Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Music Businesses Media Apple

iPod Mini Hits The 'Sweet Spot'? 481

Tooky writes "The BBC is reporting on a survey carried out by Jupiter Research which found that most consumers were only storing about 1000 songs on their portable MP3 players, claiming that ' The finding seems to be borne out by the demand for Apple's Mini iPod'." According to the piece: "Jupiter said digital music players with capacities of 5,000 songs will provide too much space for most people. It added that consumers rate other features as highly as the ability to store all the songs held on their PC."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

iPod Mini Hits The 'Sweet Spot'?

Comments Filter:
  • by andy55 ( 743992 ) * on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:05PM (#8953561) Homepage
    Thought I'd share a data point for what it's worth...

    I ordered my iPod mini about two weeks after the iPods were available (about 6 weeks ago-ish), was told 3-5 weeks delivery, and it arrived at the 5 week point. A friend ordered his last week, and they told him 4-6 weeks.

    Perhaps we should put together some more data points and extrapolate if this has been the trend since the iPod mini release.

    For all the reasons described in the article, the iPod mini exactly fits my preferences--it's sufficiently small, long-loved, well-designed, and spacious. More specifically, for me, the breakthrough was to have a audio player that a capacity beyond ~500 megs that was also suitable for running/jogging--the mini is the first to break that barrier.
    • by Neil Blender ( 555885 ) <neilblender@gmail.com> on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:08PM (#8953621)
      Thought I'd share a data point for what it's worth...

      About the only thing more worthless than simple anecdotal evidence would be attempting to extrapolate trends from data gathered on Slashdot.
      • by andy55 ( 743992 ) * on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:18PM (#8953758) Homepage
        About the only thing more worthless than simple anecdotal evidence would be attempting to extrapolate trends from data gathered on Slashdot.

        Of course, unlike the over-cynical and ever-useless comments that serve even less of a purpose.

        If a dozen people over the span of the last 6 weeks all posted that they had to wait 5 weeks for their mini, then that defintely says something about Apple and the demand. And that, sir, would make you an asshat.
      • by AhBeeDoi ( 686955 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @07:08PM (#8955408)
        I recall years ago speaking to a customer representative of a large long distance telecom provider. Her office was located in Florida and she spoke with a soft Southern drawl. Her name was Charlotte. I remarked to my colleague that half the women from the south are name Charlotte. Coincidentally, my colleague had also finished talking to another customer service representative from another telecom company who was also a daughter of the south. However, her representative's name was not Charlotte. Based on the our sampling, I concluded that my observation was correct.
    • by JLyle ( 267134 )

      I ordered my iPod mini about two weeks after the iPods were available (about 6 weeks ago-ish), was told 3-5 weeks delivery, and it arrived at the 5 week point. A friend ordered his last week, and they told him 4-6 weeks.

      I've read a lot of horror stories about long waits to get an iPod mini, and so I guess we just got lucky. When my wife wanted to get me one of these for my birthday in mid-March, she just went to the local CompUSA and bought one. It sounds as though they had plenty of them on hand (at the

      • by nolife ( 233813 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:32PM (#8953945) Homepage Journal
        Yeah, Compusa.
        I see the following scenario..
        It was $999 with a $300 instant rebate, $300 mail in rebate from CUSA, a $100 mail in rebate from Apple, a $50 bundle rebate, and when purchased with a 5 year contract on a cell phone along with TurboTax and Norton Antivirus, you got a $50 gift card that can be used in the next 3 days on 2 different items in the store.


    • > that was also suitable for running/jogging

      That's the whole reason I haven't bought a portable mp3 yet. RAM-based players don't have enough storage (or cost *way* too much), but HD-based players were too fragile (or also cost too much.) How much do you run? Is the mini holding up well? If it can take an hour-long run without a head crash or an explosion from the salt getting into it, I just may have to grab one.

      • Perfect for running (Score:5, Informative)

        by fisgreen ( 568052 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @05:17PM (#8954461)
        How much do you run? Is the mini holding up well? If it can take an hour-long run without a head crash or an explosion from the salt getting into it, I just may have to grab one.

        I've had my mini for three weeks now. Not, a super hard-core runner, but I average 25-30 miles a week, pace no slower than 7:30. I've found it to be absolutely amazing. The longest run I've used it on is about 45min and had absolutely no problems. Battery life is very good, the interface is absolutely perfect. Recommend buying the neoprene armband--very inobtrusive.

      • >RAM-based players don't have enough storage (or cost *way* too much)

        Actually flash-based players are quite cheap. You can buy a Rio 500 on EBay for about $40. You can quite easily store an hour of music in them (or two with a smart media card). Can you run for more than two hours? If so I'm impressed. Most runners don't run that long, so flash-based players are perfect. They don't skip, have virtually no moving parts, and are small and light.
      • by andy55 ( 743992 ) * on Friday April 23, 2004 @05:48PM (#8954739) Homepage
        How much do you run? Is the mini holding up well?

        I run about once a week for about 60-90 min per run at about a 7 minute mile pace, and i often run shirtless. I just assumed that'd I have to buy the mareware sport suit thing for an added $30, but the clip that comes with it (from Apple) is superb! It's a really tight clip-grip and has a very narrow profile, causing minimal bounce (a huge contrast to a normal iPod in a mareware sportsuit clipped onto your shorts). I slide my mini about 1" downward on the clip, protecting the top from any sweat, etc--a simple solution, but effective.
      • I have a 512MB flash player that is also a usb pen drive. It cost about $160. It is smaller and lighter than an iPod mini and runs for over 12 hours on a single AAA battery. I bought mine here [pcwebshopper.com] but they seem to be out of stock of the 512 MB version right now.

        It isn't fancy but it works, and can jog all day and it will never skip.

    • I ordered an ipod mini a month or two ago. They said it would be 2 weeks, but after 2 weeks they said it would be another 2 weeks, and gave me the opportunity to buy the 15 GB ipod ($50 more usually) for the price of the mini instead. I had just read about the ipod mini headphone problem, so I agreed. It arrived in 2 days.
    • I bought one at the Apple Store a couple weeks after they were released.... They said that silver was by far the most popular color, but it was also the most stocked color, and therefore they only had silver left. I debated whether to buy it there or wait a little while... in hindsight, i'm glad I bought it there... I went in to the Apple Store about a week ago to buy one for a friend (birthday present)... They said they're not getting anymore until July.. and even then they have a waiting list. Just F
    • by rtilghman ( 736281 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:52PM (#8954167)

      "the breakthrough was to have a audio player that a capacity beyond ~500 megs that was also suitable for running/jogging--the mini is the first to break that barrier."

      The Rio Nitrus was the first player to use a 1" drive. It:

      - has a capacity of 1.2gb
      - plays WMA or MP3 files
      - has a battery life double the iPod or the iPod mini (15-16 hours vs. the iPod's 8hr max)
      - doesn't come with a defective headphone jack

      Oh, and you can pick one up immediately at any local electronics store. :)

      Best,
      rt

      • by andy55 ( 743992 ) * on Friday April 23, 2004 @06:01PM (#8954836) Homepage
        Yhe Rio Nitrus was the first player to use a 1" drive.

        Fair enough, but what about the other factors critical witht he iPod? Namely, what's the price, size, and weight of the Nitus? Further, USB is pretty ugly next to firwire when you decide to drop 500 megs of new music onto it 5 minutes before you want to leave for your run. Separately, I owned two rios in my life (Rio 400? and a Rio 500). Both models had shoddy Mac OS support and froze up constantly w/ various mp3s.
    • Perhaps we should put together some more data points and extrapolate if this has been the trend since the iPod mini release.

      Apple has consistently failed to meet ship dates and demand, mostly around the time they moved manufacturing from Ireland to Asia; quality also nose-dived with nearly every model having some sort of quirk or another. Sometimes it's due to manufacturing problems, but usually, it's a simple matter of failing to deliver products on time. In most companies, that gets people fired. At

    • by bonch ( 38532 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @05:02PM (#8954268)
      As someone else pointed out, the concept of "too much hard drive space" is something most of us just don't understand at all. But it illustrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the general user that seperates "us" from "them"--people don't want too many choices. They just want the best and just enough to give them that.

      I thought it might be an interesting viewpoint to consider since we want Linux to be the adopted desktop for new computing, but don't want to give up the endless myriad of choices in browsers, desktops, cd players, etc. To the average user, the idealistic OSS philosophy is something they don't care about. They'll just wonder why they have to install two different desktops to run all the apps, three sound mixers to hear everything, and so forth. We criticize Windows for seemingly providing less choice. I think in the case of the iPod Mini, the public has clearly spoken with regards to their needs. They just want enough to get them by. Unlike you and I who would definitely find ways to fill up that extra space, most users are not like that.
      • I agree with your general observation . I have made my living using and administering computers since 1983, so I know pretty well how to get them to do what I want. Sometimes I like to spend time tweaking and improving them, but mostly I use them as tools.

        I like good tools. That is why I much prefer a product (Like MacOSX) where someone has lavished attention on deciding what should be there, presenting it cleanly, and making sure that it all works seamlessly.

        If they missed something that I need, I can

    • by thoth ( 7907 )
      I evaluated several players before settling on the iPod Mini, so I am in the demographic the article talks about. I have between 12 and 13 GB of music, but found I really only had 3 to 3.5 GB of music I listened to, so the capacity of the mini was perfect.

      Being fashion concious ;) I ordered a gold iPod mini. In all seriousness, it will match my Nokia cell phone and for some reason I think that is cool.

      Anyway, I ordered the mini on 3/22, and the confirmation email said it would take about 3 weeks due to
    • I picked up a blue iPod Mini from one of the Apple Stores in the Los Angeles area about a week or two after it was released. I'm really glad I picked one up so early since they're so hard to come by nowadays.

      And I find that 1,000 songs on the iPod Mini is more than adequate. I have more than that stored on my computer, but am content to rotate content when necessary.

      I broke my iPod Mini about a month ago and the turnaround to get it replaced was really quick. I shipped it out on a Tuesday and received
  • Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:06PM (#8953576)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • by somethinghollow ( 530478 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:14PM (#8953696) Homepage Journal
      When I was debating on which to buy, I had resolved that I theoretically could get the smallest regular iPod available and only sync certain songs. It came to my attention that I don't like every song on every cd that I own. I can still keep them on my HDD, but I don't have to sync them, since I can chose to only sync, say, a smart playlist of ratings above 3. If I have a few songs that I might want to hear, but aren't 3+, I can make a playlist for them and sync it. instead of worrying, I just got a 20gig. That solved all my problems.

      In your case, I'd make a smart playlist that picks the top 5 GB of most plays and add some sort of most recently played filter depending on listening habits incase you listen to tons of songs once (say on random). You could also throw in a rated 3+ to narrow it down. Don't "delete" them... just take advantage of smart playlists.
    • by Elwood P Dowd ( 16933 ) <judgmentalist@gmail.com> on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:15PM (#8953714) Journal
      Set up a few automatic playlists:

      One with all your highly rated songs.
      One with all your unplayed songs, in random order, limited to fit on your iPod.
      One with your least recently played songs, in random order, limited to fit on your ipod.

      Then throw some albums you want to listen to on a fourth playlist.

      Consider the "my rating" to be the "I want to hear this again" marker. If you're listening to a new song, and it's rad and you don't want it to leave your iPod, mark it, and it'll go to your highly rated songs playlist.

      Do the "these playlists only" synch. Now, everytime you synch, you get fresh songs. Just keep those less-listened to songs in iTunes. If someone ever wants to hear them (happens whenever I have a party) it's still on your computer.

      I've got a 40 GB iPod, and I still need to do this, just so I have some way of managing the 25 _days_ of music on my iPod.
      • I have a 5 GB iPod (first generation) and I use smart playlists exclusively. I have:

        - 1 GB of my newest music (so I can listen to the new CD that I just RIPped).
        - 1 GB of my highest rated music.
        - 1 GB of my most played music.
        - 1 GB of randomly selected music (to keep things interesting; if I play it a lot, it lands in the 'most played music' list.)
        - All of my purchased music (if I paid for it, I probably want to be able to listen to it)
        - All of my 'checked' Audible books. (After I finish a book, I uncheck
  • by Nom du Keyboard ( 633989 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:06PM (#8953581)
    most consumers were only storing about 1000 songs on their portable MP3 players

    Hey, there's a limit to how much I can get through this P2P pipe. The university keeps shutting down my Internet connection for filesharing. Give me time!

  • by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:06PM (#8953591)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by afidel ( 530433 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:07PM (#8953593)
    Apple has learned quite a bit about marketing since the days when they let IBM eat their lunch by not persuing the business market. Ever since Jobs returned to the helm Apple seems to be all about a better product for a slightly higher price that is packaged and marketed well. And judging by their financial performance this has been a fairly sucessful track for a company with such a small piece of their primary market.
    • Hit the nail right on the head. The majority of upscale stores on Madison Ave. are money losers. Their presence there are psychological upscale billboards. I'm surprised Apple hasn't opened a store on that upper crust avenue yet. Would do wonders for their image, even if they were selling exquisitely packaged cow turds in a fancy apple box.
    • People scoff at Apple's share in the market, but really it isn't too bad because people seem to compare Apple's share to what isn't Apple's share. They probably should be comparing Apple to Dell or Gateway. Some people even go on to claim that Apple is dying, which isn't quite true as sales appear to be steady, they actually are netting a profit and their liquid assets are quite sizable.

      re: iPod. I think it's not too hard to see why people want one when you compare them to their competitors.
  • Shows to go ya (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SYFer ( 617415 ) <syfer@syf e r . n et> on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:07PM (#8953594) Homepage
    When they were introduced, "hard cores" like me and, I think, a lot of the slashdot "community" (yeah, I know), scoffed.

    It just shows that what we as wireheads look for in a tech product is not always what the average non-geek consumer wants. For me, the concept of "too much hard drive space" is completely foreign and absurd.

    • Re:Shows to go ya (Score:5, Insightful)

      by An Onerous Coward ( 222037 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @05:35PM (#8954634) Homepage
      Proud to say, I got it from the beginning.

      It's not that average consumers are actually afraid of "too much hard drive space." It's just that, once you can fit several hundred songs on the player, it's enough. Other things like price and size become more important than yet another doubling in size of an already capacitous drive.

      It's like the way most guys select girls. If she's "pretty enough" (doesn't matter where on your priority list this one stands, because it's usually the first thing you find out) then you move on to checking out her intelligence specs, then check to see if she has a serviceable sense of humor. One might be willing to upgrade his girlfriend to the deluxe supermodel edition, if the upgrade was totally free. But if the upgrade seriously degrades the performance of the "sense of humor" or "not totally full of herself" features, no right-thinking guy would make the exchange.

      I'm thinking the mini is a better value for me. One thousand songs (fifty hours of music?) is about enough for a cross-country drive. If you drive back, you might have to suffer through repeats. That's an absolutely sick amount of music, and I don't feel a compelling need for more.
  • by LostCluster ( 625375 ) * on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:07PM (#8953609)
    You might have a ton of songs on your PC's HD, but How many tracks do you actually listen to?

    The average radio station might have access to thousands of songs on their premises, but in a typical broadcast day they're only going to use about 40 to 50 of them.

    1000 songs at roughly 3 minutes each is 3,000 minutes. That's 50 hours. We're talking enough music to go two days without having to re-dock to swap songs without having to repeat anything during constant playback. By that point, you'd want to hear your favorite songs again.

    Sure, having more space on your iPod is great if you intend on using it as a data transfer and backup device. However, your average jogger doesn't care about that, and they in fact would rather shave off the 2 ounces and 2.64 square inches off the form factor. Smaller is better sometimes.
    • Yes it's true that you are never going to listen to all 1000 songs in a row, but if they are like me you have multiple play lists.

      Sometimes they are used for even different aspects, I have my "Teach your self Spanish," various music types, and finally I am experimenting using it to store my checklists for flying.

    • You might have a ton of songs on your PC's HD, but How many tracks do you actually listen to?

      $find ~/media/music | mplayer -playlist - -shuffle

      The average radio station might have access to thousands of songs on their premises, but in a typical broadcast day they're only going to use about 40 to 50 of them.

      That's because the average radio station is getting kickbacks for saturating the airwaves with the newest hot track from the latest flash in the can pop star, and if they played a different track of
    • Well, the idea of the original iPod was that yes, you CAN bring every song you have with you whereever you go. So just in case you want to hear Frank Zappa's "Hungry Freaks, Daddy" in the car at noon on the way to lunch, you can just dial it up.

      So it appealed to audiophiles and control freaks.

      The idea of the iPod Mini is that it's a massively portable, durable, attractive device. It will play 1000 of your favorite songs, which is still 83 albums. Probably the equivalent of the average Joe's "CDs I listen to pile."

      So it appeals to "normal" people who want the LOOK of the iPod, the ease of iTunes and of course iTMS without needing the massive capacity.

      Anyway, for S&G I did an ipod playlist of everything I've listened to in the past three months. It's only 1086 songs -- and I listen all day long.
    • by tylerh ( 137246 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @05:52PM (#8954774)
      You might have a ton of songs on your PC's HD, but How many tracks do you actually listen to? The average radio station might have access to thousands of songs on their premises, but in a typical broadcast day they're only going to use about 40 to 50 of them.


      I agree that the iPodmini hits the sweet spot for a lot of people, but your above quote misses the key point:

      *which* 50 songs are you going to want during the day? I have 10 gig iPod and at least once a week I go, "darn, I wish _blank_ was loaded up."

      The really great thing about the iPod is that you have all your music whenever you want it --- not only when you planned to use it. And some of us have a heck of of lot of music... (30 GB and counting, in my case. well-enconded symphonies chew up a lot of space...)
  • by bludstone ( 103539 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:07PM (#8953610)
    By buying a 30$ mp3 cd player and a spool of 100 disks for 20$

    And those of you that complain about skipping. Thats okay, mine doesnt skip, I cushion it by about three hundred dollars IN CASH.

    http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php3?date=2003- 05 -28&res=l
    • by barthrh2 ( 713909 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:19PM (#8953772)
      That's a really good idea! It's great for jogging. Thanks to you, I've just invented an alternative to traditional jogging hand-weights: Imagine a handle, and at either end is "spool" storage for 25 disks. You can then jog along, have 100 CD's at your disposal AND get a great upper body workout.

      Of course, shuffling songs between disks may take a bit of dexterity, but that's just another benefit! Before you know it, you'll be seamlessly mixing tunes as you go!

      Thanks for the tremendous idea. It's amazing how coporate America can create these artificial needs in an attempt to bilk us out of $100's of dollars.
      • by NineNine ( 235196 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:23PM (#8953814)
        I agree. When I'm out jogging for 1083 hours straight (assuming an average of 1 meg/minute, 650 MB/CD), it's great lugging around those extra 100 CD's. Of course, mere mortals that only jog for an hour or two would be perfectly happy with one MP3 CD, but who are we kidding? I need a 5000GB IPOD for my 45 day long workouts!
    • And some of us prefer to choose to own something cool and save our money elsewhere.

      For example, I've saved over three thousand dollars these past four years by doing all of my own automotive repairs and maintenance on my family's three vehicles.

      I feel much more satisfied soaping up after a long session under my wife's Subaru than I did burning MP3 CDs back when I still had my Rio Volt.
  • Hrm, but. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jtnishi ( 610495 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:08PM (#8953615) Homepage
    One would think that if these devices were to get more popular, one could lean toward saving those MP3s in a higher bandwidth setting, such as maybe 320kbps. In that case, averaging 4 minutes per song, 4GB wouldn't probably be enough for 1000 songs. 10-15GB would be more reasonable then. Even with an average bandwidth closer to, say, 200kbps, you're not going to quite get 1000 4-minute songs on your player.

    Style is nice, but I think that thinking in terms of higher bandwidth formats, one needs to think about the larger capacity of the other iPods.

    • Re:Hrm, but. (Score:3, Insightful)

      by dasmegabyte ( 267018 )
      Or maybe joggers and fashion victims don't really care whether using 128 kbit AAC files causes a notable distortion in cymbal sustain and restriction of dynamic range during detailed passages.

      Maybe they just want to toss music on the fucking thing and get on with their day.

      Incidentally, I recently re-ripped all my "archival" VBR MP3s to 160 kbit AAC, because I liked the sound better. It's not as detailed, but AAC distortion is different from MP3 distortion and I think it's significantly less obnoxious.
    • Re:Hrm, but. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Herbmaster ( 1486 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @05:29PM (#8954586)
      a) no matter what encoder you use, MP3 quality plateaus WAY below 320kbps. (nevermind that encoding any MP3 with a constant bitrate is retarded)
      b) while it doesn't improve quality significantly, playing back 320kbps MP3s on your iPod WILL use up the battery almost twice as fast as 160kbps encoded (AAC or MP3) audio, for example. The buffer hasn't gotten any bigger, so the disk has to work twice as hard per hour to keep it full during playback. battery life is way more important to people than the quality difference between 320kbps MP3 and 192kbps MP3.
      • Re:Hrm, but. (Score:3, Interesting)

        by FredFnord ( 635797 )
        > laying back 320kbps MP3s on your iPod WILL use up the battery almost twice as fast

        Depends very heavily on how the caching is done, how much of the load is actually the hard drive, and a number of other factors.

        One could more accurately say that playing back 320 kbps MP3s will not use your battery any more than twice as fast, nor probably any less than ten percent faster.

        Until I have empirical data I'm keeping an open mind.

        -fred
  • Mini (Score:5, Insightful)

    by blackmonday ( 607916 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:09PM (#8953626) Homepage
    The iPod Mini was almost universally laughed at on Slashdot, and we seem to have a bad record of predicting these things (the original iPod announcement comes to mind..."Lame"). Apple does research which they use to develop new products. All we have is our personal preferences and better-than-you attitudes.

    • by David Hume ( 200499 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:27PM (#8953882) Homepage

      The iPod Mini was almost universally laughed at on Slashdot, and we seem to have a bad record of predicting these things (the original iPod announcement comes to mind..."Lame"). Apple does research which they use to develop new products. All we have is our personal preferences and better-than-you attitudes.


      Yes, but our personal preferences and "better-than-you attitudes" could be the basis for a valuable new market research tool. Whenever the consensus on Slashdot is that a new product is "lame," the only proper conclusion is that it is going to be a big hit. If you're lucky enough for the Slashdot consensus to be that your product "sucks," then, Yoo Hoo!, buy your company's stock.

      On the other hand, if the Slashdot crowd praises your product -- particularly if they go on and on and on about its infinate configurability and the fact that there are many ways to accomplish the same task -- you might want to take a second look.

      For example, I just criticized the new WiFi radio as a crippled WiFi laptop [slashdot.org]. So how do I buy the stock?

    • Actually, /. is really terrific for predicting the success of consumer products. Almost any product that gets ripped a new one when it's introduced is going to be a success (iMac, iPod, Windows XP, OS X, Photoshop...). And anyone that gets lots of favorable comments it going to fail miserably as far as mass adoption is concerned most of the time (OggVobis, the Linux-based Zaurus, GIMP, Linux on the desktop, the WiFi internet...). The only one better at being wrong than the /. consent is Taco who's track rec
  • Realistically (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Prince Vegeta SSJ4 ( 718736 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:09PM (#8953630)
    This may not be the case for some people, but it IMO, why would you wan't to store ALL of your songs on the IPOD. It would seem to be easier to store the majority of songs on your computer. Then, transfer what you feel your in the mood for the day or week or whatever.

    It is much easier to organize the songs on the computer, if for no other reason, the sheer size of the screen.

    I would much rather sacrifice some storage capacity for a smaller model

    If you have too many choices (songs ) on your portable device, you may just end up not using (listening to) all of the choices (songs ) anyway. After a point, as the number of choices increases, the ability to make a decision suffers, and the time it takes to make a choice increases.

    • Re:Realistically (Score:3, Interesting)

      by bwy ( 726112 )
      A lot comes down to which technology you want to be owner of record for your music data as well. Do you have one hard drive that contains a digital copy of every song you have? Do you just rip the stuff you really like and leave the rest on the original CDs you bought for years? Do you back everything up to DVD and have that as your permanent storage?

      I know a few folks who have ripped hundreds of their CDs to their hard drive, and with no backup. This seems stupid. Although, so does the 4 weekends t
  • by Capt'n Hector ( 650760 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:11PM (#8953661)
    ...that most people don't have 40 GB of music?

    Then again, I've started re-ripping all my old CDs, this time using 320 kbps mp3s, and these soak up the space big-time. I can imagine using 80 gb easily within the next few months. No, the iPod mini is great for "low" quality rips and downloaded music, and apparently people seem to be satisfied by that. I would too, though and here lies a small problem. I want GREAT sound for my system at home, but when I'm on the run with my iPod and its earbuds, a 128 kbps mp3 is going to sound just about the same as a 320 kbps mp3. This is why I wish iTunes would downsample the mp3s on my computer for use on the iPod.

    • Might I suggest... (Score:4, Informative)

      by Kjella ( 173770 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:43PM (#8954072) Homepage
      Then again, I've started re-ripping all my old CDs, this time using 320 kbps mp3s, and these soak up the space big-time. I can imagine using 80 gb easily within the next few months.

      FLAC + 128kbit aac? Yes, I know this will take up 8-900k/s instead of 320k/s. But if you put a reasonable price on the time spent ripping those CDs you don't want to want to re-rip them often if at all. If you can afford the iPod, you can afford a 250GB drive.

      FLAC is lossless, about half the size of a CD, and you can encode to any format you want in the future. You should never have to rip your CDs again (unless disaster strikes your HDD).

      For your iPod, I would suggest using AAC instead. Better size/quality ratio. Should you ever change your mind and go for a player without AAC support, simply remake from FLACs, shouldn't be worse than a script job.

      Kjella
  • by ptomblin ( 1378 ) <ptomblin@xcski.com> on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:12PM (#8953674) Homepage Journal
    I have a 100Gb of MP3s on my hard drive at home (and the CDs they were ripped from), and so the 20Gb on my 2nd generation iPod requires a lot of reloading. On the other hand, my step-daughter has a 3rd generation 30Gb iPod (which she got for babysitting the children of somebody who works at Apple) with only about 5Gb of songs. And do you think she'd swap iPods? No way! She's *so* selfish.
  • No no no (Score:5, Insightful)

    by geek ( 5680 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:13PM (#8953691)
    Typical thinking in the "here and now". They have 1000 songs now, but what about later? These guys don't think once consumers see how easy it is that their music collection will grow?

    I would not buy a device that holds 1000 songs if I only owned 999. I would buy one that holds thousands because I wouldn't want my device being obsolete in a year or less.

    I own a 15 gig 3g iPod and it's almost full. I'm hardly a power user either, I just collected a shat load of CD's since childhood.
  • by burgburgburg ( 574866 ) <splisken06@@@email...com> on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:14PM (#8953706)
    Few of those questioned had a preference for the format of the music being stored.

    I'll chant that the next time I read another industry pundit complaining about Apple's lack of WMA support (or another /.er complaining about no Ogg Vorbis support).

  • by niko9 ( 315647 ) * on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:16PM (#8953734)
    Improved audio output. I understand the need to provide maximum playing time, but I would appreciate a decent output circuit to make my Etymotic ER-6 headphones shine. As of now, I need something like this [tangentsoft.net] to drive my headphone corectly and make my tunes sound heavenly.

    Yes, I can use a more effecient pair of open ear headphones, but I don't want to be one of those jerks on the express bus where
    eveyone can hear that I'm listening to Led Zeppelin's "Since I've Been Loving You" at moderate to high volumes.

  • "Oh. Right. People don't use all that space on their players so lets release inferior products for the same price! More cash for all!! Hehehe"

    Had it been left up to the tranditional personal stero makers, I think they would have release a HDD based product that could hold 10, 20 CDs max so that people wouldn't abandon CDs. Apple gave people more space than they had ever dreamed of in one little gadget.Because apple didn't have a vested interest in CDs they release a product that essentially made them obselete. Sony for example would NEVER have done this. It would have effected their CD sales.

    I think this will lead to a glut of about 1GB sized iPodlets pushed as an alternative to the admittedly pricy ipod, by companies who, because they're also in the record business, don't really want us using compressed music anyway.

    Begs the question. Will that drive apple out of the music player business? Recall, the mere 4GB mini has sold like hot cakes.

    I expect the Sony HardDiskman to arrive soon..... With over 15 hours!!! of playback!!

    They will of course be useless as portable hard drives. IMO the handiest extra of the ipod.

  • Sound quality (Score:4, Insightful)

    by smallpaul ( 65919 ) <paul @ p r e s c o d . net> on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:24PM (#8953833)
    Why not use the extra space for better sound quality rather than greater number of songs?
    • Re:Sound quality (Score:3, Informative)

      by shish ( 588640 )
      I thought they were using 320kbps AAC (lossless, IIRC) - there's not much quality you can add to that :/

    • Why not use the extra space for better sound quality rather than greater number of songs?

      Yes, obviously more capacity is better at the same price and size.

      I think the point is (despite the usually bad headline/summary) that the typical consumer doesn't care that much about capacity beyond about 1000 songs.

      If a player can hold 1,000 songs, and costs $200 then it will beat a player that can hold 10,000 songs but costs $250.

      I'd bet that if you could shave another $50 off the price by lowering the qu

  • by lotsofno ( 733224 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:28PM (#8953896)
    Cushion your audio portable. [penny-arcade.com]
  • 20G is too small (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Smallest ( 26153 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:35PM (#8953979)
    i'm right at the top end of my 20G iPods capacity, with around 4100 songs. i could easily add another 10G worth of songs from CDs that i already own - if there was room to do it. since i've discovered the joys of Random Shuffle, even 4100 songs seems small - it seems like it's hitting the same album 3 or 4 times a day.

    can't wait till the 100G models come out.
  • by Webmoth ( 75878 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:55PM (#8954200) Homepage
    Saying a portable device has too much space is like saying your bathroom has too much toilet paper, your bank account has too much money, or that your S.O. gives you too much sex.
  • by Raleel ( 30913 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @04:57PM (#8954221)
    why? she wanted a small music player, she was in the market. i could have gotten her one of the dozen 128 meg or 256 meg models, but I got this one

    1) it's small..really small
    2) it's dead easy to use
    3) it "just works", which is a big deal to my wife, despite her CS and Math degree. she hates fiddling with stuff
    4) it came in pink
    5) I got it engraved with a romantic saying for valentine's day

    I cannot tell you how important factors like "pink" and "small" and "easy to use" are to people outside of the 18-25 yr old males.
    • >I cannot tell you how important factors like "pink" and "small" and "easy to use" are to people outside of the 18-25 yr old males.

      Hey, I'm almost 27 and I can still figure this technical stuff out! :q!
      .
      quit
      exit
      bye
      ^X^S
      ^C^C
    • "...I cannot tell you how important factors like "pink" and "small" and "easy to use" are to people outside of the 18-25 yr old males."

      And they say size doesn't matter.
  • by AmericanInKiev ( 453362 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @05:03PM (#8954285) Homepage
    Why is it a PDA is a small computer without a Harddrive, and an Ipod is a small harddrive without a computer?

    Why don't we see a PDA with capacity for 5000 songs, image, movies, audio recordings, or database files?

  • by jfengel ( 409917 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @05:18PM (#8954474) Homepage Journal
    Thing is, I only listen to my portable when I run. That means that there's a lot of ambient noise, which means that good sound quality isn't worth it. So I record things at a really low bit rate (32 kbps for spoken-word files). You can fit a lot of stuff in a little space that way; I can put an 8-hour book on a teeny 128M device.
  • by Belgand ( 14099 ) <belgand@planetfo ... m ['s.c' in gap]> on Friday April 23, 2004 @06:13PM (#8954933) Homepage
    I honestly can't fathom this. Ok, I can understand that maybe they might not see the value of having tons of extra space, but actually frightened by it? Are they afraid that the extra space is going to be used by Apple to rip, encode, and store their soul?

    As for the 1,000 song figure it seems rather odd to me. I'm a college student who doesn't pirate music, I have what I'd consider an average if maybe smallish cd collection along with about a gig or so of stuff on my computer (I don't keep my rips, they just go onto the iPod) and I still have around 2,000 songs. I realize as well that while I may not be cramming my iPod at the moment I'll be glad I have that extra space when I get more cds and don't quickly run out. I have space to grow on this and hopefully it will be able to last much longer as a result.

    People are lazy. As soon as they realize how inconvenient it is to swap songs around they'll be complaining about size and wanting more just like everyone else. At some point those 1,000 songs won't be enough and they'll have a rather strong backlash regardless of how they feel now.
  • by steevo.com ( 312621 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @07:04PM (#8955376)
    ...because it has excellent sound quality, it can host most of my music, and I can take it with me almost anywhere.

    My girlfriend has an iPod Mini because it is pink.

    4 giga-what? Pink.
  • by lysium ( 644252 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @07:44PM (#8955684)
    For those who don't want all of Apple's sugary-sweet spot, I humbly suggest a nutra-sweet spot:

    The iRiver iGP-100 [iriveramerica.com].
    Major Disadvantages: 1.5 gb drive. No firewire.
    Major Advantages: It's slighty larger than a stopwatch. Costs $200, not $250 (before accessories). No Software Interface on either Mac, Windows, or Linux*. FM tuner. Flywheel navigation (just like a Blackberry), excellent GUI. Backlight. Firmware upgradable. Passes the Girlfriend Aesthetics Exam with flying colors.

    For the size and craftsmanship of the device, I firmly believe that this player is the better deal, especially if you already have a full-sized iPod (or equivalent). It is easy to operate within a pocket -- just orient the flywheel, and you can navigate the filesystem with ease. The other buttons fit naturally beneath your fingers when you hold it in your hand. The player does not require any accessories to use fully; my girlfriend can exercise with it clipped on. It also comes with a case. I find the 1.5 gb drive is perfect for a trip's worth of music, or a few weeks of commuting. This is useful if you have a lot of music that is overlooked in your normal music listening, or if you aquire music quickly.

    4 gb for $250 is clearly the better deal. But the....philosophy of design is an invisible modifier to that price, at least in my eyes.

    1. * There is absolutely no need to mention it's ogg support. None whatsoever.

    ===---===

  • anecdote (Score:3, Interesting)

    by tverbeek ( 457094 ) on Friday April 23, 2004 @11:01PM (#8956756) Homepage
    For what it's worth, I bought myself a 10GB iPod for Xmas, just before Apple bumped the "base" iPod to 15GB (at the same price) and introduced the miniPod. While I naturally grumbled about the "lost" 5GB, I've since transferred most of my CD collection to it (the LPs... will have to wait), and I also use it for portable storage of my Photoshop and Flash projects, between school, work, and home... with room to spare. I'm sure I could fill it up if I really wanted to, but y'know... I really don't need to carry that much data around with me. I bought the iPod in part because I could also use it for portable storage of non-audio data; if not, 10GB would definitely be overkill. (Of course I could be an atypical case, because most of the music I have was acquired through royalty-paying channels.)

Beware of Programmers who carry screwdrivers. -- Leonard Brandwein

Working...