How to control the new shuffle if you don't want to use the incl. earphones

I'm not going to toss away a $500 pair of earphones just to get a new pair with the latest set of controls on the cables and I don't think others would either.

You're thinking short-term. No one is going to throw away $500 earbuds. They will get an adapter, if necessary. But I'm not talking about stuff people already have today. I'll bet when it comes time to replace those $500 earbuds (it will wear out), the next $500 earbuds will have the built-in controls so that they are fully compatible with Apple iPods. Someone who actually buys $500 earbuds is going to have the latest and greatest iPod. Someone who makes $500 earbuds is going to make their product fully functional with iPods. If someone pays $500 for someone's earbuds, it better have those controls and mike on the cable. If it doesn't, someone else will get that business.

do you think folks are going to take changes that buying a new pair of expensive earphones with the controller on the cable is going to work with a future iPod?

If every set of expensive earbuds has the controller, your point is irrelevant. The controls will be there, whether they are going to be used or not. It's not up to the customer to choose to have them or not have them. The manufacturers will put them there, because it will necessary to make their product competitive for customers who mostly have iPods.

it would be insane for them to do this with all their models.

Look at the peripherals market in general. 90% of the music player peripherals out there are targeted at iPod users. There are certainly more music players out there than just iPods. If what you say is true in the real world, why oh why are 90% of the peripherals targeted to work with iPods? Because there is no money in making Zune peripherals. The same thing will happen with earbuds. There will be little point in making a set of earbuds that does not fully support iPod users, because they will work with iPods AND any other player.

You are right that the adapter will be popular initially, because people will want to use their existing expensive earbuds with their new iPods. But when it's time to buy that next expensive set of earbuds, here's one that has the control and mike integrated. Here's another that requires me to keep using my adapter, which adds three feet to the cord length, puts another quality-lowering connection point between me and my sound, and doesn't even have a mike. Which one would you buy?

"Too many times, the stuff coming out of Cupertino (via China) just doesnt "do it" for me."

David, you poor thing, why are you bring "China" into it? The country of manufacture has nothing to do with it. For several years, all Apple products have been built in China. They might not "do it" for you, and Apple will suffer for it.

Actually, thinking about the Ultimate Ears that I have, the cables are detachable. I would not be surprised to see the company come out with new cables that I can just attach to my existing earphones which have the controller on them. Another issue is that over time, the wires in the cables can break causing failure so it makes sense that companies go to this model (where cables are detachable allowing for easy replacement/upgrade while preserving ones investment). I think this is the future model most headphone makers will take.

Kenichi Watanabe wrote:
If every set of expensive earbuds has the controller, your point is irrelevant. The controls will be there, whether they are going to be used or not. It's not up to the customer to choose to have them or not have them. The manufacturers will put them there, because it will necessary to make their product competitive for customers who mostly have iPods.

What a load of nonsense! First of all apple don't share their technologies so what manufacturer is going to add a control to their expensive headphones that's only going to work with one line of products.

Why limit your market if you don't have to? Yes apple have a good share of the mp3 player market, but last time I checked they didn't have all of it!

Manufacturers might well make their own adapters in future. But frankly it seems crazy that apple don't even release an adapter at the point of sale of the new shuffle.

The point is that apple has released their product now....how on earth can you invalidate perfectly valid comments based on the assumption that 'in the future that won't be important.....'

I disagree. My 1st gen shuffle config was perfect(it went poof today though) as I could reach down to my belt line and push the button. I didn't need to see it. I had it memorized. Now I assume I have to grab for a device bouncing along on a cord(I'm a runner), find the buttons, etc. Why have two devices strung together when one was PERFECT. I know, marketing told them to make a change, but this just complicates matters. I remember the remote cord I had for my older 20 gig that I never used!

First of all apple don't share their technologies so what manufacturer is going to add a control to their expensive headphones that's only going to work with one line of products.

Apple is sharing this particular technology, because Apple wants the third parties to meet the niche needs of its customers. They are doing so right now. The iPod peripheral ecosystem is one of Apple's best advantages versus the competition. The Griffin's and Belkin's of the world are going to have a field day with these new iPods.

Only work with one line of products? First of all, that "one line" happens to be the most popular digital media players in the world, by far. That's why 90+% of ALL peripherals on the market right now are targeted to work with "one line of products" called iPods. And second of all, when it comes to earbuds, they will still work with ANY digital media player. The presence of the little control nub on the cable does not prevent it from working with a Zune.

Why limit your market if you don't have to?

So obviously, the choice that severely "limits your market" is NOT putting the control on the cable. If you do that, you are making your product less appealing to customers who have the new iPods (any of them) and iPhones, AND you are making your product unusable on the lowest priced iPod (the shuffle). Talk about a market-limiting move - let's go after the Zune/SanDisk/Creative market!

But frankly it seems crazy that apple don't even release an adapter at the point of sale of the new shuffle.

It was a strategic decision to give the third parties added incentive to get their compatible products on the market. If Apple provided a $19 solution, there would be far less incentive. Apple is sacrificing some initial lost (or delayed) sales of the iPod shuffle for longer term gain that will benefit the entire iPod and iPhone lineup.

Geez, how strategic is this:

http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/15/third-party-ipod-shuffle-headphones-will-requ ire-apple-licensed/

Time to buy up the old Shuffles while they're still available!!!

It's licensing. Apple will use their iPod advantage to best advantage. The third parties already have similar agreements for a multitude of iPod accessories, including those that use the dock connector. And there are a multitude of such accessories, are there not?

The third parties can be making accessories for the other music players without such licensing, but they are instead making mostly iPod accessories. Why? Because they make money making iPod accessories. You are making a big deal about something that will be transparent to the customer.

Kenichi Watanabe wrote:
You are making a big deal about something that will be transparent to the customer.

Actually, the licensing fees that 3rd parties have to pay to Apple will get passed along to the customer. And it is also likely that because of Apple's draconian strategy, there will be less players; hence less competition and thus higher prices for these special headphones. Its just basic economics 101. So no, this will not be transparent to the customer.

Again, it's not any different from the current licensing situation with the third-party peripheral makers. Transparent means +not visible+. Customers are not going to see a special fee on the price tag that says "licensing cost." Any company that wants to make iPod headphones (so all of the ones that make earbuds) will agree to Apple's licensing, as they always have for other peripherals. Then, they will compete with each other, as they always have, to get the money from customers. The price for products will be based on this competition, as it always has been, for a free market. The best combination of price, features, and quality will be successful, as it alway has been. Less successful or lower quality products will cost less, as they always have. There will be sales before the holidays. In other words, it's business as usual. Oh the horror... buys those old shuffles now!

"Any company that wants to make iPod headphones (so all of the ones that make earbuds) will agree to Apple's licensing,"

Oh, please. Licensing is required for technology. Any company can make a set of earphones for an Apple iPod, and it does not need a license from Apple.

So it's OK for Pystar to sell computers with Mac OS X pre-installed, because they can do it technically...?

In any case, the technology in this case may be a control chip in the earbuds that have the controls.

I believe Apple has programmer the shuffle to only recognize input from headsets with a special authentication chip available only through licensing agreement with Apple. There will be no "backdoors.". Apple has thought this one through and I am a bit bothered by the implications of such a heavy-handed approach.

Well on 12 March exactly what I did -- got to a store here that had an original green (lighter green, not the more recent fluorescent green) in a 2gb model-- last one left and instead of full price got a 31% discount (OK it was a display model) - but super condition and should have bought a dozen...

...so OK now I have a Shuffle gen2 with 1gb (silver- but cases that color it as I wish!)- and now this 2gb light green. Can plug either into my car system via a cassette-- that won't work if I change cars since newer cars don't have cassette players-- but believe they are now equipped with jacks to take the iPod or a 3.5mm audio out directly or?

I like the square nano-- was that gen3- the one before the current longer-narrower. For running with armband- the square nano is great- OK so I'm not what you call an early adopter-- hey it was 1989 before I got my first Mac!!!!!!!!!

Best regards,

Steve Schulte
Tuesday 17 March 2009

What a joke. I rarely comment on this forum, but this is worth it.

Like so many others, I use different headphones.

1. I do not want to purchase speciality headphones that are compatible with the shuffle controls. I already own several pairs which I really like.

2. I do not want to purchase an additional adapter to connect to my current pair of headphones. Additional cost. Typically extends the cord length, making it a pain to deal with when jogging.

I will not purchase this unit for those reasons. Second gen will have to do. This doesn't mean I'm angry at Apple, I just think it was a stupid decision.

Good luck, Apple.