
Historically speaking, media player crazes tend to only last a decade or so, trailing the rise and fall of their formats by a few years. The Walkman had its heyday from the early ’80s to the early ’90s. The Discman was beloved from the early ’90s to the early ’00s. And since 2001, the iPod enjoyed its reign as a juggernaut. But we’re slowly moving out of an era where we hoard thousands and thousands of media files on our own devices. We have the cloud. But for portable devices, that requires mobile internet. iPods can’t give us mobile internet.
The iPod will never regain its status as a mainstream object of lust. We’ve moved on. We all have smarter phones. Storage capacity is less of a concern than ever thanks to the slightly ominous “cloud”. We have our devices loaded up with our favourite streaming video and music services, ready to pipe any song we could possibly want to listen to into our ears at a moment’s notice. Batteries last all day. And how much smaller or thinner do any of these devices need to be? Simply put, there’s no benefit to carrying a second dedicated device around for day-to-day use anymore.
How does the iPod stay alive in the face of obsolescence?
Apple should embrace the niche crowds. There will always be separate, but significant blocs of people who require specialty devices. Instead of making a non-essential device that appeals to everyone, it should make essential devices that will only appeal to some.
People are active. While possible, going out and using your smartphone as a music player while running/snowboarding/planking isn’t optimal. It’s heavy. It could break. It’s not waterproof. It could get lost. The improved Nike+ functionality on the iPod nano was a step in the right direction. But how about a mil-spec iPod nano that’s virtually indestructible? Waterproof, dustproof, shockproof. And maybe toss in a small, quality video camera that can record someone’s extreme exploits.
People like games. Especially kids, who won’t be getting smartphones anytime soon (at least I hope not). Apple has tried to keep its gaming apps as universal as possible, which means it’s shied away from games with intense hardware control requirements. (Consider the lack of true controller peripherals that plug into iPhones and iPod touches. Do you really think nobody‘s pitched Apple on them, or tried to make one that’s Apple-certified? To be less obtuse: People have.) But maybe it should remake the iPod touch as a truer gaming device with some specialty hardware features meant to enhance gameplay. An attachable slideout gamepad. A more beefed up GPU. Create a special section of the app store for games that use the device’s unique capabilities. Put some effort into Game centre. And make it cheap. I bet if Apple really tried, it could create a true Nintendo 3DS killer (granted, that’s not terribly difficult).
People are nerds. Audiophiles bemoan the internal audio components of the iPod. Their FLAC rips fill up their devices in a hurry (what, you think they would be caught dead streaming?). They want the iPod Pro. Cram that thing full of industry-grade components that can make their thousand dollar headphones sing. Give them more flash storage than they know what to do with. Give them advanced EQ capabilities. And price is a non-issue. These are people who will sink a small fortune into their gear for aural pleasure.
And yes, I know that appealing to a niche, high-end crowd isn’t the Apple way at all anymore — just look at what it did do to its pro apps, like Final Cut Pro X. Whether anyone really wants to admit it or not, it’s a new era at Apple.
The iPod has a future if Apple really wants it to have one. It may not be the singular, glamourous social position it once held, but it would hardly exist as a has-been product either. I hope that Apple embraces such an idea, though I suspect the only kind of embrace the iPod’s going to get is the same one that Apple extends to their more seasoned products, like the Mac Pro.



















light487
Thursday, October 6, 2011 at 8:29 AMWhen 3G broadband becomes cheap as chips, then maybe we can start to make the arguements that cloud is the new storage medium.. but until that time, the ability to store ALL of your music and music videos, as well as other videos, photos and other media and documents on your portable device in “offline” mode is still a strong arguement.
However, why would you assume that it is Apple’s responsibility to push ahead into the new decade?? Sony was behind the Walkman in the 80′s and the Discman in the 90′s afterall.. looking at those figures, Sony has been the leader of the portable audio pack for twice as long as Apple..
Ogre
Thursday, October 6, 2011 at 9:48 AMAlso, why would we pay money for music we’re just going to stream from a cloud storage service? Can’t we stream music from the internet without paying for it anyway?
The other problem, other than the price of 3G internet, is the speed, and the network congestion. If everyone starts streaming all their content *everywhere*, we’re going to absolutely need fibre, and to be plugging our devices into it instead of relying on wireless technologies for internet.
The Flash
Thursday, October 6, 2011 at 9:57 AM+1 – also, not to mention to crappy black spots all over the metro area… 3G has been around for a while now but its still not super reliable, even for browsing… How would anyone be able to stream reliablily with an infrastructure that so fickle?
jonny
Thursday, October 6, 2011 at 8:50 AMipods haven’t been innovative for 10 years. It’s just with all the hype, noobs forgot to stop buying them.
Ogre
Thursday, October 6, 2011 at 9:45 AMI think the point about exercise makes sense. I’m considering getting an iPod nano for music when I’m running, and I too, fear breaking my android phone, either by it falling out of my pocket, or bashing my arm against something if it’s in one of those armbands (I’m rather clumsy). The smaller size of the nano makes it a smaller target to hit something to break, and since it clips on, it probably won’t fall. Although, even with the recently announced price decrease, I fear that it’s still too expensive to risk breaking.
Although, I doubt we’ll ever be able to play something like this on a iPod: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/sixtostart/zombies-run-a-running-game-and-audio-adventure-for
TSH
Thursday, October 6, 2011 at 10:17 AMGet an iPod Shuffle or a Sandisk Sansa Clip. Practically indestructible, awesome for running, no need to use iTunes. Shuffle has Apple features such as track-name and a good shuffle algorithm; Clip has a little screen, mSD card slot and FLAC support.
David B
Thursday, October 6, 2011 at 4:31 PMPersonally, I miss the physical buttons on ipods and the like for when I am running, and want to change a tune. Not as much of a issue on your wrist, but trying to tap a touchscreen that is strapped to your arm, whilst running and trying not to trip, is not fun.
I haven’t used one of the newer Nanos, but can someone tell me if they have ANY physical buttons for changing tracks?
TSH
Thursday, October 6, 2011 at 10:20 AMI agree with the article as a whole: with the rise of smartphones generally I’ve observed the majority of people using their phones rather than some other thing for music. But there are particular cases where this is suboptimal and that’s a market that Apple (and others) can exploit.
Ben Zemm
Friday, October 7, 2011 at 12:32 AMI had a Nokia 5510 in 2002, which was basically a 3310 with a QWERTY keyboard and 64MB music player. So phones with music have been around for a decade, just Nokia is not as cool as Apple!
Patrick
Thursday, October 6, 2011 at 10:49 AMI still actively use 2(3) iPods in addition to my iPhone for pure convenience as far as music is concerned. The -1 latest iPod Nano for running etc, the 1G iPod touch that stays pretty much connected to my cars iPod connector (plus the car will only charge devices with the original 30 pin config, so I actually have an uber old Nano that I also interchange with the touch).. plus its way easier to organise music on iPods than an iPhone.. I interchange with my MacBookPro and MacPro all the time and to sync the phone each time is a massive pain in the arse.. not to mention having to have the same music catalogs etc.. though iCloud might solve that.
MotorMouth
Thursday, October 6, 2011 at 11:42 AMWhat I find very sad is how commoditised music has become. Doesn’t anyone get any pleasure from having a proper collection? A PMP only works for me if it can emmulate that experience and iPod has never come close. So that means I can see a huge area for improvement in the current range of devices that would broaden their appeal considerably, without necessarily taking them out of the mainstream.
iTune has always felt like some spreadsheet application to me, not a place I want to go to find music. What Apple needs to do is see how amazingly good the entire end-to-end ecosystem Microsoft built around Zune and do something similar, at least if they want my money. As it stands, when my Zune HD dies, I will almost certainly go back to my Discperson.
tom
Thursday, October 6, 2011 at 3:51 PMuntil a phone contains the 160GB I get in my ipod classic I’m not going to get rid of it. I keep my whole 30,000 song music collection in my car. Makes things so convenient. Also once I have apps and other stuff on my phone I’m going to need a lot more than 160gb to fit my music collection.
Rituparno
Friday, October 7, 2011 at 10:48 PMI agree with the above article and why should one prefer it iPod touch over the still available iPhone 3GS, after reading this one might never – http://liveoncampus.com/wire/show/3114317?utm_source=Blog&utm_medium=Seeding&utm_campaign=Ritu