perhaps the most successful product of the last few decades—and managed to screw it up. What chance does Palm have?
Tag Archives: iPod
What can we learn from the “moderated” Windows SuperSite blog?
The iPad is a big iPod touch, not a computer.
Forget the article, just read the comments, in which Thurrott states the above, and even more ridiculous things.
There are two things about Thurrott we can learn from this article on the new, “moderated” Windows SuperSite:
- He defines “moderate” as “Keep the IT luddites and Windows fans I pander to; Apple supporters need not apply”.
- His mind is incredibly, surprisingly, naively, and embarrassingly (it should be to him, anyway) closed.
Remember when tech pundits used to lead the charge for change, and get excited about new, powerful technologies that made things easier for non-technicians? Yeah, me neither.
Who Needs April Fools’ Day When You’ve Got The Onion?
You could even listen halfheartedly as your lead designer attempts to explain MP3s to you in 1998 and then immediately fire him for losing sight of the project goal. At $29.99, this thing’s a bargain. No? Fine. $9.99.
via theonion.com
Riot.
iPod Touch: Selling Like Gangbusters?
via appleinsider.com
Check out the above chart. It’s no secret iPod sales had steadied, or even dropped a bit over the last couple years. Still, it’s generally believed a lot of that is due to people buying iPhones, which are iPods that don’t show up in these sales figures.
In any case, look at the first two months of the last three years. From Y/Y of -28 and -13 to +5 in January, and from -5 and -16 to +10 in February. While the iPod nano may have some hand in this, the iPod touch is clearly selling very well.
Don’t Tell Me Steve Jobs Doesn’t Love Music
(via money.cnn.com)
CNN Money has a collection of a dozen photographs of Steve Jobs that show their “CEO of the Decade” in a more unusual light.
The above photo is #4 in the series, and my favorite by far. Anyone who doubts Jobs’ proclaimed love of music — a love that helped Apple build the iPod/iTunes ecosystem — need only look to this photo as proof they’re wrong.
Visit the link above to see all 12 photos.
What A Difference 12 Years And Steve Jobs Make.
Apple’s incredible turnaround since acquiring NeXT (and Steve Jobs) 12 years ago is well known. Apple’s been strong for over a decade, with exceptional growth far ahead of the industry, especially the last five years.
When every quarter seems to set a new sales record, even amidst a glum economy, it’s easy to become a bit jaded about the whole thing. I mean, ho hum, a few million more Macs, another 10 million iPods, and that new phone thing seems to be doing splendidly.
So let’s put some of this into perspective. The above slide is from Steve Jobs’ talk at Macworld 1997 in Boston. It’s the slide used when discussing “The Problem” at Apple. Put simply, sales in ’95 were $11.1B, in ’96 $9.5B, and in ’97 (estimated) $7B. Going rapidly downhill, Apple was bleeding money.
Fast forward to Apple’s recent Q4 ’09 results. Sales were $9.87B. That blows the doors off ’97 and handily beats ’96. Think about it; Apple bested these entire years’ sales in just one quarter. And it wasn’t even a holiday quarter.
But that’s not all. Apple reports sales with one arm tied behind its back. It doesn’t recognize all iPhone revenue immediately, instead spreading it out over two years due to specific accounting requirements. Those requirements are changing, however, and without them the adjusted figure for Q4 is $12.25B, which even blows ’95 away.
Turnaround, indeed.
Picture This: Why the iPod Nano Has a Camera and the iPod Touch Does Not [UPDATED]
[UPDATE:] I added some additional thoughts in the comments section.
Lots of stuff announced and discussed in Apple’s recent iTunes/iPod announcements, but it seems the camera situation is the most complained about. Bottom line is the new nano has one, the new touch does not.
Isn’t this backwards? Isn’t it a no-brainer to add a camera to the touch? Is Apple ripping us off? Are they just trying to “force” us to buy iPhones? Let’s burn all our Apple equipment and buy Zunes before Arrington and Calacanis can accuse us all of being sellouts… Continue reading
The Beatles in iTunes Tomorrow? I Doubt It, But Not Because of the Rolling Stones.
The Beatles Tomorrow? I Doubt It, But Not Because of the Rolling Stones.
Lots of people seem to think Apple couldn’t announce the Beatles resmastered work for sale on iTunes tomorrow because the invitations for the event used a variation of a line from a Rolling Stones song: “It’s only rock and roll but we like it.”
I don’t think that’s the reason at all. Here’s why:
Does it mean there is a Rolling Stones announcement tomorrow? Doubtful. Yet according to the theory there could be no other music sales announcement since a Rolling Stones song was used.
Had they used a Beatles song quote, surely it would have tipped their hand and, rumors aside, Apple would like to keep it under wraps as long as possible.
OK, but if the quote doesn’t preclude a Beatles announcement, then why do you think it won’t be announced?
Rock Band has been pumping up the volume on this for months, ever since the deal was inked. Further, there’s amajor push for the remaster themselves. I suspect the inytent is for RB ro fuel remasters sales, and vice versa. They don’t want the media frenzy to have a third story to write about (i.e., digital downloads). Yet.
It would be logical to hold off on the digital tunes to get as many early adaptors to buy thge boxed set. Presumable there’s moe money incolved there.
It wouldn;t even surprise me if digital download were specifically (and contractually) prohibited for X number of weeks/months after the 9/9 launch.
Why make a big deal out of the ultra-fidelity of a reamster, anbd then sell it as a compressed music file?
Here’s where it gets interesting, though. Could the Beatkles remasters be the event that finally kicks off a catalog avaialble in lossless format? That would crtainly address point #4 above. Sure, the file sizes are much greater, but Apple is routinely delivering movies and TV shows now so it’s not the isue it was when the store wa sopened six years ago.
IF lossless will be avaialble, then maybe it could be avaialble tomorrow, but it would still run counter to #2 above. Further, if any downloads were going to be available, why wouldn’t SApple have allowed pre-oreders, as they usually do, and as Amazon (and others) are doing for the boxed CDs?
Ultimately, I think no Beatles download sales tomorrow, but I do hope that when they are made avaialble a lossless option will be available.
Lots of people seem to think Apple couldn’t announce the Beatles remastered catalog for sale on iTunes tomorrow because the invitations for the event used a variation of a line from a Rolling Stones song: “It’s only rock and roll but we like it.”
I don’t think that’s a valid reason; here’s why: Continue reading
The Small Wave. 