Slashdot Mirror
HP To Start Selling Its iPod
Dozix007 writes "Uberhacker.Com is reporting that HP said Friday it will start selling its version of the iPod in September. HP's white iPod will be sold in a 20-gigabyte and 40-gigabyte version for $299 and $399 respectively. Apple's prices are the same. It is essentially a clone of the current design, with no real modification."
What else was HP going to do with them? Eat them? Plant them in the ground and hope iPod trees sprout?
If it works, why change it? Hopefully prices will go down a little......
It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
I moderate therefore I rule!
--
one of them is useless.
Why couldn't they have chosen a lower price?
If you lost your job today, don't despair. You may die tomorrow anyway.
I thought one of the reasons that HP was selling the iPod was so that they could sell it in "HP blue", which would have given at least 1 reason to buy it from them(I don't use HP products, so I could care less but)
Monstar L
Same function, same price, same look.... I'd rather have the original myself.
--
Play the Gmail Invitation Giveaway contest. 4 invites availiable.
HP should change their "Invent" tag-line to "Copy what works and will make us money".
If the price is the same... they're screwed. Apple's Ipod force is brand recognition... Same feature set too! I wonder who thought that it would be a good idea... and they got a license from Apple (which cost $$$, and maybe a % of profits)... I just don't understand?
Eureka Science News - automatically updated
More iPod units out, but possibly less iPod brand recognition? It says it's similar, but I'm curious how the iPod and hpPod differ. I guess it's good for Apple, as hpPod users will probably use the iTMS.
-- n
Perhaps the reason HP is doing this is so that it can perhaps bundle the iPod with some back-to-school computer they'll be selling. Though I think they'd probably get more buyers if they had some sort of "limited edition HP branded iPod".
Oh, why... did the poster submit a link to another Slash site?! Honestly, that's as productive as Google News linking to Slashdot! All it does is add yet another click to the process of finding the fucking news!
Matthew G P Coe
http://mgpcoe.blogspot.com/
I think this is the URL to it! http://h10049.www1.hp.com/music/us/en/ipod.html?mt xs=home-ent&mtxb=B2&mtxl=L1
It's exactly the same!
At the time of this writing, though, you could not access shopping.hp.com! Can anyone correct me if I am wrong?
mysql>SELECT * FROM users WHERE clue > 0
0 Rows Returned
Before, HP didn't have anything like the iPos. Now it can flesh out its home electronics lineup a little bit. You know, sell it in a package with its own computers and tailor the advertising so people don't get too confused about mixing Apple hardware with PC hardware.
They did the same sort of rebranding with CD burners, if I recall correctly.
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
The HP model will come with 1 year of free phone support where I believe Apple's is 90 days.
Why the need to release an iPod with an HP logo on it? I think the only impact this will have is added confusion to the average consumer. People are going to see these HP iPods, which they know full well are Apple iPods, and wonder what's different about them, when both versions are exactly the same. Furthermore, it doesn't give HP a "cooler image" as everyone and their cousin knows full well that the iPod was designed/manufactured by Apple. Some consumers may even think that HP blatantly stole Apple's design. I'm not quite sure I see the point of this, besides throwing HP a bone in return for having iTunes pre-installed on their machines.
No.
Is this really different from when Dell sold Ipods two years ago? I thought that Apple was going to license the Ipod to HP, now it looks like they have made HP into "just another reseller".
John Carmack fan, browsing at +5 since 1999.
Why would anyone choose the "iPod copy" if they can get "iPod original" from the "cool" Apple at the same cost?
because believe it or not not everybody has heard of the iPod
This will open the iPod to new markets
http://Lenny.com
HP has lots of retail agreements, so this will get the iPod on to even more store shelves. Costco will carry them for example.
Scuttlemonkey is a troll
No it's not joke. Here're relevant press releases and their "HP Tattoos" gallery:/ 2004/04082 7a.htmlk its/2004/ digitalexplaunch/fs_ipod.pdfh p.com/music/us/en/tattoos.html
http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/press
http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/press_
http://h10049.www1.
HP isn't cloning the iPod, they're buying them in bulk from Apple. This is just like when Dell offered the iPod through their online store.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
mmmh.... iPod trees....
You will be able to print your own skin for the ipod. I think its funny that people would normaly download skins for their software mp3 players like winamp. Now you will be downloading and printing new skins for your hardware mp3 player.
We're getting them in at RadioShack later this month
Yeah, its the same thing. No question.
But think of it, HP will use resellers such as Staples, Officemax, Office Depot and other outlets which gives us a reason to use those 30$ off of 150$ coupons and other 10/20% Off coupons to buy these expensive players. For people who may balk at the 300$ price, cutting it down to 250$ sometimes is all the reason for them to spend the moolah. So repeat after me, its good for the consumers. who gives a flying fuck about whether HP had innovated or not?
Rapid Nirvana
What constitutes price fixing?
In HP's online store the listing for the 40GB iPod lists that it is only compatible with Windows. Check near the bottom of the listing. Are these things coming preformatted for Windows/HP computers? Hmmm...
.deviatefromtheabsolute.
Many PC/Microsoft owners "think" anything from Apple needs to be used with an Apple to work.
HP branding makes it a more comfortable purchase, and Apple need not print "Works with Microsoft XP(tm)!" all over their boxes.
"Gee, that HP printer said 'XP Compatible' on the box, and it sorta works, so this should, too!"
HP just proved it doesn't understand basic branding: OK, so that's a pretty big smackdown to throw at a multi-billion-dollar tech giant. But consider: People buy the iPod because it's cool, it's functional and (stay with me here) because it's an iPod. If you're going to compete, you need to be different/better/unique, you need to have a dramatically lower price point, you need to have a better channel or you need to have God on your side. HP has demonstrated none of these things.
HP just told us it doesn't listen to its customers. I challenge anyone in HP's marketing organization to produce research indicating existing customers would buy an hPod (my name for it -- HP can send me a royalty check) over the existing Apple product based on exact functionality. My guess is the research doesn't exist.
Finally, HP is broadcasting the message that many of their strongest brand attributes are gone. No, I don't expect Joe Consumer to make a statement like that -- but I do expect him/her to pick up on it subtly. HP used to be about great, long-lasting products that led in their categories (printers, anyone?) both in terms of sales and innovation. They still do some innovation, but increasingly HP is trying to be all things to all people, and it's not working out too well. The clearest branding message from the hPod? That HP is a follower, not a leader.
"It was a summer's tale: Just a boy, his Linux, and a head full of dreams..."
There are MP3 players that are cheaper, some that are lighter, some that are more robust, but I've never seen one that is better.
The iPod is cheap enough (for me to buy) robust enough (to put up with my abuse) light enough for me to carry with me all the time.
And to top it all off, the design is absolutely brilliant. I'm not talking about the way it looks...I'm talking about the way it WORKS. I've messed with a bunch of other players, but the iPod is peerless.
How "cool" it is is totally irrelevant to how GOOD it is.
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
This is Apple's attempt to capture even more of the MP3 player FOR PC market. The problem with the iPod as is, is that it is designed for the Mac first then slightly modified for the PC. I for one never bought an iPod because it has to run through shit software to manage your songs, software that at its best was flaky. MP3 Players that are originally designed for the PC are made to for the most part be like external hard drive, just drag and drop files, no 3rd party software to use. The HP iPod will use only USB 2.0 not firewire (one more thing that PC users dont always have) and will work with HP's software, not jukebox. HP's software will make it more PC friendly and more like the interaction between PC and MP3 player that other "for PC" MP3 players have. Not only all that but many people that aren't tech savvy dont know that the iPod works for PC. And even if they do, they get told by store employees that it doesn't work well with a PC. Having HP's name on it will make it more recognizable as a "for PC" product, and stop people from saying "I would like a iPod, but I dont have a Mac." Now they can see from just the name that it will work with their PC. Its nothing really that new, but it will allow Apple to sell their iPods to people that require PC name recognition.
The differences are in the packaging and the material that comes with the iPod itself. The main differences are the instructions are going to be written for the WIndows user and will include one of those fold out "getting started" posters. HP felt that the Windows user needed a different sort of help with the iPod than the Mac mindset inherent in the current Apple instructions...
Compaq _invented_ the hard drive MP3 player. They had their first prototypes in 1997-8, I think. Their marketing folks decided that no one would want one, and they licensed the design off to a Korean company in 1999. You can read about it here and here.
I got mine in early 1999, unit #4. It still does things that the iPod doesn't do, like gapless MP3 playback. It has a superior interface, battery life and sound quality. A shrunken version with an attractive design would have kicked ass.
At any rate, HP bought Compaq, which means that they actually own patents covering almost every aspect of the iPod.
So what does the New HP do? They license the iPod from Apple. Yup, pay Apple for the IP that they own. I'm guessing that the clever MBAs running the company never decided to do a simple patent search.
Thus, HP wins the Dumbest Big Company Ever award. HP's stupidity regarding this matter has been confirmed to me by former employees who will remain nameless.
Jonathan
I knew it!!! HP bought Apple, I knew this was going to happen all along based on information previously on slashdot... I can't believe it took this long, BSD only took a year to die...
Oh crap, I didn't rtfa. Oops.
Wow, could you have been more patronizing in your post, or did you think you were talking to a bunch of 4 year olds? All of your observations that you think are so clever, like "the iPod is not the only MP3 player out there", could have been told to you by any kid who goes to third grade. On a short bus.
and have way better functionality than the iPod
Um, no. More (generally useless) features? Sure. Better functionality as an MP3 player? No.
I mean, forcing you to use iTunes to load music on it, or else it won't play? What's that all about? Just about every other MP3 player (ok, the creative ones suck in that way too) let's you use it as an USB Mass Storage device, no drivers, no software, and it will play any MP3 you put on there.. Nice and simple!
No its not simple, its a god damn pain in the ass to use regular file system transfers. You can start a transfer in iTunes, drag more songs to your iPod and it will add the new songs to the transfer queue. With regular file transfers, you either have multiple copies running at once, or you wait till one file transfer is over before you start the next one. And searching for songs on an iPod is fast and easy because it has a database of the songs that are on it. With your crab ass system, your player is going to have to rebuild the database on its own, or make do without one...and be slow, slow slow.
People who buy iPods are perfectly aware that there are other options out there. iRiver (iCant come up with my own iNaming scheme) and Sony are about the only other players out there in the size/capacity segment that Apple is in. Sony's player sucks unless you love Sony's format (the only one that will play on it), and the iRiver is about the same price with a couple of neat but mostly novelty features. Now this may come as a shock to you, but many well informed consumers consider the iPod to be the better buy. It has a great interface, great software, doesn't try to be a jack-of-all-trades, and it has a Firewire interface so you can use it as a boot device.
And get this, if you buy argos, creative, iRiver, or any other brand -- You're not contractually required to give Steve Jobs a rim-job..
Uh huh. It sounds like you need one...from those flesh eating beetles from The Mummy.
Regarding software for the iPod... although iTunes is the only software officially supported by Apple, there are several other programs (free/shareware) like Anapod Explorer, Ephpod, XPlay, and even RealPlayer that will transfer and manage your iPod's music collection.
As another poster points out, the iPod WILL play any MP3 you put on there. It will also play MPEG-4/AAC, which IS a standard format, licensed from Dolby. It will even play plain-old WAV files, too. The iPod doesn't support Windows Media files, but if you're using iTunes, WMA files will automatically be converted to MP3 or AAC when you import them to your library.
Maybe you're not familiar with Audible, which is an online store for Audiobooks. Audible has its own DRM-protected format which only a few portable players support, one of which is the iPod.
As far as pricing is concerned, the iPod is probably the most expensive in terms of $$/gigabyte, but not by much. Last time I checked, other 20GB players were in the $250-300 range, too. (A 20GB iPod sells for $299 or less)
Hey, it's great you like your big old Archos jukebox. But, I wanted a portable music player that was small and light enough to strap to my arm while I go out bicycling and to the gym. And I wanted one that would play Audible's audiobooks, too. The iPod was my only choice.
I'll admit, my biggest frustration with my iPod is with the software; I wish I could just plug it in and drag-and-drop my music via Windows Explorer. But it's a pretty minor complaint; Aside from being a memory hog, iTunes really is a great media player and organizer. And I still feel that the iPod is the best MP3 player for me.
I doubt Apple would let them I'm sure thier license is nothing more then to manufature them they can't make a chnge like that
http://Lenny.com
It is essentially a clone of the current design
It's not a clone of the current design; it is the current design. The exact same thing. It's just in a differently labeled box.
orange
Apple's brand hasn't worked the same magic for home computers, now has it?
You are mistaken. Early Apple computers were as successful in their day as iPod is today. History has repeated itself so far. Hopefully Apple will now deviate from history and maintain their market lead.
HP is smart to stick with white and to encourage people to print their own tattoos/skins for their iPod.
h tml
"HP describes the Tattoos as follows: The ultra-thin HP Printable Tattoos are easy to apply and remove from the player's exterior. They are durable and water-resistant, which helps protect the iPod from scratches and scuffs as music lovers carry it around. HP is working with industry recording studios to offer consumers access to the latest album art from the newest releases."
http://www.macobserver.com/article/2004/08/27.6.s
Geek wants company he works for to pay for it.
Geek submits request for "40 GB external Apple FireWire HD"
Accounting rejects request. "Apple not on approved vendor list."
Geek submits new request for "40 GB external HP FireWire HD.
Purchase request approved.
Result: Apple sells another 100,000 iPods they wouldn't have been able to Geeks gaming the system in PC-centric corporate environments.
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
Does anyone know how HP are going to handle the problems with battery life experienced by the Ipod. Will they be offering a battery replacement service like apples? Will it be cheaper? If its cheaper can existing apple Ipod owners get thier batteries replaced by HP?
Paul Gogarty
Yes, but IBM was a better known and more highly regarded brand, which then went on to clean Apple's clock and marginalize its marketshare. Which is not what is happening to the iPod. People bought IBMs for the brand.
Again, this is comparing different relative time frames. The Apple II initially did well against the IBM PC. Apple initially had greater marketshare. It took years to lose that. Apple's "marginalization" took place in the post-1984 Macintosh era, not the prior Apple II era. For a fair comparison we need to give Sony a few years, then the IBM PC comparison would be applicable.