The iPod is blessed not only with incredible design, but also with years of hardcore research. At the turn of the century, when most tech companies were making huge cuts across the board, Apple was spending millions on Research and Development (the only high-tech company that did so) … in fact, I have a friend who did a lot of R&D for the Shuffle. As a result, Apple came out of that slump with some great products and perfect positioning. And, as everyone knows, Apple sells an experience (i.e. the retail stores, the packaging, the service plans, etc).

But in reality, the iPod’s popularity, at least in the U.S., is due mostly to their keen understanding of brand marketing and viral popularity. The product does not justify the high price, and a large percentage of buyers are making their purchase because of a trend, not because they have done extensive comparative research. It’s overpriced and they’re getting away with it … and as rediculous as it may sound, people are willing to pay for the experience and the brand.

While I agree with Joel’s comments (the ones I quoted) about the state of the iPod, what I don’t agree with is his assertion that the iPod encompasses “Great Design”. Throughout the whole article he makes no mention of what about the iPod actually makes it great!? And that information was all I was seeking here too. I guess you just have to own one to understand.

Personally, that particular chicken-and-egg problem is what keeps me from buying one. I’m not willing to open my wallet for “buy one, you’ll love it” without the details of “why?”. Though, I’m not kidding myself - losing one sale to little old me makes absolutely no difference to Apple or to the success of the iPod.

“Now that we’ve more-or-less defined “design,” since the working title of this series is Great Design, I better come up with a working definition of “great.”

“Just about every product category has its blue-chip, gold-plated stars. Movie stars? Brad Pitt. Best rock song of all time? Sweet Home, Alabama, of course. Office chairs? The Herman Miller Aeron. Portable MP3 players? Clearly the Apple iPod.”

…

“But that only gets you so far, as Creative, makers of the unloved ZEN MP3 players, are learning the hard way. Despite having products that are better than the iPod by just about every reasonable metric, they are unable to even come close to Apple iPod’s dominant market share. They’re cheaper. They have more memory. They support more file formats. Etc. Doesn’t matter: they still have single-digit market share while iPod is probably in the 80s somewhere.

That’s because good design can only take you so far. Getting every aspect of the design perfect, making a usable product, making the right tradeoffs between price and functionality, between flexibility and ease of use, between weight and battery life, etc., etc., etc., is all really important, but the most it can possibly get you is to #2.

…….

“So this is what I’m talking about when I say “Great Design.” It’s that ineffable quality that certain incredibly successful products have that makes people fall in love with them despite their flaws. It’s extremely hard to pull off……..”

(end of ridiculously long quote for a blog post.)

my other comment is, i guess you have to own one to really know. kinda like the guy at work who is looking for a new laptop. i told him the other day to consider a mac, and he said “never, they are pieces of junk.” i asked him if he has ever used one, and he says no, never laid a finger on one… my question back to him is … how can he judge that something is a piece of junk if he’s never even touched one before? its like saying i’m not going to X restaurant because they have terrible food, based purely on heresay or opinion. i can’t tell you how many times i’ve had a PC person tell me that macs are junk, when all they know about them is they tried to use one once back in 1988 and didn’t like it, or something along those lines.

From (http://www.joelonsoftware.com/design/1stDraft/02.html):

“And finally, the iPod. Ah, the iPod. It’s way more expensive than any competitive MP3 player. It has fewer features than the competition. The iPod nano, the tiny one that everybody’s raving about, is the only product I’ve ever seen that can be scratched beyond all recognition just by touching it lightly with your finger, and the shiny mirror back will be permanently covered in greasy fingerprint smudges from the moment you take it out of the elegant package until the battery wears out and you have to throw away the whole thing and buy another. But who cares?”

Apple got smart and removed the Firewire port from the iPod. It was TOO nifty with that enhancement (HP knows!).

I don’t quite understand Matt’s post #2 points 3 & 4 — unless his desktop and laptops are not Macs, in which case he may have a point.

Apple could overcome all of this by installing those new batteries that recharge through the USB port…