A Decade of Apple Oddities

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Posted by timothy on Sunday October 23, 2011 @08:53AM from the everything-doer dept.

harrymcc writes "It's been exactly ten years since Steve Jobs stood on a stage at Apple and explained to a surprisingly small group of journalists that his company was going to make a music player and call it iPod. Technologizer's Benj Edwards celebrated the iPod's first decade by rounding up a dozen iPod-related oddities, including the iPod-powered tooth cleaner, an iPod mount for a semi-automatic sniper system, and the classic 1958 Dieter Rams Braun FM radio that may have helped inspire it all."

204 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Yo Dawg by ksd1337 · 2011-10-23 08:56 · Score: 1

Now You Can iPod While You iPod!
1. Re:Yo Dawg by hairyfeet · 2011-10-23 19:41 · Score: 1
  
  For those on a chromium based browser (I'm using dragon but any chromium based will work) I'd suggest a little extension called readability redux which turns this irritating as hell "Hey lets spread it over more than a dozen pages to get more adviews!" crapola into a single page, it even lets you set the size so everything is nice and easy to read like a newspaper.
  as for TFA whomever came up with a camera dock so you can work your iPod from across the room? A little too much time on their hands methinks.
  
  --
  ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
2. Re:Yo Dawg by RDW · 2011-10-24 02:07 · Score: 1
  
  as for TFA whomever came up with a camera dock so you can work your iPod from across the room? A little too much time on their hands methinks.
  I think the prize for 'gratuitous use of an iPod when there's more appropriate technology' must go the Ion Torrent DNA sequencer, a $50,000 piece of lab equipment that incorporates a dock for an iPod Touch (which supposedly runs a status monitoring app, though the machine itself has a perfectly good screen for this):
  http://www.slashgear.com/ion-torrent-personal-genome-machine-has-an-ipod-dock-23120950/
  But from a 2011 perspective, maybe the most curious artefact in iPod history is the HP-branded version, which it's very hard to imagine Apple allowing now:
  http://www.onedigitallife.com/2004/08/31/hp-introduces-re-branded-ipod/
  http://support.apple.com/kb/ht2345
Why so much Apple crap here lately? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 08:59 · Score: 5, Insightful

Why has there been so much Apple crap here on Slashdot lately? I'm not saying that there shouldn't be a story when Apple does something of a technical nature that's notable, but most of these stories are totally irrelevant and very boring.
There's nothing special about iPods. They're a digital music player, just like every other digital music player out there. People have modded them for many years now, and many of these same "hacks" were done using portable CD and tape players well before then. None of this is remotely interesting, even to those of us who enjoy such hacks.
Can we please have some interesting content here for once? Something not having to do with Apple or American politics, perhaps? Maybe something involving science or math in some way, or maybe even engineering?
1. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by masternerdguy · 2011-10-23 09:03 · Score: 0, Insightful
  
  Because Apple has brainwashed everyone into believing that their particular flavor of UNIX running on some less-than-inspired devices is special.
  
  --
  To offset political mods, replace Flamebait with Insightful.
2. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by newcastlejon · 2011-10-23 09:15 · Score: 1
  
  You say Apple is "brainwashing" everyone about OS X? Tell me, when did you last see it advertised on TV? How about in print? On the web?
  Apple started out in the hardware business then, after a brief and fruitless foray into software, they started selling music and video. Only recently have they made a serious and successful attempt at selling software, and they mainly sell other people's wares.
  
  --
  If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
3. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 09:19 · Score: 0
  
  I agree that you have asked a relevant question. I would extend it to ask why Steve Jobs has had so much media coverage lately. While no one deserves to be cursed with cancer, I still think the guy was an ass. Why anyone would buy an Apple product is beyond me. If I had more free cash sitting around (which I don't, most of it is sitting overseas at the moment) I'd be making large bets against Apple, not related at all to S. Jobs.
4. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 09:33 · Score: 0, Insightful
  
  "There's nothing special about iPods. They're a digital music player, just like every other digital music player out there..." ...except it's the single best selling line of personal music players of all time, having sold more units that all competitors combined.
5. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by deains · 2011-10-23 09:37 · Score: 0, Flamebait
  
  Yes, clearly we have all been brainwashed into buying into a stable, modern, graphical operating system that runs commercial (i.e. useful) software, has Terminal capabilities and more efficiency than any other OS. Silly us.
6. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by PNutts · 2011-10-23 09:50 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  "There's nothing special about iPods. They're a digital music player, just like every other digital music player out there..." ...except it's the single best selling line of personal music players of all time, having sold more units that all competitors combined.
  And it's so sad the haters can't put things into perspective. We're talking 2001, not 2011. At that time it wasn't just like every other digital music player, just like the original iPhone wasn't like the other mobile phones out there. So sad for a tech site.
7. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by hedwards · 2011-10-23 09:57 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  You're right, in 2001, the iPod was extremely expensive, ugly and wouldn't work with anything other than a Mac. And as for the iPhone, it wasn't going up against Windows phones, it was going up against RIM's Blackberry, who knows what would have happened had RIM not been criminally incompetent.
8. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by moderatorrater · 2011-10-23 10:00 · Score: 1
  
  There's nothing special about iPods. They're a digital music player, just like every other digital music player out there. People have modded them for many years now, and many of these same "hacks" were done using portable CD and tape players well before then. None of this is remotely interesting, even to those of us who enjoy such hacks.
  Unless you take off your anti-apple blinders for a minute and realize that the ipod changed the digital landscape. To say that they're a digital music player is backwards: the rest of the world would say digital music players are bad ipods.
  
  Like them or hate them, apple and the ipod revolutionized the tech world.
9. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 10:16 · Score: 1
  
  Why are you paying for Linux? There are many distributions that are fully available for free. Ubuntu is one of the most popular ones, but other people like Debian (Ubuntu is based on it), Slackware, Fedora, openSUSE and Gentoo.
10. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 10:18 · Score: 0
  
  Why don't *you* submit something more interesting? Or can't you live outside of the Slashdot?
11. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by IANAAC · 2011-10-23 10:21 · Score: 0
  
  Like them or hate them, apple and the ipod revolutionized the tech world.
  I would go further and say that it wasn't the iPod player itself, rather it was the infrastructure built up around it that was revolutionary. At the time there were plenty of capable mp3 players out there, but none had the setup to buy music so easily.
12. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 10:28 · Score: 0
  
  Why has there been so much Apple crap here on Slashdot lately?
  To offset all the Google/Android crap...
13. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 10:41 · Score: 0
  
  "Quick response is one of the more powerful features of Ice Cream Sandwich. This enables you to take a conversation from one medium, and instantly transfer it to another. For instance, let’s say you are driving and someone calls you. You can setup pre-determined responses like, “I’m currently driving, call you back soon.” As your phone rings, you will be given the option to swipe the call towards the automated response, "
14. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by msobkow · 2011-10-23 10:50 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  I agree whole heartedly. Slashdot needs to stop shilling Apple.
  
  --
  I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
15. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by msobkow · 2011-10-23 10:53 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  All the articles are free advertising for Apple. The company doesn't care whether the readers and posters are for or against their products. Just so long as you talk about them and spread the name.
  Nor is it limited to SlashDot -- the article titles and summaries are broadcast to social media sites as well, pushing the Apple name into the public eye without comment.
  It's disgraceful.
  
  --
  I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
16. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by flimflammer · 2011-10-23 10:56 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  and more efficiency than any other OS.
  [citation needed]
17. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 11:05 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  You say Apple is "brainwashing" everyone about OS X? Tell me, when did you last see it advertised on TV? How about in print? On the web?
  I think John Hodgman and Justin Long might like to have a few words with you regarding the last time they advertised Macs and OS X.
  And before you embarrass yourself, yes, that was both on TV and on animated banners on the web (I can't confirm seeing print ads). And yes, they DID mention it by "OS X" more than a few times during that campaign.
18. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by MrHanky · 2011-10-23 11:17 · Score: 1
  
  In 2001, most mp3 players were crap. I've got a Creative Zen as an example: the UI is really hideous. I mean, which other music player has been controlled by letting the manufacturer take a shit on the consumer's face? And where's the logic in this? Still, to skip to the next track, you need to let Creative shit. That's just how it works. Not quite logical, not quite intuitive, but it worked. Yes, it was unpleasant!
  Now, I wouldn't claim that Apple was the first corporation with the idea that Hey, instead of shitting all over our customers, we should just let them select the goddamn track they want to listen to. Sony, of course, had the Walkman line of products. High quality. Easy to use. Classy. Would not play mp3 files. Would in fact not play any format you would realistically want to listen to. So Apple took Sony's market due to Sony's attempt at satisfying their own music industry branch instead of their customers.
  And you know what? Fuck Sony. There's a lot to be said about Apple, but at the time they simply did what needed to be done, from a consumer perspective, and they did it properly. Their success was simply a matter of supply and demand.
19. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 11:21 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, clearly we have all been brainwashed into buying into a stable, modern, graphical operating system that runs commercial (i.e. useful) software, has Terminal capabilities and more efficiency than any other OS. Silly us.
  Well, hell. Thanks for telling me. I guess I should replace my solaris blade server with a mac one now. To think I was missing out on terminal capabilities and more efficiency. Thank you so much for your help.
20. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 11:22 · Score: 0
  
  To say that they're a digital music player is backwards: the rest of the world would say digital music players are bad ipods.
  
  The power of marketing. I wouldn't say they "revolutionised" the "tech world", they improved on existing ideas, sugar-coated them and marketed them well. They may have revolutionised the design world but in terms of technology the iPod/iMac just seemed like evolution to me.
21. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by quacking+duck · 2011-10-23 11:24 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Not so. The iTunes Music Store didn't exist until a year and a half after the first iPod became available. It was also initially compatible only with Macs, which made up only about 5% of the market at the time, further limiting market penetration.
  IMHO the revolutionary part was the iPod combining a number of critical elements:
  - the smallest HDD (physically; by itself the 5GB drive was the price of an iPod)
  - Firewire for fast transfers and charging (cheaper players were agonizingly slow USB1, and required separate charging cable or bulky batteries)
  - the iTunes playlist sync, rather than manual file management (which some people still prefer to this day). So you didn't have to manage files in two locations (computer, and what you wanted on your player)
  - the scrollwheel interface that let you navigate through hundreds of titles efficiently, compared to arrow keys or typing songs to find them.
  Looking at the original /. discussion on it, it's especially hilarious to see a comment about how he didn't like HDD or even Flash-based mp3 players, because CD-mp3 players were cheaper and readily available. That line of thinking is what allowed Apple to steamroll over every other player at the time.
22. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by bonch · 2011-10-23 11:32 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Yes, you are super-awesome and way too independent-minded to like what the sheeple buy from Crapple, right? Please, continue standing cross-armed in the corner, grumbling at everyone else, independent-minded Slashdot poster.
23. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by UnknowingFool · 2011-10-23 11:35 · Score: 1
  
  Yes it was like every other player in 2001 except it didn't make you decide between a small form factor and capacity. Or that it came with free software that took care of your ripping, encoding, and syncing in one package instead if you having to research and get your own solutions. Or that it allowed you to transfer files at a blazing 400 Mbps instead of 12 Mbps. Other than those things which slashdotters seem to have selective memory about these days, it was no different.
  
  --
  Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
24. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 12:05 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, clearly we have all been brainwashed into buying into a stable, modern, graphical operating system that runs commercial (i.e. useful) software, has Terminal capabilities and more efficiency than any other OS. Silly us.
  Clearly it's getting more unstable, going from It doesn't crash to having KB articles like this. You might still be in denial but it's obvious Apple are acknowledging that stability is slipping.
  
  Not saying there's anything wrong with OSX (the integration with multitouch touchpads is brilliant) but harping on about it's deteriorating stability just draws attention to an aspect of the OS that has gotten worse (also see all the complaints Lion has gotten on the forums).
25. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 12:28 · Score: 0
  
  Or that it allowed you to transfer files at a blazing 400 Mbps instead of 12 Mbps. Other than those things which slashdotters seem to have selective memory about these days, it was no different.
  I suppose your selective memory means you can't think of any usb2.0 mp3 players back then?
  
  You know what else it lacked that you still have to buy an addon for? An FM receiver, yes that's right, this music player still lacks a built-in FM receiver.
26. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by Megane · 2011-10-23 12:59 · Score: 1
  
  You know what else it lacked that you still have to buy an addon for? An FM receiver, yes that's right, this music player still lacks a built-in FM receiver.
  That's like saying the XBox 360 is crap because it doesn't play BluRay discs. I don't need an MP3 player to play FM radio. If I wanted to listen to the kind of corporate crap they put on radio, why would I need an MP3 player?
  
  --
  #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
27. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by antdude · 2011-10-23 13:03 · Score: 2
  
  So uncheck Apple filter. :P
  
  --
  Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
28. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 13:26 · Score: 0
  
  That's like saying the XBox 360 is crap because it doesn't play BluRay discs.
  No it isn't like that at all, read what was actually written rather than your own misinterpretation. I never said the ipod was crap because it lacks an FM transmitter, it's just a very obvious omission, present in many competitor devices, in an otherwise very good product.
  
  I don't need an MP3 player to play FM radio.
  You probably don't need your mp3 player to play games, display photos or play videos either, yet the ipod does that.
  
  If I wanted to listen to the kind of corporate crap they put on radio, why would I need an MP3 player?
  corporate crap? You don't have any knowledge of radio outside of top40 stations do you.
29. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by UnknowingFool · 2011-10-23 14:04 · Score: 1
  
  My memory says USB 2.0 was finalized as a specification in early 2001 but not agreed to be adopted by USB implementors until late 2001 which was after the iPod came out. This means when the iPod came out no one had USB 2.0 yet. Again selective memory on your part. Of course if you bothered to look this up, you would know that.
  Apple made the decision not to include an FM player but as an addon. Of course if they did, people like you would spin that as Apple being greedy and locking out 3rd party accessory makers.
  
  --
  Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
30. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by whisper_jeff · 2011-10-23 15:01 · Score: 1
  
  Why has there been so much Apple crap here on Slashdot lately?
  Are you joking? Seriously? A news site for nerds with a typical focus on the tech industry and you're surprised Apple gets a lot of play? Really?
  
  Are you upset Android/Google gets a lot of play as well? Or is this just a one-sided, idiotic complaint about Apple?
  
  Seriously, complaining about the quantity of Apple stories on Slashdot is just daft.
31. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by catmistake · 2011-10-23 16:22 · Score: 1
  
  Someone please mod parent up. I'll never understand why all those not interested in Apple flock to the Apple summaries to post the same BS over and over. What the Hell is wrong with them? Are they compulsive? Or did an iPod kill their dog or something? You know what I do when I'm not interested in something? Well, whatever it is, it certainly is not taking the time to complain about it.
  
  --
  The Admin and the Engineer
32. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by happymellon · 2011-10-23 17:02 · Score: 1
  
  Where can I get Office for Solaris?
33. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by syousef · 2011-10-23 17:07 · Score: 3
  
  Why has there been so much Apple crap here on Slashdot lately? I
  Steve Jobs just died. In order to become a saint he must go through a process of beautification. Basically Apple zealots have to stand around and discuss how he invented EVERYTHING from air to slice bread and how it is only through the miracle of his genius that we all basically are allowed to live. Anything positive he had anything to do with must be exaggerated. Anything negative must be minimized or excused.
  Meanwhile a true gentleman and pioneer of modern computing like Ritchie dies and no one outside of nerddom even know who he is. Welcome to a world dominated by idiots and fame based on monkey sociology. Yes even nerds can be idiots.
  
  --
  These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
34. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by Chris+Tucker · 2011-10-23 17:44 · Score: 2
  
  Haters gonna hate.
  They hate that Apple doesn't suck up to their particular hardware/software/user interface fetish.
  They hate Apple because Apple doesn't care a fat rat's ass what they think or say about Apple.
  They hate Apple because when they got to the opening day of their local Apple Store, the Store had run out of free T-shirts, which meant that they HAD to do laundry and not put it off another few days.
  
  --
  Guaranteed! This comment 100% Anthrax free!
35. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 19:58 · Score: 0
  
  Umm... He really did invent the Air, you know...
36. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by Slur · 2011-10-23 20:04 · Score: 1
  
  It's a very good OS, and so is iOS. So is Linux. Windows is finally pretty good too. I like OSs and I admire the engineers who make them better all the time. Good stuff, impressive.
  
  --
  -- thinkyhead software and media
37. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by Slur · 2011-10-23 20:06 · Score: 1
  
  Cocoa is pretty special, TTYTT. Good set of APIs.
  
  --
  -- thinkyhead software and media
38. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by Xest · 2011-10-23 20:23 · Score: 1
  
  It's worth noting that original iPhone didn't do very well either, despite the hype.
  They only shifted 6 million units before the 3G came out, even Nokia's N95 sold double that in the same period.
  That 6 million figure is from Apple's own financial reports too btw.
39. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by Kashgarinn · 2011-10-23 21:53 · Score: 1
  
  Why did you post your crap reply to this thread? I'm not saying that you don't have the right to an opinion on anything posted on slashdot, but your replies are totally irrelevant and boring.
  There's nothing special about your reply. It's a dumb comment, just like every other comment out there on slashdot. People have modded you up, and many of these "hacks" like you have nothing remotely interesting to say, even to us on slashdot who enjoy such "hacks" from time to time.
  Can we please have some interesting replies here for once? Something not having to do with idiotic stances on what should or should not be posted on slashdot perhaps? Maybe something concerning the article itself in some way?
40. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by bloodhawk · 2011-10-23 22:54 · Score: 1
  
  They revolutionized nothing. This isn't a apple hate speach but the ipod sent the digital music player market backwards and stagnated the market. It had less features, less storage and worse sound quality while being more expensive than the at the time market leaders in the digital music player industry. However they appealed to the trendy mass market crowd and basically sent all the competitors products to the wall, this wasn't all apples fault of course, much can be put at the feet of the craptastic job the then market leaders did a the time of promoting their products and the huge market fragmentation that existed.
41. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by Dixie_Flatline · 2011-10-23 22:56 · Score: 0
  
  You replied to yourself about Apple shilling, and got modded up to 4/5-insightful? I call BS; you have some extra accounts with modding points out there?
42. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by bjourne · 2011-10-23 23:23 · Score: 1
  
  Because the feature that made it possible to filter out Apple stories disappeared in the last Slashdot overhaul and now I can't get it back again. :(
  
  --
  Football Odds
43. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by RogerWilco · 2011-10-24 01:05 · Score: 1
  
  I think one of the things that make Steve Jobs special, is his rock star status. The only other nerd/geek type person who achieved that I can think of is Einstein.
  Even Bill Gates never really got out of the Nerd-corner.
  There are many great pioneers of modern science and technology, but very few of the general public could name them.
  I think a lot of the hatred is because a lot of people here are very socially awkward themselves, but secretly are jealous about someone with a tech backgroud escaping the nerd-corner.
  
  --
  RogerWilco the Adventurous Janitor
44. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-24 01:53 · Score: 0
  
  *beatification
45. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by tehcyder · 2011-10-24 02:47 · Score: 2
  
  "There's nothing special about iPods. They're a digital music player, just like every other digital music player out there..." ...except it's the single best selling line of personal music players of all time, having sold more units that all competitors combined.
  So? McDonalds probably sell more burgers each day worldwide than anyone else. That doesn't mean they sell the world's best burgers.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
46. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-24 03:34 · Score: 0
  
  no shit, I could've wiki'd this crap.
47. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by cavebison · 2011-10-24 04:12 · Score: 1
  
  Welcome to a world dominated by idiots and fame based on monkey sociology.
  Reminds me of the Edison / Tesla thing. Though to my knowledge Ritchie didn't fall in love with a pigeon.
  If you want to see how desperate some commentators are to excuse Jobs for not being more philanthropic, read this. Now that's an apologist in need of an apologist.
48. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by Bucky24 · 2011-10-24 07:23 · Score: 1
  
  Doesn't mean you have to click on them.....
  
  --
  All the world's a CPU, and all the men and women merely AI agents
49. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-24 07:50 · Score: 0
  
  I keep hearing how nobody knew Dennis Ritchie died, yet I saw posts about it on all of the tech blogs, articles on CNN, NYTimes, news.google.com, etc etc etc.
50. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by CheerfulMacFanboy · 2011-10-24 07:52 · Score: 1
  
  Why has there been so much Apple crap here on Slashdot lately?
  Because Apple Haters push it in the Firehose just so they have something to whine about.
  
  --
  Fandroids hate facts.
51. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by CheerfulMacFanboy · 2011-10-24 07:56 · Score: 1
  
  "Quick response is one of the more powerful features of Ice Cream Sandwich. This enables you to take a conversation from one medium, and instantly transfer it to another. For instance, let’s say you are driving and someone calls you. You can setup pre-determined responses like, “I’m currently driving, call you back soon.” As your phone rings, you will be given the option to swipe the call towards the automated response, "
  Wow - if that's true, they found a way to make not phoning while driving the most dangerous option.
  
  --
  Fandroids hate facts.
52. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-24 10:09 · Score: 0
  
  Why has there been so much Apple crap here on Slashdot lately?
  No reason. It's not on anybody's mind for any particular reason. Oh, except Steve Jobs' death. Other than that, yeah, no reason.
  
  There's nothing special about iPods.
  Exactly iOS sucks. That's why it barely has any market share in music players.
  
  They're a digital music player, just like every other digital music player out there.
  Piece of crap iPods. Call me when they do something unique, like play video, have WiFi, run games, synch my contacts and calendars, have an email client, a good web browser, get some bluetooth stereo support do high def video. Until then, I'll stick with my 2gb MMC RCA MP3 player.
53. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-24 10:22 · Score: 0
  
  They revolutionized nothing. This isn't a apple hate speach but the ipod sent the digital music player market backwards and stagnated the market. It had less features, less storage and worse sound quality while being more expensive than the at the time market leaders in the digital music player industry. However they appealed to the trendy mass market crowd and basically sent all the competitors products to the wall, this wasn't all apples fault of course, much can be put at the feet of the craptastic job the then market leaders did a the time of promoting their products and the huge market fragmentation that existed.
  True! Without Apple, by now, players would fit in your pocket, have 3.5" color screens with > 300 DPI, play videos, have WiFi, have bluetooth, do high def. video, do video chat, play full motion games, have a great browser, do email well, and be extensible through a marketplace of third party apps and third party hardware, where you could cheaply expand upon its use.
  
  Stupid iPod.
54. Re:Why so much Apple crap here lately? by CheerfulMacFanboy · 2011-10-26 01:49 · Score: 1
  
  http://atomictrevor.wordpress.com/2011/10/15/the-cycle-wherein-apple-creates-a-product-and-people-copy-it-and-then-improve-upon-the-design-and-then-people-ask-apple-to-do-the-same-improvements-and-apple-doesnt-and-then-people-get-mad-a/
  
  --
  Fandroids hate facts.
Fuck apple. by migla · 2011-10-23 09:03 · Score: 5, Insightful

I understand that being in the eyeball-grabbing game, a site must post an avalanche of apple related stories especially around new or upcoming marketing drives, so I'll just state that I wish it wasn't so, that the site wasn't in the eyeball-grabbing game, but in the game of building a quality community. And I'll just leave a friendly reminder:
Take heed! Apple is evil. They are out to lock you in and to destroy your freedom.

--
Some of my favourite people are from th US; Vonnegut, Chomsky, Bill Hicks.
1. Re:Fuck apple. by somersault · 2011-10-23 09:06 · Score: 0, Flamebait
  
  You could help build a "quality community" by not karma whoring and/or trolling.
  
  --
  which is totally what she said
2. Re:Fuck apple. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 09:07 · Score: 0
  
  Fine. I'll buy all my gadgets from you instead. May I see your brochure?
3. Re:Fuck apple. by dunkelfalke · 2011-10-23 09:15 · Score: 1
  
  Where exactly have you seen Google mentioned in GP's post?
  You know what? Fuck that either/or mentality.
  
  --
  "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
4. Re:Fuck apple. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 09:19 · Score: 0
  
  Fuck you.
  I'm google's customer, or at worst google's leech. I don't pay for the services in either money OR personal information.
5. Re:Fuck apple. by migla · 2011-10-23 09:20 · Score: 0
  
  You may have a point. Do you think I should have been more subtle or do you think my statement is wrong?
  As for being a whore/troll I was definitely thinking it would go down as a troll, but I thought that sometimes the truth may sound trollish if you don't make an effort to sugarcoat it and I also thought that sometimes chock treatment is the right way to go. Maybe others can put it more eloquently and civilly...
  
  --
  Some of my favourite people are from th US; Vonnegut, Chomsky, Bill Hicks.
6. Re:Fuck apple. by nightfell · 2011-10-23 09:21 · Score: 2
  
  Take heed! Apple is evil. They are out to lock you in and to destroy your freedom.
  Um, no. They want to sell you things. I'm not sure why the nerd rage. People buy Apple products willingly. And Slashdot isn't posting Apple stories simply because they have to play the game and go for page views. Apple stores are actually news for nerds.
7. Re:Fuck apple. by migla · 2011-10-23 09:23 · Score: 1
  
  >Fine. I'll buy all my gadgets from you instead. May I see your brochure?
  My gadgets are widely available on ebay in all shapes and sizes. I don't know where I put all of my brochures. Here's one of them: https://sourceforge.net/
  
  --
  Some of my favourite people are from th US; Vonnegut, Chomsky, Bill Hicks.
8. Re:Fuck apple. by migla · 2011-10-23 09:26 · Score: 1
  
  Yea fuck Apple! We should all use Google products, cause you know they're honest and kind. Hooray for angry nerd stereotypes.
  You are Apple's customer, you are Google's product.
  Nah. Fuck google too. We need a free as in freedom search as well.
  
  --
  Some of my favourite people are from th US; Vonnegut, Chomsky, Bill Hicks.
9. Re:Fuck apple. by migla · 2011-10-23 09:32 · Score: 2
  
  Actually I agree that they are not evil. I don't believe in evil. I believe acts can be good or bad. Vendor lock-in and destruction of freedom are bad things. Apple is just a legal entity for maximizing profit. It's the whole god damn system that is out of order.
  People shouldn't give money to entities (albeit non-living and amoral) that do bad things like destroying freedom.
  
  --
  Some of my favourite people are from th US; Vonnegut, Chomsky, Bill Hicks.
10. Re:Fuck apple. by migla · 2011-10-23 09:38 · Score: 0
  
  Oh, and "nerd rage"? I'll have you know that I said fuck in a really cool and somber demeanor. Thanks for the nerd moniker.
  
  --
  Some of my favourite people are from th US; Vonnegut, Chomsky, Bill Hicks.
11. Re:Fuck apple. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 09:39 · Score: 0
  
  By your own admission you say you've given Google no money. How does that make you their customer?
  Advertisers are Google's customer. Your eyeballs are what's being sold.
12. Re:Fuck apple. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 09:56 · Score: 0
  
  You can sell your iPhone and get an HTC and Apple can't stop you.
  You have some woolly ideas about what "freedom" is and how it's "destroyed".
13. Re:Fuck apple. by hedwards · 2011-10-23 09:59 · Score: 1
  
  We have freedom in search, I switched to duckduckgo a while back and I rarely if ever feel the need to use Google's search engine.
14. Re:Fuck apple. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 10:01 · Score: 0
  
  Fucking Slashtard. "Duuuhhhh U R GOOGLE's produkt!"
  I haven't seen an advert in 10 years. I block all tracking stuff, including rewriting URLs on SERPs.
  I don't use any of the so called "personalized" services at all. If search and serving up youtube vids is not google's product, and I am not google's customer, then that still doesn't make me the product either.
  I control what I see, so my eyeballs are not for sale. At worst that makes me a freeloader.
  Retards like YOU are the product. Thanks for paying for my cool toys bitch.
15. Re:Fuck apple. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 10:11 · Score: 0
  
  ...says the guy who has a +3 insightful by telling someone else not to karma whore *rolls eyes*
16. Re:Fuck apple. by migla · 2011-10-23 10:18 · Score: 2
  
  Look. Marketing works. Otherwise it wouldn't be done. Money is power. Companies like apple can use their power of marketing and power of money to shape the world as they see fit. They are shaping the world into one of for example vendor lock-in and closed source software.
  My idea of freedom is in part constructed by a notion of there being access to source code. When a hugely more influential entity than myself is shaping the world into one where people are influenced by marketing to give money to and buy products from a company that pushes proprietary software, it hampers the social movement of software/information/cultural freedom. That's, off the top of my head, an explanation of how they are destroying freedom.
  The biggest problem is of course the system that encourages greed, closedness and lock-in, and the masses of consumers consume what they are told to consume by marketing, but at least one can state on an online forum every once in a while that open is good - closed bad.
  
  --
  Some of my favourite people are from th US; Vonnegut, Chomsky, Bill Hicks.
17. Re:Fuck apple. by migla · 2011-10-23 10:28 · Score: 1
  
  That's a good start. For immediate privacy concerns, at least. What would be needed going forward is a search where users are in control of the algorithms and the infrastructure. A non-profit community project. It would be huge of course, but pretty big community projects like openstreetmap and wikipedia suggest it shouldn't be impossible in the future when the magic of bringing masses of people together that the internet does has been working a bit longer...
  
  --
  Some of my favourite people are from th US; Vonnegut, Chomsky, Bill Hicks.
18. Re:Fuck apple. by somersault · 2011-10-23 10:41 · Score: 1
  
  I don't need the karma
  
  --
  which is totally what she said
19. Re:Fuck apple. by MrHanky · 2011-10-23 11:24 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Sure they want to "sell" you things. That's why, when you already bought one of their products, they make sure you need to buy a new one now and then, through forced obsolescence. You think Siri is nifty? It's only a software update, and would work perfectly on your iPhone4 if Apple didn't want your money so bad. When you buy from Apple, you buy an expensive subscription to new hardware.
20. Re:Fuck apple. by bonch · 2011-10-23 11:35 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  avalanche of apple related stories
  What avalanche? A whopping two out of the last 20 stories have been about Apple--and one of them was really about an Android app mimicking an iPhone feature. The company that Slashdot posts most about is Google.
  Since Android came out, Slashdot has become a ridiculously over-the-top haven for emotional Apple-haters. This place has really jumped the shark.
21. Re:Fuck apple. by bonch · 2011-10-23 11:36 · Score: 2
  
  Anyone who thinks buying an MP3 player is going to "destroy your freedom" really needs to go outside for a while and gain some perspective.
22. Re:Fuck apple. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 12:11 · Score: 0
  
  I want freedom from viruses. Can I get that on Android? No. But I get it on my iPhone!
23. Re:Fuck apple. by Chris+Tucker · 2011-10-23 17:53 · Score: 1
  
  Are Apple ninjas forcing you to buy Apple hardware?
  If yes, you're a loony.
  If no, WTF are you complaining about?
  If you don't want an iPod, buy a Zune.
  Oh, wait...
  Right.
  
  --
  Guaranteed! This comment 100% Anthrax free!
24. Re:Fuck apple. by Chris+Tucker · 2011-10-23 18:01 · Score: 1
  
  This right here!
  
  --
  Guaranteed! This comment 100% Anthrax free!
25. Re:Fuck apple. by antifoidulus · 2011-10-24 00:58 · Score: 1
  
  So's Stallman, whats your point? Anyone who tries to tell you that the only way you can be "free" is by doing or not doing X is trying to restrict your freedom. So fuck off tyrant.
  
  --
  Monstar L
26. Re:Fuck apple. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-24 02:01 · Score: 0
  
  I don't see how offering a new software feature on a new piece of hardware is forced obsolescence. Everything that the iPhone 4 could do at release it can do now, plus Apple released iOS 5 to iPhone 4 and iPhone 3GS, which added a bunch of new features (and the 3GS got an upgrade to iOS 4 also). So, these phones can actually do a significant amount more than when they were released. How is this an example of anything even remotely approaching forced obsolescence?
27. Re:Fuck apple. by Tharsman · 2011-10-24 05:34 · Score: 2
  
  Look. Marketing works. Otherwise it wouldn't be done. Money is power. Companies like apple can use their power of marketing and power of money to shape the world as they see fit. They are shaping the world into one of for example vendor lock-in and closed source software.
  My idea of freedom is in part constructed by a notion of there being access to source code.
  You realize that although Android is Open Source, all the services that manufacturers must include if they want to use the name Android (and have a hope of a carrier to sell them) are not open, right?
  I also have high doubt anyone that owns an Android Phone, regardless how big of an open source advocate they are, have only open source apps installed (mainly due to the notes on things like Google Maps alone not being open source.)
  It's not like you can download the entire Google Maps source code tomorow and setup your own map service, nor your own personal Open Google Docs.
  Yes, core Android is open, but the android that ships in phones is not. You cant legally rip it off and redistribute, not with it's boundled Google branded services.
  If all it takes is for one open source product to be redemed as an Open Source champion, then why is WebKit and Darwin not enough? Why isn't it's effort to standarize the web, removing over dependency towards propietary plugins like Flash, mocked instead of aplauded?
  My goal is not to insult Google. Android is a good OS and deserves it's success. But Google is no angel. Where Apple is "guilty" of mobile market lockdown, Google is guilty of privacy violations. They have gone out of their way to make sure no manufacturer ships an Android device with competing or alternative tracking software, as it threatens their data collection capabilities.
  Again, if you find that's acceptable, great. Same way if some one accepts the downfalls of a "walled garden" then that is great for them too. Neither side is in a position take a "Holier than thou" attitude.
28. Re:Fuck apple. by shmlco · 2011-10-24 06:40 · Score: 1
  
  "It's only a software update, and would work perfectly on your iPhone4 if Apple didn't want your money so bad."
  Got a cite for this, or just an opinion? The 4S has an A5 dual-core chip vs. the A4 in the 4. The 4S has 3G speeds that are twice as fast. The noise cancellation in the 4S is improved, allowing for better, cleaner recordings. And the Siri team is already on record as saying that they were forced to make "compromises" to Siri in order to get it to work on the previous generation of phones.
  Compromise is not a word Apple likes.
  The end result of all of the hardware changes adds up to getting a better voice recording, encoding it faster, shipping the command out faster, and getting a faster response.
  So... perfectly? Guess that depends on your definition of perfection, now doesn't it?
  
  --
  Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
29. Re:Fuck apple. by nightfell · 2011-10-24 09:21 · Score: 1
  
  What are you talking about? Siri was never on the iPhone 4, so iPhone 4 users are not finding themselves forced to upgrade. If they want Siri, they can upgrade. If not, they have exactly everything they had before plus plenty of new functionality.
  What you're really saying is, Apple keeps making new products with new features, and people like them enough to upgrade. Oh, the horror!
30. Re:Fuck apple. by nightfell · 2011-10-24 09:24 · Score: 1
  
  People shouldn't give money to entities (albeit non-living and amoral) that do bad things like destroying freedom.
  No, people should give money to "entities" that provide them with value. Apple provides many hundreds of millions of people with value.
  And your last phrase "bad things like destroying freedom". Do you realize how child-like that sounds? It makes you sound like a simpleton. Apple isn't "doing bad things", they aren't "destroying freedom". Freedom is doing just fine. If you don't like Apple products, you are completely free to never pay Apple a cent.
31. Re:Fuck apple. by MrHanky · 2011-10-24 10:09 · Score: 1
  
  What I'm saying is that Apple likes to keep their phones annoyingly obsolete in important areas. No 3G on the first. Fanbois pretended GPRS actually was faster, and made up numbers to prove it, then promptly lined up for the next generation, as GPRS in reality was ridiculously slow. Now there's no LTE, which you'll buy next year. The iPhone4's camera was a major selling point but it was in fact rather shit. Now you get the one used in Sony Ericsson's phones, so it's competitive, although some miles off the better Nokias. You also want Siri, but there's no reason why the iPhone4 shouldn't have it: it's already been ported.
  All the while, it's the most expensive phone on the market. Good, but with major niggles and crippled software to make sure you always buy, buy, buy.
  Outside of the RDF, people get upset when they get crippled software updates. You, on the other hand, think Apple deserves your money.
32. Re:Fuck apple. by migla · 2011-10-24 21:24 · Score: 1
  
  I never said I was pro Android. I agree with all you're saying. Maybe you assumed I was automatically pro android for bashing apple.
  I'm anti lockdown and pro freedom.
  I'd say android is usually a lesser evil than iOS, but I've got no love for google or andoid, apart from any part that is free software, and even those parts can be tivoized, rendering the freedom of modification a dud in practice.
  So, yes, fuck Google too.
  
  --
  Some of my favourite people are from th US; Vonnegut, Chomsky, Bill Hicks.
33. Re:Fuck apple. by migla · 2011-10-24 21:56 · Score: 1
  
  It's not destroying all of the freedom all at once, obviously. I didn't mean to imply that I think I'd be renditioned to a tyrannical ally of Apple for torture by proxy if I went and bought an ipod. Sorry for the confusion.
  Just because there are worse and more direct threats to freedom doesn't mean that the lesser and more indirect threats aren't chipping away at freedom a little bit.
  
  --
  Some of my favourite people are from th US; Vonnegut, Chomsky, Bill Hicks.
34. Re:Fuck apple. by somersault · 2011-10-24 22:06 · Score: 1
  
  I basically agree with you on everything btw, I just thought you went overboard with the rhetoric.
  
  --
  which is totally what she said
35. Re:Fuck apple. by migla · 2011-10-24 22:42 · Score: 1
  
  I appreciate your objections. I shouldn't and wouldn't want to forcefully enforce my opinions, as that would indeed be very oppressive.
  The difference between me and a multinational corporation is that the balance of power is skewed. They are abusing their power of money and marketing and connections to make the world a more locked-down and proprietary experience.
  I'm just saying I think that shouldn't be encouraged. I'm not even saying people are bad for wanting and buying apple. I understand that people are children of their times. In my opinion blame and responsibility shouldn't be put on the end user, when the big guys at the top are polluting the planet and exploiting the fact that there are people willing to sell their labour in face of poverty.
  Different freedoms clash. I would love to see the freedom to create hierarchical power structures by being rich and using lobbying, marketing and money reduced for the benefit of freedom of information, culture and people having a direct say in managing the world. I don't think the system where money gives the right to rule the world is optimal for freedom and democracy, even if we're all free to become super rich and to start our own mega-corporations.
  And that RMS character, while in my opinion being right about that software should be free, sure is a scary and irritating type. I don't he should change, though. He can hold the extreme end of freedom mongering. I'm not living up to his standards. Maybe I should, just as there are plenty of other "right things to do" that I'm too lazy or comfortable or whatever to live up to, but they're all still the moral thing to do.
  The world is full of temptations to prop up the current world order, to "suck Satan's cock", so to speak, in exchange for shorter term personal convenience. One can try to maybe just lick the tip a little bit, if going cold turkey seems unreasonably difficult.
  
  --
  Some of my favourite people are from th US; Vonnegut, Chomsky, Bill Hicks.
36. Re:Fuck apple. by migla · 2011-10-24 23:07 · Score: 1
  
  I tend to do that. I erroneously expect people to get my meaning. Depending on the setting, I should of course adapt the rhetoric, lest it be counterproductive. I have trouble not being a hyperbolic punk, but I'll try to work on restraining myself a bit sometimes.
  
  --
  Some of my favourite people are from th US; Vonnegut, Chomsky, Bill Hicks.
37. Re:Fuck apple. by Tharsman · 2011-10-25 01:57 · Score: 1
  
  I didnt assume you are pro android, but unless you use smoke signals to communicate, Android is the only option left. Well, there is Windows and the zombie Palm Pre devices floating around, and the remaining Symbian ones, and Blackberries, but all of those are, perhaps, worse than Apple's iOS.
  So, if you feel so strongly about such actions, I must ask: do you even use a cellphone?
  And this site covers tech news, it does not matter if the company behind it is not "full open source", because if it did, they would cover cooking advancements and cocktail mixology. The initial message, complaining about apple themed articles, would be something you would be forced to stamp on nearly every single article that does not specifically cover Linux or open source initiatives in this website.
He's dead, can we move on? by newcastlejon · 2011-10-23 09:05 · Score: 3, Insightful

For myself, I could do without a constant stream of articles listing things he may or mat not have designed personally. If Apple release something new and interesting then by all means post it, but I think everyone here knows what an iPod is.

--
If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
1. Re:He's dead, can we move on? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 09:57 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah slashdot! Stop beating a dead horse.
  Look again. That's not Jobs' horse they're beating.
2. Re:He's dead, can we move on? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 11:07 · Score: 0
  
  He's dead, can we move on?
  He's not dead, he's iDead. That's right: Steve Jobs has, with his legendary visionary genius, made death not only stylish, but far easier to use, far more appealing, than death offered by competitors.
  
  This is this first post-mortem offering by Apple, and fans are lining up now to be among the first to purchase what is sure to be yet another amazing, life-altering product.
New Slashdot Rule Proposal by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 09:07 · Score: 0

No photo galleries of this style as stories!
Can I get a second?
And Slashdots Founder's Reivew fn the iPod by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 09:07 · Score: 1

No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame.
That quote will go down in infamy as one of the most lamebrained and utterly wrong in history.
1. Re:And Slashdots Founder's Reivew fn the iPod by dmomo · 2011-10-23 09:17 · Score: 2
  
  Why? He wasn't reviewing what it was to become. Seems a fair opinion giving the time and context.
2. Re:And Slashdots Founder's Reivew fn the iPod by Bing+Tsher+E · 2011-10-23 09:24 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  The fact remains, however, that the iPod was lame and continued to be lame until it got wireless. And it didn't have much storage space. Also, it was DRM-laden back then, too.
  It remains the case that Apple's business plan floats along on a big fat gasbag of marketing hype. Mr. Jobs flirted with new-age cult crap in his youth, and learned how to do that stuff pretty effectively. To the degree, even, that True Believers will write this comment off as coming from a Hater.
  Apple's Macintosh, the basis of everything they have become, was founded on the principle that it was a 'hacker proof' machine. And yes, they meant 'hacker' in the old, good sense. It was hyped long and hard as a 'just use it, no screwdriver required, or even permitted' system.
  Many of us have said 'fuck that' for decades.
3. Re:And Slashdots Founder's Reivew fn the iPod by Eternal+Vigilance · 2011-10-23 09:38 · Score: 1
  
  "We don't like their sound, and guitar music is on the way out." - Decca Records rejecting the Beatles
  
  "I’d shut it down and give the money back to the shareholders." - Michael Dell on the future of Apple
  
  "I think there is a world market for about five computers." - Thomas J. Watson, chairman of IBM
  
  "We don't think that's what people want. A movie takes forever to download." - Steve Jobs on the possibility of an iTunes Movie Store
4. Re:And Slashdots Founder's Reivew fn the iPod by am+2k · 2011-10-23 09:52 · Score: 2
  
  Also, it was DRM-laden back then, too.
  Actually, it wasn't, since the iTunes Music Store opened in 2003, while the first iPod came out in 2001. The DRM was added in an update (along with support for AAC).
  Unless you count the lack of support for copying back the music from the iPod as DRM. There were many programs out there that could do it, though (the files were in a hidden directory on the iPod's disk).
5. Re:And Slashdots Founder's Reivew fn the iPod by mccalli · 2011-10-23 09:55 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  "The fact remains, however, that the iPod was lame and continued to be lame until it got wireless. And it didn't have much storage space. Also, it was DRM-laden back then, too."
  
  No, the fact does not remain. It had 5Gig - a massive amount for a pocketable player at the time. Forget CD player-sized Nomads, the correct comparison is to pocket-sized Diamond Rios and similar. They had 64Mb and 128Mb typically (my memory fails, there might have been 256Mb ones as well by then).
  
  DRM-laden? Rip, Mix Burn was the advert - you ripped your own CDs, DRM-free. The iTunes Music Store came later than the iPod.
  
  It's perfectly possible not to like them without falsely belittling them.
  
  Cheers,
  Ian
6. Re:And Slashdots Founder's Reivew fn the iPod by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 12:08 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah, I had a little Rio Chiba that was expandable to about a gigabyte. 5 gig was pretty impressive back in the day. And the fact was that nobody gave a shit about wireless. To this day only a few people really give a shit about wireless.
7. Re:And Slashdots Founder's Reivew fn the iPod by Y-Crate · 2011-10-23 14:42 · Score: 1
  
  That quote will go down in infamy as one of the most lamebrained and utterly wrong in history.
  Followed by RIM's reaction to the initial iPhone announcement: They refused to believe it was real.
8. Re:And Slashdots Founder's Reivew fn the iPod by UnknowingFool · 2011-10-23 17:45 · Score: 1
  The fact remains, however, that the iPod was lame and continued to be lame until it got wireless.
  Sigh. Yes we all wanted wireless back in 2001 and you ding Apple for somehow not incorporating it when really no one did because it wasn't practical for any MP3 player.
  
  Wireless was slow. At best was 802.11b (11Mbps)
  Wirelss wasn't common. If you were lucky to have get it as wireless was not exactly common
  Wireless was a huge battery drain. Since it was relatively new, they had not worked on power-saving optimizations yet.
  Wireless would have added size. Since it was new, no one had shrunk the wireless cards to usable sizes.
  Wireless had no practical use because MP3 players are not computers. Even if a company could somehow put wireless in an MP3 player, what would you use it for? The players had low power CPUs. How would you interface with it using UP and DOWN or scroll wheels? What applications could you use? Seriously, the only thing you might do is transfer files at a pathetic 11Mbps while quickly draining the battery of a rather large MP3 player.
  Of course you could add a keyboard to it, and then build an OS around it and an interface. Congrats, you have a laptop. Or keep it small but add telephony. Congrats, you have a smartphone. The iPod Touch wasn't the first MP3 player to get wireless and even MS beat it with the Zune. But what can you do with the Zune wireless? At first squirting (which was pretty useless) and wirelessly sync. But other than those rather small use cases, wireless doesn't have much use in a Zune. The reason it makes sense in the Touch is that Apple didn't add it until they had an OS, a decent touch UI, and real-world use cases like email and apps.
  --
  Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
9. Re:And Slashdots Founder's Reivew fn the iPod by Xest · 2011-10-23 20:26 · Score: 1
  
  Jobs made a similarly dumb comment about Netbooks too for what it's worth. They really missed the boat on that one, Apple could've taken that market with ease.
10 years?! by Mabbo · 2011-10-23 09:07 · Score: 1, Redundant

This is worse than realizing that the matrix came out in 1999.
1. Re:10 years?! by necro81 · 2011-10-24 00:47 · Score: 1
  
  Whoa
  
  Too bad they never made any sequels. [xkcd]
garbage by StripedCow · 2011-10-23 09:08 · Score: 1

I just cannot imagine the amount of garbage which that iPod docking connector has caused.
And every time I walk into an electronics store, I'm thinking: what a waste.

--
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
1. Re:garbage by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 10:50 · Score: 0
  
  Every time I read one of your posts, I'm thinking: what a waste. Dipshit.
what is this...? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 09:12 · Score: 0

slashdot can you please shut the fuck up about apple - are you cunts getting paid off by the company or something?
fucking marketing shit - someone post a story about decent computers for a change
1. Re:what is this...? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 09:20 · Score: 0
  
  If you're some of the handful of people like myself who listen to Howard Stern then you're probably sick of apple as well. He talks about them every single day and claims to not be getting paid. However he has mentioned "maybe owning" some stock, although hes not sure. Like that cheap fucker doesn't know where his money is invested.
2. Re:what is this...? by hedwards · 2011-10-23 10:13 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, that's pretty common, especially for individuals who are that rich. It's tough to buy investments with that amount of money without having to deal with serious SEC red tape. It wouldn't surprise me if a 3rd party was doing most of the investing for him.
  That being said, if he owns Apple stock and is hyping it, he could be in hot water about promoting it which is why I rather doubt that he knowingly owns any shares.
3. Re:what is this...? by bonch · 2011-10-23 11:37 · Score: 1
  
  You're the third troll to claim there is a whole bunch of Apple stories. Hello? Steve Jobs just died, it's been 10 years since the iPod, and the company has several top-selling devices on the market. I bet you never complain when there are five Google stories on the front page.
  Speaking of the front page, there is only one Apple story on it--this one. Where is all the "marketing shit?"
He's dead, can we move on? by sakdoctor · 2011-10-23 09:23 · Score: 1

Yeah slashdot! Stop beating a dead horse.
When Apple stopped being a computer company. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 09:26 · Score: 3, Insightful

It's been exactly ten years since Steve Jobs stood on a stage at Apple and explained to a surprisingly small group of journalists that his company was going to make a music player and call it iPod.
In 'B' school (yeah yeah, heard it all before) we had a Harvard test case about the PC industry which included Apple Computer, Inc. To make a long and boring story short, the test case basically left Apple for dead saying it had no chance competing in the PC industry because of the slim margins (they all do), small market share, etc ....I mentioned that Apple has other things going on and they'll keep kicking. The prof kicked in "as a computer maker, No.They should liquidate" But before I could finish my point - pointing out the iPod and the change in direction of the company - some fangirl kicked in about the wonders of Macs and blah blah blah blah ....
I was trying to make a point that Apple was no longer a PC Computer maker and they were a personal device maker. And Apple Computer eventually changed their name to Apple, Inc.to reflect that change in direction.;
I learned two things in my MBA cap class: I just wasted 2+ years on a shit degree. Apple fans can be such conformists.
1. Re:When Apple stopped being a computer company. by bonch · 2011-10-23 11:38 · Score: 1
  
  They are still a computer company. They're just smart enough to realize that most people don't care that they're using a computer. Enthusiasts on Slashdot, of course, care a great deal because computers are their hobby. Enthusiasts on Slashdot also claimed the iPod would fail, the iPod mini would fail, and the iPad would fail, so they obviously don't get mainstream society.
2. Re:When Apple stopped being a computer company. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 14:30 · Score: 0
  
  >> Apple fans can be such conformists.
  Says the anonymous coward with an MBA :P
3. Re:When Apple stopped being a computer company. by seandiggity · 2011-10-23 15:59 · Score: 1
  
  I was trying to make a point that Apple was no longer a PC Computer maker and they were a personal device maker. And Apple Computer eventually changed their name to Apple, Inc.to reflect that change in direction.;
  While I think you're right, the iPod's success made it central to Apple financially and as a brand, you have to keep in mind that Apple always was, as you put it, a "personal device maker". Apple has always been about selling consumer gadgets, and viewed computing from that perspective. Jobs very, very consciously tried to emulate Sony. Take another look at the iMacs, the NeXT cube, or the Newton with this in mind...Jobs was applying the Walkman/Discman/VCR mindset to the personal computer.
  
  Now, when you start caging in users because of this approach, that's when I have a problem...
  
  --
  Geeks like to think that they can ignore politics, you can leave politics alone, but politics won't leave you alone.-rms
4. Re:When Apple stopped being a computer company. by am+2k · 2011-10-23 20:20 · Score: 1
  
  They are still a computer company. They're just smart enough to realize that most people don't care that they're using a computer.
  While you're technically right (oh the pun), that's not the point when looking at it from a business perspective. MBAs don't care if there's a computer in your walkman, just like mainstream society.
5. Re:When Apple stopped being a computer company. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-24 02:15 · Score: 0
  
  The Newton was developed after the company was saved from Jobs mismanagement. Hey, you can learn stuff in B school!
this, by M0j0_j0j0 · 2011-10-23 09:43 · Score: 1

Its starting to look a lot like engadget, sad , the article on the "quantum levitation" killed me.
The difference is in the details by sjbe · 2011-10-23 09:56 · Score: 1

There's nothing special about iPods. They're a digital music player, just like every other digital music player out there
That's like saying a Ferrari is nothing special. It's a car just like every other car out there.
Fact is that there are differences and the differences matter greatly. The differences in Apple's products and competing products may not matter to you or me but they do matter. If you don't grasp this then you will never understand why Apple sells so many of them.
1. Re:The difference is in the details by t2t10 · 2011-10-23 10:40 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Oh, the Ferrari is special: it's an overpriced, unreliable, impractical car for guys who feel inadequate. Kind of like Apple products.
2. Re:The difference is in the details by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 13:56 · Score: 0
  
  My Linux desktop is so reliable that when I update it and the graphics drivers cease to function, I can still borrow someone else's machine to SSH into it, spend a couple hours, and fix the Xorg config.
  My Windows desktop is so reliable that when it becomes deactivated because the clock was set wrong, all it takes is a couple calls to Microsoft to fix it.
  Try doing that on a Mac.
3. Re:The difference is in the details by Lost+Race · 2011-10-23 14:28 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  As a basic transportation appliance for moving a standard family unit with accessories and groceries from point A to point B, the Ferrari sucks ass. The Corolla provides 1000x the value for that purpose.
  For recreational driving, having fun, going fast, showing off, the Ferrari wins. Some people will never appreciate any of those things and struggle to rationalize why anyone would ever waste money on a sports car. Finding nothing in their own psychological inventory, they project feelings and motivations familiar to them, such as issues of "inadequacy", particularly sexual inadequacy. ("He has that fancy car to compensate for his small penis, ha ha!") Such projections reveal at best a lack of experience, perspective, and imagination; at worst a small-minded pettiness brought on by envy that someone else would have the means to waste so much money on such a frivolity.
4. Re:The difference is in the details by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 17:01 · Score: 0
  
  Remove the "have the means" from your last statement and you'll hit the sentiment better. Some people are offended at the collosal waste of resources such a purchase implies (both environmental and financial). I think there's an argument to be made that the conspicuous consumption and "I wanna go fast" angles don't outweigh the environmental and obnoxiousness (both in terms of noise and the dangerously aggressive driving habits of some owners) impacts.
5. Re:The difference is in the details by syousef · 2011-10-23 17:09 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  As a basic transportation appliance for moving a standard family unit with accessories and groceries from point A to point B, the Ferrari sucks ass. The Corolla provides 1000x the value for that purpose.
  For recreational driving, having fun, going fast, showing off, the Ferrari wins. Some people will never appreciate any of those things and struggle to rationalize why anyone would ever waste money on a sports car. Finding nothing in their own psychological inventory, they project feelings and motivations familiar to them, such as issues of "inadequacy", particularly sexual inadequacy. ("He has that fancy car to compensate for his small penis, ha ha!") Such projections reveal at best a lack of experience, perspective, and imagination; at worst a small-minded pettiness brought on by envy that someone else would have the means to waste so much money on such a frivolity.
  If I want to have "fun" driving, I go and play with dodgem cars or go-karts. I don't spend $100k on a toy car. In any case you can't have the sort of fun driving that you need a Ferrari for without either breaking the law or going to a race track.
  
  --
  These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
6. Re:The difference is in the details by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 17:48 · Score: 0
  
  While the comparisons are kind of amusing, Ferrari would never stick cute little AOL-style icons across their dashboard.
7. Re:The difference is in the details by ZigMonty · 2011-10-24 00:11 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  Dodgem cars? Really? I think you pretty much proved his point. If you don't get why some people like fast cars, fine. I'm not sure why the superior attitude is necessary. And hint: there's more to enjoying a sports car than the speed. It's the acceleration that counts.
8. Re:The difference is in the details by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-24 03:16 · Score: 0
  
  I guess your analogy would be funny if Apple products weren't #1 in reliability in nearly all publications for the past decade.
9. Re:The difference is in the details by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-24 04:45 · Score: 0
  
  at worst a small-minded pettiness brought on by envy that someone else would have the means to waste so much money on such a frivolity.
  Well, see, I thought that money was supposed to trickle down to American workers! How did it end up in Italy?
10. Re:The difference is in the details by t2t10 · 2011-10-24 11:51 · Score: 1
  
  You mean when a self-selected subset of readers answers subjectively about how reliable their devices are?
  http://www.pcworld.com/article/211074/the_tech_brands_you_can_trust.html
11. Re:The difference is in the details by CheerfulMacFanboy · 2011-10-25 14:16 · Score: 1
  
  My Linux desktop is so reliable that when I update it and the graphics drivers cease to function, I can still borrow someone else's machine to SSH into it, spend a couple hours, and fix the Xorg config.
  My Windows desktop is so reliable that when it becomes deactivated because the clock was set wrong, all it takes is a couple calls to Microsoft to fix it.
  Try doing that on a Mac.
  I tried making my Mac's graphics drivers cease to function for over a decade, and never achieved it, same for making my computer unusable by setting the clock wrong. Obviously the Mac just isn't up to this kind of reliability.
  
  --
  Fandroids hate facts.
12. Re:The difference is in the details by syousef · 2011-10-25 22:22 · Score: 1
  
  Dodgem cars? Really? I think you pretty much proved his point. If you don't get why some people like fast cars, fine. I'm not sure why the superior attitude is necessary.
  And hint: there's more to enjoying a sports car than the speed. It's the acceleration that counts.
  You can't accelerate like that on a public street without being a fucking menace. End of story. I actually do think speed can be fun. Is it worth the risk to yourself and others to do it in an uncontrolled and selfish manner? FUCK NO. Is it worth spending money you don't have to do. FUCK NO.
  
  --
  These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
13. Re:The difference is in the details by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-30 18:45 · Score: 0
  
  At least it's fun.
Stick your slides up your backside by thetoadwarrior · 2011-10-23 10:11 · Score: 4, Insightful

Seriously 13 slides and zero good content even on the first page. I'm not clicking through that shit.
1. Re:Stick your slides up your backside by Nyder · 2011-10-23 11:25 · Score: 1
  
  Seriously 13 slides and zero good content even on the first page. I'm not clicking through that shit.
  This is why most of us don't bother reading the articles...
  Just saying.
  
  --
  Be seeing you...
2. Re:Stick your slides up your backside by jfengel · 2011-10-24 09:25 · Score: 1
  
  I came to see if somebody had discovered the non-slideshow version or at least post a summary. No such luck, and Their Blog Sucks.
2001 by sjbe · 2011-10-23 10:26 · Score: 1

You're right, in 2001, the iPod was extremely expensive, ugly and wouldn't work with anything other than a Mac
Ugly is a matter of opinion and taste and based on sales and design awards I'd say your opinion is in the minority on that one but if you think it is ugly that's up to you. The original iPod was pricier than some (though not all) of the competition but it also worked better than most of the competition. Apple seems to have been the first to realize that it wasn't just the device but also the software to manage the music collection as well that mattered. They provided the most complete product, not just a cheap player and crappy, poorly compatible software written by someone else.
It shouldn't really be shocking that Apple started iTunes as a Mac only product since, duh, those are the computers Apple makes and sells. Furthermore USB 2.0 had only just been released and USB 1.0 wasn't fast enough for efficient transfers. Only Firewire was and few PCs at that time had Firewire available whereas every Mac did. I shudder at the thought of trying to sync my music collection over a USB 1.0 cable. Eventually they moved on to selling it to the Windows crowd too once they ported iTunes and USB 2.0 became ubiquitous.

And as for the iPhone, it wasn't going up against Windows phones, it was going up against RIM's Blackberry, who knows what would have happened had RIM not been criminally incompetent.
When the iPhone was first released Windows Mobile was among the market leaders. Nokia sold far and away the largest number of "smartphones" and RIM was the market leader among the business crowd as you mention at least in North America. Few people thought the iPhone would make much of a dent but the iPhone managed to redefine what we expect from a smartphone and pretty much every phone maker out there including Microsoft, RIM, Google and Nokia have blatantly copied from the iPhone.
1. Re:2001 by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-24 10:49 · Score: 0
  
  Apple stole the UI for the iPod from Creative and they stole the iPhone design from LG.
iPods were NOT the first pocket MP3 players! by Aqualung812 · 2011-10-23 10:31 · Score: 4, Insightful

To say that they're a digital music player is backwards: the rest of the world would say digital music players are bad ipods
I owned a Diamond Rio & Creative Nomad, 2 years before the iPod was ever sold. I enjoyed them more than the first iPod, and I still would take the music management software that I had to use for them over any version of iTunes.
I say this as a iPhone owner. I don't hate Apple, but I hate the incorrect praise they get for inventing things they did not invent.

--
Grammer Nazis - I mod you "troll" unless you actually add something on-topic. Yes, I know I have mispellings in my sig.
1. Re:iPods were NOT the first pocket MP3 players! by slimjim8094 · 2011-10-23 10:57 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  He didn't say they were the first pocket DMP. He's saying that people judge DMPs by the iPod. Much in the same way that handheld tablet devices are judged by the iPad, and smartphones are judged by the iPhone.
  This is, for better or worse, very hard to argue. Again, none of these were at all first. But let's think about what came before:
  - The iPod. Previous devices were bulky, slow, complex - well, Nomads. Existing DMPs had slow transfer rates and were complicated. I don't know a single non-nerd who had one. How have DMPs looked since the iPod's release?
  - The iPhone. Previous devices were bulky, slow, complex - well, WinPhones. They worked, but they sucked. Existing smartphones were really set up for mice, and I don't know a single non-business user who had one. How have smartphones looked since the iPhone's release?
  - The iPad. Previous devices were bulky, slow, complex - well, Tablet PCs. They worked, but they sucked. Existing tablets were just Windows laptops with a stylus and perhaps a note-taking program and handwriting recognition. I don't know a single non-nerd non-business person who had one. How have tablets looked since the iPad's release?
  I could say the same thing about the Macintosh and the LaserWriter. Nobody who has anything interesting to say has ever said that Apple did any of this first, but they might as well have since nobody had one before Apple came along and made them viable products. And they've been imitated on each one, to the point where you can't find a "classic" Tablet PC anywhere, or a "classic" WinMo smartphone, or a "classic" Nomad-esque device.
  And this is why Apple kicks everyone's ass. I know I've been wrong on every front - the iPhone (2G only?? No apps?) and the iPad (I already have a laptop and a phone) were huge successes despite my conviction that it was impossible. Apparently, most of these other companies are filled with people like me - and not the people who buy millions of these things because they fill a need.
  
  --
  I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
2. Re:iPods were NOT the first pocket MP3 players! by UnknowingFool · 2011-10-23 12:06 · Score: 1
  
  You seriously would take manual music management over more automation? The Rio held at most 12 songs at a time. Unless you like hearing the same 12 songs over and over you had to switch out music manually. For me that might be multiple times a day. A song list for work, then a separate one for workouts, and then another for relaxing and reading. Having to do that manually sucked.
  
  --
  Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
3. Re:iPods were NOT the first pocket MP3 players! by MobileTatsu-NJG · 2011-10-23 14:48 · Score: 2
  
  I had a Rio and a Nomad as well. To be honest, I don't know why you'd remember either fondly. The Rio had a whopping 64 megabytes of storage and upgrades were sillingly expensive. You could put a whopping one whole CD on it. That device actually got me to see if I could learn to love 64kbit mp3's. The Nomad was much bigger in terms of storage... and it was the size of a CD player.
  Speaking as an owner of both products, the iPod (+iTunes) was a BFD. I know Apple fanboys are obnoxious, but let's not combat rewriting of history with rewriting of history.
  
  --
  
  "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
4. Re:iPods were NOT the first pocket MP3 players! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 16:47 · Score: 0
  
  The reason is easy.
  Steve Jobs was about the user.
  Jobs was one of the first people to try to make computers for everyone else - realizing what users wanted and needed. It was a tool - something to transparently disappear so the user can get their work done. It wasn't something to be messed with or worry about.
  This is especially important for users to whom computing isn't a priority. Your mechanic may use a computer to diagnose what's wrong, but that's it - they shouldn't need to fiddle with source code or recompile a kernel or fix driver problems - they hook the scan tool to your car, the computer, hit a few buttons and they're getting diagnostics. (This is good - you wouldn't want to pay your mechanic $200 in labor because it took him a couple of hours to download/compile/reinstall the latest Linux kernel on their computer, would you?). If it breaks, they call support and get a new one sent over.
  Jobs realized that, and that's why despite his control freak nature, users felt "freer" using Apple's products than before. They have an "app store" to which they can download apps instead of hunting through sites like Handango or GetJar (who have been around probably over a decade) and have to install apps and such. (It was "hard enough" that Palm released an easy installer, even though all one had to do was open Palm Desktop, drag the app to it, and press the little Sync button).
  It's also why Open Source is, unfortunately, incompatible with Apple and users. Take the source code - user wants a feature/instructions on a feature/bug fix, and developer goes "you have the code - fix it yourself". Sure they could learn the language, and study how to fix it, but that gets in the way of their work (would you pay your plumber an extra $100 because he had to fix his busness management app while fixing your pipes? No? Who will?). Having source code is great for people like us who can do that work (and often have employers who don't mind fixing our tools to make us more efficient). But to a user, it's a completely useless binary blob.
  Another issue is "release early and release often" - users hate that, especially when they see an option "Frob the FooBar" and assume they can do that. They try it, only to come up with "Not implemented yet". And are told they should've downloaded today's build, which has it in there, but then something else they need goes missing or crashes.
  It's unfortunate, but one of the reasons why Jobs was as good as he was. He himself was a user, and realized that yes, freedom can be limiting, restrictions can be freedom and other such 1984-ish things. People don't care for computers (something Free Software and Open Source really don't want to hear) - they want to get their work done. If the tool doesn't let them do that, they'll find a way to do it, or declare they need a better tool.
  That printer that got RMS started - yes you and I will want to fix it. But an office worker - they'll either live with it, or demand it be replaced with a better one.
5. Re:iPods were NOT the first pocket MP3 players! by bemymonkey · 2011-10-23 17:14 · Score: 1
  
  Correct on all counts but the Tablet PC. Those were never meant for the consumer market, but rather education and business... and there's still no "app for that", what with suitable ARM hardware and software combos still completely absent from the market. The HTC Flyer and Thinkpad Tablet are a step in the right direction with their N-Trig pens, but have a ton of catching up to do. I don't think we'll see a worthwhile contendor until Windows 8 tablets with digitizer pens and a ported version of MS OneNote appear.
  Until then, I'm stuck schlepping around a heavy-ass Tablet PC with mediocre battery life - because iPads and Android tablets suck ass for taking notes.
6. Re:iPods were NOT the first pocket MP3 players! by JasterBobaMereel · 2011-10-23 19:56 · Score: 1
  
  iPod - was not the first mp3 player - Poor battery life, fiddly, breaks easily - My Creative touch has an equally simple interface and has outlasted many friends iPods
  iPhone - was not the first smartphone, or touchscreen smartphone, or multitouch smartphone, Is fragile, and a "walled garden"
  iPad - Was not the first Tablet PC - Never wanted one, have no use for one - A gadget looking for a purpose, all the faults or a laptop, combined with all the faults of a smartphone ...
  Apple are good at marketing, they are not the innovators that many think they are, they are good at spotting a market, buying the technical skills needed and building their own version of an existing device, and marketing it to the right people to start a trend
  
  --
  Puteulanus fenestra mortis
7. Re:iPods were NOT the first pocket MP3 players! by EricWright · 2011-10-24 00:30 · Score: 1
  
  No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.
  That never gets old.
8. Re:iPods were NOT the first pocket MP3 players! by RogerWilco · 2011-10-24 00:57 · Score: 1
  
  I think it's the difference between invention and innovation.
  What Apple under Steve Jobs excelled at, was to get brilliant engineers make an appliance instead of just a piece of technology, sometimes of their own invention, often by combining existing inventions in a new way.
  The other thing is a complete believe in your own ideas and willing to bet big on them in advertising and production.
  
  --
  RogerWilco the Adventurous Janitor
9. Re:iPods were NOT the first pocket MP3 players! by vaporland · 2011-10-24 01:34 · Score: 1
  
  because iPads and Android tablets suck ass for taking notes.
  In every business meeting i'm in lately (I'm in a LOT of them) there are at least two people using iPads and aPads to take notes.
  I agree that a touchscreen KB sucks; as humans evolve I guess we'll develop sucker pads for fingertips (like a gecko)...
  
  --
  Ask Me About... The 80's!
10. Re:iPods were NOT the first pocket MP3 players! by bemymonkey · 2011-10-24 02:39 · Score: 1
  
  If you're limited to notes that can be typed, sure... as soon as you need to write down a formula or make a little diagram, you're screwed. I can't think of many real-world note-taking situations (unless you're just transcribing a meeting word for word) where that applies...
  And even if you are limited to typing: Even better, go for tactile feedback and use a real keyboard.
11. Re:iPods were NOT the first pocket MP3 players! by tehcyder · 2011-10-24 03:13 · Score: 1
  
  You seriously would take manual music management over more automation? The Rio held at most 12 songs at a time. Unless you like hearing the same 12 songs over and over you had to switch out music manually. For me that might be multiple times a day. A song list for work, then a separate one for workouts, and then another for relaxing and reading. Having to do that manually sucked.
  If the alternative to something sucking is using iTunes, you have not made any progress in terms of suckitudiness.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
12. Re:iPods were NOT the first pocket MP3 players! by vaporland · 2011-10-24 03:17 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, "there's an app for that" - our business analyst employs a funny looking pen and NoteTaker HD.
  I've not used it but he seems quite productive.
  
  --
  Ask Me About... The 80's!
13. Re:iPods were NOT the first pocket MP3 players! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-24 03:27 · Score: 0
  
  What the people who fill the non-Apple companies don't get is, for example with the original iPhone, getting something to the market that is simple and focused, and works exceptionally well in a very few things is far better than a long laundry list of half-assed functionality.
  Apple is the king of this. No apps with first iPhone? How long did that last? Why would anyone have any reason to believe the next version wouldn't include apps, and the method of getting them would be very polished (and eventually set the gold standard). This is the M.O. for Apple. Small, focused feature sets that increase and improve over time.
14. Re:iPods were NOT the first pocket MP3 players! by bemymonkey · 2011-10-24 03:37 · Score: 1
  
  Then he writes in very, very large letters.
  No app can compensate for the fact that capacitive screens have an accuracy of about a quarter inch in all directions... it's like fingerpainting. And yes, I've used iPad styli...
15. Re:iPods were NOT the first pocket MP3 players! by vaporland · 2011-10-24 05:04 · Score: 1
  
  Well, the handwriting on the screen looks like it was done with a Sharpie fine-point: not as broad as a Magic Marker, but certainly much smaller line width than 1/4 inch...
  I just use a legal pad and transcribe my notes. Not everything needs to be a "science project"...
  
  --
  Ask Me About... The 80's!
16. Re:iPods were NOT the first pocket MP3 players! by UnknowingFool · 2011-10-24 09:44 · Score: 1
  
  That was well reasoned and cogent argument filled will all sorts of insights. No, it was a rant that added no value to the conversation whatsoever.
  
  --
  Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
17. Re:iPods were NOT the first pocket MP3 players! by nobodie · 2011-10-25 00:28 · Score: 1
  
  Why Apple "kicks ass" and why they were so successful and why they might continue to be so (but only if they have the sense to not buy into the foolishness being spouted above and below) is because they were absolutely fantastic at marketing.
  Think of it this way: design is primarily a marketing function in this modern world. This is not to say that it has always been primary, it sometimes was about ergonomics or usability or even fitting in the right place at the right time. But today, design is just about creating a brand style that can be sold to the public as sleek, special, beautiful, desirable, modern, high-value and high (add your desirable characteristic here). the key word is "sold" and Apple, Jobs especially, got that part. Sometime in the Pixar years he had an epiphany when he realized that it was the marketing of an identifiable design style that could set Apple apart.
  Look at the patents that they are beating Samsung about with: design stuff like rounded corners. Look at the iMac, there was no cutting edge tech there, it was all off the shelf at the time, but the design aspect built a remarkable brand that people could want to have. The innovation that Jobs had for the iMac, and arguably for every other "breakthru product" was not the tech or the iStore or anything really that remarkable, what he did was make the tech subservient to the design.
  In the iMac that meant fitting a full 3.5" HDD together with a laptop CD player and a laptop motherboard with limited ports. I had one of the first iMacs (blue and white with a tray CD player-- first three months production before the slot loaders were ready) that my wife bought, take that thing apart and it wasn't much at all. What was impressive was that by controlling the symmetry (by which I mean that he kept the number of devices that could be used to a minimum so that the OS9 kernel only had to hold drivers for a very limited number of devices) he could have a pretty zippy system even with lower speed processors (needed to keep a fan out of the case). All design criteria (no fan, no noise, valuable in a desktop system).
  Brilliant! but only in terms of marketing. Think of it as the Yves St Laurent approach to computers and you realize that the accolades he is receiving are the stuff of fashion legends as well. They always get "modded up" in the glitter world based on the effect they had in marketing their products, not in any real innovation.
  
  --
  Subversion of spatial scale luxury decoration ideas.
18. Re:iPods were NOT the first pocket MP3 players! by CheerfulMacFanboy · 2011-10-26 01:59 · Score: 1
  
  iPod - was not the first mp3 player - Poor battery life
  
  Compared to devices where either the battery was larger than the whole iPod or that could hold about 50 songs - at 64 kbit/s FBR.
  
  --
  Fandroids hate facts.
13 slides? by istartedi · 2011-10-23 10:50 · Score: 1

TL/DS (too long, didn't slideshow).

--
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Steve has been dead nearly a month now. by flimflammer · 2011-10-23 11:01 · Score: 1

I wonder when all these Apple stories "remembering the good ol' days" will finally stop getting flooded into every major news site.
1. Re:Steve has been dead nearly a month now. by bonch · 2011-10-23 11:40 · Score: 0
  
  Today is the 10th anniversary of the public introduction of the iPod. Retrospectives would have been posted no matter what.
  It's hilarious reading all the bitterness from the Apple-haters today. You guys absolutely can't stand that this company has so much influence on the tech industry. Too bad.
2. Re:Steve has been dead nearly a month now. by David_Hart · 2011-10-23 11:44 · Score: 1
  
  The news outlets will continue to the Apple news cycle until the election next year. After all, there isn't anything interesting going on in the world... It's not like we aren't at war or anything.... Hey wait....
3. Re:Steve has been dead nearly a month now. by flimflammer · 2011-10-23 13:42 · Score: 1
  
  Who said anything about being an Apple hater? The world really is just black and white with you guys isn't it?
4. Re:Steve has been dead nearly a month now. by Omestes · 2011-10-23 18:09 · Score: 1
  
  You guys absolutely can't stand that this company has so much influence on the tech industry. Too bad.
  Either that or we really just don't care. Woohoo, a silly gadget turns 10! Who cares?
  I'm sick of the "you hate Apple, since you don't worship Apple" shit, though. I have exactly as much loyalty towards Apple as Apple has towards me. Actually, I have exactly as much loyalty towards Apple as I do any company. None. I don't care. If Apple makes a product that meets my needs more than anything else with a comparable price, then I'll buy their product. If, when it breaks, there is something better made by another manufacturer, then I'll buy it instead. Apple has made some decent products, I have owned some of them and enjoyed them. They have made some crappy decisions too, and that is why I don't own anything more than an iPod anymore (down from having 2 MacBooks, and a MacMini). When my iPod breaks, I will probably replace it with another (unless they kill the Classic). If my PC or laptop dies, I'm not buying an Apple still. If my Android Phone dies, or I can get a replacement, I'm getting another Android, and not an iPhone. This has nothing to do with me hating Apple, or loving Google, it has to do with what meets my personal, individual, needs.
  If you really love a company, or have any loyalty to them (outside of them having the best product for your own work or life style), then you truly are pathetic. Apple is not better than Google, who is no better than Microsoft, who is not better than any other company out there. Sure, some of them might be a bit more ethical, sure, some have better packaging or quality control... But your basing something of your identity on products... This is something I can't understand. Apple fans (or Google fans) are no better than this chick I once knew who had a Nike tattoo. That isn't a compliment.
  Attacking people for attacking a product is equally moronic. Why does one have the need to defend Apple, or Google? Do they need your help? Are you worried that some mean kids are going to beat them up after school? They are giant corporations, they don't CARE about you, and they don't CARE if your defend them. Why bother? If someone hates your iPod, GOOD FOR THEM! How does that affect you in any way?
  Back to the beginning, I find it hard to give two shits about the anniversary of an idiotic consumer product. ANY idiotic consumer product, buy any company. I don't really care if it was an influential product or not, or an innovative product or not... IT IS AN IDIOTIC CONSUMER PRODUCT. What is there to celebrate, or retrospect? Its a gadget like any other. Big deal. Don't you have bigger things to care about?
  
  --
  A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
5. Re:Steve has been dead nearly a month now. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 18:48 · Score: 0
  
  Okay, I'll bite. Normal human beings commonly experience nostalgia for things that have brought them positive feelings. Often, those things are simple trinkets that have a very small nominal value. Ultimately, every consumer gadget that one will feel nostalgia over is likely, in reality, an idiotic consumer product. Sure, today, anyone celebrating the anniversary of the iPod could be out doing something more meaningful like ending world hunger, curing cancer, fighting injustice around the world. Maybe these people do really important things, but today on a sunday, decided to just remember with fondness a stupid trinket that brought them a lot of happiness. Now that I think about it, there's probably several people whose owe their livelihood to the iPod because for the first time, ordinary non-computer geeks knew about MP3s and wanted them. I'm sure you spent today caring about more significant anniversaries like the anniversary of the Battle of Edgehill, the death of Roman senator Marcus Brutus, the first Parliament of Great Britain, the first National Women's Rights Convention. Maybe you spent the day mourning Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus. Let people have their nostalgia.
6. Re:Steve has been dead nearly a month now. by Omestes · 2011-10-23 20:21 · Score: 1
  
  I see your point... but...
  
  Normal human beings commonly experience nostalgia for things that have brought them positive feelings.
  This is true. But feeling nostalgia over something only ten years old, that is still produced, is equally odd. Can you really be nostalgic for something less than a generation old? I suppose you can, but its still... I mean people are nostalgic, generally, for things that were around when they were kids. But most people who were kids when it came out (who had really generous parents), are now young adults at best. Can you really have nostalgia when your in your early 20s?
  Also, I do like my iPod, and will freely admit that its the best music player I've ever encountered (hence being on #3), at least for my needs; bits of it were genuinely innovative. But it really was just an iteration of a pre-existing theme. I can see being a bit misty for the birth of MP3 players. But the iPod is just another one of those, regardless of its nice bits.
  I don't mean to sound overly hostile. People getting all teary over their little white devices doesn't affect me. I'm just a bit confused by the phenomena. Should I be attaching as much meaning to my blender, toaster, or whatnot? Whats the difference between an iPod and a blender, really? Why is one worth all the brouhaha and warm feelings, while the other is more useful but completely not a bit of veneration?
  
  --
  A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
7. Re:Steve has been dead nearly a month now. by knappe+duivel · 2011-10-23 23:51 · Score: 1
  
  Woohoo, a silly gadget turns 10! Who cares?
  Hard to believe isn't it? Some people even take the trouble to write a 500-word opinion about it in a forum. Silly!
8. Re:Steve has been dead nearly a month now. by Omestes · 2011-10-24 04:06 · Score: 1
  
  Actually the reply was more about mocking fanboys. Which, you must admit, a worthy topic.
  
  --
  A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
You must lead a boring life by sjbe · 2011-10-23 11:02 · Score: 0, Flamebait

Oh, the Ferrari is special: it's an overpriced, unreliable, impractical car for guys who feel inadequate.
Even if all that is true, what does it tell you that virtually EVERY guy still wants one?
Nobody dreams about owning a Toyota Camry precisely because there is absolutely nothing interesting, fast, beautiful, fun or enjoyable about it.

Kind of like Apple products.
Right. And Windows is just a model of reliability...
1. Re:You must lead a boring life by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 12:15 · Score: 1
  
  Even if all that is true, what does it tell you that virtually EVERY guy still wants one?
  That virtually every guy feels inadequate.
  
  Nobody dreams about owning a Toyota Camry precisely because
  Because they're affordable enough that you don't have to dream about owning one. If it's the right car for your needs, you can probably afford to buy it.
  
  there is absolutely nothing interesting, fast, beautiful, fun or enjoyable about it
  But over 10 million people have bought a Camry. There must be something right about it.
  And the Toyota Corolla is the all-time best seller with over 36 million vehicles produced.
2. Re:You must lead a boring life by sjbe · 2011-10-23 13:06 · Score: 1
  
  That virtually every guy feels inadequate.
  Just because you feel inadequate doesn't mean everyone else does. Guy's like Ferraris because they are cool, fast and amazingly fun to drive. (Yes I have driven a Ferrari though I've never owned one)
  
  But over 10 million people have bought a Camry. There must be something right about it.
  There is. It's fairly practical and reliable and relatively cheap basic transportation. That doesn't mean people won't buy something better when they have the means or that there aren't better cars available. A BMW 3 Series is a better car than a Camry but it also is more expensive. There is a reason it is called a luxury car.
  
  And the Toyota Corolla is the all-time best seller with over 36 million vehicles produced.
  It provides good value for money. So what? It's still a boring soulless econobox that people almost never buy when they can afford something better.
3. Re:You must lead a boring life by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 14:11 · Score: 0
  
  But over 10 million people have bought a Camry. There must be something right about it.
  Says the guy who drives a camry, watches jersey shore, plays farmville and thinks microsoft windows is the best computer operating system in the world...because there must be something right about it.
4. Re:You must lead a boring life by AHuxley · 2011-10-23 15:51 · Score: 1
  
  A lot of basement dwelling nerds get driven around in their moms Toyota "Shopping Trolley" hatchback ... for years, mb even inheriting it.
  It must leave some product imprint - like growing up with an Apple SE/30 or G3 or iMac...
  
  --
  Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
5. Re:You must lead a boring life by t2t10 · 2011-10-23 21:07 · Score: 1
  
  A BMW 3 Series is a better car than a Camry but it also is more expensive. There is a reason it is called a luxury car.
  The BMW is not more comfortable, nor more reliable, nor lower cost, nor easier to use. It doesn't drive anywhere where the Camry doesn't drive, and it costs more. It will be in the shop more and its repairs will cost a lot more. The few things where it might technically be argued to be better (handling, top speed) don't matter on US roads and highways.
  
  So what? It's still a boring soulless econobox that people almost never buy when they can afford something better.
  In fact, the only thing that's "better" about the BMW is the fact that it is more expensive: it is conspicuous consumption. In terms of all the things that matter in a car, the BMW is inferior to the Camry.
  Mind you, there are expensive cars that give you something extra for your money: electric cars, luxury limousines, etc. But the Ferrari and the BMWs are overpriced, unreliable crap for people who just want to show off.
6. Re:You must lead a boring life by tehcyder · 2011-10-24 02:56 · Score: 1
  
  Guy's like Ferraris because they are cool, fast and amazingly fun to drive.
  I thought it was because they were a good indicator that you were rich, and therefore sexually attractive to a certain type of woman.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Nobody claimed Apple invented the MP3 player by sjbe · 2011-10-23 11:20 · Score: 2

I say this as a iPhone owner. I don't hate Apple, but I hate the incorrect praise they get for inventing things they did not invent.
Nobody with a clue is saying Apple invented the digital music player. Even Apple never claimed to be first. Apple created their own because the ones that were on the market pretty much sucked and they saw an opportunity. And they were right, the competition did pretty much suck.
What Apple did bring to the party in the case of the iPod was a complete system. There were devices that were good and there was software that was acceptable but NOBODY made a good version of both and made them work together. Furthermore, prior to 2001 USB 2.0 was not widely available which meant that most other devices had to sync using very slow connections. The original iPod used Firewire which actually mattered a lot at the time because it allowed syncing of the library SO much faster. Everyone fixates on just the iPod or just iTunes but they don't consider the whole system which was the key to Apple's success. THAT was their innovation.
1. Re:Nobody claimed Apple invented the MP3 player by vaporland · 2011-10-24 01:44 · Score: 2
  
  I think the other thing they brought to tech was a non-tech perspective.
  Apple starts with the perceived optimal user experience and works backwards to apply technology.
  HP, Dell, et al start with a feature list which defines the user experience by default.
  This approach worked well when tech was (mostly) the realm of technologists.
  Apple was ahead of its time, which cost it dearly in marketshare.
  Now the world has caught up to Apple (so to speak) which is how they have achieved 30+% growth selling relatively expensive products during the worst economic downturn in 80 years.
  
  --
  Ask Me About... The 80's!
A well-written counter-point on /.! by Aqualung812 · 2011-10-23 11:20 · Score: 1

Well done, I think you've explained it perfectly. I owned several WinMo phones before the iPhone, and I also couldn't get what the big deal was: "Music on my phone? Been doing that for years! Besides, that stupid thing can't multi-task like my phone".
As you say, though, no one else got it until Apple did it. That is precisely what Steve Jobs & others at Apple should get credit for. Not as inventors, but as translators of technology to the masses.

--
Grammer Nazis - I mod you "troll" unless you actually add something on-topic. Yes, I know I have mispellings in my sig.
1. Re:A well-written counter-point on /.! by dunkelfalke · 2011-10-24 03:58 · Score: 1
  
  I still would take a WinMo6 phone over the first iPhones any day. Because while they were somewhat uncomfortable, they were also very powerful.
  
  --
  "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
Bullshit by bonch · 2011-10-23 11:30 · Score: 1, Informative

Why has there been so much Apple crap here on Slashdot lately?
You're asking why there is so much news about one of the top tech companies with several of the hottest tech devices on the market? And you even got modded +5 Insightful for it? Slashdot has officially become a haven for Apple-hating idiots.

There's nothing special about iPods. They're a digital music player, just like every other digital music player out there. People have modded them for many years now, and many of these same "hacks" were done using portable CD and tape players well before then. None of this is remotely interesting, even to those of us who enjoy such hacks.
Less space than a Nomad, right? iPods changed digital music and became a staple of pop culture. They helped legitimize online music stores and innovated several interface ideas. The reason this is getting covered today is, not only did Steve Jobs recently die, but today is also the 10th anniversary of the public introduction of the iPod.

Can we please have some interesting content here for once? Something not having to do with Apple or American politics, perhaps? Maybe something involving science or math in some way, or maybe even engineering?
I decided to take a look at the front page and see if it really was filled with "so much Apple crap" as you anonymously (of course) claim:
Hyperion Promises An AmigaOS Netbook
NH Supreme Court To Rule On Bigfoot Video Shoot In Public Park
A Decade of Apple Oddities
Google Not Reciprocating On IFrame Usage?
Why Computer Voices Are Mostly Female
Ask Slashdot: How To Enter Private Space Industry As an Engineer?
UK Government Pushing For 'Trusted Computing'
More Interviews With World Solar Challenge Competitors
A Silicon Valley School That Doesn't Use Computers
Using Fuel Depots Instead of Giant Rockets
3D Printers To Save Hermit Crabs
Universal Uses DMCA To Get Bad Lip Reading Parody Taken Down
Jumentum Introduces a Single-Chip Linux System
Canadian Company Plans Solar-Powered Heavier-Than-Air Airships
Hobby Humanoid Robot KHR3HV Rides Bike At 10k/h
One Apple story out of 15 is some great imbalance? What the hell are you talking about?
Why is everything iPod compatible? by Fencepost · 2011-10-23 11:40 · Score: 1

What frosts me is that every flippin' clock radio out there that has external input ("Aux") for connecting an MP3 player or phone also has a nice big iPod dock either on the front or on the top. I don't want a useless-to-me chunk of exposed connectors on the most obvious part of my equipment, particularly when it means that they've made the display smaller and less visible so it's not blocked by the piece of Apple equipment that I would never purchase. I want a radio with decent speakers, a display that I can see from the shower on the other side of the room and either Aux input, Bluetooth or both so I can link my phone to it for music, podcasts, etc. and I'd rather not have to buy a Chumby to get it.

--
fencepost
just a little off
1. Re:Why is everything iPod compatible? by Jeff+DeMaagd · 2011-10-23 12:07 · Score: 1
  
  If you don't mind buying from the other of Slashdot's Great Satans, Sony ICFC707 Clock Radio has an aux input, large time display and no Apple dock. I don't know about great speakers though.
2. Re:Why is everything iPod compatible? by Dixie_Flatline · 2011-10-23 22:54 · Score: 1
  
  Why is everything iPod compatible? Because basically everyone owns an iPod. And because there are so many iPod owners out there, people build devices compatible with the iPod because that's a really good way to make money. It doesn't take much to realise that it's profitable to produce products for a large market that's already proven that it has disposable income to spare.
  The iPod still owns something like 3/4 of the portable MP3 player market and has sold millions and millions of units. Surely you can see how that could be leveraged to make some money.
Summary Fail by Osgeld · 2011-10-23 13:02 · Score: 1

"A Decade of Apple Oddities"
"iPod Oddities"
Besides if you bothered to watch the "How William Shatner Changed the World" thing on histroy channel a few years ago you would know the biggest inspiration for iPod was to be able to have a computer serve music on demand, just like in TNG
Design was after form ... which is something current apple has lacked
This new just in ... by PPH · 2011-10-23 14:38 · Score: 0

... Steve Jobs ... still dead.

--
Have gnu, will travel.
This is nothing compared to YC's Hacker News by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-23 15:01 · Score: 0

You think think this is bad? Oh boy, /. has nothing on the sheer volume of fallen god worship going on at HN
Re:Opinion and taste by TaoPhoenix · 2011-10-23 15:57 · Score: 2

Apple is where it is because they did the visual interface work that geeks traditionally couldn't be bothered with. I'm seeing lot of anti-Apple articles, but they're based on patent actions, or problems with walled gardens, or the Apple-fans, etc. I'm not seeing many articles laughing at the actual design of iPhones. They deserved to be where they are, compared for example with Microsoft's fumbling on the non-gamer entertainment side.
Is it just me but are we riding the "maturity curve" of tech, away from fun hacking unfinished chaotic projects towards "too old to do that stuff anymore?"

--
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
Leave us not forget that which came BEFORE iTunes by Chris+Tucker · 2011-10-23 18:43 · Score: 1

SoundJam MP.
SoundJam MP was, perhaps, the first genuinely useful MP3 application for the Macintosh. One could easily rip CDs to MP3, mix songs as one wished in playlists, and then burn them to CD.
Rip. Mix. Burn. Where have we heard that before?
It even had support built in for the few MP3 players of the time.
Review of an early incarnation of SoundJam.
Review of the final revision.
And, the ObWiki entry .
MacLife history of iTunes .
Without SoundJam MP. there would likely have been no iTunes, as Apple bought SoundJam MP, filed off the serial numbers, slapped a coat of paint on it and called it iTunes V1.0.
Well, yeah, there still would have been AN iTunes. Apple would have just bought Audion .
So, while the iPod was indeed a seachange for the portable music player (cassette/CD/digital) of the era, without the software to support it as easily and as elegantly as SoundJam, er, "iTunes", it was the software that made the iPod the success it was and remains to this day.

--
Guaranteed! This comment 100% Anthrax free!
FYI regarding NSFW by HopefulIntern · 2011-10-23 19:48 · Score: 1

"Page" 10 of this article is slightly NSFW, just in case you work for rather conservative overlords.
1. Re:FYI regarding NSFW by Bucky24 · 2011-10-24 07:45 · Score: 1
  
  Ok now I'm really really curious and actually want to read the article... But I'm at work :(
  What on earth could they have connected to an iPod that is NSFW.....
  
  --
  All the world's a CPU, and all the men and women merely AI agents
2. Re:FYI regarding NSFW by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-24 10:33 · Score: 0
  
  A dildo that vibrates in rhythm to the music.
Not everything Apple did was golden .... by scharkalvin · 2011-10-24 01:45 · Score: 1

I can think of at least three Apple products that were Lemons (or Edsels) as far as sales went.
1: The Apple III computer.
2: The Lisa computer (though this was the prototype for the Mac that WAS well received ... eventually)
3:: The Newton PDA (perhaps it was just ahead of it's time)
A decade? by whitroth · 2011-10-24 04:39 · Score: 1

It was the late eighties that I suggested two Mac add-ons for Macaholic friends:
1) it dices! It chops! The ultimate kitchen aid, straight from recipe to food: the VegeMactic!
2) It sharpens scissors and knives! Get perfect edges from your computer: Mac the Knife.
mark
Rampant Aspergers by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-24 10:54 · Score: 0

I swear, it's like half the posters on this site, and others, have a form of Aspergers that causes them to lose their mind when they see the word "Apple" on their screen. The only way they can possibly get through their day peacefully is if they neither hear nor see anything related to Apple. But once they're exposed to that trigger word, they start howling and banging their fists on the desk.
Seriously. Go take your pills and chill the fuck out.
1. Re:Rampant Aspergers by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-24 11:01 · Score: 0
  
  Cool story bro.
I think there's an argument to be made by Quila · 2011-10-26 08:19 · Score: 1

That the obnoxiousness of environmentalists doesn't outweigh our freedom, quality of life and overall sanity.
Personally, I fear the dangerously incompetent driving habits of the large number of slow and inattentive people on the road far more than those few fast, aggressive drivers. A Prius makes me fear for my safety a lot more than a Ferrari does.
I fear for the blind people endangered by silent electric cars far more than I fear the noise of a Ferrari, or even an environmentalist's old, clanky biodiesel.
In the end, at least a Ferrari adds beauty to the world, art on wheels, while a Prius just makes the world an uglier place.