WeeZer51402 said:
Ahhhhh..... iPod=Music Player!!!
I've heard this a few times and it's a silly objection, for several of reasons:
- There's nothing in my suggestion that would change the iPod from being a music player (or even necessarily add anything to the iPod's user interface).
- The iPod itself already does other things besides being a music player - it stores contact details, signals reminders, works as a hard drive and plays (boring) games. With accessories it also stores digital photos, does voice recording and even acts as a laser pointer.
None of these things are diverting people's attention away from the fact that the iPod plays music.
- The iPod can't stay locked into just playing music forever. It's eventually going to lose ground in the next few years to the competitors that do more. Apple realises this and that's why it works with accessory manufacturers. Working with phone companies is just a natural step.
WeeZer51402 said:
If the phone companies want to use it for something else its UP TO THEM!!!
I agree, but it's also in Apple's best interest to have some say in making sure that it's done properly (and use the iPod's popularity to forge business alliances and make it even more popular (and useful)).
WeeZer51402 said:
While it may be a good idea I don't think its apples responsibility nor do I think apple would ever market something like that. VideoPlayer Phone + iPod = To Complicated
I don't think Apple should market the iPod this way either. The phone companies will do that job for them.
ElDiabloConCaca said:
Plenty of companies make devices for the iPod without Apple intervention... Belkin, Bose, Griffin Tech, the list goes on.
?
These companies
do work with Apple's "intervention". Apple added the firmware updates to enable photo transfer + integration with iPhoto, recording of voice memos, integration of the iPod to cars, etc. etc..
It's in Apple's best interests to work with companies who want to broaden the appeal of the iPod.
ElDiabloConCaca said:
This is something that the cell phone companies themselves would have to tackle, not Apple. The idea is there -- for Apple to start making adaptors for every single cell phone would be silly -- each cell phone company would have to make their own adaptor.
I agree that the major part of the work (adding the port, etc.) should be done by the phone companies. I don't think there should be multiple adaptors at all - I think phone companies should add a firewire or usb2.0 port.
Viro said:
Because Powerbooks and notebooks (and PDAs) in general run large OSes that include the drivers to support the devices. Adding that to the phone would require additional drivers to be written for the device, something that could be quite difficult, given the constraints placed on phones since they come under the realm of embedded devices.
I don't know how big a driver generally is, but surely it isn't that big (i.e. it wouldn't require an entire OS to run). We're just talking about connecting a phone to
one device (the iPod).
I'm not sure what you mean by "given the constraints placed on phones since they come under the realm of embedded devices". Please elaborate.
Viro said:
Perhaps not to the interface since it would add one or two options, but where do you think all this added functionality is gonna go? It will require additional chips and circuitry and that will bulk up the iPod since it is already pretty much jam packed.
?
The iPod already functions as an external hard drive. Why would any additional chips/circuitry be required? The only thing I've mentioned that would require an additional chip would be adding 802.11g to the iPod.
Ripcord said:
Well, in his example, read "PDA" instead of phone, as the Treo is very much a PDA first (it's a palmpilot), and phone second (as opposed to most "Smartphones", which are phones first). Assume that it's intended to be a mini-computer, with memory expansion, connectivity to external devices, etc.
Interesting. I hadn't actually thought PDA, but you're right - it's the same thing (in terms of using an iPod as an external drive).
I think the phone's the focal point though, since phone's are already taking over the functions of the PDA (or PDAs are adding phone/wireless functionality).
Basically, I think people would love to carry around one gadget that does everything (esp. phone, organiser functions and music). However, miniaturisation and battery technology are still not quite at the point they need to be at (the Treo comes closest, but needs additional storage space, whilst simultaneously cutting down on bulk and weight).
WeeZer51402 said:
Congrats on the 1000th. I agree that it wouldnt be hard but no one has stopped to analyze the cost associated with it. Assuming that it would require a FW connection the phone companies would need to spend money on R&D and then spend money not only to implement it and market it. Lets face it if there isn't a really big buying demographic for this the phone companies are gonna loose money.
The phone companies need to spend money on R&D all the time just to stay in business and there are no sure bets. However, usb2.0 is a
standard (I think companies should add a usb2.0 port, rather than firewire - it gives them more options) and the iPod is one of the hottest gadgets around today (esp. with the main target market of phone companies).
Adding a usb2.0 port (+ "iPod as a hard drive" functionality) would seem to be a very sensible choice (more so than most of the other things that phone companies add to phones in order to differientiate themselves from the competition).
This is especially true in one respect - lots of phone ALREADY HAVE video playing functionality which is almost WORTHLESS, because they don't have the storage capacity to take advantage of it.
WeeZer51402 said:
One would assume that by adding the FW interface it would raise the costs of phones and who wants to spen anymore money than they have to? I know I don't.
Depends on what I'm getting for the extra cost. Being able to play video on the go would be worth quite a bit to me.
No-one's saying "put a usb2.0 port into every phone" - people will always have the option of a cheap phone if they want one.
WeeZer51402 said:
Even if there are a bunch of people out there with iPods and Smart Phones who says that even 50% of them want to play video on there smartphones with there iPods. Obviously this would require some research by the phone companies but as of now it wouldn't seem terribly cost-effective.
I think that the market for people who want to play video on the go is a lot bigger than we can see at the moment (and there's a significant potential for it to be grown in the long term).
The reality (as I see it) is that there is currently NO DEVICE with video that properly addresses the market and that's why the market seems smaller than (I think) it is.
People want to carry around
one device (at most two) with them at all times and the principle functionality they want is the phone.
This is why I think the current devices with a hard disk + direct video functionality (Archos, etc) haven't had a bigger demand - no phone functionality.
At the same time, video hasn't been a big selling point of phones because phones don't have nearly enough storage space.
Who would have thought a few years ago that the demand for a music player with a hard drive (and great usability) would be so large?
i.e. Demand is a very tricky thing to second guess.
Kap
