“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
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.
Thanks pog. That clarification was timely, relevant, and important.
“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.
So several unnamed iPod rivals have come on the market, and Mac sales fell after the holiday period? Mmmmm-kay…
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.
Hasn’t anyone noticed that ipod/itunes market share has gone up, not down, this past quarter ?
Everybody’s looking to call the market turn….looking for the headline that grabs vs doing some factual reporting.
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.
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).
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.
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.
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.
Hey, Drunk Cheney – don’t forget the days the those same forecasters down here in oh-so-predictable Texas say there’s a “20% chance of light rain” and we get flooded out!
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,
Just one more example of another great cock-up from the Murdoch empire.
The Times was once a great British newspaper. Today it is just a sad reflection of its former self.
London Times is OK. Here in New York (and in many parts of the country, even in LA) The Times means New York Times. London Times is specificity, not redundancy.
spyinthesky>
Nice to see you even believe in using typos like The Guardian
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
Great place to work: subsidised restaurant open twice a day (once for lunch, once for dinner). Particularly useful if on a late shift. Used to start at noon, go straight to lunch, do a few hours work, go to dinner and then drive home out of the rush hour. Absolutely fab.
The Times is over 200 years old and therefore probably deserves the unqualified title. Although it is published in London at present, it’s soon to move out, so The London Times will become incorrect rather than arguably misleading. It’s also published by News International, a division of News Corporation, who have recently been showing an increasingly pro-Microsoft anti-Apple bias in a number of areas.
London blows.
Of course iPod sales will continue to drop – who doesn´t own one?
If you have 1,2,3 or 4 how many more does one need?
Last time we bought was last October. Now everyone has one, no one needs another.
I toured their printing facility about 10 years ago. I lost a nice lighter there.
I think we need a new term to describe the mental state of certain members of the press who feel compelled to rail against Apple. How about ADS – Apple Derangement Syndrome? It’s much like BDS – Bush Derangement Syndrome but without the treason/damage-Bush-at-the-expense-of-your-own-nation factor. Allah be praised.
Conrad G.,
Everyone has one? Approx. 50 million iPods sold so far. For your edification, Sony sold over 300 Walkman cassette and CD players in a 20-year period. There are hundreds of million of people who can afford to buy an iPod who do not have one.
Apple will sell multiple hundreds of millions of iPods over a period of decades.
Get some real perspective, man.
Apple is DYING!!
NOT!!
And what does Wall street know about the digital music revolution? Much less predicting anything right?
They are just there to pretend they know, but in realitiy they don’t know for sure.
I love that –
“Apple is planning a ‘significant redesign’ of the iPod to counter slowing sales of the digital music player.”
So apple is redesiging the Nano to counter the holiday season (Slow Sales)?
Little known facts about Rhys Blakely:
•He was an astute student at Oxford, majoring in nanoeconomics.
•Adamantly refutes the theory of stronger sales during the holidays, instead explaining that companies simply are not doing well in the ensuing months.
Don’t fret. The iBangers, iHaggis and iKidneyPie are being kitchen tested in a secret Apple lab at this very moment.
one in l.a. i think, also washington (d.c.), korea, japan, and probably a lot of others too.
Oooooh! and others:
There is a big difference between “The Times”, “Los Angeles Times” and “The New York Times”: The Times is called “The Times”, the others have the name in their city in the title printed in big letters on the front page.
Just because those papers have their name in the title, doesn’t mean The Times automatically should be “The London Times”. Why not just call it what it says in huge letters at the top of the front page: “The Times”.
“There’s a battle (in)side
And it is ragin’.
It’ll soon shake your windows
And rattle your walls
For the Times they are a-changin'”
@Mike from iPod news – You are confused. To own and use a Walkman all you needed was a Walkman and music CD or cassette.
With an iPod to download music one also needs a computer.
To download music from iTunes store one needs:
– computer
– fast internet connection
– credit card
How many people you think have that? A fraction of as many that qualified to own and operate a Walkman.
Once the Apple phone comes out – if ever – this will increase apple sales, but cut into iPod sales.
Flaccus:
What an asinine, ridiculous thing to say. What’s your point asshole?
Until Apple can figure out how one can get music on their iPod without also having a big buck computer, then worldwide iPod sales will be limited.
Conrad, in case you haven’t noticed, you can load your iPod with Mp3s from either Windows or Mac computers. All you need is the free iTunes program (heck, to be totally accurate, you don’t even need that!). And Conrad, have you checked the price of used G4s on Ebay lately? Or used Windows boxes? You can get music to your iPod cheaply. It seems that only you haven’t figured out how. Why not?
MDN magic word: Lead. As in “Conrad must have eaten lead at an early age.”
“…a Thurrott on the obtuse scale…”
Ha!
Actually, I propose that we use “Thurrotts” as the unit of ob-tuse-ity on a scale, which should probably be logrithmic to reflect the extrordinary range of ob-energy to which macophiles are exposed.
Example: Dopey Brit presses enter key before actually researching, 2.4 on the T scale.
Dvorak says something like “Really, Apple just needs to come over and install wi-fi in my colon, or they might as well cash it in” 8.5 T
You get the idea…
That’s bullshit Pog. Only people in the UK just call it ‘The Times’. Virtually every country in the anglosphere has a ‘Times’. If you say ‘did you see the Times today?’ in Cork, it’s the Irish Times, anywhere in the eastern US, it’s the New York Times… and so on.
@ Getdafacts>
Following on from Brainless Genius, let’s analyse the reality.
Some 50 million iPods have been sold to date with, arguably, a cumulative capacity of approximately 75 billion tracks or thereabouts.
Apple’s iTMS has sold approximately 1.15 billion tracks from iTMS.
Logic dictates that the other 74 billion tracks must have come from somewhere else, or that people are buying multiple iPods as a) their existing unit starts to fail or b) they wish to keep up with enhanced functionality.
Both of these scenarios mean that Apple will, over time, exceed the 300 million unit sales of Sony’s Walkman rather than fall short: to keep a Walkman alive for five years and to keep abreast of current technology meant feeding it with Duracells and treating it gently.
With the iPod, you’ll replace it every three years which means that the 8 million people who bought one last quarter will be back at the well in another 36 months.
Pog – spot on.
to all our fellows across the pond, still struggling to distinguish between the newspapers, what they are called and where they are from, get some “time” in…
MW : ‘saw’ as in veni vidi vici
the iphone rules.
http://www.cashpotatos.com