While many have heralded Apple’s release of the 2 GB iPod Shuffle, and the resulting price-drop of the 1 GB model as a way for Apple to reach more customers, some believe that keeping the 1 GB model may do Apple more harm than good.
Jonathan Weinberg at Tech Digest writes:
“An iPod used to be something you desired, something pricier than most other options on the market but like with any big-name brand, you paid more to have that moniker on your gadget.”A little snobby sounding? Maybe. But with the price of an iPod dropping below $50 for the first time, could it be possible that Apple risks mixing its precious iPod image with that of bargain bin MP3 players in the same price range?
I personally disagree and think that by tapping into the lower price range, Apple will be able to swoop up the remaining customers who haven’t been able to afford the pricier models. As long as Apple maintains its high standards of quality, pricing shouldn’t be that big of an issue.
That said, Weinberg may have a point when he notes that as technology continues to improve and memory storage costs lower, the brand power and “premium factor” of a company relies on them continuing to offer more for less.
“Giving us the same for less just cheapens the range and puts the gorgeous little Shuffle up there with the cheap and nasty throwaway MP3s that are littering the shelves of so many stores right now.”The day I walk into a Wal-Mart and see a pile of Shuffles laying in the bargain bin will be the day I start to worry about Apple’s cheapening image. Until then, I think Apple’s made the right move with the price drop. What do you think?
Right there with you David.
a) The shuffle is still pricier and better-designed then things like the Creative Zen Stone.
b) The shuffle is barely even an iPod
c) Apple still has "status" covered with the top of the line, things like the iPhone and iPod touch.
There's this myth that Apple products cost more money. People commonly think this about Macintoshes and the same idea has taken hold for the iPod.
The original iPod was more expensive than other MP3 players on the market when it was introduced, but that's because it's capacity was so much higher. When you compare it to other hard drive players available at the same time it was actually a good deal.
Since Apple began competing in the Flash player market they have always been competitive on price. On several occasions Apple's increase in capacity and decrease in price was a game changer for their mainstream competitors. Indeed, several of those competitors have been unable to compete and have left the market altogether.
I think the Shuffle fits well into the iPod product line. It has clear limitations, but is very stylish. I don't think many people who want a higher power iPod will choose it, but at $49 it lets a lot of people get their first iPod easily.
I think it's a great move for Apple! It's opening the market to younger customers who can definitely benefit from a quality player at a lower price. It should also give Apple lots of positive word of mouth advertising as more people experience what it's like to own such an intuitive device.
I hope these price drops (even marginal ones) continue for other Apple products and open the floodgates. Personally, I owned a Creative Zen in the past and had shunned Apple products because of the costs. However, I went out on a limb and purchased a refurbished Video iPod 60gb for a bit less than the newest Creative player. Experiencing the vast difference in the menus and interactive qualities between the two manufacturers made me a future Apple customer for life.
Since that time, I've purchased an older Mac laptop, an iPhone, and a new 24" iMac and I love every product with as much enthusiasm as I had for my very first.
I agree with David, but the writer (Jonathan) may have a point when it comes to the "fashion" aspect of Apple products, though it betrays my own personal sensibilities (and ignores the actual value of their technological utility).
Would people really buy Coach purses if they didn't have to pay a premium for the little Cs? In Los Angeles, you will see people following their iphones around (as they used to do with their ipods). You can't have a conversation with an iphone-user without them putting their phone on the table and feigning embarrassment or surprise when you ask them about it. As I said, the "fashion" side of Apple products is not everything (they're actually great devices, too!), but their roles as status symbols should not be completely ignored, and their premium price is certainly a part of that.
Now, I don't think this ever applied to the shuffle...
You can price a Hyundai the same as a BMW, but that don't make the Hyundai a BMW. So, conversely, you can price a BMW the same as a Hyundai, but that don't make the BMW a Hyundai. That'll just take customers away from Hyudai becuase why buy a Hyundai when you can buy a BMW?
This is very good for Apple, especially for international markets. In Korea for example, iPods have become very popular, especially the 3g Nano. However, Apple is behind in the screenless market. The most popular screenless MP3 player is the Mickey Mouse player from iRiver. See: http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/gadgets/iriver-mplayer-how-mickey-got-his-groove-back-267380.php This costs about $48. With the lower price Shuffle, Apple may be able to gain marketshare there. The Shuffle still costs about $5 more because of tarrifs (which the Korea-US FTA should remove when it's enacted), and there is the Disney cuteness factor as well, so that'll count against them.
I think it positions the shuffle well as a spare device for exercise and the starter model for younger kids who will quickly be begging for a video nano.
I have one in my laptop bag somewhere, used it maybe twice. Love the idea and it's there if I ever find I need it, but my iPhone, video iPod, MacBook Pro, Mac Pro, and Apple TV really are what represent Apple to me in my life.
The shuffle is more stocking stuffer/novelty item. I suppose if I could stand the lack of environmental input I would wear one while jogging, but frankly it scares the hell out of me to participate in the outside world without auditory cues. ;)
Apple has not tarnished its image by lowering the prince of their, already, least expensive iPod. As mentioned, it will give those with less cash, the ability to get an Apple product (with iTunes, etc) instead of an inferior product. At the same time, Apple has expanded their product line on the other (high) end with the Touch. I disagree that the shuffle is a novelty item. If you close your eyes it sounds exactly the same as a Touch or iPhone or Classic..... This is the perfect first iPod for your child, as it was for mine. For Apple, it starts them out on a long road to purchasing more expensive apple products and consuming music through the iTunes music store.
I'm not sure why but seeing this post makes me angry, just the idea that someone would publish such rubish and try to "make a point" because somthing has become affordable.
I agree with everyones response, just wanted to say that the babble Tech Digest posted made me angry an I've had to SEE the babble all over the web.