New iPod Shuffle Interface is Killing People: Apple Sought For Questioning
Yes, the headline is an exaggeration, but as I read more and more about the reaction to this thing I’m really struck by some of it.
“If I lose my headphones then I can’t use the device!” Well, if you lose your headphones now what do you do? Hold the thing up to your ear and crank the volume? You need to get headphones in either case. And third parties will provide more options.
The interface gets lots of flack. Apparently the click, double-click and triple-click is just too much. No one can use it. Grandma will be helpless.
Much is made, for example, of the diagram Apple supplies about its usage:
How quickly we forget that the 2G unit had a diagram of its own:
Yeah, neither one is pretty. I learned long ago not to even try to remember the status of the lights.
Let’s think about what you do most of the time with this thing:
- Play/Pause
- Volume Up
- Volume Down
- Next Track
- Last Track
I’d say as a device meant more to be used while exercising, at the gym, etc., the above covers what you do 95 percent of the time. So let’s look closer at those…
The Three Basics
One can see that the first three items are the same for both devices. You have an upper button to raise volume, a center button to play/pause, and a lower button to lower volume.
However, notice those buttons will always be oriented correctly on the 3G shuffle. Gravity will see to that. On the 2G shuffle, however, that’s not the case (see photo). Depending on how you wear it, the orientation will be different. And remember that you’re not facing the darn thing when you use the controls. It’s controlled while being worn. I can’t possibly be the only one who used this thing in the real world and noticed that.
So right off the bat I can say the usability of the the three main controls is actually better and easier on the new shuffle than the old.
Next and Previous
Regarding next track, instead of a separate button you now use the center button and double-click. Those decrying this are overreacting. It’s not like it’s a foreign concept that a user will balk at. Some of us have been double-clicking for 25 years! In actual use, I’m sure I could go to the next track as quick, if not quicker, than any 2G shuffle user.
That leaves previous track. A triple-click is a bigger leap, I’ll grant. However, with the concept of next track easy to grasp at two clicks, I don’t think explaining a third click for previous will be that tough.
And remember, the orientation issue of the buttons when wearing the old shuffle applies just as much to the next/prev buttons. In actual use the buttons will not be oriented like you see in the marketing photos, and the device is not facing you. With the headphone controls, the orientation never changes and they’re always right there.
Will You Hold, Please?
All the ruckus about how other, less used controls require holding the button down also seem much ado about nothing.
First, click and hold, like a double-click, is not a new concept, so can we stop acting like nobody will ever get it?
Second, the 2G button had its share of holding, too, which everybody seems to have forgotten. You had to click/hold the center button to enable/disable the controls (i.e., the “hold” function). The 3G doesn’t need this feature because the controls were wisely moved off the device.
You also had to click/hold to fast forward or rewind. In short, you executed the next (or previous) track command but then kept the button held down. The 3G works the same way. This really isn’t that tough folks.
Remote Controls are Great
Remember the original iPod came with a remote? Yep, it clipped to your person and let you not have to fiddle with the device. It lasted a generation or two, but like the dock and extra cables, it got cut when Apple scaled back costs. Still, Apple knew the convenience of this capability, and I’m glad it’s back.
When the iPhone required the remote headphones that came with it, I don’t remember anybody screaming about how they were stuck with Apple’s headphones. And yet that was an expensive device where one may have more reasonably thought they’d have more choice.
Apple’s had remote headphones for a while now, and it’s a breeze to operate them. The controls are always in the same place; they’re easier to use, not harder. Third parties are getting on board as well.
Size Matters
Moving beyond the interface, I’ve read several more comments that this thing may be too small. The comments seem to think the 2G was “just right.” What is this? Goldilocks? It’s meant to be worn, people. Smaller is better.
Look at it This Way
Everybody trying to shoehorn this into the iPod line with standard thinking will have their head explode. This thing is to the 2G shuffle what the original shuffle was to the iPod. Apple took an interface element people just assumed had to be there, and removed it. Many think it won’t fly, but I like it.
Think of it this way: Apple took their $29 remote headphones, and for $50 added a 4GB memory stick wrapped in beautiful aluminum with a 10-hour battery, full iTunes capability (including playlists and podcasts) and voice features, all at a tiny size and weight with a clip to hold it on.
Complain all you want, the more I think about it, the more I like it. I hope to have mine soon.
Tweet This (16)
Dom Hay on March 12th, 2009 at 7:32 am
Spot on.
walkerp on March 12th, 2009 at 7:34 am
You miss the point about the headphones. Everybody has tons of old headphones around that you can swap in if you lose or break your primary pair. With this new shuffle, you won’t be able to do that. It makes a big difference.
Staff Comment Josh Pigford, TheAppleBlog on March 12th, 2009 at 7:53 am
@walkerp: I don’t have “tons of old headphones around.” Or at least certainly not ones I’d want to use…that’s why I stopped using those old ones…because I didn’t like them. If I lose the headphones I like, I buy a new pair…not continue to use ones I don’t like.
walkerp on March 12th, 2009 at 7:55 am
You want to go for a jog. You grab your shuffle. The headphones don’t work or you misplaced them. You grab and old pair at least for that run. Then when you have time, you go buy a new pair. Can’t do that with this shuffle. Clearly, different users behaviours are different, but this happens to me all the time.
Staff Comment Josh Pigford, TheAppleBlog on March 12th, 2009 at 8:07 am
@walkerp: Sounds like your problem is losing stuff, not Apple requiring a set of headphones with a controller. :) If we’re following your argument, you’d need multiple shuffles laying around in case you misplace one.
Adam Blaiss on March 12th, 2009 at 8:07 am
What Apple should have done would be not include headphones but a small dongle that plugs into the headphone port and includes the controls, and you can plug your headphones into that. People that are buying a Shuffle almost definitely have some headphones already that they like and this allows all people who buy it to use whatever headphones that they want. And if you want Apple headphones, you can buy them separately. This makes more sense then requiring you to use Apple’s headphones until they release a dongle to buy separately. And this is coming from someone that has the new In-Ear Headphones that will be compatible with the Shuffle.
john on March 12th, 2009 at 8:15 am
For me, this is less about removing the controls from the body of the device and more about forcing customers to use the included (and likely dreadful!) headphones. Suppose I want to use my fancy enclosed studio reference headphones? Not with this iPod…
HobbesDoo on March 12th, 2009 at 8:33 am
Great article! I always find fascinating how much whining goes on when Apple releases a new product. I guess the most fascinating part is that probably most people whining don’t even want to buy the product they’re whining about. It’s that simple, if you don’t like it, don’t buy it and stop the whining. Geez!
bc on March 12th, 2009 at 8:34 am
as for it being smaller, it really isn’t. they just moved half of the device somewhere else.
Tyler on March 12th, 2009 at 8:47 am
I agree with Adam. If apple was going to use this “remote”, then they should have just kept it as that: a remote. I personally cannot stand Apple’s headphones as they hurt my ears. I can’t stand earbuds in general. Too bad I suppose, maybe I’ll see if I can still get a 2G shuffle while they’re still around. Other than the headphones, I actually liked the shuffle quite a bit…
JS on March 12th, 2009 at 8:50 am
stop whining and buy the adapter when it’s available or don’t buy.
in case you don’t understand, Apple is in the business of selling things not accommodating you. Apple tries to make things really cool and changing things just enough to make you buy one.
BTW, you can still buy the 2G shuffle on Apple.com if you need it.
Paddy on March 12th, 2009 at 8:53 am
“Suppose I want to use my fancy enclosed studio reference headphones? Not with this iPod…”
Ah yes. I regularly take my studio headphones with me when I’m jogging. Nothing like a proper heavy pair of headphones to test those neck muscles while running.
These are all the same arguments that are brought against Apple products time and time again. Most aren’t intended for people who absolutely have to get the utmost performance out of every device. They are for the those who like stylish products with elegant software and innovative interfaces.
The Shuffle is made for ultra-portability, not sound quality.
Exactly on March 12th, 2009 at 9:01 am
@Adam Blaiss: Exactly! Why aren’t more people pointing this out? I love the old remote, but hate Apple’s earbuds, especially for working out.
Gazoobee on March 12th, 2009 at 9:04 am
Wow.
Tom writes an excellent article about how lame all the whining about the new shuffle is and explains in detail how it has no real basis, and all the responses are …. lame whining about things that have no real basis?? Brilliant! :)
The Apple earbuds are not the best for everyone, but we are talking about a cheap, almost throw away PMP here. All you professed “audiophiles” are either lying to us, or to yourselves in that if you need $200 dollar headphones I just don’t believe you will be buying the cheapest iPod on the block to stick them into. Also, you can buy the “in ear” Apple headphones anyway, so you have two chioces.
Also, other headphones *do* work in the shuffle, you just wont have any access to the controls. So??? It’s a “SHUFFLE,” get it? Given that the stated raison d’être of the shuffle is just to randomly play a bunch of shuffled music, just plug whatever headphones you want in there, put it on shuffle with the hardware shuffle switch and go for your run. Most people use playlists anyway, in that case switch the shuffle switch to off.
Is it really going to kill you if for ONE DAY (assuming you misplace the earbuds), you have to jog without the ability to advance past a song you don’t like? So what? What the heck do people expect when they buy a budget PMP anyway?
“I’m not going to buy this product because even though it’s cheap as dirt and has more capacity than other payers and has cool features that they don’t have it’s possible that some day I will lose my earbuds for a short while and thus have to suffer through only having the original features that it came with for at least a day or two and then it will only be just as good as all the others and not significantly better.”
LAME.
so1oonnet on March 12th, 2009 at 9:08 am
thanks guys for deleting my comment.. truth stings
Artur on March 12th, 2009 at 9:19 am
I second the Adam Blaiss’s argument on this, i wouldn’t be complaining at all if apple would give us a small dongle that plugs into the headphone port and includes the controls. If they would do just that i can’t imagine this discussion take place. everyone could use Appple’s headphones, and if someone wouldnt like them (like me, they’re rubish when it comes to sound) it’s just a matter of switching the headphones, because the controls would be on the cable anyways. I had this kind of solution on my discman years ago and it worked great. Besides the controls it actually was displaying the song title/artist too, so it was useful, and i could choose whatever headphones i wanted.
I know the whole idea of iPod Shuffle is that it’s the most wearable ipod, and it’s mostly for pople to use at gyms, when jogging etc. so you can easily say that those kind of people dont need high quality headphones anyway, but there are people that use this ipod everyday, just because they find it most useful/the smallest/whatever, and they do appreciate good sound quality. I didnt search, but i am 99% sure sennheizer or technics or [your favorite brand] does not offer ipod 3G compatabile headphones.
My point is, if Apple decided to include the headphones with controls and make us use them, the least they could do is to make them high quality ones, so everyone would be happy, but they didnt, and the complains began.
Adam Blaiss on March 12th, 2009 at 9:19 am
@Gazoobee
1) It’s not always about studio reference earphones. A lot of people just don’t like Apple’s earphones. When I am running or working out, I use cheap Sony headphones that have earhooks so I don’t care when they get sweaty and don’t fall off. None of Apple’s current headphone offerings with a remote supply that and certainly not at Sony’s price ($10).
2) I’m pretty sure you will need to a remote to start the music. So your second paragraph can be deleted.
Look, I’m all for just using a remote and taking buttons off the Shuffle. I love my Apple In-Ear With Remote and using the remote for my Touch is awesome. And the new Shuffle looks great overall. But I still think that Apple could meet the best of both worlds by just including an in-line remote. Since I would use a Shuffle in a gym experience, necessitating the earhook headphones, I’ll pick one up once I can get an in-line remote for a cheap enough price.
Adam Blaiss on March 12th, 2009 at 9:23 am
@Artur – That’s a great call! I would totally pay $30 for an Apple in-line remote that had a 1 or 2 line LCD like the old school Discman. Of course, I’d want it to be very light (the Apple in-line is on the cord on your right ear and you never even notice it’s there…that light) but that is a supreme idea.
Constable Odo on March 12th, 2009 at 9:27 am
How would you lose your headphones if you keep them in the device. I can understand breaking them, but losing them is probably unlikely. I’m glad I know how to splice headphone wires, so Apple would have nothing on me. Anyway, for those that don’t like the no-button Shuffle, feel free to go buy a Sansa Clip which is supposedly 5X better and much cheaper than any Apple Shuffle. You get buttons, display, FM radio, recording, and one ugly chunk of a player. You don’t like the new Shuffle? Glance at it, say it’s not for you and move on. Life is easier that way.
Do you know how many recorder devices and converter boxes don’t have all the buttons on the main unit? You lose your remote and you’re screwed. But I guess nobody seems to notice this. Only when Apple comes out with a device without buttons on the main device it’s like the end of the world and Apple will fail big-time. Wrong. Personally, I think there’ll be a hell of a lot of people that will be happy with this new Shuffle. You’ll see after the rest of the mp3 player companies start mimicking Apple with remote switches. That’s why the player is so small or can’t anyone figure that out.
I’m not saying it’s a great thing. It’s just a matter of marketing the NEXT thing whether it’s better or not. Apple is definitely trying to create a halo on all it’s products to lock users into buying more Apple products. There will be aftermarket headphones eventually that work with the Shuffle but meanwhile Apple has got ya. I don’t care since I’m an Apple investor and want people sucked into the Apple reality distortion field.
I have never used those Apple ear-buds. They don’t stay in my ears at all and I use Etymotics. So I won’t be buying the Shuffle anyway. But just because it doesn’t suit me, it doesn’t make it an automatic failure.
mogosh on March 12th, 2009 at 9:28 am
If you don’t like the 3G just go and get a refurbished/used 2G. They should be a lot cheaper now. You still have a choice–make it and stop the whining.
steven on March 12th, 2009 at 9:28 am
My problem with this device is that I don’t want to have to click through 4 gigs worth of songs. I will stick with the Nano.
Artur on March 12th, 2009 at 9:52 am
@Adam
Again i second that, besides of the sound quality, which is a matter of taste, I personally just can’t use the apple’s headphones, because they simply dont fit in my ear and fall out. I need eigher headphones that use those little ear-hooks, just to make them actually stay in/on my ears, or full sized enclosed headphones, which neighter apple offer.
Mike Perry on March 12th, 2009 at 10:02 am
Great article and funny too!. This fuss reminds me of people (alas, myself included) who made fun of Macs and their ‘pointy mouse thing’ in the mid-80s. Fortunately, I’ve grown less cranky as I have grown older. These new headphones are such a great idea, they’re on my must-have list when I replace my iPod mini.
If some want to whine, they should pick a more sensible cause. That’s the quirky and non-standard power-and-synch adapter for the Shuttle. Lose that and your really are in trouble.
Apple should do what cell phone manufacturers are beginning to do–put the micro-USB connector on the Shuttle. They’re cheap; you can find them anywhere; and the same charger that works with your cell phone will charge your Shuttle.
Paul on March 12th, 2009 at 10:06 am
You guys all understand that this interface really isn’t new – right? The whole track play/next/prev was in the 3G iPhone (more accurately probably part of an iPhone software update). The only new functionality is the click and hold section for hearing your playlists.
Now, I can’t vouch for the Shuffle just yet, but I can for the iPhone. I have the Shure mic with button extension cord, so I can use my Shure earbuds to make calls instead of using the iPhone’s earbuds. And do you know what? The button on the Shure works the iPhone’s iPod controls!!! Whose to say that the same won’t hold true with the Shuffle?! Obviously we’ll need someone to get a shuffle and try it out – but it seems likely. And granted my cord has a mic in it as well, but the accessories are basically there already. How hard would it be for Shure and other companies to develop this cord sans-mic? Probably not hard
And when it’s all said and done – us that want custom earbuds are a small user group. I can’t tell you how many people I see using the standard Apple earbuds. I think the average consumer will probably not care – because they’re already using Apple earbuds!
kapeka on March 12th, 2009 at 10:43 am
@adam Blaiss:
No, you don’t need a remote to start the music. The music will start if you switch the button from “off” to one of the two playback-options. Really simple and works with every kind of earphones.
And: Most people seem to forget or haven’t read yet, that apple is in touch with other earphone-maker to either help them making remote headphones or, afaik, to make an remote-adapter for standard-earphones without controlls. It’s just a matter of (short) time I guess until everyone may use his most favorite earphones with the shuffle.
BTW: This reminds me of the complaints about the first iMac: WTF??? No floppy drive? How can they build a computer without floppy drives?
Hm. It even reminds me about the complaints about the Air: WTF??? No CD drive? How can they build a computer without a cd drive?
Someone should make a diagramm about the “whine-to-win” ratio for Apple products: The more people are whining the bigger the success will be.
Staff Comment Tom Reestman, TheAppleBlog on March 12th, 2009 at 10:53 am
Adam,
“What Apple should have done would be not include headphones but a small dongle that plugs into the headphone port and includes the controls,”
I appreciate what you’re saying, but believe it isn’t appropriate for the low-end of the iPod line.
Apple was already MAKING the remote headphones, so all they had to do was include a pair (basically, they just rolled their remote technology down to the shuffle line). Your solution is to create a new device. It’s not just a simple adaptor. A standard headphone jack has no facility for the extra signal to send controls to the player.
Apple may very well be working on one, but it’s going to cost you, and it’s an extra dongle you have to carry around. Had one been included with the shuffle everybody would be screaming that the shuffle was too expensive (it’s already $10 more than the previous high-end), and of course they’d complain about having the extra dongle. Further, they’d ask why Apple is “forcing us to use a dongle”!
In short, your point may be valid, but the solution would have increased the cost and just led to a different type of whining. Apple may offer it as an option, though.
I think the jury is out on third party ‘phones that have already been introduced with remote controls. Not sure if they will already work with the shuffle or not.
All,
Those of you who apparently have a pile of extra headphones laying around the house. I’ll assume you didn’t steal them, so since your headphone budget is huge just pick up a spare pair of the Apple headphones at the time of purchase and your nightmare is solved. I mean, seriously, this is a silly argument.
As for those who cannot wear Apple’s headphones because they fall out of your ear. I understand that and, for now, the shuffle is not for you. Period. I believe third partys will change that soon but until then this is simply not a product to consider. But you know what? I think Apple figures the number of you is comparatively tiny to the millions of users who will simply use the total solution that Apple sold them. I think Apple’s right.
Xairbusdriver on March 12th, 2009 at 11:03 am
I must be missing something (again?). But what does any of this article (and the responses) have to do with the _new_ shuffle? As far as I can see, there is NO control of any kind except for the ON/OFF switch on the body and the “+” & “-” deal on the earbud cable. Where’s the chart for what these ‘controls’ do? At least it would be nice to play the list in order of installation. Just because it’s called “shuffle” doesn’t mean that’s the only way to play a list. That certainly wasn’t the way the early ones worked. I guess 4GB would be fine for longer ’songs’ (opera’s?) but I can see much more use if it can be turned into a ‘thumbdrive.’ ;-) Just my opinion, but I like it! LOL! :-P
kapeka on March 12th, 2009 at 11:14 am
@27 you are missing a lot. First: its not only an “on/off” switch, but a “shuffle/loop/off” switch. So you can play music in order.
And second: The earbud-controls are “+” “-” and “center click”. And the first table in this article provides you a complete overview about all the possible control-variants you have with the new shuffle.
Xairbusdriver on March 12th, 2009 at 11:22 am
I sit corrected! And I just got new lenses!! 8-| Glad to see, or at least read (finally), that there are some controls available. But I can also see the problem caused by losing the the earbuds. Looks like I’ll have to learn a bunch of codes and get better glasses, too! LOL! Thanks for the very tactful response to my stupidity! ;-)
Man, I just knew I’d make it to the end of March for my first misteak of the yeer…
Adam Blaiss on March 12th, 2009 at 12:40 pm
@Tom – One quick note:
“Apple was already MAKING the remote headphones, so all they had to do was include a pair (basically, they just rolled their remote technology down to the shuffle line).”
I believe these might actually be a “different” set of remote headphones, as they do not include a microphone, while every other remote set has included a mic. While not a radical departure, a change had to be made somewhere down the line.
Once again, I think the new Shuffle looks great, but I really do think that forcing the earphones (at least until we get more options) will limit sales after the initial rush. People go into stores and check it out, then realize that they will have to use the Apple earphones, and that will be a turn off for some. In fact, one of the great things about going into the Apple store is testing the iPods with all the high end earphones they carry, but you’ll be pretty limited in what phones can be tested with the Shuffle.
Maybe I’m wrong, time will tell, I suppose. Just my opinion, but obviously, this is striking a nerve with a lot of Apple fans across the Intertubes so there is at least a little merit there.
Paul on March 12th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
So, how can I use my noise-canceling headphones on the plane with this?
blobb on March 12th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
@Paul: but that’s what your *other* ipod’s for :)
Trinity on March 12th, 2009 at 2:35 pm
Spot on. People need to quit their bitching. Frankly, I like it. I like the idea and I’m getting one. End of story. It ‘ll be nice to not have to worry about my shuffle Rickrolling me.
Staff Comment Tom Reestman, TheAppleBlog on March 12th, 2009 at 2:44 pm
Adam,
Thanks for the response.
“I believe these might actually be a “different” set of remote headphones, as they do not include a microphone, while every other remote set has included a mic.”
I think they’re the same; having the mic is no big deal, the shuffle simply doesn’t support it. I see no option on the Apple Store for a mic-less set of headphones. And for $29 the standard remote-with-mic headphones list the 3G shuffle as being compatible.
By the way, for those wanting better quality and/or an in-ear option, Apple’s $79 remote-with-mic in-ear phones also list the 3G shuffle as compatible.
“People go into stores and check it out, then realize that they will have to use the Apple earphones, and that will be a turn off for some.”
Fair enough, but that “some” is likely a very small percentage. The reason the white earbuds are so ubiquitous (still) is because most people are just fine with them. They don’t swap them out, and are even less likely to do so for a low-cost device.
Don’t get me wrong. I think bringing remote headphones more into the light with the shuffle will help explode the third-party market, and that’s great.
For the record, my third party headphones are these, fed from my iMac via this. In other words, I can get greatly improved audio via certain means, but those thinking a third-party set of $30 headphones is a magic bullet in terms of sound quality are deluded. And those who want to spend a lot more for audio quality should NOT be using the low-cost shuffle (or, indeed, any player that relies on a simple headphone amp) as their source. That’s pointless.
Xairbusdriver on March 12th, 2009 at 3:06 pm
“So, how can I use my noise-canceling headphones on the plane with this?”
Well, you obviously won’t be able to get onboard with this thing. It is obviously (word for the day?!) not a music player of any kind, it has no visible means of control! LOL! 8-P
Garret on March 12th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
I have a 2G iPod shuffle, and an iTouch. I have had others in the past too.
When I first saw the new shuffle, I thought “hey that is exactly what I want, and the controls on the headphones are sweet”, but I will not buy one, yet.
I do not listen to my shuffle simply for exercising, but for everything. Of all the mp3 players and iPods I’ve had, I listen to my shuffle the most by far.
The reason I will not yet but one is that I refuse to use apple’s headphones. I have never liked them. The sound is poor, they go bad, and I don’t like earbuds.
Remember, I think this is an awesome product overall and a great concept, but not everyone only uses shuffles for exercising. I will buy one if and only if Apple releases an adapter; I don’t want custom headphones or 3rd party adapters.
The new shuffle is a great idea, but it was strange to release it how they did. They gave no option to people like me, and from what I can tell many other potential customers. They could have easily made an adapter, but chose not to. I don’t think they made a mistake, but why then? Why risk losing customers?
Garret on March 12th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
Oh one other thing. In order for my point to have ANY meaning I suppose I would need to say this:
Personally, I do see a lot of people with iPods (just about every third person), but I really don’t see the headphones at all any more. Obviously it has to do with where I live, but still. Of all the people I see, maybe two pairs of white earbuds to over 50 iPods. Not only that, but of the people I know personally none would wear them, including my mom.
That’s not to say upwards of hundreds of thousands of people do wear them, definitely the majority, but there’s no way Apple could accidentally risk giving up the possible crowd that they, from my view must be.
Victor on March 12th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
I really really really really sincerely hate iPod shuffles. If all you want is a simple, flash based mp3 player that allows you to simply set up playlists and play them, just buy a $15 ebay special and forget about it. Pay the Apple premium on products that are worth it. Like an iPod touch or something.
Xairbusdriver on March 12th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
An answer for the earbuds is on the way…Klipsch and Scosche announce support for the new Shuffle.
Greg on March 12th, 2009 at 5:03 pm
I predict that the older version is going to outsell the new one. This thing just plain sucks, no way I’d ever buy it. They should be working to make these easier to navigate, not harder. When I’m working out, I can’t be double and triple clicking my head phones. They should have made it gesture based. Slide your finger downward across the front to rewind, upward to forward and tap anywhere to play/pause, then a simple volume toggle button on the top like the iPhone. Perfect for running when you don’t want to have to hunt for the right button to press.
David on March 12th, 2009 at 6:10 pm
I like the new on-cord controls for the shuffle. I hope Apple or someone else makes just such a cord with a standard stereo plug on the end so people can choose their own headphones.
I’ve tried holding the Apple headphones firmly against my ears and they actually sound OK, certainly good enough for a $99 item, but they won’t stay there on their own.
Once there is even a millimeter gap between the ear buds and my ear canal the sound becomes unbearably tinny. I can’t understand how anyone can listen to music that way.
The first generation Shuffle was a thumb drive and all the other early iPods were fully functional as external hard drives. Apple must not have liked people using their iPods for data storage because the feature was removed from new iPods a few years ago. That’s sad because, while working for an Apple dealer, I met several people who survived hard drive failures in their Macs because they had their important data backed up on their iPods. I met far more, of course, who had iPod hard drive failures including one who lost 2 months of irreplaceable vacation photos. I think that’s one reason why the camera connector was discontinued.
The first generation Shuffle is also widely regarded as producing the best sound quality of any iPod. I’m going to keep using mine until it either breaks or no longer holds a decent charge.
Staff Comment Tom Reestman, TheAppleBlog on March 12th, 2009 at 6:43 pm
Greg,
“I can’t be double and triple clicking my head phones”
But you CAN be hunting for a button to click? Right.
“…Perfect for running when you don’t want to have to hunt for the right button to press.”
Are you TRYING to make a case for people who say some of this is just whining for whining’s sake? It sure looks like it.
The older shuffles require you to use buttons that, as I’ve explained, may not be in the same place all the time. The new one uses a dead simple control that’s hanging right by your face! Incredibly easy to operate, especially when running. Please.
Wayne on March 12th, 2009 at 8:11 pm
I don’t know about other people but the standard iPod earbuds hurt my ears. Now I see that I will have to use them with this product. There is a way around this. I’m not an audiophile however I demand comfort. There is a company that can help called Earsound (www.earsound.com). They sell iPod attachments so that the iPod earbud snaps into this attachment which is then put into your ear. The attachment is made from an impression of your ears so it fits perfectly! I believe they can make attachments for all 3rd party headphones. An unintended benefit is that my iPod attachments fit onto my hands free device for my cell phone so I can listen to my conference calls in comfort. I hope this helps!!!
AdamC on March 12th, 2009 at 11:20 pm
Tom had been fair in his review and I agreed with him.
For those who are using headphones that cost 3 to 5 times the cost of the Shuffle, would you buy one? If you do you know what you are going for.
BTW the majority of the users are not hifi aficionados, they just enjoy music.
Bas on March 13th, 2009 at 5:26 am
It is funny to see so many people commenting: if you don’t like it, don’t buy it and stop whining. Perhaps they did not notice that this site is dedicated to apple products, is’t the whining all part of the fun? If it wasn’t there, there’d just be cheering …, which gets old fast.
Adam Blaiss on March 13th, 2009 at 5:51 am
Not that it really matters, but the unboxing pictures on iLounge show that these are new headphones never available before (i.e. with a headset but no microphone). So Apple did go out of their way, to some extent, to make a new device for the Shuffle.
http://www.ilounge.com/images/uploads/shuffle-3g-unbox-control-bck.jpg
Adam Blaiss on March 13th, 2009 at 5:53 am
Ack…I mean with a remote but no microphone.
Chris on March 13th, 2009 at 8:19 am
The article makes good points – as far as a remote dongle, Apple knows that the best location is up on the cord just under your chin… where it will always be exposed and available, no matter where you clip the Shuffle. This is better ergonomics than the older Shuffle or a dongle, and for a clothing-attached device, the audio interface is better when exercising, etc.
So lets looks at the checklist: 100% smaller (+), 100% larger capacity for old price (+), playlists! (+), audio interface (+), better control ergonomics (+), engravable like other iPods (+), need new headphones if don’t like Apple’s (-). The single negative (other than losing a couple of hours of battery life) can be handled in a few ways… set your (volume? and) playlist using the Apple buds then switch your preferred headphones (Apple says the unit will play automatically with remote-less headphones)… buy new headphones ($50+) with the remote … or buy a remote ($20-$30 when they come out considering Apple sells remote-equipped buds for $29) to use your cheap $10 Sonys.
As an owner of the previous-generation Shuffle, I’d love a firmware upgrade to allow the audio interface and playlists in return for losing the ability to disable the buttons, if needed.
Chris on March 13th, 2009 at 8:38 am
re: #41 David – all the recent 2G and even the 3G Shuffle can still be used as flash drives; you just need the dock for the 2G and the snyc cord for the 3G. iTunes still lets you enable disk use and select how much room to leave for data, just like with the original Shuffle that had the built-in USB plug.
Regarding using other cheap flash-based players, I’m a Mac-user and none of these pieces of crap come with Mac software or play my older iTunes purchase … managing music is a PITA without some tricks (I use a script in iTunes to load a playlist to my daughter’s Disney Mix Stick, but all the music needs to be mp3s), so for me, I’ll happily pay the “Apple premium” – the 512MB Mix Stick cost $39 on sale, whereas my 1GB 2G Shuffle was a $29 refurb.
lair360 on March 13th, 2009 at 8:42 am
Oh greate! This article is very funny!!
I love this paragraph!
“If I lose my headphones then I can’t use the device!” Well, if you lose your headphones now what do you do? Hold the thing up to your ear and crank the volume? You need to get headphones in either case. And third parties will provide more options.”
heaphone lost? What a cracker!!
Pustoolio on March 13th, 2009 at 3:07 pm
@ #33 Trinity
I had my Shuffle Rickroll me once and I must say… i liked it!
Maybe your Shuffle is doing it wrong?
XXX on March 14th, 2009 at 6:56 pm
The new shuffle is a nightmare. Whoever decided to put the controls on the headphones is a moron.
shemp9999 on May 19th, 2009 at 10:46 pm
I’ve got some nice Shure’s I use with my iPhone. None of the buttons on the cord work on the new shuffle. I’ll be happy when they make a shuffle adapter. Until then, I’ve placed some foam inserts on the apple phones and will try to make do.
Almost everything else about the new shuffle makes it better than previous ones. Size -piqueño. Voiceover – great. playlist switching – yes. controls – well located, simple and full-featured. I’ve owned almost every iPod made (skipped a few nanos and 2G shuffle). This shuffle has what I want for everyday gym/commute use.
I load a 3.8Gb random playlist shuffled daily by cron.