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
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".
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.
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
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....
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
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!"
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.
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.
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/
You're being pretty subjective there. Then again, you're modded funny.
I am a Mac user. I recently bought av iRiver. Why not an iPod? Because I weighed them against each other and decided the iRiver was the better choice because of the following.
- The iRiver supports Ogg Vorbis.
- The iRiver has better battery life.
- The iRiver _can_ play directly from the file system.
You're telling me in your post that these are "generally useless" features. To me they are not. That's why I didn't buy an iPod.
"No its not simple, its a god damn pain in the ass to use regular file system transfers."
To you maybe. To me it's the other way around. You're writing like it's fact, when it really is preference.
we come in peace / shoot to kill