http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/ Engadget Comments for http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/Apr 13th 2009 10:29AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/Apr 13th 2009 10:33AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/
-Apple fanboy]]>Apr 13th 2009 10:38AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/Apr 13th 2009 10:41AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/Apr 13th 2009 10:43AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/Apr 13th 2009 10:58AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/
]]>Apr 13th 2009 11:08AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/and everyone else voted you both down...]]>Apr 13th 2009 11:11AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/
No, it doesn't pay to produce shit that this Shuffle is.]]>Apr 13th 2009 11:13AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/
That's ok.

The concept of Apple actually charging scads more than it cost to make the damn thing (essentially paying for the logo) is something that these guys still have a hard time openly admitting. They are willing morons to keep doing it, So Apple isnt doing anything wrong. Their fans are all to easily duped.

Just imagine if Microsoft or Sony did this. Exactly.]]>Apr 13th 2009 11:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/
Any big company that can't afford to screw something up has to dump a truckload of money at it. The average joe sees a materials-cost-to-retail-price multiplier of 3.6 and thinks "Boy what a rip-off" and somebody who actually knows something about it sees the same number and says, "Hmm, they're definitely planning to make most of their money off of iTunes sales..."
]]>Apr 13th 2009 11:20AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/
You're right. I'm sure there is no profit margin on the Zune. At all. We all know Microsoft is really only in it for the charity, so Microsoft is only breaking even on Zunes.

"Just imagine if Microsoft did this".

It doesn't take an active imagination, it only takes some common sense and a look at Microsoft's price tags. Or were you under the impression that Microsoft doesn't like to make money?]]>Apr 13th 2009 11:24AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/Apr 13th 2009 11:26AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/
This SHOULD be common sense. I can't say I'm surprised that so many people here don't get it.]]>Apr 13th 2009 11:34AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/
Did I say that? I mean just look at their name "M$"! But Apple fans, when they are actually honest, proudly proclaim that yeah Apple charges more for less, but I'm soooo happy to pay for it.

You've seen the comments here many times.


"It doesn't take an active imagination, it only takes some common sense and a look at Microsoft's price tags. Or were you under the impression that Microsoft doesn't like to make money?

They do make money on volume and with smaller margins. Apple makes it with smaller volume and higher margins.

That's not a big secret.]]>Apr 13th 2009 11:34AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/
Also, don't forget that Apple is selling much more than what the Zune is doing, logically, these iPods should sell even for much cheaper prices due to high demand and fast selling flow.

Note: Please don't talk about software, because pricing software is a tangible thing, and we sure never judge Apple nor Microsoft for their software, but what people should understand is that all the hardware inside these devices comes from outside these companies.]]>Apr 13th 2009 11:37AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/
Just the costs of making the tooling to make the cases could run half a million (with the number of tool sets Apple needs). And that's before any actual software R&D. Give that they added a major new feature (speech) to this one, I'm sure the R&D costs were significant.]]>Apr 13th 2009 11:52AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/
So you're convinced Apple is charging more for less on this iPod? While simultaneously being aware that is does, in fact, cost more to design an MP3 player this small? I'd like to see your figures on that, because you had to have come to that conclusion somehow. You understand that the raw materials cost estimate from iSuppli is just that - an estimate. Right? They're guessing. Additionally, they don't take all the various R&D into account, and if you think R&D is cheap for something like this... well then why isn't everybody making one to compete with it?

As far as your other comment, MS doesn't make a player like the Shuffle, so you can't really assume that their margins would be less or that they would charge less. Nobody is saying Apple isn't in it to make money - they are - but saying Apple has wide margins based on a GUESS, only on raw materials, by iSuppli, is really not thinking it through.

Saad: Have you failed business school? I bet you would if you tried. The iPod is the most successful player in the world, and your suggestion is that Apple should charge less money for them? When they're selling so fast they have a hard time keeping up with demand?

... Really?

Tell you what, you go ahead and start up your own player business, chop your margins down to nothing and become more successful than Apple. See how well that works out for you.]]>Apr 13th 2009 11:56AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/
No buttons, no screen, and for more than players that have those things. So yeah.


"Apple isn't in it to make money - they are - but saying Apple has wide margins based on a GUESS,"

Guess? This is common knowledge! Even many Apple fans will ADMIT this, and think it's awesome and a testament to how cool Apple is that they can!

Oh my apologize for kicking your dog.]]>Apr 13th 2009 12:05PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/
You should do as your name implies. Or would you only see the insides of your ass if you did?]]>Apr 13th 2009 12:18PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/
You know, you say a lot of really stupid things on this board, but this one is pretty much taking the cake. Since when does miniaturizing something cost less than not miniaturizing it? Were you not aware that Apple had no existing components to make this Shuffle from? They had to redesign the whole thing, because it's 50% the size of the previous Shuffle. What part of that fact makes you think "it should be cheaper"?

I really don't know why you're having a problem comprehending this relatively simple concept. Making a player 50% smaller than the previous version, which was already the world's smallest flash player, is not something that can be done with pixie dust and miracle whip. It's an extremely cost intensive production, and anybody who has worked in industrial design or engineering will tell you the same thing. Other people in this thread who work in those industries have said it too.

The cost of the raw materials is irrelevant to the total cost of creating something like this, and this really is common knowledge for people who have more than half a brain in their head.

As far as the wide margins, I was talking about this Shuffle in particular. You're free to guess at how wide the margins are on it when you include the cost of designing and building it, but don't treat your guesses as fact.]]>Apr 13th 2009 12:26PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/Apr 13th 2009 12:33PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/
Stop twisting things and face the facts, Apple products are expansive for no reason. All companies do R&D and do great designs from time to time, so suck it up.]]>Apr 13th 2009 12:36PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/
LOL, touche!

I'm actually surprised that the cost isn't cheaper. I expected it to be around $10. I'd pay $50 for a PMP this size, if it could charge off a standard USB mini cable.]]>Apr 13th 2009 1:31PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/Apr 13th 2009 2:45PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/Apr 13th 2009 3:11PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/]]>Apr 13th 2009 6:19PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/Apr 13th 2009 6:34PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/
And research and development costs are unlikely to be the major fraction of the difference in cost from component pricing to retail. Let us not ignore: assembly, packaging, distribution (not cheap at all), advertising, and support costs (probably the major fraction of the difference). Of course, there is nothing Apple-specific about any of this. All companies produce devices for tens of dollars worth of components, and then sell them for hundreds. Or has the Apple-hate developed to such a level that apparently intelligent people can suddenly forget that fact?]]>Apr 13th 2009 8:07PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/Apr 13th 2009 10:32AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/Apr 13th 2009 10:34AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/Apr 13th 2009 10:37AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/
Good point.]]>Apr 13th 2009 11:51AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/Apr 13th 2009 10:32AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/
a cheap mac]]>Apr 13th 2009 10:32AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/
]]>Apr 13th 2009 10:33AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/Apr 13th 2009 10:33AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/Apr 13th 2009 11:09AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/
Too bad you will have to use shit Apple Headphones and don't try to tell me they are great everyone knows the iPod headphones suck. This is also the reason I don't think this shuffle will sell well, unless Apple adds this feature to other iPods in which case many headphone makers will start to include the technology to control them.]]>Apr 13th 2009 11:30AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/
Where the hell do you live that you can snowboard then?]]>Apr 13th 2009 11:51AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/
I dont know what you mean "for snowboarding", but my Sansa Clip seems to be the best for "listening to music"]]>Apr 13th 2009 12:25PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/
I went up like 2 weeks ago and i live in washington.]]>Apr 13th 2009 12:25PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/
How do you fit on it :-\]]>Apr 13th 2009 6:13PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/Apr 13th 2009 9:29PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/
Journalistic integrity absent from your lexicon Engadget?

Well, I suppose even the Engadget crew have to put food on their tables, so I'll let you get back to meeting your Apple quotas.]]>Apr 13th 2009 10:34AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/Apr 13th 2009 11:21AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/just clicked on your profile. mmm....?]]>Apr 13th 2009 11:44PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/Apr 13th 2009 10:36AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/
"The KIRFsters wouldn't want to sully their names with cloning such a poor product"]]>Apr 13th 2009 10:39AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/13/22-ipod-shuffle-shocker-components-tiny-inexpensive/Because I'm assuming most people won't I'll paste this:

"That’s about 28% of the device’s retail price. The smaller the component cost as a percentage of price, the higher the potential profit. This suggests the per-unit profit margin on the shuffle is higher than on other iPod models. The component cost for the first iPod touch released in 2007, for instance, amounted to about $147, or about 49% of its $299 retail price. The component cost of the third-generation iPod nano, also released in 2007, amounted to about 40% of its retail price."

Now do you understand the point? It's not that the components are cheaper to manufacture, it's that they are *cheaper* than any other ipod. And also, it is possible to make a profit selling at cost (theoretically) - look at the consoles (not including the wii). Of course, Apple's current model is better than if they made everything half price, but charged us an extra 10c if we wanted to use ID3 tags :)]]>Apr 13th 2009 11:03AM