Slashdot Mirror


iPod Shuffle Finds Its Voice

theodp writes "Steve Jobs wasn't around to convince you that you should be impressed, but on Wednesday Apple unveiled a 4GB Shuffle that's half the size of its predecessor. Holding up to 1,000 songs, the pre-shrunk Shuffle sports a 10-hour battery life and also adds a new VoiceOver feature that can recite song titles, artists, and playlist names, as well as provide status information. Even without a show from Steve, the new player is generally leaving folks dazzled, although there are some complaints." Update: 3/14 at 14:10 by SS: Reader Mike points out some disturbing news that the new Shuffle contains DRM which, according to a review at iLounge, prevents it from fully working with any headphones that don't have an Apple "authentication chip."

49 of 379 comments (clear)

  1. And DRM in the fucking *headphones*. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe consumers will draw the line when Apple requires its users to install DRM-equipped electrodes in their own frontal lobes.

    Maybe.

    1. Re:And DRM in the fucking *headphones*. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      And before anyone says the Voice function is innovative, Rockbox has had it for years. Luckily Apple prevented the installation of Rockbox onto iPods with the 6th gen Classic :/

    2. Re:And DRM in the fucking *headphones*. by CrankyFool · · Score: 3, Informative

      What in heaven's name are you talking about?

      The headphones have no DRM built into them. You could argue that, maybe, Apple is actually making the Shuffle 'closed-source' by requiring a user to use their headphones with their player (I'll insert the customary car analogy -- they're producing a car and restricting you to putting their wheels on their car!), but frankly Apple has long been in the business of coming up wit new ways of doing things and letting the rest of the market catch up. Unless we hear Apple stopping other people from producing headphones or adapters for this device, I'm going to assume that we'll soon see other vendors coming up with adapters and headphones for it. Oh, look, Scosche has already announced they're working on it.

    3. Re:And DRM in the fucking *headphones*. by iamdrscience · · Score: 3, Informative

      What in heaven's name are you talking about? The headphones have no DRM built into them

      Oh really? The EFF disagrees: http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/03/apple-adds-still-more-drm-ipod-shuffle

    4. Re:And DRM in the fucking *headphones*. by broken_chaos · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ah, you beat me to it (I replied below). This really doesn't seem anything beyond a non-standard control interface - particularly since it doesn't seem to fit the definition of "Digital Rights Management" at all. It more accurately fits "Physical Rights Management" - in terms of restricting what accessories are required to do something with their device. It does nothing to the (digital) music playback (music is reported to play just fine through any headphones).

      I wouldn't doubt that one could, with a little ingenuity, hack together some sort of standard headphone jack on the end of a cut-off earbud remote that currently comes with the shuffle, as well.

      Normally I support the EFF quite highly, but they seem to be jumping the gun a little on this one, going on the word of one iLounge review, as opposed to a report from someone actually taking the thing apart to see how it works - such as a manufacturer.

    5. Re:And DRM in the fucking *headphones*. by broken_chaos · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's going, as I've noted in another reply, on a single iLounge review. Not exactly a technical analysis of what's going on inside the earphones. It sounds more like a non-standard control chip, as opposed to a DRM chip.

      See also my reply with the definition of Digital Rights Management (short version - the music is entirely unaffected and can play through any headphones).

    6. Re:And DRM in the fucking *headphones*. by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Non-standard != proprietary DRM.

      People have already started announcing 3rd party accessories for the new iPod shuffle. It may not be a standard headphone jack, but it's not locked-down. I'm sure in a months time there will be people who've made their own iPod shuffle headphone controller just for the fun of it. If you want to talk about price of accessories making the whole package too expensive, then that's something else.

    7. Re:And DRM in the fucking *headphones*. by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The impression I get about the EFF is that they've become a bit too much like Greenpeace. I'm an environmentalist, but I do get sick of Greenpeace. I also don't like the DMCA, but the amount of spin coming from the EFF lately is a bit too much for me. When organisations like this start going after the small stuff, I think they undermine the very importance of what they're fighting for and just end up preaching to the choir.

    8. Re:And DRM in the fucking *headphones*. by makomk · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You must've missed the iPod TV out debacle. All the recent iPods won't do TV out unless they can detect a special Apple authentication chip in the TV out adapter. There's no technical reason for this - they're quite capable of doing TV out via old-fashioned adaptors without the chip, and I think some of them even display a message via the TV out in this case. The sole purpose is to require accessory manufacturers to get authorised and pay a per-item fee to Apple - enforced by the requirement to put the Apple-supplied lockout chip in each one.

      It really shouldn't surprise you if they start doing the same things with headphones.

    9. Re:And DRM in the fucking *headphones*. by berend+botje · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Too bad Rockbox has "by techies, for techies" approach to the user interface.

      It really isn't very good.

    10. Re:And DRM in the fucking *headphones*. by mrsquid0 · · Score: 5, Funny

      The thing that one needs to remember is that anyone, no matter who they are, who questions Apple or points out any problem with Apple's behaviour, is evil. Apple is always right. We are fortunate to be living at the same time that Apple exists.

      --
      Just because you are paranoid does not mean that no-one is out to get you.
    11. Re:And DRM in the fucking *headphones*. by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is debatable - what ilounge is claiming is that if you don't have headphones with controls all it does is play a loop of the playlist - because the player doesn't have any physical controls on the device.

      Apple is *forcing* you to buy their headphones if you want to control it and from what I understand is that 3rd parties cannot make these special headphones without a special chip only apple has.

      So yes - its drm.

      And while some 3rd party could reverse engineer the lockout chip apple could in turn shut them down with the dmca.

    12. Re:And DRM in the fucking *headphones*. by Firehed · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That's going, as I've noted in another reply, on a single iLounge review. Not exactly a technical analysis of what's going on inside the earphones. It sounds more like a non-standard control chip, as opposed to a DRM chip.

      According to iLounge, even Apple's own previous headphones with remotes built in (for the iPhone and recent Nanos) refuse to control the new shuffle properly. So non-standard that it doesn't even work with your existing products seems pretty unlikely, though I'll happily be proven wrong if someone smashes open the remotes on either set of headphones and finds out what's in there.

      See also my reply with the definition of Digital Rights Management (short version - the music is entirely unaffected and can play through any headphones).

      Is the music player not also a digital device? It may not be DRM to the letter, but it's still technology to prevent you from freely interacting with your purchases.

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    13. Re:And DRM in the fucking *headphones*. by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Apple is *forcing* you to buy their headphones if you want to control it and from what I understand is that 3rd parties cannot make these special headphones without a special chip only apple has.

      The problem being, this part is just speculation at this point and seems unlikely. No one has seen said chip or tried to reverse engineer the new interface from Apple.

      So yes - its drm.

      Assuming said speculation was true it wouldn't be DRM, but it would be intentionally enforced hardware component lock-in. If you want to call it DRM, go ahead, but it is inaccurate. Either way it is annoying and likely actionable if someone had the legal muscle.

      And while some 3rd party could reverse engineer the lockout chip apple could in turn shut them down with the dmca.

      ...if any such chip exists as opposed to the more likely scenario that Apple built a nonstandard interface and did not include a special locking chip. So far, all anyone has seen is the interface, not this supposed chip.

    14. Re:And DRM in the fucking *headphones*. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What you lose in simple, pretty UI design; you gain back in features and usability. Of particular note is Rockbox's support for a number of music formats (FLAC and APE come to mind). Rockbox's greatest feature though IMO, is the fact that I can simply plug it into any computer with a USB port and drag a music file right onto my Ipod, just like a regular flash drive, and it'll play. I can organize my music into folders and don't necessarily have to rely on various ID3 tags or "Smart playlists" in order to organize my music the way I want. This point alone is what drove me to Rockbox. After my ipod crashed once and corrupted my Itunes database, I either had to create a new database or find a few special program that would repair the database. The former option is all that's available to most users and it means having to retransfer all your music over the corruption of a stupid database, never mind the fact that all the music files are still there on the ipod in perfect working order, albeit all renamed to hash number. Oh, and should you want that kind of database support, Rockbox provides that too. And should you need to get back into Itunes on your Ipod you can merely shut the Ipod off, turn it on, and throw the hold switch on before the Apple logo disappears and you'll boot straight into Apple OS. So rockbox even supports dual booting.

      Apple may make kick ass hardware devices, but their software plays to the same tune that M$ does.

    15. Re:And DRM in the fucking *headphones*. by adisakp · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Assuming said speculation was true it wouldn't be DRM, but it would be intentionally enforced hardware component lock-in. If you want to call it DRM, go ahead, but it is inaccurate. Either way it is annoying and likely actionable if someone had the legal muscle.

      According to Apple's VP of iPod marketing, third parties will soon be selling a small cable with the controls on it that you can plug any headphones into. It's not even a "lockout". Basically they have an extra hardware feature on their headphones that isn't standard. To get these hardware features, you need to buy Apple headphones or a third party adapter with this hardware feature. Actually, you can still use any headphones but without the additional hardware buttons on the adapter or on Apple headphones you lose the control features. It's hardly DRM.

    16. Re:And DRM in the fucking *headphones*. by adisakp · · Score: 3, Insightful

      BTW, Where is the outrage for the "DRM" of Google using a weird USB headphone adapter on Android phones?

    17. Re:And DRM in the fucking *headphones*. by DECS · · Score: 4, Informative

      The EFF, and specifically Fred von Lohmann, is not only taking a shaky position here, but expressing it ignorantly. The group is getting good at going on witch hunts without really knowing what they're talking about.

      For starters, comparing Apple against Microsoft, Ford, Toyota is not just stupid, but apeshit retarded. Microsoft isn't a principally hardware maker, but its hardware IS all encrusted with DRM, from the Xbox to Zune. It also promotes WMA/WMV DRM on files and HD-DVD style end to end video output DRM on PCs, so von Lohmanns' comments are ridiculous.

      Ford and Toyota all use proprietary parts in their vehicles that can not be swapped out for third party bits from any supplier a user might want to pick from.

      But secondly, the guy doesn't even verify the information he's complaining about at full speed. Fred von Lohmann is a shoot first, gather details later kind of guy. He was the same EFF staffer who wrote, "Apple is among the worst offenders when it comes to messing around with stuff you've already paid for. But iTunes 7.2 is likely to be remembered for the especially wicked tricks it plays on iTunes customers."

      That's the same whiney moralist language he's using here, but he was wrong about iTunes 7.2 removing the ability to rip tracks to CD. That didn't stop him from prattling on about it.

      Von Lohmann thought iTunes could no longer burn and re-rip music after reading about it in a blog. He was wrong, because the blogger he believed was also mistaken. However, von Lohmann did not correct his posting accusing Apple of "removing the feature" from iTunes; he also cited [EFF's Peter] Eckersley's "previous revelations" [erroneous nonsense about metadata spying in iTunes] as proof Apple could not be trusted.

      Apple's 'Especially Wicked Tricks.'

    18. Re:And DRM in the fucking *headphones*. by snowwrestler · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And your position is like the anti-Communist witch-hunting that pursued anyone who was not as strident in their positions as the hunters thought they should be. There's a vast middle ground between apologists saying everything is great and zealots calling everything the end of the world. Most people just don't give a shit about B2B supplier contract issues like this.

      The EFF is foolish to waste time on this when (for example) the entire end-user online video experience remains horribly laden with real actual Digital Rights Management schemes. A propriety part in a hardware accessory is NOT DRM. The EFF of all people should know better.

      --
      Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
  2. I Like It by CrankyFool · · Score: 5, Informative

    I suspect I was one of the first few people on Thursday to pick one up. This Shuffle is my first, complementing my 30GB Video, 60GB Video, and iPhone devices. Basically, I've gotten tired of lugging around the bigger devices while I bike.

    So far, I'm really pleased with it. Hate the headphone arrangement in principle, but I can live with it for now. It's tiny, as noted, and I've already lost it (and found it again) once. I suspect that's the biggest risk to owning a small, black device like that.

    1. Re:I Like It by hey! · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well, extrapolating from the trend so far, you'll be losing the next gen shuffle in your ear.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  3. Headphones by Ganty · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The inability to use your own headphones is a big problem, in fact this makes the new shuffle unusable for me as I can't use earbuds.

    Ganty

    1. Re:Headphones by mlts · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm not sure who Apple is catering to by forcing people to either wait for third parties to license the earbud chip, or use the "one size fits some" earbuds that are included.

      Children who are given this as their first MP3 player might not be able to use the earbuds.

      People who want an inexpensive iPod for jogging or campus won't be able to use these earbuds, because earbuds tend to fall out.

      Which leaves people who are just buying a really low end iPod for financial reasons. If someone wants a generic MP3 player, choices abound in this market segment. Apple has competition here, as opposed to the other models which the choices thin out dramatically, especially the high capacity iPod Classic.

      This is a head scratcher, because Apple tends to know better than this. Maybe they will make an adapter with the volume controls and button for $29 or so, so people can use their own cans.

      UI-wise, features seem to have been lost. Say I have a long DJ mix with no breaks in it. From what I've seen, I can't fast forward or rewind in a song, its either go to the beginning or skip, with no in between.

      All and all, I am disappointed. Yes, this is their low-end product, but there are some definite features that some people use everyday that are missing. At least the 2G Shuffle is still for sale. If I had to buy a Shuffle, I'd buy the 2G which has half the capacity, but allows me to do basic music navigation actions with a single button press as opposed to multiple triple-clicks.

    2. Re:Headphones by laurens · · Score: 3, Funny

      You can fast forward and rewind, although you need to read the manual for that ;-)

      Double-click-and-hold and triple-click-and-hold, respectively.

    3. Re:Headphones by pizzach · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Just a note because I don't think I was clear enough about the link. Scroll down and notice that apple is selling both versions of the iPod shuffle. Even more intriguing, they are filling different pricing brackets. $50 vs $80 which sounds very similar to the original iPod Shuffle pricing. The people who want the cheapest iPod would still be going for the earlier revision so the headphone argument is mostly moot for those people anyway.

      --
      Once you start despising the jerks, you become one.
    4. Re:Headphones by tsa · · Score: 5, Insightful

      For $29 you can get an MP3 player with a screen and no ridiculous headphones.

      --

      -- Cheers!

    5. Re:Headphones by commodore64_love · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's called "lockin".

      You kill the third-party market by designing your hardware in such a way that people can only buy the OEM's product. It used to be common practice in the computer industry, until the mid-90s when generic PCs took over. However Apple has clung to that paradigm right up to the present day.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  4. Rockbox by bcmm · · Score: 5, Informative

    I am surprised, with Apple constantly spouting "The first music player that talks to you", that no one has yet mentioned Rockbox's voice capabilities.

    It has existed for some time, and even supports it on some very cheap hardware, by calculating and storing the speech synth on a PC while the player is plugged in.

    So, Apple has, in fact, been fighting to keep speech synth off the iPod for years.

    --
    # cat /dev/mem | strings | grep -i llama
    Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
    1. Re:Rockbox by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But that's not really a music player -- It's software that you can install on a music player. Apple is not fighting to keep it off the iPod, they just don't care about supporting it. Big difference. And why are you surprised? Apple isn't a bad company IMHO, but they're not there to be everyone's best friend, either.

    2. Re:Rockbox by CRCulver · · Score: 5, Informative

      Apple is not fighting to keep it off the iPod, they just don't care about supporting it.

      The establishment of encrypted firmware with the iPod Touch and iPod Classic was an intentional move towards preventing third-party firmware installations like Rockbox. Apple made an effort to ensure you can't install it, so the issue is a lot more than a neutral "lack of support".

  5. Its like miracle ! by should_be_linear · · Score: 5, Funny

    I always thought how big and clumsy my Shuffle is, thank god they finally addressed this issue !

    --
    839*929
  6. Re:Curious by Bertie · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yeah, it's almost like the Shuffle doesn't have a screen or something.

    Oh.

  7. My Sansa by B1oodAnge1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Man I love my 25 dollar, 2 gig Sansa with a 4 gig microSD card.

    I've had speech functionality since I installed Rockbox in January of '07.
    Plus, I can play doom and gameboy ROMs in class.

    Did I mention I got it brand new for 25 bucks?

    Jus' sayin'...

    --
    RUGBYRUGBYRUGBY
  8. You can't use it with normal amplifiers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You can't play it through normal amplifiers without losing the ability to change tracks.

    You can't plug it into a cars MP3 port, you can't plug it into previous iPod docks.

    This is useless without its headphones, you're stuck with those crappy Apple ones.

  9. Teardown by joelholdsworth · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...and already someones pulled it to bits

  10. New marketing strategy by Mendenhall · · Score: 3, Funny

    OK, this is an interesting new marketing strategy for a company as a way to remove a product from their line. You don't ever have to stop selling it. You just keep halving its size until no one is sure whether they have bought one or not.

    With some good access to the RDF, everyone will continue to hear music, whether or not there was actually a device in the box.

    I still own a first generation Shuffle. I think it weighs 50 grams. Really, that's just to much to bear, carrying it in my briefcase. I know that if my briefcase only had a 10.7 gram Shuffle in it, it would be MUCH easier on my walk to work.

  11. The Voice function is innovative by beetle496 · · Score: 3, Informative

    The speech output option of Rockbox lets you navigate menus and track names and such, but is does not let you hear the title of the track while the song is playing. That aspect is pretty slick!

    --
    I paid the going retail price for a Windows screen reader and got a free Unix computer!
    1. Re:The Voice function is innovative by Aranwe+Haldaloke · · Score: 5, Funny

      Most music already has this feature. You just gotta wait for it, and you'll even listen to it in the singer's own voice.

    2. Re:The Voice function is innovative by beetle496 · · Score: 3, Funny

      LOL! I really had to think about it for a minute to figure out how you could make such an outrageous claim.

      --
      I paid the going retail price for a Windows screen reader and got a free Unix computer!
  12. morse code controls by nloop · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I appreciate Apple trying to get rid of too many control interfaces. For the most part I am behind them all the way.

    However, the one button to control this thing is rediculous. On a shuffle I often end up jumping forward or backwords through a fair amount of songs to find something I am in the mood for. On this one you double click to go forward, triple click(?!) to go back. Fastworward/rewind? double click and hold, triple click and hold (but only if you are more than 6 seconds into the track, or the triple click restarts the track). Say the name of the song? Click once and hold for 1 second. NOT FOR LONGER, if you hold longer, then you go to playlist selection!

    This is not a step forward. Apple's approach to a simple design before made them accessible to nondorks. Grandmother friendly. My grandmother would need a cheat sheet to operate this. It honest reminds me of The Onion's coverage of The Wheel.

  13. Get a Sansa Clip instead by spike2131 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The 4GB Sansa Clip is a similar size, $18 cheaper, similar battery life, has a small screen, and doesn't lock you into the iTunes ecosystem.

    --
    SpyDock: Scientific Python in a Docker container
    1. Re:Get a Sansa Clip instead by ukyoCE · · Score: 3, Informative

      The Sansa Clip is 1.35" x 2.7" x .65". 2.36 cubic inches.
      The new Shuffle is 0.3" x 1.8" x 0.7". 0.38 cubic inches.

      The Clip is bigger than the LAST generation of the shuffle. It's 8 times bigger than this generation of the shuffle. Not really what I would call "similar size".

    2. Re:Get a Sansa Clip instead by evanbd · · Score: 3, Informative

      While I like the look of the Sansa Clip (never used one), calling it similar size is simply incorrect. It's approximately 7 times bigger. I can see plenty of ways its better, but the size is not even close to "similar".

    3. Re:Get a Sansa Clip instead by spike2131 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Similar size, meaning in this case, "small enough you don't notice the dam thing".

      --
      SpyDock: Scientific Python in a Docker container
  14. NOT Digitial Rights managment by goombah99 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The headphones do not contain Digitial Rights Management. device will play just fine with ordinary headphones. in no way does it block access to your music.

    the headphones can contain a controller to tell it to advance to a given song or change volume. Were you somehow expecting unmodified headpones to do that? how exactly?

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  15. Re:Shiny and tiny! by gnasher719 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Thus we arrive at what is without a doubt the single worst product that apple has ever released.

    No, the puck mouse still has the nr. 1 place. The new iPod shuffle is at least usable, but it definately comes close though.

    Nowhere near close. The puck mouse did exactly what it was supposed to do. This Apple product _may_ be their worst ever, but maybe someone knows something worse:

    http://support.apple.com/kb/TA45469?viewlocale=en_US This was a tape backup device with 38.5 MB storage capacity. The Macintosh II at the time shipped with a 40 MB hard drive, so the tape was too small. You couldn't backup your hard drive on a single tape. Except if you stored your backup as individual files, in which case the backup time was so bad, it wouldn't be finished in the morning if you started in the evening - it used a tape drive to simulate a direct access device, with seek times in minutes. I bet 99.9% of its users tried it once and gave up.

  16. Re:Screen costs money and take up case space. by gbarules2999 · · Score: 4, Informative

    For $80, I can get the iPod shuffle with no screen, or a comparably sized Sansa Clip with a small screen, FM Tuner, voice recorder, OGG/FLAC support, and compatibility with every OS. The Sansa Clip also happens to be on sale at the Sansa store; it's only $60. So, where's that "screen costs too much," charge Sansa should be forcing on me, then?

  17. Re:Screen costs money and take up case space. by ukyoCE · · Score: 3, Informative

    Are you joking? You're comparing a 2.3 cubic inch device with a clunky 1-word "screen" to a 0.3 cubic inch device with a no-eyes-required audio interface.

    The Sansa Clip is almost 8 times bigger than the Shuffle. And that screen? That's a "feature"? The Sansa has 7 buttons plus some kind of radial ipod-ripoff pad. You want to be squinting at that screen pressing those buttons while jogging down the sidewalk?

    It's certainly a valid question to ask whether the Shuffle's size and interface are worth $20 to you, over having a clunky device with a bad interface. But you're pretending the Sansa Clip is "more features for less dollars". It certainly is not, unless you start with the assumption that size and interface are worthless.

    I don't personally have a need for a tiny jogging-targeted music player, but that's no reason to get on a high horse and act all indignant because Apple is making one. You may as well be saying HURRR TRUCKS ARE DUMB CAUSE SEDANS GET BETTER GAS MILEAGE AND ARE CHEAPER. Yeah, if you don't care about the extra features of a truck, don't get one. Duh.

  18. Re:Screen costs money and take up case space. by RzUpAnmsCwrds · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Are you joking? You're comparing a 2.3 cubic inch device with a clunky 1-word "screen" to a 0.3 cubic inch device with a no-eyes-required audio interface.

    Yes, he is. At some point there are diminishing returns regarding size.

    over having a clunky device with a bad interface

    You concluded that from, what, the fact that it's not an iPod? The Sansa clip actually has a pretty decent UI, as does the rest of the Sansa line. And you can load it without needing special software - it's a freaking mass storage device.

    It certainly is not, unless you start with the assumption that size and interface are worthless.

    Yes, it certainly is. It has more features (screen, FM radio, voice recording) for less dollars. It's not an evaluation of the quality of the Sansa or the iPod, it's just a fact.

    I don't personally have a need for a tiny jogging-targeted music player

    Apparently neither do any of the people buying the new Shuffle, because (according to Gizmodo) the tiny little headphone-cord cables are extremely tricky to use when jogging because they are too close to your head and too small (which makes them difficult to manipulate when you're bouncing around.

    Look, I like the previous-gen Shuffle's design (I own one). But there's a point when things get absurd. Requiring proprietary headphones means I can't use it in my car and I can't use it with my Shure e2g canalphones. There will probably be a $30 adapter at some point, but then we're talking about a $110 music player, which is getting into iPod Nano territory.