# Mini IPod Prices



## huck (Jan 6, 2004)

I am a bit disappointed.  I feel the Mini IPods price doesn't make sense...A 4GB HD that holds 1000 songs @ $249 US dollars.  For an extra $50 dollars you can get a 10GB HD that holds 10,000 songs.  

I think the Mini IPod is not going to be a great success.  Sorry Apple, not behind you on this one.

peace.


----------



## ScottW (Jan 6, 2004)

Ditto.


----------



## Giaguara (Jan 6, 2004)

nope, with extra 50 $ you can get 15 GB iPod.


----------



## mindbend (Jan 6, 2004)

I thought so too, at first, but that's because we are underestimating the power of style. I know three women that bought original iMacs for one reason and one reason only...they liked the cool colors. 

In fact, I had planned on buying my wife an iPod this year and I'll probably get a mini for that exact reason. She'll love it and she doesn't need the extra space. I've got a 40 GB, but I use it for moving files to and fro work and home, so it makes sense.

Some people will definitely pay for a slightly smaller, stylish iPod at that price. If you don't need 15 GB, you don't need 15 GB. I won't be surprised at all to these sell well.


----------



## OzBert (Jan 6, 2004)

To buy a 15GB iPod you're spending $100 more than you we're going to on your flash player... This is what they are aiming for, they are trying to make you go for an iPod rather than these flash players!

I think they are cool, and I will be getting my other half a pink one for her birthday... But whether they are going to be smash hit I'm not so sure, time will tell.


----------



## boi (Jan 6, 2004)

check your math. 
if 4GB = 1000 songs...
10GB = (hint: not 10,000).
anyway, giaguara is right. it's 15GB. and you're right-- i don't see them selling way too much of these. if he really wanted to break into the flash mp3 player market, he'd offer a 1GB or 2GB for $100.


----------



## Quicksilver (Jan 6, 2004)

The price is just not right!


----------



## Meltdown (Jan 6, 2004)

Why is everyone using my avatar?
Have had it for3 years

And yes the iPod mini is much to expensive.


----------



## chemistry_geek (Jan 6, 2004)

If the Mini iPod (4GB) was $150 - $175, then Apple would have a killer product, but not at $250.  For $50 more, you get the *REAL* iPod.  And one more thing, take a CLOSE look at Apple's comparison with the iPods' (regular and mini) screens.  The Mini iPod does NOT have the same resolution screen as the regular iPod; it isn't just smaller, there are less pixels too.  Gosh, I hate when things are list $1 below a whole $10 increment.  Don't the marketing people know that psychological effect doesn't work any more?  I'll keep saving my money and buy an iPod some day, or maybe just go to Best Buy and purchase one of the Rio players; there's quite a selection for under $200, AND some support FireWire.  All I need it to purchase that FM Transmitter for the iPod (inserts into the iPod's mini stereo plug) I see in ClubMac/MacMall, and I can listen to my MP3s in the car.

Apple, you really missed the price point on this one.  It seems that the mini hard drives in the iPod units are not necessarily an issue, but the cost of the electronics is too.  I like the fact that the whole body of the Mini iPods are made of Aluminum, kinda instills quality/longevity into the product, but not for $250.  I'll keep searching for a low-cost MP3 player, after all, it only *HAS* to work.


----------



## Giaguara (Jan 6, 2004)

the price will drop in the next 6-9 months.. just wait.


----------



## AdmiralAK (Jan 6, 2004)

I had been entangled at work all day long.
I came home and visited apple's site. Even though I have no need to have a portable music player, if I did I would just go for the regular iPod. the mini seems a bit too expensive. The price is just not competitive.


----------



## Ripcord (Jan 6, 2004)

Granted, the minis come with a remote, dock, and carrying case, whereas the 15GBs don't, but still...  It would have been nice to enter the mid-range market, unfortunately this is still priced/designed for the upper-end, and only a very small part of the upper-end of the market...


----------



## phatcactus (Jan 6, 2004)

Interesting, from http://www.daringfireball.net/ :


> The whole point of the iPod Mini isnt that its cheaper. Its that its smaller. The initial consensus seems to be that its too expensive  but that was also the initial consensus for the original iPod.


I still gotta agree with y'all though: it simply doesn't make sense to buy one.  Unless you really, really want a slightly smaller iPod.  But who really needs something smaller than the 15 GB?  I hope I'm wrong, but I smell a flop.


----------



## Trip (Jan 6, 2004)

Giaguara was right. Apple will drop the price no matter what within the next few weeks. They're just seeing what they can get away with for now. 

But phatcactus's post was also correct, we're forgetting the actual size of the iPod. The mini iPods are extremely small, but still quite powerful. I don't know how I feel about that...somebody will have to buy me one so I can tell you all.


----------



## monktus (Jan 6, 2004)

But haven't Rio just released a 4GB player for $249 too? I agree it could be cheaper but it seems that it's competitive given that it's very small and not any more expensive than the Rio.


----------



## Ricky (Jan 6, 2004)

That price point is exactly what's going to sell more regular iPods than iPod Minis.


----------



## Alex (Jan 6, 2004)

the mini's dont come with a dock... do they... I dont think so.
they can get one... but its not packaged.. *or I might be wrong*

Yep, the dock is optional... that means its more =)


----------



## Arden (Jan 7, 2004)

Maybe Apple priced them at $250 for a reason: if you're going for a player, you might as well go the next level up and get the full iPod.

I still say they should have models between 1 GB and 4 GB (and maybe even .5 GB) and price them between $100-200.  _That_ would sell a lot of Minis.


----------



## Veljo (Jan 7, 2004)

Arden said:
			
		

> Maybe Apple priced them at $250 for a reason: if you're going for a player, you might as well go the next level up and get the full iPod.
> 
> I still say they should have models between 1 GB and 4 GB (and maybe even .5 GB) and price them between $100-200.  _That_ would sell a lot of Minis.



I think the price is the stupidest thing I've ever seen. For an extra little bit you can more than triple your storage...I mean, why wouldn't you? It's like pricing a Dual G5 2GHz at $1000 and a G3 600MHz at $950...which would you choose?

I was excited about the idea of a 'mini iPod', but not at that price. $100-150 yes. $250....hell no.


----------



## tsizKEIK (Jan 7, 2004)

the iPods will get cheaper.. but for now they are a bit expensive.. id give the extra 50 dollars and get a 15 gb..

but ur just missing the point.. the 4gb ipos have a different hard disk in the. thats one of the reasons that makes them expensive...
and thats one of the reasons thats makes them attractive... theyre just SOOO small and light... probably lighter than most mobile phones around... and were talkin about a 4gb mp3 player ...


----------



## Cat (Jan 7, 2004)

> I think the price is the stupidest thing I've ever seen. For an extra little bit you can more than triple your storage...I mean, why wouldn't you? It's like pricing a Dual G5 2GHz at $1000 and a G3 600MHz at $950...which would you choose?


I'd rephrase that: I think the price is the SMARTEST thing I've ever seen. For an extra little bit you can more than triple your storage...I mean, why wouldn't you?
Why wouldn't Apple want you to? In this case they just made you spend $100,- more on their own products! I think the pricing is brilliant. Everybody who considers the miniPods will be attracted to the megaPods: excellent hooking. The miniPods are just the bait. And you know what? I think they will sell like hot cakes! There a re plenty glitzy people around that always buy the smallest, shinyest gadget around. Apple did a great job IMHO.


----------



## cybergoober (Jan 7, 2004)

I'm sorry, but $250 is way too much for 4 GB IMO. Who the feck cares how much the POS Rio 4 GB player is? /sigh

BFD, the mini is slightly smaller. *WOOHOO!!*  
The iPod is no behemoth by any means. Plus the iPod is _Sexy_®, the mini is cute. I hate cute


----------



## Cat (Jan 7, 2004)

Have you seen this?  Incredible, isn't it?


----------



## lbrandt (Jan 7, 2004)

Isn't there some advantage to flash rather than disk? Maybe it's more robust for joggers and others who move the pod around vigorously? Maybe flash has a longer expected lifetime than disk?


----------



## MacMuppet (Jan 7, 2004)

In the MSWF thread i wrote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by garymum4d
The new Mini iPods are NOT on the UK apple store. All the other new stuff is, iLife, G5 Xserve and so on, but No mini iPods!!!

Are we not good enough? after all we are still waiting for ITMS 


Good. It gives them lots of time to re-think the price, before they make a loss on productiuon of these things. 4gb when you can have 15gb for $50 more? Thats so poorly thought out as to be laughable. I thought they were only looking at smaller sized iPods to take on the the other smaller mp3 players on the market, something they will utterly fail to do with this pricing scheme - what exactly, has been the point of designing, producing and manufacturing iPodMinis, other than research and trial and error for the next generation of iPods.
Regardless of how beautiful, functional, small, long-lived practical and durable it is, £249 is too much for a personal stereo (mp3 or not, data-carrying-able or not), and £220 for one with a third of the capacity is not only no better, its actually worse.

I loved the complete deadpan non-reaction when Steve announced the price - like "no seriously dude, how much will it be? No, no we're not falling for it, stop yanking our chains, what will the price be? WHAT? YOU'RE ACTUALLY SERIOUS!?!?!"


----------



## MacMuppet (Jan 7, 2004)

Also it doesnt help that Apple have no regard for exchange rates. 
Currently the 15Gb iPod is $299 at apple.com and £249 at apple.com/uk - at current exchange rates it should be £166. Now, obviously rates fluctuate so we couldnt expect them to stick to them, but a more realistic approach might be nice, I mean the percentage markup is daylight robbery.
I guess if we're not Californian, we can get lost.

Oh well, sorry Apple, someone from my company goes over to NYC about once a week, at current rate by the end of the year over a hundred of us will have bought an iPod for about £160-170 - the only people I know who have them from the UK have more money than sense.


----------



## cybergoober (Jan 7, 2004)

lbrandt said:
			
		

> Isn't there some advantage to flash rather than disk? Maybe it's more robust for joggers and others who move the pod around vigorously? Maybe flash has a longer expected lifetime than disk?



And what has that to do with the iPod mini? iPod mini is still Hard Drive based.


----------



## lbrandt (Jan 7, 2004)

cybergoober said:
			
		

> And what has that to do with the iPod mini? iPod mini is still Hard Drive based.



An assumption on my part, apparently mistaken - I agree with other posters that the price is way to high and the product is not enough differentiated from the 15GB model. I'm still interested in the comparison between disk and flash, though.


----------



## pds (Jan 7, 2004)

Of course if you chip in another 50 bucks you get another 11 megs of music, but that may not be the point. Looking at the Rio, the point is that for 50 bucks someone can go from 256 meg to 4 gig. From 120 songs to 1,000

I think the thing will be hot hot hot. Not for you, but for those who are considering a Rio.


----------



## Crobot (Jan 7, 2004)

Cat said:
			
		

> I'd rephrase that: I think the price is the SMARTEST thing I've ever seen. For an extra little bit you can more than triple your storage...I mean, why wouldn't you?
> Why wouldn't Apple want you to? In this case they just made you spend $100,- more on their own products!



I disagree. I think the key part of what you just said is at the end of your quote. In your line of thinking Apple is cannibalizing themselves to make a few extra bucks. That doesn't sound like brilliance to me.

Think about it.... if Apple priced their low end iPod to just be $50 more than the top end competitor, then that logic would hold out. I mean, buy spend $249 on a Rio with 4GB of storage (flash based or drive based), when you can spend $50 extra and get tons more storage, style and convenience with an Apple iPod? .......In this scenario Apple is taking away from the competition. If Apple is simply cannibalizing one of their own lines, then they are only hurting themselves, right?



> The miniPods are just the bait.


I mean, think of all the money that has to be dumped into R&D, design, manufacturing, marketing and production of the iPod Mini. And you think all that has been done just to be sacrificed just to sell a few more iPods? *shrug* You might be right.... but it doesn't sound like a sound business decision to me. Why spend millions on a product that you don't expect to sell?

I have a different reason that Apple has priced their Mini's too high. (and yes, i think it's too high) It's quite simple..... The iPod has been selling like hot cakes. The market has shown that people are willing to fork over alot of cash to own something as cool as an iPod. In other words... people have shown that they are *willing* to pay that amount of money.

I mean, really..... Why sell something alot cheaper when people are willing to pay $299 and up? To be honest, i was surprised they even released the Mini. So, when they released it, i was disappointed but not surprised at seeing the price.

IMO, they priced themselves $50 too high. At a price point of $199 the Mini would still make them money, yet it would be cheap enough for more price conscious consumers, and the price/storage ratio would kill the competition. As it stands, i treat my 15GB iPod the same way i baby my iBook. The thing cost me alot of money, and i'm paranoid about it be dropped, stolen, or lost. However, if a Mini were priced at $199, it would be easier to conceive of buying one for a friend as a gift and not feeling like i've just broke the bank or spent too much on an gift.

So.... i think Apple needs to attack and hurt the competition.... not themselves.

Just my opinion....take it for what it's worth. YMMV.


Dave........


----------



## Cat (Jan 7, 2004)

crobot said:
			
		

> Cat said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well, cannibalizing usually works the other way round: the lesser product drawing away sales from the higher ones. Example: if Apple made a 1.6 GHz iMac it would cannibalize PowerMac sales. Cannibalizing in this case is bad because people buy the cheaper product instead of the more expensive one. In the case of the iPods I think it will be exactly the opposite: people looking for a flash player will see the miniPods just $50 above them and they'll think "hey its just as small and neat but holds a lot more songs", then they'll notice the miniPods bigger brother and they'll go "Wow! Even more gigs!" and perhaps they'll be will to spend $50 more ... the marketing trick is that they originally would have never considered the iPods at all, but by being hooked with the miniPods they possibly will be spending 50 bucks extra. This is not a negative way of cannibalizing sales.
By the way, if you had quoted me in full, I do think the miniPods will sell on themselves:





			
				Cat said:
			
		

> I think they will sell like hot cakes! There a re plenty glitzy people around that always buy the smallest, shinyest gadget around. Apple did a great job IMHO.


 I still stand by that!


----------



## Crobot (Jan 7, 2004)

> By the way, if you had quoted me in full, I do think the miniPods will sell on themselves:
> 
> 
> > I think they will sell like hot cakes! There a re plenty glitzy people around that always buy the smallest, shinyest gadget around. Apple did a great job IMHO.
> ...



I didn't quote it because i agree with you. I agree because the market already has proved that people will be willing to pay the prices. I also think they will sell some due to the cute colors. Also the reduced size will sell units also.

I also agree that taking sales away from the cheaper products to buy more expensive ones is alot better than vice versa.

However, i still stand by my statement that they should be taking sales away from the cheaper products of the competition ....... *not* themselves.


----------



## UNIX X11 (Jan 7, 2004)

Crazyness.
The smaller something gets, the more expensive its gonna be most likely...
there will be a major price drop, if it wont flop like the cube.


----------



## chevy (Jan 7, 2004)

Apple wants to sell products with margin. Low cost "iPod" and similar cannot make margin. Only the high end devices make real margin.


----------



## iluvosx (Jan 8, 2004)

mindbend said:
			
		

> I thought so too, at first, but that's because we are underestimating the power of style. I know three women that bought original iMacs for one reason and one reason only...they liked the cool colors.
> Some people will definitely pay for a slightly smaller, stylish iPod at that price. If you don't need 15 GB, you don't need 15 GB. I won't be surprised at all to these sell well.



As per Steve Jobs' key note, the iPod Mini was supposed to compete with Flash players which cost between $100 and $200. Now why should someone who is buying a $100 flash player spend $150 bucks more to get a Mini ? If at all he can afford it, he would as well spend $200 to buy an iPod. - 10G extra.

iPod Mini is not supposed to compete with iPod !!! But I bet thats what is eventually going to happen.  The price makes absolutely no sense to me.


----------



## Cat (Jan 8, 2004)

> Apple wants to sell products with margin. Low cost "iPod" and similar cannot make margin. Only the high end devices make real margin


 Hmm, Apple wants to make profit, which results (inter alia) from the combination of margin and sales volume. If you sell >2million products with even a small margin, your profit can be very high indeed...



> As per Steve Jobs' key note, the iPod Mini was supposed to compete with Flash players which cost between $100 and $200. Now why should someone who is buying a $100 flash player spend $150 bucks more to get a Mini ? If at all he can afford it, he would as well spend $200 to buy an iPod. - 10G extra.


Well, the iPod mini is supposed to comepete with the _high end_ flash players: those that cost between $150,- and $250,-. In that expensive, high end segment the mini Pod is very competitive and a lot of people will consider it. Since they were going to spend ~$200,- it is just 50 bucks more. Yes, that is 25% more, but you get 16 times the storage, etc. If they go for the normal iPod, well, all the better, yet $50,- dollars more for Apple!
The iPod mini s going to sell very well on its own, but will also attract customers to the bigger line. T sum it up:

1) Make glitzy miniPod
2) ???
3) Profit!


----------



## diablojota (Jan 8, 2004)

Well, here is what I find interesting.  There is the 15gb iPod for $299 and the 20gb for $399.  That is now too large of a price difference.  I think if the iPod mini came in at $199 followed by the $299 15gb, then you just opened up your market share much more.


----------



## lilbandit (Jan 8, 2004)

Too expensive and whats the point of competing with yourself? People who have $250 to spend will probably spend the extra money and get a full size ipod. When I heard the mini ipod rumour I thought to myself, "Right, here comes a chance to make a cheap, small music player that can make the flash based players look like really bad value. Also, here comes a chance to make AAC/mp4/mp3 the dominant formats. Sell buckets of cheap players that can't play WMA and you have cornered the market in hardware and online music retailing." But what did they do? Make a 4GB (too big in my opinion) mini-ipod that costs too much. PC's conquered the world because they were cheap and only supported Windows, a small cheap iPod could be in everybodies pocket playing mp4/AAC/MP3 leaving WMA a distant memory


----------



## MacMuppet (Jan 8, 2004)

from The Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/news/0,12597,1118474,00.html

9.15am update 

iPod mini outcry prompts price review 

Neil McIntosh
Thursday January 8, 2004 

 Apple Computer is set to review the UK pricing of its iPod mini music player, launched on Tuesday, after complaints about a substantial mark-up for non-US buyers of the device.

The iPod mini will go on sale next month in the US for $249 - which would translate to a UK price of £162 including VAT if today's exchange rates were applied. Yet Apple's UK arm announced on Tuesday that it plans to sell the device for £38 more, at £199, immediately sparking an outcry from the company's European customers.

Now a senior Apple executive has said the company will review its pricing outside the US, and blamed the high pricing on the continuing weakness of the dollar against other currencies.

In an interview, Apple vice president Greg Joswiak told Online the price announcement was "subject to change" and that the company would settle on a UK price "closer to the availability date, simply because of the volatility of the currency exchange".

The exact pricing would depend on the strength of dollar relative to the pound, he said. "What we don't want to do is lock Europe into a price now, see the dollar continue to weaken, and have done all of ourselves a disservice by pricing too early," said Mr Joswiak.

He also dismissed pre-show rumours that Apple had been considering launching a sub-$99 player as "something we don't want to get in to."

"That's why all this nonsense about us doing a $99 player was just that. We weren't going to do a player that does 30 songs - it's very uninteresting to us."


----------



## MacMuppet (Jan 8, 2004)

"That's why all this nonsense about us doing a $99 player was just that. We weren't going to do a player that does 30 songs - it's very uninteresting to us."

of course its 'uninteresting' to you Greg, what wouldnt be uninteresting is a 500 song player for $100-200 - but then you wouldnt make $97.99 profit on it, would you Greg?

Actually, to be fair to the m(e)an at Apple, anyone who thought there would a $99 player must be stupid - the man's not wrong, its just not worth it...


----------



## iluvosx (Jan 9, 2004)

Cat said:
			
		

> Well, the iPod mini is supposed to comepete with the _high end_ flash players: those that cost between $150,- and $250,-. In that expensive, high end segment the mini Pod is very competitive and a lot of people will consider it. Since they were going to spend ~$200,- it is just 50 bucks more. Yes, that is 25% more, but you get 16 times the storage, etc. If they go for the normal iPod, well, all the better, yet $50,- dollars more for Apple!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## fryke (Jan 9, 2004)

You should all hear yourselves... You sound like the macosx.com crowd after the ORIGINAL iPod was released. Too little, too expensive... Yet, they've conquered the world of digital music players!

Apple is doing EXACTLY the right thing. These things have style, even more than the original iPods and the 2nd and 3rd generation iPods. They'll sell well, don't fear. If _you_ personally rather buy something cheaper, then do so!

I would opt for the 15G probably, if I hadn't got my 10G 2nd generation iPod already. But my girlfriend would want the iPod mini. Because of the STYLE.

Apple can still reduce the price to 199$ in a few months and introduce a 2 GB version for 149$ - they'll sell like hot cakes. Because people who're in for a digital music player make several steps before buying one. And if you're true to yourself, you'd rather have a stylish 4 GB iPod mini (or a 15 GB iPod), i.e. 'the real thing', than buy _some other player_ that just doesn't cut it after all. You'll spend a bit more, but that thing will hold its promises.

I've bought the 10 GB iPod and never looked back. It's been one of my best investments in computing ever. I felt bad only very shortly when the 3rd generation iPods were released. I soon came to my senses and thought: "What the heck? It holds my entire music library and plays it well. What would a 3rd generation iPod do? The same, more or less."

You won't feel bad shelling out the 249$ for the iPod mini or the 299$ for the iPod 15 GB.


----------



## Inline_guy (Jan 10, 2004)

I think you are paying a little more for less storage, but you are paying more for the tinyer little thing.  When I watched the Keynote, I thought "That was dumb... they missed the boat on this one" regarding the price.  But I touched one at MacWorld that day, and I want it much more than my 10Gig that I have now, and only have 600 songs on!  So I will be getting one, and passing my other on to a friend!

Matthew


----------



## Arden (Jan 10, 2004)

Inline_guy said:
			
		

> I think you are paying a little more for less storage, but you are paying more for the tinyer little thing.  When I watched the Keynote, I thought "That was dumb... they missed the boat on this one" regarding the price.  But I touched one at MacWorld that day, and I want it much more than my 10Gig that I have now, and only have 600 songs on!  So I will be getting one, and passing my other on to a friend!
> 
> Matthew


 That's exactly what I think of it.  After holding one of the minis, the regular iPod just seems... big.  It's weird what a couple centimeters can do.  I'd probably go for a mini at this point, not only to save $50 on 11 GB of storage I'd probably never use but because it feels a lot cooler.  It also doesn't have that transition from white plastic to metal which seems so ugly in comparison.  And I think a lot of the price is because of the scroll wheel technology... see my post about that, I'll find it here somewhere.


----------



## Cat (Jan 10, 2004)

I bought a 12" PowerBook for mucht the same reasons I would buy a miniPod: it might be more expensive, but it is smaller and lighter. It does everything I require and it is stylish too. Well, I'm sold!   And indeed: Fryke is absolutely right! the iPod mini is a much better offering than the original 5GB iPod. Didn't it initially sell for ~$400,- ? The mini's are nearly half that price and a lot smaller. 
I don't think I could put a big ole iPod in my shirt pocket, but I might be able to hold a lighte miniPod there. That _is_ a selling point for me.


----------



## applewhore (Jan 10, 2004)

US$ 249 = £150...

I paid more than that for a 1GB Compact Flash card for my camera!

The mini is SUPER sexy (colour debate aside!)

I agree with fryke and Cat on this one - the mini is SO much more interesting than the original 5GB iPod (I bought one) and amazingly small and light...

What's all the fuss about?  If you want to buy something cheaper, get a Rio!  (Oh, sorry, they're the same price...)

;-)


----------



## superfula (Jan 12, 2004)

A lot of you are missing the big picture here.  The ipod mini is NOT competing with the iPod.  There are certain people who are more concerned with the size of the player, not how much stuff you can put in it.  You have Joe Smith who wants a flash storage player to go running.  He doesn't need 15gig of space because 1) he only has 4-5gig of songs, and 2) he only runs for 20 minutes, therefore only needs to have 20 minutes of music fit on the player.  The iPod is WAAAY to big to use when running if you are a serious runner.  It just doesn't cut it.  There are so many people...Steve said 15%???...that love the upper end flash players.  It's not about price...it's about size.  So Apple prices a small harddrive player at the pricerange people are paying for 256mb flash players.  Joe Smith sees the iPod mini, it's the same price as the flash player he was going to buy, BUT this has 4gig of space.  He can fit his whole music collection on there, AND go running with it.

What you people need to realize is that it's not about "if you just spend 50 dollars more you get 11gig of hd space".  If price were the driving force behind which players sells the most, the iPod WOULD NOT own the large market share it has.  The iPod Mini is PERFECT for me.  I go running a lot.  I owned a gen2 ipod, and I hated running with it.  On top of that, I have just under 6gig of music.  Of which, I only listen to about 1gig of that on a regular basis.  For me, that extra 50 dollars on the 15gig is nothing more than wasted money.

So just because YOU may whine and moan about how YOU think it's stupid, that doesn't necessarily mean it is stupid.  Get it?


----------



## fryke (Jan 12, 2004)

superfula: You've added one of the most important points to this argument. Congratulations.  Quote: *"If price were the driving force behind which players sells the most, the iPod WOULD NOT own the large market share it has."*

Let's not forget that some competitors had larger HDs in them when the iPod won over all of them with its 5 GB harddrive. It won because of the style, its small size (yep, for a harddrive based player, the original iPod WAS the smallest at the time!) and thus lower weight. And those are the exact same reasons that will let the iPod mini win the hearts of a lot of buyers.


----------



## Cat (Jan 13, 2004)

Just to give some background about the number one player:
Apple's original 5GB iPod, had 20 minute skip protection, was 2.4" wide, 4" tall, 3/4" thick, price = $399 

That's bulkier and more expensive than the 4 GB miniPod now. It was an absolute hit right from the beginning. Now the quality has increased (more style and functions, less bulk) and the price has actually decreased. 

I completely agree with Fryke and superfula. I hope when it is released in April in Europe that Apple will charge a fair price, since the 1  = 1.25 $


----------



## boi (Jan 13, 2004)

fryke said:
			
		

> superfula: You've added one of the most important points to this argument. Congratulations.  Quote: *"If price were the driving force behind which players sells the most, the iPod WOULD NOT own the large market share it has."*



howabout this?

"if price were NOT the driving force behind which players sell the most, the iPod would have 100% market share."

price IS a factor. the ipod is obviously the best, yet it has 31% of what once was a dying market. when you tell someone-- your regular joe-- how much your music player cost, he'll keel over. 
and yes, it's better than the 5 GB ipod 2 years ago. amazing. but a normal buyer will see:
4GB ipod, smaller. $250.
15GB ipod, still small, but not quite as small. $299.
and the decision is fairly obvious. there are a few techo-buffs who go ga ga over something so tiny, but i would assume a normal user doesn't necessarily think tiny is better when you get to something this small. 
also, regarding jogging with it. i, personally, would never strap an ipod, $250 or $499, to my arm and go bouncing around with it. i would buy a cheap 64MB mp3 player, put a few energizing songs on it, and use _it_ to jog. (rio 64 MB).

anyway, i think they'll sell a lot of these. they'll sell them to those who think they're cute, pretty, etc. for the same reason people buy a lot of apple products over other products. however, i think apple is missing something by not making a 2GB model that's around the $150 range. once time gives way to cheaper prices, and something like this is available, then apple will dominate the music world (as it's well on its way to doing now) and become an evil monopolistic company (  ) jk.


----------



## Arden (Jan 13, 2004)

Obviously, price plays a large part in people's decisions to get an iPod (besides the die-hards, of course), but it's not the only decision.  The iPod is the most compact and stylish music player on the market, and it gives the best (and the coolest) bang for your buck.

I think as time goes on we'll see the iPod mini grow in capacity while the regular iPod slowly fades into obscurity.  People will eat up 40 GB iPod minis, and I bet Apple will eventually drop the regular iPod line altogether and call the minis iPod.


----------



## superfula (Jan 13, 2004)

boi said:
			
		

> howabout this?
> 
> "if price were NOT the driving force behind which players sell the most, the iPod would have 100% market share."
> 
> ...



You're first statement invalidated the rest of your arguement.  Obviously price is not the driving force behind mp3 player sales because the iPod is winning.

Obviously the "normal user" thinks quite a bit of the size, considering the amount of high end flash players that are sold.  Why bother buying the Rio and the iPod, when you can get the best of both worlds with the mini


----------



## i_need_a_mini_ (Jan 22, 2004)

*i'm desperate*. i *absolutely* need an ipod mini now but one problem: i live in the uk  . does anyone know of an american company that stock the mini ipod that would be prepared to ship to england? i would pay so much extra to have one soon!

Aimy


----------



## lilbandit (Jan 22, 2004)

you could try ebay.com, you might get one reasonably soon. Don't expect to get one cheap though! Seeing as you would be purchasing from outside the EU you would probably be liable for customs duty and possibly VAT @ 21%. Something so small might get through but don't count on it. Why not buy a regular ipod in the UK? It would probably work out cheaper!


----------



## Jason (Jan 23, 2004)

i thought the price was a little high at first too... but...

the 4gb drive in the ipod, is actually the 4gb microdrive from hitachi.. how much does that cost retail? $499 (well here http://www.flash-memory-store.com/4gbibmiitins.html it says 599 but selling for 488, most places have it for ~499)

soooo... you can buy the 499 drive, plus case, and mp3 playing capability for 249... not bad i guess when you think about it.


----------



## bobbo (Apr 12, 2004)

They said that the original ones would be too expensive too. yes, if you have that type of money, and need the songs, i would get a normal one. however as a middle school student, $50 is a big amount of money. So this is a more affordable iPod that can still fit my songs. I  have  a 20GB iMac so 4GB of music is a lot for me. I don't need that type of space, I like the colors, and its smaller and less expensive. The mini isn't for everyone but for some people its ver nice.


----------



## mdnky (Apr 12, 2004)

Can't say I disagree with the thoughts here, but then again they can't keep the things in stock right now since they're selling so quickly.

So with that taken in to consideration, why on earth would they drop the price?!?


----------

