London Times lunacy: Apple plans iPod redesign to counter slowing sales of the digital music player

“Apple is planning a ‘significant redesign’ of the iPod to counter slowing sales of the digital music player, according to reports. Industry weblogs, which in the past have tended to accurately predict Apple’s development plans, say a new player will be released this autumn and could replace the current iPod nano,” Rhys Blakely reports for The London Times. “Steve Jobs, the chief executive of Apple Computer, last week dismissed claims that the company was facing a growth slowdown, insisting that a sharp drop in sales of the iPod was ‘not a cause for concern.’ Mr Jobs blamed a drop in sales of the music devices from 14 million to 8.5 million on the exceptionally strong demand during the holiday season. He said he remained optimistic about the growth prospects for the iPod, adding: ‘To be honest, nobody has ever sold 8.5 million music players in a quarter.'”

“However, the fall, during Apple’s fiscal second quarter, marks dragged sales figures about one million short of what Wall Street had expected. Analysts said the drop in iPod sales, which was accompanied by a forecast that was below expectations, signalled that the company was no longer set to forge ahead at the same pace. Significantly, Apple has not recently introduced new versions of the iPod to help to lift sales. Meanwhile several rival products have come on to the market. Shipments of Apple Macintosh computers also fell in the period to 1.1 million, down from 1.25 million during the holiday period,” Blakely reports.

Full article here.
Today’s poorly conceived hit-piece brought to you by Rhys Blakely and the fine folks at The London Times who can’t seem to figure out that there is no “second Christmas” in March. For “several rival products” that “have come on to the market” to have affected iPod sales, wouldn’t such products have to have actually sold some units in quantity? No such evidence is provided by Blakely. Bad form, Rhys. Blakely and his editors also can’t fathom why people would decide wait a bit to buy certain Intel-based Macs until they are actually available for sale. They’ve registered a “Thurrott” on the Obtuse Scale (see related article). Blakely’s article is just a stupid waste of time, paper, ink, bandwidth, and electrons. And, as quoted, Apple CEO Steve Jobs is wrong. One company has sold at least 8.5 million music players in a quarter: Apple has done it two quarters in a row, with many more to come.

As for the rumored “iPod redesign,” please name a year since the iPod was introduced when Apple didn’t redesign at least one iPod model.

Apple shipped 1,112,000 Macintosh computers and 8,526,000 iPods during the quarter, representing 4 percent growth in Macs and 61 percent growth in iPods over the year-ago quarter.

[UPDATE: 11:08am EDT: Added Mac and iPod shipment and growth numbers to end of Take.]

Advertisements:
Get the new iMac with Intel Core Duo for as low as $31 A MONTH with Free shipping!
Get the MacBook Pro with Intel Core Duo for as low as $47 A MONTH with Free Shipping!
Apple’s new Mac mini. Intel Core, up to 4 times faster. Starting at just $599. Free shipping.
Apple’s brand new iPod Hi-Fi speaker system. Home stereo. Reinvented. Available now for $349 with free shipping.
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.
iPod Radio Remote. Listen to FM radio on your iPod and control everything with a convenient wired remote. Just $49.

Related articles:
RUMOR: iPod nano featuring ‘significant internal redesign’ due fall 2006 – April 25, 2006
Thurrott: It’s starting to look like Apple’s iPod and Mac sales are leveling out – April 21, 2006

37 Comments

  1. MDN: It’s “The Times” not “The London Times”, if you went to the website you would see that.

    It’s a national newspaper, not a London Newspaper, so you’d be more correct in calling it “The British Times”, although that would still be wrong.

  2. “As for the rumored “iPod redesign,” please name a year since the iPod was introduced when Apple didn’t redesign at least one iPod model.”

    2002. Apple didn’t redesign the iPod that year, they merely put in a touch scroll wheel (instead of a movable wheel), made it thinner and added Windows support.

  3. So, macnut222, there hasn’t been a year that iPod wasn’t redesigned as you do describe a redesign?

    Also, MDN knows what they are doing by calling them “The London Times.” The Times dislikes that moniker which is why MDN intentionally used it, I would hazard a guess.

  4. We also need the quarter on quarter (05 to 06) to be able to accurately see any possible trends. If I was MDN I wouldn’t shout from the rooftops just yet. But the quoted figures from The Times only paint half the picture.

  5. Peter, can you look at the 1G and 2G iPods (the ones I’m referring to) and make a distinction between them? I can’t – unless you notice the little cover for the FireWire port (introduced with the 2G iPod).

  6. Wallstreet prognosticators and Weather forcasters. They are almost always wrong.

    I don’t know why people put so much stock in what they predict when what they expect to happen – doesn’t happen.

    They are professional guessers – nothing more.

    I live in Texas – they predict rain almost every day. It mostly doesn’t rain.

  7. Since one is 1G (first generation) and the other is 2G (second generation) there were design changes. Hence: “redesign.” The scroll wheel going from mechanical to electrostatic alone counts as a redesign. Not to mention the other differences: 10 percent thinner, higher storage capacities, and the aforementioned FireWire port cover.

  8. Pog,

    Perhaps you’re aware that there is also a TIMES newspaper somewhere in this country . . . New York, I seem to recall. I realize all Brits believe there is only ONE “Times,” but MDN’s over-clarification is understandable and forgivable on THESE shores.

  9. Even though I am a Londoner and I take the point (agree on most occasions) I have no problem with the term London Times for at least I know which one they are referring to. The Guadian was perfectly happy to be called the Manchester Guardian for a cetury or so,

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.