Slashdot Mirror


All Flash iPod Line-up on the Horizon?

VE3OGG writes "Several news reports are taking note of the opinion of Prudential Equity Group analyst Jesse Tortora, who seems to think that an all-flash iPod lineup could be coming in the near future. While some point out that this would ultimately super-inflate the cost of iPod production, Tortora rebukes them: '...the late 2005 Nano transition to flash provides a guide as to the point at which the previously mentioned non-cost advantages of flash memory outweigh the cost premium.' He believes that later this year Apple will unveil either a 32GB or 64GB flash-based Video iPod. Of course, like all good analysts, he also throws out some far-fetched claims. These include: the next round of video iPods will also include an iPhone-esque wide touchscreen, WiFi for Apple TV streaming, and GPS functionality. Will this be the start of a super-high-end iPod line, or perhaps a middle-of-the-road iPod Video?"

30 of 183 comments (clear)

  1. Golden Plated Requirements by HappySqurriel · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Most analysts and (unfortunately) executives look at golden plated requirements as a good thing, even though (in many cases) they really aren't ... An all flash iPod with tons of flashy features sounds great on paper until you see the price tag at $800; the price tag is never seen as that bad by many of these people because their six figure salary is (way) above their average customers income level.

    1. Re:Golden Plated Requirements by CastrTroy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But the original 10 Gig ipod was around $700 and it didn't have much problem selling. Most people will just go from some unit with less memory, like the 4 Gig Nano. If you really want to have the iPod video, you're prepared to spend big bucks anyway. I don't think there's that much of a difference between a person willing to pay $400 for a portable music player, and one who wants to spend $800. Either way it's outside the reach of 80% of people.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    2. Re:Golden Plated Requirements by mp3phish · · Score: 4, Interesting

      lets see, you can buy 1GB SD cards for ~10$ at retail. So 320$ for the flash itself(apple will pay less than that). Considering that it is only 249$ for a 30GB ipod video, the chassis of the ipod couldn't cost more than 249. So 240+320 would be the maximum price of a 32GB ipod video flash. Unless they wanted to jack up the price more, which I doubt.

      Now, take out the 30GB moving parts hard drive, that should save you about 100$. Add in the fact that apple isn't paying 10$/gig, but somewhat less than that.. say $8/gig.. so $256$. New total (retail) price would be about 405, or $399.00 for the new 32GB flash ipod video.

      Unless Apple decides to mark up the flash memory more than they mark up the hard drive, your 800$ price point is pretty far off the mark. Factor in that the failure rate will be significantly less, and the battery requirement will be less , so smaller battery (or longer life), they could actually cut the price even more if they wanted to. I say they could sell it for $349 easy and still make just as much margin as they currently are on the 30GB video Hard drive ipod.

      Factor in that the price of flash goes down every time production is ramped (about every couple months), you could have a $249 32GB flash video ipod within 6 months easy if they wanted to (but I doubt they will, Apple tends to wait and increase pricing when new stuff is available).

      --
      Your ignorance is infinitely greater than you realize.
    3. Re:Golden Plated Requirements by HAKdragon · · Score: 3, Informative

      But the original 10 Gig ipod was around $700

      The original iPod was 5GB (for $400) with a 10GB ($500) debuting shortly there after.

      --
      "Our opponent is an alien starship packed with atomic bombs. We have a protractor."
    4. Re:Golden Plated Requirements by StarvingSE · · Score: 4, Informative

      There are a lot of reasons people would go for the 8 gig flash player over the 30 gig iPod. FM radio for one, smaller form factor, and more physically robust. I myself just purchased the Sandisk Sansa e280 for $170. Its a great player; it can play videos, radio, record voice and radio, and holds 2000 songs. By the time I go through 2000 songs, I'll be home from whatever trip I'm on and can swap them for new ones. I'm not interested in storing my entire music collection on an mp3 player; that's what a computer is for. I think a lot of other people think this way.

      --
      I got nothin'
    5. Re:Golden Plated Requirements by Kjella · · Score: 2, Informative

      Man, this stuff is dropping faster than I can pay attention, went to see what a 16GB memory stick costs these days as I thought that'd be a better match than 1GB cards since costs often don't scale - take away VAT and I found it retailing here for 175$ converted to USD. 2*16GB = your 32GB for 350$. I think your $100 quote is high though, I see 1.8" 30GB disks retail for about 80$, and Apple probably pays less for that too. So +270$ retail and maybe +200$ to BOM, they'd have to take a helluva drop to margins (in percent, not dollars) to sell that.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    6. Re:Golden Plated Requirements by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But the original 10 Gig ipod was around $700 and it didn't have much problem selling.

      It also didn't have an earlier iPod version before it with more capacity and a lower cost.

      Currently, an 80GB HDD-based iPod is $350. I can't possibly imagine a 64GB Flash-based iPod going for less than $500. Why should I pay more for the ability to store less content?

    7. Re:Golden Plated Requirements by jcarkeys · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I bought my 80GB because I have 45GB of music. No other reason. I bought it versus another product because I already had some accessories for my 3G 15GB one.

      Apple will have one hell of a time convincing people that flash based over HDD based is worth $400 when you could buy two 80GB HDD for that price.

    8. Re:Golden Plated Requirements by Hal_Porter · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you want a full sized video screen, why not go for the Archos, or the Creative Zen Vision?

      Because those don't play one's collection of FairPlay audio.

      This is why you should never use DRM'd formats.
      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  2. This could be good by jdcool88 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    While I expect an iPod equipped with 64GB of flash memory would be quite expensive, it is also the perfect market to lower the cost of SSD drives. Go Apple, go!

  3. Anything is possible by Chairboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is a classic 'disruptive technology' situation. The Flash memory is more expensive and has less capacity than the moving disc, but in the long term, the benefits would outpace the downsides. When the 3.5" hard drives started coming out, they had lower capacity, cost more, and were slower than the 5.25" hard drives, but they were smaller. How many 5.25" hard drives are being made today? Many of the companies that built 5.25" hard drives failed to survive the transition because it was obvious that the public wouldn't stand for paying more for less. Obvious and correct weren't in agreement, as history showed us.

    On a side note, I'm betting we'll see bluetooth enabled iPods before too long. Wireless headsets are cool, sure, but the real money maker will be as a wireless link for the iPods to be available as external storage for things like the iPhone. Doesn't need to be super fast to stream or one-up songs from "The archive" to the iPhone, and there's a continuing market for iPods even for people who just dropped $500+ on the iPhone.

    1. Re:Anything is possible by mrcdeckard · · Score: 2


      i never considered that someone who bought the iphone would want an ipod, too. as far as i'm concerned, i want less gadgets in my pocket, not more. i certainly wouldn't want to lug around another ipod just for archiving -- and if the ipod just stays at home, why wouldn't i archive to my laptop or desktop?

      mr c

      --
      "Physics is like sex. Sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it." - R. Feynman
  4. Not a big surprise by Bullfish · · Score: 3, Informative

    As we all know flash based hard drives are coming to PC's (the Mac is a PC too), I don't think this is a big surprise and is probably the way all small devices that have mini-drives are going to go once the cost is wrestled down. Phones for sure will go this way too. It seems like a logical evolution, not a wild new thing.

  5. Re:60G of flash? by wakejagr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    make the battery user accessible, make it play mp3/aac/ogg/flac files from dirs instead of itunes databases - while we're at it, why not give it a built in radio and the ability to record from that radio . . . sounds like we're talking about one of the many competitors to the ipod. if you want something that does those things, buy something that does those things. apple is obviously taking their product in a different direction, and while i won't be buying one anytime soon (i like mp3 and ogg playback, radio, off-the-shelf batteries, etc), apple's idea is definitely working to the tune of a majority share in the marketplace.

    --
    Don't save Windows XP! http://www.petitiononline.com/jjw1xp/petition.html
  6. Analyst wrong, no larger screen by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ... the next round of video iPods will also include an iPhone-esque wide touchscreen ...

    I expect that this analysis is wrong. iPods are getting smaller and that is making people happy and driving sales. Also, the iPhone will be pretty damn expensive and needs to have a bunch of upscale features to justify it. Keep in mind that phones and digital music players are converging, what I expect to happen is that an "iPod" will be effectively built into the iPhone.

    1. Re:Analyst wrong, no larger screen by JWW · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I completely disagree. I think there is enourmous demand for a widscreen touch screen iPod. In fact I think sales of the current video iPod are really going to suffer. I know have decided to wait an see about a widscreen iPod instead of buying one of the current video iPods.

      I believe he's dead on on that one. Sometime either shortly before or shortly after June, Apple will NEED to release the new widescreen iPod, because not everyone will be willing (or able - thats me) to get an iPhone. All of these people do not want the current iPod video we want a widescreen iPod.

      Also for some convergance is overratted, some people just want a music (and video, ok some convergance isn't overrattted) player.

    2. Re:Analyst wrong, no larger screen by 644bd346996 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Most LCDs polarize the light in one direction. If you are wearing polarized sunglasses, you can only read the screen when the polarized light coming out of the LCD aligns with the filter in the sunglasses. If the light is polarized at a right angle to the direction of the filter, then the screen will appear pretty much black. Since the user interface involves modes with the screen being rotated by 90 degrees, a regular LCD would only be visible through sunglasses in one of the two modes.

      There are ways around this, though. Circular polarizers are becoming more common in devices to be used outdoors. I can't attest to how the iPod screen polarizes light, as I have neither iPod nor sunglasses handy.

  7. Having a hard time seeing it. by joeytmann · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Is it just me? Apple makes this hugely antcipated announcement for the iPhone that has more bells and whistles than any other phone, now you are going to keep the iPod on the cutting edge? My guess is that the iPod won't really evolve much until the technology gets cheaper. Why spend $500 on an iPhone, then turn around and spend another $500 on an iPod that has the same capabilities as a player? Sorry, but I will stick with my smartphone and my iPod Nano which costs about the same as an iPhone.

    --
    Insert funny smart-ass comment here.
  8. Re:New iPod to have atomic battery. And a pony. by Intocabile · · Score: 4, Funny

    The atomic battery will corrupt the flash memory and the pony will scratch easily.

    I'll wait for the second generation.

  9. History has shown execs have no problem with price by hellfire · · Score: 3, Insightful

    the price tag is never seen as that bad by many of these people because their six figure salary is (way) above their average customers income level.

    History, especially recent history, and very especially the history of the iPod, has shown that's false. Execs are acutely aware of prices of their items. Sales price is the single most important thing to any exec because it's how you make money!! People think that because an iPod isn't $25 that it's not priced for the masses. Guess what? If you can only afford $25 for an mp3 player, then Apple is NOT targetting you. Execs spend boku bucks figuring out the right market for their goods and services.

    Will they use market forces to keep their prices high? Sure. Corporations aren't by any means populist, they know exactly what they are doing.

    --

    "All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"

  10. My predictions by sootman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...and I'm always right... ;-)

    - of course iPods will EVENTUALLY be flash-based, same way that LCDs have pretty much displaced CRTs in the computer monitor market. But it'll be a couple years at least. I'd say HD-based iPods will be with us until at least until Summer 2008. There's a big difference still between 2 GB, 8 GB, and 80 GB. Not everyone needs a ton of storage on an iPod, but some people really, really do, and they won't settle for smaller. Flash iPods are higher-capacity than the very first HD-based iPod, but that doesn't mean no one's buying the bigger ones. Apple can make plenty of money on 100 and 120 GB iPods before they've got to switch designs.

    - don't look for ANY new features (widescreen, touchscreen) in the iPod until AFTER the new iPhone is released--long after. Apple always introduces nice but expensive stuff and makes a ton of money off the early-adopting/big-spending crowd, then they release a version that's a bit better and/or cheaper and get the next round of people, and so on and so on and so on. Apple is going to get a lot of money from people who want a widescreen iPod by selling them the iPhone first. THEN they'll put out a widescreen/touch-based iPod. Since the iPhone comes out this summer, I doubt Apple will release a new iPod until Jan or Feb '08. Look at what they just did with the Shuffle--they released a new one last Fall, sold a bunch over Christmas, then, January 30, HEY! LOOK! COLORS! Raise your hand if you think Apple forgot that they know how to anodize aluminum when the new Shuffle was introduced last fall. Get all the money you can, improve, repeat.

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  11. I call BS by orb_fan · · Score: 2, Interesting
    From the article:

    Tortora explained that a 30GB of HDD-based iPod is sufficient for around 40 hours of video content, but only has about 3.5 hours of battery life for video playback. He added that replacing the hard drive with flash memory would allow for an increase of about 60 percent in battery life to 5.5 hours of video playback.
    Based on these numbers, 5.5 hours only needs about 4GB of flash, so if you really want this, combine both flash and HDD in the device - then simply move the video file to flash before playback.
  12. Re:60G of flash? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Forget about Ogg etc... - I'm more worried about their move to Flash. Macromedia is a terrible format for showing video. They should stick to H.264.

  13. Apple should just go all the way... by Sciros · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...and develop a Flash-memory-based, forearm-mounted computer with a 7"x2" (or 2.5") touch-sensitive screen. It's hard to fathom how much booty that would kick. iPods are great and all, and the iPhone is rubbish but a proper computer that basically turns you into a sci-fi techie all Predator-style actually interests me. Charging "bases" at home, office, and car means you can keep your art-mounted compy permanently charged.

    The screen would need to be that multi-point pressure-sensitive one that the Asian guy from NYU demonstrated recently... wish I remembered the link to the video for that...

    And yes there should be "future-proof" versions of various levels, with option including a laser cannon, self-destruct mechanism, retractable blade, Star Wars-style grappling hook, tranquilizer gun, mace spray, and spare tire.

    --
    I like basketball!!1!
  14. Re:60G of flash? by Bob+Gelumph · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Apple like to do a few things really well that all fit in with one another.
    Adding radio could be done, but it is far from core, and could work against people paying for music.
    What is wrong with them letting 3rd party manufacturers from making their own plug-ins like the iTrip?
    Sure, being able to dump a whole lot of files on the iPod with them being playable would be good, but it introduces more complexity that doesn't fit in with their strategy.
    Apple wants a particular structure for the music on iPods because it is easy for them to maintain. What is the problem with that?
    They could introduce heaps of new features, but unless it really makes sense from a design point of view, then they won't do it.
    I bought a cheap shuffle sized player with a small lcd and very few buttons that allows more flexibility for where you put your music. It even has a radio. The interface is crap, however. I knew it would be crap when I bought it, but I wanted something cheap. When you start bundling in all the features that small segments of your market want, you end up with MS Office 2003. That's why MS got rid of 90% of the stuff for 2007. They want to make it easy to maintain and easy to use, with just enough functionality to satisfy most people.

    --
    I'm gonna need a spec.
  15. Re:60G of flash? by encoderer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "i like mp3 and ogg playback"

    I've always been surprised by how many people don't realize the iPod can play MP3s. It seems like a failure of marketing. I've had to share the good news with 3 or 4 people in the few months alone.

  16. Re:60G of flash? by dr.badass · · Score: 3, Funny

    Now make the battery user accessible, and make it play mp3/aac/ogg/flac off directories and not itunes databases and we're all set.

    In other words: change everything about it.

    --
    Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
  17. Better price estimate by babakm · · Score: 2, Informative

    I posted something like this elsewhere, but... From a recent semiconductor industry report, the latest NAND Flash spot prices (2/5/07) are: 2Gb ... $2.6 4Gb ... $3.9 8Gb ... $6.3 Assuming the same ~1.6x-ish price increment for each doubling of capacity: 16Gb ... $10 32Gb ... $16 Times 8 to get GB gives me a rough estimate of $128 for the NAND chips in the 32GB drive. Add a bit more for the other hardware and contract pricing and a cost of $160 for the storage portion of a 32GB flash iPod at current prices isn't too bad. Note that prices will fall by "later this year". I'd guess a starting list price of over $300, for which you'd get the slim design, better battery life and probably, bigger screen (maybe even some iPhone design elements).

  18. Re:60G of flash? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Informative

    make the battery user accessible That would make the unit bigger. I want a portable music device to be as small as possible. The competing tend to be 20-50% bigger, which makes the iPod an easy winner in my opinion.

    make it play mp3/aac/ogg/flac files It already supports MP3, AAC and Apple Lossless (ALE). You can transcode to ALE from FLAC without losing any data, and ALE requires less CPU power to play back (giving better battery life). Vorbis support would be nice, of course, and could be a deal-breaker if you had already ripped your music collection to Vorbis.

    from dirs instead of itunes databases I honestly don't see the benefit of this. Why is it better to drag your files over manually using a filesystem view and then have the device be required to either:
    1. Create the DB itself (on a CPU and disk that are slower than your desktop / laptop) or
    2. Use the filesystem directly, costing more disk seeks/reads (and hence a battery life hit)
    Opening up the format of the DB would be a better solution, so non-iTunes tools for creating it didn't have to rely on reverse-engineering. These days, however, the DB format is pretty well understood, so you can just run the tool that recreates it as part of your unmount operation pretty easily.

    while we're at it, why not give it a built in radio and the ability to record from that radio You can buy a portable radio for pretty much nothing, and it will be a lot smaller than an iPod. If I wanted a radio, I'd use one of these. Recording radio might be useful, I suppose, but I'd probably rather do that on a desktop and then sync it with a portable player.
    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  19. Re:60G of flash? by soft_guy · · Score: 4, Funny

    while we're at it, why not give it a built in radio and the ability to record from that radio No, what I want is the ability to send a song to another iPod wirelessly so the other person can listen to it for three days or three plays - whichever comes first - and then have the chance to buy the song. But, I don't want this to work on all songs - just some of them where the record company said it was OK to do this. If they would only add this feature, I'm sure more people would buy iPods.
    --
    Avoid Missing Ball for High Score