'Cult' of Apple hangs on Wednesday announcement

2010-01-27 05:39:14

#51

Mekstizzle: WALKER; +3,611|7035|London, England

I don't know how the iPod became a popular mp3 player, it was the marketing/apple shiny shit that did it for them. As an mp3 player it was impractical compared to the rest with the fucking iTunes as ManRed has already said, nothing special about it.

Whereas the iPhone and its smartphone category it was actually very good in that.

2010-01-27 06:04:48

#52

Winston_Churchill: Bazinga!; +521|7153|Toronto | Canada

CapnNismo wrote:
Winston_Churchill wrote:
I'd say smartphones were already mainstream before the iPhone. There are great ones along with the iPhone (especially with its flaws at the beginning), when the iPod first came out it blew any other mp3 player out of the water for years (and still holds a huge majority of the market).
I would disagree with you. Shortly before the iPhone launch, smart phones were still very much for enterprise users on the whole. Certainly Palm and RIM both made phones for the masses BEFORE the iPhone, but neither reached that market penetration that Apple managed to do with the iPhone.

And the iPhone is nowhere near the market penetration the iPod has. The iPod has all but completely replaced the "mp3 player". Its the become the Band-Aid of bandages, the Kleenex of tissues. Its far more popular than anything else.
On the other hand, people still use smartphone and dont immediately think of the iPhone. Yes, the iPhone did dominate, but the iPod's success has been far greater IMO

2010-01-27 06:06:43

#53

Bertster7: Confused Pothead; +1,101|6995|SE London

Winston_Churchill wrote:
CapnNismo wrote:
Winston_Churchill wrote:
I'd say smartphones were already mainstream before the iPhone. There are great ones along with the iPhone (especially with its flaws at the beginning), when the iPod first came out it blew any other mp3 player out of the water for years (and still holds a huge majority of the market).
I would disagree with you. Shortly before the iPhone launch, smart phones were still very much for enterprise users on the whole. Certainly Palm and RIM both made phones for the masses BEFORE the iPhone, but neither reached that market penetration that Apple managed to do with the iPhone.
And the iPhone is nowhere near the market penetration the iPod has. The iPod has all but completely replaced the "mp3 player". Its the become the Band-Aid of bandages, the Kleenex of tissues. Its far more popular than anything else.
On the other hand, people still use smartphone and dont immediately think of the iPhone. Yes, the iPhone did dominate, but the iPod's success has been far greater IMO

Damn straight.

2010-01-27 06:08:33

#54

Mekstizzle: WALKER; +3,611|7035|London, England

No it really hasn't. Not in my world at least. It's no way near become a name in itself for a product. Even those examples you listed it doesn't work like that. Not in this country. You guys always use words like Band Aid, Kleenex and even Xerox. It's your mentality vs ours. You tend to use brand names because your rampant consumerism asks for it.

iPods were always awful .mp3 players. At first they didn't even use USB. Then they don't even have drag and drop. The only reason they were popular were because of the typical douchebag apple marketing.

Last edited by Mekstizzle (2010-01-27 06:09:42)

2010-01-27 06:13:23

#55

Winston_Churchill: Bazinga!; +521|7153|Toronto | Canada

Mekstizzle wrote:
You tend to use brand names because your rampant consumerism asks for it.

lol

Mekstizzle wrote:
iPods were always awful .mp3 players. At first they didn't even use USB. Then they don't even have drag and drop. The only reason they were popular were because of the typical douchebag apple marketing.

I never said they were the best, just that they dominate everything else. And when they first came out they were probably the best at the time. Plus they had the iTunes Store that catered to the (stupid) people who bought their music legally.

2010-01-27 06:18:07

#56

Bertster7: Confused Pothead; +1,101|6995|SE London

Mekstizzle wrote:
No it really hasn't. Not in my world at least. It's no way near become a name in itself for a product. Even those examples you listed it doesn't work like that. Not in this country. You guys always use words like Band Aid, Kleenex and even Xerox. It's your mentality vs ours. You tend to use brand names because your rampant consumerism asks for it.

iPods were always awful .mp3 players. At first they didn't even use USB. Then they don't even have drag and drop. The only reason they were popular were because of the typical douchebag apple marketing.

Well - you're wrong.

The iPod has ~80% market share. The same cannot be said of the iPhone.

How good something is has no real bearing on how big an impact it has made on consumers.

And the word iPod is used synonymously with mp3 player in the UK, so I don't know what you're on about there.

Last edited by Bertster7 (2010-01-27 06:20:31)

2010-01-27 06:27:20

#57

13urnzz: Banned; +5,830|6911

i remember the Newton.

2010-01-27 06:30:22

#58

Bertster7: Confused Pothead; +1,101|6995|SE London

burnzz wrote:
i remember the Newton.

Didn't have quite the same impact as the iPhone did it....

But then it was the 80's....

2010-01-27 06:32:13

#59

Mekstizzle: WALKER; +3,611|7035|London, England

Well whatever it is that they're showing later tonight it won't be as good as the iPhone and, oh ok then, the god damn iPod too.

2010-01-27 06:51:12

#60

FatherTed: xD; +3,936|6914|so randum

mek idk how you dont see how influential the ipod is/was. people don't ask 'have you got an mp3 player' anymore, they say 'what ipod have you got'

Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella

2010-01-27 06:59:28

#61

Mekstizzle: WALKER; +3,611|7035|London, England

I dunno about that, I've never really experienced that. I never bought an iPod myself so I never caught onto that. I've always referred to them as mp3 players.

And poor one's too because of the iTunes nonsense, and especially when they first came out and they used firewire and I'm like "wtf is this shit" even though I was young and didn't need one but I still knew about it all

I always found it stupid that you couldn't just copy and paste the songs you wanted yet you could on loads of other devices, even phones, that was my main gripe.

2010-01-27 07:52:07

#62

Benzin: Member; +576|6412

Winston_Churchill wrote:
CapnNismo wrote:
Winston_Churchill wrote:
I'd say smartphones were already mainstream before the iPhone. There are great ones along with the iPhone (especially with its flaws at the beginning), when the iPod first came out it blew any other mp3 player out of the water for years (and still holds a huge majority of the market).
I would disagree with you. Shortly before the iPhone launch, smart phones were still very much for enterprise users on the whole. Certainly Palm and RIM both made phones for the masses BEFORE the iPhone, but neither reached that market penetration that Apple managed to do with the iPhone.
And the iPhone is nowhere near the market penetration the iPod has. The iPod has all but completely replaced the "mp3 player". Its the become the Band-Aid of bandages, the Kleenex of tissues. Its far more popular than anything else.
On the other hand, people still use smartphone and dont immediately think of the iPhone. Yes, the iPhone did dominate, but the iPod's success has been far greater IMO

I never disagreed with you saying that the iPod was less siginifcant than the iPhone? I disagreed with Mek when he said the iPhone was more significant than the iPod.

2010-01-27 07:56:17

#63

Winston_Churchill: Bazinga!; +521|7153|Toronto | Canada

CapnNismo wrote:
Winston_Churchill wrote:
CapnNismo wrote:

I would disagree with you. Shortly before the iPhone launch, smart phones were still very much for enterprise users on the whole. Certainly Palm and RIM both made phones for the masses BEFORE the iPhone, but neither reached that market penetration that Apple managed to do with the iPhone.
And the iPhone is nowhere near the market penetration the iPod has. The iPod has all but completely replaced the "mp3 player". Its the become the Band-Aid of bandages, the Kleenex of tissues. Its far more popular than anything else.
On the other hand, people still use smartphone and dont immediately think of the iPhone. Yes, the iPhone did dominate, but the iPod's success has been far greater IMO
I never disagreed with you saying that the iPod was less siginifcant than the iPhone? I disagreed with Mek when he said the iPhone was more significant than the iPod.

Hmm, I think I quoted you to respond to him

2010-01-27 08:54:29

#64

Benzin: Member; +576|6412

rgr

2010-01-27 08:56:07

#65

Poseidon: Fudgepack DeQueef; +3,253|6952|Long Island, New York

I'd like to know the specs... I'm looking for a laptop for college after all, but I'm not sure if this'd be very practical. I'd buy it if there were some kind of keyboard extension though.

2010-01-27 09:21:22

#66

PrivateVendetta: I DEMAND XMAS THEME; +704|6605|Roma

Mekstizzle wrote:
No it really hasn't. Not in my world at least. It's no way near become a name in itself for a product. Even those examples you listed it doesn't work like that. Not in this country. You guys always use words like Band Aid, Kleenex and even Xerox. It's your mentality vs ours. You tend to use brand names because your rampant consumerism asks for it.

Sellotape?
Hoover?
Biro?

Anyway, I'd like to think iPod was more important, it was what launched Apple out of being a niche market computer manufacturer to a global trend-creator. It opened the way for them to launch successfully with iPhone.

https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/29388/stopped%20scrolling%21.png

2010-01-27 09:25:07

#67

Hurricane2k9: Pendulous Sweaty Balls; +1,538|6116|College Park, MD

Poseidon wrote:
I'd like to know the specs... I'm looking for a laptop for college after all, but I'm not sure if this'd be very practical. I'd buy it if there were some kind of keyboard extension though.

Well in 40 minutes they're starting the conference:

http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/27/live … ion-event/

And both the iPod and iPhone were important. The iPod was cleverly marketed and now pretty much everyone has an iPod for their MP3-playing needs. As stated above, people ask "did you bring your iPod" not "did you bring your media player."

I don't think the iPhone is the best phone ever but it has definitely been a catalyst in the market penetration of all smartphones and the rapid development of smartphones in the past few years. Apple took a device that previously was mostly used by businesspeople and hardcore geeks, and turned it into something that anybody could use. Now people demand their phones have smartphone features. Palm's do-or-die solution wasn't to make a dumphone or 'featurephone' but a smart phone (the Pre). RIM markets their Curve line to the casual user. All the major smartphones have some sort of application store now.