Nobody wants to carry 2 iPhones! Bring back a new version of the iPod classic...160gb or larger, solid state HD of course, I'm sure it can now be made smaller, support Wav, FLAC, etc. Am I alone here? Let me know what you all think.
Ram used for Music files? That's not how that works. And as the carcasses of failed hi-res music players littering the history of this field (anyone remember the Pono?) demonstrates, while there is a market for such a player, it's not a big one.
And for feature requests:
https://www.apple.com/feedback/
That's the place for you to tell Apple what they should do.
Wey-hey, finally, someone wants to know what I think! This is the thread of my dreams.
(For the benefit of the unworldly among our readers, I'm showcasing some British humour...)
However, since you are keen to know what others think, here's my pennies-worth:
The iPod Touch is a great replacement for the Classic and now that Apple have released a 256GB iPod Touch, that's even better - I'm very tempted.
The fact that the Touch has apps on it is not a problem at all. In fact, it has the definite advantage that I have been able to download an alternative Podcatcher app, as the Apple Podcasts app is horrible beyond belief (sorry Apple, but it is...)
On the Touch it's possible to add songs to the Up Next list (the queue of songs to be played next), something that couldn't be done on the Classic. To be clear; on the Classic, one could create On-The-Go Playlists - then play them after creating them. On the current iPod Touch one can be playing a song and line up another song to be played after that one finishes. One can even keep adding songs to that list, just like old-fashioned juke boxes.
Kurt wrote:
Remember Microsoft's Zune? Yeah, most people don't.
Who remembers juke boxes?
You may be tempted to say that your idea of an updated Classic could do all of that (except the alternative Podcatcher), without all the extra stuff you don't want. Well, you may be right, but instead of taking the hostile-to-Apple-for-not-doing-what-you-want approach, why aren't you demanding that the manufacturers of the high-end audio players write management software for their players that as good as iTunes?
Why don't you... huh?
I have many iGadgets, but I prefer an iPod Classic for listening to music. I have 4 iPod Classics that I sent to Rapid Repair in Michigan where they upgraded the hard drive to a 512GB solid-state type and installed a high capacity battery. The battery lasts 300+ hours! (I have no financial relationship with Rapid Repair other than being a customer.)
When they put me in charge of Apple (any day now), I will reboot the iPod Classic with a Lightning or USB-Cconnector, solid-state memory and Bluetooth.
As someone that purchased several iPod Classics to keep "in reserve". I hope that new Music app and OS 10.15 continues to work with the iPod Classic.
Okay Kurt,
I can list over 15 companies making high end portable music players...many in the $1500-$8500 range. So before you tell me about the half-baked Microsoft Zune that was sent to market without fully formed software and hardware, do a little market research and see that there is a large audience of audio listeners spending money on "one-thing" devices. Apple created a phenomon when they introduced the "one-thing" iPod in 2001 and now they have abandoned the market. It doesn't have to be a huge money maker as Apple already has those things, it just needs to support the market they in fact already started.
Ziatron wrote:
When they put me in charge of Apple (any day now),
In the event of Apple failing to appreciate your irrefutable talent, another option would be to start your own company, design and make a music-only player of very large capacity and that has excellent computer software that manages said music.
That software might be the issue though. iTunes is hard to beat and of course, any competitive design would need to be different enough to be defended against any suggestion that it was plagiarism.*
When you manage this feat, I'll be in line for one of your music players - if it has:
I'll get back to you as I remember all the other features I'd like. I would design such a player and management software myself, but I'm far too occupied helping out here.
* Edited by author after initial posting.
It's not just the Pono. Remember Microsoft's Zune? Yeah, most people don't.
The majority of the population isn't very much interested in buying a rather expensive device that does one thing. Especially when those older iPods hardly cost less then, than an iPod Touch does now.
Ha! Had to laugh at the comment "... they should support the artists that have supported them in the music industry".
In fact, give me a moment, so that I might stop laughing before I do myself an injury.
Many older musicians see the iPod as having kicked them in the stomach and then thrown a knockout punch to follow. The iPod changed the music industry (of which Apple is not a part) beyond recognition and in turn destroyed the old finance model that they were used to. Many of them didn't like it and couldn't cope. As for the the record industry itself, it took far too long to adapt to the new way of thinking, but then the music industry has always done that.
tltucker wrote:
Apple created a phenomon when they introduced the "one-thing" iPod in 2001 and now they have abandoned the market. It doesn't have to be a huge money maker as Apple already has those things, it just needs to support the market they in fact already started.
Apple's introduction of a 256GB iPod Touch suggest that they have not abandoned that market at all. As for it not needing to be a huge money maker, I'm not sure that's how Apple shareholders would see it.
You may think that there is a large audience for the sort of player you want, but that doesn't mean that it's large enough.
I don't need to tell Apple what to do,
but you did:
I am saying Apple should release a new version of the iPod
So use the feedback page. And the rest really illustrates that there is no passion more intense than the audio buff feeling he's missing something.
I can list over 15 companies making high end portable music players...many in the $1500-$8500 range
So buy one of those... if you really want audio of that quality you'll do everything to get it, including change your computer and everything else. So, go on, if you really care, you really would :)
You can always go to Apple's Product Feedback Page
https://www.apple.com/feedback/
tltucker wrote:
Nobody wants to carry 2 iPhones! Bring back a new version of the iPod classic...160gb or larger, solid state HD of course, I'm sure it can now be made smaller, support Wav, FLAC, etc. Am I alone here? Let me know what you all think.
Apparently very few people agree with you as Apple discontinued the non-touch iPods due to poor sales.
tltucker wrote:
I was just hoping Apple would go back to innovating and stop relying on what Jobs created/innovated 10 years ago.
Introducing a high-end audio player now would not be an innovation, it would be an catch-up, or perhaps an also-ran.
Regarding your comment about Audirvana Plus: I think you're being a bit cheeky there. Up to this point, you've been talking about portable players, but as far as I can tell, that software (which, by the way, is not free) is designed as a high-end audio player for full-spec computers, and does not manage portable players, so it is totally irrelevant to this discussion.
You brought up the fact that the players you're interested in don't work with iTunes:
... but they won't sync with iTunes (Music) instead using their proprietary software mainly designed for PC.
and further imply that you do not have a Windows machine. Once again, why isn't your beef with those manufacturers who can't write software as good as iTunes - and don't make versions for the also-popular Mac OS (assuming that's what you mean. Unix and its variants don't count)?
You now happen (in your latest post, which I've seen while writing this) to imply your age: at your age, if you're lucky enough to still be able to appreciate high-end audio, I envy you. I must (by implication) be younger than you, I've reached the grumpy old man status in life and I'm not sure I can.
I make do with the convenience of listening to all that great music from:
at any time and place (including my car), all because of my iPod Touch.
Best of all - I grew up in a time when music was exciting and was the focal point of mine and my friend's lives. Today, for many, it's just disposable background stuff.
As I write this, one thing does spring to mind as it has many times before. Even the act of listening to music at home, on a record, was exciting: it was a ceremony, to be relished:
And that's just the albums. I loved the singles too. Here in the UK, we rarely had picture sleeves with 7" singles before the eighties, but even the label was exciting for many of us.
So my wish is for someone to design an audio player that replicates the enormous pleasure of that ceremony, together with the convenience of being able to take it with me wherever I go. A tall order that even Apple can't manage.
elppa_elppa wrote:
they need to bring back the ipod classic.
All Apple (who isn't reading here) needs to do is make a profit for their shareholders. And, it's pretty clear that the iPod Classic isn't going to do that.
That's what the iPod Touch has always been – a media player. Just because it has the same dimensions and look of an iPhone doesn't make it a stripped down version.
Apple hasn't made the small, music only type of iPod for years. They're all the Touch design. That's your only choice.
Hi Kurt,
You miss the point of my original post. I am saying Apple should release a new version of the iPod. Sony has a new high res Walkman, Pioneer, FiiO, Astell&Kern are some of the brands available, but they won't sync with iTunes (Music) instead using their proprietary software mainly designed for PC. If Apple where really interested in music, they should bring out a high res audio player for people who truly love music.
Sorry to disagree, but the Touch has all the functions of an iPhone without calling features. All these features are unnecessary and hog valuable ram that could be used for music files.
Best,
Tim
Ha! had to laugh at the comment "If anyone spends this kind of money for a music player, then whooeee!, they have found a major league sucker. But it's your money, throw it away as you wish." All you have to do is substitute Apple Computer or Apple iPhone in place of "music player" and it would also be a true statement!
Bit depth and sampling rates are real as are introduced artifacts from cheap DA converters.
Apple is missing out on a market they created. They can come in at the high end or the low end. But they should support the artists that have supported them in the music industry.
Bring back the iPod!
