New iPod shuffle first hands-on (with video!)
By Paul Miller 
posted Mar 12th 2009 12:48PM
posted Mar 12th 2009 12:48PM
Update: In-depth impressions are after the break, along with video!
Setup
Unboxing wasn't the Apple's best, but it was easy enough to get at all three components in there: the shuffle, the earbuds and the USB adapter. Setup was similarly slightly more complicated than the regular iPod, since in addition to requiring an update to 8.1, it required an installation of VoiceOver -- it all happens quite automatically with a couple clicks of automation, but it's an extra step all the same.
The actual formation of VoiceOvers for our tracks and playlists was easy enough that it was actually difficult to even spot iTunes working on it. Since our iTunes library is larger than 4GB, we built a few playlists, set them to sync with the shuffle, clicked sync and were ready to go in seconds. According to Apple, the space used up by the VoiceOvers on the shuffle is "negligible" and doesn't impact that vague "1000 songs" figure.
Usage
Excuse the audio, we had to tape the earbud to our camera mic for obvious reasons (to Apple, anyway). Also note that VoiceOver mispronounces the words "live," "VH1" and "Pitchfork."
The controls are harder to use than a traditional shuffle button layout, and it depends on how you wear the shuffle as to whether the placement of the controls on the cord is better than having them on the player. That said, it's really not difficult at all to use even the most "advanced" features here (like playlist browsing) and Apple has essentially made the controls to train you to delve into that functionality.
With the newer iPods and iPhones people are already used to pausing and starting the music with a click, and double clicking for skipping forward isn't much of a stretch. A triple click to skip backwards seems like the silliest gesture here -- and really, would it have been so hard for Apple to put a set of controls on the player? -- but it's not a deal breaker. The track identification and playlist features, however, both being unavailable on the original shuffle, would have required some learning any way you slice it, unless Apple were to add a button or two to the original layout -- something they're none too fond of doing.
Holding the button to hear the track name is simple and easy, and to go to the playlist mode, you just press and hold long enough to hear a beep. After that the shuffle just starts reading off names of playlists, you don't need to keep clicking to tab through them, and a single click sends you to one of the playlists. If you don't hear anything worth jumping to, you don't need to touch anything and the shuffle will return to the music you were playing. Both the song identification and playlist features speak over top of the song you're currently playing, which fades in and out accordingly.
Hardware
The player itself makes the old shuffles like almost giant in comparison. Its featureless face might be a bit odd if it weren't for the fact that your thumb covers the entirety of the player when you hold it. The shiny clip in back is impressively strong, and gravity should have a tough time knocking this off your workout clothes. Though suspiciously small, the off / shuffle / loop switch is easy enough to toggle with a fingernail.
Unfortunately, Apple's biggest mistake here might be with the one thing it didn't change: the earbuds themselves are terrible at staying in most ears, which just doesn't fly for a player that's primarily designed for workouts and those "on the go." It's also a needless hassle to buy an adapter cable to output songs to a stereo or a car -- Apple itself had a hacked cable to demonstrate the player to us with a sound system. Interestingly, you can plug a regular old pair of headphones into the player, turn it on, and it'll play music just fine -- you just don't have any playback controls. The stop / start button on existing Apple headphones does nothing.
Wrap-up
Still, people seem quite satisfied to put up with this sort of inconvenience and hassle when it comes to Apple, and with design, size and build quality like this, not to mention the welcome addition of VoiceOver, we imagine those third party accessory makers are going to like this new shuffle just fine.
It is pretty small, I'll give you that.
This is my favourite bit:
"at first glance we think this is totally usable"
Coming right after:
http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/11/the-new-ipod-shuffle-explained/
Schizophrenic much?
"Schizophrenic"
Not that. They weighed their options and would rather shill for the Apple product...Again. Knowing totally that this would not be a discussion with a Sony player of the same type.
"Oh it's really usable. We really mean it! Please dont be mad at us, Mr. Jobs!"
That's what she said!
@brian
deathnote fan?
"Great" = "Great".
"Superb" = "Superb"
"Usable" = code for "Pretty Crap" (only a moron would shell out cash for this).
Superlatives are used to express real feelings. "Usable" is about as low as you can go and still be polite.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superlative
"In grammar the superlative of an adjective or adverb is the greatest form of adjective or adverb which indicates that something has some feature to a greater degree than anything it is being compared to in a given context."
"pretty small".
That is not pretty small. "Small" is a comparative term.
These are pretty small, that is ginormous in comparison.
http://images.google.ca/images?q=smallest+mp3+player&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=7R-5SeTUL4GEsQP0v9VI&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&resnum=4&ct=title
"totally usable" is not much of a compliment.
""totally usable" is not much of a compliment."
Now ask yourself since when does Engadget tiptoe in their use of language?
"Pretty Small"
??? MobiBLU - July 2005 ????
An innovative mp3 player would include voice directed controls. "Forward" = "Forward", "Back" = "Back" etc etc.
Apple is just copying so many other companies that have gone before.
APPLE = "ME-TOO" !!!!
----------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Jobs is the Emperor with no clothes
____________________________________
Ok, I'll say it:
That's what she said!
http://instantrimshot.com/
"Now ask yourself since when does Engadget tiptoe in their use of language?"
only when talking about apple products that suck
does it play movies?
"It is pretty small"
That's what she said?
super laxatives.
Duh. It was always easy to use. They decided to complain about it to try to stir up some drama. People are just pissed because Apple did this. This isn't the first time a music player has had controls like this, and they're very easy to learn and use. Just an example of people needlessly complaining about a product just because they have some issues with the manufacturer. In this case, Apple. Apple poses a great target. You have the anti Apple and Apple fanboys, then you have the people who will complain just because of the silliness of fighting over small details. It makes for good blogging and tabloids, oddly enough.
@kccboy2004, I don't like talking to automated telephone services, much less my MP3 player. I'm not always in a position where I feel like I can talk. The scroll wheel was an innovative UI approach. Talking is annoying, in my opinion.
It seems like this set of controls they implemented was the best of the worst. It took something that originally seemed like a convenience-oriented control and turned it into the only control. They shoehorned functionality into the controls making it a little too complex when it was originally a fairly elegant way to do something without dragging a touch screen device out of your pocket.
I haven't seen one in person to determine if it's even possible, but some redundant backward, forward, and play/pause buttons on the side of the device would have been nice. It may be their choice was dictated by size rather than attempting to make innovative UI controls (and failing because of complexity).
Small it is but what if your headphones stop working? How will you control it?
You'll have to buy new ones.............at probably $20+
that's what she said
The packaging is pretty big. Does anyone know why they use so much plastic to ship the little thingamajig? Not very "eco".
Yup, they removed things like buttons to make it small.
Will apple or universities have classes to teach people how to use this thing?
"iShf1001 - Introduction to iPod Shuffle"
"iShf1002 - Shuffle for Intermediate Users"
Why do they still have white headphones?
I hate to say it, but the Apple haters are right, this is a really stupid idea on the whole. Having one button for so many functions is obscene! I sure hope this doesn't make its way onto their laptops. Before you know it, Apple will try and make us triple click to carry out an operation as simple as selecting a paragraph, or require that we hold down the mouse button to move a file! Where will this madness end?!??! :P
The controls are going to take a little getting used to, but so does every new computer, gaming console, and media player, even individual games usually have a learning curve of some kind. Playing Mortal Combat required a lot more button memorization than this does, and it was a pretty big hit. Cut the drama, this is far from impossible to adjust to and use effectively.
P.S. I think people are going to be a lot more miffed (as they should be) by the special headphones (or adapter) being a requirement, especially when they stop working.
@ Samboini:
Schizophrenic?
One of the articles was written by Nilay Patel and the other by Paul Miller (self confessed mac book air lover... nothing wrong with that btw)
so no Engadget is not one person, they all have different views and the podcast will tell you as much.
Designed to be smuggled into prisons? (if you know what I mean, and it's better if you don't)
In regards to the controls, one of the things that Apple was proud of with the original iPod designs is that anyone could pick it up and start using it, and have figured out the controls by themselves without an instruction sheet or anything.
Nice to see that they've said "fuck you" to their origins with the new Shuffle.
Shouldn't the LOCK button be on the headphones? I mean, what's the point of breaking continuity there? Inconsistent Apple... Inconsistent!!!
That's what she said.
Sorry I just had to.
Gotta love how the existing apple headphone with a control wont work at all (control wise). it would have been dreadfully simple for Apple to allow them to pause/play the shuffle - but they're greedy bastards and want to corner you into having to use the new headphones.
I've got an inkling these new headphones wont work with the iPhone - that would make a heck of a lot of sense - and this is Apple we're talking about ........
@Phenoum
They've been out for a while (with a built-in mic) and work fine with the iPhone and iPod touch. There are also a lot of third party ones out there if you want to save some cash.
"Before you know it, Apple will try and make us triple click to carry out an operation as simple as selecting a paragraph, or require that we hold down the mouse button to move a file! Where will this madness end?!??! :P"
That's the browser dumbass. Firefox, Safari, Opera, IE, BROWSERS BUDDEH.
@BloodyHell
No, it is the OS, and since when do you move files in your browser?
P.S. Safari is developed by Apple. so my comment would be a valid remark even if you were right.
think this sums what most of us are thinking http://vicbishop.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/new-ipod-shuffle.jpg
I still believe the [future] dongle will make/break it.
apple was bold to not include buttons on the device.
i guess it's like the iphone without a physical keyboard...?
I'm not sure "bold" is the word I'd use.
Yes, it's exactly like the iPhone without a physical keyboard.
Except that where the iPhone has a decent size touch screen with a graphic interface, this has...a button.
Yes, exactly alike.
it is totally not like the iphone. the iphone's keypad while hard to use accomplishes a goal. this is just a stupid design. you are supposed to make things easier and more intuitive as tech advances. you have to click 6 times to skip 2 songs? again, lame!!!
"i guess it's like the iphone without a physical keyboard...?"
It would be exactly like that if the iPhone had one button which you pressed 1 time for A, 2 times for B, 3 times for C....
@The Man: actually no, you have to press 2 times, hold the button down and then press 2 times again and hold the button down. Pressing 6 times would be way easy by comparison
@Mark
Then should 6 presses be 2 skips backwards or 3 skips forward? Choosing fairly high prime numbers could of course solve this problem for normal usage.
Actually, if you're in the middle of listening to a song (past the initial 6 seconds) and want to skip backwards, you'd have to press 3 times, within 6 seconds, press another 3 times. That's 6 times, to skip 1 song. You'd need another 3 presses to skip another song, which makes it a total of 9 button presses for 2 songs. I wonder how long that single button would last.
They should've just made it press 3 times if under the first 6 seconds, press 4 times if beyond the first 6 seconds. But then they might neglect support for skipping backwards at the 6th second mark.
Personally, I don't like the standard way of having to press the back button twice to skip backwards one song, but it's the standard. This is even more work, and just as less desirable.
The real question is how much thought and discussion does a little MP3 player like this really deserve? People are talking about this player is if it's some kind of investment.
The people who end up with one of these things either receive them as gifts or have *very* simple needs. For those people, the advantage of having a remote control on the phones outweighs the disadvantage of not having any buttons on this tiny, tiny device.
And Apple doesn't have to worry about cannibalizing their real iPod sales.
If my parents are any indication, these little things act only as gateway to a real iPod, and bonus now is that you get a remote control head phones *for free* that you can use with your bigger iPod, once you decide to upgrade. Win, win.
@Darren
Nice of you to step back, and look at it from an unbiased point of view. I had the typical engadget reader's reaction to the first Shuffle: "Who would want an MP3 player that had no screen to choose your song? Shuffle?!? They're going to name the player after a feature I don't even use or like!! Apple is stooooooopid". But then I tried to teach my mom to use a computer. oooooooo boy. Most of the negative comments just don't seem to understand that this fits a need, not theirs, but others who want something simplistic.
And bang on about it being a gateway: you get them using the "simple" and "cheap" player first, then they'll gradually want to graduate and upgrade to the players with more features and higher margins.
how does it sync? through the 3.5?
Yes, the previous shuffle had a dock type connector that works through the 3.5mm jack.
Just guessing it would be the same here.
Erm, how does it change song?
If you look at the photos you'll see a short USB to 3.5 cable.
I'm assuming they're said goodbye to the dock concept for the shuffle. Not that I'm upset or anything.
William, you have to watch the Apple introductory video to find that out. The video is optional, at $19.99.
The controls are on the earbud wire. It's identical to the iPhone's earbuds with the "talk" button but this time it has the iPod controls.
@samboini yeah but you get the lovely Hannah :o)
@piperboy
um... maybe i'm different from other engadget readers b/c i see real females once in a while (hint: they're not with you in your basement) but i don't get what you see in her
should come with a tracker i know alot of people are gunna miss place it lol
I was thinking they should've put a keyring loop on it to keep with your keys. After all, Apple keeps touting that aluminum as being scratch proof, so why worry?
Aluminum scratch proof... that's a good one.
A KEYRING? THAT WOULD ADD SO-O-O MUCH BULK. actually it's a really good idea. it just wouldn't look apple-y.
and no, aluminum is not scratch proof - but my aluminum macbook is holding up significantly better than the plastic one it replaced.
Look at the pictures morons! Theres a loop on the back, what the hell do you think its for!?
So it's hardly any smaller than the previous Shuffle, but costs more, is harder to use, and you need to spend at least $50 if you need replacement earbuds? Yeah, that sounds like a sure sell.
bingo
You pretty much nailed every why this iteration of the Shuffle is an abomination of the iPod line. It is complete fail thoughout. Minimalism taken to the point of zero usablility. How can you use controls when you output the sound through 3.5mm?
Fred, either you don't know how to read, or you just don't know what the words "target demographic" mean. I'm guessing it's a little of both.
I love my last generation shuffle. It is great for the gym. I agree though, the design of this version doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
Oh and how many times can you be wrong in one post? Let's count:
1. The new Shuffle is approx. 1/2 the size of the previous one.
2. The new Shuffle has twice the storage (which addresses your "costs more" argument, despite the fact that it's only ONE DOLLAR more for twice the capacity)
3. Harder to use? Because the button on the earbud cable is... what? Harder to reach? Harder to click? Have you ever used one before? I'm guessing not.
Facts aren't just for geniuses and super scientists, you know. You should look into using them more often.
And what happens when you want to replace the crappy iPod headphones with a good pair? No more controls? o.0
Before you know it, goddamn Apple will try and make us triple click to select a paragraph, or hold down the mouse button to move a file! Where will this madness end?!??!
@cloud858rk
no, you just pay apple more money for their more than likely overpriced adapter
@ Who?
awesome lol
Zak, i like how you conviently forgot to mention that you have to use the Apple headphones.
...I guess its hard to defend Apple on that one. Even for people like you.
i love the black, apple make the next iphone this color
Totally useable? Engadget's apple fanboy-ish just skyrocked to new levels. It amaze my how they are giving this navigation a thumb up when Engadget bark at any device with a resistive screen.
Well...in their defense, they did say considering the Shuffle's target demographic. Generally, people running on a treadmill, etc will not be too worried about constantly changing songs, etc, and even if they want to, it;ll be easier to grab the remote on the cord than press a button on the device itself.
That said, I would have no use for a device like that, but I know many friends who would as many still use an ancient 256MB MP3 with no cord remote and just listen to the same set of songs each workout.
Rofl! True.
And how many more advertising checks from Apple rofl.
@schmitty338
I fit into that target demographic and the Apple buds have NEVER stayed in my ears while running.
Plus, I know where my hip is (where I clip the current shuffle) so I can easily click it's controls. On the other hand, on a treadmill the cable is going all over the place...now I have to slow down to try and catch it!
Well they scored 2 of these, one silver, one black, so there is your answer. Now what I want to see is if they will give them up as giveaways? right?
schmitty338: Since when is it a technicall challange to reach for a device down your pocket and press a button? The previous shuffle was often clipped on to your clothes and is as reachable as buttons on a remote. With dedicated buttons I can skip back and forth through songs faster than you can skip through two songs using the buttons on the cord.
@schmitty
I fit into the target demographic and it wouldn't work for me. I'm one of those people who clips my shuffle to the back of my shorts and runs the cord up my back, that keeps the earbud cord out of the way of things like flailaing arms (I'm not the most coordinated) and tree branches (I run in the woods). This control placement would put the controls in the middle of my spine, not the most conducive place for them to be if I want to skip a track or change the volume.
Not well thought through.
@FOREX
I understand your point but do you not find that trying to control your current Shuffle when it is clipped to the back of your shorts is a problem?
Personally, I really like the idea of having the controls on the headphones but the current Apple earbuds aren't what I would choose to have the control on. Indeed, they used to fall out for me as well and I wasn't even running.
@Kelmon
One might think it is difficult to control but its not really. I've tried different places, shirt collar, sleeve, shirt hem, and the front of my shorts, but they all had short comings. The back, for me is the best spot, keeps the shuffle (and wires) out of the way and steady. Once you remember that pushing down goes to the next track and right and left are volume controls (up and down respectivly) its fine. Though, truth be told, I am actually using my sansa clip more often these days it sits in the same place but operation is even more intuitive.
I also seem to be the only person who likes the way apples ear buds fit when running, so I don't have the same issue as many.
Of course the real question is this: How many articles do you think Engadget can squeeze out of this thoroughly underwhelming update?
Rofl! True.
And how many more advertising checks from Apple rofl.
As many times as the anti Apple whiners are going to keep posting comments on it.
Mark Anderson didn't get breast feed as a child. Now he resents anyone or anything, including inanimate objects like the iPod, that get more attention than he got as a child.
Seriously.
@Jason
Rofl
Rofl
Rofl
You know, I don't actually think you're "rolling on the floor laughing". Just use lol or something. Even then, I'd be questioning your sanity.
And why the hell do you have the same account as Boards of Canada? Could it be that all the trolls on these posts are just one person?
"Of course the real question is this: How many articles do you think Engadget can squeeze out of this thoroughly underwhelming update?"
As many as possible to get you to believe that this thing makes sense.
Actually I did get breast fed as a child which is why I know a tit when I see one, Paul.
Paul A. Chapel didn't get dropped on his head enough as a child. Now he spends his time taking the Internet too "Seriously".
E.J. needs to get some more shut-eye.
Seriously.
+1 for the tit retort
Paul, you need to work on your taunting skills.
So implying that Mark Anderson likes transsexuals isn't enough of a taunt because it's true?
No, it's just a really poor taunt. Especially compared to the masterfully executed tit retort. Mark Anderson +1.
Try harder Paul! :p
@ Skeezle You think one day they would realize that but no, they would rather just complain and drive up click through, hence more money for Engadget from advertisers.
Mr. Anerson's sexual preferences are not of my interest, but if you want a tip, you should try to kill his taunt at the same time as making a new one for him. Like he did with the tit.
You came with an absurd accusation, or "insult", but he effectively both quenched it and repaid it with one sentence.
Then you come along and call yourself a cock before implying Anderson is interested in transsexuals; a subject you just came up with in desperation.
@Paul: i think calling yourself a transsexual first, pretty much made your argument...moot.
Ah, you don't know my history with Mr. Anderson. He has called me a 'cock' on several occasions, so the tit comment naturally confused me. At one time I commented on his obsession with male body parts, which is why I guess he had to change it up a little, you know, for "appearances."
I had to check up on that one, and it looks like you were indeed called a cock a couple of times in jan/early feb, but looking at the comments, you certainly deserved it.
That still doesn't make it especially useful in this context though. Anderson's tit was a direct answer to your post, and was amusing for everyone who bother to read all of this. You then repiled that you should rather be called a cock, because he called you a cock before. Nobody else but you, and possibly Anderson remembers that he called you a cock two months ago. It makes no sense in this context; a taunt should not have to be explained. better luck next time.
If you don't know how to play your cards, ad hominum = InstaLose
Paul,
For the love of all things able to read...stop.
Oh, Geez, you're joking, right?
I don't really care about the whole discussion going on here I just have to say: Mark Anderson, that was the best retort I've ever read on here. Well done, sir; well done.
Yo, send us another, we're done with Paul.
By the way, what happened between "at that point you might as well pick up a $150 iPod nano"/"does anyone actually feel like the numbers tip in favor of the shuffle here?"/"You might as well get the old shuffle which is easier to use" and "we think this is totally usable, especially for the shuffle's sweaty target demographic"? Did Cupertino slap you on the fingers for writing something negative about their products?
Sending them a box of new shuffles my guess it is.