We were wondering why the new
voice-enabled iPod shuffle even has a standard 3.5mm headphone jack since it's controlled by proprietary headphones, and we just got the answer: non-Apple headphones will require a special dongle that includes the new three-button controller, and Apple says it's working with third parties to bring other compatible 'phones to market. Yes, Apple's cheapest iPod is now the most needlessly complex, and far from cost-effective if you want to use your own cans: assuming the adapter will cost between $20 and $30 like most other Apple accessories, you're looking at minimum $100 outlay for the new shuffle, and at that point you might as well pick up a $150 iPod nano, which is also VoiceOver-enabled in addition to having twice the storage, dongle-less controls, a screen, and numerous other features. We'll see if this thing is so tiny these concerns wash out when we get one in our hands, but does anyone actually feel like the numbers tip in
favor of the shuffle here? We're all ears.
P.S.- Yes, we know $100 can get you any number of fine non-Apple players, we're just talking about Apple's price points. Feel free to suggest your favorite alternative, though!
Update: Apple called to clarify that the nano doesn't have the exact same VoiceOver feature, which is shuffle-exclusive; the nano does "spoken menus" but doesn't say track names as you skip around. We're getting a full list of differences between the two systems, we'll let you know if there's anything else major.
posted Mar 11th 2009 at 1:21PM
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 6)
Funke, Tobias Dr. @ Mar 11th 2009 1:25PM
A huge step back. And AAPL is back above $90.00 today... sigh
Paul A. Chapel @ Mar 11th 2009 1:33PM
Yeah, I remember people saying how stupid the original Shuffle was, because it didn't have screen and look at how that turned out.
/s
Seriously, people, look at the video on Apple's site before you judge this thing. The Voice-Over feature is pretty cool, but since I've been a fan of the headphone remote since the beginning, especially since the Zune doesn't have this technology, maybe I'm a bit biased.
Look_Around_You @ Mar 11th 2009 1:36PM
"maybe I'm a bit biased."
That's like saying the pope is maybe a bit Catholic.
coffee @ Mar 11th 2009 1:42PM
maybe I like coffee a bit too much
Jordan @ Mar 11th 2009 1:48PM
the last gen was way better. i think i'm gonna buy that one anyway
Wiigee @ Mar 11th 2009 1:45PM
@paul i saw the video and think its even dumber than i did before.
ALCie @ Mar 11th 2009 1:45PM
I'm sure investors don't care about the iPod Shuffle release. It's up because the market is up.
Unless you are just pointing out the rising stock prices due to them shattering your hopes of Apple failing?
Major4Play @ Mar 11th 2009 1:47PM
So Paul how did the original shuffle turn out ? did it take over the world ? No
In-line headphone remotes were of course ripped off from Sony, who used them with cassette players and Cd players, since you are always so clued up on how original Apple are.
Hmmm what an amazing feature the headphones will tell me the track and artist info, and yet If I am already listening to the music my brain will already have given me that information, a screen allows me to pick what music I want to hear without walking down the street muttering to myself while I click next through 4GB of music.
Idlemind @ Mar 11th 2009 1:54PM
The original shuffle looked like a pack of gum.... and a few years later... it still looks like a pack of gum.... just scratched.
Paul A. Chapel @ Mar 11th 2009 1:55PM
I really don't understand why people get upset about Apple changing a product that they never liked in the first place. And for clarification, I'm talking about the Zune or Sansa fanboys (Yeah, they exist) who have always hated iPods, but for whatever reason come to Engadget to express their "outrage" at this new change.
remymtn @ Mar 11th 2009 1:59PM
Apple seems to be the new name in luxury electronics. I like it. Now when someone sees me with my Shuffle, they'll know I'm rich. Wait, that don't make sense ...
Jack Storm @ Mar 11th 2009 2:06PM
Innovative my ass.
Disappointed with Apple ever since the new macbooks gave me no reason to update my MacBook, and their next OS adds no new features i would pay for. ugh
Funke, Tobias Dr. @ Mar 11th 2009 2:26PM
My point is that Apple products are usually evolutionary, and a lot of times revolutionary. This one is neither. If I was an investor (which I'm not) this iPod would cause me to be concerned that AAPL is losing their focus and edge. Whether or not Jobs' lack of day to day control has anything to do with this, is a very curious question in my mind.
JohnWesleyHarding @ Mar 11th 2009 2:26PM
Paul,
Although some people just dislike apple products, some of use really liked the shuffle and are really dissapointed with the "upgrade". I loved the first shuffle because it worked by itself, in that I could just plug it in to a computer without a charging dock or anything of that sort. The second generation was great because it was smaller, and came with a clip, however it needed a dock/wire to charge and connect ot the computer. When I saw the picture of the third generation I got really excited: I thought they finally combined the best of the 1st and 2nd gen shuffle. Far from it. They removed basic functionality from the device, so you are forced to use their headphones or pay for a remote. The design is terrible since it does not work on its own. Although the voice part is kind of cool, if it does not have the basic functionality the design is worthless.
toopropa @ Mar 11th 2009 2:28PM
This is the biggest Joke. If people keep buying this crap. Then Apple will keep selling it. Its all our faults.
coyotej @ Mar 11th 2009 2:28PM
@Paul A. Chapel: I'm an APPLE fan-boy and I yet am here to express my disgust. I have owned 5 ipods, including a 2G Shuffle. And this product is a step back for sure, I think they've actually done their competitors a FAVOR by releasing this over-simplified, yet more complicated product (because of the headphone-remote situation).
The shuffle didn't need to get much smaller, there is such a thing "diminishing returns" (no pun intended)
Funke, Tobias Dr. @ Mar 11th 2009 2:31PM
@Paul:
I, for one, have the (now) last generation Shuffle (2GB). I also have an iPhone, but I prefer the Shuffle for workouts and the iPhone for my car and plane...etc. I also prefer a comfortable set of earbuds with silicone earpieces, so the control scheme of this new iPod has effectively killed any interest I might have in it otherwise.
Paul A. Chapel @ Mar 11th 2009 2:35PM
Re: The True Apple Lovers.
Calm down. Apple wouldn't be Apple if they didn't take chances every now and then. Remember the FAT Nano? People didn't like it as much as Apple thought they would and they changed it the next year. The same thing will happen with the Shuffle. And if you absolutely positively have to have the older style of Shuffle, I'm sure you'll be able to get it on Amazon at a reduced price or on the refurbished page on Apple.com
monkfishbandana @ Mar 11th 2009 2:42PM
I don't normally reply on the first post to make my voice heard, but if anyone wants this for any reason then there is a video that may bo of use to you:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLzs5aHv3jI
I believe Engadget has reported on it before, but it shows how to replace iPhone headphones with earbuds of your own preference. I am under the impression that the control buttons on this new Shuffle simply utilise one wire that runs as far as the buttons and down to the device itself.
Based on this, you should be able to replace the earbuds with your own headphones and still use the controls for a fraction of the cost of an adaptor. This isn't me condoning this, though; when Apple realise their customers are more informed than they used to be (and have far more options available to them) they will have to start refraining from making such idiotic design decisions.
Funke, Tobias Dr. @ Mar 11th 2009 2:42PM
Sorry for yet another post. I was wrong to characterize this as not being evolutionary, as I suppose it is. However, consumer selection will not be kind to it. They've lost some important features while introducing new ones. I just discovered that there is no way to rewind/fast forward through music, only skipping back and forth between tracks is available : http://www.apple.com/ipodshuffle/specs.html (see how the controls work) Like I've said before, I do have 2GB shuffle, and I do occasionally use the RW/FF function, not often, but when I need it I need it. I don't need this new iPod.
Kamokazi @ Mar 11th 2009 2:51PM
I don't know why people are so argumentative over this new Shuffle. Clearly, it's going to go down in Apple product history. It will have a special place right next the Newton and the puck mouse.
Look_Around_You @ Mar 11th 2009 2:55PM
"Re: The True Apple Lovers."
So a "True Apple Lover" must love all things Apple, even though they may not like this.
That's right, drink the kool-aid, and let the RDF spin you away back to big daddy Jobs...
Thaaaats a good little fanboy. Who luves ya? That right right. Apple luves ya.
Brian from Texas @ Mar 11th 2009 3:01PM
Apple fanboys unite!
David @ Mar 11th 2009 3:11PM
The video reminded me of the onion's parody MacBook Wheel
All you need is one button
Josh @ Mar 11th 2009 3:33PM
I am huge fan of most Apple products but this is by far the most gimmicky, silly product I have seen in a long time.
A) Why does it have to be so small?
--- It's not like people are complaining about how big the last one was.
B) That VoiceOver trash seems like it would be highly annoying.
--- I don't want to have a computerized voice telling me about all kinds of songs and playlists. It would be like going back to call-in voicemail over Visual Voicemail.
C) Having to remember all the various clicks and holds is annoying too.
Hey Apple, if you don't like the Shuffle just discontinue it.
I wonder if Mr. Jobs had any say about this product at all.
fanman @ Mar 11th 2009 3:54PM
I think apple may have lost site of the fact that small stuff is only impressive if it is equally as functional. Taking things out to make it smaller isn't ingenuitive. The macbook air is a perfect case in point.
Uncontrol @ Mar 11th 2009 4:16PM
I feel embarrassed to own a Mac right now.
Greg @ Mar 11th 2009 5:38PM
Um, how do we know this won't be free, in the box? Like how the universal adapter is for other iPods, or the stand for the iPod Touch?
Don't be so quick to judge. It'll probably be something pretty small, and it might even be free.
ark_v2 @ Mar 11th 2009 6:01PM
When I first saw it I though it was really stylish, but after reading about the controls...
It's common sense. Was it to difficult to add them? Maybe bellow the cover so they wouldn't mess with the sleek aluminum.
TheWatchmen09 @ Mar 11th 2009 6:09PM
The Apple Haters are out in FULL FORCE today
That being said I think the new shuffle has some good points and some bad ones.
toneh @ Mar 11th 2009 9:40PM
Seems apple took this video too seriously..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noe3kR8KqJc
VanillaSpice @ Mar 11th 2009 10:42PM
@ Funke, Tobias Dr. - they have not dropped support for fast-forwarding and rewinding!
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3458
You can FF and REW as well as move between tracks. Not exactly an elegant implementation of those controls (which many listeners use frequently) but the functionality is there.
superhobo @ Mar 11th 2009 1:26PM
Just Apple hard at work....keeping stuff simple.
sacapuntas @ Mar 11th 2009 1:31PM
Umm... I guess nothing is more simple than putting a usb stick into a case and calling it a day.
Also, I thought microsoft had dibs on microsoft sam ... oh well.
Neha @ Mar 11th 2009 1:56PM
I just love that this post is balanced and non-threatening and devoid of snark and disgust. You guys need pull that mighty mouse out of collective behind and take the kid gloves off your precious corporation.
This is just flat out ridiculous and an EPIC Fail and PAR for the course from the likes of Apple(MiniDVI, MiniDP, etc, etc) forcing you to use their adaptors which half the time never work and are OVER priced.
But Eng plays it off so cool that if MS did this with the Zune or Sony or whatever you'd have them pitching a b!tchfit down to a bad photoshop job of a sweaty Ballmer screaming something.
Look_Around_You @ Mar 11th 2009 2:19PM
@Neha
That was the only post needed in this thread.
I suppose they still want to receive their invites, and test units from Apple, so they censor their usual snark that is freely tossed around for everyone else.
Tejas Padekar @ Mar 11th 2009 2:29PM
@ Neha:
lol... I can see the title now: "Balmy Ballmer says buttons on Headphones aid usability, Apple sneers"!
Seriously, this is the dumbest thing I've heard in a while! This is just another way of ensuring that the consumers buy Apple's overpriced, under-performing headsets! Just call it what it is in the harshest tone you can find: "This is a really dumb idea that alienates all those who have premium headphones, and need only the discrete usability of the iPod Shuffle."
Apple's adapters (I have two of them for my Macbook Pro, a DVI-VGA and DVI-Composite/S-Video) can be nice, but they are pricey! Luxury products? huh?
Julio @ Mar 11th 2009 2:31PM
@Neha
You nailed it! Couldn't have said it better myself.
superhobo @ Mar 11th 2009 2:53PM
Neha, +1.
nerdtalker @ Mar 11th 2009 2:59PM
I wish I could give Neha another high ranked click, that post is exactly what needs to be written.
So so true.
The shuffle is now way too expensive to make any sense. Apple has a tendency to do things like this, I mean, look at how expensive the mac mini is. What's the point?
TitaniumMan @ Mar 11th 2009 4:21PM
Apple probably has data that suggests people buy it for use during workout, so it's built completely around that.
drewdoog @ Mar 11th 2009 7:33PM
@nerdtalker Exactly. You need a device to sell at every pricepoint. When you redesign something and jack up the price (nearly double), you pushed out a market that would have looked at it.
VanillaSpice @ Mar 11th 2009 10:11PM
@Neha and the rest of the anti-Apple trolls, are you guys being paid to write this crap?
Since when has Engadget been pro-Apple? Did you bother to read what they said about the various App Store rejections?
And how about this, from the post? "Yes, Apple's cheapest iPod is now the most needlessly complex, and far from cost-effective if you want to use your own cans".
The only way you could possibly think that that was pro-Apple is if you are so stridently and unthinkingly anti-Apple that you believe anything other than swearing at them is being "pro-Apple".
You are all trying the theory that if you say something loud enough and often enough, it becomes true. What you have yet to realise is that it only becomes true to other idiots. Normal people with a half-decent brain still realise that your (so easily proven false) claims are rubbish no matter how frequently or how loudly you state them.
jlhubbard @ Mar 11th 2009 1:26PM
FIRST
Haikibutsu @ Mar 11th 2009 1:28PM
...to have a failing post!
Ekauq @ Mar 11th 2009 1:29PM
third to post
first to fail
valleydubs @ Mar 11th 2009 1:27PM
Pointless "upgrade."
rock99rock @ Mar 11th 2009 1:27PM
(Inserts $100 mp3 player alternative to Apple product)
mac404 @ Mar 11th 2009 1:35PM
Sandisk Sansa Clip, $80 on newegg for 4GB- screen, really good sound quality, still has a clip (obviously, as the name implies...). Or the Fuze, which is larger, but has a full-color screen for the same $80. Or the Samsung S3 for $50...there are a lot of options, all of which make much more sense than this. Ugh.
zip22 @ Mar 11th 2009 1:39PM
The 8GB sansa clip is $50 at walmart