Industry: iPods to hold on to hard drives
updated 09:35 am EDT, Fri October 12, 2007
iPods to hold on to HDDs
At least some iPods will continue to feature hard drives for a while to come, according to commentators. Research firm iSuppli yesterday described Apple's iPod classic as a "stopgap" player, built only because it is currently more economical to use hard drives for mass storage than flash, which is found on every other iPod. This view is opposed by Dave Reinsel, program director for Storage Research at the analysis firm IDC. Reisnel notes that demand for HD video and other memory-intensive content is bound to increase, and that there is simply no alternative to hard drives for users who want to carry a lot of media with them.
"If I'm going to start watching video on my iPod, yes, I'm going to want local storage," says Reinsel. "Make that hi-def and full-feature movies, then, yeah, I'm definitely going to need a hard disc drive."
Hard drive manufacturer Seagate contends that while players with 16GB or less are likely to be flash-based from now on, the price of flash memory will have to drop dramatically before it becomes reasonable to replace players like the Classic, which holds 80 or 160GB depending on the model. "If you look at laptops with flash drives," says Seagate representative Michael Hall, "the cost is still really prohibitive. Today, a 32GB (flash) drive in a notebook will cost you about $300 a pop, whereas you can get a 160GB HDD for $150."
iSuppli notes that one main reason for Apple's focus on flash has been an increase in its value relative to capacity. The 80GB HDD for the Classic costs Apple $78, the same price as a 30GB drive from two years ago; by contrast, the 8GB of flash in the new iPod nano costs $48, half what it did only a year ago.
Also important is that the iPod touch in particular has less need for local storage, since it can stream audio and video via Wi-Fi, through services such as the built-in YouTube browser.
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: Apr 2001
I think this is wrong...
There are a few problems with this argument...
1.) Hard drives break. Whether through normal wear and tear, or through impact from activities like jogging, hard drives wear out. If we could replace them for portable devices, we clearly should, and at a premium.
2.) Hard drives suck batteries. Flash memory is simply far more energy efficient. For portable devices, this is important-- especially ones with big battery-draining displays for watching video.
3.) Flash memory is growing. Economically, we're close to a break point. Even desktop PCs are shipping with solid-state drives now. Minature hard drives, on the other hand, cost more than full size ones. Pretty soon, flash will be worth the price premium over iPod-sized hard drives.
4.) Who the h*** needs to carry their entire movie library with them? The great lesson here was the Shuffle plus iTunes-- I don't need to carry all of my music. All of my favourite songs, plus a random selection of other ones, is plenty to get me through the day until my next synch. I'm seeing the same thing with my iPhone-- a few shows, a couple of movies, is more than I will ever need between synching.
I predict there will be one more revision of the iPod Classic, with the iPod nano and iPod touch becoming the standard and high-end devices. (This is a change of positioning from the nano being the budget and mini device, but the classic being the midrange to high-end as it has been.)