MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

add a screen to the shuffle and I am there!

"our lead" heh heh

Buy a closeout iPod mini. Lowered prices now make it the "shuffle with the screen".

Could some of you who have shuffles comment on how you use them day to day. I am specifically interested in those of you who also have a higher capacity iPod. Have you noticed a difference in your using habits?

I need a shuffle for snowboarding and jogging, but i am wondering at 4 GB whether it might replace my 20GB iPod altogether. How does the shuffle's battery life hold up in the cold?

Do you remember Sergej Bubka? Bestest pole vault jumper there ever was. With the regularity of a clockwork, he bettered his own personal records, centimeter by centimeter. As no one else could better him, he could and did set the pace of those small improvements, cashing in nicely on the bonuses for jumping yet a bit higher. There is no doubt, that he could have bettered himself with much larger increments, it is hard to believe that he got better by one centimeter every 6 months.

I see the same thing happening with the iPod. It is very hard to believe that the R&D;boys, combined with the engineers that shape the machines, would just happen to better the last product by a tiny improvement every few months, regular as a clockwork.

Apple is bleeding the consumer for every penny he's worth, by not skipping enlargements/improvements that have already been passed by by what's been designed, but isn't sold yet.

Fair enough, if the consumer is silly enough to pay for that, but this is where a semi-monopoly leads, people.

What M$ is for operating systems, Apple is for the digital content player market. Stifle the competition and bleed the market dry. Should anyone ever invent something better, or just different, their ass is grass and Apple is the lawnmower...

I'm waiting for the Apple of the digital player market to stand up kick Apples ass!

Agree with erk. I'll consider my first iPod once the Shuffle has a display screen or the iPod has a hard drive capacity of greater than 100 gigabytes. Not everyone uses low MP3 sample rates such as 192 kbps.

I bought my 1GB shuffle in early February and I love it. I also have a 40GB 3G and a 60GB iPod Photo Rev A. The shuffle works great for trips to the gym and on the el to work. Plus, the battery life is at least 17 hours so I can get a good two days plus out of it, even listening all day at work. And I put it on pause last week and forgot to shut it off when I got home. It still had several hours of charge left when I picked it up a few days later.

Forget the screen, people. Geez, you know wtf you put on it, just let it do it's job and shuffle. If you don't like the song (why you wouldn't is beyond me since you added it) hit the next button and be done with it. How many times are you looking at the screen anyway when you're sweating your *** off on the treadmill???

Lurker_PC:
no offense, but i don't think you'll buy an iPod ever.
it's like some one says, I'll buy a BMW when it's under 10000$ or it has wings?

I use my 1GB shuffle when mowing the lawn. I can hang it on the laniard underneath my shirt and have the headphones come upthrough my shirt as well so nothing is in danger of getting caught up on the mower or on shrubs and whatnot as I mow. The sound is aweseome on the shuffle at high volume...I dare say better than my 30GB iPod Photo. My son listens to the shuffle in his bed at night before he goes to sleep.

My son and wife both have the shuffle and they both absolutely love it. My son and I use his when we mow and he uses it when we go on long car rides. It hasn't been cold here since he has had his, but so far battery life hasn't been an issue. My wife listens to her's when she is working around the house. She loves it, no issue with battery life on it either.

Great product for when you are involved in something physical that you can just turn on and listen to it without having to fiddle with the controls.

The main thing Apple has to be careful is unsold inventory. The 1 gig shuffle wasn't getting sold so they had to drop the price. The 30 and 60 gig colour pod also wasn't selling well so they merge the color pod with the 20 gig pod which apparently is in high demand.

Personally I would have preferred a 30 gig color pod for 299. I've got a 3G 15 gig that is now full. Still now the 60 gig looks interesting. I'll wait for the prices to come down before I replace the 3G.

I don't know if a 8 gig mini or 2 gig shuffles would sell. I've heard that the 6 gig mini isn't doing as well as the 4 gig. Apple may have decided that the 4 and 20 gig drives are the sweet spots for customers and competing on price is a better way to gain market share. I agree - by selling more pod Apple get cheaper prices on components and their overhead is lower. Therefore they can maintain their profit margin whilst grabbing more customers for iTMS

I have an Original 5GB iPod, a 20 GB 3G and a 20 GB ClickWheel..... When I got my 1GB shuffle this year, I could afford to donate my original to another family member.... Now, I've got my sites set on a Color iPod Photo and I'll pass on the 3G as well.....

These things are great and make cool gifts for graduations and such. Especially the Mini's, which I don't have YET!

You have to admire people like [B]Monopolies are bad…[/B] who manage to create a conspiracy out of coincidence.

The pace of change in terms of capacity for Apple is dictated by technology improvements at Hitachi, Seagate, Samsung and others: when Hitachi start shipping the 8GB microdrive reliably, Apple will - inevitably - incorporate the improved product into an iPod mini, as they will when the 10GB version ships. This isn't screwing the consumer or anyone - in reality, the consumer will benefit from having greater capacity and more efficient power consumption, especially when combined with new silicon from PortalPlayer.

Likewise, the development of more capacious shuffles will come about because the memory foundries of Samsung and the like are being forced to create increasingly dense RAM/NVRAM modules whilst costs remain static due to oversupply: Apple are merely leveraging a given memory foundry's competitive differential advantage to create a better product.

>Sergeï
The point is that for iPod mini (as an example), there is only one bigger hard drive available. As soon as Toshiba and co are making them available, Apple use it. I understand and agree with the fact that monopol of Apple is baaaaaaad, but your arguments don't match reality...

I've been using my 1GB shuffle for trips to the gym, grocery store, and on recent flights... I have no complaints about it, and battery life has yet to be an issue, as I only use it for 1-2 hours at a time. I don't mind it not having a screen, as I just skip a song if I don't want to hear it.

I have three iPods -- a shuffle I use almost every day walking to work, a mini I got from work for 5 years of service, and a 30GB 3rd gen ipod that I use mostly in the car (not very often, as I live in Boston).

I'd use the mini more, but by the time I got it, I was used to using the shuffle. I like the shuffle a lot with the exception of a couple things:
- if you don't turn it off with the switch on the back immediately after stopping a song, it may revert back to the last place in your music at which you actually turned it off correctly.
- The 'random', while marketed like crazy, isn't random. It's just a different order. If you go backwards and forwards, you get the songs in the same order, and when you reach the end of the list, it just starts over.
- I loaded it with PodCasts yesterday before I left work, and none would play for some reason. :(
- I remember now, why consumer electronics -- especially portables -- are not usually white. My shuffle has ink stains on it from a pen that leaked in my pocket. :(

>Forget the screen, people.

Nah... I think I'll remember the screen.

---

>Geez, you know wtf you put on it, just let it do it's job and shuffle.

While not having basic control and functionality works for you, it's simplistic and plain stupid for many others. It's one notch above having a radio... even though a radio has a display.

... and WTF for someone who has the patience to use the Shuffle, you sure seem impatient with your response.

---

> If you don't like the song (why you wouldn't is beyond me since you added it) hit the next button and be done with it.

Hmmmm... I have a large collection of artists in the M-T range (Mintzer - Tyner). That's a lot of hitting the next button so I can eventually be done with it... Again, fun for some, idiotic for others.

---

>How many times are you looking at the screen anyway when you're sweating your *** off on the treadmill???

So Apple's target is the treadmill ***-sweaters. Granted! Now how about everyone else who wants a very small and portable player with basic controls and functionality?

But you're right... Apple is right on target with treadmill ***-sweaters.

" I'll consider my first iPod once the Shuffle has a display screen or the iPod has a hard drive capacity of greater than 100 gigabytes. Not everyone uses low MP3 sample rates such as 192 kbps."

I don't think Apple is losing any sleep over you not buying an iPOD dude.

And if you think you can hear the difference between a 192 kbps and one of the higher rates on a portable, then there is no point in trying to use logic to convince you to do anything.

Stick to your Walkman cassette player and enjoy Windows XP!

RE Mike K.:

I bought a 512MB shuffle in late January and promptly sold my 40GB iPod 4G.

- I worry less about cosmetically damaging the shuffle, so it actually gets used more often.
- I don't miss the screen because it's only 100-120 songs of my own choosing, so I know that I'll like whatever comes up on the rotation.
-I'm never away from my computer for more than 24 hours at a time, so when I grow tired of the song selection on the shuffle, I just plug it in to the iMac and change the selection.

YAAAWWWNNNNNN!!!!

This isn't even close to being news or even a decent rumor!

The "prediction" that a digital device will have more memory (or be faster, smaller, more intuitive) doesn't take a psychic. Hell, even my 5 yr old nephew knows that!!!

So, what's next? The awesome prediction that the Mac mini will be faster, that iMacs will have more memory and more things standard? How about the incredible prediction that all Macs will soon come with iWork pre-installed AND have a spreadsheet-like application? OOOoooooo.... so mystical!!!

Shut the f- up and get a f-in' life!!!

>And if you think you can hear the difference between a 192 kbps and one of the higher rates on a portable, then there is no point in trying to use logic to convince you to do anything.

Most people don't care about that extra frequency range.

Most people are willing to sacrifice fidelity and rich sound for portability.

... and you fit into the "most people" category, so you feel obliged to ridicule those who want something more than what you're satisfied by.

FOr me, a 100GB iPod would be awesome. The extra space will let me go lossless or uncompressed *and* stay portable.



>Stick to your Walkman cassette player and enjoy Windows XP! LOL

Stuff like this just makes posters look dumb. LOL

am i the only one who routinely skips past Mac & PC Guy's posts? Didn't think so.

Sir, you need to get some new material, or at least provide a link to the Dell board where you post about the virtues of the Mac, the iPod and OSX. We already have someone here who takes delight in baiting the Kool-Aid drinkers and Joe McConnell has been fairly quiet lately.

I'm GLAD Apple keeps making these better and better if only to stave off the EVIL CREATIVE MONOPOLY!! Don't think they're a Monopoly? Tell me, how many companies out there are making the Zen, 15? 20? 69? The ANSWER is NONE!!! Even if someone were to want to license their technology, they stubbornly REFUSE to let anyone else make a Zen.

Good luck to Apple against the CREATIVE OVERLORDS. (Don't even get me started on Rio and their CARBON Monopoly. How can companies be allowed to do this???)

By the way, I'm also of the opinion that if the current iPod wasn't doing so well, we'd be seeing successive versions even quicker, but that's just me and my antics

I dunno. 4 gigs gets to be a lot for a no-screen, shuffle-centric iPod. I can understand the shuffle concept for the smaller capacity, but with 4 gigs of music, I think I'd want to manage it.

I never listened to songs randomly before but now it how i listen to it all the time. You are reminded of how much great music is arround!. The size of the shuffle is perfect for exercise. I have the orig ipod + 20 gig ipod and a mini as well..... in search of the perfect music companion. the shuffle is it.

Welborn - the order of the "random" playlist can be reset by pressing the play button 3 times in quick succession. This was driving me crazy for weeks, as everytime I turned my shuffle off and then on again, it would start playing the same sequence of songs. I had to find out this secret technique from discussion boards, since it was NOT mentioned in the accompanying instruction manual.

Ah -- Thanks, Ronald!

2gb with screeen and $99....whoo-hoooo!

<i>From: mike k. ”Could some of you who have shuffles comment on how you use them day to day. I am specifically interested in those of you who also have a higher capacity iPod. Have you noticed a difference in your using habits? I need a shuffle for snowboarding and jogging, but i am wondering at 4 GB whether it might replace my 20GB iPod altogether. How does the shuffle's battery life hold up in the cold?"

I can't speak about the cold/battery life query as I haven't extensively used mine in such conditions...

I own, have owned or have bought as gifts for others every generation iPod. I bought the first 5g 1st Generation iPod from the Apple store on the first day of availability and have upgraded to a top of the line unit when they became available to hold more of my music collection. So when the Shuffles were announced, I was underwhelmed. However, between the date of introduction and when the shuffles hit the stores, I discovered podcasting and podcasts and it occured to me that the shuffle was the perfect "auxillary" for my main iPod's for listening to them.

What I had done (until yesterday) was use iPodder to pull the many dozens of podcasts I subscribe to off the net, and I had a pair of shuffles that I would keep the most recent podcasts on in reverse chronological order by date on them. For this purpose the shuffle is perfect. It's small and light enough to always have with you, using the neck lanyard it's always close at hand, yet you don't have to search for a place to put it as you move from desk, to mobile, to car and back, the battery life is excellent, and since they are truely "solid-state" they can take jolts and knocks much better than a spinnin' hard drive.. I switch off between the two shuffles so I always have one with the most recent sampling of podcasts. Now I'm using iTunes 4.9 instead of iPodder, and while it is going to require some adjustments to how I do things, it's a much smoother operation than iPodder allows even with the 2.1 release.

For my usage, the Shuffle has been a boon alternative to bringing out one of my iPod Photo's. I can see them being very useful to a number of market segments: kids, Physical Training, High-Risk environment usage (say for construction workers, etc.) over an HD based iPod or similar digital music player.

Having said that, I'd love to have a display and more capacity with otherwise the same form factor/battery life/etc. Multiple playlists would be nice too. I believe that for most people 1 gig is about the upper limit of usefulness without a display unless they use Shuffle mode all the time or are using them in a very specific order mode as I do. It'd be nice to be able to segregate music from podcasts, and catagorize podcasts to type, any of which would be difficult to manage without a display on the unit. Greater (2 gig for example) memory would mean I could have with me 2 or 3 days worth of podcasts instead 1-1.5 days, etc. but I feel 1 gig is about the upper limit for managability for most people without a display.

Yes, I still use my photo iPod's, but not as often. The shuffle is perfect for day to day commuting and during the day use for me. My photo iPod is relegated to riding in my "work bag" for those times when I wish to listen to music instead of podcasts, or need to move large chunks of data.

Different tools for different applications. What'd be nice would be a 2gig unit with display at the $149-169 price point, a 4gig with display at $199-219, eliminate the 4gig and 6gig mini's and put an 8gig mini at $249 (perhaps with some new colors like red and black) and possibly a color screen) to fill out the line. Those are wishes not guesses or rumors, folks.

It'll be fun to watch as always!

I have to agree to a point with "Monopolies are bad, mkay?". I also think they are only making minor improvements when I know they could do more. But I think its a huge stretch to call Apple a monopoly.

"MCCFR" I don't believe its purely a matter of technical limitation. When a bigger drive comes out I'm sure they will use it. But realistically how many songs do u need to carry with you? The adavancement that I'm talking about is already being done in other players, Apple just refuses to do it until they have sucked every penny out of every small increment of improvement- I want FM radio. You can't say it can't be done because even the shuffle knock off had one.

Now having said that if I was Apple and could string it out for millions of dollars more I would do it to but I'm just a consumer so I want my FM radio!

Mac & PC Guy wrote: "FOr me, a 100GB iPod would be awesome. The extra space will let me go lossless or uncompressed *and* stay portable."

It's more complicated than merely disk space. The non-flash iPods use flash memory to hold about 25 minutes of 128 Kbps music. That's 25 * 60 * 128 Kb or 192,000 Kb or 24,000 KB or 23.4 MB stored in flash memory. I store my music in one of my iTunes libraries in Apple Lossless format. When I assume a four minute song, my Apple Lossless library averages 24.5 MB per song.

Accordingly, not even one song on average would fit into flash memory on any disk-based iPod. That's bad. We're talking about under four minutes of skip protection and too much disk usage. (I use this library to stream music through Airport Express to my stereo system.)

Moreover, I only have 5,042 songs in this library (at 4:57 per song) and the library consumes 148.31 GB of disk space. This is compressed but lossless. There's no way to hold a moderate-sized library like this on any iPod we'll see in the near future.

I agree that 192 kbps is not sufficient for CD quality (which is itself compromised), but I also agree that for mobile use it's fine. My shuffle and my Grado SR-80 headphones make truly wonderful music while in the gym, outside, on a plane, etc., at 192 kbps.

8 GB iPod mini I can believe, but a 4 GB Shuffle borders on ridiculous. 4 GB of flash memory is still beyond cutting edge and simply the cost would make such a device way, way more expensive than the $199 mini.

From a marketing perspective, jumping from 1 GB to 4 GB doesn' make sense either.

Most likely, for these two reasons, Apple will probably continue to offer 512 MB at $99, 1 GB at $129, and maybe introduce a 2 GB model at $149. But 4 GB of flash memory just isn't credible. T3 is full of it.

Mr. Mackey:

Another point of view is that Apple refuses to do it because their research/gut instinct tells them that FM Radio/inbuilt voice recording/insert name of function is a relatively niche requirement that would either a) create extra cost and increase the rice point or b) fragment the range as you would land up with a different model for each individuals needs/wallet.

Far better to leave the development of such add-on functionality to third-parties who have a capability to be more responsive to the needs of the niche marketplaces.

As an example: XM radio often comes up on people's wishlists. But the problem is that XM only exists in the USA, whilst most of the rest of the world - Japan excluded - has opted for a de jure standard, namely DAB. For Apple to support XM would mean creating a fragmented production line, which - at peak times - would probably lead to regional stock shortages and gluts that would upset customers and shareholders in equal measure.

BTW, I meant "price point", not "rice point" which is patently silly!

The rice point is the best part, speaking of kernels.

MCCFR:

I see your points, they could certainly be a possibility. I agree that smaller third parties can afford to be more nimble but I think that a major core feature like an FM tuner should be handled by Apple.

I agree with you totally about XM. I would enjoy the product but it doesn't make good business sense to me to offer it, yet, anyway. But I do feel like FM radio is quite ubiquitous. I have never been to Europe or Asia so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong but couldn't that function be used anywhere in the world?

While I love the iPod, I have two, I must confess that I have wanted a built in FM tuner since the iPod was first announced. I might just be blinded by my own desire have it.

The iPod Mini move would be smart, but not the Shuffle.

>Mike K wrote: am i the only one who routinely skips past Mac & PC Guy's posts? Didn't think so.

Sure sounds like you skipped over my post (yet again) since you decided to comment on it.

I'm actually at a loss to understand why you chose to make that comment. While I am critical of Apple, Microsoft, MDN, and such... I do give credit where credit is due. I believe my posts to be a little more centered than so many on this board - not overly praising of Apple and not ready-to-bash-Microsoft at a moments notice.

Now what exactly about that bothers you?

Mr. Mackey:

Ubiquitous, but dying.

Here in the UK, we are already beginning to pilot the analogue switch-off which means that FM probably only has another 3-4 years of commercial life before it qualifies as "legacy" technology and six years before the FM tone disappears altogether.

Whilst most countries are not being that aggressive with the digital switchover, some smaller nations are being even more ambitious so again I would argue that even FM support in an iPod is a dead-end investment in time and effort that would be better spent delivering H.264 playback or somesuch.

Thanks randomizing for the tip, Ronald Sausage.