Neowin Editorial: iPod + nano = No More mini
Posted by anthony on 13 September 2005 - 22:09 · 56 comments & 6866 views
About the Author
Full name: Unknown
Forum name: anthony
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Full name: Unknown
Forum name: anthony
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Slashdot It!
Submit to reddit
Submit to blinklist
Bookmark on del.icio.us
Add to furl
Share on Facebook
Add to Windows Live
Add to Google- Advertisement
-
-
(1 reply)
#1 Posted by neufuse on 13 Sep 2005 - 22:18
- I thought the mini was the best of all them.. it was like the perfect size to hold and the scroll wheel was a good size... to me the nano is too small just my personal opinnion and at least the mini went up to 6GB and wasn't there an 8GB one in the works? and it had all the color choices... just needed to get a color screen and it would of been perfect
-
#2 Posted by itaniumpower on 13 Sep 2005 - 22:18
- Evolution my friend, evolution !
-
#3 Posted by Chris_UK on 13 Sep 2005 - 22:18
- lol loving the pic. iPod Mini's will probely come down in price now
so i'll get one (or two, or maybe three )
-
#4 Posted by Julius Caro on 13 Sep 2005 - 22:30
- After reading it, the only conclusion is that ipod mini is resting in peace?
There's no point in this.
-
(5 replies)
#5 Posted by vacantmind on 13 Sep 2005 - 22:32
- i wish i waited. i got a creative zen micro a few months back, this thing would have been perfect. then again i'd have to use itunes and have to have all their drm stuff, it'd be pretty nice though
Last edited by 33280 on 15 Sep 2005 - 04:37 -
#5.1 Posted by Daffy_Duck on 14 Sep 2005 - 01:59
- What do you mean? If you use mp3 there is no DRM.
-
#5.2 Posted by Starcom826 on 14 Sep 2005 - 03:16
- If you want music in other sources that aren't mp3 or purchased music from other stores that don't use AAC you're sunk. Apple does not support .ogg, .wma, etc. etc. I know iRiver does. I would like to see Apple incorporate those formats as well as other lossless codecs like FLAC.
-
#5.3 Posted by plasticparadox on 14 Sep 2005 - 03:46
- iTunes for Windows automatically converts unprotected .wma files for you. If you want lossless, iTunes/iPod will do that as well.
-
#5.4 Posted by shao on 14 Sep 2005 - 10:05
- lossy -> lossy = bad
the latter being aac just worsens things, as apple's implementation is hardly the best. back in the day when i used aac on my gen1 ipod i was shocked to see that itunes created aac files refused to play back in other windows media players (media player, vlc, mpc, winamp, etc). do i go for a badly implemented open standard codec, which has become closed, and doesn't even sound so hot, or do i got for something like .ogg, which is as open as you like and sounds beautiful?
i must admit the nano looks nice, as do most ipods when they first come out, but i wont be going back to apple until they support some of the functionality that other players do. -
#5.5 Posted by dp123 on 14 Sep 2005 - 17:31
QUOTE back in the day when i used aac on my gen1 ipod i was shocked to see that itunes created aac files refused to play back in other windows media players (media player, vlc, mpc, winamp, etc).
The gen1 iPod didn't support AAC, iTunes still hadn't adopted AAC at the time, and iTunes has never created AAC files which could not be played in other software. What are you talking about shao?
And AAC is not badly implemented. It was not open and then closed. It has the exact same status and much the same pedigree as mp3.
Last edited by 9953 on 14 Sep 2005 - 17:39
-
(7 replies)
#6 Posted by BigCheese on 13 Sep 2005 - 22:33
- Why on earth did they replace the mini with the nano. They should have replace the shuffle with the nano.
-
#6.1 Posted by dp123 on 13 Sep 2005 - 23:14
- Because the shuffle can keep getting dirt cheap while the nano can become the premier product.
The whole logic of this article is insanely flawed. They weren't pushed into a corner; they took the market into a new direction. It had nothing to do with memory capacities or price or continuing the mini, this was an obvious evolution (that isn't financially or designn-wise feasible for anyone else). They worked towards huge volumes to make a killer deal with Samsung making HDs irrelevant. They created a product that would clearly be considered in the same space as an existing product, so they removed it. The name change isn't because of capacity; it's because they want people to think of it as a new product: hence, the advertisement and color changes, etc... -
#6.2 Posted by anthony on 13 Sep 2005 - 23:26
- Actually, they didn't use the "killer deal" with Samsung, nor are HDs irrelevent. 10gb and 8gb microdrives are now available and could have been used in the mini. Also, the 2gb model of the nano doesn't even use Samsung memory. Samsungs pricing deal was on 4GB and 6GB flash memory chips only.
-
#6.3 Posted by dp123 on 13 Sep 2005 - 23:34
- No, actually it does use the deal. The deal is for 2GB chips, and 4 GB chips down the line. Just because one model continues to use Toshiba chips doesn't mean a thing. And, yes, HDs are irrelevant in the mini/micro/nano segment now. The bulky players from other companies with 6,8, or 10 GB look absurd now. With Apple getting high density flash at HD prices, anyone attempting to compete with Apple's small form factor devices with HDs is toast.
-
#6.4 Posted by priestx on 14 Sep 2005 - 01:20
- Not trying to be a troll here.. just sounding off..
The author didn't really seem to dig deep into the aspect of the nano, and it's well being with all the other players within Apple's line of mp3 players, but continued to push opinion into fact. The nano is the continuation of the new display line, with the appeal of having a smaller volume, it has nothing to do with the mini and more to do with innovation (slight return) and market product generations. Just like the first generation, and the second, they became outdated, but they didn't have the large market base to recquire an in-between change. It is because of consumer demands that Apple went from 4g to 6g... if you look at hard drive prices, a 40 gigabyte harddrive is the same price as an 80gig hd. It's all about the product and the way things sell. They have to remove outdated products or merge a product seat so that they can take full advantage of the market.
Right now it's shuffle-nano/mini-regular. shuffle is a new product seat, the mini was in it's second phase of product degradition and the regular has constantly changed over the year. the ipod photo took over it's seat, and not many people noticed or were surprised- great because thats exactly what Apple wants you to think. If they released the nano with the mini still in their product seat, then the nano would have become a NEW product seat, not a replacement, or a seat merge. You cannot build your product on just they way memory fluxs- that would not be feasible. The prices go up and down and up and down, it's a smart move for Apple to go with 2g and 4g, and not 4g and 6g- where the prices are changing more rapidly. -
#6.5 Posted by joeydoo on 14 Sep 2005 - 01:30
- Also, chipping in here, the mini was clearly the out of place in the product line up. A redesign was needed so the nano is in line with the other products. A switch to flash is a logical decision. Increase of capacity is not as important for this products target audience. And increase from 4->8GB is not very necessary when you only use it to go for a run or for the trip to and from work. It’s for ultra portability, not to hold your entire music collection. Not that size increases aren't important, but capacity is an acceptable sacrifice for a very cool, very small little gadget. People won't care about anything else. I think that you will see apple doing this increasingly the future. Design and how tiny the devices are will be more important than the capacity for the time being. How much music do you want to carry around?
-
#6.6 Posted by priestx on 14 Sep 2005 - 06:17
- It's more like the substitution property than addition.. People have been using cd's and tapes for decades.. the walkman? It would be impractical to have a huge 60g or 20g ipod nano, because you, as the end user, might be more attracted to the aspects of the nano and not the actual activity need to be done. The fun factor suddenly drops, and the customer doesn't return for a new product generation. I critisize the author for the lack of depth..
-
#6.7 Posted by shao on 14 Sep 2005 - 10:20
- So you're saying the capacity of a jukebox translates directly to the amount of fun a user has with a product and the amount of product satisfaction and respect they have towards a product. Understandable, until you flip it on it's head and say users want less space, not more.
As a fairly typical user I think it's fair to say I look for good value for money above all else. However, all this talk of seats really translates to 3 product lines, or ideals for apple. Shuffle, Nano/mini, Standard. The popularity of the shuffle and mini don't really suggest that people don't want more capacity on their players - of course they want capacity in as much as they want more of everything else, however I fell it's ultimately a cost issue which prevents more people going for the standard, or high end ipods over the low end. Personally when I bought into the ipod ideal (back in generation1) I opted for the 5gb model (or the "I can't afford anything larger", the "5gb will do" mentality), and I think that's where a majority of ipod buyers find themselves at the moment; they want the larger capacity, but can't justify the cost. Equally, the size isn't that much of a killer issue for people when they are purchasing, especially when moving from the likes of cd or tape walkman type devices. Either way, the size of any model of ipod is far smaller than what they're used to.
The issue of innovation of the ipod product line is a mute point for some people, when you look at what innovation has actually occurred in terms of the usability of the product back from generation1 - very little has changed, very little innovation has happened at all. In part this adds to the product strength of ipods. it's a familiar 'friend' that they're used to when going back and looking at purchasing a replacement device. I personally feel it's equally a negative point, and there are potential customers out there who don't feel the need to re-new their devices, or are more willing to look elsewhere purely because the lack of innovation in all of the apple range. Ultimately smaller means I have less of a bulge in my coat pocket, but what do I actually get for forking out all that money on a new device when I already have one….. Nothing.
-
#7 Posted by anthony on 13 Sep 2005 - 22:39
- Digg this story
http://digg.com/apple/Why_did_Apple_stop_m..._the_iPod_mini_
hehe
-
(3 replies)
#8 Posted by ghos on 13 Sep 2005 - 22:52
- I agree that this did not deserve to be front page. It didn't say anything I didn't already know and I don't even care about ipod's all that much. Of course I guess it stated its purpose in its description, but I didn't think it would be as lightweight as it said it was.
-
#8.1 Posted by nauge on 13 Sep 2005 - 23:26
- I was looking for the " Next >> " button for a while before i realised that i had reached the end
-
#8.2 Posted by theyarecomingforyou on 14 Sep 2005 - 03:51
- Yeah, I want my 13 seconds back... and most of that was spent looking at the picture.
-
#8.3 Posted by Julius Caro on 14 Sep 2005 - 13:50
- My thoughts actually :/
I mean, there's a fact: there is no more iPod mini. There are some theories.
But where's the conclusion?
This is a weird article !
-
#9 Posted by Mister Lamar on 13 Sep 2005 - 22:57
- no wonder I didnt see mini on the website anymore
-
(1 reply)
#10 Posted by vlsi0n on 13 Sep 2005 - 23:38
- hmmm why is the ipod mini resting now? becuse they want people to buy the brand new innovation packed super new nano... because itss sooo much different, please.. milkin' it is whats going on..
-
#11 Posted by Dessimat0r on 14 Sep 2005 - 00:37
- No wonder Walkers are giving loads away in their promotion thing, then.
-
#12 Posted by dannymp3 on 14 Sep 2005 - 00:39
- I like the nano, but it's just TOO small. The mini is just perfect! Call me weird, but smaller isn't always better.
I think the nano WILL be better on the market compared to the mini, because of the color screen, but I'd still take my mini 6 gig over the nano 4 gig.
-
(1 reply)
#13 Posted by Kushan on 14 Sep 2005 - 01:19
- I'm not normally one to complain about this sort of thing, but Neowin has been giving a hell of a lot of attention to Apple's ipod's as of late.
Like I said, normally I wouldn't mind but there are many many other alternatives out there that get almost no light because people are too busy jumping on the ipod bandwagon.
It would be nice to see Creative getting the front page any time they released a new type of Zen or something :/ -
#13.1 Posted by Daffy_Duck on 14 Sep 2005 - 02:10
- I don't think Neowin intends to report about every release of every music product. It's focusing in the big stuff and the iPod is the market leader. If people want to keep up with all the gadget releases there are places to do so. Engadget is one example.
-
#14 Posted by jthomas5150 on 14 Sep 2005 - 01:39
- I mean look at the innovative stuff Apple comes out with. Imagine if Microsoft was that innovative. Where would we be?
-
(9 replies)
#15 Posted by pickleman on 14 Sep 2005 - 01:54
QUOTE Imagine if Microsoft was that innovative. Where would we be?
Thanks to Microsoft, 90%+ of the world can enjoy a computer system without having to take a second mortgage on thier house.
The real Apple innovations have more to do with raping the public than anything else.
Imagine if Apple "ruled" the world....Computers would still be in the thousands of dollars and the growth would be minimal.
on a side note...I wonder if this "article" will be stickied to the top of the newspage as long as the other Apple news was. Methinks someone is an Apple enthusist
-
#15.1 Posted by Liandros on 14 Sep 2005 - 02:39
- well if you dont already know, apple made the FIRST personal computer for the average home user. if it was not for apple, then microsoft would not be in the position it is in now providing "90%" of the world with a pc. you have to respect apple because they have made a milestone in the computer world. look at osx. it is the most advanced os in the world. look at the nano. it is the most inovative mp3 player in the world.
also if you have noticed, there are some low cost apple solutions in the market now. mac mini, ibook, g4 imac and g4 powermacs are still not obsolete. apple does not intend on raping the public. they want the public to be happy with an error free system that does not crash everyday. -
#15.2 Posted by
MonkeyClaw on 14 Sep 2005 - 02:44
- yea someone doesnt know what they are talking about
because of m$, people spend tons of money on antivirus and spyware cause they are using an outdated operating system. if you havent noticed the price thing doesnt erally apply anymore cause apple has the emac and mini which are both very powerful systems and fairly cheap. you pay for quality and sadly thats a feature hard to come by in the microsoft/pc area.
if companies used macs they would find that they got a bunch more done and spend less time with tech support and more time getting stuff done. it helps if you actually try one out and stop spouting nonsense
-
#15.3 Posted by mugwhump on 14 Sep 2005 - 02:46
- You forgot your sarcasm tags...I hope.
Obviously you've not been let in on this now-famous quote;
In an interview in the mid 1990s, before returning to Apple, Steve Jobs was asked what he would do as CEO of Apple. At the time he was asked, its suspected he had no idea that he would ever actually be in that position, and so gave a brutally honest answer.
He said that he would milk the Mac user base for everything that it was worth to fund the development of a whole new product line.
It seems to me that is exactly what he is doing. Like...the iPod, perhaps? But those iPods sure are interesting little devices...I've got two of them myself. But don't kid yourself that Apple is out to spread love and cheer, give away puppies and candy to little kids. They are a company, and they want to make money. They just have a REALLY good salesman at the helm right now.
@Monkeyclaw, yes, and they'd also be getting RAPED over system costs. I suggest you read this book. It might help clear up some of your misconceptions. -
#15.4 Posted by MonkeyClaw on 14 Sep 2005 - 03:02
and if u were to ever use a mac it would clear up your ignorance on the matter, look the truth is os x is a much superior os focused on productivity. it is more stable, it is carefree and if a business were to use it over windows, productivity would increase by leaps and bounds. i couldnt care less what jobs said back then, hes not my idol, it does deture from the fact that the mac os and hardware platform is superior. im not trying to sound stuck up or superior but it truely is a superior platform in almost every single way besides games. -
#15.5 Posted by mugwhump on 14 Sep 2005 - 03:07
QUOTE hardware platform is superior.
Yes...that's why they are moving to the same platform as Windows? Because their platform is "superior"? "Yes, our platform is so good, we don't want to use it anymore".
You're bleeting out your marketing drivel without realizing what you're even saying.
Show me the businesses that are running solely on OS X. Please. Point them out to me, so I too can gauge their productivity. I've owned and used many Macs...now care to back up your points, or are you just going to read from the same brochure every other member of the flock does?
QUOTE im not trying to sound stuck up or superior -
#15.6 Posted by MonkeyClaw on 14 Sep 2005 - 03:27
- resorting to flames doesnt really affect me so dont even bother.
hows bout macs being industry standard for graphic design? hell im required to own one if i want to enroll in a graphic design program in college. Most of the music industry uses os x, not windows. and i am refering to producing music as in bands etc, not related to the ipod craze
as for platform i was refering to the operating system, not the architecture. i really didnt want to move to intel, i was not in support of that change but i really dont care anymore. the os is better and is based more on productivity. i have found in my own personal experience that i get much more done on a mac than i did with any pc i have owned or built. i felt that ppc was superior and had potential but im not gonna cry over it, a mac is a mac because of the os, not because of the processor.
alas im not gonna spend any more time on this topic, its pointless, your head is stuck up your ass and mine is up mine and we arent going to budge. anyhow its off topic. -
#15.7 Posted by mugwhump on 14 Sep 2005 - 03:34
- Ok, so the "truth" is now based on your personal experiences. Interesting.
QUOTE i felt that ppc was superior and had potential but im not gonna cry over it, a mac is a mac because of the os, not because of the processor.
Interesting again, considering Apple is a hardware company first and foremost. So, you're saying that this hardware company must rely on it's software to sell their systems.
Doesn't say much for their hardware. And I actually agree with you. If you'd have said simply "I think that..." instead of "The truth of it is <blah> and if you don't agree you're ignorant and have never used a Mac", there would be no problem. What it boils down to is, I tried to switch, kept up the charade for about a year and a half, spend thousand of dollars, only to find out that it wasn't all champagne wishes and caviar dreams...Macs are just computers, not some special channel to god or any other such crap, and I work better on Windows. I prefer Windows to OS X. Crazy, huh? -
#15.8 Posted by MonkeyClaw on 14 Sep 2005 - 03:44
- yep crazy, lol. well im sorry my choice of diction didnt suit u but well being an asshole doesnt really prove anything
in response to apple being a hardware company, MY PERSONAL OPINION (better eh?) is that when it comes to there computers, they are more and more a software company. without there software, no noe would want their hardware. so while they maybe at the core hardware, it goes hand in hand with the software. so yes i think they do need their software to sell their systems, if they were running windows the people fed up with windows would not buy a mac and the people looking for a new laptop for instance would go for the cheap ass dell regardless of whats inside just because its cheaper.
The way you presented your first post, i made you out to be a stupid windows fanboy spewing the stereotypical anti mac flame bait and i guess i presented my response in a similar fashion. Its not that i think if you dont agree you are ignorant and havent used one, but i encounter so many people that aer like this that its second nature to address what appears to me as stereotypical nonsense in this manner. for that i apologize.
-
#16 Posted by mikeboy on 14 Sep 2005 - 02:23
- I like the nano better, I do have a mini though
-
(1 reply)
#17 Posted by invhntr on 14 Sep 2005 - 02:58
- mmm my nano arrives tomorrow
-
#17.1 Posted by plasticparadox on 14 Sep 2005 - 03:50
- argh, lucky punk
-
(3 replies)
#18 Posted by nvizible on 14 Sep 2005 - 05:58
- Don't Troll
Last edited by 65281 on 14 Sep 2005 - 12:44 -
#18.1 Posted by parhamreza on 14 Sep 2005 - 08:48
- I agree nvizible, however I don't think you should be the one to do it.
I find it ironic that a post about linguistic errors is replete with errors itself. -
#18.2 Posted by Boogiman on 14 Sep 2005 - 09:41
- <snipped> Please watch your language.
Last edited by 33280 on 14 Sep 2005 - 17:48
-
(1 reply)
#19 Posted by DrunkenMaster on 14 Sep 2005 - 11:55
- How much is a replacement battery for the Nano? This is something I canno see anywhere on their site. I might need a new MP3 player but as long as none of the Apple players use a AA or AAA, I'm not going to buy one.
-
#20 Posted by msg43 on 14 Sep 2005 - 18:49
- hah my sisters are ****ed now they wanted the apple mini ipod now they got to save up $200 for just 2 gigs or save $300 for the big ipod, or they can go with a Zen but they don't one cause it doesn't look "cool".
-
#21 Posted by daveoc64 on 14 Sep 2005 - 19:26
- "Of course, had Apple simply added a color screen to the original iPod mini, and released it sans flash memory, things wouldn’t have worked either. The battery life of an iPod with a 4GB hard-drive and a full color screen wouldn’t have been anywhere near the 14 hours of the nano."
Many people said that before the iPod photo came out but it uses the same chipset and battery as the iPod with click wheel while managing to get 3 hours additional battery life.
-
#22 Posted by matt74441 on 15 Sep 2005 - 04:40
- Comments Cleaned
-
#23 Posted by Colin-uk on 15 Sep 2005 - 09:50
- mini article for a mini player i guess
-
#24 Posted by Ficman on 15 Sep 2005 - 14:31
- I have to admit the Nano does look VERY cool...
Incase you have been living under a rock, on Wednesday, Apple announced availability of the iPod nano and killed off the multicolored monochrome display iPod mini. They took the most popular iPod, scrapped it, and built a new one from the ground up. But why one might ask? That’s what I’m hoping to answer here.
Windows Vista Starter Edition
- Only sold in emerging markets
- Very feature limited
- Only 3 simultaneous applications running
Windows Vista Home Basic Edition- Equivalent to XP Home
- Includes firewall, parental controls, Security Center, Movie Maker, Photo Library and more
- For first time buyer / budget conscious
Windows Vista Home Premium Edition- Everything from Vista Home Basic
- Adds DVD video authoring, HDTV support, DVD ripping support
- Similar to current XP Media Center edition but with added features
Windows Vista Professional Edition- Aimed at the business consumer
- Can join domain, has IIS web server
- Akin to XP Pro
Windows Vista Small Business Edition- Designed for small businesses without IT staff
- Backup and Shadow Copy support, Castle and server-join networking, and PC fax and scanning utility
- Pre-paid access to the Windows Live! Small Business or Microsoft Office Live! subscription services
Windows Vista Enterprise Edition- Optimized for the enterprise
- Ships with Virtual PC & the multi-language user interface (MUI)
- Aimed at business decision makers, IT managers and decision makers, and information workers/general business users.
Windows Vista Ultimate Edition