iPod dying? It's already dead

There has been much blogorrhea on Tuesday over Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak's offhand comment to the Telegraph that the iPod would go the way of the transistor radio and the Sony Walkman, becoming a cheap and eventually boring commodity product.

iPod? Isn't that the music application for the iPhone?

News flash: it's already there. Sure, Apple will still sell millions of units every quarter, and it might even continue to grow unit sales and revenue for a while. But it's clear from Apple's most recent announcements that the company no longer views the iPod as its main vehicle for innovation--new (old) form factors, colors, and one interesting update are the kind of incremental tweaks you make to a cash cow product line, not the groundbreaking innovations that move markets forward.

Apple passed its mantle of innovation to the first iPhone a year ago, and that's where the action's going to be, from now on--multifunction devices with interesting new interfaces (touch is just the beginning) that act more like tiny computers than single-purpose devices. iPod? That's just another application icon on the iPhone deck.

(And here's something you'll never hear in a presidential debate: I was wrong. Specifically, I was wrong when I suggested that consumers would continue to favor single-function devices and that the iPhone's bet on convergence would sink it. I underestimated the power of the touch screen and Apple's relentless focus on ease of use, which have made the iPhone the first ultraportable computer for mere mortals.)

I appreciate Microsoft's latest Zune innovations, but they needed to be in the product when it launched two years ago. MP3 players are becoming a commodity in which low price overrides new features--especially given how tight consumer spending is likely to be this holiday season. Microsoft isn't into commodities, unless it's got dominant market share, so look for the company to turn its attention to building a more competitive version of Windows Mobile. Zune will live on--as the music playback application for Microsoft's mobile phones.

[FearlessLad]

I think Steve Wozniak, being the outcast of Apple, and the one that has-been, finally found a way to get back at Apple?and he exploited it for being the sore loser that he is. Anyone that challenges Apples continual growth and the profitable direction that it?s leading is a fool. Just visit a mall with an Apple store, you will know then what Apple means to its fans. The Woz is nothing but a talker, exploiting his has-been status that died back in 1987 and he could never rebound after. Why would anyone in their right mind actually make a decision based on such comments by such a loser. I choose the Jobs over the Woz--and Woz, go get a job, man! Stop talking crap about a company you have created. It is the one that gave you a comfortable lifestyle, before you had to blow it away on your stupid investments, on products that you thought are innovative. Look where did that get you!

[daftkey]

"Anyone that challenges Apples continual growth and the profitable direction that it?s leading is a fool." <br /> <br />Funny, there were a lot of large companies that easily had the same kind of following. Some that come to mind include Enron and WorldCom - Whose CEOs labelled detractors as "fools" and "a-holes" for questioning their future outlooks. <br /> <br />Anyone that thinks a company can become so big that it can't fall hasn't been reading the news lately.

[jon.nield]

Woz is one of the few in the world who refuses to drink the Apple Kool-Aid and he should be commended for that. Some people are purely blinded by the "divinity" of Apple with thanks to their fantastic marketing. However, an unbiased look at the competition clearly shows Apple inferiority relative to competition.

[FearlessLad]

My reply to "da ftkey" comment above: I am sorry but I can not find any resemblance between Worldcom or Enron and Apple! Am I missing something here that you, Daftkey, see?? You are comparing apples and oranges here. The failure of Enron and Worldcom is not because people ?detractors? questioned their future outlook, it is because the top management were fraudulently inflating sales and figures, cooking books in their kitchens, Apple is innovating and providing consumers with quality products that not only provide superior architecture in terms of hardware and software, but gives pride in ownership. Ask anyone who owns a Mac how they feel about it, 99.999% they will tell you they love it, I am one of them. However, ask anyone who is using Windows how they like it, then you will surly hear some colorful language flying all over the place. Woz?s stupid comments mean nothing. We all know technology will evolve. Woz?s stupid comments would be equivalent of something he would have said in 1987 ?when he was fired-- ? Oh, I think that the Macintosh SE is a dying breed, and Apple is going down because of it?? Thank God I did not listen to that loser then, and still bought Apple shares.

[compudoc318]

yeah, like the 92% of the world that uses windows hates it......if apple is so great, why such a low market share....??? i love windows, and im in i.t. i even love vista, works just fine, just has bad press. keep on talking about how great a company is that in 20 or so years still has an 8% share and overpriced products. and tell me why if osx is so great that it would come with boot camp??? duh, to have windows do the real work or gaming that a mac cant do...youll never see a pc guy with a need for a mac.

[daftkey]

@FearlessLad: <br /> <br />I'm sorry if I implied that Apple's business practises were similar to Enron or Worldcom - I agree with you the differences are like night and day. Enron and Worldcom partook in some particularly nasty accounting fraud and it cost many of their staunchest defenders a lot of money. <br /> <br />My comment was directed at your attitude that "anyone that challenges Apple's continual growth is a fool." The similarity I was trying to point to was the attitude of their CEOs and Wall Street in general back in the 1990s when they labelled anyone who dared question them "fools." <br /> <br />The only fools are those who DON'T question or challenge these behemoths - there are plenty of examples of behemoths and Wall Street darlings that have fallen - Apple very well can, too.

[logos]

I would never use loser and Woz in the same sentence even if you put sore in front of it!!

[Gromit801]

"yeah, like the 92% of the world that uses windows hates it......if apple is so great, why such a low market share....??? i love windows, and im in i.t. i even love vista, works just fine, just has bad press. keep on talking about how great a company is that in 20 or so years still has an 8% share and overpriced products. and tell me why if osx is so great that it would come with boot camp??? duh, to have windows do the real work or gaming that a mac cant do...youll never see a pc guy with a need for a mac."<br /><br />Do a little history research, and you see why Windows has a larger market share. Quality has NOTHING to do with it. Windows was preinstalled on cheap PC clones, and people buy based on cheap. Geometric progression over the years. And now, it's closer to 85% of the world. A lot of PC's are running Linux instead of Windows, and Apple has been gaining market share as well.<br /><br />We tried Vista in our print and graphic business, and discarded it fairly quickly. None of our equipment would work with it. No drivers, and the equipment manufacturers weren't planning to write drivers either. So we stayed Mac.

[zzguardian]

Oh boy, I think my next few statements aren't gonna be taken very well....<br /><br />Not defending The Woz, but Apple has a track history of abandoning its patrons. From the get go, It unceremoniously dropped the Apple II line of computers despite a very loyal customer base at the time. This is partially understand but their customer service 20 years ago made it very clear. Apple II users were no longer its concern. I see this happening again over and over. The I=Pod is now likely to die off in favour of the I-Touch and I-Phone. I can see the day when Apple will eventually kill off the I-Pod line and simply tell those customers its time to upgrade. Here's a scary thought (and completely theoretical): one day your update of the I-Tunes software will simply say 'upgrade not possible, device not supported'. Then you'll call customer support (good luck there too), and they'll tell you that you can't access the i-tunes store without the latest software. But that's theoretical only. Or is it? Remember one thing, you don't own the software or the device, you lease the rights to use it.

[dotuno]

FearlessLad (and other Apple fanboys), easy with the foaming in the mouth!<br /><br />The article does not say Apple will die (it does praise iPhone, does it not?), just that single-function devices are gradually being phased out. I have ALWAYS believed that ultimately, media devices will just become computers of different form factors. Smartphones have more or less killed PDAs, the iPhone has taken us closer to true handheld computers, this is how we are heading. Yes, there will be an overlap for a while, especially because handheld computers will still cost a fair bit more, but prices will fall, features will match "regular PCs" and single-function devices will in time become limited and obsolete by definition.<br /><br />Media devices will essentially be true PCs of different form factors - desktop, laptop, handheld; handhelds might even threaten laptops as they will be truly mobile, able to be used on-the-go and not only when you have a place to sit. This is where we will be, IMO, 2 decades tops.<br /><br />And when Internet speeds and security advance sufficiently, even mobile PCs might simply connect to the central desktop hub at home or work to access data and programs. Meaning they themselves would not carry the data, but simply be a collection of interface methods - touchscreen, mic, camera, etc. that access data from the central hub. They would then simply be "Personal Interface Devices."<br /><br />Funny, were it not that Apple had already used the name, iPod would have been the PERFECT name for a handheld computer or Personal Interface Device. More than just music, photos, video; a complete media pod.

[t26l]

it seems like you've got it right, Matt...

[magwa999]

Wozniak, is right on the money. Ipod's are just a fad and the fools who buy them, who throw their money away on something to throw away are fools also. This is where the digital age is going, more throw away crap for spoiled baby boomer children. The thing is you can buy one just as good for less than half the money. Having 2000 songs on an ipod is ludicrous and a waste of time and money.

[kelmon]

Well, yes, everything pretty much is a "fad" - it just depends on how long it lasts for. As long as you get benefit from the product that you buy, however, sufficient to justify the price then it is hard to argue that the purchase was foolish.

[daftkey]

"This is where the digital age is going, more throw away crap for spoiled baby boomer children. " <br /> <br />This is one of the reasons why, as much as it will hurt, the current financial crisis is actually needed for a healthy economy in the future. The throw-away mentality (people needing new toys, always) goes hand-in-hand with bad mortgages - people living outside their means. <br /> <br />It can be likened to the result of years of forrest fire prevention when a large forrest fire breaks out. <br /> <br />The good thing to all this, is we will probably see a number of manufacturers come out of this crisis with a better eye to longevity in their products, as consumers start to demand it again (it wasn't long ago that cheap plastic was the exception, and usually attributed to cheap, third-world products)

[GradyPhilpott]

It should be noted that even the youngest boomers are likely to be grandparents, while the older ones are becoming great-grandparents, so I'm not sure if the bulk of the iPod market are the "spoiled" children of baby boomers. <br /> <br />I do know a few boomers who have iPods and maybe even some offspring of boomers, too.

[ballmerisanape]

I still have all of the iPods I have ever purchase.. each having it's place in my life. <br /><br />my third-gen 10 gig is attached to my home media player... original shuffle is for workouts, camping, and travel... my touch is my pda, internet tablet, email... and provides music in my car. When I am done with the touch.. it will stay in the car (or my wife's) or I will find another use for it. <br /><br />Just like our Macs.. they seem to last forever.. and remain functional and relevant (my old blue iMac is now my daughter's and runs OS X fine). I also run 10.5x perfectly on my 12 inch PowerBook (16 mb vram, 1g ram). <br /><br />When I get an iMac or MacbookPro this winter, the powerbook will go upstairs and be used for email/internet/music.

[Lerianis]

Why is it ludicrous and a waste of time and money? Fact is, I can listen to a lot of songs at home, in fact about 600 a day! Now, some of them I stop, because I don't like them, but I still do listen to them. Now, buying them and putting them on an iPod is stupid. I would rather have a streaming player with satellite access that can play songs and any songs I want.

[gsmiller88]

And YET I bet you've owned 10+ PC's running Microsoft Windows, talk about throwing your money away!

[FearlessLad]

Fad??? Pal, a fad does not last 8 years. Just for your information, it is called a ?Trend? not a Fad. In the case of the iPod it is a revolutionary trend. To its credit, everyone who tried to take the lead from Apple, ended up on the clearance shelves of Best Buys, Frys and the likes. Sure you can buy something else for cheaper, few dollars cheaper! But still you will NOT have an iPod. You have something that is called: ?Not an iPod? a ?Wanna-be-iPod.? Just like the Woz, a ?Wanna-be-Jobs.? That?s all talk and no action, a ?Loser Since 1987!?

[Tim_Liao]

Gosh you folks are just a bunch of judgmental lunatics who obviously have no appreciation of what music means to many people's lives. I bet magwa999 would have trouble naming fifty songs amongst the millions created throughout the history of modern music. The iPod, Zune, or a matter a fact any MP3 player is an incredible work of modern technology. You only have to reflect on what it means to love music in the last thirty years. Thirty years ago you had LPs and if you wanted to hear music in the car you were relegated to the 8Track, maybe the cassette if you were lucky. Not to mention what a radical concept it was to listen to music anywhere in the world (note: the Walkman came onto the scene in 1981). When the Walkman came along you could literally have a soundtrack playing for your everyday life, a concept that would be foreign to those who have never had an affinity to music. People added music as incentive for their daily runs, music enhanced hikes in nature, and made traveling all that much tolerable. But obviously all that was limited as you were only able to listen to as much music as you could carry and a few hours of enjoyment that disposal batteries provided. Not to mention some of the minor hassles we now take for granted like the ability to rewind, forward, skip, accessing information, and so on. I could go on with this for hours but if you had a time machine and you were able to go back thirty years and explained to me that in the future we would have GPS, Cell Phones, the Internet, and portable music players that could hold ten thousand songs I would probably be the most amazed with the portable music player. Maybe you have to love music to understand why I'm still in awe of what the iPod did for music.

[grpaul349]

Unless the iphone becomes the size of the nano I will continue to need and use my iPod. I, along with runne

[deus_ex_machina]

The only fools I know of are those who jump every time some new "bleeding edge" gadget is dropped on the market for an outrageous price. What is more ludicrous than people queueing up to get a shiny new buggy iPhone as soon as they first become available. All "early adopters" are volunteering to be "guinea pigs" for every bug and glitch that wasn't solved before a product was shipped. <br /> <br />I have far more than 2,000 songs on my iPod. I have no use for a multi-function gadget that does far too many things poorly. My 80GB classic has far more features than I will ever use. I just want to be able take ALL my music wherever I may go. <br /> <br />The advent of the iPhone was no less flashy and unimpressive then when Jurassic Park, or "3-in-one printers" first came out. I have no desire or need for an iPhone. I personally like having some distinctions between my communications and my entertainment. It keeps things simple. The lines between business and pleasure should be a lot less blurry than they are now becoming. I remain unimpressed by the faddish desire to pack everything into smaller and smaller portable gizmos. Keep it simple stupid.

[bobby_bolan12]

@magwa999 <br /> <br />How is 2000 songs on a music player ludicrous? I have over 2000 songs on mine and I would like more space. It is very convenient to be able to listen to any music I like whenever I like - on the bus, in the car, out for a walk, at work, etc. <br /> <br />While nobody NEEDS an MP3 player, they are not a fad (just the next wave after the walkman, discman, etc.). They are not particularly expensive (my 30GB Zune cost $100). <br /> <br />It is true that consumers are more and more buying semi-disposable products, but that doesn't mean the products themselves (or the features they have) are themselves worthless.

[blsith]

The problem is that there are very basic features that are missing from the iPod, and the locked out status of iTunes means that when other competitors target one they target both.<br /><br />Personally I fight with my iPod all the time - simple things like shuffling a playlist should have been in the product years ago. A real "jukebox mode" like what iTunes has had for years should be simple to implement.

[RenoDavid]

I'm not sure I go along with the comment about things being more disposable. The transistor radio I got in 1964 only lasted about a year. The cheap rim-drive tape recorder I got lasted less that that. The reel-to-reel recorder I got in 1968 only lasted a few years. Yes, these were all fairly cheap products, but my point is that disposable stuff isn't new. Actually, all my iPods are hanging in there pretty well, although they ARE a lot more expensive than the stuff I got when I was a kid.

[3rdalbum]

I think magwa means having 2000 songs on an iPod is ridiculous, because sooner or later it will corrupt its own database and you'll have to load all 2000 songs again.

[tfortorment]

i think he means it's ridiculous to have 2000 songs because no one could ever listen to that many songs in one sitting. i do agree with bobby_bolan12 though. i have an 80GB ipod and want more space. true, i never listen to more than a large handful of songs at any one time, but i love having the convenience of being able to listen to whatever i want. if i had it my way, i'd have my entire music library on an mp3 player (no one's built one yet that can store all my music), and i have hope, seeing the recent developments in solid state drives.

[NPGMBR]

I have no idea what he means but I have a Zune80 and it has 4500 tracks. I don't listen to the popular tracks till I hate them. I'm a big music fan and only buy songs I know I'll never get tired of hearing. My collection is pretty eclectic and includes tracks that date back to the 50's and I don't download any of my music in that crappy MP3 format. <br /> <br />What I think he might be saying is that a lot of people buy large iPods with space they will never use because they don't have large collections and are likely to be fair weather music fans. If thats the case it certainly makes sense that you should buy according to what you actually use, but we are a society of copycats. A lot of us would like to believe that we could never have been cought up in the mortgage mess but the fact of the matter is that people bought ridiculously large and expensive homes just to keep up with their neighbors. The exact same thinking applies to the size and make of portable music players, cell phones, PDAs, PCs, clothing and schools we attend. <br /> <br />People still buy what they don't need because it makes them feel accepted socially and thats not going to change unless we happen to slip into a depression.

[usarioclave]

"Corrupt its own database?" Don't you mean "corrupt its registry?" But it can't - it's doesn't run Windows! Haha!

[hermantf]

Well all I have to say is thank God for fads! The iPod is one of the best entertainment products I've purchased in my whole life.<br /><br /><br />Now to @magwa999....<br /><br />You are obviously not into music. When the iPod first came out, it was the "holy grail" not only for me, but also for many other music lovers. To now be able to carry 120GB worth of music for less than $300.00 on a device that fits in the palm of your hand still blows my mind. That is incredibly cheap for (arguably) the best media player on the market. For comparison, the Sony Budu Kahn cassette walkman that was available in the early '90's and was probably the best walkman ever made was more expensive than any iPod ever. It didn't sound nearly as good (looking back, cassettes really sucked. Dolby B or C anyone?), it was incredibly bulky in comparison when you count having to carry a box of cassettes everywhere, and no where near as elegant as the iPod.<br /><br />"Having 2000 songs on an ipod is ludicrous and a waste of time and money." Maybe for you magwa999, but not for the rest of us.

[NPGMBR]

I agree. I have a large collection too and having the ability to take that entire colleciton with me every where I go is fantastic. No I don't listen to my colleciton in one setting, but I listen to my music in schuffle mode so I always get to hear my music. Having a large music collection would make no sense to a fairweather music listener but to real music fans its the next best thing to the invention of the walkman.

[yelocab]

The Walkman was a fad because CDs arrived and the cassette eventually died out. CDs were just as bulky as cassettes, but they didn't get eaten by the player. The MP3 player/iPod was the next logical step--carry around a ton of music in one small package--plus download podcasts, etc. The iPod succeeded over others because it had a good user interface. I still use my 3+ year old mini--I'm not sure a Walkman would have lasted that long--just due to mechanical failure, breaking or just wearing out.<br />And correct me if I am wrong, but aren't most current radios transistor-based? They are still included in every new car made.

[nouser]

What Woz didn't say was that the infamous Walkman is no longer around because Sony failed to continue to innovate. The walkman isn't around today because the iPod is a better device. I have no doubt that there will someday be a replacement for the iPod but I bet it is Apple that brings it to us. BTW, I carry around a bit under 4,500 tunes with me. I travel all over the US often away from home for months at a time and I have most of my music library with me when I do.

[calculatorwatch]

A lot of people seem to be missing the point. What he obviously meant was that devices made specifically for music playback don't really have anywhere to go from here. Very few people have more than 5000 tracks (probably because that's $5000), so for the mass market, carrying all of your music on one pocket-sized device is about the end of the road and there arent really any more significant advancements to make.<br />The only way to go from here is to eliminate the device and integrate music playback into the devices we already own like our cell phones. And since apple's already doing that, he's not even criticizing them like everyone's saying he is.

[Pishkado]

Several years ago, a high-paid management consultant (in a field totally unrelated to graphic arts or any of the other areas where people tend to put down Macs as "well, they're good for ...) told me he uses a Mac "because my time is too valuable to waste screwing around with Windows." He wasn't bragging, just making an objective statement of fact given his billing rate.<br /><br />Same with iPods. It's not about the player. It's about the total usage experience. It all just works, from the iTunes store on. How much time do you want to spend screwing around with the gadget, versus listening to what you bought it for? How much is your time worth? It doesn't take much of it to justify the iPod's cost.

[Seaspray0]

So this guy is screwing around listening to music on an ipod while billing his customers at some exorbitant billing rate?

[tyoung71]

Cmon..the only difference between a PC and a MAC at this point is the price point. Jobs has dictated and kept Apple in the hands of the elite. Im not saying Windows is perfect, but when I can build a top of the line windows machine for around $1k and a MAC would still cost me ove $2k, that's crazy. <br /> <br />I'd love a MAC, just can't afford one, as most people can't, and won't go into debt to get one. Jobs dropped the ball with that. He should have gone the route of Windows and licensed the Apple OS to anyone that wanted to put it with their hardware and I firmly believe that Apple would be on top at this point. <br /> <br />There was a point, just befor Jobs came back aboard Apple (i so should have snatched up some of the stock when it was cheap just before htey announced his return..lol) but Motorola and a couple of othe companies were making superior computers to the Apple hardware, he came back and stopped the licensing. I think that was a huge mistake. <br /> <br />Same goes for laptops now. <br /> <br />Mac became too avant guarde, and stays that way, for its own good. <br /> <br />If you've got a superior product make it affordable to the masses and they will buy it. People may be a bit tired and frustrated with Windows, but as a whole not enough to shell out the extra money for a MAC, we just can't afford it. <br /> <br />I always wanted an Ipod, but couldn't see spending that kind of money when there are players from Creative, and now other manufacturers that rival the capabilities at a much lower price point and on top of it don't try to dictate which formats I play on it. <br /> <br />The iPod Touch is really tasy looking, but the thing that irks me is the lack of removable memory. That just seems like a given now. Tho i do think it was excellent marketing to basically make an iPhone (without the phone) for people who wanted the toy but didnt want the contract... <br /> <br />anyway..thats my 2 cents...

[ghosford]

Seaspray, take a deep breath. Now, go back and *read* the post you replied to. We'll wait.<br /><br />Oh, yes, he was talking about using a Mac, not an iPod. The author then extended the comparison to iPods. Besides, listening to music while working (alone, as it would be rude to do it while with a customer) doesn't necessarily mean you are "screwing around."

[Mikeatle]

I totally agree with the idea that Macs are worth it because my time is too valuable to waste on Windows-based computers, regardless of the work I do. Now, regarding the iPod, I'm not sold on the iPhone as long as it's tied to ATT. Once it is available for other service providers, then we can have this discussion again. Until then, I'm sticking to my iPod Touch and my Verizon phone. Sorry.

[RenoDavid]

tyoung71, you, obviously, will always be the sort of person who looks around carefully and will make your purchases based on what you perceive as getting "more for your money." And there's nothing wrong with that at all. I'm kind of like that myself sometimes (actually, most of the time, as I'm far from being rich). The trouble is that sometimes you're going to be missing out on some elegance and quality that buying only the best can do. Yes, your Honda will get you there just fine, but not with the same panache that getting there in a BMW will provide. That's just the way it is. Using Apple products is in the one area where I refuse to compromise. It's just not worth it to me.

[bugma302]

But I think the central argument is true. The Apple Fan Boys now have an I-phone so why carry an I-pod around too? <br />The non-fans have a wealth of choice - decent budget machines, video specialist machines, audiophile machines, and so on.<br />The irony is I think - as the mac eats into the ubiquity of the PC market Apple will find there stranglehold on portable audio and smartphones eroding.

[Penguinisto]

I just love it when everyone latches onto the 'smartest guy in the room' syndrome...<br /><br />Lookit, folks - First off, it took nearly 40 years for the 'transistor radio' to die off, when it finally crashed with the "boom-box" fad of the 1980's (some of us are old enough to have bought a few of them). <br /><br />In some ways, it never did die - the transistor radio was the first truly portable music player. The iPod itself can trace its roots back to it. In that context, the iPod ain't dead. Ubiquitous, yes - but certainly not dead. <br /><br />Eventually, yes, something else will take the iPod's place. But that's about as prophetic as saying "OAMG! One day each and every one of you reading this article will die!" Well, yeah, that tends to happen eventually.<br /><br />OTOH, it's not very insightful to go around saying it, now is it?<br /><br />/P

[ghosford]

The transistor radio is dead!?! The "boom-box" fad crashed?!? Hmm, I guess I don't listen to the transistor radio (you know, small form factor with a 9V battery, the analog dial, and an extendable antenna) in my dresser drawer anymore, except when the power goes out. And I do listen to streamed music more than my boom-box, but I still listen to it sometimes (call me old fashioned).<br /><br />But the point of the article--which I agree with--is that the focus of innovation for Apple is the iPhone. You won't see any significant innovations to the iPod line in the future, just tweaks as the product enters the mature phase of its life-cycle. The boom-box is a commodity now--yes, you can still buy them, but they're all relatively cheap and similar. The iPod isn't there yet, but is headed that way as innovation shifts to devices with more functions. <br /><br />There will be a place for the iPod and other music-only devices for many years to come, just like boom-boxes continue to be sold 20+ years after they were the must-have item, but the features will settle out to some common ones among all the competitors, as those who want more advanced features will turn to the iPhone or whatever the current device for innovation is. The more things change, the more they stay the same. :-)

[MaggieRed]

Well let's see as Matt's bi-line points out " analyst with Directions on Microsoft, where he covers Microsoft's consumer products and corporate news" which just about explains the content of his journalism.<br /><br />At least Matt you gave me a chuckle with your last paragraph, dude I just cannot stop laughing, I just have to quote this one "I appreciate Microsoft's latest Zune innovations" ROFL.<br /><br />As one poster pointed out, walk into any Apple store they are packed and they are selling. And people are happy to wait in line. Enough said. <br />Where does CNET pick up these so-called journalist, what did they have a fire sale at Joe's Bar &#38; Grill and College of Journalism?

[thelemurking]

What he means by that last line is that with a Zune, if you owned an older one, you did not need to rush out and buy a new one just so the new software enhancements would work. All the new bells and whistles work on all the Zunes.<br /><br />I have a 60gb video iPod, so if I wanted something cool like Cover Flow I would have to go out and buy a new iPod because they won't add that level of an enhancement to the older iPods... where as Microsoft is going for a universal concept with updates, Apple tends to base theirs solely on each generation. I'm fairly certain the 60gb video iPod (5gen) is capable of doing cover flow and all the other stuff that the new Classic iPods can do, but we won't be seeing that without hacking it or something.<br /><br />Apple loves you disposable people who will buy the next new product even when the one you bought last year works perfectly. <br /><br />Honestly, who needs to buy a new Nano every year just because it comes in a different color?

[Mr. Dee]

Woz is seriously out loop, when you start hearing suggestions of where Apple is heading from him such as iWatch, I know he definitely out of the Infinite Loop. I sense a bit of jealousy in his comments about Apple products recently. I think because he was the first engineering guru at the Company and was there even after Jobs left, and Jobs came back saved the Company brought these new innovations to market without his input he kinda feels left out. If I were in Woz shoes, I would at least be honored to be Jobs friend and supportive of the Company and lucky to get freebies of cool new products before everyone. Sometime we don't know what we got till its gone. I think Jobs ignores his comments anyway and look at him as someone who is responsible for this Company anyway, so the friendship is unconditional and loyal.

[knute6]

I have to differ with the people that say the iPod is too common and has outlived it's usefulness. I am 55 years old and like a lot of my friends had lost my love for music (or so I thought). I bought a 10 gb iPod in like 2003 and rediscovered my love for music. Now I listen to old favorites like "Goin Home" by Ten Years After (A British Band that became famous at Woodstock in '68), John Mellencamp Junior, Billy Idol, U2, the Eurythmics. How could I have turned my back to this music? Iife is good and music makes it that much better. Thanks Steve Jobs !!!!!!

[newmanae]

knute I couldn't have said it better myself. All my cassettes had turned to crap, my albums were scratched and my turntable was long gone, the ipod and digital music saved my musical soul. iTunes sucks though, how could they have built such a great device with such a lousy ui?

[RenoDavid]

John Mellencamp Junior??

[fusillijerry]

...so this article's real purpose is an artful dodge of the author's past faulty predictions? Not only is the iPod dead, Mr Rosoff previously predicted that the iPod would KILL the iPhone. Well, I guess we should call this tech flip-flopping, using obvious reality as a smoke screen. Enjoy your Zune, buddy.

[tecmic]

Mr Woz may have other agendas but his comment holds much truth. As a new customer of Apple (I started with an iPod Touch but have moved on to an 8Gb iPhone 3G) the one thing that frustrates me most is Apple's ridiculous 'lockdown' policy. Nothing is forever in the tech world and the product life of new tech is getting shorter all the time. Just consider the life cycle of some not so old innovations! the CD, the DVD, Cell phones in general, are lucky to last a year! The original concept of PDA's is history and Sat Nav's go through a continuous metamorphasis. <br /> <br />Even the 'wonderful' Apple will not be able to maintain the innovative momentum required to keep the iPhone a top seller. As with every other tech product, a new concept will eventually emerge as technology convergence produces ever more sophisticated and magical devices for us to lust after.

[patrick_i]

Lest you forget or do not know... the iPhone and Touch run off a version of Mac OS X which is the computer desktop OS of Apple. Considering this, however inconvenient, I think it is a good idea to have some sort of lockdown protection on these products to protect itself from damage or corruption. You still have software updates available from Apple to keep your device up to date and many applications to choose from to enhance your device. If you are upset that new versions include hardware upgrades that can't be added to your older model, well all I can say is I can't sue GM to put an airbag in my 30 year old car now can I?

[pugster]

I wouldn't say that ipods are already dead. But with the bad economy and all people would look into buying alternatives like Sansa Clip. One thing that Apple was good at is making up new products like why people would want to ditch their old car for a new one. Not to mention that these $150 ipods are disposable because they are not upgradeable, not even the battery. <br /><br />I would agree that Apple is spending more of the R&#38;D on the ipod touch and ipod phone as there are more potential there as phone applications are a relative untapped market.

[lordzod01]

check your facts befor posting. iPods and iPhones can have replaceable batterys from third party juiced online. All iPods and iPhones are frequently updated on line. New screens are also available. <br /><br />If you don't have the right facts don't bother with stupid comments....

[Infinite_loop]

I fully understand your articles point, but I struggle with the notion that EVERYONE can, or should own a cell phone. What if my 6 year old daughter wants an iPod Touch for christmas? Am I to just buy the iPhone for her instead? Where do I get one without a contract?<br /><br />Or how about my cycling buddies that wear Shuffles when they ride? Are they to stuff an expensive iPhone in their back pocket in the hopes it doesn't get crushed when they inevitably fall off their bikes?<br /><br />Im sure I could sit here all day and come up with scenarios for the need for iPods and not iPhones. Not everyone in this world is a 38 year old white guy with a penchant for technology, or has the funds to buy a multi-year cell phone data plan. There are actually others that find the iPod sufficient for their own unique needs.<br /><br />Im afraid your article expresses a very narrow view of the world.

[daftkey]

I think you missed the point of the article - He's not saying the iPod is going away, he's just saying we're not going to see any major advancements in MP3 players into the future.

[JohnLudlow]

I think people are starting to realise that the iPod isn't the only MP3 brand player out there, and other devices are now offering cool features at a more competitive price. My Archos 605 WiFi, for example, is a good alternative <br /> <br />I doubt the brand will completely die, but I think Apple will be struggling to come up with enough funky new features to maintain that lead. <br /> <br />The competition will catch up in terms of functionality, and will be offering the same stuff at a cheaper price unless Apple lower their prices, at which point they'll become... ordinary. <br /> <br />Of course, if they manage to be the first in with flexible OLED screens or something like that, they might have a chance at buying the brand a little more time...

[Earthlin]

Well, I think you are wrong John. The iPod has been out for 7 years and nobody has catched up yet. The gap has even widened since, market-wise and technologically, between the Apple products and the other MP3 players. It used to be that 7 out of 10 MP3 sold was an iPod. Today it's 8 out of 10. And now there is the iPhone. Apple is not a fixed target but a rapidly moving one.

[Striker007]

Catch up? In terms of functionality Apple catches up in September. Look at mp3 players released before the nano, they had the same (save for iTunes and 3rd party things ofcourse) if not more than the 4th gen nano. And that's why their price is higher (and because they use better audio chips etc.). Apple doesn't need to do this, cause their fans will buy their new product anyway. <br /><br />It's the same with Windows, Vista wasn't an improvement, but it doesn't have to be, people will use vista anyway, in due time.

[scottjoy]

I can't help hearing the Monty Python quote, "I'm not dead yet!"

[professionaladventurer]

Aaaaaand yet, transistor radios are still making people rich. Before the ipod touch (or Iphone) the last innovative ipod was the first. (don't call adding video to a small hand held device innovation, it's not, what it is, is good business). So Appel was stamping license plates and printing their own money from 1998-2007- good for them. Microsoft has been reusing the same old code for ages. Innovation at big business is a freakin' myth.