February 23, 2010 RIP iPod

Here’s why I think the introduction of the iPad spells certain doom for the iPod line of products: Apple ‘skates to where the puck is going to be’. Meaning the touch OS is the future of mobile computing, and despite the iPod’s success, future mobile devices from Apple are not going to be running the iPod software.

One reason for this is there’s really no one at Apple championing the iPod anymore. Ever since Tony Fadell stepped down as VP of the iPod Division (remember Fadell took over the job from Jon Rubinstein, who’s now at Palm) we’ve seen very little advancement in the product line. Certainly the evolution of the iPod has slowed over the last 18 or so months.

Perhaps better support for my prediction, though, is Apple’s history of replacing their own successful products with newer or different models, even at the height of their popularity. They did it with the iMac, iPod Mini, original Nano, etc. Apple rarely leaves a product on the market long enough for it to become stale.

There’s also the marketing perspective. Killing the iPod is a genius move. After all, it is one of the most decorated consumer electronic devices of the last decade. What the iPod represents culturally might even outweigh what it represents technologically. Killing it would create a virtual black hole of headlines.

From the consumer’s perspective, I don’t see a compelling reason to keep the iPod around. If presented with the option of either an iPod Classic or Nano model or a touch OS device for the same price, I suspect 19 out of 20 people would select the Touch.

(And before you race to the comment box to remind me that iPods are great for exercising or that your 49TB music collection won’t fit on an iPod Touch, let me just ask one question: what’s stopping Apple from making a ‘Touch Shuffle’, or a higher-capacity/HDD-based version of the Touch? Just because those product don’t exist today doesn’t mean they won’t be introduced in September, in time for the Holiday lineup. Plus, those segments of users are fringe, not median.)

But there’s another reason Apple would want to do this that seems so obvious to me. Doesn’t it make sense for Apple to kill the iPod to force people to upgrade to the touch OS? Think about it. The only iPod able to purchase and download content direct from the iTunes Store is the Touch. The touch OS represents opportunity for continued profit like no other Apple product. Where you might have one or two Macs in a household, it’s not unrealistic to think every member of that same home could own a touch OS device — maybe even two. Business-wise, there’s a lot to be gained from the death of the iPod. Why wouldn’t they kill it? Sentiment?

Really, it’s not that bold to say the iPod’s days are numbered. Even my prediction of 1-3 years seems a bit conservative. Especially if you know how Apple thinks: different.

Comments

A fine point there Mr. Sperte, brief but fine…I won’t be taking any sides for now.

Cesar
February 23, 2010

When the iPod Touch goes to 128GB at @249, then I’ll be inclined to agree with you. Until then, there’s a pretty big market of people with lots of music content that, for some reason, have to keep all of their music with them all of the time. I don’t doubt that it will come, but I’m not sure it will be any time soon.

Jonathan
February 23, 2010

It seems to me that “RIP iPod” isn’t a proper title for this piece. Your argument is that “future mobile devices from Apple are not going to be running the iPod software.” Two devices, iPod Touch and the iPhone, serve the role of iPod and are currently not running the “iPod software”, but rather iPhone OS.

You ask, “what’s stopping Apple from making a ‘Touch Shuffle’, or a higher-capacity/HDD-based version of the Touch?” Let’s not forget that “the Touch” is an iPod.

Joe di Stefano
February 23, 2010

Joe, your point is taken, but I think you’re missing mine. What I’m saying is that I don’t think we’ll see the name ‘iPod’ used for any new products from Apple.

Sean
February 23, 2010

I totally agree. On both the iPhone and the iPad, the moniker iPod is now dedicated to a piece of software, not a device. When the iPad was introduced, my first thought was, “I wonder when they’ll rename the iPod Touch to the iPad Nano?”

As a runner, I selfishly hope that something sticks around in a form-factor smaller than the iPhone/iPod Touch, but I certainly don’t think the 3 non-touch-OS product lines (iPod Classic, iPod Nano, iPod Shuffle) will all survive much longer.

(not to mention the fact that iPod/iPad is easily interchangeable, but the subtle name change allows Apple to redefine the whole space – it’s no longer just about music…)

Grant
February 23, 2010

The storage chip they’ve been using in iPod/iPhone has been doubling in capacity every year since it’s launch. I believe it’s either a Samsunb or Toshiba module. Anyways, they recently announced a 64GB on a chip version, and since iPhone takes 1 and iPod touch takes 2, it’s a fairly safe bet that the new iPhone in June will be a 64GB model and the touch in September will be 128GB.

IF the current Classic is only 120GB, it’s stands a good chance of getting ‘retored’ in favor of the touch. After all, who wants to spin spin spin through a list of songs when you can just point?

Richard
February 23, 2010

*Samsung

*retired

(typed on an iPhone)

Richard
February 23, 2010

Apple has always provided a technology solution to capture every age group and price range. There are many reasons why Apple would keep the iPod. First and foremost, is that they sold 22.7 million iPods in the first quarter of 2009 (compared to 4.4 million iPhones), with comparable sales in each of the remaining three quarters. Second, providing a $49 option reaches a part of the economy at $300+ device never will. The economy is no longer positioned for the middle class to purchase multiple expensive devices for its children. Third, iPhone sales are starting to hockey stick downward as people compare the low cost of iPod to the overall cost of an iPhone with AT&T calling plan and crappy network. Third, parents want the option to keep their children off wireless networks and not have a web browser they can take into private or the ability to use the App Store. Just my perspective.

Bill
February 23, 2010

I have an iPhone and an iPod Nano.
I use the Nano in the car because it lets me make adjustments without looking.
I use the Nano at the gym because it is lighter and less bulky.
For everything else, I use the iPhone.

I think there’s still a need for nanos and shuffles.

Don Pope
February 23, 2010

I agree. While the Classic may be in jeopardy, I doubt Apple would ditch the nano or shuffle lines. The only thing the classic has going fir it is capacity.

The big question is, now that the shuffle has become practically microscopic, and the nano added a video camera, what’s left for those two lines to keep them from languishing? Storage increases do reach a usability plateau on a device like the shuffle. What would be the point of shuffling 64GB of music? :)

Richard
February 23, 2010

I think Apple’s acquisition of Lala could be another indicator that traditional iPods are not long for this world. If Apple shifts iTunes’s focus from desktop syncing to network-based syncing or streaming, iPhone OS devices will have an even greater advantage over click-wheel iPods. It’s conceivable that future non-touch iPods will have integrated Wi-Fi, but that would still leave tens of millions of iPods out in the cold.

Antonio Ono
February 24, 2010

I also still use my iPod nano

online logo design
April 25, 2010

Now since the introduction of the iPad it seems that the iPod still stands. In Belgium the iPad was not the expected success.

Canon
April 28, 2010

Personally I agree the Ipad is a bad move, but there is still a hell of a lot of hype around it and will still get A LOT of sales even if it’s a poor product just because of the strong brand apple is. In regard to the Ipod it will always be the number one MP3 player. What would take its place? in my opinion, nothing.

Web Design Surrey
May 1, 2010

@Sean that right! the name ‘iPod’ used for any new products from Apple

Çocuk oyunları
June 21, 2010

@web
Ipad is great when html 5 is active on every website.

I can not wait for more apple gooddies.

Nieuws
June 26, 2010

The simple fact is that the avaerage ipod user is interested in it as a way to play music. They are not looking for the added capabilities of the touch and other similar devices. It’s simple and it works (really well). This is perhaps the reason that there has been little product development recently. There may not be much else that can be done to improve the existing ipod (at the moment) but I don’t think apple will kill it off. Yes they have done this in the past but the iMac was in a totally different league to the iPod!

I think the iPod is the king of music and will remain so for the long haul!!!

accident claims
July 6, 2010

@web
Ipad is great when html 5 is active on every website.

oyunlar
July 18, 2010

Add a Comment

Textile guide:

*strong/bold*
_emphasis/italics_
bq. blockquote
"link":http://...
Numbered list: #
Unordered list: *