When Apple released the
third-generation iPod shuffle in 2009, I saw it as a perfect example of the
design hubris that many Apple detractors point to. From a usability perspective, there really wasn't anything wrong with the
second-generation iPod shuffle -- it had a minimal number of buttons, true, but their functions were fairly obvious. In a textbook example of the emphasis of form over function, Apple's third-generation
iPod shuffle removed
all of the controls from the device itself and moved them to the headphones' inline remote. Not only was the remote far more complex to use than the old shuffle's simple buttons, it also meant that, if you wanted to use third-party headphones, you'd either have to give up all control over the
iPod or shell out more money for an inline remote adapter. The third-gen iPod shuffle got
savaged in reviews, and it deserved it.
Apple's
fourth-generation iPod shuffle mercifully brought the buttons back. Apple even lists "buttons" as a
feature on its
page for the iPod shuffle. In a rare departure from typical Apple design, the fourth-generation iPod shuffle is much
larger than the third-gen; it's not that Apple
can't make a music player the size of your thumbnail, but it seems like Apple realized that it
shouldn't. So, the return of buttons to the iPod shuffle proves that Apple doesn't always emphasize form over function. Right?
Unfortunately, although the iPod shuffle proves that Apple is perfectly capable of learning from its design missteps, the new
iPod nano and
iPod touch both feature design compromises that are almost as boneheaded as the buttonless third-gen iPod shuffle. Click "Read More" to see the way these new iPods, nice as they are in some respects, are in other ways an example of a "one step forward, two steps back" design.
Read more →