4 ms·
Everyone always digs that out, but the first iPod was kind of lame. I don't think it's unfair for someone to have pointed that out at the time. Especially when
by untog 10y ago
Everyone always digs that out, but the first iPod was kind of lame. I don't think it's unfair for someone to have pointed that out at the time. Especially when it's a hardware product - sure, the line is going to get better but you're not going to get a free upgrade to it.
- avar 10y agoThat "someone" is Rob Malda, who ran Slashdot. In a way that comment embodies how the "old guard" on Slashdot was left behind in their predictions of what technology would become pertinent post-90s. On the other hand if you look at iPod sales numbers he was right. Their sales really didn't pick up that much until they released some new models: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ipod_sales_per_quarter.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ipod_sales_per_quarter.sv...
- mturmon 10y ago"Not unfair to point out" -- true. But, the linked comment does miss the point. Specifically, it is doing a hardware spec comparison and not thinking about what it means when a large player is entering the market with a more-usable device. And the linked comment (which is indeed an old chestnut) is typical of the spec-by-spec comparisons you still see in the tech press, and here on HN. It's a small reminder to look at the bigger picture.