New iPod nano.... ITS FLIPPIN' SMALL!
- Thread starter Superdeft
- Start date
Actually I do understand the average consumer. When they read the box (if they do that even) and one says "this player holds 500" or "this player holds 1500 songs", they say - well 1500 is better than 500 all other things being equal. Also if was true people didn't care how much it held, Apple would not increase capacity every generation of HDD, Mini HDD, and Flash DAPs.
The common Apple consumer filed a class action suits against apple for notebook and iPod battery issues - they DO care about that...
I will say the common consumer places more emphasis on marketing and trends (which is why Apple is number one) over actually spending time properly evaluating what they are buying.
Since most of your argument isn't very solid, I would say you haven't used a Rio player (which can differ by model/line tremendously - not all their players are great) or maybe you played with it for 10 seconds in a store display.
Among both the average joe (people I've let play with my Karma) and DAP connoisseurs, the Karma was judged as best. Rio sold all their IP to Sigmatel (mp3 chipset maker), so Apple, Samsung, etc can steal the technology for free now that Rio are gone...
How many commercials have you seen for other players in normal mainstream media outlets - I've seen almost none - thats why they fail.
I don't own any DAP anymore except for my Alpine CDA-9811 head unit in my car - it plays MP3 or WMA CDs. I don't see any player at the moment that stands out and the great deals on the clearance Karmas are over, so I'm not going to get another for awhile I guess.
The common Apple consumer filed a class action suits against apple for notebook and iPod battery issues - they DO care about that...
I will say the common consumer places more emphasis on marketing and trends (which is why Apple is number one) over actually spending time properly evaluating what they are buying.
Since most of your argument isn't very solid, I would say you haven't used a Rio player (which can differ by model/line tremendously - not all their players are great) or maybe you played with it for 10 seconds in a store display.
Among both the average joe (people I've let play with my Karma) and DAP connoisseurs, the Karma was judged as best. Rio sold all their IP to Sigmatel (mp3 chipset maker), so Apple, Samsung, etc can steal the technology for free now that Rio are gone...
How many commercials have you seen for other players in normal mainstream media outlets - I've seen almost none - thats why they fail.
I don't own any DAP anymore except for my Alpine CDA-9811 head unit in my car - it plays MP3 or WMA CDs. I don't see any player at the moment that stands out and the great deals on the clearance Karmas are over, so I'm not going to get another for awhile I guess.
Honestly, the Apple's DRM is pretty slack; I've never once exceeded it's limits, but then again I never burn more than one CD per playlist, though I could do 5. If you exceed that, just change the order and keep going, but you can burn a song an unlimited number of times. You can also share the music with 5 other computers. Plus the DRM only apply to music you buy online; if you rip it off a CD you can do whatever you want with it. I can't really see that being a deal-breaker.Changleen said:
binary visions said:
The battery issue aside, I hate iPods. Everything is supposed to be simpler and all, but really they make it more complicated. How do you turn on the backlight again? Oh right....of course. How did I miss it, it so obvious. (end sarcasm)
I just feel that apple products are designed and marketed for people who don't really like electronics. People who think more than 1 button is too complicated. People who think that a cd eject button on a computer tower is too complicated.
kinghami3 said:
So how the hell do I get my Common CD, (which I bought) onto my gf's iPod?
4.) Plug in iPod.buildyourown said:
You can play normal mp3s.
OMG, can you people honestly be having this same F*$%ING discussion again. Really?
How much of your damn life can you possibly waste over discussing glorified walkmans?
I know Poindexter over at icantgetlaidsoitalkaboutmeaninglessmusicplayersallday.com
said that IPOD sucks, so it must be true.
Jee eez.
How much of your damn life can you possibly waste over discussing glorified walkmans?
I know Poindexter over at icantgetlaidsoitalkaboutmeaninglessmusicplayersallday.com
said that IPOD sucks, so it must be true.
Jee eez.
That's exactly the kind of thinking that got Creative Labs where they are today.syadasti said:
Capacity is just one of many factors. Obviously consumers place varying weights on different factors, or there wouldn't be a need for iPod Minis and shuffles, now would there? Also, it's pretty much a prototypical early adopter, not a mainstream consumer, that goes straight to stats and quantitative, rather than qualitative, when it comes to product features.syadasti said:
First of all, that was for battery longevity, not charge life... not exactly an up front feature. Only really affects sales if it's not remedied for the next generation. Second, it was a very small percentage of product owners that cared or even noticed.syadasti said:
If that were the case, Apple would have sold a ton of 1st gen iPods and then lost the market to superior offerings. Marketing can only do so much, and most of it is awareness. You don't sell generation after generation of product without doing something right from a product design standpoint. See Zima for what happens with great marketing and terrible product. Then read Trading Up and The Design of Everyday Things, if you want to really understand consumer behavior.syadasti said:
Other companies have the resources to run similar campaigns... if that alone were enough to capture the market, don't you think they would do it? Apple isn't THAT big, compared to Sony, Olympus, Dell.syadasti said:
(Of note - I only own an iPod because it was given as a gift. I had planned to buy another DAP, but none of them would work with my Mac... which I will be replacing with a PC. I am by no means an Apple loyalist. I just like to recognize good work when it's done.)
I just laughed so hard hahahahahha "captain ipod"
OMG how can people honestly have the same ****ing DH discussions again and again. Really? How much of your damn life can you possibly waste over discussing glorified push bikes?Jeremy R said:
I know Poindexter over at icantgetlaidorridesoitalkaboutmeaninglesscrapalldaylong.com said that this forks sucks, so it must be true.
Jee eez
I'm buying one because Ohio said it doesn't suck and he is very smart.
What were we talking about?
What were we talking about?
WHOA. That's a first.... Jeremy got pwn3d.syadasti said:OMG how can people honestly have the same ****ing DH discussions again and again. Really? How much of your damn life can you possibly waste over discussing glorified push bikes?
I know Poindexter over at icantgetlaidorridesoitalkaboutmeaninglesscrapalldaylong.com said that this forks sucks, so it must be true.
Jee eez
So they don't have good sense.... and you want me to give my money to a company that doesn't have good sense.syadasti said:
the Inbred said:
How did you manage that?
syadasti said:
Oh so you are saying that dell and other companies are just all a bunch of nice guys that only care that they deliver us a good product and put little emphasis on clever marketing.
All of those companies wish they would have had the ipod technology first, now they are all playing catch up wishing that had 1/4 of the market share apple does.
Apple didn't innovate anything. They copied an existing product just like they always do (they didn't design the iPod in-house either), put it in a pretty package and marketed it like crazy. They weren't even close to being first:manhattanprjkt83 said:
Here is some more news you probably missed:
Apple did not take any of the important first steps that established the DAP and online music market. They were followers who stole from the innovators (just like they stole from Xerox for their OS in the beginning), not leaders and they didn't even design the iPod in house, they hired a design company which actually was making a DAP for IBM (and others too) which they said was even cooler than the iPod, but IBM didn't think there was a big market (Wired Magazine: "(PortalPlayer) was attractive to Apple because we had an operating system," said Knauss. "That was a real selling point for Apple. We had the software and the hardware already done, and Apple was on a tight schedule.")
Also Rio, who invented the first popular commercial mp3 player, set the legal precedent which cleared the way for the rest of the mp3 players and online music marketplace to comeDAPR said:
Apple did not take any of the important first steps that established the DAP and online music market. They were followers who stole from the innovators (just like they stole from Xerox for their OS in the beginning), not leaders and they didn't even design the iPod in house, they hired a design company which actually was making a DAP for IBM (and others too) which they said was even cooler than the iPod, but IBM didn't think there was a big market (Wired Magazine: "(PortalPlayer) was attractive to Apple because we had an operating system," said Knauss. "That was a real selling point for Apple. We had the software and the hardware already done, and Apple was on a tight schedule.")
Spot on.syadasti said:OMG how can people honestly have the same ****ing DH discussions again and again. Really? How much of your damn life can you possibly waste over discussing glorified push bikes?
I know Poindexter over at icantgetlaidorridesoitalkaboutmeaninglesscrapalldaylong.com said that this forks sucks, so it must be true.
Jee eez
Except this happens to be bicyle forum and I ride all types of bikes.
Now if I was over at "Social Retards who try to go through the whole day without speaking to another human while listening to 1000
screamo fag rock songs monkey." Then I would expect Poindexter would get tired of me relentlessly telling someone why their DH bikes suck and mine is better.
syadasti said:
Sorry, I'll make it easier for those with ADD to understand the hard facts:manhattanprjkt83 said:
1 - Apple didn't design the iPod, PortalPlayer did
2 - The iPod was the 9th MP3 HDD player on the market, not the first by about 2 years
3 - Apple's browsing interface was invented by Creative and patented more than a year before Apple
4 - Rio set the legal example for all other MP3 players and the online music marketplace
get off your soapbox...syadasti said:
all that information came from the internet and we all know that everything we read on the internet is real...whatever the evolution...Apple did it better than everyone else and there is only one way to determine that...MARKET SHARE. They own it and for good reason, the fvckin ipod rules.
I will keep using my ipod and keep buying new ones while enjoying tons of online support and aftermarket products...
Yup, and does that change the fact that none of it's precedents had ANY mass market appeal?syadasti said:
All those other companies should get on their knees and smoke some johnson in thanks to Apple for creating a market for them.
No one ever said you have to be first. Just best. Do you refuse to drive a Toyota because Ford has been making cars for longer?
THANK YOU for illustrating my point over and over and over again. How can you write the above and not realize what you're saying?syadasti said:
Xerox and IBM are obviously kicking themselves right now... Do you have any idea how much amazing technology was developed at Xerox and passed over or sold off because they didn't have the vision to bring it to mass market? Much more than just a windows-style OS. That's the difference between being technology focused and beign consumer/market focused. It's very similar to the difference between an early adopter (you) and the mass market.
You're helping to prove that Apple understands consumers much much better than other companies (in these respective fields).
None of the precedents were mass-marketed, so nobody knew about them except for people who were into computers. Those other companies still don't understand how important good marketing is...ohio said:
Rio, Creative, and others laid the vital ground work - they aren't the copycats most misinformed people think they are.
Now that Creative has the patent, they can profit off all past and present sales from their copying competitors - thats what I would expect them to do (kinda like Specialized with their FSR patent)...
Apple isn't the best, just the most well-known. Just like most other market leaders in other industries, they are the most popular, not the highest quality. They are the Microsoft of the DAP market...
uh, it's a pretty widely known fact that marketing works. there's a whole industry of "ad agencies", i believe...syadasti said:
anyway, my contribution on this point is that while apple does have some aesthetically pleasing and simple iPod ads (the silhouette was a great idea, so good job chiat-day/random ad firm) such ads won't go anywhere if the product isn't good. the example of zima has already been brought up.
good product = buzz = happy iPod owners like me, now on my 2nd iPod, a 1G and then a 4G/photo, who recommend the product to their friends. or perhaps it's that apple users are better connected?
Geek fight!!
Looking back in history, how often does it worked out that a company or individual (who physically does the hands-on engineering / R&D) actually take their product from nothing to the retail market?syadasti said:
The scope from root level R&D to 30 second retail commercials on MTV usually involves many companies and the sale/licensing of that base technology many times over.
So dont hold it against Apple/Jobs that they pooled all these resources into a very successful product.
I can't help myself but point out that marketing should actually be the first step in R&D, so on that front I'll agree with you that they don't understand marketing. I would argue that they all realize good marketing is important, they just don't know how to do it, especially that first step.syadasti said:
Um, no one that I've noticed has made such a claim in thise thread, though you keep coming back to it. Seems to be your personal crusade, but it's a tangential argument. Save it for people with brand loyalty.syadasti said:
Interesting. Any insight into just how much of current technology these patents cover? Again, I feel the need to point out that most aspects of what makes the iPod great and unique are not patented or patentable. It has little to do with the technology and everything to do with the packaging and UI; you've got to get yourself over that hump.syadasti said:
Again, "best" is a value judgement that is unique to each buyer. While Microsoft is the evil giant, they offer something that no one else can - connectivity and compatibility. That is probably the single most important "function" for a business that is purchasing MS software. Bells and whistles and tech-geek functionality have only hurt their products, and allowed in-roads to competitors, which is why their future products are focused heavily on simplification and ease of use for the common user. Sound familiar? Yup, Microsoft (despite being a position where they don't need to) is learning the lesson that Apple's DAP competitors keep missing.syadasti said:
By the way, I hope you're not taking any of this personally. I happen to love this discussion. As often as possible, this is what I do for a living.
syadasti said:
i like being brainwashed, then i don't have to think as much. i also love my i book, my G4, my i pod mini, and my i pod shuffle.
All of Apple's players except the probably the Shuffle infringe on the Zen Patent which is very broad and basic navigation technology most companies' mp3 players use:ohio said:
NYT said:
No, its no problem. The only responses that are annoying are coming from some other posters who don't put any thought into their response. Considering I don't own any DAP ATM, I'm only frustrated that there is nothing I really like out there right now. Might consider this new player from Sony though:
I was putting the finishing touches on my sovereign - I'll post a photo
You do this for a living - need any new employees - I just moved back from NZ and need a job again
More fun than DAPs, been out on three time so far. Just got the black bashguard and did a framesaver coat on it last night. I hate working without a stand. I ordered an ultimate, but its been backordered forever...syadasti said:I was putting the finishing touches on my sovereign - I'll post a photo
Attachments
No, I'm not saying that they don't matter at all. It's a matter of weighing the features, though, and for most people, an attractive package is a bigger consideration than a storage increase.syadasti said:
Different issue. Nothing to do with the playing time, and everything to do with the fact that the batteries (or the implementation, I'm not sure which) sucked and caused a short battery life.
True. But to you, "properly evaluating" means crawling through DAP forums, exhaustively feature matching, and determining the best value for the money. To many others, they pick up each one in Best Buy, and you know what they see? They see that the iPod is, bar none, the best looking player out there, with the slickest navigation system (the Rio's joystick works just as well, but it doesn't feel as slick and integrated).
Um, you disagreeing with it doesn't make it invalid.
You'd be completely wrong. Assumptions aren't a good thing to base arguments on. As a matter of fact, I've used a Rio Karma extensively, and a Rio Carbon to a lesser degree. I have no beef with the Karma, I think it's a great player and it's what I'd buy if I were in the market for one right now. But this isn't about me, it's about the general population.
Ahh, yes, I see. So, it's valid that you can let people play with a Karma and make a judgement, but you just gave me a hard time because you assumed I had only played with one myself?
Also true. Again, I don't deny that marketing plays a big role, but it's not everything.
Can't read the whole article. Sounds too broad of a patent. If I had to guess I would say that depending on when it was filed, Creative will be lucky to get a settlement. Stacked menus have existed for a long time. UI patents are hard to enforce. E.g. I know the guy who held the patent for storing an image digitally (pre-dates Sony... early 80s I believe) - never made a penny off of that one. Of course, he had a lot of much more specific patents in the same arena, so he's doing okay for himself.syadasti said:All of Apple's players except the probably the Shuffle infringe on the Zen Patent which is very broad and basic navigation technology most companies' mp3 players use:
You do this for a living - need any new employees - I just moved back from NZ and need a job again
I don't employ anyone, myself, anymore. But I work in strategy consulting; consumer goods marketing and development is my area of specialty. I don't always get to work in that area (in fact, not nearly often enough), but I aim for it whenever it comes up.
syadasti said:
Now we're talking.
Sweet ride.
Yes these other features matter. Certainly after a consumer has had one for a while and becomes more saavy rather than going by trend, they realize things like capacity, battery life/longevity (BTW I sold my Karma after owning it for 2 years and it still had better battery life than an iPod out of the box), etc. do make a difference.binary visions said:
I bought my last DAP in Nov. 03. There weren't many forums at that time and I didn't use them until after I bought my player. I am not an early HDD mp3 adopter either as others have said, I bought my first HDD player 4 years after the first HDD player was on the market (I did have 2 CD players that could play mp3 disc before then, but its not the same thing)...
Well most people in RM have little real world experience with what they claim to talk about, so just making a general statement like that without clarification isn't very convincing...