Switched On: The "i" behind iPod -- innovation, integration, or inertia?

Each week Ross Rubin contributes Switched On, a weekly column about the future of technology, multimedia, and digital entertainment:

More than two decades after the debut of the Macintosh, Apple decided not to license the iPod design generally. The one exception has been HP, which is currently acting more as a reseller than a licensee. So, as with its famous computer, the iPod's fate rests solely in Apple's hands, Those hands have pushed the polyphonic pods toward a dominant market share. However, how much of this has been due to innovation, the integration with iTunes, or simply brand momentum?

Early iPods had clear form factor and ease of use advantages versus their competitors. Nowadays, though, the hardware competition has become much stronger, particularly in the "mini" segment that's seeing strong growth. The changes that we've seen since the debut of the iPod have mostly been refinements - thinner designs, color screens, smaller form factors, shuffled controls, and tweaked interfaces. Compare this with Apple's iMac, which has seen two dramatically different form factors since incarnation. One could argue that the slow-growth consumer desktop computer market needs more pizzazz to create excitement, but shouldn't a company be advancing the product that's driving its growth most aggressively?

And what of the software � not iTunes, which has actually seen some nice feature improvements, but the iPod�s internal software? It has remained simple, but Apple only recently enabled iPods to go into shuffle mode without digging through on-screen menus. What about going beyond a basic shuffle? It seems reasonable to want to switch on the fly to more songs from a particular album or artist or to enter �mood-matching� mode and play songs that have a tempo or style similar to the one you�re playing. �The �Walkman of the 21st Century� should be giving us more of a taste of the 22nd.

Compare this to the intelligence we�re seeing added to digital cameras, where companies such as HP and Nikon are starting to add in-device features such as red-eye reduction and adaptive backlighting. Even Concord, a low-end manufacturer, has added a one-touch autofix feature.

Ask Apple what�s driving the iPod�s success and the company will tout integration. Indeed, producing a product with the benefit of tighter integration often results in losing the first-mover advantage. Apple�s integration has reaped huge benefits for the iPod in a time when digital music has been confusing and awkward for many users and the company will likely continue to maintain a wider lead here than it will in hardware or software per se. However, it�s a risky bet that over time the Windows Media world won�t simplify to the point where that advantage is minimized.

So how does Apple avoid what happened to the Mac? For one, there is no legacy of DOS-based MP3 players (an amusing image that) to create the switching costs that hurt Macs in the early years. Second, iPod-hostile IT managers aren�t making bulk music player purchase decisions weighted against Apple�s strengths. There�s also the third �i� of inertia. Apple continues to promote and diversify the iPod line, most recently in terms of finer, more consistent price point gradations.

The reasoning goes that as long as there isn�t a significant perceived price difference between the iPod and competitive products, Apple should maintain its momentum. This probably yielded more of the impetus behind the bare-bones iPod Shuffle than anything else. Having a high market share helps this strategy because it provides a financial incentive for third-parties to fill in features that might draw customers to competitors or add new ones (like car stereo integration) that are difficult for competitors to match.

After so much time competing with a master monopolist, Apple is acting as if it has learned the tricks of the trade � get it right, brand pervasively, steal opportunistically, enable diversity, and occasionally move the needle ever so gradually under the guise of not messing with success.

---

Ross Rubin is director of industry analysis at NPD Techworld, a division of market research and analysis provider The NPD Group. Views expressed in Switched On, however, are his own. Feedback is welcome at [e-mail].

[Jeff @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

Er, ok... what's the point of this article again? I mean some of the arguments make sense, some don't, but I just don't really know what position the author's taking.

Is it that the iPod line is stagnating? I don't see how you look at the introduction of the Shuffle and say that (whatever you think of the Shuffle - and I hate it - it is a brand new product in the line).

Is it that Apple's riding on the coattails of their own success? Ok... so what? They've got 92% market share in hard drive players and are now moving in to the flash arena. What exactly are they supposed to do? *Not* ride their own success?

Is it that they're a "monopolist" that would, by definition, need to be legally sanctioned? (This is hinted at in the last paragraph.) Apple's not stopping anyone from making their own hardware and software and indeed, many other companies have tried. I haven't seen any MS-like anti-competitive business practices from Apple. It's not like they're bundling iPods with all of their PC's and refusing to accept any competitors' products. They're selling a product and people are buying it. What, exactly, is the issue?

I just don't really know what this article is trying to say.

[B @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

The point is Apple needs to add a feature to my iPod where when I'm listening to music in shuffle mode and I hear a praticular song, I can listen to more songs from the album/artist/genre of the song I'm listening to.

[crsh @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

"i" was and is only used for consumer line; marketing-wise, it caters to the egotestical shoppers that need to be comforted (read: empowered) by purchasing a personal device that's cool, unique, "made for -me-". As far as I know though, all the companies that tried to go that route, feeding off the trendy new standard, failed. They can't spin something they don't understand, merely copying/adapting it just doesn't work (and screams "rip off").

[Oliver @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

I think the article is trying to say that in many ways apple is using the same strategies with the iPod as it did with the Macintosh, but this time it won't necessarily lead to failure in the long-run.

[tf @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

"Early iPods had clear form factor and ease of use advantages versus their competitors. Nowadays, though, the hardware competition has become much stronger, particularly in the �mini� segment that�s seeing strong growth."

You mention form factor and ease of use, yet you can't mention anyone who beats the form factor or ease of use?

"Compare this with Apple�s iMac, which has seen two dramatically different form factors since incarnation."

And it had the same form factor for 5 years! Point? I don't think so. In less than 3 years we've seen 4 gens of iPod, 3 distinct models, and numerous updates.

"And what of the software � not iTunes, which has actually seen some nice feature improvements, but the iPod�s internal software? It has remained simple, but Apple only recently enabled iPods to go into shuffle mode without digging through on-screen menus."

Has it? Contacts, Calendars, and Notes have been added. Games and additional Games have been added. On the Go Playlists were added. Battery life improved. Customizable Menus were added. Numerous other features were added.

"Compare this to the intelligence we�re seeing added to digital cameras, where companies such as HP and Nikon are starting to add in-device features such as red-eye reduction and adaptive backlighting."

How does that compare at all?

"However, it�s a risky bet that over time the Windows Media world won�t simplify to the point where that advantage is minimized."

How is it risky? WMP needs to support as many stores, devices, apps, and services as possible. Hell, it even serves as a video and music player. How can Windows Media ever get as "simple" as iTunes?

"So how does Apple avoid what happened to the Mac?"

What happened to the Mac? At its height the Mac had roughly 20% marketshare at a time when there were numerous platforms and players. The Apples had 30+% marketshare but never the Mac.

[Twist @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

Small correction:

"Compare this with Apple�s iMac, which has seen two dramatically different form factors since incarnation."

should be:

"Compare this with Apple�s iMac, which has seen three dramatically different form factors since incarnation."

The iMac didn't start at the G4 model after all.

[MD @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

"The point is Apple needs to add a feature to my iPod where when I'm listening to music in shuffle mode and I hear a praticular song, I can listen to more songs from the album/artist/genre of the song I'm listening to."

YES! I've been asking for that feature for a couple years now ;-)

That being said, what many tech writers seem to miss is that big reasons the iPod continues to be successful with the masses are its superior interface (especially when you have lots of music), seamless integration with iTunes, and the unmatched "auto-sync" method in which your music is transferred to your iPod. For most consumers, the additional "features" of competing players (like built-in voice recorders) simply aren't worth having to put up with the inferior interface and music management.

[marika @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

I think this article is about a guy who likes to listen to his own voice babbling about the ipod. We had a lot of that lately.

[met @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

Jeff, you can't see any monopolistic behaviour from apple?

How about not licensing their DRM to other companies.
Think of the situation when you'll have to buy music from iTunes because it is not available elsewhere. After all thats all what microsoft does.

[Zak @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

As they are saying, this will be the year of the MP3 player moving into cellphones. I believe this is the area that the MP3 player war will become the most interesting.

In a few years, millions of people could have an MP3 player integrated into their phone. Apple / Motorola need to release a great integrated product so the Moto/iPod phone becomes the "it" phone. This may canabalize their own product line, but the alternative isn't that pretty.

[OddManOut @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

IPod this
IPod that
IPod in a funny hat
IPod everywhere I go
Do I want an IPod ?
Heck no...

I'm not saying it's not a good product. I don't have one so I can't really have an informed opinion, but I doubt it's phenominal success is ALL based on hype and image (that's Sony's job). If it wasn't at least a GOOD product people would have stopped buying it.

But I think as the article suggests it's days as "the undisputed HD player to have" are numbered. Not to say Apple won't continue to put out an excellent product under the IPod label. But eventually, a competing service other than ITunes will distinguish itself, and someone will find a way to balance form and function without using a stark white chassis (and if they're smart they will undercut the 'Pod in price).

This may be a long time in comming, but if portable digital music remains popular I think is pretty inevitable...

And at that point Apple will be forced to accept some loss of market share in the HD player biz (which Apple can afford, it's been a profitable company *most* of it's life with a very small market share, so I doubt it will be completely edged out of a field it is currently dominating in the extreme), or innovate spectacularly.

At least I hope so for the sake of all those devoted IPod fanat-I mean consummers out there. Cause if the'Pod truly becomes/remains the UNCHALLENGED product of the arena, real stagnation is a very possible future.

Just look what's happened to Microsoft...
Their greatest innovation of late has been SP2, which is simply designed to keep their most popular product functioning the way it should have in the first place but didn't.

And lot's of people hated it to...

[David Crowe @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

#5
all you have to do in that situation is navigate to the artist/album/genre of choice. its not that hard. also, you can build "playlists" that contain similar styles of music! it's amazing. there's a reason the ipod has on-the-go playlist functionality, recently updated for older iPods too.

[Monmin @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

I don't hear much about Microsofts "Plays for sure" strategy. People seem to be ignoring this. Or just don't think it is even a threat to apple at all.

I used to really hate windows media player, but I recently used wmp10 to rip my cd's onto my new computer and I have to say wmp10 is good software.

As more hardware gets branded with "Plays for Sure" I think it could put a hurt on Apple. Sonys new players look pretty cool, if they were to work with wmp10 I might get one (I've heard bad things about Sony's own software).

A lot of people don't think Napster-to-go is worth the money, but it is a very intriguing way to make money off of music. I'm sure it will be moderatley succesful. If I ever end up with a player that supports it I would really be tempted to use it for some time. There is a lot of albums I want to hear but dont really want to buy (and I don't feel great about stealing music).

I guess what I'm trying to say through all of this is the industry is not sitting still. Apple has the lead and the momentum, but it won't be easy to keep their position. Apples market share will erode.

[we wa @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

...try 'i' for imitation...i used a mp3 player for about 3 years before apple joined the game.
...and it was just $50 from emusic.com :)

...remember, this was the apple back then, that had fallen behind and lost all innovation, and was still selling imacs and G4s that had CDROM, while PCs had CDR as standard equipment already... :(

[B @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

#10) Navigating to the artist/album and selecting it is 3-4 steps from the main menu, and when you get there there's no way to queue up the selection so you can hear the rest of the album without either skipping the rest of the song you;re listening too or starting over at the begining.

[Rich @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

The iPod momentum is key, especially with regards to third party add-ons and car stereo compatibility. That is where device lock-in is starting to occur. It is easy to spend more on your accessories than you have on the iPod. I'm surprised that no one has made a player that is compatible with iPod peripherals.

[OddManOut @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

"I'm surprised that no one has made a player that is compatible with iPod peripherals."

I'm guessing the Ipod design is proprietary enough that it's dedicated peripherals won't work with anything but an IPod.

Or something remarkably (read. illegaly) similar to an IPod...

So I think this will have to wait for our non-WTO comliant 'comrades' in the far east to handle.

That being said...yeah...I guess I too am surprised it hasn't been done yet.

Ya'll will just have to keep cruising
Lik-sang.com and it's ilk...

[Professor @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

Well, if you're reading this far, good for you. I'm not sure what the point of this article is. However, things like dynaimc playlists are par tof the reason the ipod is such a hit. Apple just gets it and Dell doesn't. Furthermore, 3rd part add ons. Have you seen first hand how cool some of these things are? Sony et al., at this point at least, doesn't have any 3rd part ad ons even remotely close. As with anything it's not just one thing that made thge ipod the smash it is.

[usario clave @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

Are the iPod's days numbered?

Probably.

But one thing that's obvious right now is that nobody in the market today is going to be the one to knock off the iPod (and its various incarnations). If they could, they'd be doing it already.

There are few things that are more personal than music, and nobody wants to carry around something that's ugly (unless they're making their own statement, or they can't afford it). Apple has taken advantage of that.

The only real competition right now is cellphones, because you do take your phone with you everywhere. Maybe soon we'll see iPod shuffles built into cellphones, maybe in some kind of licensing deal with Nokia. That would pretty much solidify Apple's dominance in the soft music world.

[Justin @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

I'm doing the Napster ToGo trial right now. . . and I do have to say the $15/mo for all the music you want IS a good deal. I easily spend $15/mo at the iTunes Music Store, and I thats for a few cds. There are a few problems with Napster though:
1) Not a big fan of the interface. For me, it's much slower than iTunes, and is not as well organized (even more subjectively, Napster doesn't look as good).
2) The selection is real good if you stick to whats on MTV and the bigger names in each genre. Once you venture out, chances of seeing it diminishes quickly. In addition, with the ToGo service, not all tracks are included--some only have the option to purchase.
3) It doesn't work with my iPod (which would be a deal breaker if I was paying for it).

In short, I would be interested in Apple doing a simaliar service.

Has anyone else heard the rummors that the 5G iPods will be redesigned? I'd love it if my iPod didn't fingerprint and scratch so easily.

[Travis Butler @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

I agree, I can't see any particular point to this column, unless it's 'The iPod hasn't succumbed to creeping featureitis, and that's bad.'

Seriously, this is starting to become my hobbyhorse in iPod discussions, the insistence by various pundits that the iPod is doomed to be overtaken because it doesn't have or or just because it has fewer features than the competition. And I'm getting more and more annoyed by it, because it implies that features are the only way to rate, choose or buy a consumer electronics device.

I'm sure I could think of all kinds of neat ways to organize and play music that I'd like to be added on to the iPod. (My own favorite is hierarchical playlists) But I have to admit that every idea I'd come up with is likely to add complexity to the iPod's interface, which is the thing that's made it such a success. So I recognize that it's a trade-off for Apple, improving functionality at the cost of making it more complex and thus harder to use; and while I may not draw the line in the same spot as Apple does, I at least admit that the line is there.

[Thought @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

There is no doubt the iPod still rules, because of its far better user interface. In short, it's easier to use, from both a hardware and software standpoint.

That being said, nothing lasts forever in the corporate world, and Apple will have to continue to come up with great new ideas if it wants to maintain market dominance.

I still believe the greatest threat to the iPod is cell phones with integrated digital music play capabilities. The company that gets the edge in this market will have a huge advantage.

Apple better hope that Motorola comes through for them. However, already Sony has their walkman cell phone, and so time is ticking away.

[koan @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

there's actually ~lots~ of room for innovation in itunes/ipod/itms...

...i mean... take itunes, for example: imagine if apple integrated a certain degree of amazon.com-style suggestion... like, you check off your itunes to send back track-listening data to apple, which archives this and builds databases comparing what you listen to to what other people listen to... it then finds commonalities and suggests music you might like...

...as far as ipod... yeah, it's a lovely player... but there are some things apple should add...

...to me, it's virtually inexcusable that there is no "queue up" option... and i'm not talking about on the go playlists... if i wanted to make an on the go playlist, i'd make one... i want to be able to be listening to 'madvillainy' and then decide that i want to hear 'wake up' off the arcade fire's 'funeral' as soon as the song i'm listening to is done... i know it's kind of hard considering the (beautiful) simplicity of the clickwheel form factor... but these are the guys that integrated the clickwheel in the first place... they should be able to do ~something~...

...also... it is INEXCUSABLE that there is no gapless playback on the ipod... granted, i love my ipod and it comes with me everywhere... but it's ~really~ annoying to get through the first track of 'voodoo' and hear that little ----jump---- where it's supposed to be seamless. isn't this the kind of thing apple could ~easily~ clear up with a firmware update? it doesn't seem like it would be that huge a deal...

...i do think apple should really step up its game... right now, the ipod is the best player because it achieves a happy medium over several categories that other players can't quite reach yet... there's also the fact that it's ~so~ damned sleek...

[Mike @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

The "queue up" feature. Yes! I have been wanting that forever. You can't play iPod DJ at a party without it. It seems like a such simple task.

[usario clave @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

The problem with "queue up" is pretty simple: there aren't enough buttons on the device to actually do it, and it's too much mental work to understand.

First, you have to have a separate mode for queueing.

This means you have to figure out a way to turn queueing on and off. Do you add another button? If you do, it's added cost, maybe $15. When and how do you enable the button? All the buttons on the iPod work all the time (except when hold is on), which minimizes the amount of brainpower your users need. A button that doesn't work all the time would break that, and be confusing.

Next, you need a visual indicator to show that you're in queue mode.

Then the user has to understand what queue mode means, and how to turn it on and off.

Then, how do you select the songs in the queue? What happens if you're playing the queue, and the queue runs out?

If you're currently playing a playlist and a song is added to the queue, do you start the queue immediately, after the song ends, or after the playlist ends?

What if you're playing in browse mode, and you add a song to the queue?

Is the queue persistent, or does it empty out? If it's persistent, how do you get rid of it?

Thinking about queueing for 5 minutes has already made the iPod more complicated, and this isn't even all of the possible issues.

With the iPod the way it is, there's no thinking required. You play, and the iPod plays the playlist until it's done. Period. It's on repeat, random play, or straight through. Period. No heavy lifting required.

Now continuous play would be nice, as would a cross fade.

[mike @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

Apple needs to decide what will make it dominate this market for the long term - a hardware/software combo like they did with the mac, or licensing the iPod OS (or really the UI) and farming out access to the ITMS, ie. the Microsoft solution.

[fustian @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

Apple owns the music business now. It may not be obvious to everyone, but it's over.

There is some fantasy floating around that a thousand small Microsoft music stores will spring up and take away Apple's market share but this is a pipe dream.

The music business operates on thin margins. You only make money if you're really big. Only a deep pocket company like Microsoft or Sony can even credibly afford to play any more and both of those guys have been failing at it.

But the iPod will only last another year or two. Cell phone companies are going to add small hard disks to their handsets and the iPod hegemony will be history.

The iPod/iTunes software will live on, however, on your cell phone. You may not be willing to pay to download music from the cellphone tower, most people will synch their cellphone to their computer through BlueTooth.

[Grandpa @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

Good lord - a computer company that has to rely on a niche pop culture product to survive. This bubble is simply going to pop and pop loud.

The future is all cellphones. Perhaps Apple has this figured out but they are already years behind even Microsoft in this regard. So that means parterning and that means dilution.

[jgang @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

i think the point of this article is that i won't buy an iPod unless it has red-eye removal. that's the next generation for you, folks.

[koan @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

grandpa...
...i wouldn't so much say that they have to "rely on a niche pop culture product to survive"... from what i hear, apple's got some 6 billion (yes, ~billion~) in cash reserves... and they're not doing too terribly concerning mac sales... the mac may continually decrease in market share, but sales within the niche to which apple plays are strong...

...the ipod isn't so much a crutch as it is something of a rocket booster... it's a little device that's amazingly engineered that helps to drive brand awareness and plant curiosity in the minds of those that buy it... like the ipod? like itunes? maybe you'll like a mac...

(...that said... yeah, the ipod did account for some 35% of their profits last year (or quarter... can't remember which)... so i could be talking out of my arse... )

...but i think the folx at apple're smart enough to know they can't count on the ipod boost forever... once the initial craze is over, look for them to start licensing things... but, by then, they could've increased their market share to 5% or so... not to mention the possibility of entry into movie downloads, etc... (so easy, really... they just need a cool looking dvr and an itms-style movie rental store with bittorrent-like speeds and high quality movies with a cool rental policy... i think they'd be dumb not to do it...)

[David Chang @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if a future iPod has red-eye removal. iPods can display photos. Why not capture them? At least one competitor already has this and now Sony is adding a camera on an MD player.

[Justin @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

I don't see a music player and camera ever being successful, thats just two things with completely different purposes. The reason iPod photo sells, imho, is people with way too much money wanting the latest and greatest.

I also don't see a phone and music player to combine. First of all, the form factor would either be close to what an iPod is now (a fatty bar) or some kind of flip phone. A fatty bar isn't going to appeal to many people, and a flip phone would just be awkward for playing music.

I guess a phone and music player could happen, because this is from a guy who said that a PDA and phone wouldn't work either, and am now investigating getting a Blackberry or Treo.

[Dennis @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

"...but Apple only recently enabled iPods to go into shuffle mode without digging through on-screen menus. "

This is wrong.

On my 2nd generation iPod clicking the Play/Pause button on the main screen while nothing is playing initiates a shuffled playback of all songs on the device.

[MD @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

"Good lord - a computer company that has to rely on a niche pop culture product to survive."

You might want to do some market research. Love or hate Apple, it's had more profitable quarters in a row than any other computer vendor, and that's true even if you remove iPods from their finances.

[Kev @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

In response to #25 and the need to keep it simple, queue should act something like a temporary playlist.

While a song is playing, I can hit menu, and queue should be one of the menu items (at the same level as on-the-go playlist or a selectable parameter). Following selecting queue, if I can select and hold a playlist/album/artist/song, it blinks three times and adds it to the queue. The queue starts playing after the current song ends (to keep it simple, no choice of song/playlist/etc, or it could be a selectable parameter).

As the queue plays through its songs, it empties out, so when the queue is done, it is empty. You can skip to the next song in the queue but you can't go back. And to keep it simple, you can't make a new queue while you're playing the current queue. If you switch from the queue to play something else, the queue empties out.

That doesn't sound too complex. It's basically a single on-the-go playlist that is temporary.

[Jack @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

What's really inane about this piece is the logic that Apple is somehow behaving differently from ANY other company out there. The most common comparison is the claim that Apple is just as bad as Microsoft.

Give us all a break.

Apple has created a great product that works on PCs and Macs and is quite flawless when compared to other devices out there. It has market domination for a good reason. It did the obvious. It made the process simple.

That said, why should Apple not control the proprietary nature of it's device? Is Sony equally dumb for not sharing inner secrets of the Playstation? C'mon already.

Also, in the case of the iPod there is no reason someone can come out with a better Mp3 player to compete with Apple. Microsoft could clearly do that if they wanted to. Sony had the chance as well, but blew it.

So please, lets end this idiotic "Why doesn't Apple share itself." mentality. Ultimately Apple's ability to innovate is the real secret to their success. Nothing more. Nothing less.

And sure someday someone will come and dominate. But it's not like Windows and MacOS. In the case of the Macs of yore, the main advantage of a PC to a Mac was cost. Nothing more. Nothing less. And that fact allows PCs to dominate the office world and inturn get into the homes of people who wanted to easilly work from home. The iPod is a personal device, and as long as costs go down, it and Apple will continue to dominate the MP3 market.

It's that simple. If cost were not an object, people would go Apple all the way. And nowadays with cheap Mac minis and discounted iPod minis and iPod shuffles, that concept is slowly becoming a reality.

[Josh @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

I dunno, man. You call the piece "inane" and then you go on to repeat a lot of Rubin's arguments, like Apple not losing this time because it's staying competitive on price and there being no IT goons to block purchases. Also, I don't know about what you read but, if anything, Rubin concludes by saying that Apple IS acting like other monopolists with the iPod.

Also, if, as you say, Apple has created a "flawless" device, how can there be "no reason someone can (sic) come out with a better Mp3 player,"

[Bryan @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

The 'i' stands for I. Me. Myself. That person in the mirror. As in ...

*I wanna listen to MY music.
*I wanna block everyone else out.
*I wanna think I look cool doing it.
*I'm better than anyone else.

#5 above knocked it out of the the park - this is another self-serving rant by another self-centered *I* who couldn't be bothered to learn any facts before broadcasting his self-important blather at the world.

Ipod is a fad. It'll fade like fads do. Until it does, we'll be subjected to many more 'much ado about nothing' commentaries like this one, *I* am sure.

THen agan, maybe this article is the beginning of the end of the fad; someone beginning to wake up and realize that the iPod isn't that cool after all.

[Monmin @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

ipod is soooo 2004....

It can't even make phone calls :)

[lilliedugg @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

Grandpa ; please do some reading before you post such non-sense.

Bryan : If you work hard, you can save up to an iPod, I know you want one cuz your post id filled with jealousy... = )

[Jack @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

"I dunno, man. You call the piece "inane" and then you go on to repeat a lot of Rubin's arguments, like Apple not losing this time because it's staying competitive on price and there being no IT goons to block purchases."

Well, I can agree with parts of it. But in general, it's inane to constantly hear this constant market domination issue when it comes to hardware makers.

And in the case of Apple, it's quite annoying. First people criticize Apple for not liscensing their OS to othet companies thus not dominating the market.

Then on the other hand the iPod dominates, and people start point the finger of "Monopoly!" at them.

The point is simple. The inanity is constant accusatory finger being pointed at Apple for being a monopoly.

I'm not saying their not. They definitely are. But they are no more/less monopolistic than any other company out there in any field.

Why is there this obsession with forcing the negative connotation of market monopolization with Apple? Why are people obsessed with pointing this out as a flaw?

"Also, if, as you say, Apple has created a "flawless" device, how can there be "no reason someone can (sic) come out with a better Mp3 player,""

What is the (sic) for? That's not a "spelling in context" issue. I do believe most anyone can--if they really wanted to--compete with the iPod. But the reality is anyone could do it, but few people do. Why is that? I don't know. Blame it on creativity. But few people seem to ever duplicate successful products correctly.

A device can be flawless, but also can be copied. Look at the Sony Walkman. When it first came out it was great. Many tried to duplicate it and few came close, but Sony was still top of the line. It had flaws, but despite them Sony knew how to balance the good/bad in a way that consumers like.

Creative has some attempts to do so with the Zen line, but it still is not the same.

[Tom Barta @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

The iPod by itself is nothing. It is a music player, nothing more. But if it it gets people into Apple stores and helps people to understand that they don't need to suffer Windows anymore; that they can move up to Mac, it has served its purpose. The author displays an excellent understanding of the inertia factor that has kept Apple's Computer marketshare so low, so long, in spite of vast superiority to the competition at any give time point since 1984 (and the biggest gap in 20 years right now, with OSX improving rapidly, unlike "Longhorn").

[Craig @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

What I'd really like to see is the ability to create a playlist of albums. I often add new music to my iPod, but forget what it was that I added. I have a playlist of "100 Newest Songs," but it's kind of worthless because it doesn't play them in order. I really need the ability to make a playlist of the "20 Newest Albums."

[Desmond R F Foulger @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

When are you Dos Based Stoneage thinking morons going to stop slagging Apple at every turn? If Microsoft or HP or any of the "others" had invented the iPod (DOSPOD? SPAMPOD? VIRUSPOD?), there would be praise spewing forth on the greatness of this device or that compnay etc.

Its time that the dinosaurs realised that the time of extinction for them is upon us - one only has to look at MS stagnation of late and the ability of BG (sorry Sir BG - (what was the Queen thinking of?)) to actually INVENT something rather than copy, to realise that Apple are on the rise and set to provide the world with an honest, stable product that actually works as it was intended.

Please get off your high horse and try to give an UNBIASED comment please.

FINALLY REALISE THAT IF APPLE WENT BROKE TOMORROW, M$ WOULD DO THE SAME NEXT WEEK BECAUSE THERE WOULD BE NOTHING IN THE INDUSTRY LEFT TO COPY.

[Desmond R F Foulger @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

When are you Dos Based Stoneage thinking morons going to stop slagging Apple at every turn? If Microsoft or HP or any of the "others" had invented the iPod (DOSPOD? SPAMPOD? VIRUSPOD?), there would be praise spewing forth on the greatness of this device or that compnay etc.

Its time that the dinosaurs realised that the time of extinction for them is upon us - one only has to look at MS stagnation of late and the ability of BG (sorry Sir BG - (what was the Queen thinking of?)) to actually INVENT something rather than copy, to realise that Apple are on the rise and set to provide the world with an honest, stable product that actually works as it was intended.

Please get off your high horse and try to give an UNBIASED comment please.

FINALLY REALISE THAT IF APPLE WENT BROKE TOMORROW, M$ WOULD DO THE SAME NEXT WEEK BECAUSE THERE WOULD BE NOTHING IN THE INDUSTRY LEFT TO COPY.

[Aaron @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

Let's settle this once and for all...... the "i" stands for Internet. Though it doesn't apply to the iPod, Jobs introduced the iMac at a time when internet readiness wasn't a very common thing. He played the "look cool" card to appeal to yuppies and younger people. Now the "i" is Apple's calling card. Anything else that uses it (i.e. iRiver) screams knock-off.

What's interesting to think about is what happens when years down the road from now, all the current computer users either stop using their computers or die. The next generation computer users surprisingly have a lot of macs. College campuses are pretty much divided down the middle on the platform dispute. They are the future of computing and it seems like Apple will get a large market share back when this happens (if they hold on that long and steve jobs is kept alive somehow). wishful thinking yes, but you can't ignore the large portion of 20 something year olds have macs instead of PCs.

[Travis Butler @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

You can actually use an On-the-Go playlist as a queue in almost exactly the way Post #35 suggests. Put your first song in the On-the-Go playlist, and start it playing. Then go back to browsing as it's playing, and add the next song to the On-the-Go playlist; it will be added on to the end and will play as soon as the first song finishes.

The only thing in #35 that it doesn't do is empty out automatically as it plays; otherwise, sounds like just what you're looking for.

[matt byrne @ Dec 19th 2005 12:11AM]

Post #47 well said. i regularly 'queue' up tracks in this way and its easy to do. On the Go playlists stop after they have played through just like suggested the only difference is you have to manually delete it, which is hardly a chore. On the question of Macs I'm getting my first one, an iBook because my uni course (media) utilises dual processor G5's of either 1.8 ghz or the full 2.5 and they are cool machines to use and look at. I love aqua and have skinned my windows pc to emulate it (windowblinds and object dock) but the time is right to own both. I'll use the PC for home dsl surfing and my iTunes and the iBook for my photo's and wifi web browsing at uni, so i'll have best of both worlds. The mac is no longer a compromise but it's ideal to have both.