More of the Same.

September 5, 2007 9:35 PM

Apple has unveiled their new range of iPods, including the iTouch, a new iPod model best described as an iPhone without the phone. It's more of the same, sure, but no doubt they'll all sell by the truck load.
posted by Second Account For Making Jokey Comments (190 comments total)

I thought about posting something about this, but figured it would get hammered out of existance. Regardless, I'm totally up for the new iPhone-minusthephonepart.
posted by blaneyphoto at 9:39 PM on September 5, 2007

O RLY?
posted by null terminated at 9:39 PM on September 5, 2007

The iPod Touch is going to go over especially big in places like Canada where we don't even have the option of getting an iPhone. I know I want one.
posted by thecjm at 9:42 PM on September 5, 2007

Wonder when the Ipod thingy and apple-in-general will start to tank in "coolness", I'm guessing fairly soon.
posted by edgeways at 9:42 PM on September 5, 2007

I hear that you can use this new iPhone to buy a tasty beverage. Sadly, said beverage is not blue.
posted by b1tr0t at 9:42 PM on September 5, 2007

What's an "iPod?"
posted by chasing at 9:42 PM on September 5, 2007

s/iPhone/iPod/
s/buy/interact with the vendors of/
posted by b1tr0t at 9:43 PM on September 5, 2007

The new Nano is ugly.

There, I said it.
posted by katillathehun at 9:45 PM on September 5, 2007

It's more of the same, sure, but no doubt they'll all sell by the truck load.

Yes, it is more of the same, so why is it here?

*sigh*

Here I was all impressed that this hadn't shown up on metafilter, we almost made it the whole day.
posted by delmoi at 9:49 PM on September 5, 2007 [5 favorites]

Couldn't agree more, katillathehun. I have an old-style nano which I think is very well designed, but the new one... well, it's square!
posted by Kattullus at 9:50 PM on September 5, 2007

The new Nano is ugly.

Yeah, what's with those color choices? Makes as much sense as the rest of their campaign.

The products are still cool though.
posted by null terminated at 9:51 PM on September 5, 2007

Wonder when the Ipod thingy and apple-in-general will start to tank in "coolness", I'm guessing fairly soon.

Nobody ever went broke predicting the imminent doom of Apple.
posted by aaronetc at 9:51 PM on September 5, 2007 [8 favorites]

I'm a big apple fan, but not at all interested in starbucks, so this is kind of bittersweet for me. I doubt that my iphone, which I waited in line to buy, will ever have the opportunity to display its new starbucks icon.

The wi-fi access to the iTunes music store is very nice, though. As soon as they install wi-fi on the subways, life in NYC will be easier to deal with.
posted by bingo at 9:52 PM on September 5, 2007

I'm commenting on this from my iPhone.
posted by padraigin at 9:52 PM on September 5, 2007

Remember, like, two months ago? When I shelled out $600-some-odd-dollars for an iPhone?

Yeah, who's the idiot now?

It's me.
posted by kbanas at 9:59 PM on September 5, 2007 [13 favorites]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the iPod Touch being as hackable as the iPhone. It's the first truely hackable iPod, really.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:00 PM on September 5, 2007

Wonder when the Ipod thingy and apple-in-general will start to tank in "coolness", I'm guessing fairly soon.

Obviously, you're not a golfer.
posted by pmbuko at 10:01 PM on September 5, 2007 [5 favorites]

these new iphones, they cut off my johnson?
posted by joeblough at 10:04 PM on September 5, 2007

These new iPods will really tie my room together.
posted by kbanas at 10:07 PM on September 5, 2007 [3 favorites]

It's the first truely hackable iPod, really.

Um, not really.
posted by scottreynen at 10:13 PM on September 5, 2007

It's the first truely hackable iPod, really.

You mean, other than the ones you can run a hacky linux kernel on?
posted by b1tr0t at 10:15 PM on September 5, 2007

lacks:

bluetooth

microphone

pda software

fm radio

memory card slot

Why not add those and kill Palm, Windows Mobile, and all the other wanna-bes (or "ares")?

posted by blue_beetle at 10:15 PM on September 5, 2007

Oh come on. Of all the news all over the internet today, you choose to link to only an Australian newspaper website? The iPhone isn't even out in Australia, so their insight isn't even as good as those by media outlets based in the USA.

Lame, this isn't Digg.
posted by patr1ck at 10:17 PM on September 5, 2007 [2 favorites]

You mean, other than the ones you can run a hacky linux kernel on?

Doesn't really count though, since you're either running Linux or the iPod system. Anyway, finally an iPod that can be hacked!
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:20 PM on September 5, 2007

I caved into the $200 announced iPhone price-drop today. Posting from the new baby now.

(though it sure could use a flash/light)
posted by sourwookie at 10:30 PM on September 5, 2007

erm. 8gig? no thanks
posted by BrodieShadeTree at 10:36 PM on September 5, 2007

Of all the articles on the phone to link to, this is certainly a strange choice.

That said, I want an iPod Touch so badly.
posted by chunking express at 10:38 PM on September 5, 2007

Speaking of the iphone/new ipod. How is browsing? Is it pretty easy and efficient?
posted by parallax7d at 10:44 PM on September 5, 2007

The only thing my g/f said when she heard about this is 'you don't need one.'
posted by jimmythefish at 10:45 PM on September 5, 2007 [2 favorites]

Given what it can do, what it can't do is really strange. A high resolution multitouch display, with full-featured web browser and wifi implies all kinds of capabilities. Like email and instant messaging, for example. Sure, you can do email through a web interface (I assume it's got the virtual keyboard) but still, it's just plain odd. It redefines "iPod" to encompass "internet device", and then falls bizarrely short of what it technically should be more than capable of doing. In a way, it's actually defined by what they quite gratuitously left out.
posted by George_Spiggott at 10:45 PM on September 5, 2007 [3 favorites]

And this is on MeFi because...?
posted by kyleg at 10:45 PM on September 5, 2007

Apple has unveiled their new range of iPods

So?
posted by dirigibleman at 10:50 PM on September 5, 2007

I don't suppose the ipod touch will sync over wifi?
posted by bananafish at 10:55 PM on September 5, 2007

metafilter in two years:

Apple has unveiled their new range of refrigerators

So?
posted by localhuman at 10:56 PM on September 5, 2007

> including the iTouch

The iPod Touch. Sorry to be pedantic.

Look, I know I sound like the world's biggest jackass. That apology was sincere. But for my own sanity I have to call people out on this i-Whatever stuff. The thing is, I work for an Apple reseller and my coworkers and I are punished daily by this. Here, I will give you an example.

Customer: Hi. I need to buy some memory.
Employee: Sure. What kind of computer do you have?
Customer: The iMac.
Employee: Great -- is it the G4 iMac? The G5? Do you know the processor in it?
Customer: It is a ten point four Tiger.
Employee: Sure, no problem. And what color is it?
Customer: I think it is white.
Employee: Does it look flat, like the ones on the sales floor? Or is it a half dome bottom with a movable...
Customer: No. None of those. The i-Laptop.
Employee: You have a laptop, then.
Customer (annoyed that I apparently did not hear him): Yes, the i-Laptop.
Employee: Is it the iBook?
Customer (voice rising in anger, as I am clearly trying his patience): The i-Laptop.

(I'll spare you the part where, ten minutes deeper into the conversation, we discover that "more memory" meant "more hard drive space" and not "more RAM". I will share the blame on that one.)

I promise you, it is not that we are so full of ourselves that non-computer-types annoy us. On the contrary, it is a colossal relief when someone just says "I don't know." I, for one, love it when customers say "I don't know." Because we are actually pretty good at helping you find out what kind of computer / device you have or need! It is our job! It's much easier than swimming down the catacombs of unreason and fear of appearing foolish that lead them to assemble their own product names in their imagination and then angrily, pre-emptively defend them against condescension from some smart-ass sales clerk.

Before the month is out, someone will come in and ask me for an "iTouch," and I will bring them out an iPod Touch, and they will angrily insist, no, an iTouch, and the whole wonderful thing will start again -- do you want an iPhone? A Cintiq? -- before we finally discover the customer just needs a god damn keyboard.

Maybe I need a vacation.
posted by churl at 11:03 PM on September 5, 2007 [58 favorites]

churl: Surely Apple is to blame for this at least partly. For most products you can have the same thing for years and become more familiar with it.

Today, the product cycles are so fast that many people I know are afraid to buy anything because a month after they buy it, it will be out of date. I mean, the IPhone is already yesterday's news - one model is being discontinued and the other is being discounted!
posted by vacapinta at 11:09 PM on September 5, 2007

George_Spiggott: Given what it can do, what it can't do is really strange.

Not really. Apple has never had a 'everything but the kitchen sink' design mentality. Feature creep might scare off the non-technical people they mostly appeal to. For example, how many ipods have they gone through without adding a radio?

Of course, I prefer the exact opposite design philosophy (devices damn well include any feature they might reasonably add) so I don't usually like Apple stuff. But it's just a matter of taste.
posted by Mitrovarr at 11:09 PM on September 5, 2007

If Steve Jobs presented the iTouch while the song "I Touch Myself" by the Divinyls was playing and he started masturbating, that would've been awesome.
posted by jefbla at 11:19 PM on September 5, 2007 [15 favorites]

The iPod Touch. Sorry to be pedantic.

Or, if one really wants to be pedantic, the "iPod touch"
posted by AdamJ at 11:25 PM on September 5, 2007 [2 favorites]

For example, how many ipods have they gone through without adding a radio?

The difference there is that a radio involves additional hardware. The features they've left off here are pure software and practically implied by the hardware. I'm trying to imagine someone who'd be scared off by the inclusion of an email client but wouldn't be scared off by "multi-touch display" or the magical notion of a button activating when you get near a Starbucks (?!), and I just can't visualize that person.
posted by George_Spiggott at 11:26 PM on September 5, 2007 [2 favorites]

The iPod Touch. The Godawful ugliness of the iPhone, but without the phone part, and entirely too little memory to store a decent music collection, for too much money.

It'll sell like crazy. To people too crazy to understand what they're buying.
posted by evilangela at 11:27 PM on September 5, 2007 [2 favorites]

I don't want to carry around a huge hard drive worth of media. I've got a 4th gen 20GB iPod and when I filled it up with music I'd get lost in the chaff and find myself putting it on shuffle and hitting next next next next until I found something I wanted to hear right then and there. And with 5 hours of video playback I don't see myself watching an entire season of Rome before I have to go sync and charge it anyways.
posted by thecjm at 11:35 PM on September 5, 2007 [1 favorite]

It'll sell like crazy. To people too crazy to understand what they're buying.

You know why threads devolve? The jackasses with nothing to say or an axe to grind post things like this. And people who would actually have a reasoned argument see that no good will come from engaging. And they're right.

I have a reasoned argument, but I'll just be a jackass here instead.
posted by jragon at 11:36 PM on September 5, 2007 [3 favorites]

Regarding the price drop: I have trouble feeling bad, or stupid. If it wasn't worth, to me, what I was paying for it, why did I pay for it? I only feel sorry for the people who fall just outside the 14 day window during which recent purchasers can get a refund of the price difference.

Regarding the new stuff: Uh, ... They're going to be printing money for a while longer yet, it seems.

Also, there is only one way to refer to the missing-the-phone iPhone. One must, at all times and with the link wherever possible, refer to it as THE TOUCH.
posted by sparkletone at 11:41 PM on September 5, 2007

Or the non-transforming The Touch
(god, John C. Reilly is awesome)
posted by blueberry at 11:48 PM on September 5, 2007 [1 favorite]

The Godawful ugliness of the iPhone, but without the phone part

So they finally released a telephone you cannot use to place a call?

Oh, wait, it doesn't have a camera, so it really isn't a phone at all.
posted by DreamerFi at 12:17 AM on September 6, 2007 [8 favorites]

I don't get the Starbucks feature. People will be in Starbucks and suddenly really really want to download a song?
posted by aerotive at 12:17 AM on September 6, 2007

churl: Yes. :-)
posted by the cydonian at 12:32 AM on September 6, 2007

Aw, I thought the new Nano was adorable. In fact I...kind of...fell head over heels for it as soon as I saw it and I am trying very hard to talk myself out of spending money on it when I have a perfectly good iPod video whose only real flaw is that it is not wee and minty blue-like.

*hangs head*
posted by angeline at 12:35 AM on September 6, 2007

MeFi was a little slow to get this important Apple news release out. What gives?

*heads to Apple store for shiny new thing
posted by caddis at 1:02 AM on September 6, 2007

>> For example, how many ipods have they gone through without adding a radio?

> The difference there is that a radio involves additional hardware.

But the software is the hard part. More time to develop, more employees, more likely to slip the ship date.

Unless the software has already been ported to the iPhone. Then most of the hard work is already done.
posted by ryanrs at 1:16 AM on September 6, 2007

Wonder when the Ipod thingy and apple-in-general will start to tank in "coolness", I'm guessing fairly soon.

iRoll
posted by hal9k at 2:10 AM on September 6, 2007

> The new Nano is ugly.
There, I said it.

Ass-ugly. Best comment i've seen is over on engadget, where someone asked if it could do the Truffle shuffle.
posted by churl at 2:11 AM on September 6, 2007

I learned from some other forum that Archos now makes a hard drive based player that has WiFi and runs a version of Opera. Apparently it's pretty good, it certainly has a lot of features. Still no Bluetooth though,
posted by tomcooke at 2:23 AM on September 6, 2007 [1 favorite]

Presumably if the iPod Touch had BlueTooth it could canabilse iPhone sales to people who already have a phone they like.

Anyway iPhone minus the phone looks fairly swish to me. Perhaps if I start listening to music when I'm out and about again I will pick one up. Looks useful than my N800 has been.
posted by public at 2:55 AM on September 6, 2007

Don't get me started on the radio issue. Sure, it is a little bit of hardware and thus a very minor extra cost, but my sense is that Apple didn't want to fight the XM battle over copyright issues and didn't want to go the Microsoft route and pay next to nothing per unit for a license and break the record from radio option - plus people bitch and moan about the MS deal, and Apple likes to pretend it is all consumer/free beer friendly when it isn't.

So, we sit here with a clunky add-on if you want to listen to the friggin' radio.

I guess we'll wait to see what the next Zune rev brings us.
posted by Muddler at 3:13 AM on September 6, 2007

I just bought a replacement 30GB iPod, and three weeks later they've decided I can get the 80GB for the exact same price.

I was okay a few years back when I missed a $50 price drop by a few weeks, but that just feels like I was robbed.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 3:57 AM on September 6, 2007

If Steve Jobs presented the iTouch while the song "I Touch Myself" by the Divinyls was playing and he started masturbating, that would've been awesome.

I don't think Steve Jobs has had to touch his own penis for any reason whatsoever since the day the iPod was released. "No, my lord... let ME get that for you."
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 3:59 AM on September 6, 2007 [6 favorites]

I just bought a replacement 30GB iPod, and three weeks later they've decided I can get the 80GB for the exact same price. [...] feels like I was robbed.

This has to be the dumbest sentiment in consumer electronics. What were you expecting to happen? No new iPods for the holiday season? They keep doing this and the timing is pretty transparent. If you can't wait a month or two for the new hotness to come out, you don't get to complain when it does and is better than the old hotness.
posted by 0xFCAF at 4:40 AM on September 6, 2007 [1 favorite]

I wanted it ("The Touch") until I started noticing what they left out: Google Maps, Mail, and a phone,

Why the heck did they do that?
posted by jpburns at 4:46 AM on September 6, 2007 [1 favorite]

I learned from some other forum that Archos now makes a hard drive based player that has WiFi and runs a version of Opera. Apparently it's pretty good, it certainly has a lot of features. Still no Bluetooth though,

The predecessor to the 604 - the PMA 400 can do all that, and it has a touch screen, and can record TV like a TiVO.

But they were doing that 3 years ago.
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 5:07 AM on September 6, 2007

I wonder if Apple will open up iPod touch to 3rd party developers since they don't have to worry about a stiff breeze knocking down AT&T's fragile network.

Oh, wait. I know the answer to this one: No.
posted by effwerd at 5:14 AM on September 6, 2007 [2 favorites]

I just bought a replacement 30GB iPod, and three weeks later they've decided I can get the 80GB for the exact same price.

Before buying Apple stuff, take look at the Mac Rumors Buying Guide, which is good at telling you when to buy and when to wait.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:16 AM on September 6, 2007 [9 favorites]

wow, really? a whole 4-8 gigs? for only $420? well how-dee partner!

please.

are they really going to trickle out these things gig by gig until getting to 80gb (or more) like they did with the original iPods?
posted by Uther Bentrazor at 5:19 AM on September 6, 2007 [1 favorite]

People should also be aware of Apple's Special Deals Store, where you can buy refurbished iPods and Computers at a lower price.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:21 AM on September 6, 2007 [4 favorites]

Blazecock Pileon: Um, I've got a 1st gen Nano which has pretty much only ever been used with Rockbox. It's nice having a DAP which can actually.. you know, play my music.. and Doom ;)
posted by Freaky at 5:25 AM on September 6, 2007

The really interesting things about this for me:

• Lack of bluetooth. Can't think of a good rationale for that, except maybe beancounting. Or maybe that they know they don't need it in order to win a customer base.
• The Starbucks Button. Nobody's getting the significance of that, it seems. As I see it, it's this: Apple has connected the device permanently and forever to them. Let us never forget that this device is a web terminal with some offline storage and caching, not a standalone device. This thing is inside the iHalo from production line to trash heap. If the Starbucks deal went south tomorrow, I'm betting that all the iTouchies in the field would magically stop showing that button. If it turned into a McDonalds deal, you'd suddenly see a McDonald's button when you were in range of a Mickey D's.
• No removable mass storage. No card slot, no USB host port. They're trying to constrain your means of getting stuff onto the device. That may also be the reason for omitting Bluetooth. I'll be curious to see how hackable it is w.r.t. UMS.

posted by lodurr at 5:37 AM on September 6, 2007 [1 favorite]

Point of clarification about the Touch: Has anyone figured out if it can make Skype calls? Does it even have a mic?
posted by lodurr at 5:39 AM on September 6, 2007

99 cents for a ringtone, and only if you've already paid Apple for the DRM-crippled version of the song.

The Nano looks more like a bad Photoshop job than I would have imagined.

The Classic is finally at a disk capacity where I can't imagine being able to fill it before the inevitable Dead Battery Forced Upgrade.

The iPod Touch combines the inadequate disk capacity of an iPhone with the lack of phone of an iPod.

The Starbucks thing is totally scummy, I mean Microsoft-on-a-bad-day scummy. It's a feature that Starbucks gets to insert ads on it?

A $200 price drop on the iPhone after three months is just weird. The thing outsold all other smartphones combined last month. I can only imagine that AT&T is really pissed about something and they need to sell a lot more two-year-lock-in contracts fast.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 5:51 AM on September 6, 2007 [1 favorite]

The price drop is unusual, yes.

Does anybody know anything about the structure of Apple's deal with AT&T? I.e., does Apple get a cut of the subscription cost?

Also, many marketing thinkers would argue for a go-for-broke, lock-down-the-market strategy on a device like a new kind of phone handset. Apple hasn't usually gone that route, so this would be doubly unusual if that's what they were up to.
posted by lodurr at 6:02 AM on September 6, 2007

I'd get lost in the chaff and find myself putting it on shuffle and hitting next next next next

You don't need a new iPod. You need a new music collection.
posted by dobbs at 6:03 AM on September 6, 2007 [6 favorites]

Does anyone know when Apple is planning on releasing new laptops? Will they have touch screens?
posted by Kraftmatic Adjustable Cheese at 6:04 AM on September 6, 2007

Per the specs, it has no microphone.

Assuming the port works like that on an iPod, could you add a microphone via the docking port?

This is suddenly seeming like a really important point to me. If there's no mic, you can't use it to make VOIP calls. That would drive upgrades to the iPhone, bringing you farther into their monetization sphere. (Assuming they get a cut from AT&T, which I think I've read that they do, contrary to usual practice.)
posted by lodurr at 6:05 AM on September 6, 2007

Also, who'll take bets on how long it take HTC to slap a cease-and-decist on them?
posted by lodurr at 6:07 AM on September 6, 2007

The Classic is finally at a disk capacity where I can't imagine being able to fill it before the inevitable Dead Battery Forced Upgrade.

If you can't either replace the battery on your iPod yourself, or find someone to do it for you for less than the price of a new iPod, you probably shouldn't be using consumer electronics. I'm just sayin'.

Personally, I couldn't care less about new, fancy iPods - my 5gig Gen1 is still going strong. When it dies, I'll be replacing it with an iPod mini that I'll put a compact flash card in. The best part of this announcement is the drop in price on the iPhone, bringing me one step closer to buying an unlocked gen1 iPhone for $100-150, which I'm pretty sure I'll be able to do by next summer.
posted by god hates math at 6:08 AM on September 6, 2007

I think two ways how collecting and listening music are colliding there. On one side, there's the guy who wants to have everything with him. If he is a Bob Dylan fan he might want the more boring and crappy dylan records in his iPod. He'll probably listen to Under the Red Sky one time in his life, but wants to know the album is there, waiting.

On the other side, there he is: the guy who extensively uses smart playlist, shuffle, syncing with playlists, etc. A Master Playlist lover.

I think it's a good idea to make two different kinds of ipods for two types of user so different. I have no use for a 20GB or more ipod touch. Just added price and weight (I have never filled my old 20Gb 3g Ipod) And the size-obsessed users got a 120GB iPod, so it was still a good day for them.
posted by darkripper at 6:09 AM on September 6, 2007 [1 favorite]

churl: My experience is quite different. Went to the Apple store considering a laptop. They just came out with new iBooks and still had the old PowerPC PowerBooks. I wanted to know why I should get a PowerBook instead of the iBook, since many of the listed specs were the same, besides one's I didn't care for (plugging in a second monitor, higher-res screen, etc). The salesman had no patience for this and lectured me on how he didn't know but APPLE KNOWS. "Can you show me some kind of listing with more specs?" "Do you think Apple doesn't know what they're doing? They made the PowerBook for PROFESSIONALS. Trust me."

Eventually he mentioned that I need some kind of online storage and email for 50 bucks a month or whatever it was, to which I said no thanks (as I explained, I already have all the online storage space I need and it's more than they offer), I had to look down at my feet because I couldn't bare to look into this guy's buggy eyes as he explained that I clearly just don't know that I need it since he had his own '3d graphics company' and uses it all the time and what I have doesn't compare.. Was a bit awkward, wasn't expecting to get this treatment. That's when I got the "LOOK AT ME WHEN I TALK"

Whew. Anyway I don't remember what my point was. Oh, yes. Take a vacation. This iLapBook selling business is hard on both of us.
posted by romanb at 6:13 AM on September 6, 2007 [2 favorites]

churl -- are there different staff selection processes for the standalone and in-store (CompUSA) Apple stores?

romanb -- flipped q -- was it a standalone, or a CompUSA store? That guy doesn't sound like someone I'd expect an Apple org to hire, but he does sound like a CompUSA type.
posted by lodurr at 6:24 AM on September 6, 2007

Infoworld: A trademark lawyer in Taipei, speaking on condition of anonymity, said descriptive words normally can't be trademarked, but added that if the HTC Touch and the iPod touch share similar functions, such as allowing users to play digital music, then Apple may face a legal hassle. The HTC Touch does allow for digital music storage and playing.
posted by lodurr at 6:27 AM on September 6, 2007

I'd have to agree with darkripper. When I had my 3rd gen 15 gig iPod I had a crap load of music on it, but would really only listen to a couple albums at a time. I switched from that to a 1 gig shuffle with no real trouble. I swap music in and out all the time. I imagine there are a lot of people who don't feel compelled to carry their entire music library around with them.
posted by chunking express at 6:46 AM on September 6, 2007

lodurr -- it was a stanalone Apple store in a great big mall near Philadelphia. I've never been to an Apple store of any kind before that, and must say was expecting something different.
posted by romanb at 6:58 AM on September 6, 2007

This has to be the dumbest sentiment in consumer electronics. What were you expecting to happen? No new iPods for the holiday season? They keep doing this and the timing is pretty transparent. If you can't wait a month or two for the new hotness to come out, you don't get to complain when it does and is better than the old hotness.

I understand the high-level intricacies of product updates, fuck you very much. When replacing my iPod that just broke (apologies for it not being perfectly coordinated with the fall product schedule) I really wasn't considering that a month down the line the "update" was going to be a 160% storage increase. The previous "updates" to the 20/30G were a 50% storage increase and a $50 price drop, not the storage capacity equivalent of a 3-for-1 sale.

I don't care about the new iPod Touches or Nanos because the thing I care for most is how many songs and videos I can carry for the price. As a consumer, I'm allowed to be upset that in terms of the one feature I want from my product, it's now worth at a third of what I was told to pay for it a month ago.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 7:12 AM on September 6, 2007

But sometimes capitalization is enough legal distinction, hence the touch vs. Touch.
posted by yeti at 7:13 AM on September 6, 2007

XQUZYPHYR, what exactly would you have Apple do? As you said, your iPod was busted and you apparently needed to replace it ASAP. It's also no secret Apple releases iPods in September. If you couldn't survive the month without your iPod clearly it was worth whatever you paid for it.
posted by chunking express at 7:21 AM on September 6, 2007

When clicking on the photo on the Sydney Morning Herald site, you see this: "This is an advertiser message. The Photogallery will load shortly." Here I am, watching an ad, waiting to see a photo of the new line of iPods. It's not easy to see where the advertising stops and the "content" begins.
posted by krinklyfig at 7:22 AM on September 6, 2007

Costs more to market than to manufacture. Consume, you bastards! Consume!
posted by Burhanistan at 7:40 AM on September 6, 2007

Seriously, XQUZYPHR, I'm on your side. I know 21 days is 7 days longer then the return period, but I would march right back into whatever the frack Apple store you bought it from and politely, but sternly, tell them just how !#()%*'d you feel about this situation and what if anything can they do to help you.

Wouldn't hurt. If you hit a brick wall, keep escalating till you get to the store manager.

I've had a few iPod bamboozles, and every time I've patiently, un-offendingly, expressed my displeasure up the line... they have helped me out. The key is not pissing them off, if you turn it into a confrontation, human nature says, F Off.
posted by cavalier at 7:42 AM on September 6, 2007

"Nobody ever went broke predicting the imminent doom of Apple."

Actually, yes. Yes, they have. I don't think this phrase means what you think it means.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 8:01 AM on September 6, 2007

The lack of email was perplexing at first, but then it struck me that unlike browsing, email is passive. People carrying wireless email devices have an expectation that email will always show up immediately. WiFi-only email creates too many gaps in service.

lodurr: Does anybody know anything about the structure of Apple's deal with AT&T? I.e., does Apple get a cut of the subscription cost?

10% of all wireless service revenue. That's not a typo.

If the Starbucks deal went south tomorrow, I'm betting that all the iTouchies in the field would magically stop showing that button. If it turned into a McDonalds deal, you'd suddenly see a McDonald's button when you were in range of a Mickey D's.

Yes, exactly. Apple is increasingly tying content deals to the new iPhone/iPod line (Starbucks, YouTube). For those who have been wondering what that "empty row" on the iPhone home screen is for, it's for marketing crap like this.

Uther Bentrazor:are they really going to trickle out these things gig by gig until getting to 80gb (or more) like they did with the original iPods?

The new iPod Touch is flash-based, which hasn't reached anything close to that capacity at a consumer price point. I expect the iPhone to hit 16GB before Christmas. The next jump after that is 32GB, which probably won't drop until well into 2008.
posted by mkultra at 8:01 AM on September 6, 2007

I wouldn't discount the possibility of Bluetooth, particularly since it would be killer to have full A2DP support. Plus, some people have found images that show the Bluetooth icon:

Engadget's Bluetooth report on iPod Touch
posted by aubin at 8:08 AM on September 6, 2007

10% of all wireless service revenue. That's not a typo.

Well, I wouldn't know to be surprised ;-). Is that more than usual (as in, don't the handset makers sometimes have to kick back to the carriers to get them to use their wares?), or less?

10% of revenue... the service is $55/mo.? That's $132 per user over the 2 year life of contract. Doesn't sound like much, but it adds up fast if you can move a million units, which is what they're talking about. Add to that the increasing (and doggedly Apple-controlled) monetization of the iPhone/Touch platform, and you've got some serious "medium-tail" revenue streams kicking in.

That's some halo.

Of course, they wouldn't be the first outfit to think like this. But if you're a marketer or a product manager, you have to admit they're doing a remarkable job of execution. Even if you hate it (which I do), you have to admit they're running the game really well.
posted by lodurr at 8:11 AM on September 6, 2007

My boss bought an iPhone the afternoon of the day before the price cut.

Ha.
posted by jeff-o-matic at 8:15 AM on September 6, 2007

The price drop is unusual, yes.

Does anybody know anything about the structure of Apple's deal with AT&T? I.e., does Apple get a cut of the subscription cost?

Also, many marketing thinkers would argue for a go-for-broke, lock-down-the-market strategy on a device like a new kind of phone handset. Apple hasn't usually gone that route, so this would be doubly unusual if that's what they were up to.
posted by lodurr at 6:02 AM on September 6 [+] [!]

It would imagine it's because they anticipated a lot more demand for the regular iPhone than actually occured - if I remember, they predicted shifting 5 million units or something*, which I don't think happened.

They need to get rid of the current iPhone stock before Christmas, when the 3G iPhone comes out. Dropping the price along with a product launch means people are fixated with the new product, and generally don't stop to consider what the price drop means. Quite clever timing really, as it means people keep buying the iPhone when the next-gen is out in a few months.

Of course, it's highly likely that Apple get a cut of subscription costs as well - not a huge amount, but some. If you look at what they wrung out of AT&T re: voicemail, plan structure, and what they have over them ("so, we can push updates to the iPhone meaning people will be sticking with it, and your plans, longer. Plus shitloads of people are going to buy this thing"). That bit's just my opinion, of course, no insider knowledge or anything. Anyone with actual information about this can either confirm or deny. On preview, 10%.

*Could be pulling this figure out of nowhere, just what I remember reading. Someone feel free to correct me.
posted by djgh at 8:17 AM on September 6, 2007

I remember hearing unit volume numbers that basically had them right below predictions, but not by much.

Surprisingly enough, I did not realize there will actually be a 3G iPhone. That basically frees them from the carriers. (Except Verizon and Sprint/Nextel, obviously. Could be a nice painful jab to Verizon, though.)
posted by lodurr at 8:22 AM on September 6, 2007

It would imagine it's because they anticipated a lot more demand for the regular iPhone than actually occured - if I remember, they predicted shifting 5 million units or something*, which I don't think happened.

Figures that high did not come from Apple. They came from crazy analyst types.

Apple's stated goal is 1% of the market (approx. 10 million phones) by the end of 2008. The actual sales of the iPhone, as near as anyone can tell, are much more in line with that prediction.
posted by sparkletone at 8:24 AM on September 6, 2007

160 GB for 350 bucks, with video support and true gapless playback.

I hate my fucking Neuros N2 more than ever right now. 80 GB, buggy as shit, "bargain closeout" price is looking more and more like a ripoff 10 months down the line, and the closest thing to gapless playback was one half-finished user firmware that only works for ogg files and does that unreliably.

I think I'm ready to believe someone else's hype now (though I'm still pissed off at that Mac classic II that ate all my files many moons ago).
posted by Lentrohamsanin at 8:25 AM on September 6, 2007

The new iPod Touch is flash-based, which hasn't reached anything close to that capacity at a consumer price point. I expect the iPhone to hit 16GB before Christmas. The next jump after that is 32GB, which probably won't drop until well into 2008.
posted by mkultra at 11:01 AM on September 6

But then:

Not really. Apple has never had a 'everything but the kitchen sink' design mentality. Feature creep might scare off the non-technical people they mostly appeal to. For example, how many ipods have they gone through without adding a radio?
posted by Mitrovarr at 2:09 AM on September 6

They're both true statements, but it underscores the weird thing that apple does, which is to make user friendly products which cater to total novice users, but then to also rely on overly technical explanations of why their products are so expensive but do less than competitors.

The novice user who would be overwhelmed by features is going to understand the sudden drop in storage based on some esoteric hard drive technology? Why not add an SD card slot so I can increase my memory by 4GB for $16 whenever I feel like it. Oh, an SD slot would ruin the aesthetics. Okay, here's $400.

The only explanation which resolves this is that Apple's products are status symbols. Luxury electronics. The Beemer of computers. That's why people buy them. Not because they are so beautiful (which admittedly they are). I understand that this is what people say is the reason they bought it, but then I look at their feet and see a pair of neon green Crocs, and I bury my head in my new blackberry that I got for free with a service contract.
posted by Pastabagel at 8:28 AM on September 6, 2007 [1 favorite]

Surprisingly enough, I did not realize there will actually be a 3G iPhone. That basically frees them from the carriers. (Except Verizon and Sprint/Nextel, obviously. Could be a nice painful jab to Verizon, though.)

Before the iPhone was released, USA Today reported that AT&T had a five-year exclusive in the US. Has this ever been confirmed or denied?
posted by Armitage Shanks at 8:36 AM on September 6, 2007

Did you get a Pearl? My stepson's got one. It's sweet.

'Neon green crocs.' Heh. I love that comment because it so neatly sums up the behavior I see from a lot of self-professed 'design-o-philes'.

I'm not sure Apple relies on those overly-technical explanations. I get that people make them, but I'm not sure that Apple does, themselves. More often I see them just glossing over the gaps in performance or capacity or features, occasionally retreating to a 'less is more' redoubt. Occasionally they find a way to justify a claim and hang onto it with bloody nails, like when they used to say that the dual G5 desktop was the fastest desktop computer on the market. It all depended on how you defined terms like 'fastest', 'desktop' and 'market' (though yes, in certain applications, the things are FAST).
posted by lodurr at 8:40 AM on September 6, 2007

The frustrating thing about Apple, for a buyer who doesn't want to feel screwed, is knowing when to buy a product. Of course, it's natural to be pissed that the thing you just bought has a sudden plunge in price or a doubling of features for the same price. It's kind of like Apple's punishment for non-early adopters. But when you're an early adopter, you risk running up against whatever flaws have not worked themselves out at release time. (Apple still won't cop to some stuff...try to contact them about an iPod hard-drive issue, and they'll still pretend it's the first time they've ever heard of a hard-drive failure on an iPod.) I got burned with the iMac once, waiting to make sure it was decent and saving my pennies, and ended up buying a G5 like six weeks before they released the core duo model for the same price. Say what you want about whether you felt it was worth the price initially, but still...
posted by troybob at 8:40 AM on September 6, 2007

Man, you're buying their hype. Getting the G5 instead of the Core Duo is not exactly 'getting screwed.' You may, possibly, 5 or 6 years from now have a problem with getting software updates, but in the short term most of your software will run faster on the G5.
posted by lodurr at 8:45 AM on September 6, 2007

There is no reason to post this post on metafilter. I miss the noise flag.
posted by tehloki at 9:07 AM on September 6, 2007 [3 favorites]

What tehloki said.
posted by rocket88 at 9:12 AM on September 6, 2007

If you bought your iPhone very recently (10 calendar days from shipment) you can get a refund of the difference. See this.

This applies to the online store, but I'm willing to bet it'll apply to any Apple store purchase, with day-of-purchase counting as day-of-shipment.

Note -- you'll need to call very quickly to claim this.
posted by eriko at 9:13 AM on September 6, 2007

The 5G iPod has been out for two years. I've been putting off a purchase for a year or so because I figured an update was just around the corner and I wanted enough storage to hold all the music on my computer. It's taken a lot longer that I figured, but the fact that I can get 160GB for $350, and with an aluminum front instead of the super-scratchy acrylic, makes that wait worthwhile.

If you bought an iPod a month ago, then why is it any less useful that it was a month ago? If you'd like to upgrade, then sell your iPod and upgrade to the new hotness. You had poor timing, but that certainly wasn't Apple's fault.

You bought the device you bought because it served a purpose for you. The introduction of a new device, that you don't own doesn't diminish the usefulness of the device that's in your hand right now.
posted by bshort at 9:23 AM on September 6, 2007 [1 favorite]

You may, possibly, 5 or 6 years from now have a problem with getting software updates, but in the short term most of your software will run faster on the G5.

no, it probably won't.
posted by quarter waters and a bag of chips at 9:46 AM on September 6, 2007

lodurr writes "I did not realize there will actually be a 3G iPhone. That basically frees them from the carriers."

I'm pretty sure the comment meant "3G" as in "Third generation", not 3G as in networking protocol. Opening up the iPhone to different carriers would mean having some way to change a SIM card, like other GSM phones.

I'll keep using my Nokia until I need to replace it, and pretty damn sure I'll replace it with another Nokia. It still has more features than an iPhone does.

I'll keep using my 5G iPod until it dies on me. 30gb is enough to hold my library (currently). I'd like a larger capacity drive, but I keep a mirror of my library on my computers, so keeping the music library fairly small is not a bad thing. Not every system I own has 200+gb HDD space.

I'm disappointed in the new iPod designs, too. Was hoping after they revamped the Nano that Apple had FINALLY figured out the wrap-around aluminum case on the Mini was the most durable thing they'd come up with and would begin using it for all the models - especially when they used it for the Shuffle, I really expected to see it on the iPod next. Instead, they do a half-ass job, replacing the soft-as-butter plastic front, but leaving the mirror-finish "please don't look at me or I will become scratched" back. Plus now it's also on the Nano.

Can't say that I think the Nano is ugly, necessarily; it's certainly square though. My wife likes her 2G Nano because it fits her hand, the armband she wears while running isn't huge on her, etc. I don't think she would like the form factor on the new models, even with video and a bigger screen. Depends, I guess. How much wider is it than the Mini was?
posted by caution live frogs at 9:47 AM on September 6, 2007

Does anyone else think that the re-branding of the old HD-based model as "iPod Classic" is a less-than-subtle dig at the Zune? Like, "ha ha, your stuff is an antique, suxx0rz!".

There is no reason to post this post on metafilter. I miss the noise flag.
posted by tehloki 37 minutes ago

What tehloki said.
posted by rocket88 32 minutes ago

The irony of these two comments is amazing.
posted by mkultra at 9:47 AM on September 6, 2007

It's also kind of ironic how something like this gets 100+ comments. It looks like we are a bottomless pit of "I'm not interested in this post so I'm going to come in here and tell you about it" (myself included) and epic "my technology is better than your technology" wars.
posted by tehloki at 9:48 AM on September 6, 2007

It's also no secret Apple releases iPods in September.

This is seriously the most annoying line I keep hearing/reading about all this. Okay, we get it. You read Gizmodo. 99% of the country, myself included, don't. I'm not an "idiot" for not speculating Q3 product cycles- and again, even if I did, to say I should have "known" Apple was going to increase storage capacity nearly three times is laughable.

Brace yourself, but no, I didn't know that Apple "always releases iPods in September," last week being only the second time in my entire life I was momentarily concerned about purchasing an iPod. And most people on earth don't know this either. I'm not a tech junkie. I just want the best device to store the most songs for my price range. Three weeks ago, I was told that was a 30GB, $249 iPod. I feel cheated. You're not going to convince me otherwise by telling me how stupid I am for not reading my Apple horoscope before heading down to the Genius Bar.

This is exactly what pisses so many people off about Apple fetishism in general- that eye-rolling "well, obviously" shit. No, actually, most of us don't subscribe to Isn't Apple Awesome Magazine, okay?
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 9:50 AM on September 6, 2007 [1 favorite]

clf, I brainfarted and confused "3G" with "GSM". Wishful thinking?
posted by lodurr at 9:59 AM on September 6, 2007

The frustrating thing about Apple, for a buyer who doesn't want to feel screwed, is knowing when to buy a product.

Not to get into a bullshit, speculative conversation over Apple's marketing practices, but I am just shocked by the iPhone's price drop. Two months after it came out? I would be insulted. I mean, who wants to be known as the guy with the "cool phone" who bought it at an "uncool price"?
posted by phaedon at 10:03 AM on September 6, 2007

... and epic "my technology is better than your technology" wars.

While that's been true in past Applefilter posts, that's not going on here.

Most of the last half of this thread has been a pretty civil, cordial, perhaps low signal:noise discussion of yesterday's announcements -- mostly iPhone and Touch, with some speculative Applefilter thrown in. It's a very very long way from the usual wars.

If you don't like this stuff, then yes, you should not be here. There are many other threads to participate in. There's no need to police Metafilter regarding post or thread quality, and especially not for threads that you only come into in order to comment about the poor quality of the thread.
posted by lodurr at 10:04 AM on September 6, 2007

Three weeks ago, I was told that was a 30GB, $249 iPod. I feel cheated.

Seriously, had the newer version not come out, would you feel cheated? Did you feel, when you bought it, that you paid the right price for it? How long would have had to pass before you didn't feel cheated? A month? 6 months? Is the iPod you bought any less useful because this new, shiny model came out?

Guess what - the fact that you bought the damn thing is proof that it was the right price. Everything that's tech-driven is going to suffer from product upgrade issues. iPods, LCD TVs, and laptops are the worst offenders. If you don't want to deal with it, nobody's making you buy any of those things.
posted by god hates math at 10:27 AM on September 6, 2007 [2 favorites]

Is the iPod you bought any less useful because this new, shiny model came out?

Why are you setting up this "usefulness" straw man? Clearly the price is what's being complained about here. If you ordered a meal at a restaurant and the guy who came in fifteen minutes after you was told they just announced a special and he gets the same meal you did for a third of the price, you would be annoyed. If the waiter's response was "well are you any less full now, sir?" would that make you happier or would you just want to punch the prick in the face? So knock it off, please.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 10:47 AM on September 6, 2007 [7 favorites]

This won't help mister 30Gb replacement, here, but for those who bought a higher-priced iPhone recently, note that Apple WILL refund you the $difference.... if you paid the higher price within the last couple of weeks.

Apple Sales Policies Page
posted by rokusan at 10:51 AM on September 6, 2007

This is seriously the most annoying line I keep hearing/reading about all this. Okay, we get it. You read Gizmodo. 99% of the country, myself included, don't. I'm not an "idiot" for not speculating Q3 product cycles- and again, even if I did, to say I should have "known" Apple was going to increase storage capacity nearly three times is laughable.

No, you're not an idiot, but the fact that you're posting here is proof that you have access to the internet. You certainly could have googled around to see whether there were any rumors, whether anyone thought that a new iPod was about to come out, or where in the product cycle the iPod might be.

If you didn't do a little bit of research, or just didn't think to do that research, then you're not automatically an idiot, but you really can't blame Apple for updating a product that is two years old.

Retail products are often replaced by new, shiny products with new features so that you'll be enticed into replacing a purchase that hasn't worn out, and is otherwise serviceable. Apple is not unique in this, and you just can't fault them for playing the retail game.

Seriously, if you want an upgrade sell your iPod (I imagine it's in decent shape) on eBay and buy the new one. You'd be pleasantly surprised to see what used iPods go for, even after a product upgrade.
posted by bshort at 11:08 AM on September 6, 2007 [2 favorites]

...he gets the same meal you did for a third of the price, you would be annoyed

1. No, I wouldn't be annoyed. My concerns, when I'm buying something, are not what some other dude pays, or whether it looks like I'm getting a good value. My concern is whether what I'm buying is a good value to me, when I'm buying it.

2. The correct metaphor for this situation would be a diner coming in to the restaurant and getting 3 times as much food for the same price. There's a world of difference between the two situations, hinging entirely on what is sufficient for one's needs.

3. Clearly, by your own words, it's not the price that's being complained about. It's the value. You want the most songs and videos you can carry, for the price. That's the freaking definition of value.

Do you really not know the parable about this? You got what you paid for. So what's the problem?


Anyway, this is dumb. Nobody came into this thread to listen to you bitch, and I've used too many comments trying to say, "go bitch elsewhere, please." I'll let you bait other people into annoying, useless arguments for a while.
posted by god hates math at 11:14 AM on September 6, 2007

Seriously, if you want an upgrade sell your iPod (I imagine it's in decent shape) on eBay and buy the new one. You'd be pleasantly surprised to see what used iPods go for, even after a product upgrade.

That reminds me. I was checking eBay for iPods to replace my lost one. I had a feeling I wouldn't find anything at a decent price for used, but I looked anyway. One rather battered-looking 5G iPod sold for $299 plus shipping. That particular auction ended the day the new iPods came out. I lol'd.
posted by katillathehun at 11:29 AM on September 6, 2007

Two months is a pretty short hop to go from New Hotness to Clearance Item (see the Special Deals section of the Apple site - the low-capacity iPhones are there for ya). Makes me wonder - is Apple clearing the shelves to make room for a newer model as has been speculated, or are they losing more money than they thought they would, running out of new buyers, and trying to plug the leaks? There are a finite number of people able to afford an iPhone, a smaller number of whom are in the market for such an item, and a limited number of those will be willing to buy it even if it means changing companies. This kind of a massive price drop, plus a decent kick in the teeth for early adopters, smells fishy to me. Apple doesn't generally go around doing that sort of thing to the people who buy their products. It isn't smart marketing to piss off your fan base, and Apple knows this.

It would have been much smarter for Apple to have released the iPhone outside of the US, at the same original price, if they could have cut a deal with a provider. They would have simultaneously increased sales, expanded the market base, and gotten rid of the excess. I'm guessing that being able to locate a provider who would comply with Apple's demands is the issue here. AT&T (while still Cingular) knuckled under in terms of plan pricing to obtain the influx of new customers a fancy new phone would generate.

But Steve Jobs is a canny bastard. Perhaps they're clearing the decks for a multi-nation rollout of a newer, better iPhone, and the US release was more along the lines of a stress test for the device? That would piss a bunch of folks off now, wouldn't it?
posted by caution live frogs at 11:36 AM on September 6, 2007

I hesitate to say this, because I don't want to give them any ideas -- but people more widely listened-to than I have doubless already said it, so I'll go ahead. If Jobs would just produce a GSM iPhone, they could mostly lock it in to services the way it's locked-in now, and the whole "we want to control the experience" line of malarkey would be moot (because it is malarkey, seriously, if it were GSM the only thing they couldn't control is the voicemail, and they could probably find a way to finess that).

The real lock-in on the iPhone is via the Internet, not via the phone network. I think the reason they haven't gone wide is that Jobs is a control freak and he wants the dollars he knows about -- not the ones that he'd have to speculate to get.
posted by lodurr at 11:45 AM on September 6, 2007

If Jobs would just produce a GSM iPhone, they could mostly lock it in to services the way it's locked-in now

the iPhone is GSM, It's just that the SIM card is soldered to the board. And AT&T's network is GSM only.
posted by delmoi at 11:52 AM on September 6, 2007

XQUZYPHYR, I don't read gizmodo, but before dropping 400 bucks on an iPod I might do a bit of research. Don't get mad at me because you feel ripped off.
posted by chunking express at 12:00 PM on September 6, 2007

Well, then, if they unsolder the damn SIM.

Time like this I want to give up on understanding the mobile phone infrastructure.
posted by lodurr at 12:01 PM on September 6, 2007

1. No, I wouldn't be annoyed. My concerns, when I'm buying something, are not what some other dude pays, or whether it looks like I'm getting a good value. My concern is whether what I'm buying is a good value to me, when I'm buying it.

No offense, but you're totally missing the point in this particular example. This is about Apple's marketing practices making people question themselves not about the total price of the product - but rather, was it worth $200 to have the iPhone ten weeks before anyone else? That question has less to do with how consumers value the product, and more with how Apple prices it. The fact that practically no time has passed, no significant upgrade to the iPhone line has taken place, and that there is no backstory that indicates that iPhones are selling poorly enough to justify the pricecut, should make consumers, some who waited two days in fucking line, feel like they've been had.

As an Apple enthusiast, I personally believe that, down the line, this story is going to blow up. Because Apple markets their products in a way that hinges on the "announcement" and "availability", and they have just taken away strength behind their own punch. Get ready. iPhone. Coming soon. $599. Hype. Prepare yourself for a revolution in technology... Ohhh... wait a second. Shot myself in the foot. Stay at home. Suck it up, we'll drop the prices soon enough. There you go, now you have the iPhone, and you're not a chump. Next time around, smart buyers are going to initially hold off.
posted by phaedon at 12:04 PM on September 6, 2007

Just waiting for a price drop does not automatically grant one a non-chump status.
posted by Burhanistan at 12:06 PM on September 6, 2007

With respect to the iPhone price drop, I thought this post was interesting:

One person on IRC said “I don’t have a ton of cash to burn, I could have used that $200.” Well apparently he did have the cash to burn and burn it he did. He gave it to Apple. Willingly. They didn’t twist his arm. They asked a price, and he paid it. ... If people would leave their self esteems out of business decisions, they would not only be happier about their purchases, they might even smarter about them.

posted by chunking express at 12:16 PM on September 6, 2007 [1 favorite]

Next time around, smart buyers are going to initially hold off.

Pretty much. No one is forcing people to rush out and buy the next piece of junk apple puts an "i" in front of. Lucky for Apple, there are lots of people that don't think before they spend wads of cash.
posted by chunking express at 12:18 PM on September 6, 2007

Because Apple markets their products in a way that...

Meh. Every company of note does this. Apple just happens to be king of the electronics hill right now. That, combined with a relatively small product line that makes every new product announcement seem like the NEW LIFE-CHANGING PRODUCT allows them to bank a lot of cash off of early adopters.

I'd like to think that you're right - that this $200 price change will cause people to think twice about what they buy. I mean, how many crappy first revision products do people that buy from Apple/Microsoft/Volkswagen/etc have to go through, before they realize that the first version is overpriced and underpowered?

However, I'm pretty sure that, for the next few years at least, people will run out and spend their hard-earned cash on brand-new apple products. Some people just have to have it first.

And chunking, that article is great. That's pretty much how I feel exactly. Like I said upthread, wake me up when I can get a used iPhone for $100.
posted by god hates math at 12:27 PM on September 6, 2007

the iPhone is GSM, It's just that the SIM card is soldered to the board. And AT&T's network is GSM only.

No the SIM card is not soldered to the board. It's only a bit inconvenient because you need a straightened paperclip to eject the SIM from the phone.
posted by gyc at 12:29 PM on September 6, 2007

iPhone open letter from Steve Jobs: offering $100 Apple store credit to early iPhone adopters.
posted by gyc at 12:38 PM on September 6, 2007

To all iPhone customers:

I have received hundreds of emails from iPhone customers who are upset about Apple dropping the price of iPhone by $200 two months after it went on sale. After reading every one of these emails, I have some observations and conclusions.

First, I am sure that we are making the correct decision to lower the price of the 8GB iPhone from $599 to $399, and that now is the right time to do it. iPhone is a breakthrough product, and we have the chance to 'go for it' this holiday season. iPhone is so far ahead of the competition, and now it will be affordable by even more customers. It benefits both Apple and every iPhone user to get as many new customers as possible in the iPhone 'tent'. We strongly believe the $399 price will help us do just that this holiday season.

Second, being in technology for 30+ years I can attest to the fact that the technology road is bumpy. There is always change and improvement, and there is always someone who bought a product before a particular cutoff date and misses the new price or the new operating system or the new whatever. This is life in the technology lane. If you always wait for the next price cut or to buy the new improved model, you'll never buy any technology product because there is always something better and less expensive on the horizon. The good news is that if you buy products from companies that support them well, like Apple tries to do, you will receive years of useful and satisfying service from them even as newer models are introduced.

Third, even though we are making the right decision to lower the price of iPhone, and even though the technology road is bumpy, we need to do a better job taking care of our early iPhone customers as we aggressively go after new ones with a lower price. Our early customers trusted us, and we must live up to that trust with our actions in moments like these.

Therefore, we have decided to offer every iPhone customer who purchased an iPhone from either Apple or AT&T, and who is not receiving a rebate or any other consideration, a $100 store credit towards the purchase of any product at an Apple Retail Store or the Apple Online Store. Details are still being worked out and will be posted on Apple's website next week. Stay tuned.

We want to do the right thing for our valued iPhone customers. We apologize for disappointing some of you, and we are doing our best to live up to your high expectations of Apple.

Steve Jobs
Apple CEO

posted by vacapinta at 12:39 PM on September 6, 2007 [1 favorite]

Totally, completely, the right move.
posted by phaedon at 12:42 PM on September 6, 2007

Occasionally they find a way to justify a claim and hang onto it with bloody nails, like when they used to say that the dual G5 desktop was the fastest desktop computer on the market. It all depended on how you defined terms like 'fastest', 'desktop' and 'market' (though yes, in certain applications, the things are FAST).

Gawd, or when apple claimed they had the "first 64 bit personal computer" When I mentioned PDAs or Linux-powered ARM boxes people claimed they didn't count because they were not "Portable" or "Workstations"
posted by delmoi at 12:47 PM on September 6, 2007

No the SIM card is not soldered to the board. It's only a bit inconvenient because you need a straightened paperclip to eject the SIM from the phone.

Err, that's right. Sorry.
posted by delmoi at 12:54 PM on September 6, 2007

This is great, that $100 will go towards the purchase of 10.5 when it comes out in about a month.

I wasn't a whiner, but I *was* unhappy with the price dropping so quickly. I'm really happy about this.
posted by mrbill at 12:54 PM on September 6, 2007

For sheer geek appeal, though, the dual processor G5 towers were rather nice pieces of hardware. People doing stuff like rendering and gene-sequencing (yes, there's a lot of gene-sequence-analysis done on Macs - it surprised me, too), I'm sure they were the duck's nuts.

But at the same time, you could definitely get faster Intel-/AMD-based hardware that would run desktop OSs.

Speed is relative. The G5 towers were great for what they were used for. Dual- or quad-Athlon towers were great for what they were used for. They weren't typically teh same kinds of things. (If I were less lazy this afternoon I'd link "typically" to some story about massively-parallel systems made up of small commodity boxes like Minis or Shuttle APCs.)
posted by lodurr at 12:55 PM on September 6, 2007

First-adopting 10.5? Oh, dear -- please rethink that. Or at least, keep some good backups.
posted by lodurr at 12:56 PM on September 6, 2007

Totally, completely, the right move.

Indeed. It's not $100 cash or check, it's $100 store credit. "Hey, here's $100, do whatever you want with it, as long as you spend it here." Heh.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 1:27 PM on September 6, 2007

It's the only way Steve's gonna get people to actually buy ringtones... or for that matter Starbucks' music...

although a refurb 8gb is very tempting for 350 now...
posted by stratastar at 1:32 PM on September 6, 2007

you really can't blame Apple for updating a product that is two years old.

Good lord, man: I get it. They update their products. I'm not angry that they updated the iPod. No one's angry they updated the iPhone. I'm angry that their "update" to the particular iPod I prefer was to discontinue it immediately after selling me one and then offer the better version of it at the same price. Thanks everyone for telling me I should have "done more research." Maybe if someone at the actual Apple Store bothered to tell me that I wouldn't be so angry. For information that apparently was so fucking obvious to everyone the "Geniuses" recommending I buy another 30GB sure didn't seem to know anything about it even when the new ones were halfway to the store on a delivery truck. Huh.

People aren't mad that the iPhone was updated. They're mad that the pre-update version had an unprecedented price drop that calls into question the excessiveness of the original price. Likewise, the "update" to my now-called "Classic" iPod was a $100 price drop for the better version. Not a 50% storage increase. Not a $50 across-the-board price drop. A price-relative storage increase to nearly three times the previous capacity. Storage-wise, that's $700 worth of the iPod I bought last month for the $250 one they're selling today. If you cannot possibly imagine why that's frustrating then you're deliberately trying not to.

XQUZYPHYR, I don't read gizmodo, but before dropping 400 bucks on an iPod I might do a bit of research. Don't get mad at me because you feel ripped off.

$250, but I digress. I replaced my iPod because after an hour session at the appointment-only "Genius Bar," including subway rides to Arlington because there are no Apple Stores in DC, I was told it was unrepairable, and then casually "recommended" by the "Genius" that I take advantage of the 10% discount on a new iPod offered if I gave them my old one to recycle. Excuse me- please, oh please excuse me- for not thinking after all of that, that what I should really do is go home and research a product I already owned so I could go back and do that all over again.

Apple has an entire store. Filled with employees. Their job is to know stuff about Apple products. I was in one. Replacing my iPod. I even had to make an appointment to talk to him; that's how much he knew about Apple product. And yet what I was supposed to have done is gone home and researched Apple Products.

Really.

This is why I'm "mad" at the Apple defenders here. Because there is no other company on the face of the earth you would offer bullshit excuses like that for. None. What the fuck, man?
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 1:34 PM on September 6, 2007 [1 favorite]

Indeed. It's not $100 cash or check, it's $100 store credit.

To people who bought the first iphones, Apple store credit is cash.
posted by vacapinta at 1:34 PM on September 6, 2007

The new iPod nano with video: for people who want to fuck up their eyes REALLY QUICKLY.

I mean seriously. That screen is what, the size of a postage stamp?
posted by The Esteemed Doctor Bunsen Honeydew at 1:36 PM on September 6, 2007

Reading that letter, I get the sense that Jobs wrote it off the cuff and didn't let anyone in PR boilerplate it to death with "Apple ignited the computer revolution blah blah blah." Good move, I say.
posted by emelenjr at 1:53 PM on September 6, 2007

Excuse me- please, oh please excuse me- for not thinking after all of that, that what I should really do is go home and research a product I already owned so I could go back and do that all over again.

I understand your frustration, but what you're saying here is that the "$700 worth of the iPod" (which you didn't know about at the time) wasn't worth another subway ride, which is just silly.

Look, you're pissed because you feel you were made a fool of, taken for a ride, etc, etc. I can dig that feeling, really, I can, but dammit, if you're gonna spend money on electronic goods, then do your research. If you can't be bothered, for whatever reason, then there is no one to blame but yourself. And I say that as someone who bought a 1.0ghz G4 laptop at very good price, only to watch a newer model come out six weeks later. That's why I know about the refurbished deals at the Apple store and the Mac OS Rumors buying guide. My own ignorance 'cause me to miss out and I'm not gonna let that happen again.

Now go back to the Apple Store and politely raise a little hell until they upgrade you. And if you complain about it being too far, then consider it a lesson learned.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 1:58 PM on September 6, 2007

To people who bought the first iphones, Apple store credit is cash.

How do you figure, vacapinta? He says:

"we have decided to offer every iPhone customer who purchased an iPhone from either Apple or AT&T, and who is not receiving a rebate or any other consideration, a $100 store credit."
posted by CunningLinguist at 2:10 PM on September 6, 2007

Dear CL: I was simply making the point that the type of people who bought the iphones are likely not one-time Apple customers but rather would be spending (at least) $100 cash you gave to them at Apple anyways and most likely in the very near future.
posted by vacapinta at 2:13 PM on September 6, 2007

Oh, sorry, misunderstood.
posted by CunningLinguist at 2:24 PM on September 6, 2007

XQUZYPHYR, for God's sake, are you 10? Or is it just that you've you never purchased consumer electronics before? Do you honestly think that any other consumer electronics store is going to do anything different after a published return policy timeframe?

And Apple is notoriously secretive about their unannounced products (yes, the launch itself was widely publicized, but NO source had concrete details of any of the launch items yesterday, with the exception of the look of the new iPod nano), so why on earth do you think that an $8/hr store employee is going to have inside information? And no, no Sony Style (e.g.) store employee is going to be privy to anything different. Add a publicized "event" to the fact that (as others above have pointed out) the 5G iPod has been around for nearly 2 years, and you'd have to be a complete idiot to think that there wasn't at least a possibility that Apple might release an improved product at the same price (no, really, in the consumer electronics industry no less!)

Besides, if you honestly cared to protect yourself from being blindsided by a new, improved, overdue product, you would have purchased the iPod from a retailer with a longer return policy (e.g. Target or Costco, who both give you 90 days for a full refund). It's not like the Apple Stores keep their return/price adjustment policies a secret.

You're just a bad consumer, and your indignation is even more embarrassing than your shopping skills.
posted by esoterica at 2:43 PM on September 6, 2007 [2 favorites]

gods, thank you Esoterica for saying what I was hoping to say by the time I finished this thread.

If you are going to blow money on a non-essential electronics product, and aren't aware that products get upgraded regularly, then caveat emptor dude. Welcome to reality. Every company does it (even mine) and b!tching about Apple just sounds like sour grapes.

How dare Apple not cater to your specific frustration! Riot!
posted by Dantien at 2:58 PM on September 6, 2007

To all those asking "why the price drop"? I think it's fairly obvious: if they can keep the momentum going, they can end up dominating the broad retail market for smartphones, much as they do now for music players. They won't have much of an incursion into the business smartphone market at first, mainly because of office integration software and the fact that the business market is already invested in RIMs and Treos and they don't turn on a dime. But for everybody else, the smartphone market was still wide open for a leader to emerge, and they've snatched it in a single stroke, or almost...

The "almost" stems from the fact that it was just too pricey; they were going to run out of customers soon as everyone who was going to buy one at that price point did. With this move they've opened up new categories of qualified buyers, particularly a) non-technophiles who wouldn't have gotten interested until they've actually seen one and would like one now, but not at that price; and b) people who wanted one all along, but couldn't afford it. This move keeps the momentum going at least through the end of the year, and by that time, they will own the market.
posted by George_Spiggott at 3:14 PM on September 6, 2007

vacapinta:

Not so much. It's $100 minus product markup. I'm not a Mac user (although I might pick up a refurb for tinkering), so I don't have the apparent brand loyalty, so perhaps my opinion of this as unacceptable is skewed.

I figure do this right and send me a check, or don't do this at all....
posted by Samizdata at 3:18 PM on September 6, 2007

You're just a bad consumer, and your indignation is even more embarrassing than your shopping skills.

Congratulations, you win the Most Orwellian Turn Of Phrase of the Week Award!
posted by turaho at 3:30 PM on September 6, 2007 [1 favorite]

Samizdata,

Are you serious? (And no, you're not the only one with an offensive sense of entitlement, but you are the only one who's, appallingly, looking the proverbial gift horse in the mouth).

First, you're honestly indignant that a company would drop a price on a phone? Are people here not aware how quickly prices dropped on "hot" phones like the RAZR or the ROKR or the Blackjack or the Q (do people not remember that the RAZR was initially a $600+ phone)? And phones go from $200 to free all the time within months of their release, which IMO is far more insulting than dropping the price from $600 to $400.

I would hope that you knew you were paying a premium for being an early adopter, and obviously the phone was worth $600 to you or you wouldn't have purchased it (or you would have at least returned it once you determined otherwise). So I'm not sure how you can, with a good conscience, ask for anything at all, and the fact that Apple is offering any concession for their price drop puts them in a completely different league from any other electronics company, because as far as I know, the step they're taking is completely unprecedented.

And no, I'm not an Apple apologist, I don't have an iPhone, and I don't really even want an iPhone. But this "I deserve" attitude is getting out of hand.
posted by esoterica at 3:45 PM on September 6, 2007

turaho, so the retailer is somehow responsible for anything besides providing accurate information about their current products and explicitly outlining their return policy? If I purchase something without doing any product research, from a store whose return policy doesn't meet my standards, when I could have purchased it from countless other stores with more liberal return policies should I determine that my inadequate product research was, well, inadequate, and I'm annoyed, that's my fault, not the store's. There is absolutely such thing as a bad consumer, your pseudo-literary pseudo-insight notwithstanding.
posted by esoterica at 4:00 PM on September 6, 2007

You're just a bad consumer

....thank you?
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 4:43 PM on September 6, 2007

....thank you?

My pleasure.
posted by esoterica at 4:47 PM on September 6, 2007

I can't imagine just blowing $250 on anything without doing some basic research on it. Any google search on 'ipod' done over the past month or so would have turned up blog posts and news articles about the new ipods coming out this month.
posted by empath at 4:52 PM on September 6, 2007

I can't imagine just blowing $250 on anything without doing some basic research on it.
(Sigh) One more time. I've owned one for a year and a half. They offered me a discount if I turned in the old dead one and replaced it. I didn't realize I had to go research it again. Especially when I'm in a store full of Apple experts, who were standing there telling me that I should just buy a new 30GB. I didn't realize I was supposed to go to a different store because I was supposed to know they had different return policies. I didn't realize that I was supposed to be well aware that Apple's new product lines are highly secretive, elusive product launches that Apple is notorious for keeping under wraps, but simultaneously everyone knows about and can find with a simple Googling. I didn't realize I'm a "bad consumer" because I was supposed to do all that instead of assuming the salesman at the store would just, oh I don't know, help me.

You know what, I give up. I'm not going to repeat the same comments all over again to answer the kneejerk responses I'm getting from people who didn't read them the first time. Screw it. I'm perfectly happy with the 30GB and not having to spend all that time enlightening myself to more effectively own a shiny beeping thing.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 5:20 PM on September 6, 2007 [1 favorite]

I can't imagine just blowing $250 on anything without doing some basic research on it. Any google search on 'ipod' done over the past month or so would have turned up blog posts and news articles about the new ipods coming out this month.

I don't think anybody's really pissed about the new iPods, as was said upstream -- I think they're pissed at having just bought a product that has been instantly rendered second-rate. To be all full disclosure about it, I bought a nano a month ago that is now half as good as the cheapest nano Apple sells, which sucks. I don't feel like a "bad consumer" for not having done better research; I bought the iPod because I wanted to have music to get me through my impossibly dull work day and I wanted it right then, not a month later. I wouldn't have waited a month because some Scientologist Mac enthusiast posted to his blog that he was really, really sure that Apple would release an update any minute now, although I probably would have bought a used one via eBay.

No. What irritates me is that the return window is as narrow as it is, and no rebate/store credit is forthcoming for people who just purchased an outmoded product. Hell, even a ten-dollar gift certificate would be nice. I mean, it's the thought that counts! I'm not crushed or anything, it's just kinda like, "Aw, man...Steve Jobs, you bitch..." I'm happy enough with what I've got, and have no real interest in watching movies on a screen roughly the same size as the face of my watch, but...yeah. Pretty lame. Sorry.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 5:49 PM on September 6, 2007

Y'know, XQUZETC., if nobody else in the thread seems to understand you, I actually do. MeFi may be populated with people who spend countless hours doing market research before taking a crap, but there are a large number of people in the actual offline world who just go to the store and buy something based on the good-faith expectation that the people hired to sell them know what they are talking about.

The folks who live and breathe Mac might spend all day at MacRumors. I don't. I'm sorry you got kind of screwed on the deal. My wife bought a Mini a few years ago, shortly before they killed it and released the Nano. Me, I ended up with a new MacBook Pro, only to find out that had I bought it two weeks later they would have thrown in iLife '08 for free. I fully understand the frustration.
posted by caution live frogs at 5:50 PM on September 6, 2007

I've had a 6 GB Sansa that plays videos, has FM, records live via built in mic, has a slot for a micro SD card, and has user replaceable batteries for $120 over 9 months ago. Granted it isn't quite as slick looking as the iPod, but screw 'em anyways.
posted by Burhanistan at 5:53 PM on September 6, 2007

I didn't realize I'm a "bad consumer" because I was supposed to do all that instead of assuming the salesman at the store would just, oh I don't know, help me.

I'm confused, it seems to me he did help you. You needed a new iPod immediately, you went to the Apple Store, he sold you a new iPod identical to your prior one (except for $50 less, since IIRC Apple had dropped the prince from $299 to $249) because it seemed to fit your needs (if you had in fact needed more storage, he could have sold you an 80GB iPod instead of your 30GB iPod -- but that apparently wasn't actually worth additional money to you). Was he supposed to tell you -- if he even knew -- that there was to be an event in three weeks where new iPods may or may not have been released, including iPods that may or may not have been, in your mind, substantial upgrades from the one you had? Was he supposed to tell you to go to Target to buy one because they had a more liberal return policy?

Or let me put it another way, if you had, say, gone to a Honda dealership with an immediate need for a new car, and they sold you an Accord three weeks before the new Accord was announced, would you have expected Honda and/or the dealership to provide any sort of compensation once the new model was revealed, given that information could have been gleaned from the intertubes of the imminent arrival of the new model? Of course not. In fact I hope it sounds patently absurd.

And in fact this is exactly why companies don't pre-release information about improved products, because they know that sales of their existing product will immediately plummet. The phenomenon even has a name: the Osborne effect. Apple has broken the no-pre-announce rule exactly once in memory: to pre-announce the transition to Intel processors, but that was due to the overriding need to have developers working on the new platform.

Thank you for finally allowing that being ill-informed about your iPod purchase is your choice. No one was saying it was a bad choice, in fact in the time-is-money sense it's likely arguably foolish to spend a significant chunk of one's time following Engadget, etc. And IMO, in the real world, for 98% of people the practical difference between a 30GB iPod and an 80GB iPod would be negligible. So enjoy your iPod and gloat about the time you saved by not caring.
posted by esoterica at 6:20 PM on September 6, 2007 [2 favorites]

What irritates me is that the return window is as narrow as it is, and no rebate/store credit is forthcoming for people who just purchased an outmoded product.

Are people really not aware that there are other buying choices for iPods besides the Apple Store? I mean they're sold at Walmart for chrissakes. Again, it is your choice to forego a better return policy to shop at a pretty store.
posted by esoterica at 6:25 PM on September 6, 2007

Are people really not aware that there are other buying choices for iPods besides the Apple Store? I mean they're sold at Walmart for chrissakes. Again, it is your choice to forego a better return policy to shop at a pretty store.

I think it's unlikely that any store would accept a return of a working product bought a month ago. However, Apple is offering a credit to people who bought the iPhone two and a half months ago. No one's entitled to that credit -- caveat emptor, as seems to be your big argument -- but really, if they're giving the credit to one group of customers, it'd be nice if it extended across the board. It's not the end of the world for me that it doesn't, because frankly, $150 (what I paid for the nano) just isn't all that much money to me. Does it annoy? You bet. I'm not sure what you're even arguing...is it really that mystifying to you that even the bestest consumer ever might be a little irritated in this circumstance?
posted by kittens for breakfast at 6:56 PM on September 6, 2007

I think it's unlikely that any store would accept a return of a working product bought a month ago.

Then you would be wrong. I know of no store, in fact, besides the Apple Store, that wouldn't refund all your money for the iPod no matter what the reason for return. I know for a fact that Target and Costco give you 90 days, and Best Buy, Circuit City, and Amazon give you 30 days to return for whatever reason you want.

And your statement that $150 isn't all that much money to you makes it all the more perplexing why it annoys you so much that Apple would have the audacity to come out with a new product without informing you prior, and not provide you any credit outside of their return period, the terms of which they made available to you prior to your purchase. I have never heard of a company that, beyond a pre-specified return period, credits hardware customers after the company announces a new model. And Apple does accept returns and make price adjustments to people who do fall under their return period.

So in other words, your argument is that you don't agree with the duration of Apple's return period -- which is valid, their return period is short and their restocking fee sucks. So my argument still stands that you should make your Apple purchases elsewhere than at the Apple Store. But that's your choice.
posted by esoterica at 7:20 PM on September 6, 2007

And your statement that $150 isn't all that much money to you makes it all the more perplexing why it annoys you so much that Apple would have the audacity to come out with a new product without informing you prior, and not provide you any credit outside of their return period

Well, because they actually are doing exactly that for iPhone early adopters. It's the difference between "oh, well, that sucks" upon hearing that the new version has been released, and "oh, well, that really sucks" upon hearing that Apple is willing to cut people a break, but only if they bought the sexy new thing everyone's talking about. One annoys, but you figure, that's life; the other makes me actively annoyed with the seller, which is different.

(Incidentally, my iPod came from Amazon, so I don't have as much personal stake in this as you seem to believe. I just think it sucks. Though returning my iPod to Amazon isn't as great an option as you may think -- at this point, the item's been opened, used, its packaging and packing slip lost to the four winds, etc., and all of these things reduce the amount of money they're willing to give you back. For me, it makes more sense to hold on to the thing.)

So in other words, your argument is that you don't agree with the duration of Apple's return period -- which is valid, their return period is short and their restocking fee sucks. So my argument still stands that you should make your Apple purchases elsewhere than at the Apple Store.

Um...which is fine, except that you also seem to be arguing that anyone who doesn't do this is a fucking moron who has only him/herself to blame, and I'm arguing that there is a reasonable expectation that a company with Apple's rep should behave in a more customer-friendly fashion. I don't think "Apple: You Knew We Were a Snake When You Picked Us Up" is a motto that's likely to win many hearts. You further seem to be arguing in Apple's favor even as you say that they suck! Your logic is...interesting.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 8:52 PM on September 6, 2007

Big change on this new batch of iPods when it comes to video output. Instead of headphone jack to composite output, which was inexpensive, now it's dock connector to component or composite output - either of which will cost you $50, but they do include an iPod power brick. Maybe some 3rd parties will get into the act and lower this stiff price a bit.
posted by porn in the woods at 9:32 PM on September 6, 2007

I'm pretty sure the comment meant "3G" as in "Third generation", not 3G as in networking protocol. Opening up the iPhone to different carriers would mean having some way to change a SIM card, like other GSM phones.

caution live frogs, I did actually mean 3G as in 3G network. I think it'll be released around Christmas time, and possibly in Europe first due to the broader 3G coverage and usage there. I think this passage is particularly suggestive:

Second, being in technology for 30+ years I can attest to the fact that the technology road is bumpy. There is always change and improvement, and there is always someone who bought a product before a particular cutoff date and misses the new price or the new operating system or the new whatever.

Emphasis mine

Basically, lowering the price of the iPhone does all the right things for Apple:
- Shifts stock for the next model
- Possibility of gaining a larger market share

You could maybe argue that they'll have two iPhone models - the "base" model, which is the one we know now, and the "high end" model with 3G, with the camera on the front and slightly better specs. So like the MacBook and MacBook Pro etc.

Of course, as with all things Apple, anyone talking about it doesn't know anything for sure, and anyone who knows anything for sure isn't talking about it. So basically just speculation.
posted by djgh at 9:44 PM on September 6, 2007

they actually are doing exactly that for iPhone early adopters

No, they actually are not. The iPhone had been out for 2 months, the 30GB iPod in question for 2 years. The iPod in question was succeeded by an improved model, the iPhone merely received a price cut. And they do have a price adjustment policy (as does Amazon, FYI), it's just not as long as you would like. And their policy is outlined very clearly for anyone who is buying products in their stores, so, no, you're not an idiot for buying from their store, you're an idiot for buying from their store and then complaining about their return policy when you could have gone elsewhere. I don't know how I can make that any more clear, but you, miss kitten, seem to be approaching hysteria over this.
posted by esoterica at 10:00 PM on September 6, 2007

I'm surprised no one has mentioned this yet, but--while keeping iphone sales going was obviously a concern--I think it more likely that the $200 price drop was primarily to keep the sales of the new ipod touch from cannibalizing sales of the iphone. Apple obviously wants to grab a huge share of the smart phone market, and (it appears to me, anyway) the only product that really had the potential to keep them from making Jobs' year-end goal for sales was their own, the new ipod touch. The price equivalence between the two devices mitigates that concern.

(Also, the ipod classic is a frickin savvy move--keeps the base happy.)
posted by LooseFilter at 10:46 PM on September 6, 2007

When a phone becoming cheaper generates this much angst, you know that Apple is ruling the world. As they say, there's no such thing as bad publicity.
posted by randomstriker at 12:18 AM on September 7, 2007

The price drop does make one feel sort of shitty. But I'm more sorry I didn't wait for an openMoko. However, I feel much better now that I have bash, ssh, and an IM application, my principle complaints.

stupid closed iphone
posted by cytherea at 1:29 AM on September 7, 2007 [1 favorite]

Apple introduces the iPology. Innovative marketing scheme turns complaints into publicity.
posted by alms at 7:01 AM on September 7, 2007

Actually, Miss Esoterica, I am...not a miss. Surely you would know this had you done your proper research and checked my profile. And you can project hysteria onto me all you like, but I assure you there's none to be found -- I just generally think Apple's behavior is lame. I am a little irritated with you, as you continuously move the goalposts of...whatever your argument is, which makes talking to you something of a trial. Anyway, it appears that those whose opinions matter most are not siding with Apple on this one:

Investors were also rattled by the news, sending Apple's shares down a total of more than 6 percent over the past two days, a drop that has wiped out about $8 billion in shareholder wealth. Apple's stock closed Thursday at $135.01.

I expect they'll quickly bounce back from this, though I expect that the shareholders are not pleased. I wonder how many of them were also iPhone early adopters?
posted by kittens for breakfast at 7:51 AM on September 7, 2007

It's probably a good time to buy some stock. The chances that it won't be back at $145 any day now seem pretty slim to me. And if this Christmas is like other Christmases they'll sell tons of iPods and make buckets of money and the stock will probably inch up again. Of course, buying stock for $133 still requires a bunch of money.
posted by chunking express at 7:57 AM on September 7, 2007

kittens, "miss" was simply a term of endearment.

I am a little irritated with you, as you continuously move the goalposts of...whatever your argument is, which makes talking to you something of a trial.

Sorry, I've stated consistently from the very beginning that it was ridiculous to complain about a return policy made clear to you before purchase when there were other options for purchase, and that a company has absolutely no obligation (beyond their return policy) to compensate purchasers of their product when a new product comes out. I have repeatedly indicated that IMO their handling of the iPhone case is unprecedented and beyond the call of duty, but the fact that they credited customers when they dropped the price of the iPhone just after 2 months of the release date in no way makes it a reasonable demand for them to also compensate you on an item that a) had already been on the market for a year (or two, depending on the circumstance in question), b) they replaced with an updated model, as electronics companies are wont to do, and c) you purchased from a third-party retailer which in fact offers you a more liberal return policy that you're firstly too ignorant and secondly too lazy to take advantage of.

What of that have I deviated from?

You, on the other hand, have complained about the Apple Store's narrow return policy, and suggested that no store would return a working product after a month, when we find out later that you in fact did not even purchase your iPod in question from the Apple Store, and in fact the retailer that you purchased from does have a complete "satisfaction guaranteed" 30-day return policy (and will make price adjustments during the same period if you fill out a form on their website), upon discovery of which you change your argument to state that it's too much of a hassle to make a return and that you've lost your packaging. Which is, somehow, apparently Apple's fault.

Now, which of us has the credibility problem?
posted by esoterica at 8:39 AM on September 7, 2007

kittens, "miss" was simply a term of endearment.

I am a little irritated with you, as you continuously move the goalposts of...whatever your argument is, which makes talking to you something of a trial.

Sorry, I've stated consistently from the very beginning that it was ridiculous to complain about a return policy made clear to you before purchase when there were other options for purchase, and that a company has absolutely no obligation (beyond their return policy) to compensate purchasers of their product when a new product comes out. I have repeatedly indicated that IMO their handling of the iPhone case is unprecedented and beyond the call of duty, but the fact that they credited customers when they dropped the price of the iPhone just after 2 months of the release date in no way makes it a reasonable demand for them to also compensate you on an item that a) had already been on the market for a year (or two, depending on the circumstance in question), b) they replaced with an updated model, as electronics companies are wont to do, and c) you purchased from a third-party retailer which in fact offers you a more liberal return policy that you're firstly too ignorant and secondly too lazy to take advantage of.

What of that have I deviated from?

You, on the other hand, have complained about the Apple Store's narrow return policy, and suggested that no store would return a working product after a month, when we find out later that you in fact did not even purchase your iPod in question from the Apple Store, and in fact the retailer that you purchased from does have a complete "satisfaction guaranteed" 30-day return policy (and will make price adjustments during the same period if you fill out a form on their website), upon discovery of which you change your argument to state that it's too much of a hassle to make a return and that you've lost your packaging. Which is, somehow, apparently Apple's fault.

Now, which of us has the credibility problem?
posted by esoterica at 8:39 AM on September 7, 2007

Another story regarding the "iPology".
posted by LordSludge at 8:43 AM on September 7, 2007

When a phone becoming cheaper generates this much angst, you know that Apple is ruling the world its products are largely just status symbols.
posted by LordSludge at 8:47 AM on September 7, 2007

Apple introduces the iPology. Innovative marketing scheme turns complaints into publicity.

Christ, sometimes I think that if Apple started printing paper money, they'd be hailed for making an earthshaking innovation in the field of human commerce.

Maybe this was a scheme, maybe it wasn't. If it was, it was sleazy, not innovative; if it wasn't, it was just another example of corporations actually speaking in a personal voice and making a show of accountability. Which is (and has been, for years) the received wisdom about the best way to deal with gaffes like this.
posted by lodurr at 9:10 AM on September 7, 2007

The money would be colorful, durable, and easy to identify, but would lack any denominations smaller than $10 and no one would accept it.
posted by mkultra at 9:32 AM on September 7, 2007

There is absolutely such thing as a bad consumer, your pseudo-literary pseudo-insight notwithstanding.

Slow down kid, I was just noting the surreality of strangers yelling at each other for being bad consumers. You know, the whole "Your job is to consume and you are bad at it" vibe. Don't take it personal.
posted by turaho at 9:57 AM on September 7, 2007

Aside from the fact that I don't know what it would mean to be a 'bad consumer' (making bad choices? failing to consume enough?), I'm quite sure that it's possible to be one.

Hell, I probably am one.
posted by lodurr at 10:02 AM on September 7, 2007

... I know I'm a bad MeFite, since I linked the wrong story.
posted by lodurr at 10:07 AM on September 7, 2007

mkultra:
Knowing apple, there'd be one bill around the $10 range, another one at $20 or $25, and then one more at $1000, with mac fanatics fervently wishing for a $100 bill because they don't want to go back to the unicolored US bill.

oh, and a whole ecosystem of accessories for them, like socks and lanyards to protect them and show them off.
posted by heeeraldo at 10:36 AM on September 7, 2007

It works just like regular money, but it's, er..."fun".
posted by eckeric at 1:24 PM on September 7, 2007

Now, which of us has the credibility problem?

I think I know which one of us has a reading problem, and that, my dear, would be you. Or rather, an inference problem -- you inferred all manner of personal information about me from my responses, then got confused and mistook your inference for what I actually wrote. I'm perfectly capable of making a judgment on Apple whether or not their actions affect me directly, as it would seem you think you are as well, although this much later I still have no idea whether you think what Apple has done is above board or not. It seems to vary from response to response, in accordance to which stance you think will score you more points. I'm not sure what your point is, exactly, but I'm off to enjoy my weekend...feel free to drop me an email if you'd like to keep this going, though don't expect a speedy reply.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 1:58 PM on September 7, 2007

esoterica:

All I said is do it right or don't do it at all.

Just so you know, I don't own a piece of Apple gear at all (although I do confess I just bought a refurbished G4 so I could tinker with OS X networking). I also don't have any bones to pick with them either in a general sense.

I quite realize Apple doesn't owe it's customers one red penny, but I feel such a half-gesture would insult me in that situation. Something along the lines of "Let them eat cake" or some such. I also quite realize caveat emptor.

FWIW, I am well known enough on my near-OCD purchasing research that most of my friends usually float purchases they are considering past me before they buy. And I even tend to research WHERE they're buying from.

And, should anyone care, I own a 40Gb Archos 504 and a couple of varying sizes of solid state players for physical labor.
posted by Samizdata at 2:09 AM on September 8, 2007

99 cents for a ringtone, and only if you've already paid Apple for the DRM-crippled version of the song.

Actually, ringtones of any song clip or audio sample or whatever you want, for free, uploaded to your iPhone via shareware called iToner.

Works great. My current ringtone is the one from the 60s spy spoof "Our Man Flint," which I've loved since I was a kid.
posted by chuq at 11:25 AM on September 10, 2007