I understand those concerns, but if you think that Apple shouldn't release hardware that competes with existing third-party hardware, then presumably you think it shouldn't release software that competes with existing third-party software.

In the case of software, that would mean that Final Cut would never have been released as Premiere was already on the market.

But much more significantly, other MP3 playing apps were around long before iTunes. If Apple had not released iTunes, then there would have been no need for the iPod. Without the iPod, these third party manufacturers would not be making the money that they're making now.

Apple needs to make sure that it doesn't treat rivals badly, but it would be absurd to expect Apple to keep away from any product just because somebody else already offers something comparable. If Apple can do it better, then that's good for consumers. If a third-party manufacturer can do it better or cheaper, that's also good for consumers.

Apple offers some superb AirPort base stations, but that doesn't mean that firms like Netgear aren't selling thousands of their own WiFi base stations to Mac users too. If a product is good and sold at an attractive price, it will still sell well.

Agreed with AlanAudio.

The spirit of competition is a powerful force.

Besides, everyone wants to ride the Emperor's coattails. Why not Apple?

I think Apple built the Hi-Fi to serve a market that was not being served. It's a higher end product than any of the other iPod speakers out there. I don't think even the Bose can crank out tunes as loud as the Hi-Fi without clipping or distortion. At it's asking price, it's also priced above the competition.

With the Hi-Fi I think Apple is going after the bookshelf stereo market. It probably sounds better than most of the bookshelf systems in it's price range, and if someone is only interested in listening to their iPod, it offers a simpler, less expensive, Apple branded alternative to bookshelf stereos.

Don't be silly, it's not 'bugging the bejeezus' out of you. It's an iPod attachment, for chuff'sake. Go get one. Or a life.

all it needed was a dumbed down internal airport express and it would be cool and different. stupid apple.

Quote

AlanAudio wrote:
I understand those concerns, but if you think that Apple shouldn't release hardware that competes with existing third-party hardware, then presumably you think it shouldn't release software that competes with existing third-party software.

In the case of software, that would mean that Final Cut would never have been released as Premiere was already on the market.

When I first saw the release of this, I said hwat!? At $399, it is $299 higher in cost than the iHome for two small advantages:

1. Digital inputs for the Airport Express which needs to be bought separately.
2. A subwoofer.

For $165 if I shop around I can get a decent digital audio system that takes the Airport Express with 5 speakers!

And the iHome offers these advantages over the iPod HiFi:

AA instead of D cell batteries.
AM/FM stereo
Alarm Clock

The iHome already offers a remote like the iPod HiFi.
So honestly, it will only sell because it is from Apple. Everyone else who is looking for economy will buy something else.

http://www.ignitek.com/icarrier.html

^Cheaper than the Bose or HiFi, and sounds much better than both. I can't stop listening to this thing in the Mac Store I work at. Complete with remote, removable top, input, etc.

Vern is right about "sounds better" being a rather subjective yardstick. I have been the happy owner of a Bose Sound Dock since its release and I am very pleased with its performance. You get "room-filling sound" from a diminutive package that, prior to its release, was not offered in something as small by any other competitor. I will admit that I like Bose products ( I also have a Bose system for my home theater, and QC2 headphones for my World of Warcraft addiction) and I am biased toward their aesthetic appeal and sound in general, and despite what the most hardcore audiophiles say about Bose, it sounds great TO ME. Klipsch released their iGroove this year, which has been the only real competition to Bose's offering. Similar form factor, comparable audio performance (though it seems to have a slightly better bass response than Bose), $20.00 cheaper, and the one major feature Bose's unit was missing- auxiliary audio input.

So I was at the Apple Store in Tampa this weekend and I decided to take a look and a listen to the new iPod HiFi. I was meticulous and obnoxious. I brought my personal iPod in and listened to MY music in what were arguably less-than-ideal acoustic conditions...The store was PACKED. Macbook Pros, Mac minis, iPods, and iMacs FLYING out the doors (but I digress). I listened loud...VERY loud. I listened at medium volume. I listened at low volume. My musical choices were intended to put the unit through its paces for instrument differentiation, soundstage, bass response, vocals, etc. (Main theme from Star Wars Trilogy, Thunder Rolls, U2 Live from Dublin, Metallica- Enter Sandman, Audio clips from Airplane, The Mac Geek Gab, The Ramones, and Portishead) They had it set up right next to the Bose Sound Dock, so I then did some direct comparison. I mean, I know my Sound Dock sounds good at home, but it is nice to hear the exact same song from the exact same file played back to back in the two units. I think this is a pretty ballsy move on the part of Apple. Obviously they have faith that it will perform as advertised and not disappoint. And it definitely didn't disappoint. Apple's unit doesn't sound "better" than the Sound Dock, but it sounds "different". Bose focuses on mids and highs and has great sound separation- it is "treble rich" and if you crank it, it WILL distort on the lows its drivers can't effectively reproduce (anyone who owns one can tell you this and the various reviews of Bose speakers bear this out). Apple's unit has moderate treble but really does a great job on the mids and lows. It also does a surprising job of creating a "sound stage", or at least as good of a job that COULD be done from a unit of its size. My little test ended up selling not only the unit I purchased, but one to another customer who I struck up conversation with at the store.

So why would Apple do this? I think that they created a product with the intention of building on the weaknesses found in the other comparable units. This unit is not competing with the JBL, iHome, Creative, or Altec Lansing. Let's be clear, this thing is competing for Bose and Klipsch's dollars. Apple's unit creates a sound quality on par (though not identical) with the high-end competitors. It included the auxiliary input that Klipsch added to Bose unit and upgraded it to SPDIF. Apple then went further and made the whole thing portable and operable off of batteries (Which are capapble of actually charging your iPod while powering the whole setup)..something none of the other units do. Finally, Apple created a unit that is in appearance, very "Apple".

It is easy enough: just a good "Portable" music box without the need of earplugs. The name HiFi does not mean much more than an "acceptable" quality sound. If it is to expensive: OK, just do not buy it ...

I saw the HiFi at a local Apple store as well. Very impressive sound, especially at moderate to loud sound levels. They really got a handle on vibration. It delivers room-filling sound with ease. And it's smaller than I thought it'd be when seeing it on Apple.com.

My ears can't tell much difference between the sound dock and HiFi. Except that the HiFi can belt it out effortlessly.

I'll only comment on it when I've heard it, but from a distance it seems great, albeit a tad overpriced.

You may not "get it." but others have: Read the very positive reviews of the iPod Hi-Fi in PCWorld, PC Mag, and Playlist (among others) to find out what you may be missing.

I don't understand how you can even compare the ipod hifi with the little speaker crowd. Short of Bose SoundDock or Audioengine A5, none of the other speakers really impress me enough to put one in my living room. They look like (and probably are) like the small "multimedia speakers" I used to have next to my computer. Their looks alone dissuade me from buying them.

The Hifi, however, looks (and due to the weight, feels) like a real and a robust audio element. If it were just a little bit cheaper, I'd buy one for my living room. (Or if it had AirTunes. Missing that sucks.)

This is what inspired designs could have been (and maybe in the future will be):

#1 A Video Boombox that accepts a video iPod. Traditional boom-box form factor. Probably about a 14" screen or smaller with a DVD drive and the guts of a CoreDuo Mini including the DVD drive and....... drum roll please......... an integrated iPod dock. Primarily aimed at the youth market/ college dorm room etc. Wireless keyboard/mouse, wi-fi for content delivery, SATA, USB2, FW400, no second monitor but decent video card for gaming. Optional TV tuner.
#2 A high end version could be built around iMac CoreDuo internals. Attache case form factor. Think flat planar speakers that fold over the display to protect it. Maybe Hi-Def wide-screen w/built in digital tuner. Gamers video. HDMI out, digital audio in/out and for God's sake Apple, give us a couple of RCA analog I/Os!!! That way it's usable with existing equipment, other mp3 devices and by satellite radio subscribers.

Your comments?

I caught the LOTR's quote, vern. Nice. This HI-FI Looks very NICE. Now apple needs to come up with better earbuds. The cheap white ones SUCK, SUCK, SUCK! You have to have them positioned exactly right or the sound is junk. And my ears are not shaped funny, I've had many earbuds and never this problem. There shape in all wrong. I use sony's noise cancelling buds. Only 40 bucks and the sound in WAY better. I would like to step up to a fancy mid level for about 150-200 bucks. Any suggestions?

That's what it's about.

None of the current offerings have a serious subwoofer that won't rattle and can be battery powered.

It's about selling something that actually sounds good to all the groups of people hanging out in the various parks and playgrounds shooting hoops and playing handball. Or the various Cisco/Night Train parties lurking in the back allies. Think NYC where there is a city park or playground (or alley) at least every few blocks.

Why shouldn't Apple bring this product out. This is already a massive market and only going to get bigger. Even if Apple's hi-fi offering only takes a small percentage of the market, it's a percentage worth having.

The reason Apple does it is very simple. They wish to drive momentum. Granted there are third party products, but unless the big players do something in any business, market penetration is not reached. Believe it or not, I feel that the iPod Hi-Fi will drive sales for all of the third party speaker vendors, not steal from them. Perhaps 20% of people have considered a living room speaker system for the iPod—now 70% have. They need the momentum to carry them further into the living room so they can introduce more products in that area of the home. Third party alone doesn't provide enough.

There are a few aspects abotu the iPod hifi that are different then the others in the market and may have been overlooked. (1) the Apple unit has a optical input (not totally unique but how many of the others have one) and (2) the width of the unit is 17", which makes it perfect for mounting in a 19" equipment rack. Granted, these features wil appeal only to small number of buyers, but isn't that the same situation with the individual iPod speakers... after all each is designed and appeals to different buyers

I was in the Boston Apple Store recently and they had a row of the various competing iPod audio accessories including Apple's iPod Hi-Fi. A guy was trying the various offerings out and I was a little disappointed with the sound on the Hi-Fi. The offerings from Bose and Altec Lansing were much clearer.

However, the only one you could really take to the local park or basketball court was the iPod Hi-Fi (I didn't see a DLO iBoom so can't comment on that). I think this is the market the iPod Hi-Fi is best suited as opposed to true high quality audio reproduction in a relatively small space.

As an aside, I saw a high number of iPod posters around Boston. South Station was completely covered in them.

The above post was me. Sorry, forgot to login.

Calling it the HiFi is a bit of a contradiction considering that the quality of all your song files are comprimised once you put them in your ipod, yeah you might have all wav files on your itunes list but they all get converted to m4a once you put them on your ipod. With that being said your never going to get the best quality sound coming from your ipod, hook your real "hi fi" system up to your computer if you want to get the best possible sound, unless you play all mp3's on your computer as well, then you probably dont give a crap about sound and you dont need something called the ipod hi fi.

They need to produce another model with AirTunes built in. A unit that can be plugged in anywhere in the house, controlled by remote control, but music played from your computer instead of your iPod. Some households could probably make use of a number of these, one in the kitchen, lounge, dining room. One for the garden, garage etc.