I suspect this is because Apple's iPods would effectively make HP iPods invisible at Radio Shack (http://www.tuaw.com/2005/07/21/radioshack-to-carry-apple-branded-ipods/)

Reply

It never made sense to me why HP sold iPods in the first place. There was nothing different about them and the Apple Store is an easier place (online & in person) to buy stuff like that. It seemed like HP was trying to appear hip. I don't expect too many people will take notice.

Reply

With Apple making deals with Walmart and Radio Shack (previously an HP iPod reseller), the space for HP branded iPods was getting smaller and smaller, and I recall reading that HP could not offer resellers the same price protection that Apple does, so the deal was doomed anyways.

Reply

It was a dumb idea for them to sell them anyway. I found it very strange to even sell a "co-branded" product. Am I remembering wrong or didn't they stop selling them once before? Only to start selling them again.

Reply

here's what I was talking about, it's over at engadget: http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000077027466/

Reply

Poor Sears. They've had an odd affair with Apple for years. Having finally broke ties with Apple around the time the first iPod, theyu jumped ship just in time to miss out on one of Apple's most successful products ever.

Ever cautious, Sears decided to wait for this whole iPod thing to either sink or swim. They let it languish on sears.com for a while. In the last month or two, they started to put the hp branded iPod on high-profile displays in their stores. They dedicated center aisle endcaps, stocked with a large accessory selection. Right now, iPod shuffles are starting to make their way into stores. All of this is thanks to HP. The question, I suppose, is whether Sears will go directly to Apple, or just drop the whole thing altogether.

Reply

HP doesn't have any idea what they're doing. I highly doubt they're making an iPod-like device and if they were it certainly wouldn't be very innovative. I think the last innovative device the company made was way back in the garage in Palo Alto.

Reply

Apple ? Soulless. HP, M$, maybe. But defiantly not Apple. Besides if they did, would suck kick ass blogs as TUAW exist?

Reply

I'll bet the 14,000 people that have been or will be laid off from HP don't care whether HP loses from this or not.

Reply

Hey look, HP just laid off 14,000 employees. The larger corporation with a new CEO has some ideas. The 14,000 employees can not be happy. Laying off the HP iPods is a much easier decision than saying good-bye to so many good people. HP is definitely the soul-less one here.

Reply

I always thought HP should have done a proper HP iPod (in blue) and I thought it was going to when the original HP rumours surfaced...

An HP iPod that matched their PCs would have more likelt being a success than just adding HP to what is basically an Apple product.

Reply

Did anyone else read quote, "CK"'s, comment? was that even a sentence? maybe he read the wrong article...

Reply

I am really sorry to say it but... The guy who said 'Hey, lets resell iPods with our own brand name' needs a slap to the face.

The only HP thing i want in my house, is the brown sauce .

Reply

One point worth noting: "a noncompete clause in the original deal with Apple that prohibits HP from developing or marketing a music player that's competitive with the iPod until August 2006" according to the SF Chron.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/07/30/BUG8RE0D3R1.DTL

Reply