HP quits selling iPods, iPod purists party down

Man, we're not sure what prompted this one, but the rumblings over at HP of late between Carly leaving, internal restructuring, and 14,000 layoffs has resulted in yet another casualty: the HP iPod is no more. Finally. From the sound of it, HP took the initiative to exit their relationship with Apple, which seems a little silly to us since if they did work out that price cut issue from before, really all HP had to do was slap their name on someone else's product, maybe share some distribution channels, and watch the bling roll in—OEMing the iPod, what could be more perfect? Well, goodbye HP iPod, we'll miss you. Eh.

[JAMSTER #1 FAN EVER @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Well, you'd think people would be upset but......

[alex @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

so what's gonna happen to my messed up HP ipod? will the warrenty still work?

[i'macomputa @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

can you charge an Apple ipod with USB like you could with the HP version?
-i'macomputa

[Wildoman @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Nice picture

[jim @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

yes, you can charge the apple version with both a usb and firewire cable. I read on a macdailynews that it was apple that pulled out of the deal, saying that it didn't make sense for them to sell the ipod under another brands name.

[Ian @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

my Ipod is HP branded. when I had problems, HP swapped me out with a new one in 2 days. Never dealt with apple support, but I felt pretty good about the way they took care of the situation.

[allen @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

when I was at the Apple store, a lot of people bringing their HP iPod in for service. And the store have to turn down everyone of them. Those HP iPod owner were pretty dumb founded when they hear "Sorry, we can't help you. You need to contact HP directly."

Anyway, I snatch a HP iPod Photo 30GB at Costco when Apple stop making the 30GB. At least I know I'm cover warranty wise as a Costco member.

[Anonymous Coward @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

If you live near an apple store, you could get same day on a 'cough' real iPod.

-AC

[mattb @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

it's about damn time. why did my most hated company get away with selling my most liked mp3 player for so long?

[jamal @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

are the ipods discounted and if so were can I get them

[Chris @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

I hope all those HP iPod owners were able to understand why the Apple Store cannot service their product. Whether or not a customer is paying out of pocket for repair service, costs are incurred and accounted for and *of course* Apple is not going to incur these costs for someone else's product, no matter how shiny white and Apple-ish it looks.

[Lee Gibson @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Why the hell would you buy something from HP and expect Apple to fix it for you?

I broke the clickwheel on my Apple 4G iPod, (totally my fault: I whacked it into the corner of a desk.) Took it into the Apple store and told them what happened, hoping I'd be able to pay to have the clickwheel replaced. The guy told me that he appreciates that I didn't try to snow him and make it sound like it was some sort of defect, and ordered me a brand new one. He apologized that he didn't have one in stock to give me right away, so I had to wait 24 whole hours.

Tell me again why I'd buy an iPod from HP?

[Rich @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Maybe HP can actually 'invent' something now...

[gerald` @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

will iTunes still come preinstalled on HP PCs?

[justin @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

i have an hp ipod that the HD crashed, but i bought the extended warranty from Compusa, do you think they will replace it with an apple?

[h0p3l355is4 @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Simple. They predict the fall of the iPod. It's already happening. Many of my friends turn away the iPod mini and look at either the Creative Zen Micro or iRiver H10 (5/6GB).

[narco @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Maybe it's some psychological business thing. If people see that the popular iPod was dropped by a major company, they're going to wonder why and assume the worst. Who knows.

Fishes,
narco.

[rocafellaice @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Since when did the lazer engraved HP on the back make internals so OMG DIFFERENT FROM AN APPLE IPOD?!??!

[gerald` @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

to hopelessish:

two things at play, here:
#1 - anecdotes =! data
#2 - you're not an "average person" and your friends are also less than likely to be considered as "joe sixpack", as evidenced by the fact that you're reading and commenting on the website, and using leet-speek.

[Nate MC @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Oh shiat, does this mean Costco won't be selling iPods anymore. My next one was gonne be from them because of their return/warranty support.

[ChillyWilly @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

"the fall of the iPod"

I love that. Even if it took 2 years for the iPod to drop below 50% market share, I don't consider that a "fall".

I'm all for another company to make a DAP that will compete with the iPod, but so far, none of the models that I've seen out there are giving any sort of competition.

Maybe HP is planning on being that company... who knows.

Regardless, I wonder if overstock.com has received any calls from HP about dumping inventory?

[stingraze @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

I never knew why HP brought ipod to their "product line". It just didn't make any sense. It doesn't make any sense ending so soon either :-0

[Daniel @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Hmm, surprising, especially since they just started branding Shuffles and Minis.

I thought this would be a long and developed relationship between HP + Apple. Guess not.

For some reason I assumed that since Apple insists on remaing propietary, that perhaps when they switch to x86, they might license the Macintosh line to Hewlett-Packard similarly to how they did it with the iPod. Then again, who do you know that would want their brand-new Mac mini to have the HP-invent logo glaring up at them?

[zainali @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

hurd knows people dont buy ipods. they buy APPLE ipods.

ipod is more like a brand name. if hp is $300 and apple is $300, the normal person (who probably thinks they are two different mp3 players) would get the apple.

[Pie @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

It'll never happen, but it would be really awesome if HP started selling iAudio X5s. I bet that they would sell a lot and the partnership would be cheaper than the one with Apple.

[Tony Scida @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

The HP deal meant a lot to Apple, I imagine, since slapping HP on the product put it on the shelves at Wal-Mart and several other retailers with no existing relationship with Apple. Not sure exactly what it did for HP, except maybe they thought it would make computer-buyers associate Apple quality with HP computers.

[Jack @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

I think the HP logo let the average user know that it was compatible for PC, many people (A few I know) didn't buy an iPod because they told me "It doesn't work with Windows"

[shiftis @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

HP must have realized that iPods suck.

[Daniel @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

The inside scoop is the royalty to Apple and the support due to all the battery and click wheel problems made them unprofitable.

[Karl @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

the day I dont have to see those white peice of craps again is the day celebrate.

[LRD @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

With Apple pulling all the strings and competing against HP for iPOD sales it was inevitable that this relationship wouldn't last. Apple needs to learn how to license its technology successfully and still have a "comfort zone" level of control-- this has and continues to be Apples weakest link.

[Zon @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

So the relationship between the hippest computer maker in the world and the least hip didn't work out? Who'd have figured?

[indolene @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

I have a feeling HP will keep servicing and honoring warranties on their iPods even after they stop making them. Not to worry folks, HP sells PC's which create actual revenue, they can afford it. Hey-o!

(ducks)

[Mike @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

"The inside scoop is the royalty to Apple and the support due to all the battery and click wheel problems made them unprofitable."

Odd.. I recall Carly's logic for co-branding the iPod was that they couldn't make a better (or more profitable) mp3 player on their own.

So, the real question is what will HP do next?

Will they come out with their own crummy player? Rebrand someone else's player (i.e. iRiver)? or maybe just not sell one at all?

[Teve Torbes @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Prediction: HP will cut and streamline its business down to the most profitable divisions and position itself for a buy out. And the buyer will be...a chinese PC manufacturer...

[kwik @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

HP discontinuation is a logical step for HP.

With apple's alliance with intel and their recent announcement during their quarterly report, showing that the halo effect is for real, why would HP want to be selling a product that ultimetly in the end maybe the trojan horse that dismantles HP and it's PC division.

If I was taking over HP, this would of been my first step was to eliminate the iPod out of our line of products. The buck HP makes isn't worth the idea knowing that the customer is also visiting the apple store more often to checkout the latest 3rd party gadgets for the iPod and as he walks in see's Apple's line of PC. Once that consumer goes home, the HP sitting on his desk is turned on, virus issue's have to be delt with, crash issue's and on and on and on.... it's only a matter of time that this HP iPod user now becomes a Mac User.

[Christopher Brinser @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

I always hate the way HP used the Apple brand name, I am glad they are though using it!

[Eric @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

The HP iPod days were numbered all along. Okay, so when HP first announced they would sell an iPod, they showed off a model that looked nothing like the white iPod available from Apple. It was rather cool looking. But when it came to market, HP opted to resell the same white model offered by Apple at the same price. Is anyone really surprised this strategy didn't work? If anything, I'm shocked they hung in there as long as they did.

HP has other problems though. Their company lacks direction. The purchase of Compaq was a mistake. And their core business-- printing is a confusing mess.

[FreeiPodGuy @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

IN SUMMARY:

1. Apple cool. hp nerdy.

2. hp models were older than Apple models. People want the newest thing.

3. The "invent" logo on the back was just priceless.

4. This whole thing was just WRONG from the start. I'm surprised this little affair lasted a whole year.

"we�re not sure what prompted this one"? Isn't it obvious?

[Kellie @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

I want to mention that HP's customer service is above and beyond Apple's when it comes to iPods. I went to the Apple store in SoHo and was told I had to go back home, go online, make an appointment then come back just to drop it off to be serviced (and still pay the handling fee of $29.95). When I went online I noticed that since mine was an HP, I had to contact their service center anyway (thanks for telling me Apple store employee). I called up HP, went over a few not so useful "fix it yourself" steps and was told all I had to do was give a credit card for them to send me a referbished one so I can send them my broken one, all free of charge. HP's service was much much better and that will be the most unfortunate loss out of all this.

[Boston Squares @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Any idea how profitable this was for them? Will apple suffer?

[El Kabong @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

*rolls eyes*

It's the same damned hardware as the Mac version, they just slap an HP logo on it. Don't be retarded they don't just have a whole new manufactering facility just to make HP versions.

OEM, ever hear of it?

My laptop is offered by Clevo, Sager, Alienware, VooDoo, and Boxx Technologies. They are the same exact laptop, in fact Clevo is the original manufacterer.

[ptrix @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

The Apple+HP iPod deal was bad for HP from the beginning, (rather than for Apple), and I'll do my best to explain why. I apologize in advance if this strikes a nerve with the Apple-haters.

First off, The reason why HP wanted to resell ipods was probably so that they could get in on the popularity of the iPod craze, and increase its own brand awareness. for the most part, it worked to a degree, but the problem for HP was that as a reseller, they probably had to "purchase" a licence from Apple to be able to legally sell the ipods, pay a fee to have the HP logo laser engraved on them, and than pay to actually purchase a supply of those ipods from the manufacturer. not cheap, but so far for them, acceptable, because in the long run, HP was probably thinking that they's make up for it because people would grow to equatethe quality of Apple's iPod with HP's product line, and that the resultant "Halo Effect" would benefit the sales of whatever else HP had to offer.

SO now, HP has these iPods, which they clearly spent a great deal on money on, just to get them, and then they had to sell them. not only to make some kind of profit, but also to try to recoup the money spent for those licencing costs, etc. that i mentionned before...

The problem comes in right about here. You see, due to all those costs, (licencing, branding, bulk purchasing, packaging, etc etc), they'd have to sell their ipods for a somewhat higher price than Apple sells theirs, and Apple has no responsibility to assist HP by adjusting their prices in order to help out a partner/competitor. That's not illegal or unethical. it's business, and more likely than not, was part of the contract that Apple and HP agreed to.

So HP is more or less forced to sell their ipods at the same prices as Apple's ipods, even though the ipods cost HP much more per unit. in other words, HP LOST money with each ipod they sold. When they started, they were hoping that drawing potential ipod customers to their online store would help them gain "street cred", and sell more of their other goods, which would have meant that while they may have lost money on the 'pods, that they would make it up elsewhere, and ended up with a net profit.

Fast forward about a year.

HP is now seeing that people aren't fools, and prefer owning ipods without the HP laser engraved logo on the back, (for whetever reasons), and that the Halo Effect is benefitting Apple much more than it is for HP. which makes sense, since it was Apple that designed the ipod, made itunes, made them work seamlessly, and brought it to the world first. All HP did was try to ride on their coattails, and ride the wave. HP isn't gaining anything, and was STILL losing money on their branded ipods, so to stop the drain on their coffers, they opted to exit the Apple+HP agreement. Sure, Apple loses the income from the 3rd party licencing that HP brought in, but they're still coming out ahead through all this, as people are increasingly buying Apple hardware in record numbers, and because people are becoming more angered and dismayed with Microsoft, and seeking a better alternative, which they provide.

To sum it up, HP leaving doesn't hurt Apple in any measurable form, and for that matter, allowing HP to sell them in the first place probably benefitted Apple because it got more 'pods into people's hand throu additional retail channels, and got more people using the itunes music store, and interested in Apple's other products.

despite what so many less-informed people here seem to want to believe, Apple won. and the shame of this is that if HP resorts to selling their own mp3 players, they probably won't be any better off than they were when selling the ipods, unless they can (1) make their own players as easy and seamless to use, and (2), make them compatible with songs sold from the ITMS (which again, would require them to purchase a licence from Apple for the FairPlay audio DRM anyway).

HP = 0wn3d.

[Greg @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Whatever the repercussions for Apple, this is MarK Hurd's MO. Just cut, cut, cut....

[morgan @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

saw it coming

[Doug @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

I'm not surprised by this. I think the decision to discontinue sales of a HP-branded iPod had as much to do with the restructuring at HP as it does with Apple's move to Intel processors. To a certain extent, as long as Apple continued to use PowerPC architecture, they could align with HP to expand the sales base for the iPod. Now that Apple is switching to Intel-based architecture, HP (along with Dell, Gateway, etc.) become more of a direct competitor because of the shared architecture between existing x86 PCs and the upcoming "Intellimacs".

As far as bashing the iPod goes, you can't deny the fact that the iPod has controlled the MP3 player market since its release, and there are no signs of letting up. Apple created something that nobody has been able to duplicate, and as a result has gotten a jump start on the competition that effectively guarantees it "lead dog" status for some time to come.

[Zerokills @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

#40, Yes Costco has the same, if not better, return policy as Sam's Club. They only sold Apple+HP iPods in the store, but they are authorized to sell Apple iPods on their website, so even if you can't pick one up in time at the store, you can always buy it online and be covered under the same return policy.

[mike @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

HPs still shipping all pc's with QT and iTunes.. so ... basically.. yeah.. Apple played their hand perfectly..

Apple knew no one would go for an HP iPod.. and HP thought the Windows users would flock to it. How condescending.

Now HP tries to.. what.. gather some remaining pride by jumping off the hottest coattails in town.. to compete against Apple in the music market..

Suicide.

[Tyler Haywood @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

will i be able to buy the ipod tattoes from hp still?

[tazz @ Jan 4th 2006 4:03PM]

cool piture lol