iPod New iPod lineup 2010

[ipedro]

September is inching closer and with it, the annual iPod refresh.

It's always fun to make predictions and see how close you come when they're announced. For the last couple of years, back to back, I've gotten my predictions spot on, including sizes introduced and dropped and price accuracy so here goes again:

iPod classic will be discontinued as the touch doubles its memory to 128GB, enough for most audiophiles with big collections. The iPod touch will become simply "iPod". I'm tempted to say that the Shuffle will drop out the bottom end as the Nano's price drops to under $100 but there may still be room for the diminutive iPod.

As for the look of the devices, I expect the iPod (formerly touch) to lose the chrome and go unibody, looking a lot like the iPad rather than the new all glass iPhone. The iPod Nano will mirror the new iPod in an aluminium unibody enclosure with a flat front and rounded back. I don't expect the nano to have a glass front due to its low price and popular use as a workout companion, prone to being tossed around and dropped regularly. Both iPods will fit in together in appearance as a duo, looking like twins, finally moving the iPod (touch) into the line, instead of a completely different looking black sheep of the family.

The Shuffle will see little if any improvement other than a price drop for the 4GB model, which will be the only option available in this brand.

• iPod 16GB, 64GB, 128GB - starting @ $199
• iPod Nano 8GB, 16GB, 32GB - starting @ $99
• iPod Shuffle 4GB - $59

What are you predictions?

 

[rw3]

I don't foresee the iPod Classic ever going away...but that's just me.

 

[ipedro]

@rw3 "Ever" is a really long time. There's no room for the classic to stay. It has stagnated in memory size and the micro HDD's are in less demand in the market and thus prone to costing more to Apple.

Moving the classic to flash memory makes no sense in that case as the current iPod Touch is more than capable of filling that role.

iPod classic is out this September. I'm firm on that prediction.

 

[obsidian1200]

@rw3 "Ever" is a really long time. There's no room for the classic to stay. It has stagnated in memory size and the micro HDD's are in less demand in the market and thus prone to costing more to Apple.

Moving the classic to flash memory makes no sense in that case as the current iPod Touch is more than capable of filling that role.

iPod classic is out this September. I'm firm on that prediction.

I have to agree with the person who said the Classic will stay. True, micro HDD's are falling out of style/the market, but the larger size of the Classic would allow for a larger flash memory capacity and a larger battery with less RAM since the classic doesn't need the power of the Touch/Pad/Phone for system processes. Audiophiles, I think, would rather spend money on a high-capacity, long-lasting media-player rather than on a lower-capacity wifi browsing device that can play music.

That's just me, though.

 

[rw3]

I didn't say forever...I said ever, like with in a 5 year time span. I don't need all the video and games stuff, that's why I have my iPhone. But for having all my music on the go, I need the Classic. You can fit 256GB of Flash Memory in the Classic. (This figure is based off how much space a 256GB SSD needs and the Classic has the available space.)

 

[ipedro]

I'm not going to argue semantics but for the record, "ever" means "eternally" "perpetually" which is where "for ever" or "forever" comes from.

That said, I see the point of keeping it as an audiophile device but I don't see it as Apple's character to stay in a niche market when they can push their flagship iPod (touch) and still mostly satisfy even the audiophiles who will have to do with more functionality, that they can simply ignore.

Apple hasn't updated the classic for several years now and the component prices will only be increasing due to lower demand.

To wrap up my point, this Appleinsider report demonstrates how iPod is no longer a considerable part of Apple's revenue so they need to condense the product line to keep it profitable.

I'm looking at this from a business and marketing standpoint and the Classic has no role in either. Sure, iPod lovers have an emotional attachment to the original iPod form factor but they're an ever smaller niche and Apple is in the business to make money, and few in that niche would be capable or willing to prop up a money losing product model.

There might be some steam left in the classic for one last year but my money is on the iPod classic going EOL in September.

 

[rgarjr]

Classic is here to stay.

 

[na1577]

iPod classic
Capacity: 128 GB flash memory (for durability)
Price: $299
Design: Thinner (0.37 mm) aluminum/chrome encolsure; new colors
Features: FM radio; Nike+; updated software

I think there is still a lot of room for improvement with the iPod classic. Since it's nearing the end of its life, Apple will probably max it out and sell it for a few more years like this, emphasizing the "classic" aspect.
---

iPod nano
Capacity: 16/32 GB
Price: 16-$129; 32-$179
Design: slightly thinner (0.23 mm); refreshed colors
Features: 2 MP still/video camera

The iPod nano got a huge upgrade last year, so I don't see Apple doing much with it this year.
---

iPod touch
Capacity: 16/32/64 GB
Price: 16-$199; 32-$249; 64-$349
Design: Flat with aluminum border (iPhone 4); separated/rounded volume controls; polished backing
Features: 3 MP still/video camera (iPhone 3GS); built-in microphone; A4; "retina" display; gyroscope

 

[iEvolution]

As much of a fan as I am of the classic I think it is gonna be gone this year. Its been slowly getting phased out. 2008 introduced the 120GB model with some new menu short cuts and Genius.

2009 they introduced the 160GB model with no additional features.

This year they'll either a) take it off the line completely, or b) get whatever single layer hard drive capacity is out by the time of the release. Seeing as the latest for Samsung is 120GB still and Toshiba is still 160GB I doubt we will see anything done with it this year.

The idea of flash memory is just ridiculous for the classic, they already have three flash players in their line up. If you are concerned with the "sensitivity" of hard drives then the iPod Classic is not for you, the iPod Touch would probably suite your needs better. I think its pretty obvious that Apple is slowly letting it go the way of the dinosaurs. Besides, adding flash memory would only INCREASE the price of the iPod Classic and you'd still get 32GB less in capacity.

Seeing as it is consistently on the top 10 at amazon.com for mp3 players [in fact it is 3rd right now behind the 32GB and 8GB iPod Touch], I'm betting option b.

Hoping for a 32GB Nano or a 128GB iPod Touch, BUT I think it is highly unlikely a capacity boost for the iPod Touch will come this year since the iPhone didn't get anything. I'm pretty sure there will be one for the nano now.

That being said this is what I'd like to see:

iPod Classic
- 200GB Single Platter HD [I've swapped my 5th gen with the 240GB dual platter drive from toshiba and it is a little on the slow side, in fact I use it strictly for video on my TV]
- Increase screen size, even if it is just a little bit..even like 2.7" or something.
- Update the interface
- Increase battery life to match the 2007 classic 160GB

iPod Nano
- 32GB capacity update. This really needs to happen since iTunes files have since gotten larger since the release of the 4th gen 16GB capacity, plus the video recording needs to have a little extra room to work with. I can fill the 16GB with relative ease with just music right now.
- change the design this year, bubble gum design is getting stale
- IMPROVE BATTERY LIFE
- ability to take still pictures

iPod Touch
- SEEK BUTTONS [Back/Forward], this is the one of two things that keep me away from the touch. I don't like having to pull it out of my pocket every time I want to change songs.
- 128GB Capacity, which is the other thing that keeps me away from this device. Support for apps, great screen for viewing video yet still can't match the capacity of the iPod Classic.

 

[na1577]

The idea of flash memory is just ridiculous for the classic, they already have three flash players in their line up. If you are concerned with the "sensitivity" of hard drives then the iPod Classic is not for you, the iPod Touch would probably suite your needs better. I think its pretty obvious that Apple is slowly letting it go the way of the dinosaurs. Besides, adding flash memory would only INCREASE the price of the iPod Classic and you'd still get 32GB less in capacity.

You don't understand. Having all flash iPods is not a bad thing. (About the sensitivity comment: why would you recommend the iPod touch? It is just as sensitive as the classic, it has a large glass touchscreen.) It reduces technical variation, yes, but most consumers don't care about that. They want a compact, durable device that can fit all of their music and movies, something the iPod nano cannot do. (at least the niche that Apple is currently targeting with the classic)

You're right about the price increase, but if you're concerned about price increases, why would you assume Apple will increase capacity to 200GB? That would be more expensive (than 160 GB) and less useful to consumers; there's high capacity, and then there's overkill. Considering the popularity of low capacity players like the nano and touch, it's a safe assumption that most iPod owners don't need outrageous numbers of bytes, even the people who would be interested in a high capacity player probably don't need 200 GB.

 

[ipedro]

@iEvolution - Great analysis except for this part:

iPod Touch
- SEEK BUTTONS [Back/Forward], this is the one of two things that keep me away from the touch. I don't like having to pull it out of my pocket every time I want to change songs.

We're not discussing a wishlist, we're predicting what Apple will release.

Apple isn't going to add any new hardware buttons considering they were resisting adding volume controls to the iPod Touch. That said, your back/forward seek buttons already exist -- on the headphone cord. If you like to use your own headphones, there are cables with the remote and a minijack.

 

[ipedro]

You're right about the price increase, but if you're concerned about price increases, why would you assume Apple will increase capacity to 200GB? That would be more expensive (than 160 GB) and less useful to consumers; there's high capacity, and then there's overkill. Considering the popularity of low capacity players like the nano and touch, it's a safe assumption that most iPod owners don't need outrageous numbers of bytes, even the people who would be interested in a high capacity player probably don't need 200 GB.

I agree. Also, local storage is going to matter less and less with the upcoming iTunes cloud. This is another reason why the Classic will disappear from the lineup. When Apple introduces over the air synching and cloud streaming, they're going to want their entire iPod lineup to contribute to the pool of users. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Nano getting a wi-fi chip for over the air synching and cloud streaming.

 

[iEvolution]

You don't understand. Having all flash iPods is not a bad thing. (About the sensitivity comment: why would you recommend the iPod touch? It is just as sensitive as the classic, it has a large glass touchscreen.) It reduces technical variation, yes, but most consumers don't care about that. They want a compact, durable device that can fit all of their music and movies, something the iPod nano cannot do. (at least the niche that Apple is currently targeting with the classic)

You're right about the price increase, but if you're concerned about price increases, why would you assume Apple will increase capacity to 200GB? That would be more expensive (than 160 GB) and less useful to consumers; there's high capacity, and then there's overkill. Considering the popularity of low capacity players like the nano and touch, it's a safe assumption that most iPod owners don't need outrageous numbers of bytes, even the people who would be interested in a high capacity player probably don't need 200 GB.

The reason I say 200GB is because 40GB per year is about how much the capacity on single platter hard drives are moving. 2007 - 80GB single platter, 2008 - 120GB single platter, 2009 - 160gb single platter.

It wouldn't be more expensive because a year would have passed by the time the 160GB was released initially, now if there is a new one that has been made that takes that price point while the 160GB gets dropped lower.

Too much, in terms of space, is not possible. 12 years ago, 4GB was huge and no one would have thought they'd need a higher capacity in computers, now look where we are at. In some instances 4GB is ONE program.

Now if we are talking about the average consumer then we should just get rid of the classic if that's what determines the needs of everyone. We should have just stopped at 8GB because 80% of the market probably couldn't even fill that up with music.

File sizes are just going to keep increasing.

Apple isn't going to add any new hardware buttons considering they were resisting adding volume controls to the iPod Touch. That said, your back/forward seek buttons already exist -- on the headphone cord. If you like to use your own headphones, there are cables with the remote and a minijack.

Yeah yeah, I got that response when people thought I was crazy that they would put video function on the iPod Nano when the 3rd gen was on the rumor mill.

We're not discussing a wishlist, we're predicting what Apple will release.

Ok well then apple predictions:
- redesigned nano with 32GB capacity, ability to take pictures added.
- iPod Touch, updated to look like the iPhone 4, no capacity updates.
- iPod Classic gone
- iPod Shuffle, stays the exact same

Apple hasn't WOW'd me since 2007 on the iPod line, I don't expect this year to WOW me either. They own the market, there is little incentive to have any really big updates as there is no competition unfortunately.

 

[na1577]

Too much, in terms of space, is not possible. 12 years ago, 4GB was huge and no one would have thought they'd need a higher capacity in computers, now look where we are at. In some instances 4GB is ONE program.

Sorry, that's not what I meant when I said that. No one would buy a 1TB hard drive for their computer if they only use 50 GBs. They would save money and buy a 80-100 GB hard drive. Likewise, it doesn't make sense to pay for a 200 GB hard drive if you're only going to use 100 of it. Most users upgrade their devices every few years. Unless they see themselves adding 100+ GB of media during that time, they're not going to buy that extra space.

 

[ipedro]

Ok well then apple predictions:
- redesigned nano with 32GB capacity, ability to take pictures added.
- iPod Touch, updated to look like the iPhone 4, no capacity updates.
- iPod Classic gone
- iPod Shuffle, stays the exact same

That's more realistic

However, I don't think Apple is going to move to make the iPod Touch look like the iPhone. I feel that we should expect to see the nano and iPod Touch aesthetically match since these two are part of the same category.

I predict that the design of both iPods will have a flat front and curved back in a unibody frame. The iPhone's design will remain exclusive to that category.

 

[SactoGuy18]

Here's what I think will happen when the iPod line is refreshed in September:

iPod shuffle--no changes except for more choices in case color design. Price remains the same: 2 GB US$59, 4 GB US$79.

iPod nano--looks almost like 5G model, but case slightly thicker to accommodate bigger battery. Will be available in 16 and 32 GB versions. Price will be US$149 for 16 GB and US$179 for 32 GB.

iPod classic--will use same case format as current model, but will now sport larger display for higher-definition video playback and smaller click wheel. Storage capacity will still be 160 GB using single-platter hard drive. Price will be US$249.

iPod touch--now essentially an iPhone 4G minus the cellphone functionality, available in 32, 64 and 128 GB storage capacities. Price will be US$249 for 32 GB, US$299 for 64 GB and US$349 for 128 GB.

 

[ipedro]

iPod touch--now essentially an iPhone 4G minus the cellphone functionality

Using the iPhone case for the iPod touch would make it thicker than the current model. iPod doesn't need the same amount of internal space as in the iPhone because it lacks cell circuitry and antennae.

I believe that the iPod touch will look a lot like a small iPad in its unibody aluminum frame, black volume rocker and orientation lock.

 

[puma1552]

--Apple will never, ever increase the thickness of any product

--There is no such thing as capacity overkill--the last 10-15 years should have taught everyone that long before now. I have 11 gigs of music and will upgrade my classic if it goes higher just because.

--Apple turns a healthy profit on every iPod sold.

--No 128 gb touch; look at Apple's habits of maximizing margins. They could easily go 128 and be profitable--but they won't. If you've noticed, they only double flash capacities every two years now. Aside from that, no way they will have an iPod with 4x the capacity of their flagship iPhone.

iPod nano: 16/32 GB, stills camera, maybe relocated camera, 28-30 hour battery, maybe relocated camera. Same form factor, maybe different shades for a couple colors like purple and blue. Possible wifi.

iPod shuffle: Killed or left more or less the same.

iPod classic: Keeps the capacity seat warm one more year. Could go 200 but doubtful because when 128 GB chips come, the classic will get killed. Harder to get sympathy for killing it when going from 200 to 128 as the new iPod line max compared to going from 160 to 128. Form factor remains the same, glass screen finally. Possibly polished silver/black to match the nanos. Possible radio.

iPod touch: no capacity bump, form factor change to bring it inline with either the iPhone or iPad, probably iPhone. iOS4 of course, camera on back only.

 

[saxon48]

My thoughts on the iPod refreshes:

Classic: Exact same, one final time around.

Touch: New model similar to iPhone 4. Potential 128 gig?

Nano: No change.

Shuffle: Higher capacity. 16 GB?

 

[Peterson8765]

I think that the iPod Classic won't be phased out this year, but probably next year. I also don't think that the Classic is going to have flash memory, since 128GB of flash memory is crazy expensive, and the Classic is $249, and Apple doesn't raise the prices on iPods. Apple usually sticks to the same prices of iPods but adds more features with that on iPod refreshes. This year I think that the new iPod Classic will have a Price drop to $229 and have the same 160GB storage, though we might see some new features such as a higher resolution and bigger 2.8" LCD screen. I don't think a camera will go in the new Classic. As for the iPod Touch, no 128GB this year, it usually follows the foot steps of the iPhone with capacitie, last year when the iPhone got 32GB, the iPod Touch got 64GB, this year the iPhone 4 stuck with the same 16GB, 32GB, but there is also an 8GB model. So I think this year it is going to be the same 8GB, 32GB, 64GB for the touch, which is a shame. The shuffle will most likely be unchanged, with a price drop of $10-$20 for each one hopefully and an added 8GB model. Those are just my two cents.

 

[mrlaxrules]

iPod Touch 4- Takes iphone 4 body. front and back camera, facetime. they would not bring 16gb back from the dead. 8-199 36-299 64-399.
ipod nano- still image, same price and gig
ipod shuffle- hard to predict but i think no changes

 

[mrlaxrules]

discuss and read amazing new news and leaks on
www.behindthewallsofcupertino.blogspot.com

 

[Peterson8765]

Theres no way Apple can make a $99 8GB iPod Nano 6G. the 5G's features right now are way ahead of the average MP3 player. In fact, in terms of technology and UI, iPod's are way ahead of the game. I even bet Apple will make the new nano even better this year, but I still don't know how. I also believe that the new nano will start at the same price this year at the same capacity, a possible small $10-$20 price drop might happen as well. As for the touch, well, I already covered that. The Classic will live on.

 

[iMac0765]

iPod nano: 16/32 GB, stills camera, maybe relocated camera, 28-30 hour battery, maybe relocated camera. Same form factor, maybe different shades for a couple colors like purple and blue. Possible wifi.

No Wi-Fi. No 32 GB. No stills. Different design (to an extent of same shape).

iPod shuffle: Killed or left more or less the same.

There is no ####ing way Shuffle will be killed. The shuffle is a really good and cheap iPod entry device for kids, sports, and X-Mas presents. The design could see a change like the past refreshes.

iPod classic: Keeps the capacity seat warm one more year. Could go 200 but doubtful because when 128 GB chips come, the classic will get killed. Harder to get sympathy for killing it when going from 200 to 128 as the new iPod line max compared to going from 160 to 128. Form factor remains the same, glass screen finally. Possibly polished silver/black to match the nanos. Possible radio.

Radio is a yes. Glass screen is a maybe. Polished is a yes. 160 is also a yes.

iPod touch: no capacity bump, form factor change to bring it inline with either the iPhone or iPad, probably iPhone. iOS4 of course, camera on back only.

Probably Retina too on 32/64 models, and 3Gen for 8 GB model.

 

[SkippyThorson]

--Apple will never, ever increase the thickness of any product

Um... iPhone to iPhone 3G - increase in thickness.

iPod Touch to iPod Touch v2 - increase in thickness.

Never ever? You know why they tapered the second version of both of those? They started too thin to add what needed to be added, and still shrink, let alone keep the same size.

My predictions:
iPod Classic sticks around. Possibly a capacity bump. Same price, possibly polished aluminum and an FM radio. They will not put a camera in the Classic, unless it's HD. I always thought it would be cool, as the most expensive and the biggest of the core iPod family, that they include the most of everything, to get it to sell more - AM/FM radio, HD still and video camera, etc.

iPod Nano gets a capacity bump and the current colors remain. They will probably keep the same pack-of-gum form factor, because they've only deviated from that proven popular style once - iPod Nano v3 - and while I loved it, it's the only major design change to ever hit the Nano. It's always been rectangle, square was admittedly strange.

iPod Shuffle will probably see some sort of a more uniform melding between the clickwheel and speech-only variations. Something needs to make them more similar. They come in different colors and capacities, and couldn't be much more different. I predict the next generation of Shuffle sees one line with a lower capacity and clickwheel, and one line with a higher capacity and speech-only. I know they have that now, but they should come in certain colors, with each having a distinctive higher / lower counterpart.

iPod Touch... This one is a tough call. I don't know where Apple wants to go with this. Personally, I can see them going to with an iPhone 4 design, with separated volume buttons, a metal band, and a back that makes it symmetrical to the front - probably glass. I think it would be cool if they made it look like an iPad, though. An anodized (or polished) aluminum tapered body with a black volume rocker, a black plastic top center strip for the Wifi, and a black Apple logo would look AWESOME. I could also see a polished tapered back like the iPhone 3G / 3GS, that comes in all the colors of the Nano. Color choices would be sick too.

That was actually really fun to type up. Thanks for the thread.