When Will the iPod Die?
The year is 1979. The president of Iraq resigns to let his associate take over –- Saddam Hussein; 200,000 people march through Washington DC in a massive Gay Rights movement; the YMCA is suing the Village People; and the Three Mile Island Nuclear Power Plant has just suffered a partial meltdown. Also in 1979, Sony changes the way we listen to music when it releases the Walkman.
The original Sony Walkman, for those of you under the ages of 15, was a small, mechanical, personal stereo, which played audio cassettes. The impact of the device was mega on a global scale. Now it was possible to choose your own music, and listen to it wherever you went. But Sony’s product went even further and became a cultural icon throughout the next decade. Sound familiar? Well it should, because Apple’s iPod does contain a lot of similarities to the Walkman, and like the Walkman, the iPod will die. Or, put another way, it is going to get replaced by something better.
The Nintendo (NES) was replaced by the Playstation; The Apple II was replaced by the Macintosh; Sony’s Walkman found itself replaced by the Sony Discman; and the Discman was replaced by Apple’s iPod. But what is about to replace the popular little mp3 player?
In technological terms, quite frankly, there isn’t much left to advance upon the iPod. Digital data seems here to stay, and music looks like it’s going to stay virtual from now on. The iPod is right on top of that, and appears that it will stay that way for some time to come. But everything does have its lifespan, and there will be a successor, but what will it be?
Well…there are a few routes music could take in the future:
Quality
Currently, music has actually taken a step backwards in quality. Just as the music industry was preparing itself for DVD-Audio, the replacement for CDs—mp3s stormed in and stole the whole show. But mp3s or, in fact, any other heavily compressed audio files are massively deleterious to the quality of the sound.
Most people don’t notice the difference, but after listening to higher quality recordings for a period of time, when switching back to compressed mp3s, these people can begin to notice the reduction in quality from what they were listening to before.
Why do I think music could head in this direction in the near future? Well, nobody ever complained about the quality of TVs, but then High-Definition came along to “expand on our visual experience.” You could even say the same about VHS migrating to DVD and even soon to Blu-Ray. It’s never something we need, but then when it becomes Hyped and Available™ everybody wants it, and most can actually appreciate the advantages the new format brings and quickly become accustomed to it.
Where do I think this could take music? To be honest, it’s so hard to say, I don’t want to hazard a confident guess. I could assume something happening with a new physical format such as CD2 or something, but, although quality would reign, I believe music really has set itself firmly in virtual-land now. So I can’t see a new physical distribution model coming back, but anything is possible —even a hybrid of the two (the possibilities just boggle the brain.)
Distribution / Accessibility
One major factor to digital distribution winning over CDs was the increased ease and speed of getting the music you wanted through your computer.
Why do I think music could head in this direction? Simply put: this is the way it’s been heading the last couple of years as music distribution has spread to digital distribution. There haven’t really been any new digital distribution models since iTunes and Napster.
It’s difficult to take guesses on how delivery of music could be made easier and more efficient on the buying public. I don’t think the iTunes pay-per-track model will last. I don’t know why, but it doesn’t feel as elegant of a process as it could be—it still feels awkward. And I don’t know if a Napster pay-per-month model will work in the long run either. What does that leave, advertising? Hah. “Unlikely” says just about everyone. Where do I think this could take music? The one image of a future music system I do have in my mind is an online iTunes. Just one single, global hub where people can login to their accounts individually. One library that will contain every song ever recorded. Don’t ask me how it’ll work, though.
There is another possible new distribution method: EIA [Everywhere Internet Radio.] It’s an interesting prospect. Every song ever made floating around in the air, ready to be plucked out by the specialist receiving device of your choice (probably an iPod,) but how on earth that would work as a viable business model I have no idea!
So which of these possible dreams is going to kill the iPod? Well I haven’t the slightest clue. In fact, I bet it’s a million miles away from the suggestions listed here. The only thing I am certain about, is that whatever it will be, is going to be just as unimaginable as the comprehension of today’s iTunes and iPod system would have been in 1979. That almost scares me a little.
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Slashdot
StumbleUpon
Comments
iTunes seems awkward, but the writer imagines a very itunes like system as superior. Playstation over took Nintendo? No, not really, play station wasn’t around when the NES was. Further, the logical conclusion from the video game industry example isn’t that there is some mind blowing device lurking in our future that will defeat current systems. The video game industry teaches us that constant there will evolution of the product, as we currently see withe video ipod, along with increased market segmentation and competition.
The writer’s introduction of sound quality as a weak point of the iPod, and as an opportunity for competitors is neglecting the fact that there is very little from a technology stand point preventing the iPod from playing higher resolution song files.
The subject of this article is also flawed. When Will the iPod Die? Could this perhaps be more dramatic only to leave the reader with essentially” beats the hell out of me”
Fortunately, I do know when the iPod will “die.” Its market decline will begin when costs of hard drives decline. People will be more willing to take a substitute product for $15 over the Apple brand selling for $60. When that happens, Apple won’t see a reason to stick around in a saturated business. Or perhaps they’ll keep innovating and stave off this doom.
While I’m addressing the subject of the iPod death, its only fair to mention the much-hyped “iPod Killer” from Microsoft. One thing must be made very clear; No iPod Killer will be capable of stealing the iPods thunder by merely replicating it.
The iPod/iTunes is a product, as we all know, that offers an end-to-end user experience. Customers can buy their music, and listen to it. Videos are also an option. The iPod plays music and videos. That’s it. if the iPod killer is going to live up to its name, it must do more than music and videos. Its the “more” that moves these products ahead, as the iPod has more songs than the walkman, the iPod Killer needs more features. The key for the MS camp is that the public has to want the features.
Two options come to mind to add to the song/video concept, cell phones and video games. The cellphone thing, according to rumor, is where the ipod is headed. I foresee a huge blunder on the part of apple if they pursue this strategy, but thats another story for another time.The portable video game system with iPod features could steal the spot light. The Nintendo DS, a hand held, is Nintendo’s best seller. The PSP is also very popular. Simply put, people like having portable game systems, ever since the Gameboy. A market exists for the hand held xbox or what I have termed the “iBox”
The iBox could store video games instead of requiring the user to carry discs or cartridges. This parallels the innovation of the ipod over the walkman, eliminating the need for tangible media.
The path to create an online store to sell the games direct, offer demos and create an online community has been paved by Apple. If this hand held gaming device is created, Microsoft could easily add music play back, and then, like magic, Microsoft has a product with some utility instead of just cloning. The game device would remain inherently a gaming device, but why buy an ipod if you can get the same thing without it? No kid would want an ipod and a iBox, the iBox makes the iPod unnecessary. If Microsoft attacks the iPod head on, they will lose, if the create a superior product, like I’ve described, they will win.
Here’s the fun part, the business end of all this. Apple hasn’t a gaming bone in its body, it could not compete. On the other hand, Microsoft has never made a hand held and hasn’t that bone either. Nintendo however has plenty of experience, and they are in Redmond too. Microsoft needs to either buy, merge or team up with Nintendo. Word in the street is that Microsoft is ready to spend a lot of money to allow people to download songs they’ve already purchased from apple. That investment could be spent in part, teaming up with Nintendo.
If this is done, the job at Microsoft is pretty simple, take the DS, stuff a hard drive in it, add the audio and video playback features and hand it to the marketing department. And then we can have a little funeral for the iPod.
Well, that’s my take on things, it won’t happen of course but we can dream…
HD Radio is promising. But I think the iPod will someday incorporate this technology in the iPod line.
One interesting feature of HDR is what iBiquity calls “Datacasting”. Even at the low bit-rate that is possible with one channel of HDR, I can think of many ways to use this extra data channel for usage as FREE music buffered streaming.
Will it “kill” the iPod? That is a tall order for it is not a device but a technology. It will be complementary to the iPod going forward.
It’s difficult to take guesses on how delivery of music could be made easier and more efficient on the buying public. -MEvans
We haven’t yet entered the FOFDM-era we fondly call WiMax (802.16) fixed/mobile IP delivery. When this system is in placed and implemented as envisioned, it will have a profound affect on current WWAN (namely GSM/CDMA/UMTS) and WLAN (802.11x). It will carry ALL types of media (IP form, of course) in one big blanket vice “cellular” footprints of 7mi or 10km diameter. Wimax will have a >50km or >30mi.
How will the iPod or aspiring iPod “killers” use this new method of music delivery? We can only imagine. But, believe me, this new method will be very disruptive to the WWAN and WLAN methods of today. Now, Apple has to be keeping an eye on WiMax for they can not afford to lose an advantage to any upstarts or behemoths like M$ to pick up.
Fortunately, I do know when the iPod will “die.” Its market decline will begin when costs of hard drives decline. People will be more willing to take a substitute product for $15 over the Apple brand selling for $60. -tyler
No tyler you don’t know when the “iPod will die”. Based on your assumptions you are stuck in the box of today - that the iPod will not evolve out of the HD architecture. I have seen with my eyes and frisked with my sweaty fingers, Samsung’s next gen 64Gbit NAND flash prototypes. Will it end there, I will not bet my life on it. 64Gbit density is not the end of Moore’s Law, as you are probably thinking.
Even today, any consumer can purchase a sub-$50 MP3 (or DAP) player everywhere. Then with your assumptions, why do the iPod with their sky-high prices are outselling these cheapos 10:1???
Your concept is faulty therefore it is not worth considering.
the iPod Killer needs more features. -tyler
Another misfired concept of the iPod “killer”. Hey tyler, the iPod’s dominance is not because it has “more” than the competition. The “less is more” and “simplicity is beauty” mantras fit the iPod like a glove. Again, reconsider your notion here because it won’t fly.
Overall, Tyler, your post is worth sipping my coffe with. I will get back with your other points - namely the “iBox”.
Robotech.
While you are correct that the capacity of ipod storage will increase, a point I didn’t argue against, you fail to understand that the marketplace is segmented and many consumers will not require 100+GB, just as they aren’t required now. As time drags on, higher and higher capacity devices will be less and less important to the consumer.
While you claim my notion of more features ‘won’t fly’ I beg to differ. The iPod does offer more; by offering the end-to-end experience, simplicity and ease of use, they do in fact have more offering than the competition.
many consumers will not require 100+GB
Personally I regret the fact that my digital music is noticeably less than CD quality. If the option was there, I’d pay the same amount for an iPod with two, three or four times as much storage as the ones currently on the market, and re-encode my audio at higher bitrate.
[I for one welcome our future 100GB iPod overlords.]
is an ipod killer even possible?
Walkman was superceded by a new media. Thus when people went to buy a new device they had to choose between tape and disc. As these were two different media types and there was no viable way to produce a transitionary device, buyers were at square one, and no longer committed to the Walkman, the marker leader.
The iPod is more like the PC. It has survived at the top of the pile, for among other reasons, it has always maintained a data and media compatability from one generation to the next.
Because the iPod doesn’t use any media, it will be able to evolve smoothly (like the PC) and always maintain compatibility with the previous generation’s music.
Even EIR you suggest Matt, which I also believe is a distinct possibility, won’t threaten the iPod - provided Apple incorporates it in to future iPods.(Given Apple’s inflexible nature, that is a risk)
Thus the iPod could dominate as long as the PC has.
The only long term threats to the iPod are Apple’s greed and/or stupidity.
Good article, Matt.
by offering the end-to-end experience, simplicity and ease of use, they do in fact have more offering than the competition. -tyler
Considering these are intangible features they may not be counted as “features” per se. Unlike tangible features such as the clickable scroll wheel, sharp LCD panel, smooth finish, sound quality, HD capacity, those intangibles are very hard to duplicate and at this point, Apple is the only one with the sharp blade to sculpt those “features” onto their devices.
So, just counting the tangibles, the iPod has less for more $$$, you agree? Creative, Samsung, or Sony can match or even exceed those in a jiffy for a little less crunch on your wallet. But, those vendors will have a hard time matching the intangible features of the iPod.
Until then, no upstart or established CE/PC company will dare declare the “death” of the iPod for their own fate is tied to that declaration.
you fail to understand that the marketplace is segmented and many consumers will not require 100+GB, just as they aren’t required now. -tyler
No, I completely understand the many market segment of even such a small but nascent market such as the iPod’s. Consumers will always have their own peculiar preferences - low prices, lots of features, simplicity, screen sizes, diminuity, etc. The iPod line tries to fill all those peculiarities with the Shuffle, nano, iPod, iPod video, and soon the iPod hybrid.
What I was trying to say was that technology shifts are constant and never stand still. You blink and your competition is overtaking you. The prototype Samsung 64Gb NAND flash will give flexibility to Apple throughout their product lines that they do not have now. Imagine, one of those chips in a Shuffle gives a whopping 8GB of storage! That is so awesome, man! Not everyday you can impress a system engineer these days.