Competition not afraid of Apple’s iPod Shuffle
January 13th, 2005 Leave a comment Visited 69 times, 4 so far today
Competition not afraid of Apple’s iPod shuffle
Apple practically completed their arsenal to take anything heads on with their new release in the form of iPod Shuffle. They now have a higher end model in the form of iPod Photo that can handle much more than just music in the form of photos. Then they have the hip and very popular iPod, which is breaking records by the day.
Now, with iPod Shuffle… Apple has an entry-level digital music player, which plans to remain cool yet functional. The small size and price is expected to shakeup the market of the flash based digital music players. However, the competition is not worried.
At least they do not appear to be that ways. Reason being, apple has gone basic for a change for their latest products. To keep the costing of the iPod Shuffle low, there is no User Interface! No display screen to show what song is playing and other details. Competition in the form of Creative and Rio believes that users have now grown used to expecting a decent UI from these devices.
Another reason is lack of features like a FM Radio player or a voice recorder. Plus, Apple would be expecting the customers to pay more for the accessories, which finally make the product complete. Stuff like an armband, USB Cable, and extra batteries raise the final price of this music player to levels where buying a competitive product makes more sense.
Apple on their part would be hoping for similar success they had with iPod. With competition providing cheaper alternatives, iPod has managed to outsell everything else to become the Walkman of the current generation. Apple has seen the sales beating the production and profits rising many folds with iPod and iTunes.
iPod Shuffle just might make it another victory for the Macintosh Company…
|
TechWhack on Facebook
|
January 21st, 2005 at 9:00 pm
Just bought 8 Shuffles for friends and family. Did not even think about others in the market – BECAUSE NONE OF THE OTHERS SYNC WITH ITUNES tracks that I paid and bought legally!!
AM
January 21st, 2005 at 9:12 pm
They were not worried a year ago when Apple introduced the iPod mini, which now has cut their share of the flash-based market by 50%. This time next year, when they are down to 10% of what they had a year ago, I guess they will still be saying they are not worried. Well, I’m not worried for them either. I bought me a Shuffle, to compliment my bigger iPod.
January 21st, 2005 at 10:16 pm
What would you expect Apple’s “competition” to say? Privately they are terrified. Apple has made it abundantly clear they want the whole market, everything. Judging by what Apple has done with the iPod, they should be very afraid. Apple is in a very strong position to leverage their brand and their HD player lead into domination of the entire music download/player industry. Next year’s market share numbers should be interesting. If the lack of a LCD display turns into a significant handicap, Apple will just add one. They have the momentum to recover from any small mis-steps and, unlike with the Mac, they have the volume to benefit from economies of scale. They can afford to undercut the comptetions because they can buy components in volume. As their competitor’s market share slips, they will become less able to buy parts at volume prices. (They get to deal with the reality Apple has faced for many years in the PC market.) Creative can break out as many cases of Champagne they want, but they are drinking it in soiled shorts.
January 21st, 2005 at 11:10 pm
Please note; there is a difference between a “user interface” and a “graphical user interface”. On/off switches, play/pause/ffwd/reverse etc are examples of user interfaces. What one sees on a computer/mobile phone/ mp3 player screen is usually a graphical user interface.
January 21st, 2005 at 11:11 pm
It’s not just about selling shuffles. It’s about creating a price war in the flash market. This forces Creative and Rio to lower prices, cutting into their gross margins, and hurting their profitability. Apple could care less about actually selling shuffles, as their breadnbutter is in the HD iPods. By hurting their competition’s profitability, they lessen the chance that they can compete with Apple in the profitable HD market segment.
Now, if shuffles sell, all the better, but it’s not necessary for Apple to achieve their aims.
January 22nd, 2005 at 12:16 am
What competition?
January 22nd, 2005 at 6:22 am
Nobody uses these interfaces on they’re mp3 players. I watch university students listening to them on the bus—none look at their screens. Jobs was right, a GUI on a mp3 player isn’t practical. Most mp3 players are busy displaying numbers (play time?) 95% of the time. Do you really need to know that? The shuffle will be a hit.
January 22nd, 2005 at 10:36 am
Apple is making quite a profit on the iPod Shuffles. By providing simplifying the user interface – such as avoiding unnecessary features such as a radio receiver, Apple will actually maintain a high gross profit margin on the iPod Shuffle (and the Mac mini, for that matter) yet also undercutting their competitors. Apple’s competitors are hobbled by lower profit margins on their more featured compact flash MP3 players.
January 22nd, 2005 at 8:11 pm
MP3 manufacturer: “Hello sir”
idiot interviewer: “Does the iPod shuffle scare you?”
MP3 manufacturer: “Obsolutely not! The price is outrageous and it has too few features”
idiot interviewer: “Thank you”
Off camera the MP3 manufacturer takes two more valium and kicks his dog.
Oh, you were expecting the executives of unsuccessful companies to admit they have products people buy only when they think there is no other choice. You know, they go to all the stores on Christmas Eve and there are no iPods to be found or they have $50 and want to get their three children an mp3 player, or they think Apple only has $500 iPods.
May 22nd, 2005 at 3:03 am
You don’t see people looking at the interface of their MP3 player because they don’t have to. It’s easy enough to go by feel for most functions (volume, track skip, etc).