I've been watching the portable MP3 player market since the iPod first came out. As a long time Apple aficionado, I was excited to see their product become a smash hit, but was curious how long it would last. The iPod team whipped up a fantastic product, but it wasn't really Apple's core market, and surely someone else would come up with something better soon... right?
Its now been four years, and while an "iPod killer" is announced every month, I still have yet to see a product that holds a candle to the iPod. Titus blogged a
recent review of the zen nano plus. It sounds nice, but to me the trade-off has always been simple: features for usability. If you don't like the iPod, its generally because you require (1) recording or (2) an FM tuner. Price, non-essential features, and support for non-MP3 formats (like Plays For Sure) which can easily be automatically converted to MP3, just aren't worth the sacrifice of a complicated user interface. Simple consumer devices need focus, not cheap features.
Calling an ergonomic hammer extravagant, only to buy a slightly cheaper one with a universal remote that juliennes fries, seems short sighted. How often are you going to use it to julienne fries, can you change the TV channel while doing it, and how does this feature affect your 95% use case? Do you want to use a crippled device 19 times for every 1 time that you record something? Most friends and family would be excited to receive a hand-me-down iPod, but a niche, difficult to use MP3 player / voice recorder / FM tuner / Julienne fry maker is just going to gather dust. Listening to music is a relaxing or energizing event that doesn't jive well with the frustration of little buttons. Focus and simplicity translate into resale value, be it with your friends or on ebay. Today, the original four year old, 5 GB iPod is selling for around $50 on eBay (some are going for $100, but that seems high to me).
Its been often said that the iPod is at a disadvantage because it uses a ("non-replaceable") rechargeable battery. Since this first became an issue, there have been 3rd party battery replacement programs for $40 ~ $50. The iPod market isn't small, there will be a replacement kit for every iPod that will ever come out. It seems that the battery lasts about two years (mine's almost there), so if you instead used two AA batteries a week, thats 208 batteries. If you bought these batteries in 24 packs from Home Depot @ $10.70 ea, thats $92. So, if my battery keeps another few months (works fine now), I will have saved myself at least $35. Even if the iPod rechargeable only lasts a year, its the same as AA batteries, and a lot more convenient. The answer could be rechargeable AA batteries - Much better than disposable AA's? Sure. Better than a built-in rechargeable-on-the-fly, while syncing or transfering files, high performance lithium ion battery? Not to me.
Some day, someone will make a product better than the iPod, or at least a better value. I think that day will only come when a company tries real design innovation, instead of commoditization. While the swiss army knife aproach might make a product look like a better value, I see the exact opposite: every extra feature is a sign of less time spent on the core feature(s?) that you are shopping for. Its a lesson learned over many purchases of products with fancy features that I've never used. After a while, you really just want one that does what you bought it for, and does it so well that years from now you won't regret the time you've wasted because you saved a buck.
