Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

iPod's Two-Year Anniversary

Posted by timothy on Sun Nov 30, 2003 01:52 PM
from the non-terrible-twos dept.
Businesses Handhelds Media Music Apple Hardware
the terminal of Geoff Goodfellow writes "Two years ago this month, Apple Computer released a small, sleek-looking device it called the iPod. This Sunday's New York Times Magazine has a long article on it: The Guts of a New Machine."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

iPod's Two-Year Anniversary 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Free registration sucks ;) (Score:5, Informative)

    by Daikiki (227620) * <daikiki.wanadoo@nl> on Sunday November 30 2003, @01:54PM (#7593315) Homepage Journal
    Google it. [google.com]

  • Two-Year Anniversary (Score:5, Funny)

    by smiley2billion (599641) on Sunday November 30 2003, @01:56PM (#7593328) Homepage
    Hey, it's also the Two-Year Anniversary of when I started paying for my iPod, which continues to this day.

  • Initial reaction wasn't favorable (Score:5, Interesting)

    by kajoob (62237) on Sunday November 30 2003, @02:00PM (#7593351)
    I know everybody is going to come on here and praise the ipod, but if I recall correctly [slashdot.org], most slashdotters (even the mac zealots) bashed the ipod when it was launched. Slashdotters not infalliable? That's unpossible! ;-)

    • Re:Initial reaction wasn't favorable (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Skeezix (14602) <jamin@pubcrawler.org> on Sunday November 30 2003, @02:29PM (#7593473) Homepage
      Slashdotters are some of the most negative people on the planet. That's because nearly everyone on /. thinks he is a generalized critic with some profound insight that others need to hear.

    • For the Umpteenth time people. (Score:5, Funny)

      by Malcontent (40834) on Sunday November 30 2003, @02:37PM (#7593516)
      Slashdot is not a person. It is however something akin to a rorschach test.

      • Re:Initial reaction wasn't favorable (Score:5, Informative)

        by Hanji (626246) on Sunday November 30 2003, @02:33PM (#7593495)
        you can't use an Apple with the windows version and vice versa

        Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm fairly certain this is no longer true. You can't use the same iPod on both computers at once (You may even be able to do so, if it's FAT32, but I don't know), but the same iPod will work on either machine, requiring only a reformat to change

        • Re:Initial reaction wasn't favorable (Score:5, Interesting)

          by krb (15012) on Sunday November 30 2003, @04:08PM (#7593937) Homepage
          actually, i use my "windows" ipod on my mac all the time, no reformat necessary.

          to go the other direction you need XPlay or something to enable windows to handle HFS+, but that's just software... easy.
          • I too can back this up.. I have my Windows formatted 3G 20GB iPod configured so that it doesn't sync playlists every time its connected.

            I can take it to my home machine (Windows XP x86) and use copy music to it / organise my lists, and then take it to work and plug it into my Powermac G4 and do the same stuff - both using iTunes, and both work in exactly the same way. It is totally painless. Though I could do with a spare connector cable as I have to carry that around with me to.

          • Re:Initial reaction wasn't favorable (Score:5, Informative)

            by nek (534149) on Sunday November 30 2003, @05:10PM (#7594346)
            You are all very misinformed: As long as you don't set the iPod to "automatically update playlists" (just manually manage songs), you can use it with as many computers as you like. I have plugged my 2nd generation 20GB iPod into at least 25 different Macs and dumped music onto it.
            The story about the "disabled ipod" was a FIRST GENERATION iPod never meant to connect to a Windows machine. Read the story.
            There are many ways to get the music back off the iPod - search versiontracker.com for "PodWorks" for example.
            As far as it being fragile - I chuck mine into backpacks and luggage and not really worry about it. I bought a TAP from CompUSA: $60 full replacement warranty for 2 years... almost time to 'break' my iPod and get a new one for SIXTY bucks.

      • Umm (Score:5, Insightful)

        by mindstrm (20013) on Sunday November 30 2003, @02:58PM (#7593604)
        Taking the music off it is cake.

        Second - it locks itslef ot one instance of itunes. That's because it's behavior is to synchronize with itunes, not just to copy mp3s to it.

        Third, it's flat and sleek..which means it fits in my pocket nicely. nothing jutting out.

        As for "a discman is better".... if you are happy with your discman, and some cdrs, power to you... it makes sense for the reasons you say.

        I travel.. and I don't like to carry a binder full of cds around with me, nor do I like swapping them. All those little things like CD wallets and whatnot add up when you are travelling.

        My ipod fits in a shirt pocket, and has far more tunes on it than your discman.

        Your discman will be stolen just as easy as an ipod.

        That said.. it's a luxury item.. nto a must-have. If you use it the way it's intended, and especially if you already use itunes to sort all your music, it's a pleasant device to use.

          • Re:Umm (Score:4, Insightful)

            by Gumber (17306) on Sunday November 30 2003, @07:02PM (#7594967) Homepage
            Of course, since an iPod is a lot more compact (pocket-sized, even), one might be less likely to leave it out where it could get taken.

  • Congratulations (Score:5, Insightful)

    by gsdali (707124) on Sunday November 30 2003, @02:04PM (#7593367)
    Not least because it's adding a huge amount to Apple's bottom line. Its helped apple through a dodgy period whilst they were moving their users to a world class OS and struggling with a slipping processor roadmap. They need a new killer device soon though I predict that this xmas is going to be the peak in iPod sales so I home January's Macworld (or the next year at least) brings something twice as cool. I'm sure Apple won't disappoint. (Well I hope at the very least).

    • Re:Congratulations ... agreed (Score:5, Interesting)

      by adzoox (615327) * on Sunday November 30 2003, @02:25PM (#7593452) Journal
      I agree, but disagree. While the iPod has definitely added to the bottomline and to the recognition of Apple design and ease of integration, it has yet to actually be the single contributing source to a profitable quarter. In all profitable quarters since the iPod introduction, Apple has always posted a bigger gan that net from iPod sales alone.

      I think Apple's current roadmap and processor line is pretty impressive, especially now that it's backed by someone who actually can produce: IBM.

      I do agree though that it's time for Apple to wow us again. I think it's time for Apple to give us a TIVO iPod with Color LCD. I can't fathom where there's innovation elsewhere that the mass public and not just Apple users want to see...

    • I think it's also kind of a gateway drug... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by MadAnthony02 (626886) on Sunday November 30 2003, @03:27PM (#7593748) Homepage

      I suspect that there is a small group of techies who have bought iPods, and then gone on to buy their first Macs. I bought a Windows iPod and was very impressed by it, and my positive thoughts on it's design helped influence my decision to buy an Apple powerbook 12" a few months later - my first Mac. At least one of my coworkers also bought an iPod and a few months later bought a Mac. So I think the iPod might be introducing Mac design ingenutity to people who otherwise wouldn't have bought Macs.

      • Re:I think it's also kind of a gateway drug... (Score:5, Interesting)

        by generica1 (193760) on Sunday November 30 2003, @04:05PM (#7593919) Homepage
        That's completely true.... I just got a G5 last weekend after owning my iPod for about 4 months. I convinced my boss to buy it for me (we are an all-mac company and I am the I.T. Manager) and traded him my old PC for it (who he is giving to his father-in-law).

        All in all, the iPod i bought really made me salivate for a computer that matched its elegance, logical design and stable, worry-free performance. Bye bye, Windows-flavoured PC... (I love *NIX but I've never had the time or interest to spend days and days configuring my computer to do even simple tasks like recognize and use all of my hardware, thus I've just casually ran Windows at home for years).
  • "No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame." - CmdrTaco

  • Missing Some Points (Score:5, Insightful)

    by repetty (260322) on Sunday November 30 2003, @02:28PM (#7593467) Homepage
    I know that this article was written for people who aren't technical types, maybe folks who first heard of "MP3's" just last year, but the difference between the iPod and the MP3 players that proceeded it are more numerous than suggested.

    Here's a story that makes a point...

    Some Apple employees loaded Mac OS X Server onto one of the early iPods and connected it to a desktop Mac. Then, they booted to it. It ran.

    I hope that all the folks who always seem troll on Apple product, saying that all they do is slap on some pretty exterior, jack up the prices, and market, market, market, will think for a moment and appreciate the depth of this product.

    And I don't even own one.

    --Richard

  • kudos to the ipod (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mantera (685223) on Sunday November 30 2003, @03:44PM (#7593828)


    i guess it's a sign of the immense success of a product when you forget that it was only introduced no more than 2 years ago... once a product feels like it's been there forever and it somewhat doesn't easily occur to you that a while ago it didn't even exist and no body heard of it, that is when it become a part of the popular culture.

    kudos to apple; and also for the fact that 2 years on no one seems to have been able to bring to market a better product.

  • I agree with Moby (Score:5, Interesting)

    by tbmaddux (145207) * on Sunday November 30 2003, @03:50PM (#7593852) Homepage Journal
    From the original article, Moby says:
    "...it's so elegant and logical, it becomes part of your life so quickly that you can't remember what it was like beforehand.''
    Like the subject says, I agree. I've had mine (30 GB) for a year now. My wife got one of the first 5 GB models and is now using a 20 GB model. We have used our iPods on two cross-country drives in the past 18 months... the freedom from the morass of country music that blankets about 75% of the distance between the two coasts is alone worth the iPod's price. When I discovered that play counts on my iPod would be updated to my computer when I synced, I started using only the iPod to listen to music. It connects to my stereo via the line-out on a spare dock. My CDs now just gather dust.

    The iPod competitors so far have lacked the interface and/or small size to be navigable with one hand. It will be interesting to see what Apple comes up with next. Can drive sizes keep going up and be useful? Do we need a 200 GB iPod?

    • Re:I agree with Moby (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Erik K. Veland (574016) on Sunday November 30 2003, @05:10PM (#7594348) Homepage
      Drive sizes will keep being useful the larger they are if you want uncompressed audio. And I think we'll be heading there eventually.

      But already now my 40 GB iPod is an external firewire harddrive that just happens to play music as well.

    • Re:Battery (Score:5, Informative)

      by Have Blue (616) on Sunday November 30 2003, @01:59PM (#7593342) Homepage
      There was no battery problem. A battery dying in 18 months was an extremely rare exception, and Apple charges $100 for a new battery, not $250, and you can get a 3rd party replacement for $50.

      • Re:Battery (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 30 2003, @02:08PM (#7593383)
        There certainly is a customer service problem. They should tell their idiot customer service employee(s) that. I know, all the 1337 geeks on /. know how to search for a replacement at DigiKey, but when someone calls the company up and asks about a battery replacement and their customer service department tells them, "the iPod is worthless, it would be $250+ to fix it, throw it out and buy a new one," there is a major problem with that company's customer service.

    • Ipodsdirtysecret.com has a dirty secret of its own (Score:5, Informative)

      by thefinite (563510) on Sunday November 30 2003, @06:54PM (#7594912)
      Actually, the guys who made the Quicktime video hardly seem interested in the truth of it all. This article [spymac.com] links to an interesting experience someone had with them. They don't seem to care about the truth of the issue, to the point that they are spreading disinformation and know it.

    • Re:And to celebrate ... (Score:5, Informative)

      by aceh0 (646013) on Sunday November 30 2003, @02:00PM (#7593349)
      apple recently dropped the price to 100$ for battery replacement. there are 3rd party replacments that are as cheap as 50$ also.

    • Re:And to celebrate ... (Score:5, Informative)

      by computerme (655703) on Sunday November 30 2003, @02:01PM (#7593359)
      Which i am sure you have been heard by now, is filled with bull...

      Seems like the makers of this "film" have some secrets of their own:
      Dumb kids. [ipodlounge.com]

      Young, stupid and camera owning...a dangerous combination...

          • Re:And to celebrate ... (Score:5, Informative)

            by AftanGustur (7715) on Sunday November 30 2003, @02:23PM (#7593446) Homepage


            Ummm did you click on the link? Have you been brought up to date on this issue? Do you know the whole story?

            Doesn't sound like it since if you did then you would know the "message" as you put it was totally ignorant of the TRUTH.

            I think you should calm down a bit and read the Neistat Brothers Side of the story [macdirectory.com]

            It explains pretty well, that, prior to the video becoming popular, nobody was willing to offer information about the existance of Apple's "99$ Battery replaceent program" , Not even Apple !!

            • Re:And to celebrate ... (Score:5, Informative)

              by computerme (655703) on Sunday November 30 2003, @03:18PM (#7593701)
              I think you should read about what young and dumb kids sometimes SAY and what the DO...

              http://das.doit.wisc.edu/neistatsdirtysecret.txt

              Then tell me they did not produced a one sided piece of biased fluff that they purposely have not corrected.

              from the link:

              I offered to mirror the Neistat brothers' iPod video after their original webhost apparently pulled out, with one condition: that they link to, or otherwise inform users about, Apple's official $99 iPod battery replacement, since the video, as it stands, is incorrect: the iPod's battery is replaceable, and, on top of it, there's an official Apple program for $99.

              They agreed to provide this information, and said they had no problem telling users how to solve the problem. I, in turn, provided webspace and bandwidth for them. The bottom line: after two days of lies and false starts, and milking my institution's generosity by providing almost 100,000 downloads and 0.7 terabytes of data transfer, they NEVER posted any information about how to solve the problem that they promised to post. Their agenda seems clear, and that's sensationalism, melodrama, and attention. The full email exchange is here:

    • Re:And to celebrate ... (Score:5, Informative)

      by ratell (521728) <ratell.mac@com> on Sunday November 30 2003, @02:10PM (#7593396)
      Here's a website [mac.com] with a nice counter to the dirty little secret. Not only has his ipod (and mine) lasted longer, but he has links to Apple's $99 replacement and 3rd party $49 replacement batteries.

    • Re:And to celebrate ... (Score:5, Informative)

      by be-fan (61476) on Sunday November 30 2003, @02:32PM (#7593486)
      This is a secret? Pretty much anyone who did their homework going in knew that before buying. Those that didn't surely found out in time to take advantage of Apple's very liberal replacement policy.

      Anyway, the third-gen iPods have a different battery (the lithium-polymer technology in the original one apparently was not ready for prime time) so the 1.5 year limit thing no longer applies. And they've got a battery replacement service now also.

    • Re:iPod durability (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Fulkkari (603331) on Sunday November 30 2003, @02:11PM (#7593397)

      When iPod harddrive spins up, it's usually in the end of the song. That means that the risk of it spinning up in the middle of a song with you jumping around like crazy is pretty small.

      My iPod has fell a couple of times to the floor while playing, and nothing happened. I heard from my cousin that some Apple salesmen even threw an iPod against a wall... or was it floor to demonstrate it. But if you're unlucky with the harddrive spinning at that time, it's propably not going to take that. Anyways, don't try this at home!

    • The hard disk only spins briefly so fill the 32MB cache. (Or is it 64? Not sure.) After that, music plays from the cache. Even so, I've dropped my iPod while the HD was spinning, and after a brief heart attack, discovered it was still running fine.

      (Phew.)

    • Re:iPod durability (Score:5, Interesting)

      by MKalus (72765) <mkalus AT gmail DOT com> on Sunday November 30 2003, @03:39PM (#7593801) Homepage
      I have a 10Gig iPod now for a year and a half and I use it exztensivly during my runs (up to 2 1/2 hours long). No problems, works fine.

      Occasionally it locks up but that is only very briefly.

      Love it.

      M.

        • Re:iPod durability (Score:5, Informative)

          by O (90420) on Sunday November 30 2003, @02:14PM (#7593416)
          There is a hefty RAM buffer into which data is loaded, and then the disk spins down. This is how the iPod conserves battery life.

    • Don't celebrate too much (Score:4, Informative)

      by Doc Squidly (720087) on Sunday November 30 2003, @02:56PM (#7593590)
      Apple wasn't the first to make hard drive MP3 players. The first one I recall seeing on the market was the Creative Lab's Nomad Jukebox (haven't got an exact date on the very first one), in 2000. It had to be out at least a year before iPod. Apple and everyone else pretty much took that idea and ran with it. iPod is a good device especially when paired with iTunes but, it's not without its limitations, as pointed out in this CNet article , five reasons not to buy an iPod [cnet.com] , already posted on /. Me, I've got a Rio Nitrus [cnet.com], which uses the Cornice Storage Element [corniceco.com] and it's a nice fit between the bulkier hard drive players (like the iPod) and the solid state players that have less storage. If Apple really wants to take the lead they should help Cornice to up their drive capacity (like to 20 Gb) and sell it in a smaller iPod that has a replaceable battery.

        • Re:Don't celebrate too much (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 30 2003, @03:45PM (#7593829)
          you're missing the point, the ipod pretty much defined what a portable mp3 player was supposed to be like.

          the stuff that came before was "proof of concept" .. basically a hard drive (or tiny expensive RAM) and an mpeg decoder.. no firewire, no small size, no good design.

          apple doesn't "copy", they "redefine".

          why do all the new music players look like ipods these days??

      • Re:We should celebrate (Score:5, Insightful)

        by MrAngryForNoReason (711935) on Sunday November 30 2003, @04:54PM (#7594264)
        If you read your own quote you would notice that the parent talked about not evolution or revolution, but innovation.

        The whole thing about the iPod isn't that it is a massive leap forward in technology, its that it is so perfectly refined. The design is so pure, they didn't set out to make the most money, or sell the most players, they set out to make the best player. Thats the innovation, making a product as close to perfect for the consumer, not just churning out a mass market money spinner for the company.

    • Answers (Score:4, Informative)

      by mindstrm (20013) on Sunday November 30 2003, @03:03PM (#7593624)
      It's clear plastic with a white undercoat, like the previous iBooks.
      And it's smooth, you can just wipe it off.

      In short, it doesn't seem to get dirty or grubby.. not like you would think.
      For that matter, neither does my iBook.

    • Re:Marketing geniuses (Score:5, Interesting)

      by hitmark (640295) on Sunday November 30 2003, @03:20PM (#7593717) Journal
      the one thing apple does diffrent then the rest of the it world is that they sellan experience, not a machine, not a os but an experience. in many ways they are closer to disney or macdonalds then ibm and dell...

      this is why they gloss over stuff like hardware specs when they try to sell something and give the gui and user experience har hard beating to make sure its perfect.

      in many ways apple products are perfect for the general user that wants a pc thats as easy to use as your average tv, stereo or video/dvd recorder...

      sure they stuffed a BSD kernel under the hood but that just means that they can scoop the cream of the open source world, hook the power users that was looking at linux or one of the BSD users and still get people to buy theyre propriatary hardware...

      no, give me linux and a joe blow mainboard.

    • Re:Marketing geniuses (Score:5, Insightful)

      by YouHaveSnail (202852) on Sunday November 30 2003, @04:15PM (#7593992)
      I can tell one thing for sure about Apple. They have brilliant marketing

      In recent years, Apple has become much more aware of what customers want. They've always made interesting technology, but they haven't always understood what customers wanted to buy, and they haven't always understood how to present their interesting technology in a way that appeals to customers. Steve Jobs is masterful in both these areas, and we have him to thank in large part for Apple's resurgence.

    • Re:2 iPod flaws that deliver me from temptation (Score:5, Interesting)

      by damiam (409504) on Sunday November 30 2003, @03:42PM (#7593819)
      If the iPod adds a firmware upgrade which allows ogg decoding (I've heard mixed reports on the feasability of this wrt current iPods

      It's definately possible. The iPod Linux [sourceforge.net] project showed that the iPod can decode oggs in 80% realtime under Linux with an unoptimized Tremor decoder. The official firmware presumably has less overhead than Linux, and a little bit of decoder optimization would definately make it fast enough.

    • Re:2 iPod flaws that deliver me from temptation (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Golias (176380) on Sunday November 30 2003, @03:56PM (#7593866)
      1) I would utterly hate it if they switched to AA or AAA batteries. The current battery is one of the best things about the iPod.

      2) It's not Apple's fault that you chose to rip your CD's using a compression format that most of the industry (and most users) has chosen to to adopt. Ogg advocates are starting to sound like Betamax owners from around 1990 or so.

    • And you think that AA or AAA batteries will SAVE you money in the long term, perhaps?

      The iPod has to run a hard drive and power a bunch of other things with batteries, and these things typically take a lot of power to run. So, pretend that it takes 4 AA batteries to run the iPod. Here, it's $4 for a two-pack of AA Energizers, so that's $8 to run your iPod. Since they're not rechargable, it only takes about 10 packs before the cost of buying one of the third party replacement batteries (I'm working in Canadian money here, BTW) is cheaper.

      If you want to buy rechargable batteries, you can buy NiMH batteries with a charger for about $50CDN. These will last at least as long as the built-in battery, but the recharging is somewhat less convenient. Admittedly, the convenience of being able to carry spare batteries just in case can be a match, if you use it that much (and we assume that 4AAs last as long as one charge on the iPod battery).

      I think that it's probably better to have an internal, non-swappable rechargable battery, personally.

      As for Oggs, I used to have everything ripped to ogg, but I've switched to AAC, since I really like iTunes. (I know that there's a plugin to listen to oggs with iTunes, but it's REALLY bad under windows. It works great on my Mac, though). If you're using iTunes, re-ripping your library isn't so bad.

    • nobody cares about Ogg Vorbis (Score:4, Insightful)

      by porky_pig_jr (129948) on Sunday November 30 2003, @04:55PM (#7594270)
      well, at least not even significant minority. As far as quality concerned, Vorbis is mediocre to say the least. There was enough tests done in this respect. Check hydrogenaudio.org for more information. It is also not well supported. Remember how slashdotters rejoiced when there was the announcement that BBC has adopted vorbis as its streaming protocol. I don't remember any news on slashdot when BBC dropped it, primarily because of lack of any decent support.

      AAC is the state of the art compression technology, and it is *standard* part of MPEG4 protocol suite. it is a natural extension and improvement of MP3. Remember my words: you'll see more and more vendors jumping on AAC bandwagon. Ogg Vorbis? Don't expect a lot. may be a few, like Karma.
    • apple is like disney, they go after anyone that looks like they are makeing a similar product.

      Not everyone, just the people who blatantly rip off Apple designs in an attempt to fool consumers. The concept is called "trade dress." [amerilawyer.com]

      Trade dress is why Apple sued eMachines and Future Power over their eOne and ePower iMac knockoffs. Check Google Images for "emachines eone" and "future power epower," and see how similar they are to the original iMac.

      Now look at Samsung's iPod knockoff. [impress.co.jp] Trade dress is also applicable here. It's pretty obvious to me that Samsung started with the iPod design and made what they believed to be enough changes to avoid legal action. You can bet that they would have made it white, if they thought they could get away with it.

      ~Philly

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.