Slashdot Mirror


Apple Discontinues iPod Nano and iPod Shuffle (macrumors.com)

From a report: Apple today removed the iPod nano and iPod shuffle from its website and online store around the world, suggesting the iconic portable media players may be discontinued. Apple continues to sell the iPod touch. Beyond new colors and storage capacities, Apple had last updated the iPod nano in October 2012 and the iPod shuffle in September 2010. Apple last updated the iPod touch in July 2015 with an 8-megapixel rear camera. Apple introduced the iPod shuffle in January 2005, followed by the iPod nano in September 2005. In total, there were seven generations of the iPod nano, and four generations of the iPod shuffle. The company has confirmed that it has discontinued the devices.

151 comments

  1. Courage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is that the reason this time?

    1. Re:Courage? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Sort of. Those music players have a headphone port.

      A pity about the shuffle. The last non-freakin'-touch-interface music player made by Apple.

      Also, they were not compatible with Apple Music so that's probably the other reason.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    2. Re:Courage? by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      No, probably money.

      I am surprised they were still there. The iPhone was the iPod killer. Which expanded the use of WiFi, and Cell Wireless needs. So streaming music became the norm. Thus the iPod model with the App store isn't as profitable, combined that most people have some form of smartphone now, so having a separate music device is redundant.

      So why keep the factory open and ready to make a device that people are no longer buying in enough quantity to justify it?

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    3. Re:Courage? by tepples · · Score: 1

      A parent is likely to consider a child old enough to have a portable media player but not old enough to have a cell phone number and bill.

    4. Re:Courage? by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      There are still a number of Mp3 players. or you could get a Raspberry Pi and have them make their own.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    5. Re:Courage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ROFL

    6. Re:Courage? by DarkVader · · Score: 1

      So hand the kid your old iPhone, then if you want to activate phone service on it you can.

    7. Re:Courage? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      I had to get another one, but I used Amazon to get a used one because iPod Nano generation 2 was great and just what I wanted. Especially from 5th generation on they had so many useless features and the form factors just weren't very good for sticking in your pocket or glove box, or controlling while there's sweat in your eyes from exercising, etc.

      Still though, I've never seen any podcast player that worked a well as an iPod with iTunes; everything else was clumsy and/or required manual operations.

    8. Re:Courage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      having a separate music device is redundant

      Only if you like dead batteries. I have a separate MP3 player because it lets me listen to music without draining my phone's battery and lets me use my phone without draining my music battery. It's also a LOT smaller than a phone which makes it perfect for my morning run and fitness regimen. Having a bulky phone on you is the last thing you want when exercising. It's also a lot cheaper than my phone and would be much easier to replace if it gets damaged or lost.

    9. Re:Courage? by Shirley+Marquez · · Score: 1

      Just not a big enough market any more to interest them. Other companies will continue to produce music players so long as a demand for them exists. Current options include various Sansa models from SanDisk, the Mighty player that downloads Spotify playlists, high-options like the FiiO models and the Hi-Res Walkman, and a plethora of cheap no-name players from China that you can find on eBay.

  2. tail's too short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    there's no room for apps, so there's no point in making them without the revenue stream

  3. u dont need an ipod by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    just use ur phone

    1. Re:u dont need an ipod by green1 · · Score: 1

      That's exactly the point, I last had an mp3 player a decade ago before I had a phone that could play music. Why carry a second device to do the same thing?

    2. Re:u dont need an ipod by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One place to use these is where you don't want the phone to be present. For example, my son is not allowed to have a phone in class at school (at least not a smart phone, I'm not sure about feature phones). He is allowed to listen to music in certain classes, though, and this is where a nano or shuffle would come into play. And smart parents probably don't want to let their kids have smart phones or tablets at all (except perhaps as limit-time rewards), where again a nano or shuffle would work. Whether or not you want your kids to have expensive toys like the nano is another matter...

    3. Re:u dont need an ipod by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      just use ur phone

      I would, but it doesn't have a headphone jack.

    4. Re:u dont need an ipod by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I carry my iPod shuffle while running as it is much smaller and lighter than a phone so easy to carry around.

    5. Re:u dont need an ipod by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Touch interface SUCKS for a music player. Also you can't clip a freakin' smartphone to your shirt. And an iPhone costs about ten to twenty times the price of the shuffle.

      I'll be heading to a local store to see if they'll sell the last units at discount prices.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    6. Re:u dont need an ipod by jellomizer · · Score: 0

      First world problems.
      Your poor kid cannot listen to music during some classes.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    7. Re:u dont need an ipod by omnichad · · Score: 1

      It's a third world problem too, when Apple only wants to sell luxury items. There are other manufacturers, but competition is good for the market.

    8. Re:u dont need an ipod by Sumus+Semper+Una · · Score: 1

      That's exactly the point, I last had an mp3 player a decade ago before I had a phone that could play music. Why carry a second device to do the same thing?

      Have you ever tried jogging with a Samsung Note in your pocket? Or even a regular sized smart phone as opposed to something the size of an iPod nano or shuffle? There are reasons to have a small, dedicated MP3 player, even if they don't apply to everyone. It just doesn't have to cost so much and has no new features to try to sell, which is why I suspect they would prefer to discontinue it. Fortunately, they aren't the only provider for that kind of device.

    9. Re:u dont need an ipod by unixisc · · Score: 1

      I was doing that, but I have 2 phones, & don't always carry the iPhone on me. However, the car navigation system has an iPod player which does a less than adequate job while working w/ my Lumia. So I bought this 7th gen iPod Nano recently, and loaded it up w/ some music videos, and stick it into the console USB port, which is connected to the iPod player.

      Since the Apple store doesn't have most of the videos that I want, and of the ones that do, the volume seems really low, I am planning to wipe that and replace it w/ audio files that I've collected, assuming that iTunes lets me do it.

    10. Re:u dont need an ipod by Quirkz · · Score: 1

      I keep a dedicated music player in my car, because I can't fit enough on my phone.

    11. Re:u dont need an ipod by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Because I want a small player to take to the gym or running that 1) does not cost me $500+ to replace if I lose it/damage it, 2) does not have a phone/text messaging (yes I know that makes me weird; I go to the gym to work out, not yap on the phone or text like most), and 3) is not a mini boat anchor in my pocket.

      And yes, I know there are non-Apple players. Do you honestly think Apple will expend ANY effort to maintain compatibility with these devices?

    12. Re:u dont need an ipod by SeriousTube · · Score: 1

      Because apple phones don't have a headphone jack.

    13. Re:u dont need an ipod by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 2

      Because they do the same thing better.

      My own reason - and likely others will have others - is that my first-gen iPod Nano has physical buttons. I don't have to pull it out of my pocket, turn on the screen, unlock it, and have to look at it to see where to push.

      When my first iPod Nano died I found out Apple had done a recall on them years ago due to a potential battery issue and were still offering replacements. I got a seventh generation as a replacement - touch interface, only two physical buttons - sold it, and bought a second-hand first gen with the money.

      So there you go. Just because you can't imagine a reason doesn't mean there isn't one for some people.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    14. Re:u dont need an ipod by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, no, I'd prefer to have my phone's battery intact when I land, and not have to kick some smelly millennial's ass away from the two power outlets the fucker is hogging just so I can GTFO the airport.

    15. Re:u dont need an ipod by Woeful+Countenance · · Score: 1

      Have you ever tried jogging with a Samsung Note in your pocket?

      No, but I run four miles a day with an iPhone 6 Plus. I don't notice it, though I can't stand to carry a jangling key-ring with five keys on it. To each their own.

      I bought an iPod nano because it has a radio. For that purpose, it's an overpriced piece of crap, but I use it anyway. The most glaring problem is the lack of a way to lock the controls, so the volume and radio station may fluctuate unpredictably.

    16. Re:u dont need an ipod by green1 · · Score: 1

      My wife jogs every day with her Samsung S5 Neo, her iPod hasn't been plugged in in years.

      Personally the only time I run is if something is chasing me...

    17. Re:u dont need an ipod by green1 · · Score: 1

      Maybe you should have chosen a phone that suited your needs? it would probably have been cheaper than a separate device.

    18. Re:u dont need an ipod by green1 · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what the difference is between leaving your phone in the car/at home vs having it on you and not replying to messages. For that matter, most phones have a silent or do-not-disturb mode that works very well.

      As for replacement cost. Maybe you need to be less hard on your things?

      As for apple compatibility with other devices... why would they? and why would you care? it's a music player. put music on it and forget it. Unless it is INCREDIBLY poorly designed, there's nothing Apple needs to do to make it compatible with their computers. it should just be a storage device that you drag and drop music on to.

    19. Re:u dont need an ipod by green1 · · Score: 1

      Then maybe you shouldn't buy apple phones?

      If the device you're buying doesn't suit your needs. Consider buying a version that does.

    20. Re:u dont need an ipod by green1 · · Score: 1

      My phone has physical buttons too. volume up, volume down, power, and home. Those buttons control music as much as I need to. they adjust the volume, skip forward or backwards, and pause.

    21. Re:u dont need an ipod by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That doesn't mean your kid doesn't need a smartphone, it means you need to start raising a fuss with the school board.

      Smart parents want their kids to have smart phones. Stupid parents don't want their kids to have phones.

    22. Re:u dont need an ipod by DarkVader · · Score: 1

      Yes they do.

      Not only do they have headphones in the box that plug into the phone, they also have an adapter in the box to plug in your old-style headphones.

      And of course they also have Bluetooth, which works beautifully without plugging anything in at all.

    23. Re:u dont need an ipod by Sumus+Semper+Una · · Score: 1

      How do you manage it? My jogging shorts only have side pockets and they're either so deep that my gait causes the phone to start swinging wildly because of its weight (which annoys me to no end, and it's only an S5) or they're so shallow that I worry about the phone falling out when I step up from crosswalk to curb.

    24. Re:u dont need an ipod by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      As much as you need to. You are not me, nor are you anyone else.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    25. Re:u dont need an ipod by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 2

      That's exactly the point, I last had an mp3 player a decade ago before I had a phone that could play music. Why carry a second device to do the same thing?

      Have you ever tried jogging with a Samsung Note in your pocket? Or even a regular sized smart phone as opposed to something the size of an iPod nano or shuffle? There are reasons to have a small, dedicated MP3 player, even if they don't apply to everyone. It just doesn't have to cost so much and has no new features to try to sell, which is why I suspect they would prefer to discontinue it. Fortunately, they aren't the only provider for that kind of device.

      They are discontinuing it because hardly anyone buys them anymore. If people bought them, Apple would continue to build them, and even improve them.

      Why is it ALWAYS some sort of "ulterior motive"?

    26. Re:u dont need an ipod by rthille · · Score: 1

      I don't carry my phone when I run. My iPod Shuffle, clipped to my hat works great for that.

      I've got a 6th-gen Nano in the car for podcasts. The iPhone Podcasts app is shite, so I prefer the nano.

      --
      Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
    27. Re:u dont need an ipod by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      The phone has problems though. First, it's expensive. I don't want to go jogging with one in my pocket for fear it will break, and certainy it will get a bit sweaty. And the phone is HEAVY! Ugh. And finally the user interface on the ipod nano, 2nd gen, is very easy to use, you don't have to swipe your fingerprint will on the run, or squint to see the screen in the sunlight, etc.

      Today though, my ipod is in my car as the mp3 players. It works great with itunes, downloads podcosts easily and with no hassle and then my car can play those. My phone won't do that; itunes won't work with 3rd party mp3 players, and non-apple podcast programs are sucky.

    28. Re:u dont need an ipod by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      I've got a 2nd gen nano and I like it. Every generation after that seems to have gone downhill. Either in an odd form factor, or with video, or losing all the buttons to be touch ony, etc. When I first got mine I thought it was a really brilliant UI, I was not searching for the manual to remember how to do certain things.

    29. Re:u dont need an ipod by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope. A separate device is vastly superior.

    30. Re:u dont need an ipod by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only do they have headphones in the box that plug into the phone

      What kind of headphones? Are they good? As my Sennheisers? As good as my Behringers? As good as a pair of generic, Chinese canalphones? No?

      they also have an adapter in the box to plug in your old-style headphones

      Neat! A dongle! I love dongles, those in-line boxes on the cable NEVER get in the way, sway back and forth or snag on things.

      And of course they also have Bluetooth, which works beautifully without plugging anything in at all.

      Yeah, I love that lossy Bluetooth audio compression on top of the already existing lossy MP3 compression. It just makes the music sound that much cooler.

    31. Re:u dont need an ipod by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      I didn't like which way the curves went on the second gens, so it was always downhill for me.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    32. Re:u dont need an ipod by Woeful+Countenance · · Score: 1
      I don't know much about fashion or clothing terminology, but I suspect the difference is that I'm not wearing jogging shorts: I wear what I think are called "cargo shorts", with a belt. They end just above my knees, and I guess they're tight enough to prevent anything from swinging wildly. I probably got them from "Vermont's Barre Army-Navy store".

      Things falling out reminds me of President Johnson ordering pants. He wanted pockets deep enough so his pocket knife and what-not didn't fall out when he sat down. I'd go to a store; the President of the United States just called the owner of Haggar.

    33. Re:u dont need an ipod by Woeful+Countenance · · Score: 1

      they also have an adapter in the box to plug in your old-style headphones

      Neat! A dongle! I love dongles, those in-line boxes on the cable NEVER get in the way, sway back and forth or snag on things.

      Unlike, say, headphone cords.

      And of course they also have Bluetooth, which works beautifully without plugging anything in at all.

      Yeah, I love that lossy Bluetooth audio compression on top of the already existing lossy MP3 compression. It just makes the music sound that much cooler.

      You don't have to use MP3; iPhones can store and play back uncompressed audio. Still, you won't get high quality without an external DAC, which is yet another thing to get in the way. Listening to a portable device using Sennheisers is probably a waste of good headphones anyway. (I use Shure headphones, but I recognize the absurdity.)

    34. Re:u dont need an ipod by Sumus+Semper+Una · · Score: 1

      Huh. I usually prefer a looser fit for running shorts for the increased air circulation (which is what causes the wild swinging), but maybe cargo shorts with a tighter fit but breathable fabric are worth a shot. Thanks for the link at least!

    35. Re:u dont need an ipod by Shirley+Marquez · · Score: 1

      They never did. All the compatibility effort is done by the makers of the players. Usually that's just the minimal effort of allowing the player to mount like a USB drive so you can drag files to it (which is exactly the same thing you do on a Windows or Linux system), and including AAC decoding support so you can play music from iTunes.

      The only way that Apple could block the ability to play iTunes files would be to change the format of them. That would also break existing iPods so Apple isn't going to do that. Blocking the ability to mount the device as a file system would also break compatibility with all sorts of other devices, so again it's not going to happen.

      Years ago there were non-Apple music players that would sync with iTunes. Apple no longer supports that capability for any non-Apple device, even the ones that were previously supported, and no new non-Apple device has offered iTunes synchronization for years. There is third party software that will sync non-Apple players with iTunes.

    36. Re:u dont need an ipod by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unlike, say, headphone cords.

      Which headphone cords have a fat, weighted box dangling and swinging inline on the cord? None of mine do.

      You don't have to use MP3

      No, but you are stuck with lossy Bluetooth audio compression, which was never intended for music in the first place. That's far worse than a well encoded MP3, no matter what your source audio is. 99% of all people will be using lossy sources, so that just makes it doubly bad.

      Listening to a portable device using Sennheisers is probably a waste of good headphones anyway.

      No it isn't. I use my V-MODA M-100s with my SanDisk player all of the time. It sounds great. Maybe just iPhone audio is crap and that's why you think the way you do?

    37. Re:u dont need an ipod by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look, I get it. You want to complain, and have nothing useful to add.

      But the reality is that you can use your Sennheisers, just plug them into the fucking dongle. It's a very small dongle, it's less likely to snag on something than the fucking headphone cable.

      And Apple's headphones are quite good. Far better than the generic garbage Chinese canalphones, in fact.

      But hey, you've obviously got a bunch of money to spend on headphones since you bought Sennheisers in the first place, so you can get some quite fancy and expensive Lightning headphones if you can't bear to have a dongle. I mean, I'm not stupid enough to spend $900 on headphones, but you certainly can, since you just can't bear to have a dongle and must have fancy headphones to listen to your MP3s.

      As for me, I only use headphones to make phone calls. I'm quite happy with my $16 Bluetooth Plantronics ear dongle. I don't even bother plugging in the Lightning connector to connect to my car unless I need to charge the phone, Bluetooth is quite sufficient sound quality for listening while I'm driving. And if I'm at home, the surround system is connected via optical digital link to one of my Mac Pros, which has everything encoded in Apple Lossless.

      And you're really going to whine about headphone quality while touting the virtues of plugging into the 1/8" jack in a fucking phone? The one that's connected to a crappy amplifier and equally crappy D/A converter? That jack? Come on, if you're really bothered by sound quality you're going to use an external D/A converter and headphone amp anyway - which is easy to do with the Lightning connector.

  4. Background info by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I googled for this and apparently "ipods" were things Apple provided for people to keep their music on until Steve Jobs had finished inventing the telephone.

    1. Re:Background info by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What'a a telephone?

    2. Re:Background info by serviscope_minor · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yeah but they were a load of rubbish.

      No wireless.

      Less space than a nomad.

      LAME.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    3. Re:Background info by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The iPhone uses the same DAC as the iPod, but it was crippled through software, likely to improve battery life. Anyone who was interested in music quality and had a decent pair of headphones could easily hear the difference for the exact same song played on an iPod vs an iPhone.

    4. Re:Background info by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Originally phones were just for talking on, they transmitted sound and hence the name 'phone' which comes from the Greek for sound. Then Steve Jobs had the idea of adding a screen, like on a telly - hence the name 'telly-phone' or telephone.

    5. Re:Background info by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      The iPhone uses the same DAC as the iPod, but it was crippled through software, likely to improve battery life. Anyone who was interested in music quality and had a decent pair of headphones could easily hear the difference for the exact same song played on an iPod vs an iPhone.

      Too bad you don't know anything about hardware.

      How in the FUCK do you "cripple" a DAC? It has exactly ONE job: Convert a number into a voltage (or current) level. That's it.

      You're insane. Try looking into the EQ settings on that phone. Somebody probably fucked-around and put some sort of ridiculous "Bass Boost" EQ preset on the phone you were listening to.

      Moron.

    6. Re:Background info by HalAtWork · · Score: 1

      Yeah, now I have to buy an expensive phone with way less room and use it instead. Sucks honestly. I don't need the phone bits. But at least it has a good camera. The one thing I was disappointed with in the iPod Touch was the neutered camera. Hard to find tablets with a good camera too. Not sure why they think only phones need them.

    7. Re:Background info by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What people used before asynchronous messaging

    8. Re:Background info by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >...until Steve Jobs had finished inventing the CLOUD STORAGE FOR YOUR MUSIC
      FTFFY

      Look, the iPod is merely the stepping stone to get your music off your own ownership & onto the 'caring & responsible' storage clouds. Where your music is sniffed & decided if it's a copy or not. Lots of music loss these days...

  5. More people would buy them by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 2

    More people would buy them if they removed the headphone jack. Maybe apple should try that.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    1. Re:More people would buy them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they need a better "innovation". They should just sell a pretty rock... iRock.

    2. Re:More people would buy them by blindseer · · Score: 1

      I thought it was the "iRack"

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      I can't wait to see how the iRan turns out.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    3. Re:More people would buy them by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Somehow I was expecting... something else.

      I would have bought the iRack 36D.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    4. Re:More people would buy them by blindseer · · Score: 1

      I expect that to happen. About the time when Apple starts to make headphones with the iPod functions built into them.

      I can imagine a headset that takes voice commands for playing music, or taking notes, or whatever. It will double as a headset for an iPhone, or pair with another Apple device. If voice commands are impossible because of noise then use a small set of buttons on the earpieces, or use your phone to control it.

      Alternatively there will be enough headphones with Lightning connectors, or whatever comes to replace it, that people call those the "headphone jack".

      Do a search on "Lightning headphones" and "USB-C headphones" and perhaps you too can see why the days of the headphone jack is numbered. Wireless charging and wireless headphones could mean seeing a phone soon with no ports on it.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    5. Re:More people would buy them by jittles · · Score: 1

      More people would buy them if they removed the headphone jack. Maybe apple should try that.

      Apple does not have the courage to do such a thing. Leave it to Samsung to remove the headphone jack, first.

    6. Re:More people would buy them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But then you wouldn't be able to join the military!

  6. Capitalism is communism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is no respect for the individual. The market collective rules what you can buy. Apple must surrender to the public domain all patents and copyrights on the iPod nano and shuffle for there to be justice.

  7. Apple Watch by iamacat · · Score: 2

    That's probably the current way to listen to music with Bluetooth headphones and get lots of other functionality. If that's too expensive, there are also Android Wear/Samsung devices with similar functions. Technology moves on and MP3 players without WiFi are pretty clunky in 2017.

    1. Re:Apple Watch by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      I bought a Fiio DAP last week exactly BECAUSE it doenst have wifi. It will never update, it will never change, it will eternally be the same interface. I want that.

      --
      Good-bye
    2. Re:Apple Watch by Gilgaron · · Score: 1

      My kids have iPod nanos because we wanted something with limited functionality. Small market for that, I suppose.

    3. Re:Apple Watch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, kids are a 'small' market, by definition, I guess.

    4. Re:Apple Watch by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      And if you really want something like an iPod shuffle, there's plenty of those on eBay. Not sure they can play AAC though. Some sellers do list AAC support but it comes from a Windows-only program that converts AAC into something else for the music player.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    5. Re:Apple Watch by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Kids don't have a lot of money.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    6. Re:Apple Watch by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      Technology moves on and MP3 players without WiFi are pretty clunky in 2017.

      Not to mention having less space than a Nomad.

      Totally lame.

    7. Re:Apple Watch by omnichad · · Score: 1

      MP3 players without WiFi are pretty clunky in 2017

      Requiring connectivity limits where you can use it and makes it a security liability once it's out of support.

      A player that can store music can work for decades if replacement batteries are available. If I could get my hands on a Classic with Flash storage and an easy to replace battery, I'm set for life. If I want to stream occasionally, I have my phone for that.

    8. Re:Apple Watch by Gilgaron · · Score: 1

      They probably have more capital than I do if their grandparents come into play!

    9. Re:Apple Watch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.

    10. Re:Apple Watch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then you're a bad parent.

    11. Re:Apple Watch by iamacat · · Score: 1

      Market for gadgets to use for decades at the expense of convenience is too small for the likes of Apple. But I am sure it can be picked up by a niche company.

    12. Re:Apple Watch by omnichad · · Score: 1

      They don't have to be made for it to be good for it.

  8. I love my Nano by murdocj · · Score: 1

    I have an old Nano and I still use it and I just love it. It's light, I can operate it without looking at it, have a great fabric case that clips to my shorts when I work out. If it would hold a charge and would always shut down when I tell it to it would be perfect. But Apple is still going to have to pry it from my cold, dead fingers.

    1. Re:I love my Nano by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      But Apple is still going to have to pry it from my cold, dead fingers.

      Er what? No one from Apple is coming to your house to destroy your nano. Apple is simply not making or selling any new ones on their website. You can still get one at other retailers like BestBuy, Target, Walmart, Newegg, Amazon, eBay, etc.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    2. Re:I love my Nano by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I can operate it without looking at it

      That's the killer feature for me, when I'm driving I can reach down and skip to the next track by touch and never need to glance away from the road.

    3. Re:I love my Nano by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      No one from Apple is coming to your house to destroy your nano.

      You would think.

      (Yes, I'm joking. Yes, I know there's a difference between an iPod nano and a prototype iPhone.)

  9. oh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People still bought these?

    1. Re:oh? by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 2

      People still bought these?

      Not an iPod specifically, but I recently bought a new mp3 player for the gym since I don't want to take my phone into the gym with me. Sure... there's still desire for mp3 players and a market (if a smaller market). My kids all have mp3 players too- the eldest is only 13 so some way off needing a phone still.

      / side rant- nothing worse than the chick who sits on the equipment you want to use playing with her phone for 30 minutes and not exercising... I swear 20% of the people at the gym don't actually do any exercise.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    2. Re:oh? by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Yes but not as many as when iPod was popular. If you need a small media player, these were ideal.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    3. Re:oh? by rthille · · Score: 1

      I did. I bought a Nano just a month ago to use with my Airpods, since my 6th gen doesn't have bluetooth. But the podcast app on it sucked, so I returned it.

      --
      Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
  10. Shuffle was combat ready by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 1

    Both of our kids had Shuffles. My son left his in his pocket and it went in the washing machine. Still worked after it came out of the dryer.

    --
    Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    1. Re:Shuffle was combat ready by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing exceptional. As long as they're turned off, most electronics will survive the washing machine.

    2. Re:Shuffle was combat ready by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      I just tried that with a 15" MacBook Pro. You lied.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    3. Re:Shuffle was combat ready by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My kid also sent 5th-gen nano through wash+dry. screen is dead but music still plays on external speakers (with external controls).

  11. I still use both, well one at least by jfdavis668 · · Score: 1

    I use a shuffle and a nano at the gym. Unfortunately, I just ran the nano through the wash. I guess I should order a replacement before their gone.

    1. Re:I still use both, well one at least by OzPeter · · Score: 1

      I use a shuffle and a nano at the gym. Unfortunately, I just ran the nano through the wash. I guess I should order a replacement before their gone.

      Several months ago I also ran my old, square nano through the wash as well. I replaced it with the current model but boy do I miss that old form factor. I had to buy a 3rd party case in-order to clip in on and even then I had to cut the case up to get decent access to the volume buttons.

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
  12. saturation by ArhcAngel · · Score: 1

    I have the last three phones I used as daily drivers. One is the living room remote, another is the bedroom remote and yet another is a media player. There are simply too many devices that can do what these devices were purpose built to do. And they have more functionality.

    --
    "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
    1. Re:saturation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have the last three phones I used as daily drivers. One is the living room remote, another is the bedroom remote and yet another is a media player. There are simply too many devices that can do what these devices were purpose built to do. And they have more functionality.

      Speaking of purpose built, do you even remember what the only function of a phone used to be?

      Here's a hint; it wasn't to control your TV or play music.

    2. Re:saturation by DarkVader · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I remember.

      Those days sucked. I had to carry a phone AND a Palm Pilot.

  13. Appsolutely! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Modern app appers ONLY app apps, and these LUDDITE iPods can't run apps!

    Apps!

    1. Re:Appsolutely! by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      It's probably the first time this comment has been on-topic and appropriate. Mod parent up, +5 informative.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
  14. The end of an era by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Two really groundbreaking products. They pushed the envelope at the time and altered our perception of what was even possible. Like the iPhone, we take them for granted now. But if you lived it, you know -- these shaped the industry and created the micro form factor marketplace that exists today. Well done. RIP Steve Jobs. Your legacy is remembered.

    1. Re:The end of an era by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WTF? These were slightly finer polished 'me too' products.

    2. Re:The end of an era by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd like to dig up Steve Jobs and sodomize his corpse with a broomstick. He is nothing. He never was and never will be. He is dead, dead, dead. Woz was the good one. Woz is the smart one. Jobs was evil from the start. He wasn't anything but a limp dick. Very limp.

    3. Re:The end of an era by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Woz was a one hit wonder. Jobs went on to build an empire and spearheaded the creation of devices which irrevocably changed our world. All while staying true to his nature.

    4. Re:The end of an era by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      Woz was a one hit wonder. Jobs went on to build an empire and spearheaded the creation of devices which irrevocably changed our world. All while staying true to his nature.

      At least TWO hits.

      And oh, what hits they were, too...

      BTW, your jealousy is showing.

  15. Expect an Apple Watch update by blindseer · · Score: 1

    With battery and storage technology improving these devices got small enough to put on a wrist band. Also, cell phones are not the luxury items they used to be and some are more capable than many low end laptops.

    The Apple Watch was considered a flop by many, I think Apple learned from that. Anyone remember the Apple Newton? That's just and early prototype of the current iDevices. They'll take their lessons from the Watch and iPod and come out with something new. I'm quite sure of that.

    With electronics getting so light and people wanting these augmented reality things then maybe Apple will come out with a computer that has a screen you wear on your head and call it "iGlass". "iPatch"? I'm sure people will call them "iSores" though.

    --
    I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    1. Re:Expect an Apple Watch update by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Actually in many senses the Newton was far ahead of our current smart phones.
      Especially in handwriting recognition, interaction of 'Apps', the software centered around a soup of objects, the programming language (Dylan).
      There are plenty of enthusiasts still using them, the prices on eBay are extreme.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    2. Re:Expect an Apple Watch update by shess · · Score: 2

      With battery and storage technology improving these devices got small enough to put on a wrist band. Also, cell phones are not the luxury items they used to be and some are more capable than many low end laptops.

      So I can replace $150 worth of dedicated music player with $1000 worth of bluetooth headphones, a watch, and a phone? Sign me up!

      Though I guess I can't really fault Apple for dropping it. It's not their duty to support every random long-tail use case.

    3. Re:Expect an Apple Watch update by blindseer · · Score: 1

      So I can replace $150 worth of dedicated music player with $1000 worth of bluetooth headphones, a watch, and a phone? Sign me up!

      No. If you already have invested $1000 in headphones, cell phone, and fancy watch then why spend another $150 on something to do what the other things you already own can do?

      Companies didn't stop making pagers because the competition made better pagers. They got out of that business because people got cell phones instead. What does an iPod Shuffle do for someone that likely already has an iPhone and/or Apple Watch? Even cameras and GPS units have the ability to play music now. The iPod Touch is so small, cheap, and light that it's pushing the other iPods out of the market. The iPod Touch also does much more than just play music.

      Do people even wear a wristwatch any more? I haven't had one in years. I have a iPhone in my pocket all the time, and it tells me the time just fine. It also plays music, gives me access to e-mail, all kinds of stuff. I used to carry a flashlight with me too but my iPhone replaced that. Not a perfect replacement but it's good enough to get me to where I keep my "real" flashlights.

      One thing I've pondered recently is how much I rely on my iPhone for everything. I thought it might be wise to get an iPod Touch as a "hot spare" in case I lose or break my iPhone. At $199 or $299 it's pretty cheap for what it does. Now, if they'd only offer one without that stupid headphone jack.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    4. Re:Expect an Apple Watch update by Cochonou · · Score: 1

      Do people even wear a wristwatch any more?

      Yes.

    5. Re:Expect an Apple Watch update by blindseer · · Score: 1

      I should have been more specific. Do people wear wristwatches as anything other than jewelry or status symbols?

      People can get a wristwatch that can keep time with incredible accuracy for less than $10. People obviously buy them since I can still see them for sale. What I don't see though are people wearing them. There's a very limited market for a watch as a mere timepiece. What there is a large market for are people that buy wristwatch like devices that are more jewelry than a time piece, or more of a fitness monitor that happens to keep time too.

      The wristwatch has transformed into a fashion accessory and/or multi-function device. Pagers had a similar transformation into the cell phone and these computers on a wristband. The portable music player has also evolved, and like the wristwatch have become a fashion accessory or multi-function device.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    6. Re:Expect an Apple Watch update by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually I love wearing an analogue wrist watch, a precise, tiny machine, doing it's job in a world of digital shit.

  16. Good News for Mac Mini? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I'm hopeful, since this would have been the perfect time to discontinue the Mac Mini if they had no intention of updating it.

    1. Re:Good News for Mac Mini? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 2

      Maybe they're waiting for next tuesday.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    2. Re:Good News for Mac Mini? by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      I'm hopeful, since this would have been the perfect time to discontinue the Mac Mini if they had no intention of updating it.

      Apple claimed in April that the mini was "Still a very important part of our product line-up."

      They also hinted at a redesigned mini. Look for something in 2018, to coincide with the new "modular" Mac Pro.

  17. That's a shame. by Scorch_Mechanic · · Score: 2

    I have an iPod Nano (fifth generation). I use it almost entirely as a podcast device, and the built in FM tuner is nice when I'm walking somewhere and I want to listen to the radio (I listen to a lot of public radio). The thing holds decent charge and has a decent enough amount of space, allowing me to keep the space open in my phone and not use up charge on the same. It may a little cumbersome sometimes, but not very. I like it, and will continue to like it until it eventually dies an ignominious death.

    Then I'll probably replace it with something non-apple. iPods are nice, but expensive. This one was a gift.

    --
    You should turn signatures off.
    1. Re:That's a shame. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Apple lost my custom for portable media players when they transitioned the Nano from a device with tactile controls to a touchscreen. I need to operate the device by touch more than I need to look at the screen and admire pretty icons.

    2. Re:That's a shame. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed, that was a death knell for the ipod, and only in 2012! Who would have thought it!

  18. Teaching opertunity. by jellomizer · · Score: 1

    Get the kid a Rasbery Pi and have him make his own Music Player.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  19. Still surprised they managed to sell the Shuffle by iampiti · · Score: 2

    For me a screen is a pretty important thing in a music player but I guess some people don't care.
    Anyway, my reasons to still use an "MP3" player in 2017 are that: My smartphone doesn't have an FM radio, using the player I avoid draining the phone's battery, I dare carrying the player in situations/places that I consider too dangerous for the much more expensive phone.

  20. iPod touch is very close to iPhone by perpenso · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The iPod touch looks and acts like an iPhone, including standard and 3rd party apps, but without the cellular connection, phone or GPS. As much as I love the Pi, it is not a replacement for an iPod touch.

    The iPod touch can also be important to iOS developers. A far less expensive device to test on. Also a convenient secondary or tertiary device to leave running past versions of iOS for testing.

    1. Re:iPod touch is very close to iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As much as I love the Pi, it is not a replacement for an iPod touch.

      Ok, but nobody said it was. This is about alternatives to the Nano and Shuffle, not the the Touch which Apple is still making (for now).

    2. Re:iPod touch is very close to iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As much as I love the Pi, it is not a replacement for an iPod touch.

      Ok, but nobody said it was. This is about alternatives to the Nano and Shuffle, not the the Touch which Apple is still making (for now).

      The conversation drifted to, is an MP3 player necessary when everyone has a phone? It was brought up that some parents may not want to start a child on a phone. The iPod touch was mentioned as an alternative to the phone, a far better alternative than the Pi. Even little kids want more than just an MP3 player. Games for instance.

    3. Re:iPod touch is very close to iPhone by pnutjam · · Score: 1
    4. Re:iPod touch is very close to iPhone by guises · · Score: 1

      The iPod touch can also be important to iOS developers. A far less expensive device to test on.

      My experience: if you're not buying new then it's cheaper to buy an iPhone than an iPod Touch. Probably due to market glut, I don't know, but check both before you buy. The difference was substantial when I did it most recently.

    5. Re:iPod touch is very close to iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep. I've got a SanDisk Sansa Clip Zip running Rockbox with a 128GB micro SD card. It's fucking awesome.

  21. Re:Still surprised they managed to sell the Shuffl by Gilgaron · · Score: 1

    Mine last saw heavy use when I was finishing my basement. Nice to have something with physical buttons so I could skip songs randomly without taking attention off of what I was doing. Screens are nice but you have to look at them to accomplish anything, which is only ideal most of the time...

  22. my 1st gen iPod shuffle just... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...looked up at me from my desk and said, "Don't worry, I'll keep working forever. Let's go for a run!"

  23. Nano market by unixisc · · Score: 1

    The kids are not the ones who want limited functionality. Some of their parents are!

    1. Re:Nano market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *sigh* Was it that bad? Or was it just too subtle?

    2. Re:Nano market by unixisc · · Score: 1

      No, it was just not obvious at all. Kids may want something, but their parents may prefer getting something else. Nothing in your statement suggested that, no matter how deep one looked

    3. Re:Nano market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *wow!* Because of you I have to spoil everything?

      You get one more stab at it... Do yourself a favor and try not to think so hard

  24. Wallet by Chrontius · · Score: 1

    Pity. I was just thinking about how the iPod Nano could be the entry-level Apple Pay wallet you give your kids. Or made into a small phone for people who like small phones.

  25. iPod Shuffle Small but important niches by williamyf · · Score: 1

    These niches were:

    1.) I want to do sports without having my phone on me, be as light as possible.

    2.) I want an iTunes capable device I can use while driving my car without looking at a screen, only by tactile and muscle memory feedback... (my particular use case)

    For these two niches, there was nothing like an iPod Shuffle. There are some chinese knock-offs that offer a similar formfactor, but not similar quality.

    Will be sorely missed.

    --
    *** Suerte a todos y Feliz dia!
    1. Re:iPod Shuffle Small but important niches by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 1

      My wife teaches spinning, and needs to keep all her music with her. The phone doesn't work because she can't tolerate a lock screen while teaching, and also doesn't want the "bing" of a text message or phone call coming in to be a distraction.

      The nano would have been perfect if it had more storage. She ended up just getting the touch and leaving it in airplane mode. Compromise, overpriced for her need, but it works ok.

  26. Boring... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When I want to listen to the latest and greatest music... I listen to the radio. Aside from that, all I need is my copy of Pink Floyd's 'Dark Side of the Moon' and some LSD.

  27. Hey, Apple: by ZecretZquirrel · · Score: 1

    "You don't have to do this." --various dead, to Anton Chigurh

  28. Ubiquitous in all car audio systems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would like it if there was a way to connect USB to my car audio system and access FLAC files natively. With my hacked classic 60gb iPod and iFlash i have 256gb of micro-SD ALAC files which my car radio will let me browse by artist, album etc on its touch screen because its apple-native, and digital link-no headphone jack cd-quality is the best audio i have ever heard. I want to see the same thing for lossless audio on my Android so I can purge apple products from my tech inventory. They do sound awesome on the stereo and integrated touchscreen with USB digital audio makes it mandatory until I can do the same thing with Android.

  29. Loved my shuffle . . . by dmatos · · Score: 1

    I had a shuffle for many years until I replaced it. It was fantastic, mostly because it was so small and light. I'd just clip it to the back of my shirt collar when going for a run or out to do some gardening, and it was pretty much imperceptible.

    By contrast, smartphones tend to be upwards of 100g, or almost a quarter pound. That's enough weight that if you want to secure it to your person, you need to look at a special holder to do so. Pain in the butt.

    --

    It may look like I'm doing nothing, but I'm actively waiting for my problems to go away.
    --Scott Adams
  30. My phone is too puny by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 1

    That's exactly the point, I last had an mp3 player a decade ago before I had a phone that could play music. Why carry a second device to do the same thing?

    One big problem with phones (and tablets) is that at least none of the ones I have found so far, have a hard disk. SD Cards are just now getting to where they're nearly big enough (for not too much money) so phones will probably become viable pretty soon. (But I realize this kind of depends on the size of your collection; we all have our own spots and maybe 200 GB is plenty enough for some people, whereas others won't be happy until they can carry 4 TB.)

    BTW, if anyone knows of a phone or tablet sized Android device which actually has (roughly) terabyte-magnitude storage, or better yet, can take an internal 2.5" SATA drive, please share. I realize there are external drive options available, which should be ok in the car, but that's always going to be a little awkward and hackish. (And if you've got a battery-operated computer anyway, then it's silly to not have your hard disk on the same UPS. Whoops, I turned off the car before I shut down, we'll need to fsck before music's available again...)

    But it's just a matter of time. 256 GB SD cards are pretty widely available and cheap, so in just a couple more years, what I want should be around. Hmm.. anyone know of a current-day tablet that will take 2-4 SD cards? ;-)

    --
    "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
    1. Re:My phone is too puny by green1 · · Score: 1

      Apple is discontinuing the iPod Shuffle and iPod Nano. The highest capacity iPod nano or shuffle had 16GB of storage. My phone has more than that before I add an SD card.
      So please explain how my suggestion to use your phone instead of the iPod nano or iPod shuffle will negatively impact the amount of music you can carry around?

    2. Re:My phone is too puny by Sloppy · · Score: 1

      So please explain how my suggestion to use your phone instead of the iPod nano or iPod shuffle will negatively impact the amount of music you can carry around?

      I can't. I was explaining that phones aren't very good as portable music players, not comparing them to iPods. Now that you mention the amusing/stunning limitations of the iPod, my argument basically just comes down to: I don't use a phone because they're just as bad as iPods. (In terms of storage. iPods have other problems, too.)

      Even in 2003 my music player had a 30 GB hard disk. From looking at 2.5" drive prices, a modern music player ought to have 500GB-1TB. Problem is, I can't find a modern one! Everyone keeps saying to use phones, but all of today's phones still have storage roughly on par with late 1990s computers.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    3. Re:My phone is too puny by green1 · · Score: 1

      If current generation portable music players are no better than phones for capacity, then you've completely invalidated your own argument.
      Maybe none of them are good enough for you, but that doesn't mean that you can simply use the one vs the other to solve the problem.

  31. iPod Nano is the last great device for long runs. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Sure it's a pain to load music - the old school way from your iTunes music collection. But the combination of the Nano and in-ear bluetooth headphones is by far the least intrusive way of listening to music or podcasts when running. I find it odd those who strap on to their arm devices the size of a paperback to go for a run. The audio quality of the Nano is great, the battery life too and it can fit in anywhere. In the winter I just tuck the Nano into my glove negating the need for any sort of arm band. I've gone through pretty much the entire iPod Nano series and multiple bluetooth headphones. For running, the current Nano paired with an excellent set of headphones such as the Jaybirds, the experience cannot not be beat. I knew their evolution would come to an end as it is obvious that Apple has lost interest in this space. Still; its a shame Apple chose not to continue it's evolution. A wireless way of syncing music would have been great.

  32. iPod Nano. The last great music device for running by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure it's a pain to load music - the old school way from your iTunes music collection. But the combination of the Nano and in-ear bluetooth headphones is by far the least intrusive way of listening to music or podcasts when running. I find it odd those who strap on to their arm devices the size of a paperback to go for a run. The audio quality of the Nano is great, the battery life too and it can fit in anywhere. In the winter I just tuck the Nano into my glove negating the need for any sort of arm band. I've gone through pretty much the entire iPod Nano series and multiple bluetooth headphones. For running, the current Nano paired with an excellent set of headphones such as the Jaybirds, the experience cannot not be beat. I knew their evolution would come to an end as it is obvious that Apple has lost interest in this space. Still; its a shame Apple chose not to continue it's evolution. A wireless way of syncing music would have been great.

  33. Saw This Coming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Been expecting this for since Steve Jobs died.

    iTunes will be next; possibly September.

    Still use my 6th gen nano as a wristwatch. And my 2nd gen shuffle still works; listen to it at home (great FM radio).

  34. These small players were great. by Dusanyu · · Score: 1

    For places like the gym or any place where your expensive phone could possibly be stolen or, could fall from your pocket and break. The advantages of these small light devices cant be understated as well Oh well I still have my Gen 1 iPod mini its easy to open and easy to service ill keep it going.

  35. Re:Still surprised they managed to sell the Shuffl by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    Screens are something for a mammoth music collection. The iPod shuffle originally came with 512MB of RAM, barely enough to fit 2-3 albums. You didn't need a screen to select a song.

    It also had a pretty niche purpose. I owned one despite generally hating Apple devices (mainly to do with iTunes) and already having an MP3 player. It was DAAAAAMN light, and it was just a little clip. I don't think there was a more perfect device for jogging. I'm still not sure there is.

  36. Telecommunication by HalAtWork · · Score: 1

    Not exactly, but teleVision and telePhone both have the 'tele' prefix due to the method of transmission called Telecommunication.

    "Telecommunication is the transmission of signs, signals, messages, words, writings, images and sounds or intelligence of any nature by wire, radio, optical or other electromagnetic systems."

    1. Re:Telecommunication by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And this relates to audio playback of digital stored content how?

  37. One small step ... one big step by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every time Apple makes a product announcement these days I keep finding myself one step closer to moving off their products. They seem to have a knack for droping all the best things they've come up with. (magsafe, shuffle, a decent Macbook Pro ... )

  38. Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why pay a load of money for another device that is pretty much the size of a phone (or evaen smaller), when everybody has phones today that can play music? We don't need no iPod or stupid iWatches. It's good to see Apple fading away. Expensive is not the way to go anymore.