Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Is Apple Trying to Take Over iPod Accessories? 193

Posted by ScuttleMonkey
from the signs-point-to-no dept.
An anonymous reader writes "With more and more iPod accessories being released by Apple all the time many users are speculating that Apple is trying to shoulder the after-market iPod companies aside. However, at least one user doesn't see it that way, and thinks that Apple's move may actually help the after-market companies. From the article: 'Even if it wanted to, Apple knows that it couldn't simply make the iPod accessory market participants magically go away. If Apple did try to steal their lunch, all it would succeed in doing would be to drive those companies straight into the arms of the iPod's competitors, most of whom are desperate to see any kind of an accessory market form around their players. And that's the last thing Apple wants to have happen.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Is Apple Trying to Take Over iPod Accessories?

Comments Filter:
  • by guitaristx (791223) on Monday March 06, 2006 @02:45PM (#14860013) Journal
    linky [userfriendly.org]
  • brand strength (Score:5, Insightful)

    by paulthomas (685756) on Monday March 06, 2006 @02:46PM (#14860028) Journal
    To your average iPod buyer, no amount of accessories will make another player as attractive as the iPod.
    • Re:brand strength (Score:3, Insightful)

      by tpgp (48001)
      To your average iPod buyer, no amount of accessories will make another player as attractive as the iPod.

      Nope. Choose either:

      To your average apple fanboy no amount of accessories will make another player as attractive as the iPod

      or

      To your average mp3 buyer, no amount of explanation will make them understand the difference between another player and an iPod

      You see - to your average joe, an mp3 player is an ipod - they no more understand the difference between an ipod and *generic mp3player* then they do the d
      • You may be right that the average public may not be able to tell you that *generic mp3 player* has *generic non-iPod feature (voice recorder, radio, etc.)* but they WILL be able to tell you that it isn't either as good looking or as trendy as the iPod. That's why Apple sells so many of those things, because they know what the average consumer really cares about, and it isn't techie features.
        • But you can get a voice recorder and radio add-ons if you want it. But how many people listen to radio on their iPod? Seriously? I only listen to radio to get traffic reports (AM radio) and some news, and thats only in the car when I don't feel like listening to my iPod music.
      • Re:brand strength (Score:3, Interesting)

        by hunterx11 (778171)
        I can't tell the difference between jeans from Tommy Hilfiger and Old Navy, yet plenty of people buy the former despite the price sometimes being several times as much.
      • You see - to your average joe, an mp3 player is an ipod - they no more understand the difference between an ipod and *generic mp3player* then they do the difference between kleenex and tissues.

        Frankly, that's a load of horsecrap. The average Joe can certainly tell the difference, and knows which company makes it. How many "average joes" did you interview to determine they don't know the difference?

    • Re:brand strength (Score:4, Insightful)

      by rhesuspieces00 (804354) on Monday March 06, 2006 @04:46PM (#14861412) Homepage
      <i>To your average iPod buyer, no amount of accessories will make another player as attractive as the iPod.</i>

      Do you have any basis for this statement at all?

      Customer walks into store.

      Man: "Hi, I would like to buy an MP3 player, a protective case, a dock with build in speakers, and an adapter to use it with my car stereo."

      Sales rep: "Do you see that wall over there? Those are iPod accessories. You can get cases ranging from $10 to $500 in plastic, silicon, or leather in any of 800 million colors from companies ranging from Nike to Gucci. There are suitable speaker systems and car adapters from a plethora of manufacturers in virtually any price range."

      Customer: "What if I don't want an iPod."

      Rep: "Oh, hmm... Well, in that case you could buy this Rio and keep it in a sock, and if you're handy with a soldering iron, maybe you could hack one of the iPod accessories to fulfill your other needs."
      • Re:brand strength (Score:2, Insightful)

        by hey! (33014)
        Well, in that case you could buy this Rio and keep it in a sock, and if you're handy with a soldering iron,

        And that, my friend, is Apple's secret in a nutshell. What you need to go through to get your whole music buying and playing experience to match the iTunes Store/iTunes/iPod combo function for function doesn't strike the average person as all that different from soldering connectors and milling cases. After I bought a mp3 player, which as an player is pretty good, I tried out their software and it wa
      • Do you have any basis for this statement at all?

        For what little it's worth, I'm that sucker. I feel dirty as hell for it but I'm also honest enough to admit it's true.

        The iPod just [got] it right.

        Having messed with various alternatives, I tried the old mono version. Rather than clunky jog switches and too many buttons, that touch wheel was the perfect way to navigate. Rather than present me with a million config options (and, I'll admit, I'm usually a total whore for them) it gave me a few way out of the wa
        • If units cost $29 and you can sell 1,000 at $40, or 10,000 at $30, which is the right choice?

          Sell 10,000 at $30 with a $1 profit and you can make $10,000 and pat yourself on the back for selling more than your competitors.

          Sell 1,000 at $40 with a $11 profit and you can make $11,000. Sure, you have less customers but you made more money.

          My guess is Apple has such a massive market with the core iPods that they're happy to run the numbers that way - sell less overall but at an outrageous profit and they still
  • omgwtfbbq (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Soviet Assassin (815206) <sovietassassin AT gmail DOT com> on Monday March 06, 2006 @02:47PM (#14860036) Homepage
    OK, so apple created the ipod, they can create accessories if they want

    If other companies are too slow to release new ipod accessories and apple beats them to it, well thats just too freakin bad for those other companies now isnt it?

    Dont blame apple for keeping on top of the game, blame those smaller companies for slacking.

    • Re:omgwtfbbq (Score:2, Informative)

      by wo1verin3 (473094)
      I'm not really a big fan of the 10% royalty fee [macnn.com] however for accessories which use the universal docking connector.
    • Yes, they can create accessories if they want. But not without receiving the wrath of Apple haters seeking to spread some FUD. The only reason they did the iPod HiFi is because it fills a vacuum in the current offerings.

      And a $99 iPod case? LOOOOL I'm sure the iPod case guys are shitting their pants now. OMG Nobody will want to buy our $35 case now. I actually interpret the pricing as a deliberate attempt by Apple to not offend or harm the case vendors, while still providing a solution for the oddball
      • The only reason they did the iPod HiFi is because it fills a vacuum in the current offerings.

        This is a joke, right? Mod funny? Because there are [bose.com] no [hammacher.com] end [designtechnica.com] to [alteclansing.com] iPod [logitech.com] speaker [klipsch.com] accessories [klipsch.com]. None [tivoliaudio.com].

        • Re:omgwtfbbq (Score:3, Insightful)

          by coolgeek (140561)
          Which one of your specified solutions is battery powered with a subwoofer, AND encased in resin so the subwoofer doesn't rattle the case? Exactly none.
    • Re:omgwtfbbq (Score:3, Insightful)

      OK, so apple created the ipod, they can create accessories if they want If other companies are too slow to release new ipod accessories and apple beats them to it, well thats just too freakin bad for those other companies now isnt it?

      Um, not when they have a near monopoly. Let's change that to "MS created Windows, they can create the programs for it if they want."

      Still agree with that statement? Didn't think so. And I'm not sure where you're going wieh the speed argument. Apple isn't "beating" anyon

      • I don't like MS, but in retrospect the monopoly case was kind of B.S. wasn't it?

        I mean, they were being charged primarily for bundling a browser with their OS. It's 8 years later, can you find an OS without at least one built-in browser?

        Microsoft had some bad business practices, but it never was a monopoly. Their customers and developers were always totally free to move to another platform. Microsoft simply made sure there were compelling - but never overwhelming - reasons to stay.

        It's very different fro
      • Actually, I *do* still agree with that statement.

        Yep, Microsoft has a monopoly with Windows, and yes, they can, in fact, make programs for it.

        Now, if you changed the situation so that it bore no resemblance what-so-ever to what is actually going on - if you said "Microsoft has a monopoly with Windows, and they are the ONLY ones who can make programs for it" I'd disagree.

        Fortunately, Apple isn't attempting to be the ONLY ones who can make accessories for the iPod. They're just offering another option. The ON
    • Re:omgwtfbbq (Score:2, Insightful)

      by noisyfont (919296)
      Sure, but this overlooks a simple fact: since the ipod shuffle, apple has started releasing ipod accessories at the same time as the ipod itself. In other words, this isn't a levelled field where competition push towards better products with faster release. Apple could certainly take advantage as the designer of the ipod to drive other cie's out of the ipod accessories business. They could try to change the ipod specifications to rapidly for third parties to keep up, while their products would always word f
    • If other companies are too slow to release new ipod accessories and apple beats them to it, well thats just too freakin bad for those other companies now isnt it?

      That is an "if" that isn't satisfied here. Has Apple beat others to the accessories game? Apple was generally late to make accessories, and sometimes half-assed too, like the $99 leather case and the iPod socks. Anyways, I think this whole article is irrelevant. There is plenty of room in the market for accessories, and thankfully a lot of them
    • Maybe thats what apple is trying to do; force the other companies to R&D even more accessories for the ipod.

      Get some profits from an existing market without any heavy R&D, while at the same time forcing your new competitors to help sell your other products.
    • Yes.....and I wish Apple would move on at least one item.....a Microphone for the 5th gen iPod. Griffin made the iTalk. Apple got rid of the connector they used. 5th Gen iPod can still record audio. Someone else (not Griffin) has a Mik ein the works, but I have not seen it yet. It also costs 79 bucks...more then the iTalk was orignally I think. Anyway this Mic just now became available. I wish there were more mike options now but this mic from Xtreme Mac is the only one I know of.
  • Uh... Yea! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 06, 2006 @02:47PM (#14860039)
    What kind of stupid question is that? Of course they want to own the market that sells $1 leather sleeves for $30-$100! Why should some Chinese company profit with $100 iHomes when Apple can profit with $150 iHomes.
  • by w.p.richardson (218394) on Monday March 06, 2006 @02:47PM (#14860048) Homepage
    Incredibly overpriced stuff = maximal profits!

    Believe it or not, a company exists to make money. With the cachet of the Apple brand already driving the sales of the ipod, why not increase the booty a bit by getting in on the extras?

    • Incredibly overpriced stuff = maximal profits!

      By that logic, maybe Apple should sell their already ridiculously priced iPod case for $199 to maximize profits. There is the small matter of pricing your accessories such that people will actually buy them. The only people stupider than Apple for trying to sell a case that cost 1/3 of what the iPod itself does, are the people that actually buy it.

      • In general, I agree (this is a fundamental tenet of economics). However, it's really about the branding in this specific case. The people who are buying ipods are trendy hipsters. Your run of the mill trendy hipster isn't going to want to be seen with a bo-bo case covering their premium priced ipod, so they will pay for the brand.

        The core of fanatics here don't really pay attention to the prices, so long as the brand is there. If it has the logo, then it sells. It's the same principle as designer je

        • I see what you're saying, but the iPod is way past the point of trendy and into the mainstream. In Q4 2005, Apple sold something like 1 iPod *per second*. Hell, I have a 4th gen 20GB model myself. I would expect Apple to offer accessories that, while certainly not cheap, would appeal to as wide a range of iPod users as possible. A $99 leather slipcase that doesn't even offer access to the iPod's controls doesn't come close.
        • by Fahrenheit 450 (765492) on Monday March 06, 2006 @03:51PM (#14860771)
          The people who are buying ipods are trendy hipsters.

          Except when they're not...
          • Sometimes they're people who use Apples as their primary computer (or at least their primary computer for storing/playing mp3s[1]). I've yet to see an mp3 player other than iPod who's interface with the Mac could be described as much beyond "pathetic".[2]
          • Sometimes they're people who reviewed their needs and found an iPod was the best fit for them. A good example of this would be me. I found that a Shuffle suited my needs better than any other player on the market at the time. Now, it may be a Nano, or something different -- then it wasn't.
          • Sometime's they're people who think mp3 player=iPod -- they aren't even aware (or are only barely aware) that other companies make mp3 players. A good example of this would be my mother -- of course she called me before buying one and I sent her my old MuVo that was lying on the shelf collecting dust. Of course, she doesn't use that player anyway, as the human interface pretty much sucks for someone who is not overly familiar with their computer. She would actually be much better served by picking up an iPod which integrates seamlessly with iTunes. Note. This is a potentially huge group -- likely far larger than the "trendy hipster" demographic.
          • Sometimes they're people who find the interface on the iPod to be much better than that of the competition. E.g. navigation on my MuVo pretty much sucked ass (though it was better than the shuffle in some regards). And they find that to be much more important to them than the features that the iPod doesn't have. And of course there is a huge class of people who don't want all those other features -- believe it or not most of the world could care less about things like gapless playback, ogg support, or voice memos.
          • And as always, there are the brand jockeys and trendy hipsters. But these people exist for every product, and pretty much every brand...


          But hey, I get that it's easier to toss off a dismissive generalization than it is to actually think about something.

          [1] I use mp3 throughout to refer to a whole swath of digital audio formats, as I'm too lazy to type everything out.
          [2] Of course I stopped looking after buying my player last year. Thing may have changed, but I doubt it...
          • Except when they're not...

            Apple's advertising is tightly coupled to Apple's sales. Apple begins an ad blitz for the iPod that has essentially no content but plenty of playing off of hipness, Apple sells tons of the things.

            So while I'm sure that there are people who went out and made a carefully reasoned decision to get the best product, it isn't much of a stretch to say that the bulk of iPod owners purchased the product because it had a hip image.

            It's not as if the iPod is the only product for which this h
            • Apple begins an ad blitz for the iPod that has essentially no content but plenty of playing off of hipness, Apple sells tons of the things.

              So, why did it sell so well before Apple did any significant advertising of it?

              it isn't much of a stretch to say that the bulk of iPod owners purchased the product because it had a hip image.

              Actually, it is. People don't buy music players just to be hip. They buy them to ... you know ... play music. I think all this "iPod only sells because it is hip" is either just s

            • While it's true that the iPod has a much hipper brand image than the other MP3 players, I think it's more accurate to say that the iPod *has* a brand image, whereas other players have almost no image whatsoever. How many other MP3/Ogg players can you name off the top of your head? I'm a geek, but I couldn't think of any offhand other than the Nomad, and that only because of Taco's infamous "No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame." comment about the iPod.

              When was the last time you saw Nomad, iRiver, Arch
  • Yes... (Score:5, Funny)

    by taskforce (866056) on Monday March 06, 2006 @02:48PM (#14860052) Homepage
    owever, at least one user doesn't see it that way, and thinks that Apple's move may actually help the after-market companies.

    That's right... You guys are misunderstanding this. Apple are saints. They're only trying to help other companies by releasing competing products!

    • You guys are misunderstanding this. Apple are saints. They're only trying to help other companies by releasing competing products!

      Sarcasm aside for a minute: Didn't we go through all of this when Apple included Dashboard in OS X 10.4, basically killing Konfabulator on OS X? Or when Apple started selling Final Cut Pro and Apeture? Or GarageBand, Pages and Keynote... you get the idea.

      Apple has helped encourage a burgeoning accessories market with the iPod, and just because they're playing the game themselves
    • Wow! So the "Switchers" campaign did have some success!
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 06, 2006 @02:48PM (#14860056)

    Is Apple Trying to Take Over iPod Accessories?

    You mean, has Apple realized that people are willing to pay obscene amounts of money on cheap accessories for the gadget of the decade, and would Apple like a cut of that delicious, delicious profit by making some of those cheap accessories too? I believe the answer is "yes".

    Next up on Slashdot: Is Microsoft trying to compete eith Open Source?

  • by TheWorkz (866187) on Monday March 06, 2006 @02:49PM (#14860060)
    I dont feel that there is any issue with Apple releasing their accessories. In fact, the "Apple" Branded accessories I have purchased for the NANO are much better quality than third parties. An example is the armband which is a leather that feels much softer and gentler on the skin. Third party accessories for the same item are half the price, but normally elastic and plastic.

    It all comes down to quality of product, and I would much rather have something confortable and that lasts longer and looks nicer for a little more..

    One exception is the new itrip nano.. that thing rocks.
    • You hit the nail on the head. There are a lot of products out there for the iPods. Not every product is going to be of reasonable quality but, due to the default markup, they will all be quite expensive.

      So how do you find a good product. Certainly an Apple branded product will be a good risk. It will probably be of reasonable quality, and not neccesarily out of line on price. For instance, a $100 Apple case might compare favorable with a $215 Prada case.

      Now, with me, I have my favorite companies.

    • Of course there are crappy 3rd party products. There are also vastly superior 3rd party products sold to supplement the stuff that Apple puts out.

      You can also lose out by buying Apple. A $99 case for an Ipod? Does is massage your ass when you wear it? A $30 armband for the shuffle that only cost $2 to make?

      "It all comes down to quality of product, and I would much rather have something confortable and that lasts longer and looks nicer for a little more.. "

      Again, don't buy shitty 3rd party products.
  • Not quite (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Red Flayer (890720) on Monday March 06, 2006 @02:50PM (#14860078) Journal
    "If Apple did try to steal their lunch, all it would succeed in doing would be to drive those companies straight into the arms of the iPod's competitors, most of whom are desperate to see any kind of an accessory market form around their players. "

    I think the summary has it backwards. The accessory market won't develop unless the product has good marketshare already. If Apple drives the iPod accessory companies to make accessories for the iPod's competitors, it will in effect drive them out of business.

    Look at it this way: if there was good profit to be made making accessories for other music players, there would be companies meeting that demand already.
  • They're trying to better define the market. They want to put their accessories at the very top end of the market, and shake everyone down from there.

    It's like getting your key blanks from the dealer rather than at the corner store. They don't want to take away the market, but they certainly do want to own the 75% margin end of it.
  • I guess Apple will just have to boil the frog, then.

    Elbow out the accessory companies one company or accessory at a time, until they lose the critical mass they need to stay in the business. And do it slowly so that won't mount a unified reponse against Apple, such as a multi-complainant antitrust suit.
  • by DigiShaman (671371) on Monday March 06, 2006 @02:56PM (#14860138) Homepage
    If you thought those were expensive, check out what Coach [coach.com] has to offer!
    • An iPod case from Coach is not just a cover, it's a fashion accessory. They are a company which mostly sells $300+ purses.

      Note that a purse does exactly the same job as a paper grocery bag under most circumstances. From a functional point of view, it's just a bag with a handle.

      Women buy expensive Coach bags (and even more expensive ones from other makers) because what a woman carries is considered part of her outfit. She doesn't carry a purse; she wears it.

      From the photos I've seen, the $100 iPod cover f
    • I understand the cheese [coachfarm.com] is pretty good though.
    • Re:Coach (Score:3, Informative)

      by blackmonday (607916)
      I was about to mod you up, but I clicked on the link and realized that Apple's leather case is MORE EXPENSIVE than those sold by Coach. I love Apple's products, and dammit they have a right to sell anything they want, but the leather case does seem to be a bit of a stretch...

  • Raising the bar (Score:2, Interesting)

    by woozlewuzzle (532172)
    It may be a case of Apple simply not being impressed with the 3rd party products currently offered. If quality accessories will help sell your product, and the after market isn't releasing high enough quality, Apple may well want to 'show them how it is done'. Basically Apple spends its marketing and development dollars to prove that a quality accessory can make money and that should encourage the after market companies to improve their wares.

    Or maybe Steve is really on one of his kicks to control everythin
  • by hihihihi (940800) on Monday March 06, 2006 @03:01PM (#14860179)
    if I remember correctly, many decades back Harley Devidson motorbikes did the same thing by creating the black fashionable leather garments for its fans, as they already had a *cult* following, this just helped them in strengthening it further.

    i think apple is also following the same footsteps..
  • by Turn-X Alphonse (789240) on Monday March 06, 2006 @03:08PM (#14860257) Journal
    Is it anti Apple week? Seems to me the news outlets have been overhyping Apple and when Apple didn't live up to it (and never claimed to do so), they decided they should attack Apple so they look better.

    I mean I don't hear anyone going "Sony are releasing PSP extras! That should be banned!" or "Nintendo released a DS carry case! They're trying to push others out of the DS add ons market!".

    Seems the old "attack opponents character so we look better even if we're as black as that pot over there.
  • Slashdot (Score:2, Insightful)

    Apples for Nerds. Stuff that apples.

    For crying out loud, I'm as much of a fan of Apple as anyone. OK, not anyone, but I do like my Powerbook quite a bit. But really, the ratio of Apple to non-Apple news on /. has become extremely high. I mean, where's the news about how Dell tries to sell accessories? It's not news, and neither is this.
    • by Kludge (13653)
      This makes 2 stories in one day about "iPod accessories". Who gives a crap?! I long for the day when /. posted the latest kernel releases and useful, cool nerd stuff rather than this.
    • I don't mind apple stories, but they should at least be somewhat interesting. This is retarded fluff.
  • by saboola (655522) on Monday March 06, 2006 @03:25PM (#14860447)
    Is Apple Trying to Take Over iPod Accessories?

    Yes. That was easy. What's next? I'm on a roll.
  • I don't think Apple should/would want to become the exclusive producer and seller of iPod stuff. There will always be the $.99US iPod skins (with $19.99US shipping, of course!) and straps and such. That said, Apple would likely want to gain additional revenue by offering its own bits and bytes of accessories. Apple will surely pick up some sales of iPod accessories if they are sold co-located with iPods - because many folks reason that the accessory will be "more compatible" if made by the same company as t
  • By dropping the dock and now dropping power cords Apple has allowed accesory makers to step in and make better docks and power cords for use with the pod.
  • by Dynedain (141758) <slashdot2@anth[ ... m ['ony' in gap]> on Monday March 06, 2006 @04:00PM (#14860885) Homepage
    Step 1) Create high demand, but easily scratchable MP3 player.
    Step 2) Sell cases to prevent scratches to said easily scratchable MP3 player.
    Step 3) Profit!!!
  • Plenty of room (Score:3, Insightful)

    by tgibbs (83782) on Monday March 06, 2006 @04:05PM (#14860934)
    Apple is going to aim for the high end, high margin end of the accessories market, just as they have with everything else they sell. There will be plenty of room for 3rd party manufacturers of bargain-priced accessories, as well as premium-priced accessories targeted toward "niche" markets that are too small for Apple to bother with.
  • by Pleb'a.nz (712848)
    ... prove people think too much about things.
  • by Fatal0E (230910) on Monday March 06, 2006 @04:20PM (#14861110)
    Anyone remember when Apple jacked their licensing fees for port access late last year and pissed off manufacturers? Just in case you dont: http://www.macnn.com/articles/05/10/11/made.for.ip od.licensing/ [macnn.com]

    I haven't read anything that spoke towards manufacturers backing out b/c the licensing hike tho but I suppose economic theory implies some products getting squeezed out.

    Is apple trying to squeeze out the market by marketing first-party schwag and jacking its fees?

    I think a more compelling argument might be that they're just trying to squeeze every dime out of the ipod as corporately possible before the ipod loses its buzz. Between that and the fact that the silly boom box is yawn inducing (as opposed to being the killer accessory for the killer app) I'm not sold on apple's upcoming knick-knack dominance.
  • I'm not a fan of iPods because I consider their lack of a removable battary to be an intentional design flaw for the express purpose of making the ipods 'expire'.

    That being said. One best features of the ipod is the external interface. Yes, the UI is good, and the case looks cool, but I can't think of any other digital audio players that offer complete access to the unit to external components. This is a crucial feature.

    If anyone wants to make an 'ipod killer', the first thing they need to do is ma
    • Right, because you can't get replacement batteries.

      Oh, wait, you can. My iPod's 3 years old and on its first replacement battery. The hard drive's running fine. Heck, if I were feeling needy, I could get one for my 2G iPod from Macsales.com for $8! The thin battery makes for a thin case, which is a great selling feature.

      The battery was only an issue for early adopters, until 3rd parties started offering replacements. It's now a moot point, IMO.
       
      • by Belial6 (794905) on Monday March 06, 2006 @06:43PM (#14862453)
        The ipod is designed to not allow replacement. Yes, this can be circumvented, just as you can refill inkjet cartridges. This does not change the fact that the product was specifically designed to fail, and that many people will be unable to replace their battery. I consider the fact that I would have to 'hack' my equipment to replace the battery to be an intentionally created design flaw. Not the size of the battery, but the fact that there is no battery door. In fact the very link you gave has 'Professional Installation Services' for battery replacement. This shows that the design is flawed. Consumers should not require professional help to change the battery on their portable audio player.

        To state that this design choice is not an issue at all, show a distinct fanboy attitude. You may feel that it wouldn't stop YOU from buying one, but it is certainly a problem for a very large portion of the population.
        • the iPod is "designed to fail"? What a load of crap! Lithium batteries are much more efficient than other types of batteries, and allow the small form factor. Plus they are much more environmentally friendly. Who want to be constantly replacing batteries, or have a huge player, anyway? The batteries can last for years, it's hardly something that fails quickly in most cases. If it fails under warranty, it gets replaced for free.

          Nothing to do with fanboyism - I don't even own an iPod. And the battery is not a

          • "The batteries can last for years, it's hardly something that fails quickly in most cases. If it fails under warranty, it gets replaced for free."

            That's right, you agree that they fail, and that will usually fail outside of warranty. Given how trivial it would be to make a battery door, and thus make the battary replaceable, there can be no question that the unit was designed to fail. I never said that it an ipod would 'expire' while it was still in warranty. I just said that it was designed to 'expir

        • In addition to these comments: http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=179394& c id=14865060 [slashdot.org]

          > [lack of user replaceable rechargeable batteries] is certainly a problem for a very large portion of the population.

          What percentage is a "very large portion", 33%? I think 33% would be a very generous definition for 'very large portion of the population'. I'll bet the percentage of the [audio player buying] population that needs user replaceable rechargeable batteries is more like 1% -- and it would be an o
    • You should have written the title of your post as "I don't like iPods, so I will bash them on an old point that has been rapidly disproved over and over again on Slashdot as well as a 30-second Google search."

      You could say this is still bad design, making one remove the case--and possibly damaging the iPod--to replace a battery, but you cannot say it's not possible. Apple either didn't realize this was going to be a problem, or understood the problem but took time to forge a solution so as not to scare awa

  • How many iPod car adapters does Apple make ? How many vinyl cases do they make ? How many... aw, screw it.

    Anyone with half a brain knows that two high-end ( to use a nice term ) products don't mark a 'taking over' of the iPod accessory market. Apple looked at a bunch of can't-fail high-markup accessories, and picked the two that had the highest likely return on investment. End of story.

  • by angle_slam (623817) on Monday March 06, 2006 @06:55PM (#14862541)
    This explains why the iPod is so easily scratched--they want people to buy aftermarket cases. (Seriously, I bought an iPod yesterday. The back already has several long scratches on it.)
  • by bagder (32513)
    I thought Rockbox [rockbox.org] was the coolest accessory anyway, and Apple sure can't take over that! ;-)

Arithmetic is being able to count up to twenty without taking off your shoes. -- Mickey Mouse

Working...