alt Hacker NewsI though $50 seems like a fair price for what you'd get. And then I saw it was only a deposit. A retail price of $250 seems way over the mark for what it is.
Who would be the market for this product?
Its expensive so its up market, but all of those buyers would already have phones and would be unlikely to bring another device just to have music that their phone is already exceptionally good at providing.
it's unlikely to be runners or bikers or other endurance athletes as they'll already have their phone or if they use a watch have music on their watch so they don't have to bring a phone.
Phones already do a great job of offline with downloaded music and movies so that doesn't seem like the right crowd.
Most kids get a hand me down phone with no cellular to start with from their parents so that doesn't seem like a good fit.
now i feel like I'm writing the hacker news dropbox review where i say its use case is already easy to do and the product will go nowhere;)
But seriously, who would be the target here?
Replies
Nostalgia? Maybe not even, as you could buy a second hand iPod off eBay. Maybe for people that only use dumbphones and want still the possibility of listening to music?
Curious to see how much they sell, I suspect not much
Hi. I am the target for this kind of device. I like to have a dedicated music player, and I like the shape of the iPod classic. I don’t want to use a smartphone.
This device has Bluetooth which the old iPod did not have, which is an enhancement. The old iPod also forces you to sync the music using the iTunes library.
>A retail price of $250 seems way over the mark for what it is.
There are, in 2026, dozens of models of mp3 players selling from around $120 to even up to $400 or so, from brands from Chinese OEMs to Sony, including a few that mimic the iPod interface. From iPod style to expensive DAC ones with impendance tailored to high end headphones.
>But seriously, who would be the target here?
People interested in mp3 players.
People who want to focus on music listening, and not have a constant distraction device at hand when doing it.
>Phones already do a great job of offline with downloaded music and movies so that doesn't seem like the right crowd.
Seems like you've missed the whole "back to focused use device" trend going on for the last few years and that general niche.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00lLrwHQPns
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XaTRhWazMPs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFVo1bmUXzw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viU9JhIsbl4
https://www.audiophileon.com/news/hd-music-player-top-10
https://www.whathifi.com/best-buys/portable/best-portable-mu...
https://www.techradar.com/news/best-mp3-players-techradars-g...
Expensive mp3 players are for audiophiles. They have better much DACs than a phone, hi-fi headphone jacks in addition to regular ones. Probably other hi-fi features I don't know or care about. They can easily run over $400.
Inexpensive mp3 players are for people who want a distraction-free device, who want a headphone jack, or like physical buttons, I guess, and they also often have somewhat better DACs than a phone, not that my busted hearing can tell. I think decent ones are in the $50-100 range. I have a $70 that I like fine. It's metal, it plays most media formats (not opus, which annoys me, and it flakes out on some specific ogg vorbis). Only thing I don't like is switching between linear and shuffle play is too many button pushes.