Comments on: Podholes #01: The Bad Beginning http://www.podholes.com/2006/11/21/podholes-01/ PODHOLES is the podcast-about-podcasting (PAP) with real advice and real attitude Mon, 18 Feb 2008 17:37:28 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Andy http://www.podholes.com/2006/11/21/podholes-01/comment-page-1/#comment-26 Andy Wed, 27 Dec 2006 18:01:26 +0000 http://www.podholes.com/2006/11/21/podholes-1-the-bad-beginning/#comment-26 If I hadn't listened to show #2 first, I wouldn't have noticed anything wrong with show #1. I am curious, you mention the MXL990 as a good first Mic, and the iRiver 700-800 Series. Do these two work together? I have been trying to figure this out all morning. I'd hate to buy them both and not be able to utilize. Obviously I would love the Zoom recorder (drool) but the cash keeps running away from me. I know there are a ton of options out there for putting together equipment for beginners, but have you thought about picking out some selected products to show us what a good "Starter Bundle" would be? This might keep people from going out and purchasing the Podcast-Crappy-Packaged-Thingy. Andy If I hadn’t listened to show #2 first, I wouldn’t have noticed anything wrong with show #1.

I am curious, you mention the MXL990 as a good first Mic, and the iRiver 700-800 Series. Do these two work together? I have been trying to figure this out all morning. I’d hate to buy them both and not be able to utilize. Obviously I would love the Zoom recorder (drool) but the cash keeps running away from me.

I know there are a ton of options out there for putting together equipment for beginners, but have you thought about picking out some selected products to show us what a good “Starter Bundle” would be? This might keep people from going out and purchasing the Podcast-Crappy-Packaged-Thingy.

Andy

]]> By: AndyCast Andy http://www.podholes.com/2006/11/21/podholes-01/comment-page-1/#comment-7 AndyCast Andy Wed, 29 Nov 2006 19:02:02 +0000 http://www.podholes.com/2006/11/21/podholes-1-the-bad-beginning/#comment-7 Gentlemen, Great first show...and if this is as bad as it gets....woo hoo...what a ride we are all in for! Can't wait for the next! Gentlemen,

Great first show…and if this is as bad as it gets….woo hoo…what a ride we are all in for!

Can’t wait for the next!

]]> By: Paul from DesMoines http://www.podholes.com/2006/11/21/podholes-01/comment-page-1/#comment-6 Paul from DesMoines Mon, 27 Nov 2006 18:12:18 +0000 http://www.podholes.com/2006/11/21/podholes-1-the-bad-beginning/#comment-6 Having not yet listened to this episode I'm adding my two cents anyways - It seems like Apple is shooting themselves in the foot by pursuing this. Aside from the fact that it makes them look like the big bad, insecure, corporate wolf in the eyes of the general public, they're screwing themselves out of free name recognition, marketing, and advertising. Kinda The term "Podcast" has become very very synonomous with "iPod" I don't have enough fingers and toes to properly count how many times I've suggested a podiobook or a podcast to someone who isn't MP3 player/RSS saavy. Their inevitable response is "I don't have an iPod!" I then explain to them that they don't need an iPod, but that's neither here nor there. What is relevant is that the term iPod popped into those peoples heads when I used the term "Podcast." What is also relevant is that I personally know of 3 people who bought various iPods because "They thought the idea of podcasts was cool"...yes they bought iPods, lining Apple with another $750 in hardware revenues alone, just to listen to podcasts. And that's just in my little corner of the world. So, inconvenience of re-terming the podisphere ~sets aside another $1 for Apple royalties~ I say that if Apple wants to break up consumer psychological synergy between Podcasts and Ipods ($2 more), run the risk of losing consumer brand loyalty, and look like the big bad wolf in the process, let em. Having not yet listened to this episode I’m adding my two cents anyways -

It seems like Apple is shooting themselves in the foot by pursuing this. Aside from the fact that it makes them look like the big bad, insecure, corporate wolf in the eyes of the general public, they’re screwing themselves out of free name recognition, marketing, and advertising.

Kinda

The term “Podcast” has become very very synonomous with “iPod” I don’t have enough fingers and toes to properly count how many times I’ve suggested a podiobook or a podcast to someone who isn’t MP3 player/RSS saavy. Their inevitable response is “I don’t have an iPod!”

I then explain to them that they don’t need an iPod, but that’s neither here nor there.

What is relevant is that the term iPod popped into those peoples heads when I used the term “Podcast.” What is also relevant is that I personally know of 3 people who bought various iPods because “They thought the idea of podcasts was cool”…yes they bought iPods, lining Apple with another $750 in hardware revenues alone, just to listen to podcasts. And that’s just in my little corner of the world.

So, inconvenience of re-terming the podisphere ~sets aside another $1 for Apple royalties~ I say that if Apple wants to break up consumer psychological synergy between Podcasts and Ipods ($2 more), run the risk of losing consumer brand loyalty, and look like the big bad wolf in the process, let em.

]]> By: Michael Mennenga http://www.podholes.com/2006/11/21/podholes-01/comment-page-1/#comment-5 Michael Mennenga Thu, 23 Nov 2006 17:24:03 +0000 http://www.podholes.com/2006/11/21/podholes-1-the-bad-beginning/#comment-5 This whole area is a bit unclear. It seems that Apple is going after those who are blatantly infringing on the "Pod" name. Still, a cease and desist order is only a first shot. If someone ignores the letter, then the next step is litigation. So far, no one has gone that far to define the actual or implied infringement. Until that happens, it is all speculation. This whole area is a bit unclear. It seems that Apple is going after those who are blatantly infringing on the “Pod” name. Still, a cease and desist order is only a first shot. If someone ignores the letter, then the next step is litigation. So far, no one has gone that far to define the actual or implied infringement. Until that happens, it is all speculation.

]]> By: Summer http://www.podholes.com/2006/11/21/podholes-01/comment-page-1/#comment-4 Summer Tue, 21 Nov 2006 20:07:18 +0000 http://www.podholes.com/2006/11/21/podholes-1-the-bad-beginning/#comment-4 So by Apple's reasonings, the rights-holders of "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" have a claim against Apple for use of the word "pod"? Sometimes pointing out the absurd is necessary. So by Apple’s reasonings, the rights-holders of “Invasion of the Body Snatchers” have a claim against Apple for use of the word “pod”?

Sometimes pointing out the absurd is necessary.

]]>