Now that it is obvious to all but the most rabid anti-Apple fanatics that the iPod is a phenomenal success, people are trying to figure out exactly how and why it happened.
The iPod is certainly not perfect. Incompatibility with other formats means that at one level it perpetrates its own version of Henry Fordism: ‘You can have anything you like so long as it’s Apple.’ This is the more irritating because the music store’s coverage is by no means universal.
Nevertheless, the things it has got right hold key lessons for companies trying to woo customers in any industry, whether product- or service-based.
One lesson is the importance of using the right medium, and executing it properly. The iPod is a textbook example of getting applications – for playing, organising and buying music – to work seamlessly together through the net without dropping you between the gaps. The second is simplicity. The more complicated the product, the harder it has to work to make you love it. A large part of the iPod’s appeal is how easy it is to use – put another way, the fact that nothing gets between you and what you want from it.
The iPod took the personal music revolution the Walkman began and refined it to the point where it now is a part of our culture.
From the article: ‘You can have anything you like so long as it’s Apple.’ This is the more irritating because the music store’s coverage is by no means universal.
What?
It would be less irritating if Apple had a lock on distribution of more music??
The only music I can’t play on my Apple gear [iMac and iPod] is music “protected” by a competitor’s DRM.
All my exisiting CDs can be ripped & enjoyed. Most of my future CDs will be too.. barring future “Sony root-kit”-type fiascos….
Daring Fireball was commenting on this in 2004:
http://daringfireball.net/2004/08/2004_wont_be_like_1984
That’s compatibility. If you enjoy music enough to consider buying a $300 iPod, there’s a good chance you have a CD collection numbering in the hundreds. Thousands of songs, which cost thousands of dollars. The iPod and iTunes fully embrace your existing music collection.
Already have music in MP3 format, from sources unknown? The iPod and iTunes will play them, no questions asked. That’s compatibility.
(Compare and contrast to Sony, whose latest supposed “iPod-killer” stubbornly only plays songs in Sony’s proprietary ATRAC format.)
From the article: And that’s the second thing about the iPod: it puts you, not them, in control.
And the writer is irritated at Apple because more music isn’t available as “singles”? When it is often “the industry” which doesn’t want sales of singles… especially not at 99-cents.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/08/10/itunes_japan_artists/
And how many artists are still concerned with “Protecting the Album”…? [per this column from 2003]
http://www.macobserver.com/columns/thebackpage/2003/20030703.shtml
The best companies I worked for — those who became successful and stayed successful — were those who did what Apple has done with iPod. You step back, frequently, and look at this product that’s making a ton of money — right now — and say to staff, “OK. What will our competitors do to beat us!” And you get it on the street before those other companies do it to you.
I don’t own an iPod; so, I don’t know all the specific iterations. Still, the very thing Apple-bashers piss and moan about is dramatic changes to successful products. Folks — that’s one of the ways you get to stay ahead of the curve.
Doesn’t mean you can’t screw up. But, you scrap the crap. You don’t waste three years trying to sell Edsels. Then, you move on. Sometimes you scrap the stuff that’s working “good enough”. Then, you move on.
I think one of the major reasons the iPod is so successful is that it
LOOKS SO DAMN COOL!
All this other rubish about how easy it is to use, the iTunes music store, bla bla bla… just business mumbo jumbo speak.
It looks cool and plays music – no one cares about all that other.
The biggest thing that made the iPod such sucess is the smallest thing, one that is often overlooked.
The switch from firewire only to USB.(When I bought my first pod, I also had to by a firewire card) Itunes was huge, don’t get me wrong, but they would have never been a hit with anything but Mac users and a tech savvy windows users. Most PCs still don’t come with firewire, so you do the math.
Captain, millions and millions of iPods were sold before the switch to USB. There’s no way to tell why it reached critical mass this past year: the millions of adopters, the easy-to-use software, the new design (with the video) or the media campaign. One thing I’m sure of: I haven’t bought a PC without Firewire in over 4 years. Desktop OR laptop.
Malren (7) what percentage of the general public (barring our esteemed compatriots commenting here) even has a clue what Firewire is? or even USB for that matter, but at least their digital camera, and everything else runs on USB. Buddy of mine just got a new laptop … I think 4 USB ports and 1 Firewire – an indication of general popularity – they don’t call it “Universal” for nothing. Anyway, besides that, I think the Apple iPod ads are lame (IMHO), but they do look cool, and work well – ‘nuther friend of mine had a Zen Micro, then won an iPod and gave the Zen to his dad … he says its much better (I don’t own one … not enough of a music geek to spend that much cash 🙂 )
of course the irony of Apple’s ‘our DRM only’ model is that, while preventing the iPod from playing other legally downloaded songs, it does nothing to prevent playing of ‘stolen’ music, which will be in MP3 format.
and the software is one of the best things. I know of where I speak – I had a Sony minidisk MP3 player for a while, and its software was a total kludge. iTunes is brilliant by comparison.
Marketing and then public trend.
Apple could wrap a used burrito and it would sell among their most hardcore fans. That the product worked got it past this critical first step. And it was not anything new or original except in a smoother UI.
Then it was the new toy for trendsetters and mixed in with great PR from Jobs and the machine, add a name branding (podcast) and everyone wants to be on the bandwagon.
I don’t own one, and do not foresee myself doing so. I belive it is an inferior product, overpriced, and too quickly surpassed.
Malren,
Apple sold less than 2 mililon ipods before switching from firewire to usb. I bought my third gen less than a week after it went on sale. And I have a t-shirt to prove it. (Numbers source on units sold: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPod)
In 2004 Apple doubled the amount sold previously, after the switch to usb. Granted it can hardly be attritubuted only to USB, but I still think it is the most important reason. (Otherwise how many current owners would actually go through the trouble of installing firewire. Most are lucky to be able to turn the damn thing on.)
And all PCs should have firewire. It is the only way to go for large transfers.
CC
Surpassed by its own. I didn’t clarify that point. Thank you. Apple has had the age old business model of designed obsolescence, holding back on upgrades that they have allready planned, then rolling out the next model, which everyone has to have.
And as noted, there are other makers who build a simillar product. They just don’t have the Apple branding. Doesn’t mean one is better then the other.
If Apple carries all the songs the other services are selling, what difference does it make if I can’t buy somewhere else? Heck, what other service is compatible with Macs? Why is it that Apple has to open up when no one on the other side is opening up to Mac users? If you were a real keyboard (as opposed to your last name) I’d have thrown you out long ago.
Apple sold less than 2 mililon ipods before switching from firewire to usb. I bought my third gen less than a week after it went on sale.
I’m also
but i did something good
go to: http://www.promt.org/ad-prom-jewelry.html
there in the search box pt “ipod” and you will find some good offers
The little questionaire of reality:
Who do you think makes the most money from the average album, especially over the course of many years – the record company, or the artist?
Do you think an artist makes more money from their album or from the various sources of income (ticket sales, shirts, keychains, beer) while touring?
Where are most CDs produced, anywhere in North America, or somewhere else? Do people actually do most of the work, or is production mostly automated through robotics?
iPods took off because of a clean interface, good portability, right size and appearance, and LOTS OF ADVERTISING. Steve Jobs continues to prove he’s a brilliant marketeer. However, they’ll forget about that existing customer base soon enough. That’s Apple’s business model: innovate and make pretty, have great sales, move on to the next big thing, ignore your established customer base. Don’t believe me? See: Apple //, Mac history (esp OS), Newton, etc….
I have a 20 Gig Rio Riot. I had it before iPods existed. I still have it, runs like a champ. Sure, it’s bigger than a pack of cards — but, I manage to lug it around with my dainty 240 pound figure. Size isn’t really a problem, since I wear mine on my belt while biking. Once I can get a 40-80 Gig MP3 player that uses Flash or Solid State memory, then I’ll upgrade.
Finally, at the end of the initial report, it said, “The iPod took the personal music revolution the Walkman began and refined it to the point where it now is a part of our culture.” HAH! Who are you, Steve Jobs? The tape Walkman, then CD Walkman, established the personal music revolution, and made it part of our culture. The iPod just put it into a smaller, more expensive package (marketing!)….
It’s popular because it’s the only gay accesory str8 men can carry without being called fags.
think one of the major reasons the iPod is so successful is that it so usefull