Goodbye iPod, and Thanks for All the Tunes
wired.com
wired.com
The Windows world at the time was a big mess of nonstandard cabling, messy drivers, sketchy quasi-shareware applications vying for presence on your desktop, while the Apple world was plug-and-play over a high-speed bus that came standard, and the music management experience was top-notch. And while there was some good hardware coming out of Korea to give the iPod a run for its money, the integrated Apple experience was without match.
For Windows, Apple bundled MusicMatch Jukebox at first, but then made iTunes available on Windows, which became their foothold that would later set up the iPhone for success.
By the time Microsoft caught up with WinXP and Windows Media Player, Apple had already stolen the higher end of the market, leaving WMP largely in the domain of cheap flash-based USB sticks that could only fit a subset of your songs. Then everyone pivoted to a DRM-laden storefront, making switching costs high. A later effort to refocus their first-party efforts with Zune resulted in an incompatible DRM ecosystem, and fizzled on the market.
The iPod, in many ways, foreshadowed the Apple tactic that would become famous from the later iPhone: take the state-of-the-art in a particular market, pare it down a bit, endow it with tasteful industrial design, make sure it has a strong, ideally "frustration-free" integrated environment to take part in, give it an upmarket but justifiable price, and market the heck out of it with aspirational brand advertising.
My recollection of the time was that most MP3 players were based on Flash storage rather than HDDs, so I could get about 10 songs onto mine.
Macs didn't really take off as a thing until long after iPods had been mainstream for a while, so I don't think the integration was actually very important compared to the fact that there was a well known HDD-based MP3 player.
I think the first Windows compatible iPod was the game changer. It had a large HDD but was much lighter and smaller than similar HDD-mp3 players at the time (such as the ones above).
Part fashion accessory, part music appliance, part computer, the purpose of the iPod was understood by Apple and poorly understood by their competitors.
Just like how the Walkman wasn't the first portable cassette player, or even technically the best, Sony relentlessly innovated on that form factor making smaller, lighter versions, waterproof ones, and ultimately owned that market. It wasn't until the iPod rolled around that someone displaced that position so completely.
I recall it being very difficult to explain to my peers what I was carrying. Thankfully the nomad looked like a CD player.
(Off topic, but not that much: my sister grabbed her first iPod as a windows user approximately 12 hours after the 3G became available on the shelves here in Italy, mainly because she had been so envious of mine... so anecdotally there was quite a lot of pent-up demand, and they were smart to bottle it up to the point of explosion and then harness it.)
I mean, I had a iPod, but I used 3rd party software to load it since iTunes was mess.
That ipod still works. Every once in a while I charge it and listen to the gentle clicking of its tiny drive.
Sure, at that time, few people had a Mac, but certain demographics had it. And I distinctly recall that people in the office were curious about the iPod, and were impressed with the intuitive UI (with the physical scroll wheel, which was really quite nice - it had inertia and would spin a while when you spun fast).
FireWire, integration, and storage size ("all your music in your pocket") definitely played a role. Basically, if you had an iTunes library, the iPod was a total no-brainer.
Windows XP pre-dates the iPod. Windows Media Player pre-dates the iPod by over ten years.
The whole post feels like you've re-imagined a lot of the history, certainly much of it doesn't align with my experiences and impressions at the time.
Meanwhile Apple had the monstrosity that was/is QuickTime.
The reason iPod was so popular was it's form factor/UI/UX/ease of use and the iTunes Music Store.
It also needed USB to become successful, FireWire held the iPod back from mainstream adoption.
If you bought your computer in a store -- like most people in the US at the time -- instead of building your own, it came bundled with some other product: WMP at least, possibly MusicMatch, RealJukebox (eventually merged back into RealPlayer), which you were likely using. Getting your Nomad or iRiver, a comparable devices to the iPod, to work with that, was not as smooth as the iTunes-iPod combo.
Nope, Apple had had iTunes since 2001, and by the time the iPod came out, I for one had ripped most of my CDs to iTunes and basically used the Mac as the primary music machine.
Even today, iTunes still depends on QuickTime, but given I haven't used Windows in almost ten years or seriously used iTunes in almost 8 years, I couldn't tell you whether that dependency is the old QuickTime 7 API or if Apple ported a subset of the newer QuickTime APIs over I also couldn't really tell you which they use on Macs* anymore either given I prefer to avoid launching iTunes whenever possible.
That said, iTunes up to about version 6 point whatever the last point update was, was genuinely a really great jukebox on Windows. It was easy to use, loaded fast, ran fast and I ran it nearly 24/7 on my old XP machine. iTunes 7 ruined all of that, and my first indication would have been when it took over an hour to complete the install process and the first run was dog slow.
* Apple did deprecate and remove QuickTime 7 from Mac OS X, that said, I wouldn't put it past them to maintain an API in maintenance mode exclusively for their own use, particularly when it comes to maintaining the many-heads of the beast that is iTunes.
Microsoft took about 5 years to catch up, no small part due to USB 2.0
Clearly, the install base of these products significantly contributed to the software people used to manage their portable music players. In May 2003, a Nielsen report put Winamp's install base at 5.5 million, Windows Media Player at 43.1 million, RealNetworks at 26 million, and QuickTime at 13.5 million [4][5].
[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2000/01/10/business/technology-micros... [2] http://www.zdnet.com/article/apple-product-marketing-says-qu... [3] http://www.websiteoptimization.com/bw/0801/ [4] http://www.zdnet.com/article/music-players-market-share-wina... [5] https://www.cnet.com/news/aol-trumpets-new-winamp/
XP was released on 25th octobre 2001. First ipod 2 days before, on 23th october 2001.
I think the OP's point was that, while you could do this stuff on Windows, it wasn't nearly as functional, seamless, or simple as it was with an iPod and iTunes or even MusicMatch (which really, really sucked, at the time).
And the Creative Nomad ZEN Xtra with 60GB was phenomenal for a reasonably sized library.
For software, I recall two options:
MediaMonkey Gold, a media player that synced with ZEN players and could automatically convert media formats.
Notmad Explorer, a software suite from Red Chair Software that allowed for file and playlist management for the ZEN players.
Which of these four things are lucky circumstances and not the product of smart, consumer-thoughtful, hard work on the part of various teams at Apple?
Why is it that Apple has been "lucky" in this way so many times when so many other companies could have won instead?
> Apple had already stolen the higher end of the market
Stolen? I realize this is just a turn of phrase, but I think it does reveal a strong bias that sees a market win by Apple as illegitimate.
That the iPod dominated the industry really shouldn't be a surprise when Sony was producing junk like the NW-E3.
That's a heck of a lot of "lucky circumstances" to call it "lucky circumstances" ;)
I'd say it was a lot of hard work delivering on a (rather novel at the time) idea that may or may not have worked. All that effort paid off in the end. Same goes for iPhone.
These two, at least, aren't it. The iPod only became truly successful once it had a USB connection and a Windows client. Before that point it was a total niche product.
The best thing about the iPod was its usability (the scrolling wheel). Mac integration is pretty irrelevant since almost everyone had a PC back in those days.
I had an iRiver H340 [1] back in those days (~2004 or so). It had decent hardware keys for control, and a whopping 40 GB of space (with a 2.5" HDD). iPods back then had a fraction of that. The iRiver h3x0 could play both MP3 and Ogg Vorbis. The battery would last long enough for commuting back & forth. But it didn't have such a scrolling wheel. Nor did it have any of the DRM garbage. Nor did it receive any of the marketing or hype the iPod had. You could however just download a bunch of MP3 from a.b.mp3.* or whatever and fill your device up. Back in those days, it was even legal to "download" in my country. Or you could use EAC to rip a bunch of your CDs and have it with you on the go in a more portable... "format". Oh, and it had USB OTG. You could also pimp it with unofficial open source firmware, Rockbox [2]
Quoting Cnet's review from 2005: "It's just not as out-of-the-box simple as the iPod. If this all sounds discouraging, just remember: the H340 does so much more than the iPod." and "It's noticeably thick, not to mention heavier than it looks. (In the world of gadgets, a few ounces or fractions of inches make a difference.) The overall look is utilitarian although the color screen does add some style points. We like to call the H340 the "Soviet iPod."" [3]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iriver_H300_series
How is great execution "luck"?
"Caught up"? The steaming pile that Microsoft call Windows Media Player is the sole reason I ever bought an iPod. Synching was barely worthy of the word, getting music on any of the "Plays for Sure" devices was a pain in the ass, random shit just didn't work (I recall making a playlist was damned near impossible), and to put the cherry on top, all of your Plays for Sure surely didn't play after they shut that store down. Please note for the record that I was a Kool-Aid guzzling Microsoft employee at the time. Any sane person would have given up on the first try.
So one day the wife and I headed to the local Apple Store and hooked ourselves up with a couple of Nanos. The lack of friction made long-term customers out of us.
The main competitor for Apple’s iPods was Sony. And the reason why Apple won is the fact that Sony also includes Sony Music, i.e. insisted on DRM. I think that’s why minidiscs didn’t really took off.
I personally use mine for swimming. You can buy waterproofed shuffles such as this one: http://a.co/f64p74y and they work extremely well for swimming. In fact when the shuffle was discontinued I immediately bought another one as backup to my trusty waterproof shuffle that I've used for 3 years.
For swimming, I guess you could use something like this.
https://www.wareable.com/headphones/best-headphones-for-swim...
[1]: I'll qualify that I mean something with a screen and a user interface, because I once had a toaster oven that was pretty great
Or maybe once you cross into the digital divide, does the experience and associated nostalgia perhaps not work the same way?
The iPod is a brand and not a product category. The analog, would be standalone digital portable media players having a retro-comeback, not then iPod itself having one.
> Or maybe once you cross into the digital divide, does the experience and associated nostalgia perhaps not work the same way?
Quite possible; is there any aspect of the experience with iPods or other standalone players that is lost using multifunction digital media devices like smartphones?
Very light-weight and small. People going for a run would strap it to an arm or other convenient location.
Battery life. Having a device with a known, dedicated use (as a psychological difference, rather than a strictly practical one). Handling the most common operations by touch, rather than actually pulling it out to use a clumsy touchscreen.
Also a lower replacement price. Someone might want to steal my expensive smart phone, or it might break and make me sad. If I had a $20 dedicated media player, then there's nothing to worry about.
Most electronics will have toasted batteries over time. Devices without easily replaceable batteries will have a harder re-surgence, even if they deserve one.
But... I listed to a wider variety of music when I could start at an entry point and browse my way in, possibly tripping on a long un-listened album along the way. Now with most search driven music subscription apps, I feel like
1. Browsing functionality is crap. I typically can't go in looking for a genre and find anything I want to listen to.
2. The search feature is a brick wall of need-to-know-what-you-want-to-listen-to.
Also, having the TV on (routed digitally to a DAC / Amp) to listen to music sucks. Most of the streaming apps for TV scream for attention visually, when I want to—surprise—listen to music.
So yeah, a small interface that I can reliably browse music from like an iPod attached to my sound system but could also be taken with me sounds lovely.
Still rocking a 5.5G iPod 30GB, Recently modded it with a 200GB MicroSD and it runs on the Rockbox which is Open Source and doesn't have any limit on the songs or storage that my other iPod Classc 6G 80GB has, thanks to Apple for that limit on the 6G iPod Classics, Rockbox can break that limit, But yeah you always need to boot to OF (Official Firmware) to copy tracks onto the iPod else there will be song skipping etc, Perhaps due to the third party HW chipset in between which is the SD Adapter (this is for every iPod 5G-7G with aftermarket modded HW)
And also yeah the 5.5G iPod (I think there are older iPods with this chip plus the iPhone 2G also had this/the same company's chip and 1st gen iPod Touch as well iirc) DAC chip is from Wolfson Audio which used to be great before the CL (Cirrus Logic) engulfed them & this makes it great fun to listen over my CL chip 6G, forget the phones, Apart from the Wolfson powered Voodoo modded Android phones nothing comes close to that level of detail, fun.
To people who want to mod them head over to the iFlash and get a hold of it, you'll be shocked to see how robust these things are. Plus there can be lot of inter mods that can be done like you can fit a 5.xG chipset into a 6-7G shell and vice versa - the frame can be interchanged+faceplate also goes in hand with the respective frame or need to shave a few bits off the metal frame, along with the backplate, headphone jack/hold switch flex cable plus massive battery upgrade(s) also exists - 2000mAh and up, these all are interchangeable. The Clickwheels, LCD panel aren't)
Technical aspects really aren't what made the iPod successful. Sure, the clickwheel was a really great idea, and it was an overall well-polished product. But other players were good too. Without the marketing, and without the breakthrough pricing of music on the iTunes Music Store (complete with iPod-ecosystem lockin via DRM), it would have gone nowhere.
In some ways the iPhone is a similar story IMO, but I guess that's even more controversial...
When iPods were around everyone referred to any MP3 player as an iPod and most people still say iPad to refer to tablets.
The Apple Watch might one day take that role, but for now it doesn't offer enough storage and its interaction is a bit more difficult due to the small size.
On the other hand, my next phone will probably be the next generation 4 inch iPhone SE with the most storage I can get when Apple introduces it.
I'm really starting to like the idea of a small phone + an iPad over a slightly larger phone that really doesn't enhance usability for me.
To be fair, I tend to stick with the same songs anyway, it makes it easy for me to always know how I'm doing with regards to my run, without having to look at the watch or wait for a mile / km update to come along, since I know when in the playlist I should be when reaching certain parts of my track. (Provided I run the same track, that is, but usually I do.)
There’s a lot of nostalgia involved in these things. They’re not bad devices. They could have gone on selling them for almost forever.
There's also the non Apple branded ones.
[0] https://www.geek.com/apple/ipod-classic-discontinued-because-apple-couldnt-source-parts-anymore-1607952/Wired (I think) sometimes pulls out old stories and puts them on their homepage along with the news, poster might not realized.
Side note, I still have one of those iPod Shuffles around somewhere. Great little device to clip on your running shorts, but it had the weirdest cable. They mapped 4 USB pins onto a TRRS connector and synced it through the headphone jack.
The iTunes reliance was annoying in general, but it seemed even more out of placed with the "USB stick" shuffle.
[1]. Don't know if you could call them apps, as they needed to be rebuilt with the OS (don't remember if they were pluggable modules or you literally had to rebuild the OS if you wanted to write an App, but it came out of the box with a few apps and games, and you could write your own in C. Their API was weaker than Android's, but to me more enjoyable.)
Many people think that way, but I really much prefer to organise my music in iTunes than in the file system. (Even with iTunes, you can always go down to the file system if you want to, but try making a smart playlist in the file system alone...)
(Granted though that iTunes has become way too crowded with functionality now.)
iTunes + filesystem aren't the only two options. At the time, I usually had my library set up in Winamp and XMMS, and iTunes was annoyingly opinionated about what the structure of the library should be. I would've liked the option to use something besides iTunes.
*Do not eat iPod Shuffle
Ugh CNN does this too (along with changing the "updated time" and healines) to look like they have more content than they actually do. No doubt it's smart but really annoying when you realize you've clicked an article thats really old.
I kind of want to go see if it’s in my cupboard still.