Hein sight is a wonderful thing. My uncle had a 2G he purchased from Best Buy, but he was intelligent enough to enroll in the 3 year extended plan. And he is now the proud owner of the exact model you are eyeballing, Greg. And all for the price of the $79 enrollment fee and and additional $50 to cover the selling price difference, of the two models. Of course sentiment can play no part in economy.
Makes me squerm too, thinking about missed opportunities like that. And it sound like you are just avoiding what is going to happen anyways. So enjoy your next iPod, and iPod after that, and iPod after that..................
I would like to see Apple increase market share, at their pace and style. If you look at mass retailer offerings you will see an included monitor. A headless Mac isn’t necessary. I always thought Apple would do well in a partnership, with Target, to sell eMacs, iMacs, and bundles to include 20GB iPods. Using the assets already in place, and just “ramping up production” could be beneficial with both market share and profits. I know a decent eMac could be sold for $599 of $598 with some minor upgrades, and maybe $798 with an iPod.
I see the Apple and Target cultures, potentially, working well together, with now additions to the Apple Catalog necessary.
I don't think we really have to worry about the brand name "iPod Mini" getting stale after such a grand reception this year. Apple never let the iPod standard get old hat, and just as soon as these 5 colors get a bit overloaded in the market, I'm sure you will magically see generation 2 with 5 NEW COLORS.
Yes, we the consumer, are gullable.
There was quite a bit of history to absorb in this article, but I thing I’ve digested all of it now. And I think I have four points missed by Mr. Seibold.
Let think about advertising. Apple, in all of its greatness, is still one company against many. As a matter of fact, “many” is an understatement; an “army” might put things in better perspective. Since Apple’s decision in the 80’s not to share its technology, through licensing agreements, began the process of isolating themselves from the rest of the early computing world; at least it was tiny then. Now Apple is competing against dozens of viable computer builders who all share one thing in common; they build PCs. Its just a simple fact that advertising isn’t going “fix” anything. Apple’s only goal in public promotion should be to make sure that the public hasn’t “forgotten”. Anyways, Apple’s focus should continue to be “hook’em in college” by continuing their involvement in our major institutions of education.
My next point involves the analysis of Apple’s growth and decline of sales volume. Any person who runs a business is familiar with a Profit & Loss Statement; whereas you analyze the successes and failures of your business. There are two mathematical ways to go about this. One is analyzing percents against a whole, which was greatly covered in the article above. The other is the evaluation of YOUR overall sales in a strictly “units sold” analogy. If you were to plot a graph of the percent of market share, you would see peaks and valleys against an environment that was dynamically changing from moment to moment, as it was going through a metamorphosis. Now plot a graph of units sold, year by year. Without hard evidence in front of me, I would ponder a guess that you would see a very steady growth of units (Mac’s) going out of the doors; very stable growth in an ever changing, and truly booming marketplace. Looking at graph two, you might not be so worried after all. And I must point out again, that Apple is doing this alone.
My third point is the iPod comment made by Chris near the end of his article. Doesn’t the iPod of today remind you of the Apple II back in the glory days of computing? It does to me: Different environments producing the same effects. The Apple II was alone in the computing world; or at least it felt that way because Apple was so “head and shoulders” above the rest. And for that superiority, Apple received order after order. Now look at the iPod. In the world of digital audio players (DAPs), Apple jumped on board while portable digital music was in its infancy, and with some help, created a beautiful device that has become its own icon. Apple can’t make‘em fast enough. Are there other DAPs? Yes, but they are not truly competitors, at least not yet. Apple II and iPod; I say their early years are far too the same. And what’s the iPod’s future? That is up to Apple to decide, and I hope they didn’t forget the past.
I’m sorry to ramble, it’s been too long, but I’d like to make a social comment, an Apple social comment. When you think of the people who own Macs, who are they? I think their writers, musicians, photographers, video artists, graphic designers, animators, and architects; the artisans of our time. Do we honestly think that these people want to exist in the mundane majority? No, they want to exist in the “elite minority”. These people are proud to use their Apple equipment and say “Here we are, in a better plain of computing existence.” Keep your PCs and I’ll keep my Apple, my Lamborghini of computing.
Thank you.
data masked,
I guess it all depends on what kind of inputs you have on your Denon. If I wanted to I could connect my receiver (Onkyo) to my network with an ethernet connection. I know Denon offers this on a few of their products too. Which once again put us in options much less than expensice than this Apple creation. If you don't have this option for connection, then I appologise and you need an audio out.
Once again, all I want to say is that there are options out there. My iPod lives by my receiver and I spent $20 to do so. You can burn a random playlist on to a cd and spend about $.30
Tony T. wants a very small router/bridge/access point and is willing to pay twice as much as regular size devices. Thats fine, it sound like he thought it out.
I'm looking for more, thats all. Maybe some contol through the Airport Express to my computer, how about radio control too?
The only reason I made my comments is so when people read they might think about it a little, you know, make sure the purchase is justified. Who knows, with some improvements, or add ons, I might jump on board. I was ready to buy with the origional iPod, and I wish the first installment of Airport Express made me want get on the bandwagon too. Aplogies to all.
dear data masked,
If that is your REAL name. The airport extreme is $129 according to Apple's site.
And we all know that if its $129 at Apple's site, then its $129 everywhere.
Almost every company that carries routers and access points has devices for video game systems called wireless bridges to accomplish the same thing. The trick is, having Airtunes see it. I don't know yet, but I have a feeling that this might be exclusice to teh Airport Extreme.
And again my point is that this "cute" device is nothing new, just "cuter"
Tony T,
It is good that this device will benefit you and your specific need.
However, the point I was trying to make is that this device is a "static" technology.
True however, it is small and handsom. But, I hope you know you will pay twice the price for nothing new except saving some space in your laptop bag.
And, do you realize that you will need one of these Airport Expresses for each room. Or, you have to plan on rewiring it from room to room, just like an iPod. (and last I checked I could buy 3 docks and cables for about the same price) So, once again, musically will this help you at home? Not by my point of view.
I see little if no benefit to this device. Did we all forget how portable our iPod is?
With a dock and a "Monster" cable we can create the exact same thing for alot less $$$$$$. And if you want more control just add the "naviPod" by Ten Technologies and now you have a wireless remote control. And you know what? Still less $$$$$$, and there is no chance for a signal to be broken by a cordless phone or microwave.
I think sometimes computer users as a whole quickly leap at things that look like a technological advancement, but then realize that there is no advantage at all. I have a wireless network myself too. I even have a wireless printer. But I need a real benefit to bite on "no cords". Cords have value too, in their places.
Once again Apple has made a sexy looking thing here. But think first here before you buy in.
I think we might be jumping to conclusions here. I haven't seen any kind of true business model for Microsofts plan to "lease" music to its customers, or I should say potential customers. There is quite a bit of controvercy around ownership rights of music on iTunes and other formats, and the fact that there is a concern of actual use of the product after downloading. The concern also relates to the potential "stripped" use of such downloads in the future.
With such concerns brewing over ownership, how is a lease of music going to fair better. Easy answer; it will not get off the ground because of the the imediate uncertanty of how long the access to music will be.
One more point is the fact we all know Microsoft has a history of price increases after even modest sucess in the marketplace. You can look at price structures for many of their software titles to see the trends.
Basically, I won't be concerned in the slightest unless Microsoft shows a long term business plan to present music, in high accessability, in the market place; be it for $50 or $5000, it just doesn't matter.
Nathan,
Bravo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Starbuck is already experimenting with 4 coffee shops where you can download music and burn th CD? I believe the experiment is in California right now.
To Jeff Mincey:
I understand you are arguing the possibilities, in which you discuss the ultimate possibility, if the pattern continued, not in favor of the customers like you and I. So lets continue down this made up road.
Would it be in the interest of Apple or even the record labels to go in this direction? No! For turning away from your source of revenue, the customers of iTunes, is probably the fastest way of losing market share, and Apple's advantage in the marketplace. Would you not agree?
Do you honestly think a company would go in that negative direction on purpose or even on accident?
If Jobs were to read these comments about, what I feel was a very good move, I think he would honestly think to never do anything good for us (the customer) ever again. He improves a wonderful thing (iTunes), and for what: "Your policing me...............let copyright be the copyright so I can do all the illegal things I want....................I want the right to break the law"
Do you think if Apple didn't cooperate with the record labels, by helping them protect their right to do business and protect copyright to protect profitability, that we would even have iTunes at all?
The last thing Apple needs is to be a source for music piracy..........the bad public relations of being catagorized with a Kazaa, or old Napster would threaten their position of dominance in the marketplace, more amunition for the competition.
I have a personal investment in this music system, the iPod and iTunes, and I don't want it to go down burning, because Apple didn't maintain the balance.
You, Jeff, have this same investment too. I would think you would want it to suceed, just like I.
The reason I feel so confused, by all this debate, is because I don't feel restricted by iTunes 4.5 at all. Lets go back in time a bit.
I the days of the LP, your only copy had to be very well protected. Because, one sctratch ment no music or spending more money. There was no such issue as back up coppies for the average "Joe on the street". This is when Copyrighting, by itself worked. If you wore out your 8 track tape, there was no backup to go to. You went back to the store to buy another. Copyrighting alone worked here too. Then the introduction of the cassette tape started to change everything. You could copy your LP's, 8 tracks, and cassettes and create back ups, even mixing albums and multiple albums. But there was a sound quality sacrifice that the audiophiles couldn't stand. This is when Copyright started to show weakness. A simple written rule won't stop a person set on doing what he or she is set on doing.
So now, to feel restricted by only being allowed to create 7 coppies of purchased music, seems a bit like we are reaching for a complaint.
We are in total ownership of our iTunes music. We can back up on an infinate number of hard drives, both internal and external. We can play our iPods on our hip, in the car, on our home systems, our computers (both connected and unconnected to the internet). Yet all I hear is complaints that we can't copy our music to the level of a distribution facility.
I know all this debate is hypathetical, but we are evaluating a new product like the 1000 year old book. It seem a bit odd.......thats all.
I would just like to say to Jeff Mincey:
It's unfortunate that you don't like iTunes or the iPod (the tone in your agressive writing shows that). The good news is you will fetch a very good price on eBay for. Shall I start the bidding at $100
Lighten up, have you ever read the licence agreement for software you downloaded for free...........of course you have iTunes is free.
The Google/Dell Alliance Has Interesting Ramifications For Apple & Microsoft
A Fixed One or a New One? Buying Your Second iPod
Why You Won't Be Seeing a "Headless" Mac
iPod mini Burnout
I Want An Apple Credit Card
Low Market Share Blues? Don't Blame the Marketing Department
Airport Express Falls Short
Airport Express Falls Short
Airport Express Falls Short
Airport Express Falls Short
A $50 Microsoft iPod Killer? Feh!!
Not Good: Jobs Changes The iTunes Rules
Not Good: Jobs Changes The iTunes Rules
Not Good: Jobs Changes The iTunes Rules
Not Good: Jobs Changes The iTunes Rules