Slashdot Mirror


Birth of the iPod

b00le writes "There's a little story over at Wired about the genesis of the iPod from the point of view of Ben Knauss, a former senior manager at PortalPlayer, the company Apple Computer approached to help develop its player. There's some nice gossip about The Steve's involvement in the project, the extreme secrecy and so on, but for me, the kicker comes at the end: 'Knauss stayed on until near the end of the iPod's development, but quit shortly before it was released because he had no confidence it would be a success. "It was probably a mistake, but then you have to go with what you think at the time," he said.' "

346 comments

  1. Older news slashbox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i cant find it anymore! anyone know where it went?

    1. Re:Older news slashbox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're logged in do you have slashboxes turned off? Go to preferences and click on the 'homepage' tab

    2. Re:Older news slashbox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, as in the option to turn on older news does not show anymore, it has disappeared out of the customize slashboxes list of options. i can turn on others though

    3. Re:Older news slashbox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I actually have the same problem. One day, boom, it dissapeared.

  2. And the winner ... by Alranor · · Score: 5, Funny

    of the understatement of the year contest goes to:

    "It was probably a mistake,"

    1. Re:And the winner ... by timeOday · · Score: 1

      Was it necessarily such a big mistake? Just because you work on something extremely successful doesn't mean it benefits you. Companies don't work that way.

    2. Re:And the winner ... by coolgeek · · Score: 1

      My favorite line:

      Knauss, 33, is now contracting for Microsoft. guess when you burn your bridges with Apple you get exiled to work on Windows.

      --

      cat /dev/null >sig
    3. Re:And the winner ... by gidds · · Score: 1
      Indeed.

      Plus, it's easy to snigger now, in hindsight. But I wonder how many people would have agreed with him at the time. Probably quite a few. (Hard to tell, because it's almost impossible to undo a year or two of impressions and associations.)

      --

      Ceterum censeo subscriptionem esse delendam.

  3. The Pete Best of the iPod by Silver+Sloth · · Score: 5, Funny

    And now he's with M$

    --
    init 11 - for when you need that edge.
    1. Re:The Pete Best of the iPod by Snork+Asaurus · · Score: 4, Informative

      My guess is that most people here will miss the joke by about 2 generations. For those who don't get it: Pete Best.

      --
      Sigs are bad for your health.
    2. Re:The Pete Best of the iPod by Silver+Sloth · · Score: 1

      The Beatles, wasn't that Paul McCartney's band before Wings?

      --
      init 11 - for when you need that edge.
    3. Re:The Pete Best of the iPod by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obscure album liner joke alert:

      ---> Were the Beatles as big as the Bay city rollers?

      (hint: check the jacket for "The Beatles at the Hollywood bowl").

    4. Re:The Pete Best of the iPod by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Beatles, wasn't that Paul McCartney's band before Wings?

      That is a VERY old joke.

    5. Re:The Pete Best of the iPod by tbone1 · · Score: 1
        • The Beatles, wasn't that Paul McCartney's band before Wings?
        That is a VERY old joke.
      Well, they're a very old band. "When I'm Sixty-Four" is now a trip down memory lane.

      --

      The Independent: Reverend Spooner Arrested in Friar Tuck Incident - ISIHAC, Historical Headlines
    6. Re:The Pete Best of the iPod by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      I bet he prefers that over being the Stu Sutcliffe of the iPod. Although, working for Microsoft...

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    7. Re:The Pete Best of the iPod by objekt · · Score: 1

      Seriously, it's a joke from the '70s. A bit on Saturday Night Live.

      The irony is that kids today are much more likely to know The Beatles than Wings.

      --
      -- Boycott Shell
  4. Tee Hee by USAPatriot · · Score: 5, Interesting
    ...because he had no confidence it would be a success. "It was probably a mistake, but then you have to go with what you think at the time," he said.' "

    No kidding, he's not alone.

    Here's what our very own illustrious CmdrTaco said at the time, " No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame."

    --

    Slashdot Moderation: From positive to terrible in 2 "insightful" posts.

    1. Re:Tee Hee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ipods are still lame. 1GB minidiscs will kick their ass

    2. Re:Tee Hee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      minidiscs, even at 1GB, are STILL not what anybody wants. Even 20GB minidiscs wouldn't be what anybody wants.

    3. Re:Tee Hee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But the iPod has wireless now..

    4. Re:Tee Hee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's cool. The iPod now has Wifi. You just need a Pocket PC and some extra software.

    5. Re:Tee Hee by AragornSonOfArathorn · · Score: 3, Insightful

      mindisc WOULD kick ass if it wasn't crippled with DRM and compatible only with Sony's crappy windows software. The hardware is awesome, small, light, runs forever on one AA battery. But its severely limited. The software sucks ass. Sony is shooting themselves in the foot on this one.

      --
      sudo eat my shorts
    6. Re:Tee Hee by Kakemann · · Score: 1

      The reason most techies said things like these are that they simply didn't understand that Apple did with the iPod what nobody had ever done to a HD based MP3 player before: Made it small, user friendly and good looking.

      This is what makes the cute girls go "Ooh! I'd want one of those!". They wouldn't say that about the 1st gen. Nomad.

      Now, what _I_ thought when the iPod was released was this: "Finally a _good_ MP3 player. Now i just have to wait a few more years for the price to come down and for the Vorbis support to be added."

    7. Re:Tee Hee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a ten year owner of MD equipment, I agree fully. The 600D is my last MD purchase.

    8. Re:Tee Hee by dborod · · Score: 1

      It's also worth noting that the ./ community dumped all over the ipod mini when it was released, claiming that no one would buy them, for an extra $50 you could get triple the drive space, etc...

      Check it out here.

      As we've since discovered, the mini was even more popular that the maxi ipod. I guess this is proof that the ./ community is not representative of the world at large (gasp! horrors!)

    9. Re:Tee Hee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, you're right. I want a closed box with no screws that you can't change the battery, and STILL can't drive any bass into Portapros. The 2$ toilet-colored earbuds are much better. That's why MP3 sounds better. Right.

    10. Re:Tee Hee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except when it comes to audio expertise. As we all know, ATRAC sounds like garbage, 18 people said so. Everyone's an audiophile now, even people with a Lloyd's boom box.

    11. Re:Tee Hee by finkployd · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you're right. I want a closed box with no screws that you can't change the battery, and STILL can't drive any bass into Portapros. The 2$ toilet-colored earbuds are much better. That's why MP3 sounds better. Right.

      Yes, and one just needs to look at how horribly the ipods have sold to see that many share your opinion.

      Finkployd

    12. Re:Tee Hee by molafson · · Score: 1

      Sony is addressing some of the long-standing complaints about minidisc. Apparently the new Hi-MD units can transfer recorded content from the player to your computer over USB.

    13. Re:Tee Hee by Moofie · · Score: 1

      ....after you turn around three times widdershins, wave a dead chicken over the machine, and feed all your music through Sony's ATRACk musicfuckerupper.

      So, yeah. Minidisc is grand.

      not.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    14. Re:Tee Hee by Chiron+Taltos · · Score: 1
      For even more laughs, read what LoudMusic had to say at the time as well. Note LM recieved a +4 Insightful at the time, so LM was by no means alone in thinking the iPod would be a bust.

      why most of us need our day jobs

      --
      CT

    15. Re:Tee Hee by AragornSonOfArathorn · · Score: 1

      a dead CHICKEN? crap, i've been using a DUCK the whole time. no wonder it doesn't work

      --
      sudo eat my shorts
    16. Re:Tee Hee by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Chickens are totally the way to go, man. Much better juju than ducks.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    17. Re:Tee Hee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like that's an indication of anything useful? How many Rolls Royce Silver Shadows have been sold? How many Big Macs? Enjoy your Big Mac, chief!

    18. Re:Tee Hee by edrain · · Score: 1

      At least apples and oranges are both fruit...

    19. Re:Tee Hee by finkployd · · Score: 1

      Like that's an indication of anything useful?

      Ummm, yes it is. I'm not sure what strange economic theory you are buying into but generally in the real world, when something is selling like hot-cakes, it is because people find it to be useful. I don't think the world is full of ipod owners who are grumbling "damn this this is useless". Not only are the enjoying it, it seems they are purchasing new ones when they come out.

      Of course to play into your bizarre and totally irrelevant metaphor I will grant you that the ipod is nothing like a Rolls Royce. However may more Honda Civics are sold than the Rolls so I think we can safely conclude that people find Civics to be useful as well.

      Finkployd

  5. Hindsight 20/20 by sebi · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "It was probably a mistake, but then you have to go with what you think at the time," he said.

    I guess it would be easy to make fun of him now. Let us however not forget that one first reaction to the unveiling of the iPod read "No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.

    1. Re:Hindsight 20/20 by Hungus · · Score: 5, Funny
      Yeah this is one of my favourite comments from that article's posting:
      Re:I'm buying one purely for the tiny firewire hd (Score:1)
      by Lars T. (470328) on Tuesday October 23, @05:48PM (#2469232)

      The iMac will never sell.
      Okay, I was wrong, but the iBook will never sell.
      Okay, I was wrong about the iBook too, but the iPod will never sell.
      --

      Lars T.
      I certainly hope he was trying to be funny. Otherwise, how did that crow taste Lars?
      --
      Bad Panda! No Bamboo for you! In matters of importance ACs will not be responded to. Want to say something critical,OK
    2. Re:Hindsight 20/20 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Lars T" may be his real name, but he often goes by the pseudonym of "John Dvorack". You might have heard of him or read some of his profound prognostications on all things Apple.

    3. Re:Hindsight 20/20 by MacBorg · · Score: 1

      Hell, I'm as fanatical a mac-geek as they come and when the Gen1 iPod came out, my reaction was that it was too damn expensive, that it would flounder like the Newton did and that Apple would be lucky to recoup the development costs... ...have I been proven wrong, or what? I have to say, I just placed my order for a refurb 10GB unit... so I'm eating crow here.

    4. Re:Hindsight 20/20 by lysander · · Score: 1
      Let us however not forget that one first reaction to the unveiling of the iPod read "No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame."
      Let's not also forget that this appears to be a quote from none other than CmdrTaco.
      --
      GET YOUR WEAPONS READY! --DR.LIGHT
    5. Re:Hindsight 20/20 by Hungus · · Score: 1
      Dvorack:
      • Good on keyboards
      • Bad on pundits

      Dvorack always make me think of that candy commericial parody "sometimes you sound like a nut... most times you are one."
      --
      Bad Panda! No Bamboo for you! In matters of importance ACs will not be responded to. Want to say something critical,OK
    6. Re:Hindsight 20/20 by goMac2500 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Wow. From day one of the iPods introduction, there were posts complaining about lack of ogg support.

    7. Re:Hindsight 20/20 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dvorak was actually a huge Mac fanboy. You guys just hate him because he told the truth (that Apple Computer was really fucked up in the 90s.)

    8. Re:Hindsight 20/20 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you are going to insult someone with any credibility, you need to at least spell his name correctly.

      It's Dvorak, D, V, O, R, A, K.

    9. Re:Hindsight 20/20 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Lars Traeger is a long time Mac advocate. See his many Usenet posts, especially those in comp.sys.mac.advocacy . Ten to one his post was meant to be sarcastic.

    10. Re:Hindsight 20/20 by Lars+T. · · Score: 4, Funny

      Actually yes, that was irony.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    11. Re:Hindsight 20/20 by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      Dvorak? Bah, an amateur. Now Rob Enderle, there's a pro.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    12. Re:Hindsight 20/20 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then its OK because Dvorak doesn't have any credibility :) Besides I posted right before I went to sleep and it had been a LONG day.

    13. Re:Hindsight 20/20 by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      Oy, there go my 15 minutes of fame.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    14. Re:Hindsight 20/20 by Graff · · Score: 1
      Dvorak? Bah, an amateur. Now Rob Enderle, there's a pro.

      If by pro you mean PROstitute then, yes, Rob Enderle is a true pro in the computer industry. Just ask his pimp-daddy Bill Gates.
    15. Re:Hindsight 20/20 by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      To think I didn't get any mods for the original article - and that was when you still got Karma for Funny.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    16. Re:Hindsight 20/20 by pointguy · · Score: 1

      Actually no, that was sarcasm...

    17. Re:Hindsight 20/20 by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      No, it was an expression or utterance marked by a deliberate contrast between apparent and intended meaning. Isn't it ironic when the supports of the true meaning of "irony" get it wrong?

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  6. The Entrepreneur's Dilemma by TopShelf · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "It was probably a mistake, but then you have to go with what you think at the time," he said.' "

    This is a dilemma all entrepreneurs (and software developers) face - if you wait until a product is absolutely perfected before taking it to market, you will likely lose your opportunity. At some point, you have to get it out there and gauge public opinion (which should help guide further development), lest you burn all your resources in R&D.

    --
    Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
    1. Re:The Entrepreneur's Dilemma by mveloso · · Score: 1

      There's a fallacy embedded in the above: that a product is/can be perfect.

      It's a common mistake in the technical world. Perfect = no bugs.

      It's even more common in the intellectual worlds of academia and reportage. A perfect product is one you can't complain about, does everything you want, that's free. Heck, maybe it should perform fellatio and cunnilingus on demand.

      In the real world, there's no such thing as a perfect product. There are only iterations of a product as you tweak it to your customers. There's learning and refining what you have, and understanding how and why people are buying and using your product.

      The most important thing you can do is release a product, because that's the only way you'll know if your ideas work or not. The feedback you get is invaluable.

      And it's not like the iPod wasn't a "perfect product." It had no serious bugs. It had a great interface. It was easy to use. Every generation after as tweaked it, but the core is the same.

  7. Design Philosophy by ndavidg · · Score: 2

    Apple has a design philosophy lacking in many un-user friendly electronics products. I do hope they succeed in the market, with items such as Apple TV's and DVD's and car stereos and such.

    1. Re:Design Philosophy by valkr1e · · Score: 2, Informative

      there already was a mac TV, but even if they did come out with one again, it would be something like iTV, but would probably look very cool http://www.lowendmac.com/500/mactv.shtml

    2. Re:Design Philosophy by Moofie · · Score: 1

      I've got a TV tuner in my Performa 6220. It's a nifty little app. Same basic mobo design as the MacTV (which was cool and black) but it's got a PPC 603 processor running at a blistering 90 mHz. Thing is a barn-burner!

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
  8. DOH! by Benzpyrene · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Although he is kicking himself right now, you can't really blame the guy. Even the most successfull people in our society do things that they regret in hindsight. Warren Beatty, Donald Trump, Bill Gates, etc...

    1. Re:DOH! by Nishal · · Score: 0

      warren beatty?dont ya mean warren buffett

    2. Re:DOH! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, that's the one. He financed Ishtar, didn't he?

    3. Re:DOH! by macklin01 · · Score: 1

      The comment about it being Warren Buffet, rather than Warren Beatty, is right. Warren Buffet is often referred to as the "Oracle of Omaha" for his success in understanding and predicting the financial / economic climate.

      There's actually a neat story about Warren Buffet when he was young. There was a man whose young neighbor once approached him with a (set of) wild investment idea and asked him if he wanted to go in on it with him. The guy figured the neighbor for either a con artist or a hack and turned him down. Well, decades later, that young man is a very successful Warren Buffet, and I'll bet the other is kicking himself for turning down that once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.

      Sorry, I looked all over for a link to that anecdote, but I couldn't find it among the sea of "young Warren Buffet neighbor" google hits. -- Paul

      --
      OpenSource.MathCancer.org: open source comp bio
    4. Re:DOH! by Moofie · · Score: 1

      I'd wager that Warren Buffet would tell you that following his instincts have gotten him more money than not doing so.

      He might miss an opportunity here and there, but I'd gladly trade places with the man.

      Except for the whole being really old and kinda homely part.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
  9. Whoops! by holzp · · Score: 5, Funny

    Knauss stayed on until near the end of the iPod's development, but quit shortly before it was released because he had no confidence it would be a success.

    The article should be titled 'IClod'.

  10. strange... by Chuck+Bucket · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's strange that after so many years of making great computer hardware Apple's niche is almost redefined for them via a glorified walkman. No, that's not flamebait, but merely an oversimplification. Still, this is part of Steve's overall 'digital hub' theory, so the Macs still fit in, it just feels like they're getting a bit more out of focus compared to the extranious hardware.

    CB

    1. Re:strange... by slungsolow · · Score: 1
      It is rather amusing that the iPod is the product that is keeping them afloat and flush with cash.

      I think making the iPod compatable with PC's was a great idea, but it really doesn't help him with pushing his computers as the 'digital hub' that he wants them to be. Frankly, apple should stop producing non-pc compatable products. Offering their operating systems and applications on different platforms would certainly help with the 'digital hub' plans. I won't even get into allowing third party manufacturing of their computers. We should all realize that doing that would
      1. Drive down the price, and;
      2. increase their market penetration...
      but no.. that will never happen.
    2. Re:strange... by iamacat · · Score: 1

      That would be a wonderful idea if Apple could pay for their R&D effort by selling an OS without any application base. Everything would need to be recompiled, and forget about your classic apps. Would you pay $600 on top of your PC cost then to run an alternative OS? Solaris X86 is not making any great inroads last I heard.

    3. Re:strange... by Andy_R · · Score: 1

      Actually, I think you'll find it's their huge pile of cash that's keeping them flush with cash.

      --
      A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
    4. Re:strange... by slungsolow · · Score: 1

      Lets not assume it would be sold for $600 dollars first of all. And it certainly wouldn't be too hard for Apple to make software like iCal (or any other Apple only application) available to the windows/linux crowd.. hell, they did it with iTunes and they are certainly benefiting from that.

    5. Re:strange... by iamacat · · Score: 1

      Windows XP home is $200 for a high-volume, lower-quality product, with R&D costs shared with more expensive XP pro/2003 server. Most people immediatelly pay another $300 for Office. Apple can never survive selling the OS at these prices.

      They are not making money selling free iTunes for Windows either. Currently, their only goal is to drive sales of iPods. In time, perhaps they can negotiate a better contract with music labels and the music store will become the main money maker.

    6. Re:strange... by slungsolow · · Score: 1

      Apple is a marketing powerhouse. They would have no problem selling an operating system that is compatible with a PC. They could easily recoup R&D costs through licensing of their hardware architecture to third party vendors. If Dell or IBM sold a G5 compatible computer apple would easily benefit, and therefore gain a larger share of the PC market.
      They are making money by selling songs through the free iTMS on the windows platform. They increased the sales of iPods simply by making them easily compatible with windows pcs. In my opinion iTunes has nothing to do with the popularity of the iPod. The fact that its a great product makes it a strong seller.

  11. The Hand of Jobs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I'm surprised the iPod team actually produced a finished product based upon how difficult Steve Jobs is reported to get along with.

    I would have been interested as an aside in seeing pictures of some of the earlier prototypes as the iPod made it's way from an initial design to the finished product.

    1. Re:The Hand of Jobs by cryptochrome · · Score: 1

      His ass was on the line, of course he was very interested. Can you imagine what could have happened if the iPod had a crappy interface or really bad battery life? It would never have gotten off the ground. If they could satisfy Steve Jobs they could satisfy anyone that could afford to give it a shot.

      What I would have liked to hear about the iPod was how they came up for the idea of the scroll wheel. AFAIK that's Apple's patent, and the defining feature of the iPod's interface that sets it above the competition. The current click-wheel is an even bigger improvement.

      --

      ---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?

    2. Re:The Hand of Jobs by jcostantino · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Jobs is supposed to be very conservative when it comes to electronic devices with too many features. He hates PDA's as an example but that's more likely because he'd rather push laptops with a higher margin.

      I think the reason that the iPod has succeeded so well is due to the fact that any bonehead can pick one up and play music. It's about as intuitive as it can be.

      I also would have liked to see their prototypes - I'm always interested in taking a look at a particular product's development. A company I used to work for had a relationship with one of the design offices at Motorola and they had some weird bits there from aborted projects or concepts.

      --
      Reviews with a twist! http://www.sardonicbastard.com
    3. Re:The Hand of Jobs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why? If Jobs are that difficult to deal with, nothing would ever get done. But the fact is, despite Jobs involvements in iMac, iMac FP, OS X, iLife, etc., those products came out to see the day. While Jobs is notorious for being difficult, I think even he realizes that products need to come out and the company needs to sell products to make money.

    4. Re:The Hand of Jobs by WormholeFiend · · Score: 1

      What I would have liked to hear about the iPod was how they came up for the idea of the scroll wheel.

      my Own Personal Hypothesis(tm) is that they stole the idea from the Intellivision game controller.

      www.makingit.com/intellivision/PR/PR_pix/intelli vi sion.jpg

    5. Re:The Hand of Jobs by TheLink · · Score: 1

      What's so special about the iPod's scroll wheel?

      My old Mag 17" monitor has a pressable wheel to control the settings. Rotate wheel to highlight item, press the wheel to select highlighted item.

      But yeah, if you can satisfy Steve Jobs, you've gone a long way towards making a decent product. He's the one who wanted "insanely great" stuff.

      --
    6. Re:The Hand of Jobs by NoData · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yup, nothing like a good Hand-of-Jobs to ensure to a successful release.

      Oh, I'm bad...

    7. Re:The Hand of Jobs by k4w0ru · · Score: 1

      Have you used one of the recent ipod's before? (3rd generation, maybe 2nd too, not sure about 1st).

      The wheel itself doesn't rotate or move. It's kinda like a touchpad on laptops, but made of smoother plastic. You can rotate your thumb on its surface and it senses which way your rotating and scrolls acordingly.

      The ipods are the only products i've seen this on.


      Also, (atleast on 3rd gen ipods) the buttons are also touch sensitive. They don't actually push or click in, you just touch or tap them. I've seen this before on other macs and apple monitors and surprisingly in an elevator in a hospital in LA (I think) over 13 years ago.

    8. Re:The Hand of Jobs by cryptochrome · · Score: 1

      The touchpad wheel was a 2nd generation iPod thing. The 1st generation used a mechanical scrollwheel, which gave very pleasing feedback. That was the thing I didn't like about 3rd Gen: no feedback on wheel or buttons. OTOH, the non-mechanical one is almost certainly more durable.

      However a mechanical wheel would be incompatible with the current click-wheel, which is the first really novel interface I've seen in a while.

      --

      ---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?

  12. Knauss by Greenisus · · Score: 1
    Knauss reminds me of Tom Hanks, who was all but convinced that his movie Forrest Gump would be a complete flop

    . . . and now we have theme restaurants based on the movie.

    /perhaps I should open a bar called the iPod Lounge

    1. Re:Knauss by Stuart+Gibson · · Score: 1

      I think that iPod Lounge may complain.

      Stuart

      --
      It's all fun and games until a 200' robot dinosaur shows up and trashes Neo-Tokyo... Again
  13. It was interesting to note... by CrackedButter · · Score: 5, Interesting


    ...that IBM had an idea which incorporated bluetooth headphones, makes me wonder why Apple didn't do it, and that was in 2001! But don't get on at me for how it would effect the ipod's battery life, the ipod *could* be a little bigger to take a bigger battery and then we could all be happy.

    1. Re:It was interesting to note... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats probally because bluetooth doesnt have the bandwidth to support stereo sound at reasonable quality.
      Ever wondered why nobody has made any bluetooth wireless headphones that arent mono? now you know...

    2. Re:It was interesting to note... by tonywong · · Score: 1

      They probably didn't have a chip or chipset that was cheap and low power enough for bluetooth to be integrated into the iPod and iPod headphones.

      The article didn't state what IBM's time frame to market was either.

    3. Re:It was interesting to note... by sebi · · Score: 1
      I don't know nearly enough about bluetooth to even guess how it would affect battery life. What I do know, however, is that bluetooth headphones - like all wireless headphones - need a power source. So you'd be in a situation where you have to charge two different things whenever you run out of power. Or you have to buy the kind of batteries that power hearing aids. Not a cheap thing and also as far as I know not a size that works for rechargeables.

      Bluetooth headphones sound like a nifty idea, but one that doesn't make all that much sense for a portable player. Sure, people use them for their cellphones, but you generally use them a lot less there than you would listening to music. So the battery problem is not as big of a deal.

    4. Re:It was interesting to note... by JackCroww · · Score: 0

      Why hasn't any thought about using two Bluetooth devices for stereo headphones? One for each channel?

      Yeah, I know, that would really suck batteries, but it would work.

      --
      "Ayn Rand is a bloody socialist compared to me." - Robert A. Heinlein
    5. Re:It was interesting to note... by JWW · · Score: 1

      But then you wouldn't have the distinctive white cord.... ;-)

    6. Re:It was interesting to note... by magefile · · Score: 1

      Hearing aid batteries suck ass as far as life goes, especially if you want to do radio reception. Be nice if one of the FM adapters for the iPod let you choose a frequency, as my hearing aids can pick up 2 or 3 frequencies (for communicating with auxiliary aid devices). I do use a similar device, and using the receiver reduces my batteries' lifespan from about 7 days to 4 or 5. Which is a hassle, and expensive to boot.

      Plus, removing the minijack and doing bluetooth would make it that much more of a PITA for people who don't want to use apple-supplied headphones - people who own expensive ones, hearing aid users who have cords that plug into their aids, people who hate in-the-ear headphones (this includes hearing aid users; hearing aids can work with over-the-ear headphones, but not in-the-ear. So there really was never a good reason to do bluetooth, and a lot of good reasons not to.

    7. Re:It was interesting to note... by CrackedButter · · Score: 1

      I have wondered actually but never looked into it, i just thought something like that wouldn't be ready for most people who bought an ipod.

    8. Re:It was interesting to note... by CrackedButter · · Score: 1

      But you could still retain the white ear buds.

    9. Re:It was interesting to note... by MacGod · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But don't get on at me for how it would effect the ipod's battery life, the ipod *could* be a little bigger to take a bigger battery and then we could all be happy.

      I think the battery life issue is exactly the problem. You assert that everyone would be happy with a bigger iPod, but I don't know what you base that on. I know the iPods diminutive stature was one of the biggest selling points for me. And I think that the phenomenal sales of the iPod mini (despite its seemingly lackluster price per gig value) shows that the size does matter (wang jokes aside).

      Furthermore, I like not having to charge my headphones.

      Also, let's not forget that the bluetooth transmitter and receiver would take up additional space in the iPod and headphones, respectively

      This would also be much more likely to lock me into Apple's headphones, rather than buying a generic, better-quality set of headphones I can connect via a standard jack

      Others have talked about the compression issue, I won't rehash it here.

      The biggest thing though is that the headphone connecter and earbuds probably cost all of $2 for Apple. A BlueTooth setup would be significantly more

      I know that there is a geek tendency to use cool tecnologies just because they're there, but I don't think this is a good application of BlueTooth. Someone on Slashdot said a few days ago that Slashdotters tend to overestimate the public's appetite for their pet technologies. I think this is very valid. I just don't think there would be a market for this, given the tradeoffs.

      However, I could be wrong. Market an iPod-BlueTooth headphones set as an accessory, and we'll see. There's certainly a market for iPod accessories out there, if you're right about the desire to own such a thing, you could rake in the big bucks. However, I think the continued absence of just such a peripheral indicates that there's no real demand.

      --
      "Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one " -Albert Einstein
    10. Re:It was interesting to note... by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1
      that IBM had an idea which incorporated bluetooth headphones, makes me wonder why Apple didn't do it, and that was in 2001!

      Remember this is an Apple product. Apple's focus on their products is functionality first, features second. One of reasons the iPod is a success is that it is designed primarily to be a portable music player first. Not an all-in-one mp3/radio/bluetooth/etc player. Also with the short development time they probably wanted to remove all unneccessary features. Without the need to focus on bluetooth, etc, they can work on the battery issue, the playlist issue, the interface, etc. Future models might have it but only when Apple feels it has optimized the iPod's current features.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    11. Re:It was interesting to note... by kalidasa · · Score: 1

      The iTrip does let you pick a frequency. Look for the artist "Griffin Technologies" on your browse list. That's the list of frequencies the iTrip can handle.

    12. Re:It was interesting to note... by toolio · · Score: 1

      I agree bluetooth headphones would be great with an iPod.

      I though about this and wondered if I'd leave behind my iPod places since I would still hear music 30feet from where I left it. Then I see myself walking around until I get warmer (clearer signal).

      Just a thought

    13. Re:It was interesting to note... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See, I knew this would happen. Minidisc is crap because of the MP3 to ATRAC process, but wireless headphones with very bad compression, good!
      Welcome to cognitive dissonance, Apple-fanboy style!

  14. Love this part on Jobs' influence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Knauss said Jobs' influence was sometimes idiosyncratic. For example, the iPod is louder than most MP3 players because Jobs is partly deaf, he said. "They drove the sound up so he could hear it," Knauss said

    That's why the iPod goes to 11!

    1. Re:Love this part on Jobs' influence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      But...


      Couldn't you just have 10 on the knob, and make 10 as loud as 11?

      :P

    2. Re:Love this part on Jobs' influence by IncarnadineConor · · Score: 1

      I have seen so many of these 11 jokes laterly, did /. just become aware of spinaltap or something?

    3. Re:Love this part on Jobs' influence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      /. is stuck in a temporal timewarp. That's why they think a 1970's operating system is so good - it's cutting edge stuff round here.

      Next week, look for the Cabbage Patch Kids and deely bopper references.

    4. Re:Love this part on Jobs' influence by passion · · Score: 1

      Interestingly enough, that's similar to how Ben & Jerry's got their start. One of them was mixing ice cream, and asked the other to taste it. The taster had a cold, and therefore his stuffed nose dulled his sense of taste, so he kept asking for more chunks to be added.

      --
      - passion
  15. Honest Question by NYTrojan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is not meant to offend, I am really curious..

    Obviously the iPod is very popular, but for the life of me I don't see what makes it different from other mp3 players. For those of you who shelled out the big cash for this thing, what makes it so special? Why sets the iPod apart aside from slick marketing?

    1. Re:Honest Question by hcdejong · · Score: 2, Informative

      A good (as opposed to 'merely tolerable') UI, both for the player itself and for its connection to a computer (FireWire, so copying songs won't take ages, iTunes as the UI on the computer end).

    2. Re:Honest Question by kelnos · · Score: 1

      i think it's the interface. i've heard some die-hard iPod fans say that it's "the only mp3 player out there with a usable interface". personally, i'm not a big fan of it. i dislike the wheel - i like buttons. nice responsive buttons that i can press and i know when they're pressed. but then again, i'm a geek and a software developer, so my interface tastes don't necessarily match up with what's considered mainstream...

      --
      Xfce: Lighter than some, heavier than others. Just right.
    3. Re:Honest Question by texasbat · · Score: 0, Troll

      You are correct. It's all about marketing. The one with the best hardware does not necessarily win in the marketplace. The tough part is not designing a better mp3 player or other device, but making the marketing relationships to get your product in the various channels for mass consumption, along with spending vast sums on advertisings. Believe me - it's not easy going up against an established player in an industry but it can be done.

      --
      I work too hard for my illusions just to throw them all away.
    4. Re:Honest Question by Bigbutt · · Score: 3, Informative

      I received mine as a gift. I was interested in buying one but the price was the killer for me. Same with the PowerBook G4 1.25Ghz I recently bought. I needed a new laptop and wanted to play with the new system but the price was higher than I wanted to pay. Fortunately it costs me about $100.

      Having only used a couple of mp3 players, I think the thing I like most is that I don't have to have a CD wallet along with the device. Since most of my music is located on it (only the ones with 4 or 5 stars to keep it to the 20Gig limit), letting it randomly play music surprises me with songs I may not have heard in a while.

      On a recent trip to Athens, I only needed my laptop and ipod and had all my tunes and tools with me.

      --
      Shit better not happen!
    5. Re:Honest Question by UserChrisCanter4 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No offense taken.

      Size is important (gentlemen, start your double entendres); The iPod is physically small enough to put in your pants pocket comfortably. It doesn't sound like it's that much smaller than a Nomad Zen or Dell DJ or Archos Jukebox, but the in-person difference is astounding. Those other players would only fit in a pair of those ridiculously baggy jeans that hang below your ass.

      The UI on the player is great. Read some of the review about what it takes just to play a signle song on, for example, the DJ. Assorted menu navigation plus three or four clicks on the choose button, which is located, IIRC, obscurely on the side. Now, it can take a lot of menu navigaion to play a PARTICULAR song on the ipod, but one can start the music playing by basically mashing the center button until they hear it.

      iTunes: This is what brings it all together. It's what helps a lot of computer non-lits use the whole package quickly and easily. I wouldn't have a problem using a device that mounted and transferred as another drive, but a lot of people do. And iTunes treats the iPod as a synced device. Anything that has changed playlist or song-wise is instantly updated (over firewire, no less), making the whole process simple and easy.

    6. Re:Honest Question by Adlopa · · Score: 1

      I think 'style' pretty much sums it up, whether it's the physical design, the menu system, the seamless integration with iTunes or the marketing. No other MP3 player, IMO, comes close to the iPod in any of those areas. There are better-sounding MP3 players, of course...

    7. Re:Honest Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For me it was simple. I could get to any song I wanted in the steps. I organize playlists as I download music. Effectively all my playlists are mixes of whatever. I have kept the play lists the same for about 4 years so i know where everything is, i just make more of them as i get more music. i can get to any song i want on my ipod in 3 fast (fast is key) steps. at the time i got my first gen ipod, i couldn't do that on any other player. oh and the variable scroll wheel helped alot.

      many players don't have this. no matter how fast you spin that wheel, it will only move down the list so far. but the ipod pickes up speed as you go faster.

    8. Re:Honest Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It's a beautiful device, both physically and in the UI. Even my parents, normally very gadget-phobic, started gushing about it when they saw it.

      The capacity is big enough to store all the music you're likely to need - no constant swapping around of mp3s. This was, in fact, the sole reason I didn't buy an MP3 player for a long time. Nevertheless, it's small enough to fit in a pocket.

      And it was pretty much the first to achieve all three; and the advertising has been spot on - so it has defined the market, and become fashionable in the process. It has a number of competiting products these days - but it is only the iPod that has a presence outside the geek sector.

    9. Re:Honest Question by Threni · · Score: 1

      > Obviously the iPod is very popular, but for the life of me I don't see what
      > makes it different from other mp3 players.

      Because it's an Apple product it appeals to a certain sort of computer nerd. That also makes it expensive. But a lot of computer nerds happily spend hundreds or even thousands of dollars on little boxes that are sometimes only used for a few months before being sacrificed on the alter of 'newer...faster...better'.

      (Contrast this with people from less well off professions who will think long and hard while they are saving about getting a new TV, fridge etc for the same price as the "Whizzgasm 400 billion" graphics card.)

      They're more convenient than either CD based solutions (you need to carry alargeish wallet of CDs to have the same number of tunes at your disposal)
      or solid state ones (flash ram is still way too expensive for more than 3 or 4 CDs worth of music at comparable compression rates).

      Some people think they look good. Personally I've always found Apple stuff pretty ugly. This didn't factor into my decision not to buy one, though. I don't really care what stuff looks like as long as it does the job. Frankly, although I could afford it, I just couldn't justify spending that much money on it. It IS, after all, just an MP3 player.

      http://www.fishkeeping.co.uk/

    10. Re:Honest Question by Darth+Maul · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You just have to use one for a bit. The user interface is just great. Nothing gets in the way of the user just trying to play some tunes. I have a 15GB 3rd-gen and I use it every day. It's just amazing.

      Products from Apple generally have that quality that you really cannot comprehend until you use it and hold it. It's that sometimes nebulous concept of quality and design perfection. Sure, you can compare price, storage, battery life kind of quantitative measurements between the iPod and other players, but there's more to the iPod than just those numbers. That's why I cannot even respond to people here on Slashdot that go on about Nomad or Sony players with "better numbers".

      Sorry, but some of us care about design.

      --
      --- witty signature
    11. Re:Honest Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IMO in athens?

    12. Re:Honest Question by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Interesting
      For me:

      1. Size. It is small enough that I can clip it to my belt and forget it's there (until I sit on it). It's also small enough to comfortably fit in trouser pockets when it's raining.
      2. UI. It is very easy to navigate to a particular song / album / genre / artist and tell it to play all of them. You can also play pre-selected playlists in a very small number of clicks.
      3. Integration. iTunes is a superb piece of software, and it makes managing large collections of music very easy. iTMS is also very nice, but wasn't available here (UK) when I bought my iPod. The iPod integrates very nicely with it - music and playlists are transferred in the background, and play counts and ratings are synchronised.
      4. FireWire. USB2 seriously loads the CPU, which is not something I want, especially when using my iPod as an external hard drive (I often use it as a backup device).
      5. The dock. The iPod dock has a line out port, and is connected to my stereo. When I get home, I drop my iPod in the dock and remove the headphones. When I do this, there is no interruption to my music (and it's charging while it's in the dock).
      6. AAC support. I prefer AAC the sound of AAC audio to any other lossy compression scheme (and I was using it with FAAD in WinAmp/XMMS before I became a Mac / iPod user)
      There are also a few other quite nice things, such as the fact that it stores a copy of my calendar and address book (although not a very up-to-date one, since I don't bother syncing it that often).
      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    13. Re:Honest Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Seeing that your nickname is NYTrojan, I assume you live in New York. I suggest you go to one of Apple Stores. There are many in New York and try it yourselves. While you are there, play with Powerbooks, Powermac G5, etc.. At the end, you may realize what it is that drives Apple fans nut about the company. It's about little things that add up to a pleasure using their products. Most of them are non-expressible by number and yet endearing the products to the users. E.g. pulsing power light when sleeping, the use of a wheel instead of buttons, simplicity, how they arrange menus and buttons. Even some of the things you dont see: using spring-loaded screws (unlike Dell which will try to reduce costs by using less screws). After all things, how much are you willing to pay to get that pleasure? We know that many people will pay that extra cost.

      Not all things are about numbers in dollars, GHz, GB, songs, playlists, screen size, etc..

    14. Re:Honest Question by falcon5768 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      well for me at the time (I have a 1st gen) it was a number of factors...

      There where very few hard drive based MP3 players out there... I had a RIO, but honestly they barely fit a CD at decent encoding... I liked the idea of carrying more than that since I used to put two of three albums onto a long play cassette.

      The design was very tight... the buttons made a LOT more sense than the RIO's, the menu and playlist system was much better (hell it HAD a playlist system... the Rios didnt unless you spent 300 dollars for the upscale ones) and the battery life while maybe on par with the RIO had one thing over it.... it could be recharged and thus I wasnt spending 4 bucks on a pack of AA's every so often. Plus I could recharge it via my laptop, another cool feature.

      It worked with iTunes, which a few players did atthe time, but not many of them, and vs. other players it was the one that was most seemless in its working.

      It wasnt expensive.... remeber the players that where HD based where big.... while they where cheaper, you couldnt carry them. The ones that where on par with the iPod though where actually more expensive at the time. People think (and still do) the iPod is expensive....but cost per feature wise, its actually kinda cheap. The HD's alone are not much cheaper than the players.

      It was a HD.... you could mount it and save your files on it which for a long time I did.... my 5 gig still doubles as a HD sometimes.... I erase it if I need to because the files are over 1 gig, load the files I need to onto it, and then just reload it.... doesnt take long at all... and no other player was firewire based, they where either USB (no USB2 yet) or worse....serial!

      It was cool, no doubt about it. even if you hated it, you talked about it, and just about everyone wanted one.

      --

      "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."

    15. Re:Honest Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It IS, after all, just an MP3 player.


      It can be but I find I use the address book and calendar often and transfer movie files from around 1 to 5 gig as the portable firewire drive that it also is comes in handy.
    16. Re:Honest Question by lavar78 · · Score: 1

      It initially succeeded because it was the first large-capacity player that was small, Firewire-based, and had a good UI. Since then, the superior UI, style, and marketing have kept it at the top. I shudder thinking back on the days I used to add songs to my Creative Nomad using the craptacular PlayCenter software over USB 1.1! I knew right away the iPod was a significant breakthrough in this market.

      --
      "Dave, I stand still--the conclusions jump to me!" - Bill McNeal, NewsRadio
    17. Re:Honest Question by nine-times · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You hit a lot of the big points, but I'd like to add something small that I find pretty nice: On a mac, you can use iSync to get your calandar and address book on to the iPod. It may not sound like much, but iSync can keep multiple Macs, your .Mac account (webmail address book), your iPod, your PDA, and if you have a phone that connects, your cell-phone, all up-to-date with the same info. OK, I only use it to keep my Mac, my web-mail, and my iPod with the same contact list, but it's nice to have...

      And I find the dock particularly useful... I have no stereo, just the dock plugged into some speakers.

      But in general, I'd wrap up everything you said and everything I've said into this: The thing is well thought out, well engineered, and well put together. Most of the MP3 players I've found have been just difficult enough in their setup, just crappy enough in their design, and just bulky enough to carry around (for the amount of space provided), that they seemed like more trouble than they're worth. I'm someone who likes to play with technology for the sake of playing with it, but I won't continue to use something on a daily basis until it's reached a certain level of maturity. PDAs, for example, I find to be more trouble than they're worth. Most MP3 players, I find to be "not quite there, yet" and more trouble than they're worth. The iPod was the first one who hit "ready for prime-time" status, in my mind.

    18. Re:Honest Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh you are just *so* 1337!

    19. Re:Honest Question by evilned · · Score: 2, Informative

      I switched a few months ago from an iRiver Slim X350 to a 3rd gen iPod and have been pretty happy with the move. iTunes and the iPod do a wonderful job of keeping my collection organized, as opposed to the old way of having to organize it myself when I burn a mp3 cd. The UI is light years ahead of what I was using with the iRiver player, navigating 20 gigs of mp3s is easier than dealing with 700 megs on the iRiver. Sizewise its alot better as well. I did look at iRIver's hard drive players but I just didnt want to have to manage the mp3s with out iTunes anymore. The only thing I dont like with the iPod is the battery life is the suck compared to my old iRiver player.

      --

      "My head hurts, My feet stink, and I dont love Jesus." -Jimmy Buffett

    20. Re:Honest Question by Smack · · Score: 1

      Have you used a DJ? Its main navigation is a pushable scroll wheel, like on a mouse. To play a song, you only need to use that one thing. Or you can press the play button at most menu levels to just play everything below it. It's not as hideous as you make it out to be.

      The only buttons on the side are the volume and the record (which is similar to an old-fashion minitape recorder).

    21. Re:Honest Question by Mr_Silver · · Score: 1
      You missed one other point.

      Many people believe (and I know there are a vocal minority on slashdot that don't) that it looks good. That is, it looks good when you take it out of your pocket, it looks good to wear with a suit and it looks as if it really was worth the money you paid for it.

      In short, it doesn't look like some cheapo moulded black plastic toy that Fisher Price produce for children.

      I know that a lot of slashdotters (and some people) are prepared to put up with something that is clunky, heavy and butt ugly if it has tonnes of neat features - but the rest of the world has shown that it doesn't think in that way.

      --
      Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
    22. Re:Honest Question by Some+Dumbass... · · Score: 1

      The UI on the player is great. Read some of the review about what it takes just to play a signle song on, for example, the DJ. Assorted menu navigation plus three or four clicks on the choose button, which is located, IIRC, obscurely on the side. Now, it can take a lot of menu navigaion to play a PARTICULAR song on the ipod, but one can start the music playing by basically mashing the center button until they hear it.

      This is completely wrong. I mean, seriously, it's factually wrong!

      To play whatever's currently queued up on the DJ, you hit the "Play" button, which is at the bottom center of the front of the player (between the "fast forward" and "rewind" buttons). Simple, eh?

      Yet again, these highly moderated posts which favorably compare the iPod to other mp3 players simply aren't well informed. I mean, the guy got the location of the "Play" button wrong! WTF? Is finding a picture of the DJ on the web and looking at it really that hard?

    23. Re:Honest Question by Blitter · · Score: 1
      I bought my iPod the first day it was available because it was the first MP3 player that had two crucial qualities:

      1) small and light enough to conveniently take anywhere.
      2) enough storage space to make it worth taking anywhere.

      Additional benefits are the UI that makes other player UIs look like they were designed by monkeys, firewire connector that let me upload a whole album in a couple seconds, itunes makes managing playlists and contents of the ipod trivial, and it doubles as a hard drive for carrying files around.

      $400 dollars was a lot of money, but I still use my first generation model every day and it's some of the best $400 I've ever spent.

      --
      I am Jack's writable stack pointer.
    24. Re:Honest Question by Some+Dumbass... · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For those of you who shelled out the big cash for this thing, what makes it so special? Why sets the iPod apart aside from slick marketing?

      I have a theory that most people have only used one type of mp3 player (e.g. just an iPod). They buy whatever looks best at the time, and if it breaks, they buy another.

      If I'm right, most of the commentary on the relative merits of various mp3 players is really worthless. The commentary tends to be the same every time: "whatever I bought is cool, and other stuff sucks." Probably more cognitive dissonance going on there than anything else :). I've complained before about how people talk about mp3 jukeboxes which they don't own and make factual mistakes about their capabilities. While everyone cites "reviews" to back up their opinion, I've seen lots of reviews which go every which way. There are zillions of them out there, and it's probably not too hard to find one which supports your pre-existing point of view :). Not to mention that many reviewers, even the ones at big-name publications, aren't necessarily all that accurate, e.g. they may have been given a half-hour to play with the device, or may be biased towards whatever device they used first (implicitly comparing everything else to it and inevietably finding other players wanting).

      I think a better question would be this: what type of person would buy a certain type of mp3 jukebox? Who, for example, would buy a Rio Karma? They're ugly, that's for sure. But they're also small, relatively cheap, packed with features, and supposedly have a great UI. Perhaps a good player for someone who wants a relateively cheap mp3 jukebox and who doesn't care about looks, but isn't willing to sacrifice features?

    25. Re:Honest Question by WaltFrench · · Score: 1

      Gotta look at one's whole music ecosystem, from discovering new music all the way thru to repeat rapture with music that is deeply meaningful / beautiful / etc.

      Apple's Music Store, iTunes and the iPod will never replace friends' advice, Global Rhythm mag, WEMU.ORG, SF's Opera & Symphony, KCSM FM, etc., for finding "new" music. (Your tastes may vary.) But together with a decent set of phones like the Etymotic 4S's or a great stereo, the Apple kit covers the rest of the bases superbly. Especially for somebody who wants to spend time listening closely to great music, but has a lifestyle that seldom calls for sitting still in the Living Room.

      15 minutes after seeing the iTunes RSS feed about having recently added Patricia Barber's albums, I'd sampled enough tracks to choose 2 albums and had the music, in quite good fidelity, on both my hard disk and my iPod. (Decent price, too.) Yes, the experience of ripping CD's is also excellent, and almost as fast, thanks to the well-thought-out UI in iTunes and GraceNote.

      But "it's the UI" misses the point. Because it's so easy and portable, my music is now more than twice as accessible, for a measly few hundred dollars (a small part of what it cost me to get all that music in the first place). No stacks of CD's on my frequent business travel, or choosing at 6AM what music I want to hear at the Y after work. Makes ya feel good every time you switch it on.

      --
      "Inquiring Minds Want to Know!"
    26. Re:Honest Question by UserChrisCanter4 · · Score: 1

      Eh, you caught me. I wrote this post in the six minutes before I needed to leave this morning. With ample time, I would've found more supporting evidence. What I did remeber was that several reviewers complained about UI, although to be fair I now realize that most of their complaints were targeted at difficulty getting to slightly more complex functions, such as playlist navigation. Interestingly, while searching I did find several who claimed that you couldn't track back and browse a list while the music was still playing (WHA?!?), but I would assume that firmware fixes have probably corrected that.

      I also didn't bring up the issue that the Dell DJ uses MusicMatch, which is pretty widely recognized to be absolutely wretched compared to similar programs. Nor did I cite many initial reviewers complaints that installation on the DJ was occasionally hit-or-miss (fiddly driver installation was cited on more than one website). I also didn't get into the fact that the DJ doesn't follow proper USB Mass Storage rules, meaning you need to install a driver to allow you to use it as an external drive.

      Finally, I didn't get into the fact that outside of the 15 /.ers who live and die by OGG and thus love the Neuros or Karma players, the Dell product is generally accepted to be the "next best thing" to an iPod by most reviews. And this second best product is physically larger, uses lousier interface software, is not as flexible with mass storage, and (with the release of the 4th gen iPods) has almost no battery or price advantage to fall back on.

    27. Re:Honest Question by Some+Dumbass... · · Score: 1

      Eh, you caught me. I wrote this post in the six minutes before I needed to leave this morning. With ample time, I would've found more supporting evidence.

      It's just that there have been a lot of stories on the iPod lately, and almost nobody seems to be doing their research on non-iPod players. Yet lots of posts which comment on non-iPod players get modded way up. You got up to +5 based in part on shoddy evidence. What can I say?

      [big snip... the bit below adequately summarizes the rest]

      And this second best product is physically larger, uses lousier interface software, is not as flexible with mass storage, and (with the release of the 4th gen iPods) has almost no battery or price advantage to fall back on.


      Fair enough. Now for my retort.

      Some of the points you made are valid, and some aren't. Those navigation issues you mentioned aren't a problem for me, though maybe that's because I'm using the latest firmware. Still, consider this: the "second best" product still has significantly more battery life (20hrs vs. 12), and a battery which should last longer than a year or so. It works with Windows-standard WMA files, and has one or two nice extra features (e.g. a built-in mic for voice recording). And it's still cheaper than the not-yet-released Gen4 iPod ($48 is nothing to sneeze at, and some people are more than happy give up 5Gb to save $100).

      I still don't understand exactly why some people think the general populace is more into having a usb mass storage device than saving money (I sure wasn't -- I just wanted an mp3 player!) If nothing else, cost must have some effect on people's choices. I mean really, on SlashDot's _Apple_ site, of all places, people seem to assume that everyone shells out extra money for the "best" product. You guys should know that's not true since 90% of the world uses PCs, right? ;) Even if the DJ is "second best", people buy second best to save money all the time. Not understanding that is just snootiness. This is of course why ranking products on an absolute scale (first, second, etc.) is silly.

      See, this is the kind of well-researched and more balanced discussion which I'm _not_ seeing much of on Slashdot. Sometimes when a highly politicized topic comes up, you'll see some posts which are complete junk, but which espouse an opinion which is popular with a reasonably large group, which are modded way up. I get the feeling that iPod-related topics are in that category.

    28. Re:Honest Question by thoth · · Score: 1
      I have a theory that most people have only used one type of mp3 player (e.g. just an iPod).

      I used an iRiver before I bought an iPod. At least 80% of why I bought the iPod is because the iRiver was too damn hard to use. The little remote thing, each jog dial has 4 positions: twist left, twist right, push briefly, push and hold. Basically, I need the manual just to navigate the thing. And that makes me angry when I use it. I felt like I had to drill with flashcards every day just to maintain my competence operating it, since I don't listen to music every day and didn't develop the flippin' muscle memory that thing required.

      With the iPod - no problems. I want to listen to a playlist shuffled? - easy for me to find. And so forth. No I haven't tried the Rio, but I also don't have $250 bucks to spend over and over looking for the ultimate player.

    29. Re:Honest Question by Moofie · · Score: 1

      I wasn't a fan of the touch wheel, until I played with a click wheel iPod mini yesterday.

      That is one sweet user interface. Yay new big ass cheap large battery click wheel iPod. She /will/ be mine.

      Next week, when I get paid, that is... : )

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    30. Re:Honest Question by babyrat · · Score: 1

      I bought a DELL DJ (15GB) because it was $100 cheaper than an IPOD. the design was not as polished as the ipod, too many buttons, i had a difficult time adjusting volume or skipping a song without actually pulling the device off my belt or straining around to see the buttons.

      It was heavy - bounced around when I ran with it. Locked up quite often (once every few days) and required a unbent paperclip (or something similar) to reset.

      I then used a buddy's Ipod and found it to be MUCH better in all respects, except battery life, which is 8 hours comapred to 16 (which probably explains the weight difference).

      I finally settled on an Ipod mini because it was lighter and smaller still, and 4GB is plenty for me - I don't mind having to juggle around songs from my laptop to the mini every couple of weeks when I want a change.

      All the points the previous posters made regarding usability, integration, reliability are certainly true in the case of the ipod to dell dj comparison.

      I initially thought that the finer touches of the ipod were not worth $100. I realized they were (in my case).

      Note I'm not citing any reviews, and everything here is based on owning a Dell DJ for a month and my mini for about 6 weeks now.

    31. Re:Honest Question by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Seems to me like really good UI design is rather a different thing from "style". I mean, I suppose the iPod is stylish (it's WAY more stylish than I am, that's for sure) but good design is way more than "style".

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    32. Re:Honest Question by Heywood+Yabuzof · · Score: 1


      It may be a small feature, but people do care about it. My sister has pretty much switched all of her "PDA" stuff (contacts and calendar) from a PalmPilot to her new iPod. It doesn't offer all the features of a PDA, but it offers enough of them to make it work for her. One less device to carry around!

    33. Re:Honest Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I ordered my 1G iPod 4 days after it was announced. Those were 4 long days of pondering if I really should buy it or not. In the end, I bought it for a number of reasons, all which turned out to be well worth it, and then some! (Really, the iPod answered all the problems I had with MP3 players until then, and then more!)

      Silicon memory was/is too expensive, so I was considering an mp3 CD player made in Taiwan that I saw at a shop in Bangkok. That would allow me 650Mb of mp3's at once, with simply popping in a new disc when necessary. Carry around 3 CD's, that should be enough. I already used a portable CD player, so this didn't seem like a big deal. However, it was big, and one thing I wanted with an mp3 player was portability when I was at the gym, jogging, biking, what not. iPod matched both problems; size and storage capacity fit the bill.

      I already had a Mac with FireWire, and after trying a friend's mp3 player via USB, I was damned sure USB1.1 would not cut it. The more storage the player had, the more painfull the job of transfering songs would be.

      The iPod would double as a FireWire HDD. This was not something I had originally anticipated in an mp3 player, and was an added goodie. Not only was it an HDD, but it was bootable. I always carried a boot CD for Macs, with various recovery tools on it. I'm not a technician or office IT guy, but the office IT guy had no clue with Macs, so all the designers would come to me with their problems. Also, my parents would need help now and then. The iPod meant I could trash my aging collection of boot dics and tools. (By then, everyone I knew had a FireWire-able Mac.)

      DRM never was a concern to me, I had never run accross a non-mp3 DRMed player until then. However, some people on /. brought up the point, and I liked it. My songs. My collection. My choice of how I want to listen to it. (I personally own over 500 CDs, and although I do use p2p to DL songs, I also purchase full CDs when I find a new band/group/artist that I like. It may be illegal, but it's ethical, and I don't have a problem with that.)

      5Gb was more than enough. Sure, I can't fit my entire collection on the iPod, but on the other hand, I'd say a good 350 CDs I own a rarely ever listened to. That Skid Row CD I bought when I was in high school is just collecting dust. So 5Gb was good enough, for sure. (It still is today, and is one reason I predicted the iPod mini would sell like hotcakes. It did even more so than I had expected. Next week the iPod mini is FINALLY starting sales in Japan, since production in the U.S. wasn't meeting demand and they delayed the rollout over here.)

      One cable to rule them all... Yes, 1 cable for transfers and recharges. The iPod comes with an AC adapter for recharging, but I hardly ever use it. I don't even think about recharging, it just sorta happens. I like that.

      10 hour battery life. That kicks the crap out of my previous CD player. After years of buying various battery powered toys (which I'm sure a lot of /.ers have) I have a general rule that the battery life is anywhere between 50% to 75% of what's listed. That meant 5 to 7.5 hours of juice. Still good enough. (And I later found out that even that was more than enough, since I usually recharge before 3 hours, simply because I connect it to my Mac.) The only time I really drained the juice was on a snowboarding trip. (Yes, I have a Burton iPod jacket. It kicks ass. Snowboarders out there may start salvating.) It was cold as hell out, which probably wasn't great on the battery. I still got a good 7 hours (full day) out of it. iPod and snowboarding... a match made in heaven.

      Finally, it's just down right cool. The case design, the no-nonsense simplicity, the UI is very nice, all which are simple added benefits. My original 1G iPod is still happily running every day (I listen to it about 2 hours on the train every day) and the battery life is still satisfactory. I've dropped it time and

    34. Re:Honest Question by UserChrisCanter4 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I wouldn't ever try to rank things as absolutes either. I own a Windows PC and a Mac, and I wouldn't argue that a Mac is the best for everything (although I do feel that for a general purpose user buying a retail boxed product, it makes more sense most of the time).

      The initial post was someone asking why the iPod is popular, because they couldn't for the life of them understand why so many people raved about it. Some of the issues (size and UI) can't easily be communicated without comparing it to other, similar products. Saying, "it's small enough to fit in your pocket" doesn't communicate the same concept as, "it's the largest MP3 player that will comfortably, unobtrusively fit in your pocket, whereas Players X, Y, and Z are just a tad on the bulky/clumsy side." Others, such as iTunes integration, can easily be explained on their own. The iPod is currently the best selling MP3 player because it represents Apple's generally superior approach to design in a reasonably affordable package.

      I certainly understand that people buy second best to save money all the time. Therer are some scenarios where it makes a whole lot of sense. MP3 players happen to be one of those products, IMHO, where it's worth it to go for the unit that does everything you need. I would definitely point someone to a DJ or Creative if they were looking for a semi-permanent car-based MP3 player,. For something to carry around frequently, use easily (especially for the non /. crowd, the ones driving the iPod's popularity), and not turn into just another forgotten gadget, however, I feel that it's worth that little extra cash. That's not snootiness, it's personal opinion. It's not that I don't understand why people want to save money, it's that I don't personally feel that the savings justifies the features I give up. Apparently, a lot of people tend to agree with me.

      As for the Mass Storage issue, I think you'd be surprised how many of the normal populace, especially the younger crowd more likely to purchase an MP3 player, actually carry around a USB flash drive. Having both your semi-important data and your mp3 player in one box is handy. I also failed to mention that I enjoy the fact that the iPod doesn't look like some cheap plastic-y crap or some beamed-from-mars crazy layout that a crackhead designer thought was "cool". The DJ actually falls into the same category, but the Creative and Rio fail the plastic test, and the iRiver units too frequently fall into the "dude, blue and black looked awesome on that warez site, let's go for it" school of design. Visually pleasing products are worth it (again, at least to me).

      You're right, I probably did get partially modded up because there's a sizeable chunk of slashdot who shares my belief. I like to think, though, that I reasonably back up a lot of those assertions (the navigation faux pas excluded). The man asked why the iPod is so popular, and I gave him some of the reasons why I find it worthwhile and recommend it to a lot of people.

    35. Re:Honest Question by rjung2k · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, the DJ's interface still pales against the iPod.

      When you want to scroll through a list on the DJ, it's scroll... move thumb... scroll... move thumb... scroll...

      On the iPod, this is just turnturnturnturnturn.

      Good luck finding the one song out of a collection of 5,000 with the DJ.

    36. Re:Honest Question by Smack · · Score: 1

      Very true about the limitation of the wheel.

      The interface also needs a good dose of "what would make sense here". Like pressing Play on the Music Library doesn't do anything, and it should play the whole music library. Instead they need another menu item to do that.

  16. Favorite Line by Ancient+Devices+King · · Score: 0, Redundant

    My favorite line from the article:
    "Knauss said Jobs' influence was sometimes idiosyncratic. For example, the iPod is louder than most MP3 players because Jobs is partly deaf, he said. "They drove the sound up so he could hear it," Knauss said."

    --
    -"It seems like you're trying to exploit a security hole. Would you like help?"
    1. Re:Favorite Line by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and then the French came along and made them turn it down again for the EU models :(

    2. Re:Favorite Line by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No joke. Some of us ARE deaf, and the iPod was one of the few portable electronic devices powerful enough to drive Grado 'phones w/o a head amp. The blasted earpieces/headphones just don't work with hearing aids :-(.

      Another plus of the iPod was that they seem to have put more sound-quality into the product than really necessary. There's a line-out as well as headphone out, one which is good enough to get a reasonable review from audiophile mags.

      The price of "comparable machines" seems to be within $100, which isn't a large chunk of change. Face it, if you're getting anything like an iPod, you've got money to burn...

  17. Why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    would you want Bluetooth headphones? So your music is compressed further to the point where it sounds like it's filtered through a waterfall? There are other kinds of wireless headphones out there that work better than Bluetooth. They aren't included with the iPod because they're expensive enough to cut into the profit margin.

    1. Re:Why by CrackedButter · · Score: 1

      Tell me about the alternatives, i thought BT was the only realistic option?

    2. Re:Why by Moofie · · Score: 1

      I've got a pair of Sennheiser wireless cans. They set me back $200 two years ago, and they are pretty mediocre. They sound pretty good when they deign to lock in to the base station's signal, but they were not worth what I paid for them.

      It's hard to imagine Apple would have been able to come up with a substantially bettwer wireless headphone system that fits their style requirement (the Sennheiser cans look like you're weraring earmuffs) without placing themselves into Bang & Olufsen pricing territory.

      There are a few pairs of BT headphones just now coming out, but I'm unconvinced that BT has anywhere near the bandwidth for good fidelity. I hope i'm wrong...it's a great idea. But it's not ready yet.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
  18. The problem is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem is that the iPod is a great product, but their core products... the Mac has to be kept up to date.

    In theory, the iPod could easily be overtaken by a company that wants to over take it. Right now, nobody has decided its worth spending so much on. Probably memories of a .COM boom/bust.

  19. Sucess in marketing. by H8X55 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A lot of techs i know have blown off the iPod and are currently using another device to provide portable storage and audio playback. The iRivers are incredibly popular amoung 'i.t. people'. I know a lot of folks rave on about Creative's products as well. I personally like the Neuros.

    From a tech standpoint the iPod lacks some functionality, or has too high a price point for many of us. But from marketing, fashion, and the MTV crowd it is the "it" thing to own. No one can predict these things though. "It" just happens. Like a $45 trucker hat.

    1. Re:Sucess in marketing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      The only "raving" about Creative products I've ever done or heard is how horrible they are.

    2. Re:Sucess in marketing. by harlingtoxad · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Creative mp3 players have more storage and cost less than most other players. The sound quality is superior to the iPod and other competitors. They also have a user replacable batteries. The computer software is not so great though. http://gear.ign.com/articles/437/437957p1.html

      --
      Gravity is not just a law, it's also a good idea.
    3. Re:Sucess in marketing. by harlingtoxad · · Score: 1

      Forgot to mention that Creative doesn't support OGG files. Neither does the iPod, but to me and lots of /.ers this makes Creative players useless.

      --
      Gravity is not just a law, it's also a good idea.
    4. Re:Sucess in marketing. by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      The thing is people point to bulkier, clumsier looking products and use the price of that to say the iPod is "overpriced" or something. The problem with that is the compact design comes at a price, and of course, a good package design comes at a price too. Zen looks pretty nice but it is pretty boxy and bulkier too. I've seen an iRiver that is very close to an iPod's size but has an awful large protruding arrow pointer and costs just as much as iPod.

      The MuVo2 does look like a decent competitor to iPod mini, but nowhere have I found actual dimensions to the product. They love bragging about the small 1" hard drive, that doesn't mean much because that doesn't say what the actual product size is.

    5. Re:Sucess in marketing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only reason these so-called i.t. people avoid the iPods is the same reason they avoid Macs. They take it as a blow to their ego that the entire skill set they've built up to deal with a certain technology is rendered useless by great design. They are mechanics faced with a machine that breaks down two orders of magnitude less frequently.

    6. Re:Sucess in marketing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looking from the top: width wise its almost exactly the same, its a little shorter, and a little deeper. So basically its a little smaller, but thicker in your pocket. And IMO its a very good competitor to the IPOD - I own one myself :)

    7. Re:Sucess in marketing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yah, the software kinda sucks, but they are a great value and generally sound good (excepting the earbuds/headphones that come with them - and they can be replaced with something nicer for 30 bucks)

    8. Re:Sucess in marketing. by karnal · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I can understand that you may want ogg support, but let me say one thing:

      fuck ogg.

      *whew*. With that said, this story is about the IPOD (right?) which doesn't do ogg, and honestly, people who are interested in the ipod for it's MP3 playing capabilities (as well as the tie in to itunes) don't really give a shit. So stop it already.

      --
      Karnal
    9. Re:Sucess in marketing. by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 1

      The Zen does not have a replaceable battery...at least mine does not (USB 2.0 20 GB Zen).

      Right now my only beef with it and the major reason I want a iPod is that it does not work at all with iTunes....either on Windows or Mac and the program you use for syncing music on it quite frankly sucks ass. It's SO bad a lot of the Nomad people I know buy Notmad because it does nto suck as much as Creatives CRAP.

      --

      Gorkman

    10. Re:Sucess in marketing. by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 1

      The Creative players don't work directly as USB hard drives. You have to sue special software to use them for file storage. That's a fatal flaw in my book.

    11. Re:Sucess in marketing. by Some+Dumbass... · · Score: 1

      The thing is people point to bulkier, clumsier looking products and use the price of that to say the iPod is "overpriced" or something. The problem with that is the compact design comes at a price, and of course, a good package design comes at a price too.

      No, the problem is that every single person who praises the iPod assumes that people will pay extra for the particular features which the iPod has.

      For one thing, I was under the impression that when it comes to most products, cheapness rules, especially when even the cheaper products are fairly good (e.g. your choices are not just "high end" or "crap"). For example, I still think the Dell DJ has a great UI, looks good, and costs about $75 less than the comparable iPod (until recently, that is). Yes the iPod is smaller and has more features, but somebody needs to explain exactly why most people are willing to pay the extra $75 or so to get them. What need do they have which is not met by the DJ? Do so many people really not care about a 30% (or so) price difference? Do that many people really use ITMS?

      For another thing, this doesn't explain why people aren't buying players with other features which the iPod doesn't have. Yes the iPod is neat, but why not buy the iRiver for (a bit) less? The iRiver may be a bit uglier (a matter of opinion), but it comes with a nice large inline LCD for the price. Why aren't people attracted to that particular feature? Who cares what the player itself looks like, it goes in your pocket (and the LCD looks cool)! The explanation most iPod owners seem to give for the popularity of the iPod is that it has just exactly the features which everyone wants, e.g. "people don't want inline LCDs, they want breakout!" or "people don't like blue, they like white!" or "People don't care about battery life, they want a click wheel!" I find these explanations unlikely. I do not find it unlikely that the iPod has the exact features which that particular iPod owner wanted (that's why they own one). I wouldn't be surprised if iPod owners were assuming that their personal preferences match those of the general public and using that to justify the iPod's popularity.

      Of course, people do buy lots of iPods, so I could be completely wrong. Maybe the iPod is just right for most people. However, my goal has been to make a case for why it's not the _features of the iPod itself_ which are the reason why people are buying them. Comparison shopping does not turn up a clear winner in "bang for your buck". You can get a different set of features, often for less money, or a smaller set of features for much cheaper. So why does everyone pick the iPod? Is everyone really of one mind on this (cue "1984" commercial?) I say it's due to lack of comparison shopping: the iPod is all that most people know about, so that's what they buy.

      So yes, success in marketing is the key, at least in my opinion.

    12. Re:Sucess in marketing. by H8X55 · · Score: 1

      You have to sue special software to use them for file storage. That's a fatal flaw in my book.

      or use Windows XP?

    13. Re:Sucess in marketing. by Cerebus · · Score: 1

      For one thing, I was under the impression that when it comes to most products, cheapness rules, [...]

      Of course, people do buy lots of iPods, so I could be completely wrong.

      You're completely wrong.

      Form factor, looks, and 'coolness' are all decision factors. Cost is important, but not most important. The continued viability of Nike is an obvious example.

      --
      -- Cerebus
    14. Re:Sucess in marketing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Zen is not really that bad at all, and I've had one for 3 months now. My GF has an iPod and besides the better interface and Itunes support I'm not in any way jealous of her Mp3 player like I am of her new Saab.

    15. Re:Sucess in marketing. by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 1
      or use Windows XP?

      You still need to use Creative's software. Their players do not implement the USB mass storage interface. They are not like iPod, or iRiver, or Archos, where you just plug it in and it works for file storage.

      Their protocol has been reverse engineered, and software is available for Linux to use these players...but what if Creative breaks that in a firmware update?

    16. Re:Sucess in marketing. by Some+Dumbass... · · Score: 1

      You're completely wrong.

      Form factor, looks, and 'coolness' are all decision factors. Cost is important, but not most important. The continued viability of Nike is an obvious example.


      The kinds of people who are into things like "coolness" (e.g. kids) often get their money secondhand (e.g. from parents) who may be more value-oriented. Furthermore, mp3 players are more expensive than shoes and are less of a necessity (almost everyone needs shoes, though rarely a $150 pair). So I still think that money matters when it comes to mp3 jukeboxes. Maybe not that much (they are a luxury item, after all), but some.

      As a side note, "coolness" is very much an advertising thing, and even tastes in look and form factor can be influenced by advertising. Like I said, I think advertising is ultimately why people buy iPods.

    17. Re:Sucess in marketing. by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Unless this guy compared the two players with the same (good) pair of headphones, I wouldn't believe his "louder and clearer" claims are worth the Internet they're printed on.

      Sound quality is HIGHLY subjective, and comparisons based on anything other than controlled double-blind tests are meaningless.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    18. Re:Sucess in marketing. by Moofie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ...or maybe people who praise the iPod are willing to "pay extra for the particular features which the iPod has" and don't give a shit what anybody else thinks.

      But I understand how that might contradict your notion that anybody who disagrees with you must be overly susceptible to marketing hype.

      "I was under the impression that when it comes to most products, cheapness rules"

      Manufacturers like Ferarri, Bang & Olufsen, and Rolex disagree with you. So do their customers. There certainly is a market for the cheapest available object that (allegedly) accomplishes a task. There is also a market for quality products that actually DO accomplish the task (which are often purchased by people who got burned on the first set of objects). And there is also a market for luxury goods, where really top-drawer industrial design is more important than low price.

      Like the Dell DJ? Great. Go buy one. If it suits your needs, I think that's dandy.

      The rest of your post is just wanking, trying to fit the facts as you (mis)percieve them to your preconceived notion that "success in marketing is the key". You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I happen to think it's bollocks.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
  20. Sure he left before launch, but he went to M$.... by Shoeler · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This reminds me of when the cheif designer for Banyan-Vine's streettalk went to Microsoft - viola, Active Directory, which very closely resembes Streettalk!

    Same-old microsoft play. Take the idea someone else creates and call it innovation when you include it in the OS that 95% of PCs use.

  21. Deaf Guy Wanted For Music Listening by grunt107 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Although Jobs' influence seems to have helped the iPod become the force it is, I find it odd that he would be so influential on the sonic quality - being that he is partially deaf. I am partially fat (oh, who am I kidding - "totally fat"), so I should not be a contact for bicycle seat design.

    1. Re:Deaf Guy Wanted For Music Listening by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless, of course, you want to sell the bicycle seats to someone besides people in great shape. Like, oh, most of the country.

    2. Re:Deaf Guy Wanted For Music Listening by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the seat company was targeting fat people you may be the ideal contact.

    3. Re:Deaf Guy Wanted For Music Listening by passion · · Score: 2, Insightful

      why not? You'd be one of the first to notice that the seat's too hard and hurts your rear, or that it's not shaped properly and is uncomfortable... something that skinnier types would only discover after pedaling 20 miles away from home.

      --
      - passion
    4. Re:Deaf Guy Wanted For Music Listening by MKalus · · Score: 1
      so I should not be a contact for bicycle seat design.


      Actually,

      that's why they call them 'sattles' not seats....

      Just have a look at some of the bike photos from this years tour.

      I have seen some Time Trial set ups where the saddle is nothing more but a thin "slice" of carbon fibre.
      --
      If you want to e-mail me, use my PGP Key.
    5. Re:Deaf Guy Wanted For Music Listening by HeyLaughingBoy · · Score: 1
      I find it odd that he would be so influential on the sonic quality

      Actually, that's exactly why he should be influential. The "perfect customer" doesn't exist; what you need is someone who can point out where your product needs improvement.
    6. Re:Deaf Guy Wanted For Music Listening by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Although Jobs' influence seems to have helped the iPod become the force it is, I find it odd that he would be so influential on the sonic quality - being that he is partially deaf.

      I don't know if you know this, but audio specifications can be represented as numbers that even deaf people can comprehend. Shocking, I know.

    7. Re:Deaf Guy Wanted For Music Listening by rjstanford · · Score: 1

      Just have a look at some of the bike photos from this years tour.

      I have seen some Time Trial set ups where the saddle is nothing more but a thin "slice" of carbon fibre.


      There's a simple explanation for this. When you're biking seriously, you're not just sitting on the seat - a lot of your weight is supported by your legs on the pedals even when it looks like you're sitting down. That, and on a long ride (especially as you get up to, or surpass, a century), a little discomfort is way better than the chafing that would occur with a wider seat. Just think about it, shudder, and move on.

      --
      You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
    8. Re:Deaf Guy Wanted For Music Listening by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Actually, they're called "saddles", but who's counting?

      The most comfortable saddle for a 100+ mile bike ride is not the same as the most comfortable saddle for tooling around the park with the chilluns. After about 20 miles, that big comfy cushy sofa under your ass starts to chafe something awful.

      I'm a big dude, but for my distance riding there is no substitute for a firmly padded narrow saddle, that's properly adjusted in height and angle to not bother the dangly bits.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    9. Re:Deaf Guy Wanted For Music Listening by MKalus · · Score: 1

      I know that ;) I have a sattle myself, riding 200K on a "coushy" one would kill my ass pretty fast.

      --
      If you want to e-mail me, use my PGP Key.
    10. Re:Deaf Guy Wanted For Music Listening by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only that, but if you use a medical device called a scrotal suspensory, the dangly bits never flip flop around and that's one less worry! I bought a testicle-holder for 10$ at the pharmacy. I recommend you get the largest one, as the 'medium fits all' was obviously designed for some sort of arboreal lemur, not an adult human. It helps to keep the boys together. I also have a good hard narrow saddle with the ergonomic slot. The combo is awesome.

    11. Re:Deaf Guy Wanted For Music Listening by Moofie · · Score: 1

      That may be the funniest thing I've ever read on /. Cheers! ...arboreal lemur...ROFL

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    12. Re:Deaf Guy Wanted For Music Listening by bobbozzo · · Score: 1

      Beethoven was completely deaf in his later years but it didn't stop him from composing the 9th symphony, arguably one of his greatest works.

      --
      Nothing to see here; Move along.
  22. Understandable by cubicledrone · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Business is relentlessly cynical. I would guess that the iPod was constantly ridiculed during development, and that there were numerous attempts (all driven by office politics, no doubt) to cancel the project.

    Nothing will work. Nothing will make money. Nobody wants to buy it. Nobody cares. Everything sucks. It's so hard to make money (announced in a $3 million conference room) It'll never work. What makes you think people will buy it? What makes you think you're qualified to work here? Blah blah blah.

    It's so predictable any more it's almost comedy. It is truly amazing that anything new is developed at all. Try taking a new product to a bank for a loan to manufacture it. I can hear the whining already. Every single word is predictable. After a while it becomes truly redundant and very difficult to listen to.

    Oh, what wonders have been lost to society for office politics and lack of capital.

    --
    Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
    1. Re:Understandable by lpangelrob2 · · Score: 1
      Yeah... let me throw in that it's a businesses' natural tendency to play it safe -- and that if you played by the conservative estimates, I'm sure the Apple's internal figures would have the word "failure" printed all over it.

      Relate this to the video game industry, which relies on creativity to spark sales (with caveats... Pikmin didn't exactly take off, while Pokemon did), and it's easy to see why gamers in general tend to shake their heads over the game industry's blight.

    2. Re:Understandable by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1

      >I would guess that the iPod was constantly ridiculed during development, and that there were numerous attempts (all driven by office politics, no doubt)

      Read the problems with the iPod during development. For two months, with production lines ready, they had a 3 hour (off or on) mp3 player. That is a technical problem that you would be an idiot to ignore.

      >Nothing will work.

      Seriously, you need to look at what is happening in the world. There are lots of thing businesses are doing which are creative. Sometimes too creative that it gets close to illegal. Go to a product convention for any product category. Watch TV. Open up a mass-marketed science magazine. All sort of new products out there. There are too many new products out there that its hard to get people's attention to them.

      >Try taking a new product to a bank for a loan to manufacture it.

      Thats because a bank is a lender of last resort, you don't go to them for this stuff. They like conservative investments. Try a venture capitist or an 'angel investor'. Hell, they were throwing money around like nothing a few years ago and they will again in the future.

      --
      The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
    3. Re:Understandable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Business is relentlessly cynical.

      You should try working for my former employer sometime.

      His boundless enthusiasm was only exceeded by his utter incompetence at being a manager. (micromanaging people, breaking his own rules, dating employees, etc.) Last I heard, they were headed downhill rather fast..

  23. Not just the iPod... by ugauaauag · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This guy also had the iTunes Music Store thought up as well.

    "Tony's idea was to take an MP3 player, build a Napster music sale service to complement it, and build a company around it," Knauss said.

  24. Re:Why oh why by kelnos · · Score: 1, Interesting

    while you're making some gross oversimplifications and this is an obvious troll, i can't help but partially agree. i despise the stupid wheel, the non-responsive buttons (when i push a button, i like to feel it depressing), and the lack of an off button (no, holding down "stop" until i _think_ it's turned off is _not_ an off button). the on-screen UI is pretty well laid-out, but it feels more like a "ok, we have a limited number of buttons, let's see what we can design to fit into that restriction", rather than something designed in a less-restrictive manner. but hey, what do i know - it's wildly successful.

    as for the fanaticism surrounding it, it's just your typical "in-crowd" fad. except that the in-crowd is a bit more geeky than usual. will something better come along? probably. but i don't really care. i'm just waiting until i can afford one of these.

    --
    Xfce: Lighter than some, heavier than others. Just right.
  25. Re:Why oh why by FutureShoks · · Score: 1

    Amen.

    --
    ___FutureShoks___
  26. For those of you too young to remember. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Music device maker Apple was once a famous computer company. Current magazine coverboy Steve Jobs was once in the computer business before being replaced as CEO of his company by sugar water a salesman.

  27. Re:Why oh why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    about time someone put my thoughts into words. I would have left apple too: the conversation goes something like:
    SJ - Were going to sell your wild walkman for $400
    BK - Ah, $400?
    SJ - 1 ipod, 2 ???, 3 PROFIT!!!
    BK - Ah, $400... SIR?
    SJ - Can you imagine the saps buying these products?
    BK - You realize that an MP3 player sells for 1/3 of that.
    SJ - This is going to sell millions. Were revamping the company.
    BK - Hey do you know BG?
    SJ - They're all going to go crazy because it says apple and its $400.
    BK - That's all right, Ill get my secretary to look him up.
    SJ - I feel so good that I should sell V2 for $500
    BK - I'll talk to you later.
    SJ - Teeheee $400.
    SJ - Hooo Hooo Hoooo $400.
    SJ - Hey Where'd BK go?

  28. going ahead with flawed ideas by abhinavmodi · · Score: 1

    Computing History is replete with such cases of going ahead with mistaken ideas. One such incident that springs to mind is the drafting of the various AAL standards for ATM, all but a few later ones being left unused

  29. whatever happaned to persistence? by insomnyuk · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So much for the adage 'slow and steady wins the race.' I wonder how much money this guy lost in bonuses and stock options by giving up early.

    I found this particularly interesting:

    Knauss said at one of the first meetings with PortalPlayer, Fadell said, "This is the project that's going to remold Apple and 10 years from now, it's going to be a music business, not a computer business."

    1. Re:whatever happaned to persistence? by abb3w · · Score: 1
      I found this particularly interesting:

      Knauss said at one of the first meetings with PortalPlayer, Fadell said, "This is the project that's going to remold Apple and 10 years from now, it's going to be a music business, not a computer business."

      No doubt the lawyers for the Apple Corps (aka) will find it particularly interesting, too.

      --
      //Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
  30. Re:Why oh why by 59Bassman · · Score: 1
    Bitter much?

    I don't own an iPod, and I don't plan on it. What Apple has done is come up with a convenient package that made a lot of similar technologies work on a large scale. Buy one, plug it in, connect to the iTunes server and you're there. For people who may not have been ripping all their CD's to .mp3 (or perhaps weren't downloading music beforehand), this was an easy way into an electronic storage format with a higher capacity than CD.

    Do I like Apple? Not particularly. Do I like The Steve? Hell no. But I grudgingly admit that Apple seems to do a better job with interface and packaging useability than just about anyone else. And apparently, people are willing to pay for it.

  31. Apple becoming a music company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Choice quotes:

    "This is the project that's going to remold Apple and 10 years from now, it's going to be a music business, not a computer business."

    "Tony had an idea for a business process and Apple is transforming itself on his whim..."


    These statements bother me bigtime. I know the quote is from the guy who originated the iPod idea, but the fact Steve devoted so much time to the project, and that apple has a division devoted solely to the iPod, leads me to believe that they might really think this is where their company is going. If that's the case, then I morn for apple. Here's a company who is on the cusp of everything revolutionary (with OS X), yet they're going to bail out because the very first product they sold to windows users is successful. Talk about company execs being blindsighted by a single successful product.

    Apple has WAY more to offer the world then just the iPod, I just wish apple themselves would see that.

    1. Re:Apple becoming a music company by viggen9 · · Score: 1

      In response to the quote from the article: Knauss said at one of the first meetings with PortalPlayer, Fadell said, "This is the project that's going to remold Apple and 10 years from now, it's going to be a music business, not a computer business."

      I hope that for a guy (Knauss) who was so right about the iPod that he is wrong-as-can-be about the future of Apple. We want to listen to our iPods and play on our iMac G5's too!

    2. Re:Apple becoming a music company by Mitleid · · Score: 0, Troll

      Well, as "revolutionary" as you seem to think Apple is, their computer systems have a pretty marginal user base. They've been around for quite some time now, and it doesn't seem like they've made any leaps and bounds in regards to getting more and more people to use their computers. From my experience, there are two types of Apple users; those that use them because they are the best tool for the job, and those that use them out of style. The people who use them out of necessity usually could care less what kind of machine they're using; it's got the tools, fine. The people who use an Apple computer based on style seem to drool all over everything, no matter how trivial, Apple wants to release (computer or otherwise).

      The userbase trend seems to only be getting worse, and as far as company longevity goes, it's probably best for Apple to concentrate on music products like the iPod. It seems that often times, people neglect the fact that Apple is a company, and thus wishe to make as much money as possible; Apple could care less about their "loyal" userbase. It's like some Apple users consider their purchase of an Apple a donation or something; Apple, like all other companies, only desire a profit and could care less about their users and their philisophical or moral reasoning for buying their machines.

      --

      --
      Is it me, or did it just get fatter in here?
    3. Re:Apple becoming a music company by viggen9 · · Score: 1

      I seem to recall a certain company by the name of Best Buy mentioned here a week or two ago. The company, it turns out, is firing some of its worst customers who represent a hole in their profit model. As I recall, many /.ers were not too thrilled by this, and I for one do not care to shop at a place where I, the customer who brings in money, is not treated well. To be successful, you have to keep your customers happy so they will keep coming back for more. If you are focused on pure business, it will backfire sooner or later.

      Look at Walmart for example. They make a profit by treating their employees like crap. This is not a business model that I agree with, and so they have lost me as a customer (ok, i only shopped there because i was given a gift card).

    4. Re:Apple becoming a music company by OmniVector · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think you're missing a third reason why some of us happen to use macs:

      They're better. style? yeah it's nice, but i don't *need* a pretty computer. Necessity? I could code on linux/windows just as easily as the mac. No, i use it because it's a better operating system. It gets out of my way. I know some people don't like to admit it, but every market has a high and low end. BMWs and Toyotas aren't really in the same class of vehicle. Think of it like this: The person who has the means to purchase a BMW never really considers purchasing the Toyota. Likewise the opposite, the Toyota buyer never really considers the BMW as it's too far out of a comfortable price range.

      basically what i'm trying to say is apple's niche is perfectly fine -- high end quality computers. Sure there is a market for the low end. a rather large (95%) market, but that's not apple's target. It would be silly for BMW to market towards the toyota buyers. i think that's why apple's switch compain wasn't very successful

      apple's profits are still vastly in desktop/laptop sales. so your "focus on the music products" as a longevity argument wouldn't really hold much water. If apple lost 50% of it's desktop/laptop sales in the next few years, it would really hurt their profits. they can't self sustain themselves on a low return item like the ipod, at least not at the moment. (low return in the sense that you might profit $50 off an ipod and $500 off a powermac).

      at any rate, as i said before. apple's doing just fine. sales are way up, and the highest in 8 years as the last quarterly report says. we might have the ipod to thank for increased media exposure/switchers, but by no means is it the company's saving grace at the moment as a cash cow.

      --
      - tristan
    5. Re:Apple becoming a music company by CrackedButter · · Score: 1

      Last quarter Apple grew inline with the entire PC industry, they are making headway, but it is slow. However, they are just 1 mac company vs countless PC makers... collectively, who would you think would be selling more and more of each year?

    6. Re:Apple becoming a music company by johnpaul191 · · Score: 1

      you can say that about Apple's user base as much as i can say anyone running M$ Windows only does so because their school or job has them do it and they follow their leaders like sheep.....
      or
      i could say anyone that runs Linux is too cheap to pay for an operating system....

      how many people run an Apple OS (or Linux) has no bearing on the quality of the product. your statement is a vague clouded viewpoint of the Mac userbase. it's a fact that Apple breaks new ground left and right with hardware and software. If they were such a non-issue why would Dell, Microsoft and others spend so much time trashing them and not just ignore them? with 3.x% of new computer sales they are no real threat to those guys, but their innovation keeps everyone else in check.

      more people eat at McDonalds than anywhere else and that food is complete garbage. the fact that they own the prepared food market does not mean they are better than what your mom cooks.

    7. Re:Apple becoming a music company by kalidasa · · Score: 1

      Now, repeat after me: there is a difference between market size and market share. Apple does get more users; but Windows gets more users slightly faster. Let's put it this way: if in a given year Apple has a 10% market growth, and Microsoft has a 10% market growth, they have identical market share numbers to the previous year (excluding a third party for the sake of simplicity). 2% of today's market is a lot better than 5% of the market 5 years ago.

    8. Re:Apple becoming a music company by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      I disagree. In most industries 2% of a bigger pie is better than 5% of a smaller one, but that's not necessarily the case here. The difference is interoperability: if the marketshare dwindles too far, developers will stop making software for it, and it will become a ghost OS like BeOS or Amiga. And every time I've heard about people deciding to target a platform, the decision is based on market share in percentages, not number of units.

      Luckily, Apple has been hedging their bets by making their OS able to run *nix apps, so I'm not too worrried (although much more effort needs to be made to get Mac-style user interfaces)

      Losing relative marketshare in an expanding market may be good for Apple's short-term bottom line, but it's not good enough for their long-term success.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    9. Re:Apple becoming a music company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My mom works at McDonalds, you insensitive clod!

    10. Re:Apple becoming a music company by Mitleid · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You make some valid points that I failed to consider. Namely, that maybe Apple does rely a lot more upon desktop sales than I had original assumed. I stand corrected.

      However, I have to say outright that I think you're reasoning behind Apple as a "niche" market is completely flawed. You use an example of a high-end/low-end market, but the fact is you are comparing apples (no pun intended) and oranges. The example you use of a BMW vs. Toyota might work if we lived in a world with 2 different types of roads, say "performance" and "economical". The performance-minded buyers would be the ones with a large amount of income to spend on a luxury car, while the economical drivers would purchase whatever gets them form point A to point B and be satisfied, and both buyers would drive on their corresponding roads. However, the fact is that we live in a world with one type of road, and you buy what you can afford and what you need to get the job done.

      ...and then I lead into my final point, which is my criticism of your claim that Apples are "better". This, my friend, is a completely opinionated statement. They might be better, for you. My personal computer is used in majority for gaming, and I think you'd be hard pressed to convince me that gaming support on an Apple is the same as it's going to be on a Windows machine.

      This isn't meant to be an attack on your character or personal philosophies, but something I think you need to analyze is the reality that not all people use computers for the same thing. You may use computers to a degree that, for you, they all are capable of the same task. However, some people, such as myself, use computers for reasons that are a little less balanced, and thus have to make choices within a certain set of criteria.

      For example, my brother is an aspiring sound engineer/music producer, so when my parents suggested they buy him a laptop for Christmas to assist in his endeavors, they asked for my input. My answer, without hesitation, was to buy him a Powerbook. The software and toolset for recording and audio production are unmatched on an Apple, so I went and ordered the thing myself. He's had it now for six months. He's been completely satisfied, and therefore so am I.

      Don't get me wrong, you make some very valid points, but in the end your argument boils down to simply a matter of preference. I know this is slashdot, and I shouldn't care, but I'm actually rather offended that my initial post gets modded "Troll" while a rebuttal that boils down simply to "they're better because I like them" gets modded up as insightful. I have no problem that people enjoy using an Apple because it suits their needs; I'm glad you've found something that gets the job done. But please, spare us the whole "quality" spiel.

      --

      --
      Is it me, or did it just get fatter in here?
    11. Re:Apple becoming a music company by OmniVector · · Score: 2, Interesting

      i disagree. there's a difference between a system's capability to do something, and a system's potential to do something better.

      as an OPERATING system, i.e., not the 3rd party games/software, mac os is more advanced. this is impossible to contest. quartz extreme, UNIX underpinnings, aqua, usability studies, and prepackaged, more featureful, bundled software (iLife, Mail, Safari) don't lie.

      windows just like many other oses can get you from point a to point b, and if your application happens to be a game you're pretty much going to need windows. but does that mean windows has some inherent superior game development apis? not really. coreaudio, openal, opengl and many other libraries on the mac are equivalent to directx. that's a product of market share and mind share, not of a system's potential.

      here's another analogy that might clear things up: at the end of the day, if you could run all your windows software on mac os x, on your x86 box, would you honestly actually use windows over os x considering all the advantages the base system has? i'm willing to bet the vast majority would switch if the barrier to entry were 0. of course that's not the case, so for now we have the market friction inbetween the two OSes like a wedge carving out the "audio/video/style" people who cherish the platform (for different reasons) and the necessity folk who just want something that runs word and their games.

      --
      - tristan
    12. Re:Apple becoming a music company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, as "performant" as you seem to think Porsche is, their cars have a pretty marginal user base. They've been around for quite some time now, and it doesn't seem like they've made any leaps and bounds in regards to getting more and more people to drive their cars.

      Quality != Quantity

      'nuff said.

    13. Re:Apple becoming a music company by Mitleid · · Score: 1

      Ah, but here is where your argument falls apart again. If, at the end of the day a user could in fact use an Apple for the exact same tasks they could on a Windows machine, would they even be able to afford it? As it stands now, buying an Apple computer is more often than not a luxury purchase. And, ironically enough, if we take your car analogy into account, I'm sure you could ask anyone what make of car they would rather drive: BMW or Toyota, and chances are most people are going to pick the Beamer. But can all of those people afford it? I seriously doubt that.

      --

      --
      Is it me, or did it just get fatter in here?
    14. Re:Apple becoming a music company by Mitleid · · Score: 1

      This is totally flamebait, but I'll bite because it seems to illustrate a trend I've seen spawn from my initial post. The intent of my post was not to insinuate that Apple is an inferior machine or that Apple is doomed because they have a marginal userbase, but rather to try and convey that Apple is a company, that above all else desire to make money. And, theoretically, if making more money required that they abandon their desktop and laptop line and concentrate completely on iTunes and digital music players, I'm sure they would do so.

      As much as the "Mac zealots" love to place Jobs and company on a pedestal, the fact remains that he and everyone who works for Apple are human, and no matter how brilliant anybody may think he is, he still has his price. If abandoning the desktop and laptop series of machines meant a great deal more income, I'm sure he'd tell his "loyal" followers in so many words to go fuck themselves. To believe anything else is delusional, and it seems like a lot of the people who responded to my initial post are simply ignoring this fact.

      --

      --
      Is it me, or did it just get fatter in here?
    15. Re:Apple becoming a music company by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Of course it's a matter of preference. Why would any given buyer care about the priorities of any OTHER buyer?

      You like gaming. That's cool, so do I. However, I also like having a computer that I don't have to reinstall the operating system on every six to eight months. My WinXP box (that i'm typing this on right now) is about to get supplanted as my primary computer by a dead sexy 12" Powerbook that the FedEx fairies are bringing me tomorrow.

      Sure, I'll still keep the WinXP box around for gaming, but for EVERY OTHER TASK I need to accomplish, the Mac does it better.

      I'm glad there's a strong Windows platform out there. I'm glad that Linux is gaining a foothold on the desktop (although I happen to think the UI design is really lousy in most cases). I'm glad that Apple finally has a superb operating system that can go toe to toe with the best the world has to offer.

      It is a good time to be a computer user. There are LOTS of superb choices out there.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    16. Re:Apple becoming a music company by Mitleid · · Score: 1

      I apologize for calling this post flamebait. It was sort of oddly worded, and my first reaction was that it was simply trying to get a rise, but after respondind and re-reading it I reconsidered.

      But THEN, like a complete fool I neglected to go back and remove the flamebait accusation from the post before submitting. My apologies to the original poster; I'm not a loose cannon for accusing someone of flamebait, I just wasn't paying close enough attention.

      --

      --
      Is it me, or did it just get fatter in here?
  32. Dude? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you need to borrow some money to, like, buy an iPod?

    (I use mine as a back up device for my mac, as well as as a walkman, and have OS X 10.2.8 on it for software testing purposes. It's quite handy for transferring information to my XServe too, but what do I know)

  33. Re:Apple is dying: Sell stock now. by hugesmile · · Score: 1
    Apple will run out of steam

    Interesting reference to make your point. Dated 11.19.03, It says "Banc of America said Apple is fairly valued at $21. Shares are down 3 cents to $20.38. "

    Yet the chart shows today that the shares are trading for $32.40. Had I listened to this article back in November, I would have missed out on a 50+% rise in the stock price.

    Good one.

  34. Slashdot Reader by awhelan · · Score: 4, Funny

    Knauss stayed on until near the end of the iPod's development, but quit shortly before it was released because he had no confidence it would be a success.

    He must have read all the slashdot comments saying it would fail.
    Yet another way slashdot can ruin your career.

    1. Re:Slashdot Reader by toolio · · Score: 1
      "He must have read all the slashdot comments saying it would fail. Yet another way slashdot can ruin your career."

      Never ever trust the general Slashdot public to predict a successful/unsuccesful product launch for the general public. (period)

    2. Re:Slashdot Reader by AEton · · Score: 1

      This is the page you're looking for.
      This is the original /. article on the subject.

      --
      We recently had heard in the office over one of the Yellow Machine that's made by Anthology Solutions.
  35. Its "The Innovator's Dilemma" by crovira · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As an organization get larger, (enough to afford a $3 million conference room) the costs of promoting any ideology or technology get larger until they become insurmountable.

    That's when some fool with more brains that money eats the lunch of some bigger fool with more money than brains.

    Innovations come from without, not from within.

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
  36. Re:Apple is dying: Sell stock now. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well I mean, it's an obvious troll -- "beset by angry creditors"? A simple glance at the balance sheet shows the falsehood, since Apple doesn't HAVE any creditors! They have no debt and billions cash in the bank.

  37. Re:Apple is dying: Sell stock now. by e1618978 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I think that you need to take another look at the balance sheet - you didn't notice that they paid off $400 million in debt, so (cash - debt) went up.

  38. Re:Apple is dying: Sell stock now. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Billions? Must be thinking of Meecrosoft.

  39. Re:Why oh why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
    they took an existing product, made it "cuter" and jacked the price up 10-fold to sell to hipster morons who define themselves with their expensive toys.

    Jacked the price up tenfold? I see why you'd assume that, but HD MP3 players are actually quite comparable in pricing. I've actually been shopping for an MP3 player lately, and the iPod has been a strong contender, even though I'd prefer iRiver's 20 gig player for the ability to mount it as a drive. With the recent price drop, the 20 gig iPod is actually significantly (c$70) cheaper than iRiver's product, and even before the price drop, the price was within $40 or $50.

  40. Re:Sure he left before launch, but he went to M$.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Same-old microsoft play. Take the idea someone else creates and call it innovation when you include it in the OS that 95% of PCs use.

    Apple "stole" Acid's Lead Developer for Soundtrack and GarageBand (which is, as a result, *extremely* similar).

    And have you already forgotten that Watson and Konfabulator (regardless of Mac zealot's wishes) were basically stolen from their authors without permission or compensation. Yes, yes, I know, Sherlock already could search, so exactly duplicating Watson's functionality is just a logical extension of that, and Apple has prior art on widgets with their Sticky Notes and Calculator. Yeah. Right.

    But the threads on Konfabulator and Watson were largely apologetic and supportive of Apple, while I highly doubt MS will get any support for displaying the exact same behavior.

  41. I agree with Taco by tunabomber · · Score: 5, Funny

    I mean just think of what the iPod COULD have been. Along with the lack of wireless, I was also pissed that Apple left out the following features:

    -The ability to create a Beowulf cluster of multiple iPods. Just imagine- a render farm on the go!
    -AltiVec Velocity Engine
    -Videoconferencing
    -floppy drive
    -alpha-channel transparency (c'mon this is APPLE we're talking about here!)
    -"eject" button- in the current iPod, you would have to drag the disk to the trash in order to eject it!
    -The ability to interface with ANY Swedish vibrator.
    -Support for Ogg Vorbis AND Ogg Theora.
    -Drivers for Linux/BSD/Hurd.
    -Gyroscopically-controlled 3D pointing device.
    -The ability to modulate subliminal messages into the music that will make me stop being so damn fat.
    -Support for both the NX (no-execute) AND Evil bits.

    WTF? Is that too much to ask!

    --

    pi = 3.141592653589793helpimtrappedinauniversefactory71 ...
    1. Re:I agree with Taco by g0at · · Score: 4, Funny

      You forgot about a right mouse button.

      -b

    2. Re:I agree with Taco by McAddress · · Score: 2, Funny
      You forgot about a right mouse button.

      I would like to use this opportunity to correct a mistaken belief of many windows users. Macs have a right mouse button. They are actually missing the left mouse button. However on a Mac, the right mouse button has the same functionality as the left mouse button on a PC.

      rumor has it that His Steveness's parents forced him to be a lefty, and he has been bitter ever since.

  42. Only one possibleconclusion about this Knauss guy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'Knauss stayed on until near the end of the iPod's development, but quit shortly before it was released because he had no confidence it would be a success. "It was probably a mistake, but then you have to go with what you think at the time," he said.' "

    The iPod was going to fail? This guy must be a Slashdot regular, fer shurr.

  43. Re:Apple is dying: Sell stock now. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    no no.. they really do have billions in cash reserves.

  44. Re:Why oh why by Suriel · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    All you're buying is the name, and the 30 extra hours some designer spent on look and feel. "Think different"... yeah, whatever...

  45. damned number of trolls on today by falcon5768 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    but my favorite point in the peice..... that originally DRM was never thought of for the iPod and iTunes Music Store, and that Apple felt it would damaged the sales.

    Seems the RIAA decided to change Apples mind about it.... who wants to guess they would have refused to do the iTunes Music Store without it having DRM and probably wanted something stronger than what Apple gave them.

    --

    "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."

    1. Re:damned number of trolls on today by allgood2 · · Score: 1

      Well there was an interview with Steve Jobs, not that long after the iTunes Music Store debut. In the interview, he had spoken to the Big 5 music companies and was telling them why DRM wouldn't work, and why their (Apple's idea) would. And that they sent him away. Then while product after product with DRM kept failing, Jobs and company kept coming back, attempting to educate the Big 5 companies. Finally, once the Big 5 had enough failure under their belts, and Jobs came back with FairPlay (basically DRM light), they agreed to proceed. But they all thought the project would fail.

      The irony is to get the Big 5 Apple had to adopt DRM which it didn't want. But to get Apple, the Big 5 had to accept DRM light, which protected the consumers rights as much as it did the RIAAs. So FairPlay is the compromise between divergent opinions.

  46. The scroll wheel invented here?... by Wonderkid · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I lived in California between 1991 and 2000 and frequently showed my friends (some who worked for Apple and others who were well connected patent attorneys) drawings of conceptual hardware devices my company was (is) planning. Plus, a drawing of a computer of the future I designed and won and award for in 1982 (yes, '82). My 'scroll wheel' was identical to the iPods, button in the middle etc. I refer to the first generation iPod scroll wheel, not the excellent new clickable one in the 4G ipod and iPod mini. I have no proof my idea was stolen, but am fairly sure it was as the few people I showed it to reacted in that way that says "Hmmm..." But you know what, congrats to Apple for actually making the thing. For that is what counts.

    --

    O'WONDERWe're working on it.

    1. Re:The scroll wheel invented here?... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't really think you were ripped off. Nevertheless you might want to stop showing your top secret design drawings to anyone who will bother to look. I have friends who work as corporate lawyers who could talk endlessly about insider NYSE stuff, but they don't. It's easy. You just keep your mouth shut.

    2. Re:The scroll wheel invented here?... by Wonderkid · · Score: 1

      Yup, I was young and trusting. I think we all go through a phase when we 'discover' the world is not as nice as Mr. Disney made out during our yoof. :-)

      --

      O'WONDERWe're working on it.

    3. Re:The scroll wheel invented here?... by GrahamCox · · Score: 1

      It's both irritating and flattering/vindicating when an idea you had gets taken up. But drawings are not products, and if you didn't patent...
      I also "invented" the iTrip about 3 years ago, and the Airport Express about the same time, but apart from telling a few people "wouldn't it be great if...", I did nothing about it. I don't mind, i'm glad these things do now exist. There are thinkers and there are doers - but if you are purely a thinker then someone else will eventually come up with the same idea, team up with a doer and be the one to make the millions.

  47. See.. it begins. by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 1

    Like I mentioned earlier, 11 jokes will soon become very lame. I'm just warning everyone in advance. This one didn't even have a setup!

    --
    Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
  48. Re:Apple is dying: Sell stock now. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I learned something new today then: $4 to 5 billion in cash reserves. That is pretty impressive. I'm not sure how they could have accumulated that much cash in 25 years with the relatively small target market.

    Thanks for pointing that out.

  49. Even the new v4 iPods lack ... by burgburgburg · · Score: 1
    basic Tardis functionality. How exactly am I supposed to use my iPod for time/space travel without this? Is this some sort of pro-Dalek gesture?

    The Doctor is not pleased.

  50. Analysis Paralysis by hotsauce · · Score: 1

    Like my director says: analysis paralysis.

    I think there's another thing going on, too: tech features vs. desirability. Jobs understands that it's not only a list of technical features that's important, but a more wholistic view of the product, which includes usability and "sex appeal".

    This is probably why most geeks at first thought the iPod was lame. Like a lot of Apple products (and products of other upscale manufacturers), the spec sheet doesn't do it justice; you have to use it for a bit.

    1. Re:Analysis Paralysis by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      the spec sheet doesn't do it justice; you have to use it for a bit

      Werd. I thought they were overpriced and of little use, but I went for one when I was offered a very good deal. After using it for a few days, I got it. It's an amazing device, and I wouldn't hesitate to get another, even at full retail.

      I feel silly saying it, but the iPod has changed my life for the better.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  51. From the Wired article: by passion · · Score: 1

    "Tony's idea was to take an MP3 player, build a Napster music sale service to complement it, and build a company around it," Knauss said. "Tony had the business idea."

    Hmm, sounds familiar - someone comes up with an idea, and before it's fully implemented, it lands int the hands of Steve Jobs, who does a fantastic job of launching it and selling it to the masses and Apple ends up smelling like roses, forever changing the industry.

    --
    - passion
    1. Re:From the Wired article: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Don't forget, Jef Raskin was working on GUIs before Jobs visited PARC. And Xerox got a very lucrative investment opportunity in exchange for said visit.

  52. Outsourced? by mrokkam · · Score: 1

    I wonder how many people noticed that some of the work on the iPod was outsourced to India!!
    Yeahh baby. Apple also used that cheap slave labour!!! No wonder they have such huge margins on the iPod and are able to like..give away free songs. Yeahh..

    Therapy is expensive... bubble wrap is cheap. You choose.

    1. Re:Outsourced? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Very little was outsourced to India even though PortalPlayer has offices in India 99% of the work was done in Kirkland, in fact while I worked on this project at PortalPlayer NONE of the development iPod units were allowed out of the country... we had to beg just to get 4 units and then beg some more to Apple to get Mac's to test these on. they sent curtomer returned Iooks and Macs that half didn't even work... plus they billed us for this equipment to boot.

      PortalPlayer got screwed on the deal because we were told that even after the release we as a company could not desclose we worked on the iPod. It hurt us in sales calls because after the iPod was released we would go to customers and they would ask if we could make something like a iPod for them... and we could NOT tell them that we not only can but we helped in it's design.

      You lay down with dogs you get up with fleas

    2. Re:Outsourced? by Moofie · · Score: 1

      I'd like to see what would happen if you told those Indian engineers to their faces that they are slaves.

      You buy the tickets, I'll get the popcorn. This should be good.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    3. Re:Outsourced? by mrokkam · · Score: 1

      Well, see

      I am Indian and I know that they are not slave labour. But the typical american's view on outsourcing to India is that underpaid slaves work there who are willing to go to any extent to steal jobs away from the united states. And the reason they are so cheap is because their output is of questionable quality.
      Atleast thats what I sense from all the reading I do. So, I dont necessarily agree with it. I am just writing keeping the typical reader in mind. Maybe I am wrong. But I dont really care.

    4. Re:Outsourced? by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Well, THIS American thinks that outsourcing to India means that some people in India can become wealthy and start building up the standard of living on the subcontinent.

      This American thinks protectionism is always bad. However, that philosophy means that, should I be willing to move to India to keep doing my job at teh going rate in India, the Indian government should issue me a work visa.

      But that's not going to happen, because most government think that protectionist trade strategies are only "good" when they do them.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    5. Re:Outsourced? by mrokkam · · Score: 1

      waiddaminit!!

      U think India is more protectionist than the US??? Try getting a visa for India and then tell me abt it. ( well... lemme make it easier for you. India will welcome you with open hands)

      I'm not saying that the US should totally let others 'use n throw' it. But then again, the US is a nation that has profitted immensely by utilizing the non protectionist policies of other nations (even going to the extent of arm twisting them at times...to get policies to match with their needs) and it is only fair that they are now going to help others make some money. After all... as per the american dream, the best person wins irrespective of race..creed..colour...and I add nationality:)

      Somehow I think we are missing the point here. and going off topic:D So heyy... back to ipods and Apple:D

  53. OK. Where's the real dirt? by pdp0x14 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    There was some gossip in the article, but not enough. I'm sure there was more to his leaving than just not thinking the product would be successful.

    It's excruciatingly unpleasant to work with Jobs; that's widely known.

    One of endless examples:

    By Andy Hertzfeld, on how he was inducted into the original Macintosh team:

    ... [Jobs] walked over to my desk, found the power cord to my Apple II, and gave it a sharp tug, pulling it out of the socket, causing my machine to lose power and the code I was working on to vanish. He unplugged my monitor and put it on top of the computer, and then picked both of them up and started walking away. "Come with me. I'm going to take you to your new desk."

    I'd like to know much more about the iPod story.

  54. Forrest Gump by lavar78 · · Score: 1
    Knauss reminds me of Tom Hanks, who was all but convinced that his movie Forrest Gump would be a complete flop
    ... instead of the overrated success it eventually became. Unlike Gump, the iPod isn't overrated.
    --
    "Dave, I stand still--the conclusions jump to me!" - Bill McNeal, NewsRadio
  55. Re:Why oh why by lavar78 · · Score: 2, Informative

    The new 4G iPod has buttons that depress when pushed (the new click wheel). Personally, I think a dedicated off button is a bad idea. I wouldn't want to accidentally turn off my iPod.

    --
    "Dave, I stand still--the conclusions jump to me!" - Bill McNeal, NewsRadio
  56. Re:Sure he left before launch, but he went to M$.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The guy who wrote Watson was offered a job at Apple to work on Sherlock, and DECLINED. So there goes that example.

    As for Konfabulator... Apple has way more prior art than you indicate, having shipped Desktop Accessories ever since the Mac 128K.

    Dashboard may not be nice to Konfabulator, but it sure ain't evil.

  57. Where will the Mac be in 10 years? by metalligoth · · Score: 1

    From the article:

    Knauss said at one of the first meetings with PortalPlayer, Fadell said, "This is the project that's going to remold Apple and 10 years from now, it's going to be a music business, not a computer business."

    I wonder if Apple will suddenly stop making the Mac one day if the marketshare continues to dwindle? I'm a huge OS X fan, I'm typing this from my iBook, so it's no troll. As someone who was screwed when they dropped continuation (or any support whatsoever) for the Apple II line, I have to wonder what will happen to the Mac if it's not making money, but their music section is.

    Any thoughts?

    1. Re:Where will the Mac be in 10 years? by xombo · · Score: 1

      If you payed any attention to the last Apple conference you'd of known that Apple's CPU sales are up in addition to their marginal market share.

    2. Re:Where will the Mac be in 10 years? by metalligoth · · Score: 1

      That doesn't mean anything. The Apple IIgs, at the time they cancelled it, was the world's most popular make of PC.

    3. Re:Where will the Mac be in 10 years? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? It sold more than 17 million units, like the Commodore 64? Gah, you Apple fanboys are nauseating.

    4. Re:Where will the Mac be in 10 years? by Moofie · · Score: 1

      More popular than the Commodores? That's interesting. Do you have some numbers?

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
  58. Re:Why oh why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    30 hours to build a UI?

    Have you ever TRIED to design a GUI? Have you ever had someone else try to use it afterwards? Intuitive UIs take a long friggin' time to design - lots of planning, lots of testing, lots of revising, lots more testing.

    Anyone who thinks this can ever be done in a day has obviously never done so.

  59. Re:Why oh why by oberondarksoul · · Score: 2, Informative

    You can mount the iPod as a drive - and through FireWire it's a nippy little thing too.

    --
    And tomorrow the stock exchange will be the human race
  60. The truth behind Portal Player by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    I know people who have worked directly with Portal Player. They apparently developed the "OS" inside the iPod, which is married to their hardware platform. Rather than use a more robust, preexisting product, they built their own OS. It is not a good one, or at least it wasn't at first. From what I understand, morale was pretty low at the company. My friends, who were working with people from Portal Player, were extremely frustrated working with them. Portal Player blamed everyone else except themselves for the constant problems with their OS. While my friends were not involved with Portal Player's iPod project, the OS problems they saw would probably carry over to the iPod since it's presumably the same OS.

    Having used the iPod a lot, I can tell you its problems weren't all solved. It's a quirkly little beast. For all of the iPod's vaunted coolness, compared to the reliability (and the UI) of other digital audio players, it's clear that the iPod is 90% hype. It looks cool and holds 40GB, but other many other players are, quite simply, better. For example, I have my iPod set up to always have the backlighting turned on. Often times, when I turn it off, the backlighting stays on. Little weirdnesses like that are commonplace. There are many more, such as how it sometimes refuses to play certain MP3s, skipping over them in the playlist; you have to force the iPod to go back and try again, and (usually) eventually it will play. And I can't forget to mention how horrible the responsiveness is when it's playing music. Hit a button to skip forward/backward a song or two or three, and you're lucky if it obeys. Try skating through the menus while it's playing, and you often get treated to erratic, herky-jerky reactions.

    Those are just the bugs. Then there's the UI. Oh, the annoying UI... That scroll wheel is kind of cool, but precise scrolling through the menus can be a challenge, especially when you're moving. If you're jogging, you *have* to stop. If you're driving you can get away with it, but it's hit or miss, depending on your shocks and the quality of the road. But the thing that bugs me the most is the fact that when it's done playing an entire album, or if you stop it in the middle and turn it off for a long while, you lose your place. When you restart the iPod and press play, it starts playing *all* of your songs, starting with the A's. Whoever thought *that* was a good idea?

    There are many more issues, but I won't belabor further. Anyone who's used the iPod a fair amount knows what I'm talking about. I have no trouble understanding why this guy left Portal Player. I would have run for the hills too. But as I always seem to forget, and he apparently did too, it's rarely the best technology that wins. It's the best-marketed technology that often comes out on top. Just like the iPod.

    1. Re:The truth behind Portal Player by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hate to tell you, but this was not a troll. Perhaps slamming the iPod seems like sacrilege to slashbots, but the truth is that the morale at Portal Player was quite low at the time, which quite possibly contributed Knauss' exit. I can tell you without question that my friends working with Portal Player experienced firsthand the major problems with their hardware/software platform. Mod it down as trolling all you like, but that doesn't change these facts that were omitted from the article. I'd use my real user name, but because these people still have a relationship with PP, I don't want to cause them any trouble.

    2. Re:The truth behind Portal Player by ViolentGreen · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I have an iPod and I find none of that to be the case. I see one of two possibilites. You got a lemon or you are a troll.

      --
      Not everything is analogous to cars. Car analogies rarely work.
    3. Re:The truth behind Portal Player by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have an iPod and I find none of that to be the case. I see one of two possibilites. You got a lemon or you are a troll.

      Or perhaps you don't use yous as heavily. I'm told that playing MP3s encoded at 256k or higher can cause some of the playback issues. But why don't you try this: start up a playlist with, say, 10 songs. Once the first track is playing, press the forward button to skip to track ten as fast as you can. Once you get there (if you don't overshoot and lose your spot in the playlist, ugh!), skip backwards as fast as you can, back to the first track. Try doing this at three clicks per second. You'll see it can't keep up. It's too stupid to simply wait until you're done clicking to see how many tracks it should skip. It tries to play songs as it goes, and jerks to the next one. It misses button presses, so you have to press more than the 9 times you would expect. It's all very jerky, and not smooth at all, and if you press too many times you have to restart your playlist from the beginning. Pure crap.

      And there's no denying that the scroll wheel is hard to use for making menu selections while moving. Try it and you'll see, especially while driving with the iPod on your dashboard or car seat. Real buttons would solve this one.

      Try this one. Turn the volume up to max while playing (which I do all the time because I play it back through my head unit), then turn off the iPod. When you turn it back on, the volume is reset. Every time I turn the damn thing on, I have to reset the f***ing volume. Argh!

      If you can't verify any of these things, then I know who the troll really is.

    4. Re:The truth behind Portal Player by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Bingo... I worked there for a couple of years from small start up burning through money like crazy to a middle size company that continued to burn through money like crazy. The problem was that our sales force could NOT close a deal and Sanjy Kumar the VP of Technolgy had to always go to customers and close the sale.

      So you had a sales force heading all over the world meeting with companies but could not sell a single chip, of they would come back with new requirements that meant a change to the firmware and chip design thus forcing us to delay a release. this went on for two years.

      The main problem was that firmware/software development was being done in Kirkland and the chip was being designed in San Jose... plus we had a small office in Charlotte SC and offices in India. so not only do you have 4 offices in different locations but also in different time zone and date zones. Communication was a HUGE problem... or lack of communication.

      We had a all indian development team that just worked on the codec's... headed by a complete moron. For a whole year we would have dev meetings and each week the problems with the codec were always two weeks away from being fixed.... a whole year of this and this guy would have the same excuses. And if a bug was found it was always someone elses fault... the sound test file is incorrect, the scope was off or some other lame execuse.

      The developers in India would find a problem but would not attempt to fix it on their own or even report it since it "wasn't their code". If they came upon a problem that blocked them from continuing their development of the code they would just stop and freeze like a deer caught in a cars headlight. We would finaly find out the problem when we asked them at the weekly meeting where they are in their development.

      I finally quit because the total mis-management of the product. The managers in Kirkland were VERY paranoid and god forbid you sent an e-mail stating a problem... they excepted a face to face meeting when it came to problems (can you say cover your ass) so that blame can be laid... and not to try to fix the problem.

      The UI on the iPod was not developed by PortalPlayer they just used some of the base firmware code, codec and the ARM7 chip. We had a few really good developers but not enough to over come the majority of incompetent ones.

    5. Re:The truth behind Portal Player by clf8 · · Score: 1

      Ok, the scroll wheel is a little overly sensitive. Rating a song up/down just one star can be infuriating.

      Never notice my volume being reset, but I don't ever max it out (maybe it only happens in that case). Turn it off all the time, as well as letting the sleep timer turn it off and letting it turn itself off after a pause. Stupid question of the day, is your firmware up to date?

  61. I doubt it by lavar78 · · Score: 1

    Despite the low market share, Apple's computer business is in good shape right now. I just don't see it. Apple's been on the brink before, but they keep fighting.

    --
    "Dave, I stand still--the conclusions jump to me!" - Bill McNeal, NewsRadio
  62. I Beg To Differ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    There are several (large) companies who have tried, most notably Sony, whose players are lambasted above. I believe the reason Apple built a music player by which to measure all others is that the specs weren't polluted by outside requirements. Steve had the vision and, more importantly, the authority to make it what he knew it to be (doesn't hurt that he is very good at what he does).

    At Sony, there are forces with competitng agendas. The "DRM crippling" comes from their ownership of an RIAA member. (Note in the article the clues about AAC DRM being forced on Apple). Other Sony products, like cameras and non-HD players, suffer from input from the group that does the Memory Stick (==insert Memory Stick rant here==).

    It is VERY hard for companies to resist this effect, each of the factions is headed by people with years/decades of stored up political capital.

    Arguably, Apple was the only one who could have created such a product. They are independent enough to make the business idea their own, but substantial enough to bring it to market and to deal with the media companies.

    I for one, applaud loudly. "WELL DONE"

  63. Re:Why oh why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He said designer, not programmer.

  64. At least, for the iPod, nobody died! by callipygian-showsyst · · Score: 2, Interesting

    During the Apple Newton development, one programmer was so stressed, that he shot himself!

    1. Re:At least, for the iPod, nobody died! by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Wow! And that wasn't even with Steve around! Maybe Scully really was a bigger a-hole than Fearless Leader, although that's pretty hard to imagine.

      And no, this isn't a troll. I love The Leader.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    2. Re:At least, for the iPod, nobody died! by Drakonian · · Score: 1

      Really?

      --
      Random is the New Order.
    3. Re:At least, for the iPod, nobody died! by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Or maybe people who SHOOT THEMSELVES have emotional problems that go beyond having a pushy boss?

      Just a theory.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    4. Re:At least, for the iPod, nobody died! by oaklybonn · · Score: 1

      During development of the After Dark screensavers, we had two suicides...

      RIP: Robert "Mouse" Herrall, John Hartshorne.

      Did the product schedule do it? No, they were just depressed individuals.

    5. Re:At least, for the iPod, nobody died! by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      I guess there's a reason you're the rocket scientist, and a reason I don't know what I was thinking. =)

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  65. Re: You just made an ass out of yourself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you read read the Wikipedia article that you like, then you read these sentences: "Note that Apple was invited by PARC to view their research, and a number of PARC employees subsequently moved to Apple to work on the Lisa and Macintosh GUI. However, the Apple work extended PARC's considerably, adding windows that can be overlapped, manipulable icons and a fixed menu bar and direct manipulation of objects in the file system (see Macintosh Finder) for example. The modern GUI as we know it owes as much or more to Apple as it does to PARC - it is incorrect to claim that Apple "copied" or "stole" PARC's work."

  66. Re:Sure he left before launch, but he went to M$.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The mugger who kills you doesn't think he's evil either. He justifies it as self-preservation. Likewise, Apple KILLED Konfabulator. Dead. Self-preservation? Sure. Their computer marketshare is down below 2% now and dropping. The only thing keeping them alive is iTunes and iPod. But they completely copied what Konfabulator did, right down to the GUI graphics and the same selection of widgets (weather, stock market, etc.). And they don't have the decency to even give Konfabulator a nod for their work.

    And I still don't see how this is different from MS doing the same thing and being attacked for it. MS never forced the iPod guy to go work for them, but they're still eeevil for stealing an Apple employee, while Apple is wise and saintly for stealing the AcidPro guy.

  67. Question for you iPodians by Qwavel · · Score: 1

    I'm still unclear as to the nature of the Apple music format.

    I know that it's better than MP3 - so are WMA and OGG. And I'm not really interested in comparisons between these next gen codecs: they are all good enough for me.

    I just want to know if it's proprietary. Some people tell me it is an open codec called AAC. So will my CD-ripper software (CD-ex) and other music utilities be able to include the codec so it can rip and encode to this format (without breaking the law)? Can other brands of MP3 players support this format without paying a license fee?

    I wouldn't want to develop a music collection in this format, and then find that it isn't supported by the software and hardware that I want to use because it is a closed format. If I get locked into a proprietary format then the owner of that format can charge an excessive amount for the use of that format, based on the lock-in.

    I'm not blaming Apple if it is proprietary - obviously MS does the same. But, if so, I'll take a pass.

    1. Re:Question for you iPodians by kalidasa · · Score: 1

      AAC is part of the MP4 standard. It has the same kind of restrictions MP3 has (not much, see http://www.chiariglione.org/mpeg/faq/mp4-aud/mp4-a ud.htm for details). Basically, yes. However, iTunes Music Store sells protected AAC. Protected AAC can include a proprietary DRM layer, and on iTMS, Apple uses FairPlay. If you buy protected iTMS files, you would have to burn to CD and reencode (lossily) the result to get another format, and the result would be much poorer in quality than the source protected AAC file. However, if you have existing MP3 files, they will play in iTunes and on the iPod, and iTunes will, if I recall correctly, encode MP3 at various bit rates as well as AAC, AIFF, and Apple lossless. I'd suggest, unless hard drive space is an issue, encoding in AIFF and then converting those files to AAC 128 for iPod use (which is very quick - just import the AIFF into iTunes, select it, convert - yes, it can batch - and then remove the AIFF from the library, keeping a backup). That way, you can try another bit rate if you get a bigger iPod, and you aren't locked into anything too proprietary. Apple Lossless is probably a better choice than AIFF, if you're sticking with Apple, but I suspect that AIFF is better supported in the Linux and Windows world.

    2. Re:Question for you iPodians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      No, you can't directly to apple format using CDex. You can by using iTunes.

      Apple files will play under iTunes, or you can easily add the codecs/get the updates, to let them play under winamp, windows media player, etc.

      They won't natively play under most MP3 players. However, converters exist and are supposedly easy to use.

      Still I don't see a reason to use the Apple format unless you have to - .MP3 is universal and will stay that way for the future. And CDex ripping MP3s will sound approximately the same (but slightly better) than an .m4a at the same bitrate.

    3. Re:Question for you iPodians by Qwavel · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the helpful response (someone pls mod it informative).

      So, if I understand correctly, I could rip my stuff to generic AAC - which is about as proprietary as MP3 - and use it on an iPod, and with other devices that support AAC. But I won't be able to do much with iTunes stuff.

      You mentioned that AIFF is supported on all 3 client platforms - good.

      But I thought it was an uncompressed format like .WAV? Or is it a compressed lossless format like Ogg Something (can't remember the name)?

    4. Re:Question for you iPodians by molafson · · Score: 1

      Still I don't see a reason to use the Apple format unless you have to - .MP3 is universal and will stay that way for the future. And CDex ripping MP3s will sound approximately the same (but slightly better) than an .m4a at the same bitrate.

      Very wrong. AAC is understood to be a higher performing codec, achieving better fidelity at lower bitrates than MP3.

    5. Re:Question for you iPodians by horigath · · Score: 1

      1 - Yes, you can rip to generic AAC from a variety of apps. These files can be passed around and used almost as easily as mp3s, the only limit being software/hardware that doesn't support it (for example, most non-ipod mp3 players.) However, it'll play in winamp and the like.
      If you buy a song off of itunes, you'll only play it in itunes or on the ipod (unless you break the encryption).

      2 - AIFF is a standard, uncompressed audio format. It is essentially the same as WAV with different headers. It is commonly used in audio production facilities (ie. recording studios). You can play it with practially any software.
      When you put a CD in a mac, the computer sees the contents as AIFF files, much as a windows machine will see it as WAV.

      3 - The following formats are lossless, but compressed. They all achieve more-or-less 50% of the original (WAV or AIFF) filesize:
      FLAC; SHN (shorten); and Apple Lossless. iTunes and the ipod only support apple lossless, but it is easy to transfer your files from one format to another, because there is no quality loss.

    6. Re:Question for you iPodians by molafson · · Score: 1

      So, if I understand correctly, I could rip my stuff to generic AAC - which is about as proprietary as MP3 - and use it on an iPod, and with other devices that support AAC. But I won't be able to do much with iTunes stuff.

      Anything you rip to AAC using the iTunes application will be DRM free. The DRMed AACs are the ones you buy from the iTunes Store.

      But I thought it was an uncompressed format like .WAV?

      WAV and AIFF are basically the same thing. The file formats are slightly different.

    7. Re:Question for you iPodians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes you can use generic AAC on iPod and other software players like winamp that support it. Most other hardware mp3 players don't support AAC though. I think one thing people get confused about is that iTunes will rip into MP3 format just like any other MP3 ripper and the iPod will play MP3's from anywhere you get them including P2P, other ripping programs. The advantage to using AAC is you get the same quality sound at a lower bit rate.

      The only format DRM'd through iTunes is songs you actually go out and purchase.

  68. A non-iPod buyers perspective by abb3w · · Score: 1
    When buying an MP3 player, there are a number of features you look at, and the relative importance for different people may vary, but the list is fairly standard.
    • Player size in centimeters, grams, and gigabytes.

    • The quality of the user Interface.
      The aesthetics of the exterior appearance.
      File transfer speed to your computer.
      The battery life.
      The durability.
      The price.
    For almost all of these attributes, the iPod is highly competive with other models. In the case of the user interface, volume/weight, and especially aesthetics it is notably superior to almost everything out there. The only real drawback has been that the pricetag matches the quality-- ya gets what ya pays for, but ya pays for what ya gets.

    As a comparison, when I was shopping around, I settled about a year and a half ago on the Archos Jukebox 20. It is modestly larger and heftier, enough so that it won't fit in a pocket, but is still comfortable in the (supplied) belt look case. It was substantially cheaper (by about a factor of 2 for the same drive space) and felt more drop resistant. I didn't fall in love with the UI on the iPod; the Archos is servicable enough. It provides me a couple hours run time with normal use. And, while I didn't realize the immense advantage at the time, the Archos is powered by (essentially) four utterly boring AA Nickel-Metal Hydride rechargables-- which, when they die, are only marginally harder to replace than on a walkman. (Ya like apples? How ya like them apples? )

    Seriously, however, for those with the disposable income to afford the additional quality an iPod offers, it's a nice player. Since I had a modest-paying helldesk support jobs, I was better off spending the money on something cheaper. At this point, however, the new iPod 20s are dropping to about where the Archos was when I bought it. Looking at current models, were I shopping today I'd probably go with the iPod 20 rather than (say) the current Archos Gmini model.

    --
    //Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
  69. I prefer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the mouth of babes

  70. Re:Why oh why by chegosaurus · · Score: 1

    oooh! somebody can't afford one!

  71. Apple critics have poor track record by SethJohnson · · Score: 1


    Ha-ha! Thanks for that link. It reminds me of how tech pundits have predicted failure for several recent (post-Jobs' return) Apple products and then failed to step up to eat their own words publicly.

    I remember a guy here in Austin who does the saturday morning computer radio show saying the iMac was doomed because it doesn't have a floppy disk drive. Back then it was a safe bet to predict failure for Apple's new products. Not anymore.

    I think the only predictions that went the other way on a recent Apple product was for the Cube. People thought that was going to be the hot-shit computer because it was small and had no fans. Although it didn't last long on the market, the resale value of them is still strong---

    Apple Cube on Ebay.
    Somewhat comparable G4 on Ebay.

  72. Re:Sure he left before launch, but he went to M$.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I worked at the Kirkland WA, offices of PortalPlayer during the devlopement of the iPod and Brian came from M$ prior to working for us and "left" (he was let go.. the PC version of being fired) because he just plain failed to do his job as PM.... well he and some of the other management staff... but he was the last hired and they had to feed someone to the mighty Apple God when things weren't turning out as what was promised.

    Surpising thing is we had a iPod that connected to Windows and tranferred files but because iTunes wasn't supporting Windows at that time Steve Jobs killed that design, also the firmware we developed (Tango) supported not only decoding codec's but encoding as well... just think iPod with a mic input that could be used as a digital recorder... but that feature was disabled.

    The battery issue was known and the problem is that chip that PortalPlayer designed sucked a lot of power even whiel not playing due to the fact that we had trouble shutting down some lower functions and not being able to turn them back on.

  73. Re:Why oh why by transient · · Score: 1
    lack of an off button

    It doesn't have an off button because it doesn't need one. It turns itself off after you pause it.

    --

    irb(main):001:0>
  74. apple? great hardware? rofl. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    sure its great if u like payin 2 x the price or more aspc parts, and waiting several years for mainstreap software to make a port. Out of curiosity I have tooled around w/ apple computers before, and decided that I would not like any of them, even if they were free.
    the only 2 good things applehas ever done was firewire + ipod.
    cm taco's statemet about no wireless is not so important with firewire, as you need to power the device. firewire does both data and power (which given the lack of mini cold fusion batteries is a necesity atm)
    as for apple being redefined, it is possible. a company that puts out overpriced crap with a not only me too, but us first, philsophy actually stumbles ona product that people use, and enjoy. Yet, typically they gouge their users with insanely high prices. Still this is new terrritory for apple, as they hve something normal people would like to buy and use. but they are not out of the woods yet, as many,many ipods dont work very well, sporting a number of hardware and software issues. classic apple charge top dollar, and make the cheapest possible product, that barely works.
    apple is a rapacious company that caters to elitist nerds with money to blow on some warped sense of prestige or being different. Since ipod design was outsourced, it is like the adopted child in a retarded/inbred family, but it is only a matter of time before the ipod falls as well and the competition takes over. Till then ill jus thave to keep using my buggy 30 gig 'pod,wishng it worked as good as it looks

  75. Look at this one. by Retep+Vosnul · · Score: 1

    Pecka (31619) on Tuesday October 23, @03:47PM (#2468015)

    Yes ist's nice and all, but does it play ogg vorbis files? Thet's what my whole collection is.

    . Guess this is the VERY FIRST OGG post on the iPod.

    ( it's in the taco story ! )

    --
    -- forget /. It's gone.
  76. Re:Why oh why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The iRiver has a pathetic interface , an ugly raised joystick that gets in the way of its own pouch, a built-in battery, weak headphone amp and lousy customer service.
    Did I mention there are GAPS between each track?? And the interface really is lousy? I had to read the manual to get the thing to record, and even then it recorded the sound of its own hard drive spinning up....
    For 600$ canadian, I expect more, a LOT more, like performance at the level of my 11 year old minidisc recorder, for one...

  77. The iMac disk drive thing was a big shock by ianscot · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Everyone, everyone wrung hands over the original bondi iMacs not having disk drives. I had an old cartoon where someone dressed up as one for Halloween: "I have NO DISK DRIVE!!!" Ooh, scary.

    Partly the blind spot comes from critics being a)reactive and b)assigned to review individual products alone.

    With the iMac, Apple was aiming to put out a sweet little appliance home computer, with all those ease of UI advantages, designed for internet-able homes. The idea was that swapping files by floppy would be obsolete because they'd be too small for modern files and everyone would be networked to everyone else. (Look up. We live there.) Critics reacted by saying iMacs wouldn't fit the old model, in which computers were isolated islands (or island chains, in LANs) and you had to carry those life rafts from one slot to another.

    iPods were definitely an extension of the whole "digital hub" idea. They weren't bigger, badder mp3 players, because Apple wanted to sell them as a complete system built into the whole "hub" idea. Critics saw the price and compared them to other mp3 players. They didn't see how Apple was positioning the product.

    In both cases, Apple was thinking about -- cue usually bogus businesspeak -- new paradigms, and the critics were reviewing just the individual product, without appreciating how it'd fit the bigger picture.

    --
    "Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
    1. Re:The iMac disk drive thing was a big shock by untouchable · · Score: 1

      I believe it was an old Foxtrot comic.

      --
      As Seen On TV's? Come back!!!
  78. It's just an mp3 player. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why is /. so obsessed with this gadget?

    1. Re:It's just an mp3 player. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because apple pays them the big bucks to run the stories...

      If apple will pay the big bucks to get an ipod placed in a "50 Cent" music video they can definitely afford to pay off a floundering company like VA Software Corporation...

  79. Re:Why oh why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does anyone give a fuck as to what you think? No.

  80. Ben was fired from PPI. He did not quite! by OldManCoyote · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ben was fired from PPI, he did not quite. I was where for over 2 years, know the inside on what really happened. Two main reasons why he was fired: * Incompetence: He didn't know how to run a development team and people who where on the firmware team at PPI didn't trust him * Apple (what we called by the code name 'BandPass' at the time) did not trust him and could not work with him. He really angered a lot of people at Apple and almost cost PPI chances at building the iPod for them. He was mainly fired from PPI for this reason alone, since BandPass was are best (and only) customer who would ship at the time.

  81. Apple vs. Microsoft by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 1
    It will not surprise me if Apple vs. Microsoft in music goes the same way Apple vs. Microsoft went with computers.

    Apple sells computers. Microsoft sells software to the people that make computers that compete against Apple. Microsoft doesn't really compete against Apple. They let others do that, and they reap the profits. (And if Apple somehow manages to win in "Apple vs. Everyone Else"", Microsoft cleans up as the leading seller of Mac applications).

    The situation in Music looks very similar. Apple sells a player. Microsoft sells software (WMA and operating systems) to people making competing players. Apple has a music store. Microsoft sells software (DRM software, databases, web servers, etc) to build music stores.

    What Apple is doing is more sexy, but Microsoft's approach is probably going to make a lot more money in the long run.

    1. Re:Apple vs. Microsoft by inkswamp · · Score: 1
      The situation in Music looks very similar.

      I disagree. One of the surprising things that Jobs said when he returned to Apple was that Apple was the only company that "made the whole widget" (that is, make the software and the hardware) but that they had failed to wield the power that it gave them. I think we're seeing, right now with the iPod/iTunes combo, the end result of the company that can weild such power. MS doesn't do the hardware. Dell doesn't do the software. Everyone in the Wintel world has been left in the lurch by this move.

      Apple sells a player. Microsoft sells software (WMA and operating systems) to people making competing players.

      Competing players that have thus far failed to provide any significant competition against the iPod and it's because Apple doesn't just sell a player. They sell the software that goes with it and the iTunes music store that is designed to work so well with it. They make the whole widget. Love it or hate it, the iPod has slashed its way through the hordes of wannabes and will continue to do so until someone can manage to make the whole widget and compete. Not a trivial task.

      Apple has a music store.

      Here's where you should have caught the real problem with your theory. Apple has a music store that is intimately tied in to the iPod. Not only that, but Apple was bright enough to design a store and DRM scheme that isn't insulting to its users nor destructive to its business-partners. They do that by making all of it themselves. You can't say that so far about any other model so far, and I think that's the real strength here. Dell can create a player and Wal-Mart can make a music store, but neither of them are actually competing with what Apple does.

      Microsoft sells software (DRM software, databases, web servers, etc) to build music stores.

      Last I heard, the iTunes music store runs off OS X (but I could be wrong.) I'm not sure I follow your logic.

      In fact, music companies are right now rethinking their reliance on WMA format because it's not compatible with the iPod. Apple may actually yank the rug out from under MS with this. And what can MS do about that? Precious litle and none too soon either. That's because they only make the software. They're supposed to have a player out sometime soon, but we'll see.

      I think a better observation here is to think in terms of complacency. In the early 90s, Apple was the king of the hill in PCs and they rapidly fell into complacency, not worrying about what MS might have up its sleeve. Nowadays, MS seems to be about everything except making good software (games, news media, search engines, dissing Linux, etc.) MS has become the complacent one.

      --
      --Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."
    2. Re:Apple vs. Microsoft by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 1
      What I mean by selling the software to build music stores rather than putting out a music store and player themselves, Microsoft wins if anyone other than Apple ends up at the top. Look at all the big names jumping into the music store business: Walmart, Amazon, Sony, and no doubt many more will follow.

      Apple is betting that everyone else will fail. Microsoft is betting that at least one besides Apple will succeed.

    3. Re:Apple vs. Microsoft by Bricklets · · Score: 1

      ...Microsoft wins if anyone other than Apple ends up at the top. ... Apple is betting that everyone else will fail. Microsoft is betting that at least one besides Apple will succeed.

      With the OS wars, Apple would have won I think if anyone other than Microsoft ended up at the top (not that this would have been a good thing, given I agree they had become complacent then). Right now, I think Apple is trying to out-compete every one of their competitors. They are fighting tooth and nail, probably trying to show to the world why they feel their position and Microsoft should have been switched. Microsoft on the other hand according to you is now hoping, no praying, that something comes along and strikes Apple down.

      --
      Little Bricklets
    4. Re:Apple vs. Microsoft by inkswamp · · Score: 1
      I understood what you meant, but you're missing the forest for the trees. I'm not trying to sound condescending, but it seems that you're missing the key element here that makes seems to make Apple a success at this. They make it all: the software, the hardware, the store, etc. It's all them. They don't rely on anyone else, and nobody else is involved in a way that significantly dilutes their vision of how this should work (barring the music companies who appear to have forced the DRM issue, and even there, Apple worked out what is one of the few examples of reasonable DRM out there.)

      That's why I think Microsoft "winning" when anyone else ends up at the top is a highly unlikely scenario. It appears that doing so would require building something as streamlined and well-designed as the iPod/iTunes combo--that's hardware and software designed by one company, one company with one vision, not two partnering companies with slightly different aims, not one company on its own doing part of it and hoping someone else will come along and fill the void. That's why the examples you cite are not actually competing with what Apple is doing. I can't see how any of them will manage to get an upper hand on this.

      In fact, I'll go out on a limb and say that in the next year or so, we'll see the music business and technology companies bending to Apple's will. We're already seeing it with the music companies who are reconsidering their reliance on WMA because it's incompatible with the iPod. We're seeing HP on the verge of introducing their own co-branded iPod. We've seen changes in the DRM the iPod/iTunes model uses to suit Apple's needs.

      MS doesn't win if everyone wants to succeed on Apple's terms and that's how it appears to be going.

      --
      --Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."
  82. Re:Why oh why by John+Newman · · Score: 1

    I love the wheel. Really, how else are you going to navigate down a list with hundreds or thousands of elements? A "down one screen button"? Twenty lines per screen, you'd have to push it 50 times to get to the bottom. Or 25 to get the middle, if you add a "to the bottom" button, but now you have four buttons (up, down, top, bottom) instead of the wheel. Two "scroll buttons"? Not too bad, but it would have to be accelerated as a function how long you hold it down, but then you have the awkward issues of 1. having to wait until the acceleration kicks in and 2. having poor access to elements located right at the point where the acceleration kicks in. Scroll buttons sprout like weeds on scientific instruments, and I never found them pleasant to use.

    The scroll wheel, OTOH, is simple, elegant, and perfectly functional. It accelerates as a function of how fast your finger moves around it. So with slow, small motions you get incredibly fine control; while fast, sweeping motions can scroll through the entire 1000-element list in a second. When you get near your destination, your finger slows and super-fine control is instantly returned. It's all so smooth it just feels totally natural. And having the "select" button in the middle is a no-brainer. Your thumb goes from wheel to button and back without hesitation.

    When I first heard about it, I was skeptical about the scroll wheel (I never liked them on mice), but Apple's implementation is just perfect; it would be ideal for any application where you need to navigate a huge list of options.

  83. Appreciated but... by NYTrojan · · Score: 1

    New York != NYC. I live in upstate where such specialized stores are much harder to find.

  84. Re:Why oh why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    which isn't a big surprise, considering how ridiculously overpriced they are.

    i was looking at a best buy ad awhile back, they had a 20gb ipod for $400 and a 40gb some other mp3 player right next to it for $250. i lolled.

    $150 OF PURE CUTENESS WHATS NOT TO LIKE OMG

  85. Re:Why oh why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The iPod mounts as a hard drive as well.

  86. Re:Sure he left before launch, but he went to M$.. by dfghjk · · Score: 1

    Just as Apple did in this very case. That's what the whole article was about. A guy comes up with an idea, works with a bunch of OEMs, then Apple comes along, buys out the effort, kills the OEM relationships, then ships the product as their own ingenuity. It's not as though the concept of the iPod was even new at the time of its introduction.

  87. Does Steve Jobs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...remind anyone else of the philosopher king in plato's republic?

  88. Taco *WAS* right by Atario · · Score: 1

    But is clealy now deeply embedded in the Jobs Reality Distortion Field.

    My evidence?

    There is now an entire Slashdot Topic devoted to the iPod. (See top of this page.)

    Pathetic.

    --
    "A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
  89. Re:Why oh why by dfghjk · · Score: 1

    Actually it needs one more than anything since it apparently NEVER turns off. It's interesting that one of the late problems in the development of the original was power management even when the unit was "OFF". The claim was they fixed that but the 3G models certainly suffer from it greatly. My 3G model self-discharges when "OFF" within three days and all my friends' do, too. Giving the unit a proper, mechanical power switch would fix that. As it is, an iPod is virtually useless for a 24 hour airline trip to the other side of the world. All its competitors are just fine doing that. We'll see how the 4G version does.

    Funny thing how Apple nurtures it easy-to-use, intuitive image but pulls such a boneheaded design move for the sake of aesthetics and produces a non-intuitive, poorly performing device as a result. The lack of an OFF switch is the iPod's worst problem IMO.

  90. Re:Why oh why by dfghjk · · Score: 1

    At least the 1G wheels were "simple, elegant, and perfectly functional". The newer wheels don't work nearly as well. As for other solutions, wheels turned on their edge (ala wheel-mice) and sticks work fine, too. A wheel like the iPod's was at the time a proven effective control for its application and was certainly not new. It has the unique feature of requiring greater finger movement than any other control for accomplishing its task (although I don't find that a problem).

  91. Are Single Function Devices King? by gilgongo · · Score: 1

    Does anyone think it's significant that the iPod is a single-function device?

    It doesn't have wireless.
    It doesn't have a phone in it.
    It doesn't have a calendar.
    It doesn't have a [insert random function].

    It just plays music.

    Maybe I'm biased, because it just so happens that I've spent all day today facilitating user testing sessions for a mobile phone company. I just sat through about five hours listening to users of all ages and backgrounds saying things like "There are too many functions," "All this stuff is so confusing," "Why the hell would I want to do that?" "I just want it to do one or two things well, and that's it", etc.

    --
    "And the meaning of words; when they cease to function; when will it start worrying you?"
    1. Re:Are Single Function Devices King? by berniecase · · Score: 1

      It does have a calendar.
      It does have an address book.
      It does have a text reading app.
      It does have a game (three on the 3rd gen and higher units).

      Granted, the device is a music player. And it excels at being that. The other stuff does not get in the way. That's one of the things about it that makes it so nice to use. It's got a lot of stuff in it, but it isn't cluttered.

    2. Re:Are Single Function Devices King? by gilgongo · · Score: 1

      Well there we go - I never knew it had a calendar.

      My perception of it (I don't have one, you can tell) is that it just plays music, 'cos that is how it's marketed. I wonder if it would sell any worse if it didn't have the extras - I doubt it.

      --
      "And the meaning of words; when they cease to function; when will it start worrying you?"
  92. Re:Why oh why by qqaz · · Score: 1

    oooh! somebody is bitter about paying too much!

    --
    sup :cool:
  93. Mod Parent Up! by egg_green · · Score: 1

    This is one of the most insightful posts I have read on any of the "iPod v. Joe mp3 player" discussions. I admit that I have fallen into this trap myself. I have an iPod, and I think it's great. I find myself saying that the 'Pod is better than other players, when that is not as true as I would like to believe. But it makes me feel better; I'm justifying my decision to spend $300 on an mp3 player.

    1. Re:Mod Parent Up! by Moofie · · Score: 1

      You're absolutely right. There are no valid reasons to think iPods are superior to other players. You are absolutely not entitled to form your own opinion, and evaluate your needs relative to the capabilities of various products. You had better just try to get together the shards of your self esteem by hugging yourself and rocking, while muttering "but I got white earbuds...." in order to justify your purchase.

      Didja get the sarcasm?

      If not, wanna sell your iPod?

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
  94. Portal Player by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    I know people who have worked directly with Portal Player. They apparently developed the "OS" inside the iPod, which is married to their hardware platform. Rather than use a more robust, preexisting product, they built their own OS. It is not a good one, or at least it wasn't at first. From what I understand, morale was pretty low at the company. My friends, who were working with people from Portal Player, were extremely frustrated working with them. Portal Player blamed everyone else except themselves for the constant problems with their OS. While my friends were not involved with Portal Player's iPod project, the OS problems they saw would probably carry over to the iPod since it's presumably the same OS.

    Having used the iPod a lot, I can tell you its problems weren't all solved. It's a quirkly little beast. For all of the iPod's vaunted coolness, compared to the reliability (and the UI) of other digital audio players, it's clear that the iPod is 90% hype. It looks cool and holds 40GB, but other many other players are, quite simply, better. For example, I have my iPod set up to always have the backlighting turned on. Often times, when I turn it off, the backlighting stays on. Little weirdnesses like that are commonplace. There are many more, such as how it sometimes refuses to play certain MP3s, skipping over them in the playlist; you have to force the iPod to go back and try again, and (usually) eventually it will play. And I can't forget to mention how horrible the responsiveness is when it's playing music. Hit a button to skip forward/backward a song or two or three, and you're lucky if it obeys. Try skating through the menus while it's playing, and you often get treated to erratic, herky-jerky reactions.

    Those are just the bugs. Then there's the UI. Oh, the annoying UI... That scroll wheel is kind of cool, but precise scrolling through the menus can be a challenge, especially when you're moving. If you're jogging, you *have* to stop. If you're driving you can get away with it, but it's hit or miss, depending on your shocks and the quality of the road. But the thing that bugs me the most is the fact that when it's done playing an entire album, or if you stop it in the middle and turn it off for a long while, you lose your place. When you restart the iPod and press play, it starts playing *all* of your songs, starting with the A's. Whoever thought *that* was a good idea?

    There are many more issues, but I won't belabor further. Anyone who's used the iPod a fair amount knows what I'm talking about. I have no trouble understanding why this guy left Portal Player. I would have run for the hills too. But as I always seem to forget, and he apparently did too, it's rarely the best technology that wins. It's the best-marketed technology that often comes out on top. Just like the iPod.

    Reposted due to earlier mad moderation

    1. Re:Portal Player by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Make that "bad" moderation, sorry.

    2. Re:Portal Player by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you moderators complete f***ing retards, or what? Did you read the followup to my original posting from the ex-PortalPlayer employee who agreed with my assessment about problems at the company? Just why is this a troll? Perhaps you're Apple/PortalPlayer shills? Either way, get a freaking life!

  95. Re:Sure he left before launch, but he went to M$.. by Moofie · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You left out the part where Steve Jobs refined the physical design, and Apple designed the user interface, which are the parts of the equation that nobody else in the industry has gotten right.

    If it were Microsoft, they'd have listened to the guy's pitch, thrown him out on his ear without a nickel, and then organized a tiger team to re-implement what they thought the guy was trying to do. And they'd implement it poorly.

    --
    Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
  96. Re:Why oh why by lavar78 · · Score: 1

    AFAIC, the only off switch on a portable music player should be click and hold just like the iPod.

    --
    "Dave, I stand still--the conclusions jump to me!" - Bill McNeal, NewsRadio
  97. Re:Why oh why by clf8 · · Score: 1

    I'd respond on the wheel comment, but Josh already has really well. Given a massive number of songs in a list, it is mechanically one of the easiest and most fluid ways to scroll through them.

    As for your "non-responsive buttons," the gen4 fixes your issue with this, since (I believe) it has a physical click below the scrollwheel. The iPod's original interface remained minimal while providing amazing functionality through (somewhat intuitive) reuse. I think their combination of scrollwheel with buttons below it (with a real physical click even) is pure genius.

    Lack of an off button? No holding down "stop" until you "think" it's off? Well there's no "stop" button, which for some reason seems to bother some people. But the screen does turn off to let you know when it's off. Music does stop playing. And worst case, it's still on for 2-3 minutes or whatever the timeout it before it actually turns off. Not really sure what the big problem is here.

    Do you have any explicit suggestions for what buttons should be added? Would these confuse the "average" user who actually reads the manuel and still doesn't understand?

  98. Re:Why oh why by chegosaurus · · Score: 1

    Not likely. I think they're great value for money, and I'd happily drop £400 on another if anything happened to the one I've got. In fact, I think the new ones are only £300, which is even better. Anyway, it's only money.

  99. Re:IPOD JUST PLAIN SOUNDS BAD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shhh, they might get mad that they wasted their money

  100. Because it "Just Works" by TheBillGates · · Score: 1

    Several reasons
    1. It "just works". I had never seen one before and within 5 minutes I had the iPod figured out. I had played with other MP3 players friends had and they were too confusing.
    2. It synced beautifully with my existing music collection.
    3. Small enough to fit into my pocket.
    4. As a Mac support tech, I can boot Macs off of it and copy over the user's data when there OS is messed up. I don't see any other MP3 players that will let me do that.
    5. A small 30GB external drive for storing large files!

  101. iPod UK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    iPod = £400 from Virgin Megastore (www.virgin.com)

    That's $733. Would you pay THAT for what is in essence a HDD with a slick UI and headphones?

    Until the price is reasonable, I'll stick with the other UK residents who'll get an equivalent with more features for £169.

  102. Steve "The Architect" Jobs says... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Steve "The Architect" Jobs - You are here because your own proprietary music formats and iPod knock-offs are about to be destroyed. Its very user base terminated, their entire enterprise put out of business.

    Neo - Bullshit.

    Steve "The Architect" Jobs - Denial is the most predictable of all human responses. But, rest assured, this will be the fourth time we have redesigned the iPod, and we have become exceedingly efficient at it.

  103. Re:Why oh why by John+Newman · · Score: 1

    The iPod wheel does require more finger movement than any possible replacement, but that extra effort is traded for time and control. It's faster than any possible replacement, and offers better control, too.

    A wheel on its edge would work better than buttons, and require a smaller range of motion (not necessarily less motion total) than the scroll wheel. But it has it's own limitation - the need to stay motionless when not being moved. A sideways wheel, by its nature, must be mechanical. To keep it from moving freely as you jiggle your iPod, it must either have reasonably strong resistance, or a catching mechanism. My scroll wheel mouse has a series of catches. The problem is that those catches quantize its movement. That's less than ideal for scrolling windows - you can only scroll a line at a time, never smoothly - although it would be OK for scrolling a text list. But if you want to scroll fast, you need to go through an awful lot of those catches. The motion is small but highly repetetive, and not very efficient - each motion can only turn the wheel by as much of the wheel as is protruding. That's almost always less than half a rotation. Even if it's got 100 catches per rotation, that means 20 longish finger twiches to get to the end of your 1000 songs - versus two sweeps of the iPod scroll wheel.

    You could make the motion smooth, and have a little magnet or something that provides resistance so you don't get unwanted movement. You could even use the magnet to provide acceleration, so you get much faster scrolling with faster movement. And you even make it free-spinning with a strong enough push. But that would require an awfully sensitive and complex mechanical device, which would probably be a lot more expensive and easier to break than a tiny round trackpad with solid-state controls.

    Sideways wheels also have to protrude from the device (if it doesn't protrude, how do you move it?). That ruins the smooth contours and makes it more awkward to put the device into a case, for example.

    Sticks hardly seem ideal, either. Again, it has to protrude from the device, and to be useful it would have to protrude a LOT. You could store it flush, but then it only goes in one direction. Unless you store it flush sideways, but then you have to waste the time to "deploy" it every time you want to scroll. That'd seem a real pain to me. A stick would have to be fairly long to provide both fine control and smooth acceleration. Obviously, either extreme of movement (up or down) would provide the fastest scrolling - and it ought to be awfully fast, to quickly get to the bottom of that 1000 song list. The smallest movement would scroll just one element. But the smallest movement can't be too small, or it becomes hard to do without overshooting. But you still want some gradations between "one per touch" and "to the bottom in a second". You can design it so that anything up to, say, half-way moves it one element, while the far half of the movement spectrum gradually increases the speed of scrolling up to the maximum. But that requires a fairly long stick. Unless you ignore how far the stick moves, and say that a brief touch moves it one, and the longer you hold it the faster it goes. But then it's just like a button, with all the problems of button scrolls.

    I can't believe I've written this much about the frikin iPod scroll wheel. I just think it's such a fabulously elegant peice of functional engineering, regardless of how novel it really is. And I consider my 3G wheel perfect; I never tried a 1G iPod.

  104. Article is distorted, one sided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This article is strangely distorted.

    The OS was made by Pixo, a company Apple partly acquired (after the iPods introduction). The integration of the OS with the iPod hardware was done in complete secrecy there, most employees not knowing a thing about it.

    The second distortion is that all of the Portal Player employees worked on the iPod... I talked to an employee that had never heard of the iPod...even after the iPod had been out for a few months!

    This guy makes it sound like Portal Player dropped everything for apple... but I find that highly unlikely. If they did, it was because it was part of the contract.

    There are many great stories to share about the creation of the iPod...

  105. The Hand of ... Schiller! by Socket+Scientist · · Score: 1

    What I would have liked to hear about the iPod was how they came up for the idea of the scroll wheel. AFAIK that's Apple's patent, and the defining feature of the iPod's interface that sets it above the competition.

    According to the Newsweek cover story this week, it was Apple's VP of Marketing Phil Schiller who proposed the scroll wheel and its acceleration. To my knowledge this is the first time Apple has credited a specific individual. Does his name appear on the patent?

  106. Re:Why oh why by kelnos · · Score: 1

    as someone else already pointed out, holding down pause (sorry, forgot it was pause and not stop), supposedly turns the device off, but it would remain sucking battery for quite some time after that. and as for no stop button, yeah, that does bother me. you can think whatever you want about that, but it bothers _me_, and that's what matters to _me_. finally, i'm not an "average user". and i'm not saying that the iPod isn't fine for average users. as with all other comments on /., mine was a _personal opinion_. you can argue with it all you want, but my opinion is just as correct as yours.

    --
    Xfce: Lighter than some, heavier than others. Just right.
  107. Re:Why oh why by kelnos · · Score: 1

    you _do_ make a good point, when you have long lists of files. however, for me, this isn't a problem, as the songs i listen to frequently are all pretty-well organised.

    i think i'm just not a fan of the hand movement required to use it. i'd rather have a pressure/duration-sensitive button, or a small scrolling wheel, or something of that nature. just my preference. we can debate the merits of either approach all day, but the fact of the matter is that one works better for you, and one works better for me. in case you didn't notice, i was expressing an _opinion_ in my original post. in general, opinions based on personal taste can't be judged as right or wrong. my view on this is just as valid or 'correct' as yours.

    --
    Xfce: Lighter than some, heavier than others. Just right.