4 ms·

I would say the only substantial change from one iPod to the next was the amount of storage and the quality of the screen. You'd never need to talk about which

I would say the only substantial change from one iPod to the next was the amount of storage and the quality of the screen. You'd never need to talk about which generation you had, because they only do one thing: play music. Meanwhile, successive iPhones have a few features that differentiate how they actually behave: - processor (screen smoothness, webpage performance, what games you can play) - camera (quality of images) - radio antenna type - OS versions supported (iPhone features often vary by OS version, unlike the features of the traditional iPod) In conclusion, iPods only have one real feature, and it doesn't change, so you don't need to talk about version numbers. iPhones have more features that do change, so version numbers are important.

qq66 14y ago
iPods grew in feature set as much as iPhones have... they added cameras, video, color screens, and FM radio over the product lifecycle.
- jamesaguilar 14y ago
  Hmm, compared to the changing features of iPhones, how important do you think the new features of iPods were to buyers (especially in the first few generations)? Me, I never used the FM radio or video capabilities of my iPod. I could be atypical. Camera, maybe, but by the time that was introduced the iPod already had a long history of not having version numbers. And color screen is an interface change, not a functional change, so it doesn't really fall into the set of things I was talking about earlier.
  - truebecomefalse 14y ago
    Very important...sometimes. I had someone order 100 of the wrong generation once... We needed front facing camera in out setup. I'm not sure how typical our use case was but there was another 10,000 item order of the correct generation after the contract completed.
    - jamesaguilar 14y ago
      Pretty sure that if you're ordering a lot of a hundred of them, you're already outside the range of the typical buyer I was referring to earlier. That said, can you share what you were using them for? You've piqued my curiosity.
micampe 14y ago
What year is your Porsche 911?
- jonny_eh 14y ago
  Does that affect what software I can install on it?
- jamesaguilar 14y ago
  I don't understand where you're going with this. Are you implying that there are meaningful comparisons to be made between a luxury vehicle whose base model costs $79,000 and a device for playing music whose base model costs $99? Or the opposite? Anyway, I have a MINI. The Porsche is too expensive for me.
  - micampe 14y ago
    what does price have to do with naming? I was implying that there are many many products where the manufacturer changes the model and keeps the same name. I used the 911 because it's very recognizable name, but your Mini is using the same name as the one that was produced in 1961 and you definitely can't use the same accessories, not even the same gas. but wait, I'm also going to argue the opposite right here in the same comment: Leica has been making the M cameras since 1954 and they use numbers, sometimes with suffixes just like the S in 4S (M3, M4, M4P, M5). they even went backwards with the M2 released after the M3, and they all use exactly the same lenses and accessories. my point? it's an entirely pointless discussion trying to rationalize which is more correct or more wrong: companies have been doing both for decades and both have been successful.
    - jamesaguilar 14y ago
      I see, you're arguing that the approach doesn't matter. I think anyone who has tried to suss out which Intel chip to buy in the last few years would like to have a word with you. Some approaches are better than others. And: pointless discussions are the only kind we have here. So why complain about it?
rahoulb 14y ago
It matters a lot when buying cases (as someone who knows Apple products and still bought the wrong one for my wife's Nano)
schiffern 14y ago
>I would say the only substantial change from one iPod to the next was the amount of storage and the quality of the screen. That's quite the selective memory you've got there. - First gen. "1000 songs in your pocket." First music player to use Firewire (no USB 2.0 yet!). First HDD player to use 1.8" drives. - Second gen. Touch replaces mechanical scroll wheel. Windows compatibility (MusicMatch). - Third gen. Mechanical buttons entirely replaced with touch. USB syncing. iTunes Music Store. iTunes for Windows. First iPod to feature the dock connector. Full case redesign. - Fourth gen. Return to mechanical controls with the click wheel. iPod Photo introduced, the first iPod that can output to an external display. - Fifth gen. Photo merged into regular iPod. Video playback. Music videos and TV shows appear on the increasingly poorly named iTunes Music Store for the first time. Gapless playback. Games. - Sixth generation. Aluminum case. Dramatically better battery life (36 hours vs. 8-12). Genius. Audio recording. Maybe you could argue that the fourth and sixth generation iPods were just capacity bumps and screen overhauls, but many of these features are no less significant than the "processor upgrades" and "radio antenna type" that you cite for the iPhone. Apple didn't dominate the portable music player space for a decade (>70% marketshare the entire time) by standing still. They also didn't have monotonically increasing revision numbers tacked onto the end. Saying there were no substantial changes to the iPod because "it just plays music" is only slightly less absurd than saying there are no substantial changes to the iPhone because "it just makes calls." And of course, I'm not including the best example of revisionless names, the iPod Touch! We all know it's a stripped-down iPhone, but it's always been called simply "the iPod Touch."

qq66 14y ago

iPods grew in feature set as much as iPhones have... they added cameras, video, color screens, and FM radio over the product lifecycle.

jamesaguilar 14y ago
Hmm, compared to the changing features of iPhones, how important do you think the new features of iPods were to buyers (especially in the first few generations)? Me, I never used the FM radio or video capabilities of my iPod. I could be atypical. Camera, maybe, but by the time that was introduced the iPod already had a long history of not having version numbers. And color screen is an interface change, not a functional change, so it doesn't really fall into the set of things I was talking about earlier.
- truebecomefalse 14y ago
  Very important...sometimes. I had someone order 100 of the wrong generation once... We needed front facing camera in out setup. I'm not sure how typical our use case was but there was another 10,000 item order of the correct generation after the contract completed.
  - jamesaguilar 14y ago
    Pretty sure that if you're ordering a lot of a hundred of them, you're already outside the range of the typical buyer I was referring to earlier. That said, can you share what you were using them for? You've piqued my curiosity.

micampe 14y ago

What year is your Porsche 911?

jonny_eh 14y ago
Does that affect what software I can install on it?
jamesaguilar 14y ago
I don't understand where you're going with this. Are you implying that there are meaningful comparisons to be made between a luxury vehicle whose base model costs $79,000 and a device for playing music whose base model costs $99? Or the opposite? Anyway, I have a MINI. The Porsche is too expensive for me.
- micampe 14y ago
  what does price have to do with naming? I was implying that there are many many products where the manufacturer changes the model and keeps the same name. I used the 911 because it's very recognizable name, but your Mini is using the same name as the one that was produced in 1961 and you definitely can't use the same accessories, not even the same gas. but wait, I'm also going to argue the opposite right here in the same comment: Leica has been making the M cameras since 1954 and they use numbers, sometimes with suffixes just like the S in 4S (M3, M4, M4P, M5). they even went backwards with the M2 released after the M3, and they all use exactly the same lenses and accessories. my point? it's an entirely pointless discussion trying to rationalize which is more correct or more wrong: companies have been doing both for decades and both have been successful.
  - jamesaguilar 14y ago
    I see, you're arguing that the approach doesn't matter. I think anyone who has tried to suss out which Intel chip to buy in the last few years would like to have a word with you. Some approaches are better than others. And: pointless discussions are the only kind we have here. So why complain about it?

rahoulb 14y ago

It matters a lot when buying cases (as someone who knows Apple products and still bought the wrong one for my wife's Nano)

schiffern 14y ago

>I would say the only substantial change from one iPod to the next was the amount of storage and the quality of the screen. That's quite the selective memory you've got there. - First gen. "1000 songs in your pocket." First music player to use Firewire (no USB 2.0 yet!). First HDD player to use 1.8" drives. - Second gen. Touch replaces mechanical scroll wheel. Windows compatibility (MusicMatch). - Third gen. Mechanical buttons entirely replaced with touch. USB syncing. iTunes Music Store. iTunes for Windows. First iPod to feature the dock connector. Full case redesign. - Fourth gen. Return to mechanical controls with the click wheel. iPod Photo introduced, the first iPod that can output to an external display. - Fifth gen. Photo merged into regular iPod. Video playback. Music videos and TV shows appear on the increasingly poorly named iTunes Music Store for the first time. Gapless playback. Games. - Sixth generation. Aluminum case. Dramatically better battery life (36 hours vs. 8-12). Genius. Audio recording. Maybe you could argue that the fourth and sixth generation iPods were just capacity bumps and screen overhauls, but many of these features are no less significant than the "processor upgrades" and "radio antenna type" that you cite for the iPhone. Apple didn't dominate the portable music player space for a decade (>70% marketshare the entire time) by standing still. They also didn't have monotonically increasing revision numbers tacked onto the end. Saying there were no substantial changes to the iPod because "it just plays music" is only slightly less absurd than saying there are no substantial changes to the iPhone because "it just makes calls." And of course, I'm not including the best example of revisionless names, the iPod Touch! We all know it's a stripped-down iPhone, but it's always been called simply "the iPod Touch."