4 ms·

Sounds a lot like... "No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame." This kind of thinking is what has allowed Apple to sweep up so much damn money, along with

Sounds a lot like... "No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame." This kind of thinking is what has allowed Apple to sweep up so much damn money, along with ownership of the DAP and tablet markets. Give people what they actually need instead of filling out spec lists to appeal to the nerds.

spamizbad 16y ago
But that statement was a fair (albeit glib) criticism of the original iPod. It never really had it's breakthrough moment until the 3rd generation.
- stcredzero 16y ago
  Those original iPods were amazingly well made. Lots of them are still going strong, modulo a replaced switch, headphone jack, or battery.
- lurch_mojoff 16y ago
  But that was not because the iPod had no wireless, neither because it had less space than Nomad. I hope we can all agree, with the benefit of hindsight, that the reason for the slow uptake of the iPod was a combination of it being Firewire only, it being Mac only, Apple not being the brand they are now, and the fact that people were not really familiar with and didn't quite understand the concept of digital music.
  - spamizbad 16y ago
    I think we're both making the same point here - the original iPod had a lot of friction holding it back with consumers. What I was attempting to elude to was this: until the iPod had better connectivity options (USB and PC support) in addition to reaching storage parity (40gb by gen 3) it finally blossomed and took over the market. It's not that the 1st gen iPod was garbage - it wasn't - it just lacked some crucial components before it could conquer the market.
- danilocampos 16y ago
  The iPod got wireless and more storage than a Nomad in the 3rd generation?
Pewpewarrows 16y ago
Apple doesn't have to do much to appeal to the mass market of people that purchase their products. The iPad 2 could have only added a camera, and it would sell by the millions this year. Apple has very good PR. It's allowed them to create a nice ecosystem of brand loyalty where people will always come out to buy their "next great thing" year after year. They've made a good profit from it, so it must be working. When you go beyond the people that buy Apple products because they're Apple products, to people that actually make a conscious and informed decision about what they buy, there are definitely several valid concerns and reasons not to buy into it. Pointing to large sales numbers as a counter-argument to criticism is just plain silly.
- danilocampos 16y ago
  > Apple doesn't have to do much to appeal to the mass market of people that purchase their products. Of course they do. They're not selling $20 pairs of jeans, here. They're selling expensive stuff that requires a conscious decision to purchase. Apple needs to provide a compelling case to move their product. It's not practical to buy something just because it's from Apple. It has to actually do something for you as a user. > Apple has very good PR. This line is exhausting. Apple has very good products. The great marketing and PR is a result of having very good products. You can't sell 15 million units of a brand new, $500 product in nine months on the strength of TV ads and magazine pieces. It has to actually work well. There may be an initial element of brand trust to grease the skids for launch but sustained sales require something real. My parents aren't Apple fans. They're not nerds. They spend a lot of time frustrated with technology. They're nuts about their iPad because it works really well. That's it. Adding a USB port isn't going to make them like it better. It's going to make it more complex, which is going to degrade their experience in using it. "Oh, well, that whole 12 hour battery thing? Doesn't count if you use the USB port. Then it's something else." "What? Why?" "USB uses power." "Why?" etc. > Pointing to large sales numbers as a counter-argument to criticism is just plain silly. You continue to miss the point. The criticism isn't valid. Apple has sold a shitload of iPads on the strength of its simplicity. You're talking about making it less simple. In that case, its success is more than ample refutation of your assertion that adding junk to its spec list is going to somehow improve things. It's like saying, around 1950 "Hey, turn the automobile into a Rhinoceros – then it'll be able to hit things with its horns." "But people don't buy cars to do that. Look how well they're selling." "Sales are not a valid refutation of my criticism that cars have no horns to hit things with!" etc. But like I said: Chalking it all up to clever marketing, instead of painstaking investments in software design, hardware fabrication and supply chain optimization is how everyone else keeps dropping the ball while Apple sprints all the way to the bank year after year.

spamizbad 16y ago

But that statement was a fair (albeit glib) criticism of the original iPod. It never really had it's breakthrough moment until the 3rd generation.

stcredzero 16y ago
Those original iPods were amazingly well made. Lots of them are still going strong, modulo a replaced switch, headphone jack, or battery.
lurch_mojoff 16y ago
But that was not because the iPod had no wireless, neither because it had less space than Nomad. I hope we can all agree, with the benefit of hindsight, that the reason for the slow uptake of the iPod was a combination of it being Firewire only, it being Mac only, Apple not being the brand they are now, and the fact that people were not really familiar with and didn't quite understand the concept of digital music.
- spamizbad 16y ago
  I think we're both making the same point here - the original iPod had a lot of friction holding it back with consumers. What I was attempting to elude to was this: until the iPod had better connectivity options (USB and PC support) in addition to reaching storage parity (40gb by gen 3) it finally blossomed and took over the market. It's not that the 1st gen iPod was garbage - it wasn't - it just lacked some crucial components before it could conquer the market.
danilocampos 16y ago
The iPod got wireless and more storage than a Nomad in the 3rd generation?

Pewpewarrows 16y ago

Apple doesn't have to do much to appeal to the mass market of people that purchase their products. The iPad 2 could have only added a camera, and it would sell by the millions this year. Apple has very good PR. It's allowed them to create a nice ecosystem of brand loyalty where people will always come out to buy their "next great thing" year after year. They've made a good profit from it, so it must be working. When you go beyond the people that buy Apple products because they're Apple products, to people that actually make a conscious and informed decision about what they buy, there are definitely several valid concerns and reasons not to buy into it. Pointing to large sales numbers as a counter-argument to criticism is just plain silly.

danilocampos 16y ago
> Apple doesn't have to do much to appeal to the mass market of people that purchase their products. Of course they do. They're not selling $20 pairs of jeans, here. They're selling expensive stuff that requires a conscious decision to purchase. Apple needs to provide a compelling case to move their product. It's not practical to buy something just because it's from Apple. It has to actually do something for you as a user. > Apple has very good PR. This line is exhausting. Apple has very good products. The great marketing and PR is a result of having very good products. You can't sell 15 million units of a brand new, $500 product in nine months on the strength of TV ads and magazine pieces. It has to actually work well. There may be an initial element of brand trust to grease the skids for launch but sustained sales require something real. My parents aren't Apple fans. They're not nerds. They spend a lot of time frustrated with technology. They're nuts about their iPad because it works really well. That's it. Adding a USB port isn't going to make them like it better. It's going to make it more complex, which is going to degrade their experience in using it. "Oh, well, that whole 12 hour battery thing? Doesn't count if you use the USB port. Then it's something else." "What? Why?" "USB uses power." "Why?" etc. > Pointing to large sales numbers as a counter-argument to criticism is just plain silly. You continue to miss the point. The criticism isn't valid. Apple has sold a shitload of iPads on the strength of its simplicity. You're talking about making it less simple. In that case, its success is more than ample refutation of your assertion that adding junk to its spec list is going to somehow improve things. It's like saying, around 1950 "Hey, turn the automobile into a Rhinoceros – then it'll be able to hit things with its horns." "But people don't buy cars to do that. Look how well they're selling." "Sales are not a valid refutation of my criticism that cars have no horns to hit things with!" etc. But like I said: Chalking it all up to clever marketing, instead of painstaking investments in software design, hardware fabrication and supply chain optimization is how everyone else keeps dropping the ball while Apple sprints all the way to the bank year after year.