“Would you take advice on what is and isn’t cool from a guy who still thinks black turtleneck sweaters are the height of sophistication,” Andrew Thomas asks for The Inquirer?
“What finer example of the Apple marketing machine’s power over the gullible could there be than the launch of the ‘HiFi’ ghetto blaster add on for the iPod? After years of flogging overpriced products on the grounds that they were technically superior, Apple now launches an overpriced product so demonstrably inferior to a genuine HiFi system that it would be laughable were it not for the power of the Apple Marketing Juggernaut,” Thomas writes. “Make no mistake, the same gullible saps who think an iPod is cool will rush out and snap up these useless things and push up the level of credit card debt around the world to new heights. Because the battery-powered cereal packet with a couple of tiny speakers in it carries an Apple logo, they’ll fondly imagine it sounds great, but as they’ll only be listening to James Blunt and Coldplay anyway, who cares?”
“Once upon a time, expensive Macs were, arguably, more stable than the WinTel equivalents, but those times are long gone… Apple’s given up and gone over to Intel processors. It’s given up its own operating system and bolted a pretty GUI on an ancient OS called UNIX. Steve, it seems, likes both his clothes and operating systems to come from the same decade,” Thomas writes. “Now what rational person can doubt that rumours of a wholesale move to Windows are founded in fact? The bottom line is that Apple doesn’t care about computers any more. It never sold very many in real terms, which is why the price tags were so eye-watering. Today it makes its money by selling music online and by launching a constant stream of ‘must have’ iPods and accessories that the gormless Jobs worshippers slavishly buy.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Articles about Apple from people who don’t use Apple products are always funny. They look at things through the perspective of their own sad situation. They always look at the highest priced Mac compared to the lowest priced piece of junk Windows PC they can find. They don’t do a fair price/performance/features comparison because that would clash with their warped perspective. They never factor in the value of their time. They can’t imagine that Apple’s way could just be better and more cost effective, so they invent the fantasy of an entire class of Apple fanatic Steve Jobs worshippers who will buy anything with an Apple logo simply because it looks nice, or because they’re gullible, stupid, brainwashed or whatever – anything they can think up except that Apple’s products are actually genuinely better. That idea they cannot admit to themselves because it would mean they they chose wrong with their Gateway Windows XP PCs, discontinued Dell DJs, Napster 2.0 subscriptions, Internet Explorers, and the like. They like to pretend they have choice, but their choice is always shackled to Microsoft; Windows or Windows Media regardless of whatever PC or media player that buy then try and fail to use effectively. Some “choice.” Or they’re just trolling for hits. The facts are, as those who’ve used both Apple and non-Apple products know, that Mac OS X is remarkably better than any other competing operating system, the iPod+iTunes+iTunes Store is remarkably better than any other competing hodgepodge of digital media player and online service.
Advertisements:
• Apple’s brand new iPod Hi-Fi speaker system. Home stereo. Reinvented. Available now for $349 with free shipping.
• Apple’s new Mac mini. Intel Core, up to 4 times faster. Starting at just $599. Free shipping.
• MacBook Pro. The first Mac notebook built upon Intel Core Duo with iLife ’06, Front Row and built-in iSight. Starting at $1999. Free shipping.
• iMac. Twice as amazing — Intel Core Duo, iLife ’06, Front Row media experience, Apple Remote, built-in iSight. Starting at $1299. Free shipping.
• iPod Radio Remote. Listen to FM radio on your iPod and control everything with a convenient wired remote. Just $49.
• iPod. 15,000 songs. 25,000 photos. 150 hours of video. The new iPod. 30GB and 60GB models start at just $299. Free shipping.
• Connect iPod to your television set with the iPod AV Cable. Just $19.
Related article:
Defending Windows over Mac a sign of mental illness – December 20, 2003
might even be the first…
I do agree with the statement “an overpriced product so demonstrably inferior to a genuine HiFi system.”
I am pretty amazed at the gall of Apple’s Hi-Fi and its pretension of being “Home Stereo. Reinvented.”
Please.
“Because the battery-powered cereal packet with a couple of tiny speakers in it carries an Apple logo, they’ll fondly imagine it sounds great, but as they’ll only be listening to James Blunt and Coldplay anyway, who cares?””
LOL. That’s brilliant
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”LOL” style=”border:0;” />
…this guy is gonna get some hatemail.
agreed, but there’s a market for it. Look at B&O for the answer to whether it’s true!
Read some of the discussion on the Mac Mini, jeeez, what kind of problem do these people have. Same as with this ‘boombox’, the cool-factor outweighs the quality- and price-factor by far.
People who don’t realize that are not any better then all these bad season homebrew analysts.
“I am pretty amazed at the gall of Apple’s Hi-Fi and its pretension of being “Home Stereo. Reinvented.””
You must have some sort of magical web browser that allows you to hear the sound quality of this device. Have you even seen this thing in person before spewing off at the mouth about how bad it sounds?
…the guy thinks ipod hi-fi is overpriced and inferior to full blown stereo system….and IMHO, it is….but how he makes the logical leap about the entire computer line is beyond me…
…this is akin to complaining that the pop-up camper that Porsche sells as an SUV accessory is overpriced and won’t let you survive on Mt. Everest and thus this means the ultimate doom for the company and all its vehicles are crap.
I think this is normally called taking advantage of the “brand” strength with accessories. You either need the $300 designer brand handbag or you can settle for the $13 Walmart knockoff. NBD!
…and if moving to Intel means doom and trash, just what is it that the Inquirer writer has been using all these years?
This guy is a sad, sad excuse for a journalist. He says that once upon a time, Macs were more stable than Windows, but that was before they “bolted a pretty GUI on an ancient OS called UNIX.” Oh, so Mac OS9 was rock solid, and built on totally modern technology?
The last line of his article says it all: “Ten years ago, Apple had a reputation similar to that of IBM – good, reliable products you could rely on.” Oh yeah, in 1995/1996 Apple had a great reputation. And great grammar by the way, reliable products you can rely on? I think he is an untrustworthy journalist that you can’t trust.
It’s true. The black turtleneck does make him look like a putz.
I think the comment about Unix shows complete ignorance.
Am not!
Time to go buy an iPod HiFi.
>”I am pretty amazed at the gall of Apple’s Hi-Fi and its pretension of being “Home Stereo. Reinvented.””
>>You must have some sort of magical web browser that allows you to hear the sound quality of this device. Have you even seen this thing in person before spewing off at the mouth about how bad it sounds?
That goes for every comment too. I’m sure it doesn’t sound like a high end stereo, but have you even heard it yet? How can you comment on it?
The assumption is always that we, Apple fans, love Apple products so much only because we love the company, but it’s really the other way around – we love the company because the products are so great.
That being said, until I get to hear the iPod HiFi, I won’t really judge it, but I’m not impressed yet. Even if I give them the benefit of the doubt, and it really does sound amazing, I still wouldn’t be interested because all it does is iPod. If it could truly replace my home stereo, meaning I could plug in a tuner, or my TV, and DVD into it I might be a little more interested, but my home stereo is used for much more than just my iPod.
With regards to this article, all I can say is wow!!! This guy has vitriol coming out of his pores! I love his comment about how Steve Jobs couldn’t possibly be the conductor of cool because he wears turtle-necks! If this guy was any shallower, he’d be floating! Don’t bother to flame him. With all his hate frothing about like it is, he’s bound to explode before we even get the chance.
Sounds like someone wants an iPod but can’t afford one. Poor guy.
I think this guy has just passed his MCSE and thinks he’s qualified.
I personally don’t like the iPod Hi-Fi. The iPod should blend into it, not stick out like a bolted-on after thought.
My $0.02.
Why is Andrew Thomas’ photo cropped so tight to his face in the article?
Because he’s wearing a black turtleneck sweater.
Macromancer, et al:
I don’t need to hear the product.
Its called physics or acoustics. Its called the ability to read a spec sheet. Its called 30+ years in the audio field.
It is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for the iPod Hi-Fi to actually produce high fidelity sound. This is not an opinion. It is a fact.
Read Apple’s published specs: “Frequency response: 53Hz to 16kHz ± 3 dB”
That isn’t even remotely high fidelity. By DEFINITION!!!!!! And the “overpriced” observation is also true. It is a fact: the iPod Hi-Fi costs more than the already overpriced Bose system. What more do you need to know?
A more detailed discussion of the product’s complete lack of high fidelity is in this thread:
http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/8744/
What finer example of the Apple marketing machine’s power over the gullible…
I’m just going to play devil’s advocate (or devilled avocado) for a moment.
There are around sixteen million machines out there with OS X.
Apple will have sold around 50 million iPods by the end of this quarter.
Does this mean that Windows users are more gullible than OS X users?
Help me avoid the obvious conclusion.
Some people have a different perspective.
How many people are judging the hi-fi before they hear it?
NEARLY EVERYONE.
People are idiots. No wonder advertising works so well.
“I think this guy has just passed his MCSE and thinks he’s qualified.”
It’s more like I think this guy just passed a kidney stone and cannot think at all…
Andrew Thomas thought he had a pube until he pissed out of one…
I have a comment about the so-called “ancient” Unix. Just because something is a number of years old does not make it less than world class, as OS X obviously is. To use only one example, which is not meant to be political in any way, is the F-14 fighter plane. It was designed in the 1970’s. Over 30 years ago. It’s now being replaced (slowly) by a carrier version of the F-22, but do you think anyone ever considered the F-14 to be “ancient”, and by inference no good? The guy’s simply an idiot.
I kinda wish that they would re-introduce the L-1011 again. I miss that plane….
the picture is tightly cropped b/c he’s a fat load…
The s–t’s not even on the market yet. how can it be “demonstrably inferior” if you can’t test it.
It doesn’t have to be better than everything, only the other ipod specific products that are in its range, such as Bose system and maybe the Klipsch system.
The guy is trolling for hits on his page. (and I fell for it, oh well). its full of misinformation like macs being 50% more expensive.
Yeah, I thought the L-1011 was a good plane, too. Maybe the F-14 is being replaced by a version of the F-15. Point’s still the same.
my email to him:
Apple makes more money from their PCs than they do their ENTIRE ipod line combined. Not to mention software sales.
Your attitude insinuates that you either wrote this article partly to get a rise, or that you are just another pissed off, close minded, windows user.
Judging from your pic I would say a little of both.
also about the ipod hifi, you dont know anything about it, nor have heard one, so why waste our time?
Dont you have somehting better to do?
Isnt it time to reinstall windows again?
email him here: http://www.theinquirer.net/?page=24&authorID=4
…and the hi-fi is not great looking, just looks like a speaker. but has anyone seen sharper images’iPulse?
m
“Demonstrably inferior”
Read Apple’s published specs: “Frequency response: 53Hz to 16kHz ± 3 dB”
A real High Fidelity stereo blows that away. And a real high fidelity stereo is actually STEREO. This 17″ system has less than a 15″ stereo soundfield.
That is demonstrably NOT high fidelity.
Its $350 fer chrissakes. You can buy a 5.1 receiver speaker combo for that money!!!
Is it my imagination?
Or is this decade shaping up to be the birth of the PROFESSIONAL ASS TALKER?
Seems everywhere you look these days, from computers, to software, to video game systems, to video game and movies…
You see more and more clueless idiots talking out their asses about things they have no hands on experience with and likely never will.
They reach their off-base/WRONG conclusions by relying on FUD and other misinformation, never considering for a moment that some ACTUAL research might just provide the REAL answers.
In a word… PATHETIC
Ultimately the quality of these new products (the hi-fi and iPod case) is not the issue, what people seem to be most pissed off about is that apple have released something that isn’t revolutionary and isn’t what their wild imaginations were dreaming up, instead they come out with products designed to take advantage of a lucrative market which they are responsible for but have no share of.
Apple products have never been cheap, they’ve always been at a premium but they were high quality so could be easily justified. These new products are no different, of course quality is subjective so some people won’t like them, but those who do will buy them. No-one loses out.
How exactly is the new Hi-Fi demonstratably inferior to a “genuine” system? For the equivelant money you’d have to buy speakers and an amp basically, you’d get a wider stereo field admittedly but quality wouldn’t automatically be better.
Other companies make similar systems and yes some may be cheaper, some may be better, or both. So what? That doesn’t mean this is crap. Why shouldn’t apple take advantage of the market? And yes when you buy apple you pretty much are paying something towards the badge but so what, the badge is worth something for a reason, it inspires confidence in the products, is cool etc. You pays your money you makes your choice.
Also just because something is old (ie Unix) doesn’t mean it’s bad. It’s only bad if you fail to build on it and improve it. If apple used something which was “old” and bad in the first place then he’d have a point but they didn’t. Why reinvent the wheel? They went Unix because it’s proven to be good. That’s why it’s a selling point.
Also, irrespective of if Job’s clothing is considered cool or not, it works for him, plus he looks a hell of a lot cooler than fucking Bill Gates ever could.
“the other other Mark”
You bet your petunias. After 20 years of listening to people slap me in the face with fanatical-anti Apple rhetoric, the conclusion I’ve come to is that there ain’t nothin more gullibley fanatic than a bunch of pc heads who won’t even consider using anything but Windoze no matter how much it costs them and their employers in real time and real dollars and cents.
Beyond a show of a doubt, if corporate America would move away from MS products and over to anything else, Mac, Sun Solaris, Linux, for God’s sake even Amiga; The cost of owning and operating and mainting personal computers in the work force would go down so much that MS would be out of business inside of two years from the mountain of lawsuits that would follow once people were awakened from the stupor that MS and it’s IT minions have had the whole country in for the last 20 years.
A little like what’s happened with the cigarette companies over the last 20 years.
He was sounding right, until he got off the HiFi subject and into stuff he knows nothing about.
The iPod HiFi IS a piece of over priced ugly garbage we almost all can agree on that.
Also this “peral white” theme is getting quite old, it’s worn out. Perhaps that’s why the black 30GB iPod is Apple’s best seller.
That I agree on, the rest of the article is nothing but a troll from a whiner.
Typical level of journalism from The Inquirer….. pure crap
“ancient OS unix” …. yeah, XP with Windows NT & DOS foundation is more modern and robust LOL
“gullible saps who think an iPod is cool” ? … yeah, i want the new Sony Bean player (discontinued), er..Dell player (discontinued) …
“today it (Apple) makes its money by selling music online” ? …. yeah, financials show music sales to be just above break even, but that’s factual information so it doesn’t matter
Wow…the level of BS in this article is amazing.
What kind of idiot reads The Inquirer ? What’s the draw, because it is not informative journalism.
I don’t care what the definition of HiFi is. In this case they are using HiFi as more of a marketing term than a technical definition. People think they know what it means. To most people it just means something that sounds good and that’s why they are branding it as a HiFi.
I don’t care what all your tech spec manuals say or how much experience you have in the audio field. Bottom line is, if it sounds good then people will buy it. And my point was, that you were just damning this thing and I know you haven’t heard it because no one has them on display yet.
“What’s the draw, because it is not informative journalism.”
Yea, I’ve seen better draws taken from crack users…
Mama says alligators are ornery cause they got all dem teeth and no toothbrush…
and its portable, is that $379 5.1 system portable?
I think they need to make a weather resistant one to take to the beach
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
maybe a yellow sports model with plugs for the ports to keep the sand out…
where have I seen that before??? hmmmm
What a fcuking arsehole. I refuse to go near the register, so if someone posts his email I’ll send him some venom too…
One of the brilliant things that Apple consistently does is to make products which are understated, which to the superficial appear to be nothing special. It could be described as a self-powered speaker in a box, just as a Rolex can be described as a timepiece, but that merely reveals the ignorance of the observer.
Apple have made sensible choices over materials, drivers and the amplifier. It’s a well-balanced combination of features and will do a great job of doing what it’s supposed to do. The acoustic design of the bass enclosure is to a good standard, the materials used to make the housing are the same as used on professional speakers, offering rigidity and toughness with a resistance to self-resonance.
My initial thought was that it’s too expensive for what it is, but when I took the trouble to find out more about it, it became clear that the design is a very clever one and I think that users will be delighted with it.
The thing that must worry companies already in this market is that Apple are offering a very high quality item at an appropriate price point. Of course you can get cheaper speakers, but getting equally good speakers in a similar sized housing might be much more difficult at that price point.
I’m also sure that this is merely the first product of this type and that Apple will be releasing other units to address different requirements.
I stand corrected. I just noticed that the iPod HiFi does have an analog/digital input. Still not exactly built to replace your main home stereo but it’d be great for an office.
As MDN says, don’t knock it till you try it. Or as I always say, “People who know use Apple.”
Macromancer:
The definition of high fidelity is quite well established. It is the ability to accurately reproduce the full range of human hearing.
The term has been in use for over a half century.
I don’t need to hear the plastic box to know what it will sound like.
>What kind of idiot reads The Inquirer ? What’s the draw, because it is not informative journalism.
Same kind of idiot as reads MDN. Only MDN readers use Macs and Inquirer readers use Windows or Linux. MDN is hardly a shining example of informed journalism either…
m, I hope you were joking about the iPulse. That thing was hideous! It looked like a disco ball threw up!
And I don’t need you to tell me the definition of HiFi to determine whether I like the sound or not. The people who KNOW the definition of HiFi will know that it truly isn’t. The people who don’t care will just listen to it and decide on the spot if they like it.
Maybe it makes you feel more comfortable living within your definition, I’d just rather hear it and decide.
I think you have your panties in a bunch for no reason. Just don’t buy it if you’re that rabidly against it. It’s that simple.
Reality Check FYI the article was linked to at Google News.
Okay I have a question.
I’m not an audiofile, nor do I play one on tv… however this is something I’m wondering about:
Hi-Fi is clearly not an audiofile system as a stand alone piece, nor does it seem that it could ever will be given 128k and the existence of true high-end systems…. however, what if what we are seeing here is more like “iCenterChannel” to be followed by some sort of iSub and iSat (wireless even)?
(brief aside- Bonjour could let you organize these components into groups and sprinkle the groups throughout your home. Hi-fi remains the mobile component).
So the question is, could we be seeing the first salvo in a semi-sweet audio set up? Or given the build specs, will this type of thing always be a low-end device?
Fidelity fantasy or emerging strategy? Inquiring minds want ot know.
He starts by dissing a speaker system he has never heard. It may be crap but how would he know?
He just goes downhill from there. Dissing Unix is going to piss off a hell of a lot more people than dissing Jpb’s mock turtle neck.
He obviously is either trolling for hits or he’s a complete asshole.
Probably both.
has some time on my hands to write him (part 1):
i had some time on my hands, so I wrrote a small rebuttal…
—
“Voice of Unreason”
well, yeah, i should think so.
OK, let´s´look a your drivle point by point:
A QUESTION for you: Would you take advice on what is and isn’t cool from a guy who still thinks black turtleneck sweaters are the height of sophistication?
–> wrong question: It´s not about cool, it´s about what tool gets the job done without wasting my time.
but even I think Apple’s Steve Jobs looks like a 1960s throwback.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
–> 1960s? I am not that old, but it reminds me rather of the 1980s, right?
Besides: Who cares? – Jobs is one egomaniacal asshole, and drives people to extremes, afaik – and even to some decent engineering & design. I couldn´t care less about what he wears onstage or offstage as long as I don´t have to see him without clothes (yuck
Apple’s products are increasingly becoming a triumph of style over content
–> show some proof. no really, bring it on.
What finer example of the Apple marketing machine’s power over the gullible could there be than the launch of the “HiFi” ghetto blaster add on for the iPod?
–> the leather case is even more laughable – Do I care? Of course I don´t care. Should they start to throw 10 different accesories on the market for every new iPod or Mac model, I still wouldn´t care.
Now if Macs and/or iPod and especially Mac OS X started to fall behind Win/Linux I´d worry…
Apple now launches an overpriced product so demonstrably inferior to a genuine HiFi system
–> a.) compared to a genuine HiFi system it is inferior, regarding performance as well as price
b.) if you´d actually researched your drivel, you would have realised that most Mac forums are full “less than thrilled” Mac enthusiasts
Make no mistake, the same gullible saps who think an iPod is cool will rush out and snap up these useless things and push up the level of credit card debt around the world to new heights.
–> cheap trolling.
Once upon a time, expensive Macs were, arguably, more stable than the WinTel equivalents, but those times are long gone.
–> Bullshit
Sure, they looked quite nice, but why pay 50% more than an equivalent PC system and then hide the thing under a desk?
–> You cannot possibly that dumb:
a) Over 50% over all Apple CPUs are laptops, i.e. always on the desk. Of the half of the desktops are either iMacs or Mac minis or eMacs (disc.): So 80% of all Macs will be constantly in view.
b.) When buying / leasing your last car, did you spend a minute on which model to buy based on its apperance / i.e. what it should express, what people should think about you driving that car? OK, let me rephrase: Would you agree that most people base their decision whichcar to buy not only on economical/ecological/practical reasoning, but also on status/message/statement? (That 2nd question was a rethorical one, answer it with “yes”) So, a whole lot of people base their decision on which $20,000 car (that they use an hour a day) to buy on “looks”, but buying a $2,000 computer, that they have to look at for 10 hours a day is stupid?
Talk about a double standard, pal.
part 2:
But now Apple’s given up and gone over to Intel processors. It’s given up its own operating system and bolted a pretty GUI on an ancient OS called UNIX. Steve, it seems, likes both his clothes and operating systems to come from the same decade.
–> More cheap trolling. I won´t even bother to comment on that.
Now what rational person can doubt that rumours of a wholesale move to Windows are founded in fact?
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />)) Nutcase.
–>
The bottom line is that Apple doesn’t care about computers any more.
–> Right. They should have just stayed with a sloooooow G4 that freescale/motorola didn´t manage to develop properly , so that it actually could compete with Celerons
and with the G5, that IBM
a) didn´t manage to optimize so you could use it in a laptop
b.) didn´t manage to develop (read 3GHz) within 2 years so that even the lousy quad 2,5 GHz model had to be overclocked (read woter cooled) in order not to toast it (remember Apple´s “toasted Intel Bunny Ad”?)
That´s why Apple switched to Intel: Because they don´t care about computers.
Now what rational person can doubt that rumours of a wholesale move to Windows are founded in fact?
–> Every single person with an IQ above room temperature.
Today it makes its money by selling music online and by launching a constant stream of ‘must have’ iPods and accessories that the gormless Jobs worshippers slavishly buy.
–> may I quote: “Some people couldn’t get a clue if they smeared their body with clue musk and did the clue mating dance while sounding the clue mating call in a field full of horny clues at the height of clue mating season.”
a) apple makes music by selling computers and iPods. If the sales curve continues like is it soon starts making much more money in iPods than on Macs. Why should they abandon the Mac? (Why should MS abandon MS Office for Macintosh: It earns them $1billion profit per year)
b.) To my knowledge, iPod buyers are not gormless (at least most of them)
c.) Between 90 and 95% percent of all iPod buyers are certainly no Jobs worshippers, most probably ever heard of him.
good, reliable products you could rely on.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
–> Even if it waters down my argument, this one is too good to ingnore: “reliable products you can rely on?” – I damn sure hope you didn´t major in English
rgrds
Matt
Enquirer writers are a bunch of morons that don’t know what there writing about. Just like the newspaper magazine. A bunch of made up stories about stupid rediculous things that make no sense. Anyone could do there job.
Anyone who knows Hi-Fi won’t buy this Apple Boombox thingy. Non Hi-Fi types buy B&O for the sound quality. Hi-Fi types know B&O mostly produce nice looking junkfi or lofi. Go to a Hi-Fi trade show and listen to systems that cost
$100,000+ those WILL be Hi-Fi! Sadly, most people these days don’t know about Stereo or imaging or even the benefits of valves over transistors. Steve Jobs does know about Hi-Fi. I heard the speakers he is supposed to own at a show and they are good. Saying he’s going to give up his $50,000+ setup in favour of this Boombox is just marketing and every Hi-Fi enthusiast knows it.
Macaday, it was the Inquirer, not the Register. Make sure your anger is directed at the right site!
As for the iPod Hi-Fi being/not being competitive with a 5.1 surround stereo. That’s like saying a Subaru outback isn’t competitive with a Porsche 911. They are targetted at completely different markets people!
A 5.1 surround stereo is designed to be installed in your home theatre. You have to run speaker wire all over the place (in the walls preferably), and for the average person, a 5.1 surround system is a nightmare to setup and use. Once you install it (after 1-2 hours), you pretty much leave it there and never move it again unless you have to. iPod integration costs extra.
The iPod Hi-Fi, is designed to put on your kitchen counter, or your deck, or your nightstand. It takes all of 2 minutes to set up. It has iPod integration built-in and a remote control. You can easily take it to the garage when you’re working on your car or to the cottage or a picnic.
So where’s the problem people? If you want a home theatre setup, get a 5.1 surround amp and speakers. If you want something simple, that takes far less space, is easier to use and portable, then consider an iPod Hi-Fi, or similar product.
fscking idiots
informed: I agree with you, there’s better sounding options for the same price than one-piece iPod speaker systems. I have a old Aiwa bookshelf stereo with a line-in cable for airtunes/ipod that sounds great. All I’m saying is lets actually test and compare things in the same category (semi-portable, one-piece, ipod specific, $300 range).
rolleyes: There are too many experts (i.e. professional ass talkers) whose opinions are less useful than opinions posted in places like these. And less fun to read.
“iPulse. Available in vomit colors.” See, the Hi-Fi isn’t so ugly, is it?
Apple marketing department has excelled again:
“Change the way you experience digital music. For $349, iPod Hi-Fi delivers crystal-clear, audiophile-quality sound in a clean, compact design. Hear, hear.”
Audiophile-quality sound – from an MP3 file with 53-16kHz reproduction? That’s FM radio quality! Who on earth would describe FM radio as “audiofile quality”. It’s a blatant lie.
Really.
Because many Mac apologists were less than wildly impressed with the appearance of Apple’s iPod Hi-Fi and the video specifications of the new Mac mini, Thomas et al are making outrageous comments and predictions. However, this recent blip in history hardly characterizes Apple’s capacity for providing functional and innovative products. Apple’s demonstrable economic dominance in downloadable music and vastly superior OS are probably better measures of Apple’s future success.
Now, consider the absence of the “iPod killer” and the agonizingly and embarrassingly long wait for Microsoft’s emasculated, yet bloated and apparently butchered, version of Longhorn. When PC apologists have no viable commercial product to compare and contrast with Apple’s their only recourse is to resort to subjective opinion and emotional-based insults.
It is easy to see that the emotional strain exhibited by PC apologists is beginning to take its toll in objective thinking. As long as mere opinion and snide remarks are all Andrew Thomas and his peers have to offer it proves that their arguments are unfounded and their assessments are worthless.
It’s like a woman sports writer writing about how jock straps are overrated. Or a male journalist saying tampons are more effective than pads. This guy is just starving for hits. Any douchebag can do it. Don’t fall for it.
Ah, MacDude, our resident troll said:
The iPod HiFi IS a piece of over priced ugly garbage we almost all can agree on that.
Um, no, we cannot.
Ugly? I for one appreciate its understated design. Haven’t heard it yet, but I expect it just might make a great addition to my den. I was thinking of Tivoli or Henry Koss or Bose, but I like the simplicity of this unit better. Once I get a chance to hear it, I’ll make up my mind.
Garbage? Sheesh, how do trolls like you get from “could be better” [I agree with that] to “garbage”? Where did reason and perspective and proportion go in this world? Or are you still in pre-school?
Over-priced? Only if it is more than you want to pay, or you can point to a competitive product that produces same value and quality for a substantially lower price.
Precisely because your post is about “taste,” by definition, we cannot agree on it.
MW: “small,” as in MacDude’s small brain.
is it just me or has there been an increase of “Apple/Mac OS/iPod/iTunes is stupid” articles lately? it’s to the point of being passe of blase, take your pick. face it…
these pathetic people are simply trolling for hits!! they’re trying to anything to justify receiving a paycheck.
please, people, please….
DONT FEED THE TROLLS. if you ignore them they’ll fade away into ‘net oblivion.
informed –
“Read Apple’s published specs: ‘Frequency response: 53Hz to 16kHz ± 3 dB’
That isn’t even remotely high fidelity. By DEFINITION!!!!!!”
Ever heard of Spica TC-50 loudspeakers? That’s about their frequency response. They sold for $550/pr. And, they made Stereophile’s list of the top 100 audiophile products of all time. If you think frequency response and size determine sound quality, you’re not “informed”.
That said, I doubt Apple’s boombox is anywhere near being true hi-fi, or even mid-fi. You’d probably get much better sound from a cheapo receiver and a pair of PSB Alphas. But, nobody takes the car makers seriously when they say their SUVs are actually sports cars. So, why are people taking Apple’s marketing hyperbole at face value? Nobody really believes the iPod Hi-Fi is a replacement for a true hi-fi rig costing several times as much. The real question is, does it sound good for this class of products, and my guess is that it probably does. My biggest gripe is with the fact that you can’t separate the speakers. But, with a product like this, nobody’s expecting to enjoy real 3D stereo imaging. Most people don’t even know what that is.
So, the hyperbole is ridiculous, but if it’s a decent product in a category where a lot of products sound just plain lousy, Apple will have done well. Apple’s not about hi-fi. It’s about convenient access to your music.
This guy is so smart he should run for government office.
Macromancer:
It wasn’t my intention to pick a fight. I was excited when the rumors went round that Apple was going to release a powered-speaker-dock thingy.
I figured Apple would do it right. I figured they would deliver a good value for the money. Apple’s computers could always justify their prices. This HiFi can’t.
If Apple had priced this thing at $199, I might even buy one.
It’s the $350 price tag that pisses me off. I find it absurd. I find the the $299 price of the Bose dock to be absurd. This is from someone who has an expensive Yamaha/Tannoy surround system in my living room, an expensive Pioneer/Infinity stereo in my bedroom, and a professional recording studio.
$350 should be able to buy a lot of high fidelity. I hope Apple wakes up from their dream soon. This product isn’t home stereo reinvented. This is Cadillac pricing structure applied to cheap plastic.
Perfect article to alleviate temporary constipation
I guess this guy forgot that Windows is still based off of MS-DOS. Isn’t that a few decades old, also?
This guy is so smart he should run for government office.
BWAAAA…HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
now THAT’S comedy!!
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”LOL” style=”border:0;” />
If the guys from the Inquirer say we’re gullible saps.
Well…they are the experts.
Majikthize:
Are your thighs really magic? (I haven’t the slightest idea how to pronounce your nick)
No, I have never heard of Spica TC-50 loudspeakers. Surely you realize that Top 100 lists in magazines are toilet paper for landfill rodents. Those lists are only published get people all fired up to write in and agree/disagree with the magazine–just like these blogs.
We are all so clever.
I can’t believe people here are playing into this guy’s trolling trap. Wait . . . this is MDN, I guess I can believe it.
On a side note, If the ipod hifi is successful, I think it is “home stereo reinvented”. No cd player, no wires, just ipod and speaker.
“If the ipod hifi is successful, I think it is “home stereo reinvented”. No cd player, no wires, just ipod and speaker.”
Except that it’s been done before. I wouldn’t exactly call having built-in handles “revinventing home stereo.”
an ancient OS called UNIX
Whoops! Retard alarm just went off! Time to stop reading.
successful
YHBT
A masterflamebaiter is trolling for hits. The Enquirer in the U.S. has more dignity and credibility.
Here’s a summary:
1. My editor says I need more hits.
2. Apple fans are easy to rile.
3. Apple sucks.
4. I have no first hand knowledge of any new or old Apple products but that’s not a requirement for my job.
5. Macs are toys. They must be because I wouldn’t make a mistake in computer choice.
6. iPod and iTunes are a fad.
7. I know all of the buttons to push make millions of Mac users angry. It’s the main reason I have a job here.
8. Apple and Steve Jobs suck.
9. Fashion is an easy mark.
10. All Apple customers are fanatics and brainwashed cultists. Every one.
11. Profit.
Informed is quite right, of course. 16kHz? Sheesh! Most humans can hear at least up to 20kHz. At 16kHz you can’t hear what’s no longer there ‘cos it’s been filtered out. To say otherwise is to argue that black is white. It’s science, folks!
A quick Google search turned this up:
Public Switched Telephone Network: 300Hz to 3kHz
AM Radio: 100Hz to 5kHz
FM Radio: 50Hz to 15kHz
Consumer stereo system: 20Hz to 20kHz
Professional audio equipment: 5Hz to 24kHz
– just some guy’s opinion, of course, but near enough. As I said yesterday, the iPod is specced at 20Hz-20kHz. The iPod Hi-Fi isn’t.
But then, what do I know? I haven’t actually heard one yet.
/sarcasm
Re the HI-FI debate!
Glad we are reaching some peace on this…
Surely the concept of a “hii-fi” system for the ipod (read MP3 quality) is a contradiction in terms, is the sound quality in the compression too bad for any true hi-fi ear (I am not one of thoose). My impression was that even cd compression was almost unaccepteble for true hi-fi buffs!?
So I think that as macromancer was arguing that the point of the ipod hi-fi is more to giive a good sounding/compact & stylish boom box for your ipod!?
Whether they have achived this time will tell!
PS did anyone see that german tube-amp thing made to go with to pod think it was priced at around 5000, to play mp3’s from what planet???
Reality Check:
>What kind of idiot reads The Inquirer ? What’s the draw, because it is not informative journalism.
Same kind of idiot as reads MDN.
Oh man, talk about an easy straight line…
Wouldn’t it have more effect if people wrote to the editor of The Inquirer rather than to the author when pointing out the flaws in this article? Obviously email to the author isn’t going to do a thing except allow you to vent, but a ton of email to the editor telling him that, because of Thomas, you no longer trust what the Inquirer says. (that’s assuming you did in the first place)
I think the Hi-Fi is a total joke. It’s an accessory, not even a stand-alone product by itself. And as an accessory, it’s overpriced.
On the other hand, I’m really interested in the new Mac Minis. However, I guess I’ll wait for the new models that don’t have Intel Craphics built-in.
TT: “Apple makes more money from their PCs than they do their ENTIRE ipod line combined. Not to mention software sales.”
Up until last quarter, you were right. However, last quarter, Apple’s revenue of iPods and “other related music products and services” was $3.4 billion. PCs, peripherals, and software came to $2.35 billion.
So Apple is now making more money selling iPods than PCs.
“Still not exactly built to replace your main home stereo but it’d be great for an office.”
OR A DORM ROOM.
I’m calling Bu!!sh!t on all the joe audio pro’s who are spouting off. One person claimed that it can’t be High Fidelity BY DEFNINITION! What definition are you using? Looking up High Fidelity in wikipedia leads me to believe that the freq response range would qualify. In fact, aside from the fact that most people can’t even hear outside of the range specified, there is the quote “The term high fidelity tends to be applied to any reasonable-quality home-music system”.
It’s a worn out marketing term. Like “space age” or “hi-tech”. I’m not saying it’s a good or bad product. I’m pretty sure not one of us here has even heard it and from the blabbering I’ve seen on this board I can tell that the audio pros on here are pretty much spouting crap.
It’s given up its own operating system and bolted a pretty GUI on an ancient OS called UNIX.
Don’t let the fool fool you; Windows XP and it’s predecessors can trace their own heritage back to the ’70s from the VMS lineage thanks to Dave Cutler and his former employers DEC. Microsoft even got sued for stealing VMS code from DEC.
http://www.windowsitpro.com/Articles/Index.cfm?IssueID=97&ArticleID=4494
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Microsoft_Windows#Windows_3.1_and_NT
Well, the guy may be blowing smoke out his ass, but I MUST agree with ONE of his statements:
“Apple now launches an overpriced product so demonstrably inferior to a genuine HiFi system…”
Seriously, the iPod Hi-Fi is NOT hi-fi no matter HOW much RDF and spin is used to sell it. It’s a desktop iPod speaker system. PERIOD.
I’m feeling quite gormfull today and hapfull and feckfull as well.
I wonder what the billionaire Steve Jobs had as a sound system before? It’s either great or crap.
If replaced his stereo with the Hi-Fi, maybe I could buy his old stereo on the cheap?…
Once upon a time, journalism was, arguably, something to pay attention to, but those times are long gone…
He could do a real review if he got an iPod HiFi boombox and did some field testing, but since he’s just trolling for hits, it is obvious he won’t.
Besides, his “article” is full of ad hominem attacks that shows his poor logic…
Another troller, move on folks.
“full of ad hominem attacks”
Yeah! What the heck does he have against grits anyway? (j/k)
First of all, I didn’t read the Inquirer article, I am going by Mac Daily News’ comments about it. You will understand why as you read the rest of this. All of the drivel about the Mac and gullible iPod users etc. is just that, drivel, meaningless chatter. As for the iPod HiFi, I don’t know how it sounds. Does anyone yet? With the right engineering it could sound good, think Bose Wave Radio: the first time I came across one of those, I was in a room full of beautiful sound and it took me a while to find that little Wave Radio which was making all of it. I’m still doubtful the HiFi can replace the stereo image I get from my installation which receives its audio input from an Airport Express. You do have to understand the difference between marketing and reality.
What this bozo Andrew Thomas and the rest of the Inquirer crew know is gullibility. They rely on it daily in order to show their advertisers the page counts on their articles. I haven’t seen from them a positive comment about anything Apple has done in years. So I simply don’t ever go to their site. I’m not interested in helping them get paid.
Once upon a time, expensive Macs were, arguably, more stable than the WinTel equivalents, but those times are long gone… Apple’s given up and gone over to Intel processors. It’s given up its own operating system and bolted a pretty GUI on an ancient OS called UNIX.
Ha! Is this maroon talking about OS9-? Did he ever use OS9? Jeebus on a stick, that was the most unstable piece of crap evar! Sure, it was still better than Windows but I still hated it. Nothing like rebooting 8 times a day during normal operation. Or 20 if you had to do any troubleshooting for extension conflicts. The only way to have more fun was if it happened with a deadline standing on your neck.
THE authority:
If you think the $350 price is reasonable, go buy one.
If looking up a definition in Wikipedia is you’re idea of becoming an authority, we’d have nothing to talk about.
Something interesting for the audiofiles:
http://www.macnightowl.com/index.htm#facts
A QUESTION for you: Would you take seriously any form of journalism from a guy who looks like he’d clobber your mother for her purse?
“….or imaging or even the benefits of valves over transistors.
TUBES RULE! – Too bad I can’t afford a high-end tube amp. Tubes are warmer sounding, more 3-d and just reproduce sound better. Give me a tube amp, a good platter with a high-end needle with some thick ass vinyl and you’ve got SOUND.
But, being more expensive to produce (making tubes is also a highly toxic process), the industry changed and time marches on….
Even though the CD is still a digital medium I can still notice a HUGE difference between DDD and AAD – AAD sounds better because it ORIGINAL source is analog.
“In fact, aside from the fact that most people can’t even hear outside of the range specified….”
The low E on a standard 4-string bass is around 40Hz.
The low B on a 5-string bass is around 30 I believe.
Ok, so nothing I said relates to this thread, if you’re still reading this far you are a glutton for punishment.
Spongy provided the link to yet another writer who doesn’t get it: http://www.macnightowl.com/index.htm#facts
The complaints people are making are about the Hi-Fi’s value. The audio specs are only part of the argument.
I’ve yet to read anyone doubting that the iPod Hi-Fi will produce decent sound suitable for offices or dorm rooms. No one doubts the thing will work seamlessly with the iPod. But Apple priced this plastic box at half the cost of a Mac Mini and at the price of a complete 1000 watt JVC 5.1 home stereo system from Best Buy: http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=7033505&type=product&productCategoryId=pcmcat40200050002&id=1099395276778, so it is perfectly acceptable to hold the Hi-Fi up to the standards of other $350 audio systems currently available.
This author addresses the Hi-Fi’s published audio shortcomings by making the typical half-cocked observation: “Forgetting that most adults can’t hear a 20 kilohertz signal…” Yeah, fine. But the author conveniently omits that most adults CAN hear when that 20KHz signal is NOT present. The high harmonics are what give a sense of space, air, and realism to a recording.
I love people who read in their automobile owner’s manual how to operate the accelerator pedal and then believe they’re fully prepared to compete in the Indy 500.
When dismissing the frequency range of the Hi-Fi as unimportant to the product’s value, none of these overnight authorities bother to address that pesky 6db total wiggle room of ± 3dB. For those in the know, that is a pretty sloppy spec. But in La La Land, inferior specs aren’t significant when home stereo has been reinvented.
The author (who apparently monitored this and other threads at MDN) goes on to say: “In the real world, if the specs are realistic, it’s a lot better than you have a right to expect from the price.”
So $350 is a bargain for this system? I’m so glad I don’t live in his real world. Apple marketing does tend to blind people.
Elsewhere, I provided links to several technologically and sonically superior powered speaker systems costing less money. Products that actually have value commensurate with their prices. Some of these products have been used to create the music Apple sells at its iTunes store.
This author can’t be bothered with value comparisons. He goes on to insult anyone who has ever chosen between pissing money away or spending money wisely when he writes: “But it may be good enough for most people, who don’t think the audible difference makes a difference.”
Yup. $350 of no difference. Piss away, Gene Steinberg.
What is it with faggot Mac fanbois who are too scared to flame me using their real email addresses?
Pussies.
(no offence intended)
Andrew
Sheesh that shut them up
Here’s the extremely intelligent, well thought out reply a Mac Fanboi wrote to Andrew Thomas…
Start Quote:
“what a f***n homo you gay biatch, windows is batty because lets face it, the viruses and the spyware etc. Mac OS X to the day has only two known malicious softwares. So get your gay windows machine and live under a rock so no-one can attack you with viruses you gay homo. You are dumb beyond your years so go shove a stick up your a*se and go live with you windows mates you dumb b*stard p**ck”
End Quote:
Andrew, I just wanted to let you know this doesn’t represent the average intelligence of Mac users in general thank God!!