RSSiPod Shuffle: Apple Understated
By By Joe Wilcox, Guest Columnist | Published February 11, 2005, 12:19 PM
PERSPECTIVE On Thursday, as I headed back to Washington from Washington (to D.C. from state), I spotted an iPod Shuffle; the guy seated directly in front of me had one, which noticeably hung around his neck.
I got to thinking about the brilliance of Apple's simple approach to music, which is so much about cool. Already, those white headphones, which contrast against just about every head or outfit, are now a pseudo status symbol. Next, looks like music cool just might be the white rope around the neck with iPod Shuffle attached.
The approach demonstrates many of the things that Apple is doing right with digital music players. The company has turned a knack for the understated into a marketing machine that touches virtually every Mac product, including iPod Shuffle.
Elvis Costello said it, "Uncomplicated"
Apple retail stores are remarkably understated. The only bright colors are found on marketing material placed throughout the store. Otherwise, the tasteful stores are quite stark, so that the shoppers' eyes are drawn either to the colorful marketing posters and signs or to the products on sale.
Back in the early 1990s my wife, who is a graphic designer by trade, and I worked at the same magazine. So, I spent lots of time in the magazine's graphics arts department, where I also had plenty of knock-down, drag-outs with the designers, who had a tendency to over-design the layouts. Busy page layouts tend to draw attention away from the text - and isn't the magazine buyer supposed to be a reader?
Better design is understated, where pictures and graphics draw the reader’s attention to the text on the page. The same concept should apply to retail; clutter distracts the shopper and draws attention away from products for sale. Apple's understated approach puts the focus on the products.
Mac computers are equally understated, yet distinctive from Windows PCs. Take, for example, the Titanium PowerBook and successor Aluminum PowerBook. They aren't all that remarkable, yet attractively distinctive because of what's missing. Many Windows notebooks tend to appear bulky by comparison, in part to support legacy connectors that Apple did away with years ago.
Then there is Apple using diminutive slot-loading optical drives, instead of tray counterparts, which along with the missing ports help make for a thinner, lighter notebook design. The less-is-more approach means a Mac user can carry a full, desktop-replacement notebook that's about an inch thick and weighs only about five-and-a-half pounds. By comparison, many desktop-replacement Windows notebooks are bulkier and typically weigh in at eight, nine or 10 pounds.
Mac OS X is remarkably understated, particularly compared to Windows XP. The dominant colors are white and brushed steel (OK, so maybe that's no color). The approach draws the user's eyes where they need to go and makes it more difficult to get lost or confused about where to click or what to do. Color contrasts against the white to highlight what's important, like buttons -- red, yellow and green -- for changing a window's view.
Apple uses its understated approach to strip away complexity, too, in virtually all its products. Any iPod is the best example. To synchronize music between a PC or Mac and an iPod, the user needs to do little more than plug in. There are no dialog boxes or multi-step processes. Plugging in synchronizes the iTunes library with the iPod. The synchronization process is highly understated, but in the right way that strips away complexity and so improves the user experience.
Stevie Wonder said it, "Songs in the key of life"
A couple of months ago, I asked my 10-year-old daughter to try out a couple of portable music players and synchronize music using Windows Media Player 10. Repeatedly exasperated, she gave up. Oh, and she was grumpy about it, too. The problem: The processes were overstated, so to speak, and so overly complex.
Few weeks back, a friend brought over two iPod Shuffles (grammatically, it really should be iPods Shuffle, but Apple, thinks different -- ah, differently -- about plural use). He had called from the Apple Store in San Francisco, the only place with iPod Shuffles at the time and insisted I needed two.
Sunday after Macworld, he dropped off the music players, and I coughed up two C notes and another 10 bucks for tax. My daughter, who has an iPod mini, simply couldn't wait to get out the iPod Shuffle. But she had to. I insisted on getting a full battery charge, which took more than four hours hooked up to her iMac G4.
While the iPod Shuffle charged, my daughter started working through her library of about 350 songs. From watching Steve Jobs' Macworld keynote address from the Web, she figured out that rating the songs would make easier the synchronization process. So, she rated her favorite songs, a task never done because she mostly listens to music on a portable player.
I had actually wondered if this would be a problem, not just for her but other people. Based on Apple's discussion of Shuffle synchronization, emphasis seemed to be on Shuffle mode pulling off songs based on frequency of play. But what would that mean for people that rarely listened to music on their computer - those folks, like my daughter, that favored the portable music player? Sure enough, when set to auto synchronization, iTunes 4.7 mostly filled up the iPod Shuffle with songs my daughter listens to least.
Fortunately, Apple had created other ways to Shuffle synchronize the music player. My daughter started over, first by synchronizing her top-rated songs and then working through other criteria, such as playlists. She worked through this process until the Auto-Fill function indicated the iPod Shuffle could hold no more songs; 139 was the final tally.
The iPod Shuffle wisped away my daughter's memories of the previous, frustrating synchronization experience. Apple's Shuffle synchronization actually preformed better than I expected. The understated, Shuffle and Auto-fill, is part of why the synchronization experience is so good.
Liz Phair said it, "Why Can't I?"
The iPod Shuffle is so remarkably understated some competitors are aghast at the appeal. I've talked to vendors that have dismissed iPod Shuffle because of its lack of features, such as a display or FM radio. But they fail to realize that these extras add complexity. The vendors also don't understated how the whole package -- iTunes, synchronization and Shuffle play -- makes Apple's diminutive music player appealing.
Then there is that white, so greatly understated, that Apple has turned into a billboard. If you see white headphones, an iPod is almost certainly attached. Or a white computer, it's almost certainly a Mac. How does a company get the corner on white? What could be more ubiquitous than white? But I would argue that Apple has done just that, and it wouldn't be the first company to so. For years, white soap was associated with Ivory. Plain and simple - and understated.
In a world of color, white dramatically stands out. And so iPod headphones or iPod Shuffle hung round the neck will stand out, as status symbols and as billboards for Apple products. The understated is what gives Apple products so much distinction.
Competitors really need to study what Apple is doing right and how to incorporate a similar approach into their product designs and marketing. I'm not suggesting everyone go out and make white products. It's the approach, not Apple's execution that matters.
Understated often means uncomplicated. And sometimes that means cutting back consumer choices, as Apple did with iPod Shuffle. Less really can be more. For years, Burger King marketed under the moniker, "Have it your way." But I recall going into a Burger King on Broadway in Manhattan where the express lines signs stated, "Have it our way." Plenty of people would forgo choice for the quicker meal; the simpler way.
Joe Wilcox has been covering technology since 1994 and is a Senior Analyst with Jupiter Research. Joe can be found on the Web at Microsoft Monitor.
I don't exactly agree with this article. I mean, yes it's entirely possible, but I have my reservations and my own explanations.
White: White, is cheap - if noone knows this, colors make for more expensive, period - whether it's on paper, walls or PCs.
Powerbooks, G5s, etc: Ofcourse stuff is missing, you have to BUY just about anything, including connectivity wether USB, Firewire or otherwise; I'm sorry but in MY opinion, in that case....less is less. If you talked about them including everything in the package, then I wouldn't be able to say anything...but most really do come naked, with the option to buy parts.
I walked into best buy and found myself in the middle of the Mac section, and for the same power and (i purposely say and, not or) less, their notebooks and PCs were at least an entire GRAND ($1000.00) dollors or more higher. I mean good God, a 12 or 14 inch screen (Apple) or a 15 or 17 inch (Toshiba), a 2.x GHZ (Apple) or a 3.4 GHZ (Toshiba) and the Apple is 2890 while the Toshiba is 1730. Come on now....
I'm not exaggerating. Sure some people like less, as in smaller size etc. but even tablets are way cheaper than maximally configured Powerbooks for thousands more AND the Intel/AMD machines generally either come with plenty expansion built in or most parts in the package.
Don't get me wrong, I'm really not a Mac hater (in case I'm seeming like one) but there is no justification by saying less may be more, less is less and Macs have become more of a 'statement' in my eyes than 'functional'.
It's like owning a Mercedes or a Bentley....yes, the Mercedes is a great vehicle, both are premium and 'high class' and both are equally powerful and feature packed but a Merc is 50-80 grand, a Bentley is in the 100,000s. To me, and Apple buyer is kind of like the person who buys the Bentley; not because it's 'better' but because everyone knows it's more expensive, less people own one and then come the 'bragging' rights.
Ipods are nice I MUST agree but would I buy one? Never ever in a million years, unless they REALLY started to compete. For now I'd rather spend the money on a Creative Labs product like a Zen or Muvo because they have more features, are more 'open', are less proprietary and cost less.(I don't care what color my earphones are, as long as they sound good and last long).
The shuffle appeals to me very much because it's very small, as small as a stick of gum and to me is functional as I can wear it around my neck; wearing 512-1gb of songs appeals to me, very much so. I can't bring that many songs around generally unless I take my DVD player and a DVD with me, or my larger archos with me....but will I buy it? I won't say no - but I'm at minumum waiting for something with at the least a small backlit screen which displays the song names because for me, that's a requirement for my portable mp3 device and I refuse to settle for less.
Less can be more? Sure - but if you're willing to settle for less then why even bother?
Score: 0
|Speaking of less is more, let's not forget Apple's past and current LESS IS MORE FAILURES:
1. Original '84 Mac came WITHOUT arrow keys.
2. Original '84 Mac came WITHOUT numeric keypad.
3. Apple Newton came WITHOUT thumbkeys and WITH poor handwriting recognition.
4. Mac OS 9 and lower came WITHOUT pre-emptive multitasking kernel.
5. Older Macs came WITH that stupid hockey puck mouse.
6. Older Macs came with PROPRIETARY printer/connectors and AppleTalk while the world used parallel ports and Ethernet.
7. Current Mac Powerbooks come WITHOUT feet under the laptop, so laptops tend to overheat.
8. Current Macs come WITHOUT a second mouse button and WITHOUT the mouse dial. ( My computer artist brother complains about this constantly since on a PC the second mouse button is used as an eraser while drawing. )
In short, when it comes to TRUE ERGONOMICS, LESS is LESS, Apple!
Score: 0
|So.. you're faulting Apple for something it did 20 years ago? Lest you forget that Apple dominated the personal computing market in 1984, no matter how much the things it did seem to you as "failures."
The point is that at the current moment, Apple's understated approach is working. 8.4 million iPods sold in 2004 means the company is doing something right that competitors can't seem to understand.
Score: 0
|I could care less about apple's and competitor's looks - Apple has lots of advertising, getting the word out is what they are doing right.
I will not buy any portable player unless it supports .ogg vorbis files. Because of their nature, I don't think apple ever will support .ogg, even though they do not have to pay to support it, while they have to pay to support mp*
Score: 0
|Must be a Linux user.
Less than 5% is how many people use Linux on the desktop. Have fun with your .ogg vorbis format.
Score: 0
|i've got win xp home, and Linux... Yes, I support the open source formats.
Why have .wma, .mp3, .ram, .whatever apple is, .proprietary, when .ogg is free to support. Wouldn't it be nice if everyone stopped forcing their formats on their users and just stuck with a format that is as good, and doesn't cost them a thing?
have fun with your .proprietarIES :-P
Score: 0
|Must be a pessimist.
I don't like Linux and I use OGG and FLAC every day.. On my Windows XP machine.
Back to the topic though. Does the iPod Shuffle have a replaceable battery? It would be a real waste of money if turned out like the now defunct iPod that I bought at the beginning of 2004.
Score: 0
|.ogg is never going to go anywhere.. there's no point to it. MP3 is good enough as a standard format.
Score: 0
|yes, mp3 is good as a standard. ogg is debatably equal to or better than mp3. It is also getting more support by other programs and devices. Plus, your favorite audio ripper/player wont have to pay to support it, which means a lower cost to you too. That is a point of it, here are a few others:
ogg vorbis wouldn't sell out to RIAA and their DRM encodings unless law forced them to.
wma is becomming a semi standard too, only cause of people like yourself. mp3 is good enough, and microsoft goes and makes their own proprietary format, and others start switching to it or just start using it, there is no point of it. Why? if "mp3 is good enough," are they using .wma? And Sony's ATRAC is a joke too.
So the point is, you can use .ogg vorbis and demand your favorite media player or portable device, like iRiver to support it (which many of the iRivers do already.) The only point of using mp3 is because everyone else does, and that it is already widely supported. If you continue to use proprietary, YOU will continue to be used.
Score: 0
|Want to sell that iPod? last time I checked a battery replacement kit was $40 or you could have it done for $80.
White goes with anything. Colors don't. So for the fashion-oriented market (teens & early twenties) the Shuffle realy makes sense.
As for the idea of simplicity, it does make a difference. I purchased a flash-based player for my brother for Christmas. Mostly because he is a Windows user AND due to environment where he would be using it. After helping him get his loaded and going I decided I would NOT buy onr of thses. Too many different functions being accessed by too many little buttons/switches and a tiny screeen I can't read. I already have enough devices to try and remember all the controls/functions so for my music I want simplicity.
The Shuffle is really competeing with CD players or radio where all you do is turn it on and listen.To compete effectively, it must stay simple.
Score: 0
|Competitors had 20 years "studing" apple. Bill Gates business is to "study" Apple for the last 2 decades!! And I think he's a very bad student in some areas.
I pressume that his califications would be:
E- In technology
A Predicting the future
A In laws (or avoiding them, or at least, contracting lawers)
A+ In monopoly
A++ in robery
Score: 0
|Apple gets an A++++++ in being overpriced for what you get, especially now with the Mac mini. Include a keyboard, mouse, and monitor and now we're talking, though it would still cost more than a PC system with the same configuration. Also, the Mac mini is a real pain if one wants to actually upgrade anything in it in their own. If my computer is going to cost that much I want to be able to maintaine it myself without having to take it to a tech for $40 to $50 per hour.
Score: 0
|I totally agree. I would never buy an iPod because I think they are too expensive. I'd however buy a Shuffle. Since I use iTunes and I like all the songs I buy, I could care less what order they are played in. :)
Score: 0
|totally agreed!
if only they were a little cheaper i'd have bought mini, classic, u2 and shuffle for colleciton, now i'll have to do with one soon :)
Score: 0
|ipods are gay
mp3 is gay, use ogg
linux is teh roxorz
wow, we've never heard any of this before *rolls eyes*
Score: -1
|What do you mean iPOds and MP3 are gay? What is that suppose to mean? Is that something like calling a black man the N word?
Score: 0
|and the shuffle ISNT expensive? im not a mac hater either, but you really do get LESS for MORE. $250 MSRP for the shuffle. i bought a brand new iRiver H320 20 GB with a true color backlight display, FM tuner, picture viewer, the works for that price. AND i play oggs with it. btw, while it may not sync itself upon connection, it's not rocket science either. if you cant sync this thing to your Windows XP PC, you dont belong using it.
Mac is all about "image". PC + non-Mac gadgets are all about actual functionality. last time i checked, the color of the housing of a unit didnt make it do more or do it better. i still dont understand how they can still ship 1 button mice in 2005 ...
Score: 0
|Your post is gay.
Score: 0
|Why do you ask, looking for a date? Sorry, I'm not your type. I prefer women.
Score: 0
|The Shuffle is $99, not $250.
Score: 0
|