Have an account? Log in to leave your comments!
journal: toy
iPods, phones, and Gates
It has the potential to become an unusable mess, or, as Steve Jobs puts it, a "tortured user interface."
I recently read this article on AppleMatters about Bill Gates’ comments that music-playing mobile phones will one say replace the iPod. I want to make it clear: I do believe that mobile phones will take some of the MP3 player market. I do believe that they have a future. I do not believe, however, that phones will relegate standalone players to the garbage dump.
Many people who see mobile phones as what will bring the iPod down often point to the death of the standalone PDA, and mobile phones have pretty much overtaken them. However, the primary function of the PDA differs greatly from that of the iPod. The PDA handles data that is often used in conjucntion with communication devices; for example, contacts. It also handles datathat one would talk about in a phone conversation (e.g. a calendar and a conversation where one would discuss setting up a meeting). In this case, convergence makes sense because PDAs and phones work in tandem with each other. One allows you to contact people, the other allows you to organize data around people. It makes sense. One could even make the case that a camera built into a phone makes sense because it is partially intended to allow you to send photos to people via your phone. Once again, it has to deal with communication.
However, I feel there is a point where this convergence of devices doesn’t work as well, and I think phone-music player convergence is about where the line is drawn. Music players have absolutely nothing to do with communicating and interacting with others. Their primary function is not managing data about people like the PDA. And if you think about it, the cell phone and music player seem to be contradictory. The cell phone is used to connect with other people and tune into the rest of the world. Often times, the iPod is used to isolate yourself and tune out that annoying guy sitting next to you on the bus. And there are times when people turn off their cell phones because they don’t want to be pestered. Some of these people probably pop their white earbuds in their ears when their phones go off. Different duties, different focuses, different devices.
Also, there’s the issue of creating a user interface for these super phones that store contacts, send e-mail, take pictures, play movies, music, wash your car, make you breakfast, and do your taxes for you. It is very hard to make a decent single user interface that can handle all sorts of functions, especially considering the small size of cell phone screens. It has the potential to become an unusable mess, or, as Steve Jobs puts it, a “tortured user interface.” If anyone could pull it off though, it would be Apple. I could be wrong (after all, I didn’t expect the Mac mini), but I don’t see Apple going in that direction anytime soon, however.
Will some people find value in a combined MP3 player/phone? Without a doubt. There are some people out there who like having one device for multiple functions. And music player cell phones will probably do quite well in the market. But to say flat-out that the iPod is doomed to go the way of the PDA, BetaMax, and dinosaur, especially at this fairly early point in the evolution of the digital music market, would be jumping the gun a bit.
Revision 5-16-2005: minor grammatical errors fixed.
 |
20 | 1102 |
| Nick | comments | views |
thinkback
Just try to take a camera phone into the ‘Y’. Not that I have. 
I do agree with your premise. I see the phone getting smaller as it evolves, eventually reaching Star Trek communicator size. A ‘Swiss Army’ phone would just have to get bigger as featuritis progressed.
One other issue that makes an MP3 phone a non-starter in my opinion. As long as I have to use the carrier’s bandwidth to download music and I cannot freely transfer music between my MP3 phone and computer, I will not pay extra for a phone that has MP3 capability. With today’s MP3 player, I can download music to my computer, I can rip CD’s I already own and store them on my computer. I can then take all of this music and freely transfer back and forth to my MP3 player. With the phone companies MP3 Phone, they want me to purchase music for my phone (at double or triple the market rate for Apple, Napster, Yahoo, etc.). If I want to transfer music I purchased on my phone to my computer, I go through thier network, paying for the bits I transfer. If I want to send music I have on my computer to the phone, I use thier network and pay for the bits again. Until the carriers let me freely transfer music between teh MF3 Phone and my computer, their products are dead in the water. The nbext hurdle is to reduce the music price to The alternative is that I would be willing to pay for a few ringtones, but that is it.
Good analysis. You’ve hit most of the salient points about why this odd push to digital phone convergence isn’t the slam-dunk that a lot of pundits seem to think it is.
A couple of points. There are only two points of convergence that I can think of with the cell phone and the portable music player. One is that there is a theory that people only want to carry one device. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen any marketing that points to that at all. I always want my cell phone with me. I only want my iPod around when I have time to listen to it. That is much of the time but it isn’t always like the phone. Honestly, I have no idea where my iPod is right now because I’m at home and I don’t need it currently. My cell phone is sitting next to my computer right now. And it will be in my pocket if I got out and get the mail. Basically the “need it with me all the time” thing is not nearly as compelling with the iPod as with the phone.
The second thing is that there is really only one reason to want your phone functions mixed up with your music player functions and that is the consequence of what you wrote about isolating yourself. What would be a good fix to that is to have the iPod respond to the cell phone over Bluetooth and act as a wireless headset. It could automatically pause when the phone rings and allow you to take the call. This can be done without squishing the phone and the player together. Bluetooth phone services in luxury cars already do this. It is existing technology.
The big downside of using your phone as an entertainment device is that batteries are always limited. If my iPod battery runs out, I might be annoyed but that is the extent of the problem. I don’t want to have to start managing my music player use based on whether or not I might need to make a call later. The battery life of my cell phone is a much more necessary commodity than the battery life on my iPod.
Another problem is that cell phones are generally more robust than even an iPod. I really don’t think I want a disk drive in my phone. At least it better not be integral to operating the phone. If the disk dies, I might lose access to my multi-media but I definitely can’t afford to have my phone stop working.
I have to disagree, Bill Gates knows what he’s talking about when it comes to the market. He didn’t get Microsoft to be the largest software company in the world by a huge margin by not understanding how the market works and what people want to buy.
I disagree specifically with your contention that music players and cell phones don’t mix. Cell phones are no longer just about voice communication, they’re also about storing data. And an interesting thing with data communication is you can download music. The iTunes music store was a great success since it allowed you to download music a-la-carte. With a standard music player you first have to download it to your computer and then transfer it to your player. With a cell phone player you can download it straight to your cell phone while you’re on the go and listen to it right away.
Being able to download music also allows you to have much more effective storage space. If you have a subscription model instead of an a-la-carte model you could just download and delete songs as you like. Current 3G data transfer rates are sufficient with WMA64 or OGG64 to download the songs streaming, and once EDGE becomes widely deployed 128KB/s and 256KB/s downloads will also be possible.
Having a music player built into the cell phone allows you to remove the computer as the middle man, you can get your music right when you want it wherever you are.
Remember, migo, I’m not dismissing them entirely. I just do not feel the cell phone will completely take over the market. For example, last I checked, smart phones with gaming capabilities and such have yet to kill portable gaming systems.
I wish these comments were editable. Oh well.
| me94501 | May. 16, 2005 | |
| 5:36 pm |
Bill Gates knows nothing about the market. Everything Microsoft has done (other than the original OS and Office, with new versions of code bloat forever) had been a major financial and market failure. Look at MS financials for proof.
Honestly, I can’t think of anybody who has a cell phone that’s younger than 30 years old who uses it solely for calls. I remember people saying the same thing about camera phones, how nobody wanted a phone in a camera, now I know more people who have camera phones than cameras. Camera phones used to suck but now they’re up to 7MP. It’s only a matter of time before cell phones catch up in the music player department.
Oh, and Internet Explorer was a financial and market failure? It dominates the market in a way only Microsoft can.
Yet. Also standalone cameras have capabilities that are hard to fit into a cell phone. Music players don’t, just look at the Motorola E398. The only thing that needs to be solved is the storage issue, and it’s just a matter of a couple years before cell phones catch up. After that it’s another year at most before with contracts a cell phone with a 150GB hard drive costs less than an iPod with the same size hard drive. You’re also in the US where cell phone adoption is seriously hindered by the FCC. Cell phones are thriving in Asia, and it’s only a matter of time before they come over here. I suppose some of what I see might be because a good half of our population is Asian here.
So you would have no problem with, say, listening to music and not wanting to be disturbed being disturbed...with a phone that could ring at any time?
I like to listen to my iPod when I want to tune out the world and not have to deal with a ringing cell phone. I don’t think I’m alone. And I’d be arguing this even if the iPod wasn’t the market leader. And personally I think PSP-like devices make more sense as a multipurpose device than a phone.
Sorry, migo. I still don’t agree with you.
| me94501 | May. 18, 2005 | |
| 3:17 pm |
So aren’t the responses on this thread just showing that these phones would do well but that music players will also continue to do well.
Almost all phones these days can be set not to ring. That’s only an issue for people who are completely ignorant of how phones work.
PSP doesn’t make sense at all, it’s a Sony Proprietary system, nobody wants that kind of thing these days.
People completely ignorant like me? 
Actually, I know how to do it, but the interface on my phone can’t hold a torch to the iPod.
I was referring to PSP-like devices, not necessarily the PSP itself.
Anyway, let’s just end it here before we go debating the same thing for days, migo.
| me94501 | May. 19, 2005 | |
| 8:38 pm |
I bet you didn’t read the manual.
1.
Good Article!
I for one have no want or desire for an “mp3 phone”!
First of all, the phone is a nuisance. The last thing I want is a phone to bother me when I am listening to music while working out, mowing the lawn, biking, etc. There’s this little thing called voice mail.
Secondly, the phone is currently banned at some places that a music player is not. My local YMCA is an example.