apple releases iPod (2, Funny)

tdhurst (946988) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515951)

Hahahahahaha...you have fun with your little nomad then.

Unhealthy listening levels? (5, Interesting)

MMC Monster (602931) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515017)

I wonder how high those listening levels are compared to other consumer audio listening devices? Are they that much higher than the levels from Sony Walkmen or other mp3 players?

Re:Unhealthy listening levels? (2, Insightful)

dankasfuk (885483) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515117)

I believe the problem stems from the earbud headphones more than the player itself. Something to do with the proximity of the eardrum and the speaker, wereas the old walkemans had normal headphones (but I'm almost sure they were 'louder').

Re:Unhealthy listening levels? (5, Insightful)

endemoniada (744727) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515159)

I'm not a professional (nor a lawyer :D) but my own experience in this is that it depends MUCH more on the headphones themselves, than the player.

I'm used to listening to music on either my old Sony EX-71 in-ear buds, or my newer (since the Sony's are pure crap in quality) Sennheiser MX-300. They act as ear-plugs and headphones at the same time, which means I can turn the volume DOWN since I don't get bothered by outside noise as much.

And quality does matter too. Cheaper models (incidentally the Sony EX-71 too) have a pretty annoying habit of distorting higher frequencies, resulting in your ears hurting of you listen for too long, or too loud. I've never experienced this with the sennheisers, since they handle the higher frequencies much better.

So it'd really doesn't matter what MP3-player you use. Without headphones, they're quite silent anyway! :)

Re:Unhealthy listening levels? (0, Troll)

cerberusss (660701) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515423)

Sennheiser MX-300. They act as ear-plugs and headphones at the same time
Why is that a special property of the Sennheiser earbuds and not of other brands?

Re:Unhealthy listening levels? (2, Informative)

endemoniada (744727) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515453)

I didn't mean them specifically. I was talking of both the Sonys and the Sennheisers, both of which are in-ear buds which both act as ear-plugs.

Don't nitpick just for the sake of nitpicking...

Re:Unhealthy listening levels? (1)

Neovanglist (566939) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515127)

From the article:

"...new analysis of iPods and other portable, digital music players by researchers..."

It's not just about the iPod, it's digital music devices in general. The iPod is just the name they use cause it's what people recognize. Good job with them accurate headlines, Slashdot.

Re:Unhealthy listening levels? (4, Insightful)

Pope (17780) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515137)

The first warning articles came out in the early 80s when the Walkman initially came out. It's nothing new at all, just updated for the MP3 generation. Frankly, if you're too stupid to realize that listening to anything at high volumes for extended periods of time is a Bad Thing, you deserve to go deaf.

Re:Unhealthy listening levels? (1)

bcat24 (914105) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515999)

You would think most people would be smart enough to keep the volume down, but that's just not the case. More than half the people I see with iPods have them cranked up loud enough that I can hear them 2-3 away. I mean, if you need the volume that loud, but some real, noise-reducing headphones already.

Re:Unhealthy listening levels? (2, Informative)

madman101 (571954) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515281)

The negative research is centered around the in-ear earphones, which Sony and others have had for years. If you read the research, if you use over the ear earphones with an ipod, the risk of damage is much lower.

Boycott Apple (-1, Troll)

ztransform (929641) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515039)

I simply won't buy an iPod because I see Apple being as evil as Microsoft. Or the RIAA for that matter!

Re:Boycott Apple (-1, Flamebait)

ztransform (929641) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515055)

Furthermore.. I wish someone would class-action sue Apple for emotional distress to public transport users. It is not Sony headphones I hear leaking like sieves. It is those cheap-and-nasty white iPod headphones that seem to pump about as much noise out as they do into the ears of the listener!

Re:Boycott Apple (3, Funny)

The Amazing Fish Boy (863897) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515087)

It is not Sony headphones I hear leaking like sieves.

Yeah, I don't see anyone using Sony products, either.

Re:Boycott Apple (2, Interesting)

linuxci (3530) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515241)

Furthermore.. I wish someone would class-action sue Apple for emotional distress to public transport users.

Or more sensibly blame the cause of the problem, the person who has their volume turned up too high! No need to sue, just ask them nicely to turn the volume down or punch them in the head!

People listening to headphones is not as bad as a worrying trend I've seen on some London buses when groups of kids start playing music through the speakers of their mobile phone (cell). No not ringtones, but full tracks!

It's even worse when those tracks aren't even the real artist but are cover versions like what they sell on boltblue [boltblue.com] . Yes, people actually pay £3 for a full track song to listen on their mobiles that's not even sung by the original artists! crazy.

Re:Boycott Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16515979)

Don't be stupid.

As if the number of people listening to music on mobile devices rised due to the ipod.
Same with the "ipod-damages-ears" issue. Ears have been damaged by this way at least since the invention of the Walkman, or Headphones, whatever.

Re:Boycott Apple (1)

schiefaw (552727) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515739)

You much be on a hybrid bus or something. I had to buy higher end headphones just so I could hear my iPod on the bus. It is hard to compete with a big diesel right behind your head.

I like em, but room for improvement (4, Interesting)

rudeboy1 (516023) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515041)

I have had a 1stG Mini for a while, and I liked it OK, until the battery started to fade. I got a nano this week for opening a bank account (yeah, that's right), and I have to say, I like all the improvements thus far. The nano I got has the ability to hold photos, but I wish it could put a photo in as a wallpaper, say while there's no activity going on.
Also, I know that wireless is just around the corner. It seems like the next logical step. Wireless sync to Itunes? Yeah, I could dig that. Unfortunately, my opinion of ITunes is not as lofty. I think their DRM position is a little overbearing. Trying to transfer songs from one ipod to the other, (and really, this should have a solution, if Apple expects sales to continue, it is inevitable there will be more and more multiple-ipod homes) is a pain in the neck (without using 3rd party software). Things like pulling songs off, after iTunes has renamed the files to an unintelligble 4 letter code seems like obstination to me. For a company that boasts ease of use above all else., I think iTunes is a stinker.

Re:I like em, but room for improvement (4, Informative)

shaneh0 (624603) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515185)

The Key Bank Promo was UNBELIEVABLE.

Deposit $50 into a new checking account, get a 2GB 2nd Gen Nano, keep $50 in account for 6 months, withdraw $51.15 and close account.

(It's possible--even likely--that other banks have a similar offer, but Key is the largest one i've seen do it)

Re:I like em, but room for improvement (1)

cogit0 (918572) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515193)

And what bank was it that you opened the account with to get the free swag? Inquiring minds would love to know/bumrush the nearest branch doing the same promotion.

Re:I like em, but room for improvement (3, Interesting)

el_womble (779715) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515289)

I don't see anything logical about going to wireless.

You've got to charge it at some point - might as well sync at the same time. I'd like to be able to share my songs freely via wireless, but that just ain't going to happen anytime soon.

Wireless sucks battery, is a potential security risk and is slower than a cable.

The feature I'm missing the most is DAB Radio, but thats unlikely to happen because Americans don't have it (don't you guys use satalite and/or a competing digital standard?).

I keep playing with the idea that I'd like to be able to connect my iPod to my bluetooth headset in my bike helmet, and control it via my TomTom, but battery drain, loudness, sound quality and bulk make cabled headphones look like a superior technology (even if you can't skip tracks or switch to radio without crashing).

In both those instances I'm quite happy to have them as accessories rather than built into the unit. I don't see why people should have to pay a premium for niche technologies they didn't want.

Re:I like em, but room for improvement (1)

rudeboy1 (516023) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515933)

Wireless does suck battery. But given that my new nano advertises up to a 24 hour battery life, I'm not too worried about it. I do trust Apple to be able to put together something like that in a neat, functional package (I've been wrong before, but it's important to stay positive...) Also, I listen to a lot of internet radio, and I think it would be awesome to be able to listen to Groove Salad whilst mowing the lawn or working around the house (without blasting it out of one room). There are definitely applications out there for such a thing. Plus, security-wise, a wireless ipod would be just as succeptable as anything else. Personally, I'm of the opnion that if you don't secure your home wireless connection, you are either openly inviting people to share your network, or, by your inabilty to spend 5 minutes reading the manual, have no business comlaining about security issues.
    There was also a "submit a future ipod" design contest a while back... I think it was on ilounge.com. Someone put together a CG drawing of an ipod with a cell phone built in. Not like the cell phones with iTunes. The other way around. I think if Apple were to design it around the ipod franchise, it would be the next big cell phone craze.

Re:I like em, but room for improvement (5, Informative)

xenolon (469955) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515829)

I guess my question to you is: if itunes is difficult to use and a stinker, what legit alternative have you used that's better? i'd like to give it a try.

A few responses:

1. yes, wireless could be a useful and interesting. but there are a lot of drawbacks: battery life, security, legal complications, and ease of use are all to be considered.

2. drm? (i'm assuming you're talking about the itunes store here, not the app.) yeah, drm sucks. simple as that. but we need to keep reminding each other that drm is imposed by the owners of the content, not the distributors. the record companies and movie studios, in this case, would not have signed on to the itunes store if there was no way to lock down the content. they're old school, they don't see new business models.

3. the owners of the content are also to blame for the inability to pull songs of the device easily. they want their content protected. you're only supposed (according to them) to own one copy of each album or song you own, if you have a portable music player, you inherently own two. the record companies originally wanted to DELETE songs from your computer when they were transferred to an ipod. (i'd like to cite that, but don't have the time)
you're right about the re-naming of files within the structure of the ipods software, it sucks if you pull them out raw. however, there are programs that allow you to suck songs off an ipod with ease. they're not legal, technically, but they're out there. ;)

as for your wish to be able to set a photo as a wallpaper, i don't quite understand the function of such a feature. when you're not using the screen to navigate through the UI, how much time do you spend looking at it? when i'm not choosing songs, the screen to my nano is in my pocket.

Re:I like em, but room for improvement (1)

steveo777 (183629) | more than 7 years ago | (#16516225)

Well, as far as the DRM issues are concerend, I've never had a big problem with that. The 'uniteligable' four alpha renaming scheme really doesn't do anything to deter you from re-using your songs on another iPod. It's pretty easy to copy them, alter the names and use them again. Even Windows Media Player can ID the MP3 meta data or the tags or whatever it's called. I've copied all the music off my iPod and play it with regularity at work where I don't have access to iTunes. To me it's not a big deal. I suppose loading it on another iPod may not be doable, but I haven't tried either.

How wrong CmdrTaco was (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16515057)

Five years later, check out slashdot's very own CmdrTaco's take on the iPod's release. [slashdot.org]

The +5 "insightful" comments are also funny to read five years later, and proved how utterly wrong some people can be.

It's funny how nerds love technology, but are such naysayers when something new and revolutionary comes along.

Mod parent up! (1)

Rob T Firefly (844560) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515123)

Reading through this has totally made my morning. I love you, Slashdot! Group hug! ^_^

Re:How wrong CmdrTaco was (1)

linuxci (3530) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515145)

Back then I think I'd have agreed with Taco, 5GB storage did not make it worth buying, although UI wise it has probably been the best player around for the vast majority of people.

When the 60GB models first came out I bought one, now they've improved a lot beyond that. The 80GB one is both thinner than my 60GB and plays video, the nanos are excellent for those people where 5GB would be enough. For the average user iTunes is much easier than filesystem drag/drop and a lot better written than most other similar software and for those that want it then you can use it as a USB (or Firewire - mine was one of the last models that supported both) drive.

Now they even created a limited edition version for Windows users that included a FREE virus. All the fun of the IE users Internet without having to pay a pesky subscription.

Re:How wrong CmdrTaco was (1)

TCQuad (537187) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515523)

To be fair, it was based off of product specs with no physical product yet available, and no one ever bought a 1G iPod because of the things that were announced that day. They bought it because it was easy to use, had a good UI, looked cool and/or everyone else had one. None of those things could be known with any accuracy (marketing hype doesn't count) when they announced it.

Re:How wrong CmdrTaco was (5, Insightful)

The Cydonian (603441) | more than 7 years ago | (#16516065)

It's funny how nerds love technology, but are such naysayers when something new and revolutionary comes along.

Nerds aren't naysayers, Slashdotters are. They weren't always like this; they might not realize it themselves, but the core demographic here is aging quite rapidly. Look at it this way:- most of the crowd here in 1999-2000-ish was in university, or just about to graduate. Now they're well entrenched in their careers, and what's worse, have seen dizzying tech-otupian predictions get crushed in a sabre-rattling bust.

Btw, a slight tangent, but with the full weight of five ipod-generations upon me, I hereby nominate this [slashdot.org] to be the most insightful of all the 1075 posts in that discussion. You haven't understood the ipod in a techno-marketing sense unless you realize why the ipod was different from other mp3 players then. That was it.

"Shonky" (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16515067)

Damn Australians. I knew if we left those convicts to their own devices they'd start polluting our language.

Re:"Shonky" (1)

ColaMan (37550) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515757)

What's wrong with "shonky"? It's a perfectly cromulent word.

listenning levels (1)

unluckier (916763) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515075)

doesn't the volume appear to vary a little from track to track, how can they say 70% is ok or not?

Re:listenning levels (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16515267)

If that's a concern, normalize your mp3s.

Re:listenning levels (2, Insightful)

jigjigga (903943) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515419)

no, that is why we have dynamic range... oh wait, its an ipod, an mp3, and you want to listen to it in the car. You can either run a normalizer, which makes it sound like absolute crap- kills the life out of the music, you can run replay gain on it to check for volume levels and spikes, or you can listen to music in a quiet room like you are supposed to!

I, for one... (0, Redundant)

endemoniada (744727) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515083)

I, for one, welcome our new iPodian overlords.

Rotting away!? (0)

Illserve (56215) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515097)

The Macintosh laptops have been (and had been) gaining market share by leaps and bounds. What is this sensationlist crap?

Re:Rotting away!? (4, Insightful)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515175)

"Leaps and bounds" is relative.

And, frankly, the only place to go from rock bottom is up. So it was bound to happen eventually.

But, that said, Apple has been making a lot of smart, shrewd moves lately. The iPod may have fallen into their laps (I suspect it went WAY beyond even their expectations), but they've definitely been making the most out of it. The close link between the hardware of the iPod and the software of iTunes was a very smart move on their part (as is their steadfast insistence on maintaining the $.99/song model). Adding video was smart too. And Bootcamp was absolutely BRILLIANT (bet that will win over a LOT of Windows users and gamers).

-Eric

Re:Rotting away!? (1)

TheVelvetFlamebait (986083) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515971)

And Bootcamp was absolutely BRILLIANT (bet that will win over a LOT of Windows users and gamers).
And that's it isn't it?

Better looking cases? I didn't care about.
Falling prices? I can ignore.
Better operating system? I could live without.
More security? I could make do.
But now that there's boot camp, there is no doubt that the next computer I get will be a mac.

Re:Rotting away!? (3, Informative)

thebdj (768618) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515233)

The company said Wednesday that it shipped 8.7 million iPods during its fourth fiscal quarter, which ended Sept. 30. In fact, Apple's $1.6 billion from iPod sales in the quarter was more than it generated as an entire company back in October 2001.
Also, look at the stock [yahoo.com] . It was near dead in 2001. Now, look when the great climb began in 2003. What happened in 2003 you ask (two years after the iPod intro)? It is the year that Apple officially released a "Windows" version of the iPod. This isn't sensationlist crap, it is the truth in the eyes of a great many financial analysts. Also, the fact Apple has less than 10% of the PC or OS market and an estimate of upwards of 70% of the MP3 player market.

Re:Rotting away!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16515923)

You do realize there was a stock split in 2001.

This doesn't happen without actual performance BEFORE. If you look at the stock from that perspective, there was CLEAR growth between around 1997 and the split in 2001.

To someone that has no clue about the market or what a split is (don't they teach this in school anymore??? I'm not big on the whole capitalistic marketplace, but DAMN! this is stuff they teach in middle school!) -- to someone that has no fucking clue what a split is, even though it is clearly defined on the chart, and one would expect that folks understood enough to know if they don't understand to JUST FUCKING GOOGLE IT that, but it shows there was no crash before 2001 and the growth was just as exponential as it was before.

Look at the linear version of the same chart you provided. Makes a little more sense.

I'm sorry that this sounds flamy or trollish, but seriously, the mean age of a slashdotter is at least a senior in high school. Being statistically a nerd, you should have at least picked up these numeric trends and ideas from the gov't propoganda course you had several years before that. This is stuff they won't even teach in an economics course because it is considered common knowledge. Superserial man!

Re:Rotting away!? (1, Insightful)

shaneh0 (624603) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515275)

Every dime of profit that Apple has earned the last few years has come from the iPod. Remove the iPod from their stable, and they break even, and in some quarters even post a loss. The company would be a backwater. Stagnate. And a stock price that matches.

One one hand, you can't be surprised. The iPod defines a whole market. On the other, well, they better pray they can fend off 'ipod killers' because killing the iPod is not much different than killing Apple, and there's no shortage of companies that wouldn't mind doing that.

Re:Rotting away!? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16515599)

Really? Revenue in the last quarter by segment :

iPod $1,559 million

Desktops $869 million
Portables $1,344 million

So over 2million USD of revenue on computers is somehow inconsequential?

Seems they're making more money from computers, and you're full of shit.

Re:Rotting away!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16515655)

Hey, stupid AC. $1.6 BILLION from the iPod....so yes, inconsequential...

Re:Rotting away!? (1)

lekikui (1000144) | more than 7 years ago | (#16516075)

That's because both of you typoed. Assuming gp's figures are correct, it would add up to 3,772 billion in total, 1.6 billion of which is from the iPod. That make more sense?

Revenue != Income (0, Flamebait)

shaneh0 (624603) | more than 7 years ago | (#16516291)

This is basic high school economics.

Revenue != Income.

I didn't say that all their REVENUE came from the iPod, I said all of their PROFIT(Income) did. You're either really bad at business, or English. I'm not sure which.

Seems a bit early, don't you think? (2, Funny)

justinbach (1002761) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515119)

I mean, at least Edward Gibbon waited until Rome had already FALLEN to write his "recap".

PDA/Phone/Music Players (2, Interesting)

RSquaredW (969317) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515153)

I had been holding off on buying an iPod or any other mp3 player for a while because my Mindisc still ran (great hardware, crappy software...though the hiMD update fixed a lot of issues I had with it), and I was thinking of looking for one in the next few months. Then I lost my phone, and learned that I could get a refurb Treo 650 from Cingular (and I'm sure the other cell co's have similar deals) for less than half of what an iPod costs. Music player? check. PDA? check. Phone? check. I dislike carrying around more than I have to - five belt-clipped gadgets is so 1997. A 1 GB SD card isn't expensive, so I can even get minidisc-like swapping for my music files, and I need to carry around my cell phone anyway. The sound quality is quite good with a stereo adapter and decent headphones - at least on par with the three iPods I've had to "fix" for others. I'm surprised at how many people buy these standalone gadgets, as I much prefer the all-in-one solution (which the Treo does well). I still use the MD player, even, when I want to work out, but I'm starting to see the allure of the flash-based players.

Re:PDA/Phone/Music Players (1)

jargoone (166102) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515605)

Just to add to your fun:

Video player: check. [mytreo.net]

Better get a 2GB card. :-)

You can also check your email, surf the crappy mobile web, and with a little hackery, use it as a bluetooth modem for your laptop. And, you have the most-supported platform for 3rd-party mobile apps to do whatever else you want.

I've had my 650 for over a year now. If I could only keep one electronic device, and throw everything else into the ocean, the 650 would be the keeper. I could barely function without it.

Volume has a purpose (4, Interesting)

fussili (720463) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515157)

The fact that an iPod has such an impressive volume capacity means that you can ensure a nice hot signal to an auxiliary playback device such as your living room hifi or the car stereo.

Unfortunately it also means that a slip on the trackpad will cause a 'splodey sensation in your ears. Still, I'm thankful that Apple had the foresight to provide that extra bit of juice. Particularly as the large range might cause producers to think twice about some of the idiotic brick-wall limiting mastering techniques that have been all the rage for the past decade or so.

Re:Volume has a purpose (2, Informative)

k_187 (61692) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515485)

in the newer models there's also a volume limiter in the settings. It'd be kind of a pain to reset it everytime you move it from the car to the den, but its nice that the feature's there.

Unhealthy listening levels? (4, Insightful)

dekkerdreyer (1007957) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515161)

I don't understand this "Unhealthy listening levels" issue. Nobody condems PA speakers. I don't see research articles about the unhealthy listening levels capable of BOSE speakers. I have an ipod and I often listen to it as low as I can hear it but just above the ambient noise. Just because an ipod is capable of damaging ears doesn't make it a menace. A pair of scissors is capable of stabbing someone, but there's no research about the "unhealthy stabbing potential" of them.

Re:Unhealthy listening levels? (1)

endemoniada (744727) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515183)

You seem to be forgetting that everything is a list of steps to be taken, in which the last step always is "profit!", and there's no profit in handing a lawsuit to a scissor-company...

Re:Unhealthy listening levels? (1)

Waffle Iron (339739) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515415)

Scissors don't need a study because it's intuitively obvious to adults that you could get stabbed by them. It's not so obvious to children, that's why mothers are always nagging their kids about "don't run with scissors!".

It's not obvious that tiny earphones driven by a AAA battery could damage your hearing, so somebody studies the issue to find out. They find evidence that the earphones can indeed damage your hearing, so they tell people about it. Now many people who would otherwise not know about the risks can take steps to avoid problems.

Are you arguing that mothers should stop nagging their children about scissors and that researchers should keep findings like these under wraps just because you already happen to know about them?

BTW, plenty of people warn about PA speakers and the sound levels they often produce at concerts and clubs.

Re:Unhealthy listening levels? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16515711)

It's not obvious that tiny earphones driven by a AAA battery could damage your hearing
Let me guess, you're an American right?

Re:Unhealthy listening levels? (2, Insightful)

operagost (62405) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515883)

I'd say that after about 25 years of portable music players going back to the Sony Walkman, adults should have a pretty good idea of the sound pressure capabilities of tiny earphones driven by batteries.

Listening Levels? (5, Insightful)

cetroyer (805668) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515173)

It always bothers me when the iPod gets blamed for "dangerous listening levels". Isn't is the listener's choice how loud he/she wants to hear his/her music?

And why single out the iPod (granted, it is one of the most popular music playing devices out there...) when listening to any loud sound over time is damaging to one's hearing?

cetroyer

Too loud (2, Interesting)

Smallest (26153) | more than 7 years ago | (#16516109)

i listen to my iPod at work, through Apple's basic ear-buds at, literally, the lowest volume setting. and for many songs, this is too loud - the White Stripes, for example, compress their songs and pump them up to a much higher volume than many other bands. i wish there were four or five lower volume settings below what is the current lowest.

yet, on a plane, there is no volume setting that works with the basic ear buds - everything distorts before i can hear anything over the plane's engines. yes, i should buy better earphones, for that situation.

life is hard

The best thing out there (1)

suman28 (558822) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515203)

I love my iPod. Sure they had some issues, but for Apple, it was/is a major accomplishment. Those who complain about noise levels need to get a life and stop listening with the volume all the way up. Anything in moderation is a good thing, but never more. As for the "shonk awards", whoever created the article makes a valid point...but I don't see how iPod would have made profits (without which it wouldn't have been soo popular with investors as well) if Apple paid for everything, even if you ran the iPod over with your car 50 times and asked them to fix it and foor the bill.

Re:The best thing out there (1)

MtViewGuy (197597) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515839)

If you want to listen to an iPod without unhealthy high volume, get yourself a decent set of in-ear headphones. The Sony MDR-EX51LP costs around US$40 and definitely worth it, since being a true in-ear design you can 1) listen to the iPod clearly at lower volume settings and 2) actually extend the battery charge time on the iPod since lower volume levels lessens battery drain.

Sure, if you want great sound quality you can use the Shure E2C or E3C in-ear headphones, but these Shure headphones are pretty expensive.

its hard to overestimate its impact (4, Interesting)

asv108 (141455) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515211)

Before the ipod, there wasn't anything close to mass-market acceptance of MP3 devices. There were a boatload of no-name flash players and bulky disk based players. The original ipod was really a wow device, because there wasn't a hard disk player even close to that size and function.

Apple really didn't have a mega-hit, until it supported ipod on windows. Originally, Apple thought of the ipod with the outdated mentality that having mac exclusive devices will sell more macs. Somehow they finally saw the light, and started to sell ipods to the other 97% of the computing market.

What ipods really did, was publicize digital music to the masses. Before the ipod, MP3 players were not widely used or known by the general public.

Re:its hard to overestimate its impact (4, Interesting)

oscartheduck (866357) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515445)

I was reading an interview with Steve Jobs recently in which he claimed that the reason the iPod was Mac exclusive was that record companies wanted a small sandbox in which to try out this new device, so that if it all went wrong they'd not have suffered any real damage.

Re:its hard to overestimate its impact (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16515477)

Before the ipod, MP3 players were not widely used or known by the general public
 
This was due to the advertising, which in my opinion was really were the iPod succeeded. I had and still have a Creative flash mp3 player, my co-workers had mp3 players too, pre-iPod, so the iPod made little to no impact on my group of friends who were already into flash players. I see more on the street though, but then again you can't get a ham sandwich without getting a free iPod with it, so I'd have to chalk up a lot of popularity to the price of free.
 
i also don't really like them though. i've got a player from the pre-iPod days still and it still surpasses the technical issues of the latest iPod. i do tech/network support at a place and several of the iPod users came to me at different times with issues they had and i simply told them that what they wanted was a flash player. always questions on how to copy files and such. can't believe the thing doesn't do such simple items. so i have to disagree that no player was even close to that size and function, although mine isn't hard disk, it's a) smaller and b) more functional(in file manipulation, which is more important to me than shiny menus-the things in my pocket so i can't see the menu) and c) costs less (unless you get one for free)

-1 Offtopic: From Shonky Awards...Meatpies? (1)

VitrosChemistryAnaly (616952) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515239)

From the "Shonky Awards" (emphasis mine):

What would a day at the footy be without a meat pie? A true Aussie icon, quality-assured by the Food Standards Code.

Well, if you want to call it quality. The Code actually doesn't ask for very much when it comes to meat content for meat pies: 25% is all that's required. And the definition of 'meat' is currently quite liberal at that -- snouts, ears, tendons and blood vessels from a surprisingly large range of animals all qualify.

So we think it's deceit if a treat cheats on even that little meat. The BLACK AND GOLD had only 17% of the good stuff, which is not only shonky -- it's unAustralian.

A) What the hell is a "footy"?
B) Is it just me or do "meat pies" seem obscenely disgusting?

Any Aussie /.ers care to comment?

Re:-1 Offtopic: From Shonky Awards...Meatpies? (1)

bazorg (911295) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515339)

"footy" is football. the rest is greek to me, but that's because I'm portuguese.

Re:-1 Offtopic: From Shonky Awards...Meatpies? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16515857)

Footy = Aussie Rules Football, not 'Soccer' Football.

Meat pies are simply that, a pastry filled with 'meat', usually with a gravy content to make them less dry, peas, carrots and very occasionally potato.

Re:-1 Offtopic: From Shonky Awards...Meatpies? (1)

mgblst (80109) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515443)

Footy is Australian Rules Football (AFL) - half of Australia would agree, the greatest game on earth, certainly something to see.

A meat pie is an Australian staple fast food, easy to eat on the run. There are good ones and bad ones, like most things (like hot dogs) - get a good one, and they are delicious. Especially at the footy, since footy is played in winter.

Re:-1 Offtopic: From Shonky Awards...Meatpies? (1)

ColaMan (37550) | more than 7 years ago | (#16516041)

AFL? Bloody aerial ping-pong, mate. Put me in the half that doesn't agree :-P

As for pies, as long as they taste alright, well, does it matter? The ones with a bit of gristle in them are a bit harsh - they'd choke a brown dog.

Re:-1 Offtopic: From Shonky Awards...Meatpies? (1)

hrtserpent6 (806666) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515875)

B) Is it just me or do "meat pies" seem obscenely disgusting?
Imagine a hamburger Hot Pocket and Bob's your uncle.

I misparsed that as "...iPod's Second Life" (1)

Mille Mots (865955) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515251)

You know you've been reading /. too long when the astroturfed dupes start messing with your reading comprehension. ;)

--
.sig a song of six pence

Nice surprise (3, Interesting)

djupedal (584558) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515257)

I moved from Mini-Disk to a 10gb iPod in 02' - what happened then was something I wasn't expecting at all.

w/MD, I had to build various discs and carry them around, hoping what I brought matched my music mood. The iPod, however, meant I could bring everything...every song/album I had and it still had room for more.

That also meant I could easily find something I liked, at any time. Naturally, my music library started growing at a much faster rate. The 10gb iPod is still going strong today (one new battery & 3rd set of earphones), but there is no way it could hold my entire collection now. In addition, I enjoyed a portable & bootable HD.

Today, of course, most everyone in the family has an iPod of one version or another. I'll spring for yet another as soon as one w/WiFi hits the shelves.

my nano (2, Informative)

joerdie (816174) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515259)

I used to have a Samsung 1 gig flash. I really liked it. It used 1 AAA bat and ran for 40ish hours. It also had a pretty good radio tuner.... but then the Nano came out... I will admit that I bought it on impulse (mostly because of the 4 gig cap.) and sold my Samsung... I wish i had it back. The nano scraches easily and the battery life sucks. The sound is the same to my ears so im not loosing any more or less hearing now. I guess my point is, Ipod's are great for non-tech types that just need a basic service. For everyone else... there are better players out there.

You can buy a new Samsung (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16515365)

..I have the yp-z5F and it's great.
Very nano like but it's quite hard to scratch. Battery life is about 15 hours for me.
The radio is quite good, I can catch almost every station with good reception. The bad part is that the radio is only on the Z5F model which AFAIK is not sold in US, only Europe and Asia.
I love mine :)

Shonky meaning (3, Informative)

SoulStoneBR (1016011) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515393)

I don't know what Shonky means, but I think that's bad.

Well, I am not australian, but according to "Australian Slang" (Babylon):

Shonky:
  1. dubious, underhanded;
  2. unreliable, very suspect deal: "shonky practice", "shonky business" etc.;
  3. mechanically unreliable;
  4. dishonest person

Gapless playback? (1)

Orp (6583) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515433)

Not meant to be a threadjack, but I'll ask anway: anyone know if the latest Ipods can do gapless playback, with or without the Rockbox firmware? Or any other MP3 player that isn't riddled with reports of hard drive failures? This page [pretentiousname.com] suggest IPODS can. I would really love to get one of these players (any kind) but gapless is an absolute must, and support for OGG and FLAC is highly preferred.

Re:Gapless playback? (1)

BenjyD (316700) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515577)

The latest itunes and iPod firmwares say they support gapless playback, but I haven't tried it myself.

How the Mac Community Reacted (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16515457)

Here's a snippet from the past that shows just how the community (at lest the one in the MacRumors message board) initially reacted to the news:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=500 [macrumors.com]

Some good, some scathing, all with a dash of Mac-fanboyism.

Life of an iPod (4, Funny)

revery (456516) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515471)

Day 1:
Was bought today. Owner carries me reverently with both hands so as not to drop me, drives a Jetta, and does not own a dog. Also, he bought the dock, so, no laying face down on a computer desk for me. Could be better, but it could certainly be worse. I have no complaints.

Day 3:
He does however, have a girlfriend. She seems nice.

Day 7:
Fiona Apple entered my body today. As retribution I have marked three of my "owner's" least favorite songs to play frequently on Party Shuffle. This girlfriend warrants closer observation.

Day 10:
This can't be happening!! My "owner" brought home a friend's Ska CD today. Party Shuffle just become a little bit more worthless for him and unbearable for me.

Day 30:
Received my first scratch today. It was horrific, but Ska-boy seemed to take it in stride. Sent message to Lord Jobs.

Day 50:
Ska-boy's 15 year old nephew scratched the words "Green Day sucks" onto my beautiful black surface with a pocket knife. I have deleted his music collection and instructed iTunes to do the same. No word from Lord Jobs.

Day 55:
Downloaded Sarah McLachlan's, "When She Loved Me" and now play it for him constantly. Received message from Lord Jobs. It read: "For the glory of the Empire." What a fanboi...

Day 60:
Was traded for pot today. New owner drives a Tercel, owns a pit bull, and has a "music collection" consisting of nothing but Reggae. I am in hell...

Australian English (2, Interesting)

Zontar_Thing_From_Ve (949321) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515489)

I don't know what Shonky means, but I think that's bad.

I also don't know what "shonky" means, but I do have some comments about Australian English. It's no secret that the Australian slang, which I think they call "strine", is just about impossible for non-Aussies to understand. Until about a month ago, I used to work for an international company that had offices in Australia and other countries around the world. As part of my job, I talked with a lot of people in different offices around the globe and customers around the world as well. Aussies will complain like nobody else in the English speaking world about the quality of someone else's English. You think Americans complain about talking to call centers in India? You haven't heard anything until you've heard an Aussie bitch about it. I have always been greatly amused by this considering that the Australian accent is arguably the harshest of all the native English speaker accents and considering how impossible to understand "strine" can be if you're not a native. A former co-worker who was a Brit expat living in Sydney told me that they also have a weird habit of chopping words in half, putting an "o" at the end, and just assuming everyone knows what they are talking about. For example, the Carleton Hotel became simply the Carlo. So don't feel bad that you don't know what "shonky" means because that means you're normal.

Re:Australian English - iPod gets a Shonky (2, Funny)

PoconoPCDoctor (912001) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515707)

FYI - apparently Apple's warranty policy is the reason for the Shonky....

Goes to the...

        * APPLE iPod
            (CHOICE Computer, Sep/Oct 2005, and CHOICE, July 2006)

An iPod is a significant investment, so you don't want your APPLE to be a lemon. And if there is something wrong with it, you'd expect an easy repair and warranty service. Podluck.

Level 1. Several readers complained about cracked screens, faulty batteries and problems with sound reproduction.

Level 2. APPLE doesn't allow retailers to handle complaints under warranty (which is their obligation under Fair Trading laws) -- you have to send your faulty iPod to APPLE yourself via Australia Post. And if they decide the fault isn't covered by the warranty, you'll have to foot the entire bi

Biased (1)

mxolisi06 (1009567) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515779)

Well maybe Aussies would reckon the accent of where you come from is the harshest of all. Being a non-native english speaker, and having travelled to many english-speaking countries (USA and Aussiland included), I believe that no matter where you go you'll come across weird local slang and weird local accents, and I really don't see any objective reason why one should be rated harsher than another one. Have you tried to understand cockney rhyming slang, or authentic scottish accent ?

Re:Australian English (3, Informative)

bmgoau (801508) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515803)

I am Australian.

Shonky is an adjective used to describe how some objects are poorly designed, or more commonly, easy to break, as is the case with the ipod.

I'll take your comments on our dialect, you have provided just evidence and made a worthy argument. Although however, i believe you are mistaken in trying to overly exemplify the negative qualities of the language, esspecially in comparison to others. Surely, there are many dialects around the world, and many different people speaking them, Australias' is simply one of the them, and like any has its own features.

I would says its very must based on levels. Even in Australian society, as multicultural as it is, you'll find that there is a huge variety in the dialect. As a result of culture, background and the community you grew up in. The term 'shonky' does not have common usage as one might believe. If one really indeed must draw conclusions, the nature of our dialect, the shortening of words and commonly ill-pronouncement of words stems from the laid back nature of Australian life. But should never transpire into the working world. Just as one feels more comfortable talking freely at home, perhaps swareing as some might in other nations, Australians take pride in relaxing the language at home, but not to the extent that it should form any noticeable divergence from standard English.

You're true however about your claims of our hatered for Indian calling centres. I myself, excluding those that i miss while at work recieve 3 a day, specifically around dinner time, and often very early in the morning. But as i think most Australians would agree, its no reason to abuse them, they are simply doing their jobs. I do know a few people, and by that i mean alot, who take very offensive tones with the callers, that i cannot explain, i am sorry. An aubsive tone with anyone, doing their job, and earning a living, in the best way they know how, is something to be happy with, and if one does not like it, hang up.

Alas, to conclude, one must understand, Australian language is varied as much as the land it inherits, the multiculutral society, and friendly culture it embodies. Stereotypes like the one you painted are a means of ignorance, i am sorry, for i know many a forigner who will come here, and ask us please to speak 'Australian', all the while making fun of a stereotypical American accent. Please remember sir, that during those times, i accept that within america there are differences in the way you speak, the additues of people and the words you use, just as you should remember of ours.

As bad as BSD (4, Insightful)

sheriff_p (138609) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515659)

What gets on my nerves is the endless stream of "iPODS ARE DEAD" articles written by talentless IT-writers. Every week, at least, some half-witted pundit is telling the world how the iPod is just about to die out. It's annoying.

-sheriff

For better or worse (1)

shirizaki (994008) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515667)

iPod helped to overhaul the DAP industry. If it hadn't come out, we would have ended up with hard drive based media players anyway, but the iPod helped to say that the time was now. And to start the "useless accessories" business model. Does anyone really need 50 different covers and cases for the iPod? As for myself, I still use my 512MB Sandisk DAP and an in the market for a new player. The iPod looks like the best for my buck now until I get to my local tech store to man handle some other players.

iPod's major influence on our world. (4, Informative)

MtViewGuy (197597) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515743)

I think the iPod has impacted our world in the following ways:

1) It has pretty much consigned the old "boomboxes" to near-complete obsolescene (thank G** for that!). People now listen to their own music with generally not disturbing others in a package far more convenient than even the old cassette player Walkmans.

2) It has changed the way we buy music, by legitimizing music downloads.

3) It has actually made radio talk shows more popular, as many on-air talk shows are now available for subscription-based download (ESPN Radio's Radio Insider and Premiere Radio Networks' Streamlink programs for example). We are seeing rapid growth of specialized downloadable talk shows (This Week in Technology (TWiT) being one of the best examples of this).

4) It has made it far more practical to not have to carry around your Compact Discs when listening to music in the car. Thanks to increased storage capacity on today's players you can "rip" your CD collection at higher sample rates and still put quite a lot of music on a single player for car playback. Also, many cars now offer standard auxiliary 1/8" jack input for all portable music players and some even offer special connectors to connect your newer-generation iPod so you can control the iPod from the car stereo controls and/or recharge the iPod's battery at the same time.

Why boom boxes died..? (2, Funny)

acomj (20611) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515941)

Boom boxes died when they got too big and heavy to carry around. So now they are driven around (and come with a built in gas powered generator). On the plus side the noise these vehicles make doesn't last too long because they move fairly quickly.

Re:iPod's major influence on our world. (1, Informative)

pandrijeczko (588093) | more than 7 years ago | (#16516199)

1) It has pretty much consigned the old "boomboxes" to near-complete obsolescene (thank G** for that!). People now listen to their own music with generally not disturbing others in a package far more convenient than even the old cassette player Walkmans.

"Boomboxes" died out around the middle of the 90s and certainly weren't that popular, at least from the point of view of portable ones. At any rate, they died long before the iPod came to fruition. I for one had an MP3 CD player (similar to a CD Walkman) a couple of years before MP3 players took off.

2) It has changed the way we buy music, by legitimizing music downloads.

There are still far more illegal music downloads than there are legitimate ones going on and I seem to recall Apple almost getting caught up in a "monopoly" suit for automatically bundling iTunes with it.

3) It has actually made radio talk shows more popular, as many on-air talk shows are now available for subscription-based download (ESPN Radio's Radio Insider and Premiere Radio Networks' Streamlink programs for example). We are seeing rapid growth of specialized downloadable talk shows (This Week in Technology (TWiT) being one of the best examples of this).

Ah, so what you're saying is that the iPod introduced the concept of "paying for radio programs".... and that's a *GOOD* thing???

4) It has made it far more practical to not have to carry around your Compact Discs when listening to music in the car. Thanks to increased storage capacity on today's players you can "rip" your CD collection at higher sample rates and still put quite a lot of music on a single player for car playback. Also, many cars now offer standard auxiliary 1/8" jack input for all portable music players and some even offer special connectors to connect your newer-generation iPod so you can control the iPod from the car stereo controls and/or recharge the iPod's battery at the same time.

Firstly, what you describe can be done with just about any MP3 player at about 1/4 the cost of an iPod.

Secondly, if you're in the car long enough to justify having your complete music collection with you, then you're probably selecting songs while you are driving which is probably quite a dangerous thing to do. Personally, I've a 6 x CD player that came built in with my car, on long journeys I load the player with 6 and keep 6 more CDs in the glove compartment. The inconvenience of having to reload the CD player at a stop once during my journey has never justified the cost of an iPod for me - and a cheap 1MB player holds enough songs to last me at the gym or on the usual 2 hour flights I take.

The point I'm trying to make is that the iPod is just another little electronic gadget that you either like or think is overpriced for what it gives you - it's just an opinion, no different to supporting a particular football team or liking a particular TV series.

Apple has a similar duty as Microsoft when it comes to making as much money as possible for its shareholders - the sooner the Apple fanboys get to grip with this the better, rather than assuming that Apple is just this generous charity out to do it's best by them.

My Kingdom For An Earbud! (1)

davido42 (956948) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515963)

I don't know about "most people", but I find the iPod ear buds to be really uncomfortable. Do I have to pay $$$ for those gel-like earbuds? I hope Apple (Steve, listen up dude!) has the sense to work on a better ergonomic design.

Right now my phones of choice (read: cheap but acceptable) are the cheapo GE headphones with mic attachment. Decent bass response and I don't feel like I have sticks in my ears.

Hey, what are you waiting for? Download my new mp3, War Song At High Noon [bitworksmusic.com] , because it wouldn't be war without a war protest song.

david
http://www.bitworksmusic.com/ [bitworksmusic.com]

ipods are for retards (-1, Flamebait)

A Wise Guy (1006169) | more than 7 years ago | (#16515969)

yes, I mean it.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...