PDA

View Full Version : could this be real? i doubt it... (iPod AV)




Pages : [1] 2

sam10685
Mar 5, 2006, 12:11 PM
what do u think about this 6G? i'm still really skeptical but it's really good if it's fake. http://www.macshrine.com/ipodav.htm



yippy
Mar 5, 2006, 12:14 PM
I would say that is the most convincing one yet due to the lighting in the photos. However, it also looks exactly like all the other fakes and so we know it is not to hard to photoshop a picture to look like that.

mrgreen4242
Mar 5, 2006, 12:20 PM
Cool, I like it. Definitely the best yet... has a "real" screen on it (not a test screen or turned off) and is show from a few angles.


Anyways, I'd buy one IF it was more than a media player (ie, has PDA type functions and wireless etc). I still say it'd be a waste of a big touchscreen and all that storage space and computational power to NOT have some other features in there.

CoMpX
Mar 5, 2006, 12:25 PM
I agree, if it just has the same features as the 5G iPod then what's the point of it. It looks pretty real to me though. Look at the bottom picture. You can see the "lines" on the LCD all the way down to the bottom part of the large screen. If this was fake, wouldn't that be EXTREMELY difficult to do in Photoshop?

jkelly888
Mar 5, 2006, 12:34 PM
the last picture on the page is the only one that looks photoshopped. the rest are very convincing

mrgreen4242
Mar 5, 2006, 12:34 PM
I agree, if it just has the same features as the 5G iPod then what's the point of it. It looks pretty real to me though. Look at the bottom picture. You can see the "lines" on the LCD all the way down to the bottom part of the large screen. If this was fake, wouldn't that be EXTREMELY difficult to do in Photoshop?

Well, you could do the mockup artwork, display it on any LCD screen (a monitor or a PDA for example) and then photograph it and put it onto a 5G ipod pic.

Here's my overall opinion on these: it doesn't matter if it's real or fake. We pretty much KNOW the next iPod will look something like this. There isn't anywhere to go from the 5G except to a full screen. And there's no other good control mechanism for a full screen iPod than touch screen.

The only questions (and answers) that matter are:

Screen size: 3.5" or 4"?
Resolution: Full DVD resolution or not?
HDD size: 30gb? 40? 60? 80? 100?
Price: ???
Will it replace the 5G or be sold as a new line?
Features: Will it do anything beside play music and movies?
iTMS: Will they sell feature films? Will it be rental/subscription or buy to own sales?

Pics like this are fun, but don't mean much at this point.

sam10685
Mar 5, 2006, 12:35 PM
as i said earlier, i am VERY skeptical because Apple usually doesn't let stuff like this get out but if it is fake, whoever did it did a REALLY good job... all the angles are even and stuff and the shot of it at an angle does the color-changing ting that LCD's do so--very intriguing.

whooleytoo
Mar 5, 2006, 12:36 PM
If this is a fake, it's the most sophisticated one yet. The shadow of the iPod AV on the Hi-Fi, the reflection of the iPod's screen on the HiFi in the last shot.

If this is fake, Apple should really hire this guy, he's got talent! ;)

briangig
Mar 5, 2006, 12:38 PM
Now these look real, those would be pretty tough to photoshop...

depending on price, new screen coating, and possible more functions/features (wifi PLEASE), I would most definetly trade in my 5G.

PlaceofDis
Mar 5, 2006, 12:50 PM
well it is a fake.
its a PS of a 5G iPod with a screen stretched across it. its a good job of it, but its not that hard to see.

would be an intersting real model though.

cunning.stunt
Mar 5, 2006, 12:57 PM
nice pictures, i'd say the best yet by far!!
Although id say it's a fake; mostly due to the fact it is identical in size to the 5G which would indicate its an edited image - is it really likely that apple will fit a bigger hard drive, full size touch screen, upgraded battery/circuitry all in the shell of a 5g? i think its unlikely.
Would have to be bigger
and it wouldnt be possible to utilise the full screen horizontally in a dock as its docked vertically, which is the other factor that suggests it's fake. and i would think that most people would use a dock if they brought an ipod 6g as there isnt space to hold it like the 5g.
im no photoshop expert but a lot of people could probably achieve the effects in the pictures using photoshop the problem is you need a good camera and a 5g ipod to get good pics (like those) to work from.

ITASOR
Mar 5, 2006, 12:58 PM
The shadow of the iPod AV on the Hi-Fi, the reflection of the iPod's screen on the HiFi in the last shot.


Yeah, but if you put a 5G on there, it would have the right shadow too...

whooleytoo
Mar 5, 2006, 01:00 PM
Yeah, but if you put a 5G on there, it would have the right shadow too...

Very true. My fault, I just want to believe!

funkychunkz
Mar 5, 2006, 01:00 PM
I think the dock connector is different than the 5G's. The white is thicker. It actually looks THINNER than the 5G. Wait a second... who would bother converting 'Ice Age 2' for this widescreen ipod? Either really cool product, or god-like p-shopping job. They would even have had to take into acount that the touch portion of the screen reflects light differently (pic 2).

In any case, this is good news: apple is ging us an upgrade; photoshoppers are taking the world over by storm.

arn
Mar 5, 2006, 01:02 PM
there's no reason to think that MacShrine has real images. They are simply posting what is being sent to them.

arn

Capt Underpants
Mar 5, 2006, 01:11 PM
Does anyone have a mirror of the pictures? I can't access the site.

arn
Mar 5, 2006, 01:15 PM
images

CoMpX
Mar 5, 2006, 01:17 PM
Does anyone have a mirror of the pictures? I can't access the site.

Me neither.

EDIT: Got them. Thanks arn.

EGT
Mar 5, 2006, 01:25 PM
Fake or not, they looks fantastic.

Capt Underpants
Mar 5, 2006, 01:36 PM
images

Thanks, arn!

Those images do look really amazing. If Apple comes out with a product like that, I will have to restrain myself from buying it.

derajfast
Mar 5, 2006, 01:45 PM
i think they are fake, and ive believed the others ones prior as being real......2 reasons,

i think the last picture with the scroll wheel looks pretty fake

also, apple wouldnt demo this with ice age......ice age isnt a pixar movie, and the person who made this probably thought it was......ice age is fox animation studio, a competitor to ice age

itd be more believable with the incredibles or finding nemo or toy story on it, but ice age is like having shrek on it

munkle
Mar 5, 2006, 02:09 PM
In case MacShrine goes down again, here's a Flickr set of the high res images (http://flickr.com/photos/tauquil/sets/72057594075602860/).

liketom
Mar 5, 2006, 02:13 PM
what we need for absolute proof is a video of the dam things !!!

arn
Mar 5, 2006, 02:20 PM
hig rez images also uploaded to

http://guides.macrumors.com/Gallery_of_Video_iPod_Mockups

arn

zap2
Mar 5, 2006, 02:25 PM
That last pci looks to fake!

Stinkythe1
Mar 5, 2006, 02:26 PM
If these are real, then this will definatly be my first ipod.

Mac_Freak
Mar 5, 2006, 02:45 PM
FAKE
http://lantkiewicz.t35.com/1copy.jpg

TMA
Mar 5, 2006, 02:51 PM
A good way to find out if these are fake are to look for images of 5G iPods and iPod Hi-Fi's to see if an unedited one can be found.

onemacmini
Mar 5, 2006, 02:52 PM
you can tell if u turn the contrast full and gamma too.

Felldownthewell
Mar 5, 2006, 02:53 PM
The first two, especially the 2nd (with the hand holding it) could be real. The third looks PSd. I think they are all fake, but what an excellent job! I bet we get a product like this soon enough.

onemacmini
Mar 5, 2006, 02:55 PM
must of taken ages to do. but gives apple a few ideas. some companys make all this speaculation to see what the public want......look around for those apple employees:) :D

zigzag
Mar 5, 2006, 03:09 PM
I looked at it too at high contrast, it looks like it might not be brush strokes, but rather a reflection of some sort.

runninmac
Mar 5, 2006, 03:18 PM
I think it would seem real but it just looks too thin, the battery life would be horrible.

ero87
Mar 5, 2006, 03:37 PM
If the controls "appear" when you touch the screen, how would the pictures show the controls? nobody is touching the screen.

Spanky Deluxe
Mar 5, 2006, 03:39 PM
The first two are some of the best fakes I think I've ever seen!! Very believable!! If Apple released a real Video iPod like that that was moderately priced, I'd be sorely tempted to break the piggy bank open.

nagromme
Mar 5, 2006, 03:42 PM
At some point, the sheer NUMBER of images has to be suspicious :D

Just for fun, attached is my mockup (ONLY A MOCKUP) of an iPod with:

* The exact 2.4x4.1" dimensions of the 5G.

* A 4" diagonal screen.

* 16:9 ratio.

(As you can see, to make the borders truly even all the way around a 16:9 screen, the 5G's dimensions would have to be altered a little. Which is not a comment on the alleged spy photos--some of them look pretty good. Just noting the results of my experiment.)


I agree, if it just has the same features as the 5G iPod then what's the point of it.
The point would be to watch video bigger :)

That's ALL I see coming in such a product (if one ever appears) and that's good enough. Dreams of PDAs and smartphones are just going to make people frustrated, I predict. The iPod is a music player, becoming (secondarily) a portable video player.

More complex tablet-type products MIGHT come from Apple next year or something, but not soon and probably Mac-based rather than iPod-based. That's my guess.

Vagcmyevad
Mar 5, 2006, 03:45 PM
Very interesting... in the following picture:

http://mirror.root.vc/macshrine.com/1full.jpg

... you can see the reflection of a tiled roof with some sort of pipe running across it. This is most clear when looking at the iPod AV's screen. This would make sense since all the objects (iPod nano, "iPod AV", and iPod Hi-Fi) are very shiny...;)

If these are fakes, they are very, very good!

(or am I just going crazy? :eek: )

al3000
Mar 5, 2006, 03:46 PM
I hope it looks like those pics, they make it look so so good :D

cunning.stunt
Mar 5, 2006, 03:51 PM
If the controls "appear" when you touch the screen, how would the pictures show the controls? nobody is touching the screen.

it would be on a timer i guess like the backlight timer

runninmac
Mar 5, 2006, 03:53 PM
If the controls "appear" when you touch the screen, how would the pictures show the controls? nobody is touching the screen.

Thats a really good point. The only thing I could think of is if it has the 2 second delay type thing when you change the volume.

If anyone has the movie Ice Age maybe you could go though it and see if the scrubber is in the same spot as the iPod shows.

iZoom P5
Mar 5, 2006, 03:53 PM
If people thought the scratches on the 5G/nano were bad, wait till this thing comes out. The class action suits would start before it even shipped!

nagromme
Mar 5, 2006, 03:53 PM
It would be silly for me claim certainty, but my gut reaction is:

* Images that are probably real (55% chance): Only the original "classic" test-pattern photo with the Chinese characters that nobody has translated. (Despite the suspicions people have raised, some of which are legitimate. That video, however, was not convincing as has been discussed to death.)

* Images that are probably fake (75% chance): Everything seen since then, including these. But if so, these are well done at least. The "brush marks" don't bother me, but the UI seems odd to me.

That's not proof, just my gut reaction.

cunning.stunt
Mar 5, 2006, 03:55 PM
Very interesting... in the following picture:

http://mirror.root.vc/macshrine.com/1full.jpg

... you can see the reflection of a tiled roof with some sort of pipe running across it. This is most clear when looking at the iPod AV's screen. This would make sense since all the objects (iPod nano, "iPod AV", and iPod Hi-Fi) are very shiny...;)

If these are fakes, they are very, very good!

(or am I just going crazy? :eek: )

thats an easy affect to achieve really though, just a simple overly of a new layer and with a really low opacity setting and possibly change of gradient

themacman
Mar 5, 2006, 04:03 PM
images
very convincing. i would definitley buy one of they came out, but if there going to relase this they would defintley have to add some sort of comptley new feature to reallys set it aside from the 5G

TMA
Mar 5, 2006, 04:03 PM
The problem with these images and all the others that came after the 'Original' (with test pattern and mysterious, undecipherable alien symbols/characters) is that we've all had time to think about how these can be faked. We've even been treated to a video 'tutorial'. With these latest images it's gotten to the point where it's impossible to tell if they're real or not and there's not much motivation to try.

WaRrK
Mar 5, 2006, 04:05 PM
I know that most people think the 3rd one looks the most photoshopped, but to me it gives the most evidence that it is real - look at the reflection on the top of the iPod HiFi - over the volume controls you can see the reflection of the virtual click wheel, but to the sides you can make out the reflection of the screen boundaries and the darker shadow of the screen bevel. If they had taken a photo of the 5G there wouldn't be the 2 darker shadows running down the side of the screen reflection.

Granted - I'm no expert on this kind of thing and it may be hope overriding everything else.

Still we can all agree on the following:

1) If they are real - we all will want one

2) If they are fake - that's one talented photoshopper!

SwiftLives
Mar 5, 2006, 04:16 PM
I think what is shown as brush stokes in the curves-enhanced version is actually a reflection of some sort.

I'm usually the cynical one, but this is actually quite convincing.

The counter in the bottom left looks very similar, but not exactly like the one in Quicktime when running a movie full screen. So it's not just a direct screen grab from QT.

Going into Photoshop and futzing with contrast, curves, etc. doesn't yield any hints to it being photoshopped. Everything on screen adjusts evenly, which shows there was no obvious manipulation.

The only thing I can think of is to ask someone who owns the movie Ice Age to post an image from the 17 minute and 33 second mark.

al3000
Mar 5, 2006, 04:20 PM
Come on Apple, release the damn thing!!

DavidCar
Mar 5, 2006, 04:23 PM
I think what is shown as brush stokes in the curves-enhanced version is actually a reflection of some sort.

...

The only thing I can think of is to ask someone who owns the movie Ice Age to post an image from the 17 minute and 33 second mark.

I would like to see the original Ice Age image as well. Perhaps it could be digitally subtracted from the supposed iPod image to bring out the reflection. It is more complex than brush strokes, I think.

decksnap
Mar 5, 2006, 04:26 PM
The first one looks the most convincing. In the second one the black border around the movie doesn't look like a solid black border like the other one. It looks like a shadow/glow imposed over the video.

WaRrK
Mar 5, 2006, 04:27 PM
I think what is shown as brush stokes in the curves-enhanced version is actually a reflection of some sort.


I agree - I flipped the image horizontally I think this would then give you what you would see if you were the one taking the photo and looked up - I agree with Vagcmyevad - it looks like a pipe running across the roof. Whilst it is easy to acheive with a low opacity layer - if you were creating the fake and went to that much trouble - wouldn't you make the reflections a touch more obvious?

Short of compelling evidence to the contrary - I'm going to stick my neck out and say this is a real object - not that it is necessarily the next iPod - but it is a real "thing" that has had its photo taken.

kugino
Mar 5, 2006, 04:28 PM
I know that most people think the 3rd one looks the most photoshopped, but to me it gives the most evidence that it is real - look at the reflection on the top of the iPod HiFi - over the volume controls you can see the reflection of the virtual click wheel, but to the sides you can make out the reflection of the screen boundaries and the darker shadow of the screen bevel. If they had taken a photo of the 5G there wouldn't be the 2 darker shadows running down the side of the screen reflection.

Granted - I'm no expert on this kind of thing and it may be hope overriding everything else.

Still we can all agree on the following:

1) If they are real - we all will want one

2) If they are fake - that's one talented photoshopper!
yeah, i think it's the most convincing of the three, although i'm still not convinced. we'll know in the next month or so (hopefully)

DavidCar
Mar 5, 2006, 04:34 PM
The only thing I can think of is to ask someone who owns the movie Ice Age to post an image from the 17 minute and 33 second mark.

The image is from the Ice Age 2 preview available on the Apple Movie Trailers website. I can't get it to stop on that exact frame for some reason.

Some_Big_Spoon
Mar 5, 2006, 04:39 PM
It kind of doesn't even matter if it's a fake.. If the rumors are true, that's what it'll look like anyway, or so close that it won't really matter. For now, all the fakes will just be variations on a theme until whatever it is gets released.

scienceguy
Mar 5, 2006, 04:45 PM
It kind of doesn't even matter if it's a fake.. If the rumors are true, that's what it'll look like anyway, or so close that it won't really matter. For now, all the fakes will just be variations on a theme until whatever it is gets released.

Has anyone noticed that MacShrine's ISP has suspended them?

http://www.macshrine.com

Very interesting...

Vagcmyevad
Mar 5, 2006, 04:49 PM
Has anyone noticed that MacShrine's ISP has suspended them?

http://www.macshrine.com

Very interesting...
This isn't anything special, they've just been dugg (http://www.digg.com/apple/iPod_AV_-_Exclusive_Pictures)...:cool:

Squire
Mar 5, 2006, 04:53 PM
i think they are fake, and ive believed the others ones prior as being real......2 reasons,

i think the last picture with the scroll wheel looks pretty fake

also, apple wouldnt demo this with ice age......ice age isnt a pixar movie, and the person who made this probably thought it was......ice age is fox animation studio, a competitor to ice age

itd be more believable with the incredibles or finding nemo or toy story on it, but ice age is like having shrek on it

I was going to say the exact same thing. I seem to recall a mockup last year having the same problem. Also, look at the size of the dock connector in pic #2 vs. pic #1. Is it just me or does it seem bigger in the second pic? Almost like it's a photoshopped nano. That said, it does look real to me, but I'm no expert.

-Squire

al3000
Mar 5, 2006, 04:56 PM
I was going to say the exact same thing. I seem to recall a mockup last year having the same problem. Also, look at the size of the dock connector in pic #2 vs. pic #1. Is it just me or does it seem bigger in the second pic? Almost like it's a photoshopped nano. That said, it does look real to me, but I'm no expert.

-Squire

I might be wrong but if it is real, I doubt it was a picture apple would plan to release, therefore the fact that it is not a pixar movie doesn't really seem relevant.

rock6079
Mar 5, 2006, 05:00 PM
what we need for absolute proof is a video of the dam things !!!

a video would still have its skeptics, recall the "iWalk (http://www.zen89593.zen.co.uk/iwalk/)"

jer2eydevil88
Mar 5, 2006, 05:02 PM
Two of these have a couple of problems... if they were real these would not be in the photographs...

i'll put up what I mean in a second... gotta wait for a video to finish rendering before I try and manipulate any photo's in photoshop...

haha I wonder what the Mac Book pro will be like for this summer... hopefully this ipod is real and i'll be able to buy both the mac book and one of these..

.:: edit ::.

okay here we go with thumbnails but if you wanna see the high res demo's just click them

http://www.zigzap.net/ipodfakes/small_oops1.jpg (http://www.zigzap.net/ipodfakes/oops1.jpg)

http://www.zigzap.net/ipodfakes/small_oops3.jpg (http://www.zigzap.net/ipodfakes/oops3.jpg)

http://www.zigzap.net/ipodfakes/small_oop2.jpg (http://www.zigzap.net/ipodfakes/oop2.jpg)

http://www.zigzap.net/ipodfakes/small_oops4.jpg (http://www.zigzap.net/ipodfakes/oops4.jpg)

treblah
Mar 5, 2006, 05:17 PM
Anyone notice there is a visible headphone jack in the same spot as the 5th Gen in the pic where the 'iPod AV' docked in the Hi-Fi but no visible jack on the pic where its on its side...

I'm guessing fake.

nagromme
Mar 5, 2006, 05:22 PM
In the second one the black border around the movie doesn't look like a solid black border like the other one. It looks like a shadow/glow imposed over the video.
I agree. They make it look like the image and the black are all on one level sitting on the surface of the iPod with no depth.

In fact, any LCD's image is sunk beneath the surface some, so at an angle, you'd see the depth on the far edges--extra black space--but the near edges would show less or no black, because the black would be hidden by the iPod's body. In this fake, there's an even line of black all the way around, which would only make sense head-on.

Here are a couple examples of how the screen border SHOULD look. There should be SOME depth even if you assume the new screen is "less deep" than the old one.

http://databank.alion.ru/upload/review/371/img/9195/resize_350x0-ipod-5g.jpg

http://img.engadget.com/common/images/3060000000049790.JPG

Also, in photo 3, the reflection in the Hi-Fi looks nearly parallel to the original. I'm thinking it would show much more angle between the tilted iPod and its reflection. Someone with a 5G iPod dock could do a rough check to see if I'm right or not. (As far as I can tell, the angle of a Hi-Fi dock should be the same as any other dock.)

All good fun, but not as much as when an Apple event was actually expected soon....

CoMpX
Mar 5, 2006, 05:22 PM
Anyone notice there is a visible headphone jack in the same spot as the 5th Gen in the pic where the 'iPod AV' docked in the Hi-Fi but no visible jack on the pic where its on its side...

I'm guessing fake.

Hmm, I'm not sure about that. I think I can juussstt make out the headphone jack in the first pic.

plinkoman
Mar 5, 2006, 05:36 PM
wow. fake or not, if apple were to release a true video iPod, i'd place a wager that it would look like this. http://images.zeroforum.com/smile/emthup.gif

Kingsly
Mar 5, 2006, 05:39 PM
Arrgh, I want so desperately for this to be real... sigh...

dongmin
Mar 5, 2006, 05:47 PM
http://guides.macrumors.com/images/thumb/7/7e/3fullipodav.jpg/800px-3fullipodav.jpg

I don't know if the image is real, but the above interface design makes no sense. You're having to power the entire 4" LCD just to get the touch screen controls. This is horribly inefficient. The battery life would be the same whether you're playing music or video. Doesn't make much sense. I'm leaning towards a fake.

The only way this design would make sense is if you could turn off the back lighting for the bottom part of the screen when you're playing music. But then this creates two other problems: first, it'd be hard to see the controls if the backlighting is off and second, you'd risk screen burns.

StarbucksSam
Mar 5, 2006, 05:52 PM
Looks kind of neat, but I'd hate it in real life. The shadows make it look more real, but that doesn't mean much... I don't trust these "spy photos" anymore.

mikemodena
Mar 5, 2006, 05:55 PM
I really hope that the real 6th gen iPod looks like that. I'd be ordering one the day it was announced. That GUI looks awesome.

SwiftLives
Mar 5, 2006, 05:59 PM
http://guides.macrumors.com/images/thumb/7/7e/3fullipodav.jpg/800px-3fullipodav.jpg

I don't know if the image is real, but the above interface design makes no sense. You're having to power the entire 4" LCD just to get the touch screen controls. This is horribly inefficient. The battery life would be the same whether you're playing music or video. Doesn't make much sense. I'm leaning towards a fake.

The only way this design would make sense is if you could turn off the back lighting for the bottom part of the screen when you're playing music. But then this creates two other problems: first, it'd be hard to see the controls if the backlighting is off and second, you'd risk screen burns.


I don't look at the clickwheel when I'm navigating my ipod, so it wouldn't necessarily need the backlight.

Granted, the reason I don't look at it is because the clickwheel is a tactile experience. It has a different texture than the rest of the ipod and pushes just like a button. Having the clickwheel on the screen will completely eliminate the tactile sensation, so navigating this device without looking at it would be a nightmare. Even the 3G iPod had texture and recessed buttons that you could feel with your finger.

That alone casts the credibility of the product in this form into doubt.

carve
Mar 5, 2006, 06:05 PM
ice age 2 hasen't been released!!! unless he works for him:confused:

jordanste
Mar 5, 2006, 06:05 PM
are you kidding me!?

digitalshawn
Mar 5, 2006, 06:06 PM
ice age 2 hasen't been released!!! unless he works for him:confused:

You beat me that was going to be my first comment on this board! Good eye though!

carve
Mar 5, 2006, 06:08 PM
i think its just a waste of time

are you kidding me!?
why do u say that???:)

jer2eydevil88
Mar 5, 2006, 06:13 PM
I've gone ahead and posted those pictures in my last post in an attempt to disprove these photos.

I am no photoshop expert but I know enough to zoom in...

DavidCar
Mar 5, 2006, 06:13 PM
ice age 2 hasen't been released!!! unless he works for him:confused:

I've already grabbed the same frame off the Ice Age 2 trailer on the Apple website. So this iPod is playing the trailer, obviously.

carve
Mar 5, 2006, 06:15 PM
I would REaLLY enjoy if this was real

digitalshawn
Mar 5, 2006, 06:26 PM
I've already grabbed the same frame off the Ice Age 2 trailer on the Apple website. So this iPod is playing the trailer, obviously.

The only thing is, in the photo the time stamp with the touch controller is 00:17:33 so I wouldn't think Apple would have a 17:33 second trailer.

http://www.digitalshawn.com/web-images/iceage2.jpg

but as a newbie I could be reading way too much into it.

CoMpX
Mar 5, 2006, 06:31 PM
but as a newbie I could be reading way too much into it.

Actually I think that's a very good observation. Apple wouldn't have a 17 minute trailer.

DavidCar
Mar 5, 2006, 06:32 PM
The only thing is, in the photo the time stamp with the touch controller is 00:17:33 so I wouldn't think Apple would have a 17:33 second trailer.

...

but as a newbie I could be reading way too much into it.

Good point.

DavidCar
Mar 5, 2006, 06:34 PM
Actually I think that's a very good observation. Apple wouldn't have a 17 minute trailer.

I don't understand the implications. If this is real, and they are not playing the trailer, then what are they playing. And if it is false, then what is the point of the timestamp at 17 minutes.

Capt Underpants
Mar 5, 2006, 06:38 PM
The only thing is, in the photo the time stamp with the touch controller is 00:17:33 so I wouldn't think Apple would have a 17:33 second trailer.

http://www.digitalshawn.com/web-images/iceage2.jpg

but as a newbie I could be reading way too much into it.

To me that reads 00:17.33, ad I cannot see the upper point on the colon.

DavidCar
Mar 5, 2006, 06:40 PM
I'm going to disagree with Nagromme on the LCD depth vs case depth issue. I think that concerning the diagonal reflection that goes through the FF button on the screen, then extends into the case, the position of the centerline of this reflection shifts slightly as it passes from the screen to the case consistent with a slight change in depth of the surface.

digitalshawn
Mar 5, 2006, 06:42 PM
I don't understand the implications. If this is real, and they are not playing the trailer, then what are they playing. And if it is false, then what is the point of the timestamp at 17 minutes.

Ice Age 2 has not been released in the theaters yet.

DavidCar
Mar 5, 2006, 06:43 PM
Two of these have a couple of problems... if they were real these would not be in the photographs...


http://www.zigzap.net/ipodfakes/small_oops4.jpg (http://www.zigzap.net/ipodfakes/oops4.jpg)

I think this photo is taken in front of a beige box. The line of the color shift is the reflection of the top of the box, which is consistent with the reflection of the fingertip being in front of that line

digitalshawn
Mar 5, 2006, 06:43 PM
To me that reads 00:17.33, ad I cannot see the upper point on the colon.

That's a good point, I'll have to go back and watch the two trailers Apple has to see where the frame is at 17.33

whooleytoo
Mar 5, 2006, 06:44 PM
To me that reads 00:17.33, ad I cannot see the upper point on the colon.

a) I agree, it looks like 17.33 (seconds). This obviously means the 'columns' mean minutes, seconds and hundredths of seconds. No hours? The obvious implication - the new video iPod can't store an hour of video? This sucks, this is total BS. (I bet it has integrated graphics too!):p

b) I think it's funny the amount of time we (me included!) spend debating photos like these, which are almost certainly fakes; even if the product they're supposedly based on might well exist.

digitalshawn
Mar 5, 2006, 06:46 PM
b) I think it's funny the amount of time we (me included!) spend debating photos like these, which are almost certainly fakes; even if the product they're supposedly based on might well exist.

Oh I know, I'm waiting for the oscars and tired of checking fed ex for my delivery. So I thought i'd join in on the speculation.

jkelly888
Mar 5, 2006, 06:46 PM
the thing is, if looking at the time position, then if it was a 17 and a half minute long trailer wouldn't the dot be at the end? the pic is implying that the movie is about an hour to an hour and a half long

dornoforpyros
Mar 5, 2006, 06:48 PM
wow..people are still tricked by these fakes? I can't believe there is serious discussion about this.

DavidCar
Mar 5, 2006, 06:49 PM
That's a good point, I'll have to go back and watch the two trailers Apple has to see where the frame is at 17.33
FWIW, the frame I grabbed was 28 seconds into the trailer I was watching.

-- timed by hand. I don't have a built in counter in the display I'm watching

whooleytoo
Mar 5, 2006, 06:49 PM
Oh I know, I'm waiting for the oscars and tired of checking fed ex for my delivery. So I thought i'd join in on the speculation.

Me too! Shows how good Apple have been at generating hype around their products. Can you imagine there being a Creative group speculating & salivating over the release of the next model Rio?

Me neither.

CoMpX
Mar 5, 2006, 06:50 PM
the thing is, if looking at the time position, then if it was a 17 and a half minute long trailer wouldn't the dot be at the end? the pic is implying that the movie is about an hour to an hour and a half long

Excellent point, good thinking. Is there any way at all this person could have access to the full Ice Age 2 movie? Pirated download maybe?

digitalshawn
Mar 5, 2006, 06:51 PM
Me too! Shows how good Apple have been at generating hype around their products. Can you imagine there being a Creative group speculating & salivating over the release of the next model Rio?

Me neither.

You mean you're not this active on the creative rumor sites :confused: I thought everyone was just as into creative as apple!

derajfast
Mar 5, 2006, 06:52 PM
guys this is so obviously fake

the photoshop is good, but they got careless

how would steve jobs have an early copy of ice age 2?

if it was cars, or another unreleased pixar movie, maybe.....

but ice age 2 in an unreleased (released in like 4 months) video of a movie DIRECTLY in competition with pixar.......i HIGHLY doubt steve jobs has a copy of ice age 2, and then would use it for testing on the unreleased ipod av.....doesnt make sense

DavidCar
Mar 5, 2006, 06:52 PM
Excellent point, good thinking. Is there any way at all this person could have access to the full Ice Age 2 movie? Pirated download maybe?
So he was playing a pirated download on an unreleased iPod? curious.

DavidCar
Mar 5, 2006, 06:55 PM
...but ice age 2 in an unreleased (released in like 4 months) video of a movie DIRECTLY in competition with pixar.......i HIGHLY doubt steve jobs has a copy of ice age 2, and then would use it for testing on the unreleased ipod av.....doesnt make sense

Faking an unreleased movie doesn't make sense either, I don't think, if it was supposed to be an image of an existing iPod.

I don't have an answer for the missing headphone jack images.

And the movie is due out March 31

derajfast
Mar 5, 2006, 06:58 PM
I think what is shown as brush stokes in the curves-enhanced version is actually a reflection of some sort.

I'm usually the cynical one, but this is actually quite convincing.

The counter in the bottom left looks very similar, but not exactly like the one in Quicktime when running a movie full screen. So it's not just a direct screen grab from QT.

Going into Photoshop and futzing with contrast, curves, etc. doesn't yield any hints to it being photoshopped. Everything on screen adjusts evenly, which shows there was no obvious manipulation.

The only thing I can think of is to ask someone who owns the movie Ice Age to post an image from the 17 minute and 33 second mark.

this is from ice age 1, but that photo shows ice age 2, which is an unreleased movie by a COMPETING company to pixar.....dont think steve jobs has that movie yet

whooleytoo
Mar 5, 2006, 07:01 PM
guys this is so obviously fake

the photoshop is good, but they got careless

how would steve jobs have an early copy of ice age 2?

I think this is fake too; but even it were true, the likelihood of it being Jobs' iPod are slim to non-existent. This would be a prototype iPod in a lab somewhere in Cupertino that someone would test with whatever video was lying about; it would hardly matter to them whether it was Pixar or anyone else.

iIra
Mar 5, 2006, 07:32 PM
I don't look at the clickwheel when I'm navigating my ipod, so it wouldn't necessarily need the backlight.

Granted, the reason I don't look at it is because the clickwheel is a tactile experience. It has a different texture than the rest of the ipod and pushes just like a button. Having the clickwheel on the screen will completely eliminate the tactile sensation, so navigating this device without looking at it would be a nightmare. Even the 3G iPod had texture and recessed buttons that you could feel with your finger.

That alone casts the credibility of the product in this form into doubt.
You hinted at my first reaction when I saw these pictures. They're obviously fake because any touchscreen iPod wouldn't have a clickwheel. There's nothing to click. I'm envisioning a control scheme more like the 3G iPod, which was my favorite anyways.

Boingy
Mar 5, 2006, 07:37 PM
You hinted at my first reaction when I saw these pictures. They're obviously fake because any touchscreen iPod wouldn't have a clickwheel. There's nothing to click. I'm envisioning a control scheme more like the 3G iPod, which was my favorite anyways.

Are you kidding? Almost everyone I know who has tried the clickwheel ends up prefering them. It's almost compleatly intuitive as opposed to the 3G which is not that by about half.

~V

Ghibli
Mar 5, 2006, 08:11 PM
At present time the site is unreachable: the page says:

"This Account Has Been Suspended
Please contact the billing/support department as soon as possible."


Maybe Apple made them close? If so, then something true may be over there...

Any news from someone better informed?

kugino
Mar 5, 2006, 08:12 PM
ice age 2 hasen't been released!!! unless he works for him:confused:
ice age 2 was photoshopped, too ;)

ChrisH3677
Mar 5, 2006, 08:26 PM
So, after all the hoo-haa over the scratches on the nano screen, you all reckon
Apple are going to release unit for VIEWING VIDEO that depends on you rubbing your finger on it's screen???

Yeah right

And how long before that section of the screen becomes dulled and scratched?

A touch sensitive screen will end up as a debacle for Apple.

Boingy
Mar 5, 2006, 08:32 PM
So, after all the hoo-haa over the scratches on the nano screen, you all reckon
Apple are going to release unit for VIEWING VIDEO that depends on you rubbing your finger on it's screen???...

And how long before that section of the screen becomes dulled and scratched?

There is technology out there to protect the screen. Wired ran an article on it in early Feb (http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,70117-0.html?tw=rss.index). With that it would be easy and scratch resistant/proof. I do, however, see the problems posed by so much touching.

Maybe this is just my wishful thinking.

~V

JordanNZ
Mar 5, 2006, 08:36 PM
A clickwheel on a SCREEN!? Bahahaha. Nice photoshop skills.
But not very well thought out.

p0intblank
Mar 5, 2006, 08:52 PM
Wow, those pictures look amazing! :eek: I would believe them if this product was already out, but damn... these look absolutely believable. The form factor is perfect too. It'd fit right into the Universal Dock, but still have a big screen. :)

I would sell my 5G and buy this without a doubt! :D

Edit: Jordan, have you been following the Apple news lately? There have been many stories on Apple patenting touch-screen interfaces.

MacQuest
Mar 5, 2006, 08:56 PM
This is just lame.

Why would anyone assume that this spy shot [real or not] was taken by anyone from Apple?

If real, it could be any employee working for the manufacturers of the vPod. Maybe not even in this country. Of course they'd have to have an iPod HiFi and Nano lying around, but maybe they're all manufactured in the same place.

It's times like these that I look to the guidance of obscure and indecipherable clues to lend credibility to my conspiracy theories.

Did anyone ever find out what that Chinese writi... NVM.

AML707
Mar 5, 2006, 09:02 PM
I want it!!!! PLEASE APPLE! :)

themacman
Mar 5, 2006, 09:05 PM
So, after all the hoo-haa over the scratches on the nano screen, you all reckon
Apple are going to release unit for VIEWING VIDEO that depends on you rubbing your finger on it's screen???

Yeah right

And how long before that section of the screen becomes dulled and scratched?

A touch sensitive screen will end up as a debacle for Apple.
i agree. the one thing i hate about the color screens is that they show finger prings very easily, and maybe apple has some sort of protective display thing or something because having a very scratchable and finger print prone ipod is something that Apple does not want.

xterm
Mar 5, 2006, 09:27 PM
Ice Age 2 Trailer D from trailers.apple.com

http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/7690/iceage0pj.th.jpg (http://img207.imageshack.us/my.php?image=iceage0pj.jpg)

Boingy
Mar 5, 2006, 09:36 PM
Ice Age 2 Trailer D from trailers.apple.com

http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/7690/iceage0pj.th.jpg (http://img207.imageshack.us/my.php?image=iceage0pj.jpg)

And 28 seconds in, not 17.11... That's not looking good. Anyone have a bootleg version of the movie early and know if this scene is like 17 mins in? I'm still trying to hold out hope.

~V

EDIT: I'm not encouraging piracy. If, however, you've already done it, help us out.

chuckiej
Mar 5, 2006, 09:48 PM
a) I agree, it looks like 17.33 (seconds). This obviously means the 'columns' mean minutes, seconds and hundredths of seconds. No hours?

People, video is divided into Frames after Seconds. There are 30 frames per second. Therefore, 17:33 or whatever with 17 being seconds makes no sense. It would have to be 17 minutes and 33 seconds into an unreleased movie.

And no, even if Ice Age was made by Pixar, there's no way Steve would let an unreleased movie be on an iPod, even his own prototype. For instance, he's not sitting in his house trying out a possibly existing 6G iPod with the full version of Cars on it.

SpamJunkie
Mar 5, 2006, 10:10 PM
Any chance the Ice Age 2 trailer is included on some DVD and appears about 17 minutes in?

Dark Horse
Mar 5, 2006, 11:46 PM
At present time the site is unreachable: the page says:

"This Account Has Been Suspended
Please contact the billing/support department as soon as possible."


Maybe Apple made them close? If so, then something true may be over there...

Any news from someone better informed?

umm...is it mirrored anywhere? I want to see it. The fact that its been shut down seems like the best evidence for it being real we've seen.

swingerofbirch
Mar 5, 2006, 11:59 PM
If these are fake, then would that mean Apple would never be allowed to make this product since it would be copying the ideas of a proposed improvement to a product?

Or do you need to get proposed improvements passed by the Patent Office? And are you allowed to get patents on product improvements if the product is only made by one company and is not a general item (like a broom for example)?

berkleeboy210
Mar 6, 2006, 12:09 AM
Here we go again.... New Pics of these things will be posted from now until April 1

jacinto45
Mar 6, 2006, 01:18 AM
People, video is divided into Frames after Seconds. There are 30 frames per second. Therefore, 17:33 or whatever with 17 being seconds makes no sense. It would have to be 17 minutes and 33 seconds into an unreleased movie.



I disagree. How on earth would it be useful for an iPod to have frames? It would just be a distraction to see a number moving really fast without providing any information. So, if this somehow is real, I definitely think it's 17 minutes and 33 seconds into something. More likely, though, it isn't real at all.

rideahyperLite
Mar 6, 2006, 01:37 AM
And 28 seconds in, not 17.11... That's not looking good. Anyone have a bootleg version of the movie early and know if this scene is like 17 mins in? I'm still trying to hold out hope.

~V

EDIT: I'm not encouraging piracy. If, however, you've already done it, help us out.


get over it. a clickwheel on a touch screen can't work. so that means that these are fake. when you put your finger on the wheel to scroll the volume you are probably going to hit the play/pause button or whatnot. a clickwheel has to be able to move. these would have been more convincing using the 3g scheme. which would be dissapointing because it's nice to have a button to press that way you can easily pause or skip a track with the ipod still in your pocket, and without using a remote.

ToastMaster
Mar 6, 2006, 01:53 AM
Here we go again.... New Pics of these things will be posted from now until April 1

Of course, that's assuming that there WILL be a new iPod released on April 1. Steve Jobs only hinted at "something big" on the 1st. It could be absolutely anything.

But a new iPod would be a pretty logical guess, I suppose.

edit: Does anyone have any concrete evidence to support that there is a new iPod slated for release next month, or anytime soon?

Btw, these pics are totally mock-ups.

fulmer
Mar 6, 2006, 01:55 AM
get over it. a clickwheel on a touch screen can't work. so that means that these are fake. when you put your finger on the wheel to scroll the volume you are probably going to hit the play/pause button or whatnot. a clickwheel has to be able to move. these would have been more convincing using the 3g scheme. which would be dissapointing because it's nice to have a button to press that way you can easily pause or skip a track with the ipod still in your pocket, and without using a remote.

I'm not sure if the vPod is real or not, but I do know that there is feedback available for touch screens.
Alpine PulseTouch Feedback (http://www.alpine.co.jp/alpine/products/alpine_technology/system.html)

English Translation:
The irritation with conventional touch-panel control is canceled.
The ground-breaking interface which has implemented the comfortable operation by a more direct and secured feeling called "PulseTouch."
When you touch the screen, it will vibrate so that a screen will supply force feedback.
The screen will respond to the operators fingertip with a positive response.
A touch operation will not be recognized except when an icon is touched, since the oscillating pattern changes.
Misoperations are avoided because of this.
It corresponds also to a slide operation with a touch panel.
The feel of an operation and the function also evolved further.

Lumeswell
Mar 6, 2006, 02:17 AM
i agree. the one thing i hate about the color screens is that they show finger prings very easily, and maybe apple has some sort of protective display thing or something because having a very scratchable and finger print prone ipod is something that Apple does not want.

Ive been lurking for a while following the vPod rumours, and one thing I havent seen mentioned. What if it retained the click wheel, but on the back of the unit, with a visual representation on the screen of where your finger was.

Im not blessed with a full blown iPod, but I know I dont need to look at my Shuffle to use the controls, I think I could quickly get used to using a click wheel around the back while I watch the screen, particulalrly if it showed me on the screen where my finger was on the back. Not a mirror of the back, but like the unit was transparent, and you were seeing through the video to the wheel on the back - I hope that makes sense.

In this way you get all the functionality of the click wheel (with the feedback everyone is discussing) - without having to touch the screen, or put your fingers in front of what you are watching.

Thoughts?

jer2eydevil88
Mar 6, 2006, 02:45 AM
thought about that but it would increase the learning curve for apple products... it would not make it past R&D in ease of use...

iJaz
Mar 6, 2006, 04:58 AM
Yuck!
He needs to cut his finger nails!

Shattering Fast
Mar 6, 2006, 05:05 AM
Ice Age 2 trailer could be part of a trailer reel that comes shipped with the iPod or something.

But whatever, probably fake, ********** genius though.

Doraemon
Mar 6, 2006, 05:35 AM
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/796.gif

http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyarchives/796.html

;)

amthrupm
Mar 6, 2006, 05:38 AM
These chinese characters simply say "here" or "over here" (zhe4 bian1). Also, the handwriting looks very childish (like a year 1 chinese student).... not proof either way

It would be silly for me claim certainty, but my gut reaction is:

* Images that are probably real (55% chance): Only the original "classic" test-pattern photo with the Chinese characters that nobody has translated. (Despite the suspicions people have raised, some of which are legitimate. That video, however, was not convincing as has been discussed to death.)

* Images that are probably fake (75% chance): Everything seen since then, including these. But if so, these are well done at least. The "brush marks" don't bother me, but the UI seems odd to me.

That's not proof, just my gut reaction.

ejl10
Mar 6, 2006, 05:58 AM
Eminem's FACK is 3:25... the screen totals 4:25. In addition, it it were 2:16 in with 2:09 remaining, the progress bar would be approx. 1/2 way through, not 2/3 of the way through. I call shenanigans.

Hattig
Mar 6, 2006, 06:02 AM
If they're fake then it's a really good photoshop. The previous 'extended 5G screen' was very obvious because the perspective was wrong at the end of the screen, not so here. 3 shots too, which have to be consistent - although the point about the headphone jack not being visible on the first photo seems to be valid, although I can see something very faint there. Other people have mentioned that the picture stands up to standard analysis as well.

The whole Ice Age 2 thing is a pointless discussion. Why use this film in a mockup? It hasn't even been released yet, the scene shown might be from the trailer, so the wrong time would give it away as a fake, but if it is the full version ... from a DVD Screener perhaps - I'm sure the sort of person that reviews movies for the media would also get iPods and accessories to review as well, and watching the film on the iPod would be a sensible way to do both reviews. OTOH it is a coincidence that they took a picture that just happened to be in the trailer...

The second picture is hard to see what the film is - it's upside down, and it looks like some ruined buildings, possibly in black and white. Assuming that the pictures are real, then it could be from another upcoming movie (or DVD) release, any guesses?

Also regarding fack, yeah, it looks suspicious that the song is 3:25 and the display shows 4:25 - but this would be a rather amateur mistake to make. I guess that someone made a mockup of the UI in photoshop, then took a picture of the mockup on their monitor, then spliced that into the final picture very skillfully.

ipacmm
Mar 6, 2006, 08:02 AM
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyarchives/796.html

;)

That was funny.


In regard to the pictures, they look like a really nice photoshop job. I hope something like this is real because I do need a new ipod...

whooleytoo
Mar 6, 2006, 08:43 AM
People, video is divided into Frames after Seconds. There are 30 frames per second. Therefore, 17:33 or whatever with 17 being seconds makes no sense. It would have to be 17 minutes and 33 seconds into an unreleased movie.


In case you missed it, that was a joke..


And no, even if Ice Age was made by Pixar, there's no way Steve would let an unreleased movie be on an iPod, even his own prototype.

If Steve had that kind of control on the prototype iPods, there wouldn't be leaked shots of them on the net. (I'm still sceptical about these, but the 5G ones were real).

IF these are real, someone just transferred a movie (or trailer) to the iPod and took a few photos. Steve wasn't involved in picking the movie for the leak.

MarcelV
Mar 6, 2006, 09:18 AM
IF these are real, someone just transferred a movie (or trailer) to the iPod and took a few photos. Steve wasn't involved in picking the movie for the leak.I think you missed the point. Ice Age 2 hasn't been released..... and the trailer isn't 17:33......and the slider shows that it is approx. 1/6 into the movie....

Demon
Mar 6, 2006, 09:19 AM
i like the idea, but photoshopped iPods are old news...

i agree that the new "AV" better have other functions. preferably PDA functions that seamlessly syncs to iLife and iCal, mail... etc.

whooleytoo
Mar 6, 2006, 09:24 AM
I think you missed the point. Ice Age 2 hasn't been released..... and the trailer isn't 17:33......and the slider shows that it is approx. 1/6 into the movie....

;) And you missed mine - what Steve wants/allows on the prototype iPods isn't a factor here. Whoever leaked these photos (assuming for one moment that they are real) isn't exactly in the "I do what Steve tells me" mould!

Peace
Mar 6, 2006, 10:06 AM
What I wanna know is...

What about the "missing frames" ??

Is it a coverup?

Is MacShrine really suspended for posting real photos ?

What about the shadows?

And the missing headphone port ??


:rolleyes:

lozpop
Mar 6, 2006, 10:08 AM
And this?????:confused:

http://static.flickr.com/40/108735599_740704dfa2_o.jpg

icloud
Mar 6, 2006, 10:48 AM
I think that fact that around 100 14yr olds (from all the photos) own these little devices makes them umm...fake

wkhahn
Mar 6, 2006, 11:27 AM
If the controls "appear" when you touch the screen, how would the pictures show the controls? nobody is touching the screen.

The controls are in the photos for two reasons.
First, the movie is paused. A good reason for the controls to remain until the movie is unpaused.
Second, the music is playing. If in music mode, why not constantly display the touch-wheel?

Also, the edited photo showing the difference in contrast are in line with each other, and show a repeated pattern to them, suggesting shadows of a regualr pattern from above; maybe an exposed pipe, or tiled cielings.

Sorry if this has all been mentioned already.

ipacmm
Mar 6, 2006, 11:28 AM
And this?????:confused:

http://static.flickr.com/40/108735599_740704dfa2_o.jpg

That one looks really fake.

mashinhead
Mar 6, 2006, 11:29 AM
To me that reads 00:17.33, ad I cannot see the upper point on the colon.


If you watch the trailer it is that image about 17 seconds in.

Boingy
Mar 6, 2006, 11:31 AM
If you watch the trailer it is that image about 17 seconds in.

No, actually a screenshot from the trailer showes that frame just over 28 seconds in...

~V

modernpixel
Mar 6, 2006, 11:49 AM
The general concept for the iPod video - full bleed LCD touchscreen - has remained the same for all of the rumor mockups. But I can't get past a couple of things:

1.) Fingerprints. Fingerprints. Fingerprints. Would a user have to carry around an iCloth to continually wipe smudges off of the screen. Seems like a nit-pick...but think about what that would be like after a week of using the thing.

2.) Battery life - powering an LCD screen that size that has to be always-on AND running a processor that is playing video is going to require some serious battery power. I'm not sure that people should expect the form factor to be so small. Unless Apple has invented a new power source....maybe the iPods will run directly off of the power of Steve Jobs' ego.

3.) Is the demand there yet? Downloadable TV shows and music videos are now available at the iTMS, but is there any research that suggests that people are actually watching them portably, and not on their computers? I think for Apple to truly delve into this territory, hardware wise, there would need to be a clear demand for portable video -- otherwise I think we'll be looking at more of a focus on downloadable video content for playback on computer/TV.

Perhaps if the iPod Video offers other functions, as someone else suggested, it might appeal more broadly.

4.) When are they going to change the name of the iTunes Music Store? The brand doesn't make much sense anymore, especially if they bust it out into a full fledged movie/tv/music store. Even the name of the application - iTunes, doesn't work anymore.

CoMpX
Mar 6, 2006, 12:23 PM
And this?????:confused:

http://static.flickr.com/40/108735599_740704dfa2_o.jpg

This looks very fake. Notice the uneven border width along the bottom of the screen.

ValdeX
Mar 6, 2006, 02:32 PM
Another photo, very realistic to me...

http://static.flickr.com/38/108722216_5a5603b09a_o.jpg

darh
Mar 6, 2006, 02:35 PM
Another photo, very realistic to me...



is it from the same source as the other 3? look nice though!

Boingy
Mar 6, 2006, 02:38 PM
From www.macshrine.com which is now back up:

Many apologies for the downtime, Apple Legal sent a DCMA to our hosts who then suspended us for most of the morning. We have now removed all mention of the device from MacShrine. I’m sure that you can still find them on mirrors though *hint* Thankfully we can now leave this whole iPod mess behind us and hope another fiasco like this will never happen again, thousands of you must be so confused by all the images coming back and forth! Anyway, thanks for your understanding and we do hope some of you get the joke on the right…

To the right is a mini poster for Ice Age 2...

I'm kind of counfused since DCMA has no legal signifigance (http://www.acronymattic.com/results.aspx?q=DCMA). But I must stand in hope.

~V

dornoforpyros
Mar 6, 2006, 02:42 PM
Hey Kids,


THEY ARE ALL FAKE!

Do you think it's any coincidence that within 2 weeks of a video being released that shows how to fake this "iPod" that everyone with a copy of photoshop is releasing their own fake to pull one over on the mac community?

And think back, how many of the "leaked" apple/mac photos have been real? of the ones that have I don't believe any of them (correct me if I'm wrong) were nice clear photos taken in a users home?

It baffles me that you people even need to study these photos to know their fake. Please stop, your embarassing yourselves.

john159
Mar 6, 2006, 03:04 PM
whoa apple legal made them take it down... sounds wierd.... :rolleyes:

Ghibli
Mar 6, 2006, 03:23 PM
From www.macshrine.com which is now back up:

Many apologies for the downtime, Apple Legal sent a DCMA to our hosts who then suspended us for most of the morning. We have now removed all mention of the device from MacShrine.
~V

Very interesting... Apple legal moving very fast this time... gives room to think...

Boingy
Mar 6, 2006, 03:25 PM
THEY ARE ALL FAKE!


What about the video? http://youtube.com/watch?v=B1H_d_7CVPc

I hold out hope for it's all I can do.

~V

macdong
Mar 6, 2006, 03:33 PM
i think we should simply conclude that whatever rumors that come with pictures are fake :rolleyes:

TMA
Mar 6, 2006, 03:33 PM
Hmm that's very interesting that Apple legal are apparently getting involved. I say apparently, because normally Apple go after all sites hosting the image, not just one. Engadget and TUAW are still showing it.

3 Options -

* 1 - The image is of a real, currently unreleased Apple product.
* 2 - MacShrine are trying to make their story more believable (this could backfire in a big way)
* 3 - Apple are getting sick of all this forgery and speculation.

lorien
Mar 6, 2006, 03:34 PM
What about the video? http://youtube.com/watch?v=B1H_d_7CVPc

I hold out hope for it's all I can do.

~V

OMG, that video is so cool!! :eek: :)
Either these kids are getting real good at photoshopping or Steve's going to be real pissed soon!

(rubbing my paws together with glee)

[EDIT] Awww, I see it now, the reflection of the light doesn't move....another big fat FAKE :rolleyes:

TMA
Mar 6, 2006, 03:34 PM
What about the video? http://youtube.com/watch?v=B1H_d_7CVPc

I hold out hope for it's all I can do.

~V

Where/How did you come across that video?

Laslo Panaflex
Mar 6, 2006, 03:36 PM
There is this one too, which looks pretty real, but the author says it's fake.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=8zjcQvBpNec&search=video%20ipod

dornoforpyros
Mar 6, 2006, 03:36 PM
What about the video? http://youtube.com/watch?v=B1H_d_7CVPc

I hold out hope for it's all I can do.

~V

oh boy your right, because fake videos (http://www.zen89593.zen.co.uk/iwalk/) have never turned up before.

Also look at that video, sure he's scrolling over the virtual wheel but notice how nothing is really happening? Basically when he starts moving his thumb over the video editor just faded in some OS X looking stuff, yet would there be a volume indecator or video scrub bar appearing and doing something as well?

boncellis
Mar 6, 2006, 03:42 PM
A response from the legal department does not necessarily mean that the image is real, or even that it closely resembles something that Apple is developing. It could be nothing more than to maintain secrecy for an upcoming event.

How many people read through the posts here and elsewhere regarding the potential introduction of a similar iPod on the 28th and were immensely disappointed when it didn't happen? I imagine there were quite a few. Could Apple be taking preemptive action as to guard against another letdown (or backlash in some cases)?

That said, I don't think the photos are genuine, but find it interesting that so many have closely coordinated their designs of a new iPod as if to reach some sort of amateur consensus of what it "should" look like. I think some are either giving the folks who have created the mockups too much credit, or Mr. Ive too little.

lorien
Mar 6, 2006, 03:47 PM
oh boy your right, because fake videos (http://www.zen89593.zen.co.uk/iwalk/) have never turned up before.

Also look at that video, sure he's scrolling over the virtual wheel but notice how nothing is really happening? Basically when he starts moving his thumb over the video editor just faded in some OS X looking stuff, yet would there be a volume indecator or video scrub bar appearing and doing something as well?

I guess it's logical that if a movie is playing then scrolling the wheel would be volume adjustment.
What's with this guy and his flashlight-in-the-broomcupboard fetish?

mainstreetmark
Mar 6, 2006, 03:50 PM
How many people read through the posts here and elsewhere regarding the potential introduction of a similar iPod on the 28th and were immensely disappointed when it didn't happen? I imagine there were quite a few. Could Apple be taking preemptive action as to guard against another letdown (or backlash in some cases)?

Yeah, I agree. We all get worked up for something that just might be technologically impossible to produce in that form factor (since even decoding the video would require more battery), and if a real video iPod ever comes out, and it's 15% thicker than any of these mockups, then the "Negative Rumor Rating" will soar.

Much like that Hi-Fi thing. I don't like it, but I would have liked it more had it been a total surprise. Instead all those rumors about it being "totally unique" made me imagine all sorts of magic, when, in fact, "totally unique" translated to "runs on batteries, too"

Boingy
Mar 6, 2006, 04:14 PM
Where/How did you come across that video?

It was on digg.com for a few and I came across it there.

~V

Boingy
Mar 6, 2006, 04:21 PM
Yeah, I agree. We all get worked up for something that just might be technologically impossible to produce in that form factor (since even decoding the video would require more battery), and if a real video iPod ever comes out, and it's 15% thicker than any of these mockups, then the "Negative Rumor Rating" will soar.

I would have to call shenanigans on that. Even if it had to be 25% thicker than my 4G 40GB model and a little bigger in the othe 2D I would jump at one of these. I expect a good chunk of folk are the same way.

That having been said, methinks that there will not be as big of a market for this device as the standard iPod. You can't watch it when you drive for one. There are a lot of tasks where we can use auditory distraction while needing visual focus and the iPod can provide that. On the other hand, unless you are a total info-slut it's hard to walk and watch a movie/read a book.

~V

milo2020
Mar 6, 2006, 05:30 PM
No one else noticed how bad the reflection is of the thumb in the second photo? Definite fakes

Sam*
Mar 6, 2006, 05:37 PM
Sorry if it has been metioned..

but all the fake photos use feel good inc by gorillaz the same as the advertisement for the ipod 5g and at the exact same time as the advertisements for the ipod 5g (3:41)

Boingy
Mar 6, 2006, 05:41 PM
Sorry if it has been metioned..

but all the fake photos use feel good inc by gorillaz the same as the advertisement for the ipod 5g and at the exact same time as the advertisements for the ipod 5g (3:41)

Interesting, and I don't recall this being mentioned. Thanks for the insight... and dashing my hopes. :p

~V

Sam*
Mar 6, 2006, 05:45 PM
Interesting, and I don't recall this being mentioned. Thanks for the insight... and dashing my hopes. :p

~V

Hey somethng must be coming as on the Buyers Guide on here it now says for the ipod

Don't Buy - Updates soon

HarrySlone
Mar 6, 2006, 05:51 PM
Fake or not its cool looking and i think that if apple introduced an ipod like this ALOT of people would buy one, myself included

mojohanna
Mar 6, 2006, 05:53 PM
Thats a really good point. The only thing I could think of is if it has the 2 second delay type thing when you change the volume.

If anyone has the movie Ice Age maybe you could go though it and see if the scrubber is in the same spot as the iPod shows.
Can't do that. Its Ice Age 2. I don't even think it is in the theaters yet. Another cause for suspicion.

CoMpX
Mar 6, 2006, 05:55 PM
Hey somethng must be coming as on the Buyers Guide on here it now says for the ipod

Don't Buy - Updates soon

That doesn't necessarily mean anything because those ratings are just based on simple time checking programs that see how long it has been since an update, and it posts the appropriate response.

jwhitnah
Mar 6, 2006, 06:14 PM
as i said earlier, i am VERY skeptical because Apple usually doesn't let stuff like this get out but if it is fake, whoever did it did a REALLY good job... all the angles are even and stuff and the shot of it at an angle does the color-changing ting that LCD's do so--very intriguing.

Looks real to me. I only hedge because people are so good at create BS. I honestly (oh yeah sure you did) thought the last attempt with color bars looked fake.

SilvorX
Mar 6, 2006, 08:00 PM
there's always the times when people cry out "it's fake!" when it turns out the device is not fake at all, we'll find out sooner or later if it's fake or not, if it's not around by June, then it's definitely fake, you never know until it's actually released

Phat_Pat
Mar 6, 2006, 08:39 PM
EDITED:

apple legal sent a letter removing this post. We apologize.

Boingy
Mar 6, 2006, 08:43 PM
Saw a post on gizmodo about the video and someone said 'I have proof it's real; IM me at tu madre PWN.' The following is our chat log:

Me (9:36:20 PM): hey, this may be a bit random but i saw your post on gizmodo and i'd kinda like to hear the proof...
tu madre PWN (9:36:40 PM): i'm not showing proof anymore, because everyone in the "proof" chatroom was pissing me off and i'm too lazy& busy to explain it 500 times right now.
tu madre PWN (9:36:41 PM): sorry.
tu madre PWN (9:36:47 PM): its not your fault.
Me (9:36:51 PM): ...
Me (9:36:52 PM): dubious
tu madre PWN (9:37:28 PM): i have proof, but like i said, chatroom, stupid, busy.
Me (9:37:35 PM): copy and paste
Me (9:38:04 PM): fyi it's kinda a dick thing to do to say 'ask me for proof' and then tell folk who ask for it to sod off
Me (9:39:49 PM): ah and the truth comes out; no proof it is
Me (9:39:54 PM): not cool buddy
tu madre PWN (9:39:58 PM): dude.
tu madre PWN (9:40:00 PM): ****.
Me (9:40:06 PM): insightful

That's depressing. Here's hoping he wasn't some dude on a power trip.

~V

Boingy
Mar 6, 2006, 08:44 PM
EDITED:

apple legal sent a letter removing this post. We apologize.

Haha!

~V

TheDulcimer
Mar 6, 2006, 09:23 PM
http://static.flickr.com/42/108288441_81be7caced_o.jpg

aa...
Mar 6, 2006, 09:45 PM
I'm convinced.

it looks great! exactly how i'd imagine Mr. Ive to interpret the brief.

start saving people!

dornoforpyros
Mar 6, 2006, 09:52 PM
http://static.flickr.com/42/108288441_81be7caced_o.jpg

please stop...for the love of god make it stop...ok, we get it, everyone knows photoshop and can duplicate the screen to make it streatch across the iPod. I'm really find it sickening that everyone is grabbing for their 15 seconds of "could it be real?" fame.

ToastMaster
Mar 6, 2006, 10:04 PM
Wow.

That one has to be the worst mockup I've ever seen.

Boingy
Mar 6, 2006, 10:05 PM
Saddness... The second images, with the thumb, has been shown false. The original is here (http://www.skattertech.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/03/ipodavfake.jpg)

That bodes poorly for the rest.

~V

arn
Mar 6, 2006, 10:06 PM
Saddness... The second images, with the thumb, has been shown false. The original is here (http://www.skattertech.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/03/ipodavfake.jpg)

That bodes poorly for the rest.

~V

That can't be the original. The video ipod image has more data (more of the fingers)

http://guides.macrumors.com/images/c/c8/2fullipodav.jpg

arn

TheDulcimer
Mar 6, 2006, 10:14 PM
Wow.

That one has to be the worst mockup I've ever seen.

No no no, THIS http://static.flickr.com/43/108849427_12e7905e3d.jpg is the worst one you've ever seen. :D

Boingy
Mar 6, 2006, 10:16 PM
That can't be the original. The video ipod image has more data (more of the fingers)

http://guides.macrumors.com/images/c/c8/2fullipodav.jpg

arn

You are being funny right...? The term crop has a meaning to you, yes?

~V

TheDulcimer
Mar 6, 2006, 10:26 PM
please stop...for the love of god make it stop...ok, we get it, everyone knows photoshop and can duplicate the screen to make it streatch across the iPod. I'm really find it sickening that everyone is grabbing for their 15 seconds of "could it be real?" fame.

I am sorry Mr. Donoforpyros. I did not realize anyone would get upset at my adding to the pool of ipod fakes. I will do my best next time to make it convince you its real so we don't have this happen again.

dornoforpyros
Mar 6, 2006, 10:43 PM
I am sorry Mr. Donoforpyros. I did not realize anyone would get upset at my adding to the pool of ipod fakes. I will do my best next time to make it convince you its real so we don't have this happen again.


no no, it's ok. The reason I'm so up tight about this is...well. I've got go the new iPod and I thought I was the only one:

Flying Llama
Mar 6, 2006, 10:45 PM
they're all fake i tell you! all of them!


:)

Shamus
Mar 6, 2006, 10:52 PM
That can't be the original. The video ipod image has more data (more of the fingers)

http://guides.macrumors.com/images/c/c8/2fullipodav.jpg

arn

Couldnt the 'original' photo just been cropped??

socamx
Mar 7, 2006, 12:39 AM
All this iPod AV/Video/whatever stuff is getting old. Maybe if people stop responding to all these pictures, then maybe the people will stop making so many fakes?

Talk about beating a horse to death...

lorien
Mar 7, 2006, 02:18 AM
no no, it's ok. The reason I'm so up tight about this is...well. I've got go the new iPod and I thought I was the only one:

Watch Steve use this pic in his next keynote :rolleyes:

MrCrowbar
Mar 7, 2006, 03:58 AM
http://static.flickr.com/38/108722216_5a5603b09a_o.jpg

This one is defietely fake. I did a mockup weeks ago (see my first posts on macrumors) and the screen content was stolen from my pic! Anyway, it was stolen by 4 mockups I've seen so far.

Xidius
Mar 7, 2006, 10:02 AM
Looks like despite the DMCA Macshrine still has new images of the iPod AV being uploaded:

http://www.macshrine.com/gallery/browseimages.php?c=6

- Xidius

ValdeX
Mar 7, 2006, 10:28 AM
This one is defietely fake.

Hahahaha, of course is fake, I know because I did it.



...the screen content was stolen from my pic! Anyway, it was stolen by 4 mockups I've seen so far.

Stolen content??? hahahaha, so sue me!!! ...first, the images that I used are from the original iPod Video photos from the apple.com website, not yours.

I made this to demostrate how easy is make a "realistic" image, because I think that all are fakes!!!

TheDulcimer
Mar 7, 2006, 10:35 AM
no no, it's ok. The reason I'm so up tight about this is...well. I've got go the new iPod and I thought I was the only one:

You know, theres a real market for these photos, maybe we should make some kind of website where people pay us to show them all the ipods they want to see.

And and people could make requests for what they want in the next version, and magically it would be online within the hour! We could already have the leaked photos of the 24th gen ipod people!

-The Dulcimer-

(in case you didn't already know, Dulcimer is the codename of the first ipod)

Xidius
Mar 7, 2006, 10:41 AM
Apparently you guys are too lazy to click a link. :P Here's what appears to be the 5th image in this collection:

http://xidi.us/temp/5-1.jpg (http://xidi.us/temp/5.jpg)
click = full size

http://www.macshrine.com/gallery/showimage.php?i=81&c=6

- Xidius

dornoforpyros
Mar 7, 2006, 10:42 AM
You know, theres a real market for these photos, maybe we should make some kind of website where people pay us to show them all the ipods they want to see.

And and people could make requests for what they want in the next version, and magically it would be online within the hour! We could already have the leaked photos of the 24th gen ipod people!

-The Dulcimer-

(in case you didn't already know, Dulcimer is the codename of the first ipod)

that's actually not a bad idea, I don't know if people would pay but we could run google ads. We could call it iLeakedPics.com

CoMpX
Mar 7, 2006, 10:44 AM
That looks incredibly real, but I guess it would be easier to photoshop since there isn't much there besides metal and engravings. Still, it looks so real. Anyone agree/disagree?

DavidCar
Mar 7, 2006, 10:50 AM
...

I made this to demostrate how easy is make a "realistic" image, because I think that all are fakes!!!

I've not checked this thread for a while so I'm not up on the current discussion, but I don't think your image has the same complexity as the original three images, with the reflections, etc. So I suppose that makes this a discussion about irreducible complexity, that an image is so complex that it cannot be created by doing simple photoshop manipulations.

TheDulcimer
Mar 7, 2006, 10:55 AM
That looks incredibly real, but I guess it would be easier to photoshop since there isn't much there besides metal and engravings. Still, it looks so real. Anyone agree/disagree?

I don't know much about how apple does Model #'s and Serial #'s, but that one has the exact same area of numbers to my 5th Gen. i could be wrong but i think apple might change things up a little if it were a new product.

-The Dulcimer-

ValdeX
Mar 7, 2006, 11:05 AM
I've not checked this thread for a while so I'm not up on the current discussion, but I don't think your image has the same complexity as the original three images, with the reflections, etc. So I suppose that makes this a discussion about irreducible complexity, that an image is so complex that it cannot be created by doing simple photoshop manipulations.

Yeah, I know that, but my image was done in 12 1/2 minutes, just imagine somebody with advanced PS abilities can do with more free time...

ToastMaster
Mar 7, 2006, 06:42 PM
That looks incredibly real, but I guess it would be easier to photoshop since there isn't much there besides metal and engravings. Still, it looks so real. Anyone agree/disagree?

That pic would not be hard at all to make. I'm not very photo-editing proficient, but I estimate very little challenge in modifying a few letters on a pic of the back of a 40gig.

HarrySlone
Mar 7, 2006, 06:49 PM
With all these pictures and vidos coming out and all of them being so similar , I think something like this has got to be coming, and if apple haddent planed on it, they have to have seen all the interest in this type of ipod.

flir67
Mar 7, 2006, 10:32 PM
Apparently you guys are too lazy to click a link. :P Here's what appears to be the 5th image in this collection:

http://xidi.us/temp/5-1.jpg (http://xidi.us/temp/5.jpg)
click = full size

http://www.macshrine.com/gallery/showimage.php?i=81&c=6

- Xidius


unless there is some alien light absorbing force I've never seen a towel absord a camera flash that close to it. the metal backing shows the flash of the camera but someone forgot to include the effect into the background. the towel shows no light from the flash

its a so much a fake....

Flying Llama
Mar 7, 2006, 11:29 PM
unless there is some alien light absorbing force I've never seen a towel absord a camera flash that close to it. the metal backing shows the flash of the camera but someone forgot to include the effect into the background. the towel shows no light from the flash

its a so much a fake....

no, that's the real part. i think that semidisk of darkness on the bottom could just be the lens getting in the way of the flash (on a dSLR)

my $0.02

Xidius
Mar 8, 2006, 01:30 AM
unless there is some alien light absorbing force I've never seen a towel absord a camera flash that close to it. the metal backing shows the flash of the camera but someone forgot to include the effect into the background. the towel shows no light from the flash

its a so much a fake....

So you think the shammy thing is photoshopped?

- Xidius

daver11
Mar 8, 2006, 02:12 AM
I apologize if someone has already mentioned this - I didn't take the time to read all the posts.

I am professional designer and photoshop expert. I thought it would be interesting to see if I could tell if any of the photos were fakes. I grabbed the first photo in the gallery and ran a simple test on it - it is absolutely a fake.

When a photo is taken with a digital camera set to capture the photo in the JPG format, compression artifacts are created that are normally invisible to the naked eye. By adjusting the saturation and lightness of a photo, you can make these compression artifacts visible.

I took the first photo in the gallery [ http://guides.macrumors.com/Image:1fullipodav.jpg ] and made a simple adjustment: In Photoshop, open the "Hue/Saturation" menu and set the saturation to 100 and the lightness to 40. You can instantly see the compression artifacts (they appear as a pixelated pattern). You will notice that the entire image contains these compression artifacts, except for the image of the video. If the image of the video where part of the original scene that was photographed, compression artifacts would be visible. Since they are not, the image of the video must have been added. Therefore, the photo is a fake.

I have attached the image with my adjustment made, showing the compression artifacts.

daver11
Mar 8, 2006, 02:29 AM
Fake

You can see the pixelated transition from orange to yellow and yellow to green in the background. If the video were part of the same original photo, the transition from blue to violet would be just as pixelated.

Pixelization is not evident in the skin because the color is uniform.

daver11
Mar 8, 2006, 02:30 AM
Fake, too

daver11
Mar 8, 2006, 02:32 AM
Inconclusive

daver11
Mar 8, 2006, 02:33 AM
Also fake

daver11
Mar 8, 2006, 02:33 AM
fake, too

daver11
Mar 8, 2006, 02:36 AM
Some of the above images have compression artifacts throughout the image - it is the differing size of the artifacts that betray the fact that more than one original image was used to create the final image.

Xidius
Mar 8, 2006, 02:44 AM
You will notice that the entire image contains these compression artifacts, except for the image of the video. If the image of the video where part of the original scene that was photographed, compression artifacts would be visible. Since they are not, the image of the video must have been added. Therefore, the photo is a fake.

I hate to argue with self-proclaimed Photoshop experts, but..

The method you used to reveal the "flaws" only works with like-tones with like-complexity. As you can plainly see, there is a huge lack of compression artifacts on the white surface in comparison to the nano. Now look at the black boarder around the LCD on the iPod AV. Hey look! The same level of compression as the nano! Because they are both the same tone. The Nano is not the same tone as the LCD itself however.

If you check out the upper right of the screen, where it appears to be dipping toward negative, and consequently becomes slightly darker, you'll see the screen does in fact have the same compression as everything else in it's tone-range.

If your argument was sound, then that would mean the iPod AV itself (screen and boarder included, image being displayed excluded) is genuine.

IN ADDITION, artifact size is not consistent throughout images. They differ by complexity. Large mostly-consistent surface? Large artifacts. LCD displaying a complex movie? Small artifacts. As seen here. (http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=42696&d=1141806578)

Sorry, but your "evidence" cannot be used in this case.

- Xidius

Sogo
Mar 8, 2006, 04:00 AM
There is a nice ipod video, video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zjcQvBpNec&feature=Views&page=1&t=t&f=b), going around.

mackeeper
Mar 8, 2006, 05:04 AM
L O S T + iPod = :D

djdarlek
Mar 8, 2006, 05:08 AM
its a so much a fake....

I don't know man, while I appreciate your comments about the flash, to me this really does intruige me a LOT more than the last 3 pics... there are some really subtle differences that I don't think anyone has mentioned here yet?

First off, compared to my 30gig Video iPod there are quite a few differences to the back. Now I appreciate that people can Photoshop all this stuff, but usually with mockups and fakes it's their willingness to replicate the original product... but with this latest pic I notice that they have boldly chosen to add a few random symbols.

For one, it's a 40gig iPod. Why go to all that effort to change something?
The iPod AV thing seems to have the same great proportioning that most Apple stuff has.. it almost looks spot on. I don't know where the whole iPod AV thing came from but to me it seems like it's an obvious choice.

The copyright is for 2006... my latest gen 'pod says 2005...

What are those 3 other symbols near the 'CE' mark? I think these may be HUGE clues. Like the 'FC' could be 'feather control' or something...

And the EMC No: 2465?

Model No. A1185?

Squire
Mar 8, 2006, 06:14 AM
What are those 3 other symbols near the 'CE' mark? I think these may be HUGE clues. Like the 'FC' could be 'feather control' or something...

They are all regulatory bodies: the FCC, CE, and VCCI. I think they were included on the nano as well. But I agree that it looks real. (Of course I wouldn't know a photoshopped iPod if I tripped over one.)

Squire

<edit> FCC stands for the Federal Communications Commission (US), CE stands for Conformité Européenne (European), and VCCI stands for Voluntary Control Council for Interference by Information Technology (Japanese).

djdarlek
Mar 8, 2006, 06:45 AM
They are all regulatory bodies: the FCC, CE, and VCCI. I think they were included on the nano as well. But I agree that it looks real. (Of course I wouldn't know a photoshopped iPod if I tripped over one.)

Squire

<edit> FCC stands for the Federal Communications Commission (US), CE stands for Conformité Européenne (European), and VCCI stands for Voluntary Control Council for Interference by Information Technology (Japanese).

Nice one :) Sadly over here in the UK it looks like we only have the CE symbol, alongside a 'don't bin your iPod' logo... i mean seriously like we need to be told that! lol

sishaw
Mar 8, 2006, 07:36 AM
Voila!

42706

jblodgett
Mar 8, 2006, 10:11 AM
There is a nice ipod video, video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zjcQvBpNec&feature=Views&page=1&t=t&f=b), going around.


Of course, the guy says below -- it's a fake, something he made.

flir67
Mar 8, 2006, 11:02 AM
isn't there a way to search the fcc or the ce websites for new products to make sure they meet market production safety guidelines. If I remember right a few years ago some company was faking the fcc item numbers and they got caught because their product was causing interferce with other items around it.

I think there's a way to search for it on the gov websites but not sure which one. if you can find it , you might be able to prove if the ipod is real or not.

just my .02 cents

:)

Titony
Mar 8, 2006, 11:08 AM
This is my dream :

http://homepage.mac.com/tonytigrato/BloggyTony/page3/page2/page2.html

No foolish Ipod, only dual screen:cool:

waveman216
Mar 8, 2006, 01:49 PM
I've been reading these arguments on the validity of these photos since that last batch went out and thought I'd throw in my opinion for my first comment on here.

First photo with the test bars: Absolute 100% fake. Wished it wasn't at the time, but if you look at how people disected it in photoshop showing the jpeg artifacting it's obviously a fake.

This new round was either done by a GREAT photoshopper or it's real. And trust me, there are people out there that would be able to composite an image on photoshop to the point where you wouldn't be able to tell unless you REALLY know what you're doing.

I'm voting this new round is real. Look at the artifacting where the screen blends to shadow and then to the edge of the ipod. The artifacting continues through this area without any obvious break. There's no evidence showing where the "fake" screen was doctored into the image.

Like I said, someone is either a serious professional with way too much time on his hands or these are real.

Boingy
Mar 8, 2006, 02:16 PM
This is my dream :

http://homepage.mac.com/tonytigrato/BloggyTony/page3/page2/page2.html

No foolish Ipod, only dual screen:cool:

And that would be a) huge and b) more expensive than sin. And c) so amazing Jobs would have a pile of first born children.


~V

arn
Mar 8, 2006, 02:20 PM
I apologize if someone has already mentioned this - I didn't take the time to read all the posts.


Interesting analysis.

Can you do the same analysis with these photos (iPod 5G and PowerMac G4 Quicksilver) which are known to be real:

http://guides.macrumors.com/Gallery_of_Apple_Leaks_and_Prototypes

daver11
Mar 8, 2006, 02:54 PM
Interesting analysis.

Can you do the same analysis with these photos (iPod 5G and PowerMac G4 Quicksilver) which are known to be real:

http://guides.macrumors.com/Gallery_of_Apple_Leaks_and_Prototypes

OK - I did the adjustment to the video-iPod image. Using my original reasoning, the image would be a fake. If the image is actually real (and not a fake image of a real product), then my analysis may be wrong.

However, I still think that the pixilation in different parts of the image would be the same if the different parts were both part of the same scene - see below.

Although I am a Photoshop expert (its what I've done for a living since 1991), I have no real expertise in identifying fake images. I'm just using my experience and best judgment.

I hope I am wrong and the images are real - I WANT ONE!!!!

Xidius
Mar 8, 2006, 03:22 PM
I hope I am wrong

Oh don't worry, you are (referring to the iPod AV photo.)

See, you confuse material with tone. Yes they are both LCDs, and they both have different levels of compression. But by that logic, the iPods are made of the same material, so wouldn't the white bezel be as distorted as the nano's?

Once again: Compression differs by tone and complexity. Not material.

Note: I am not saying the pictures are genuine. I am just saying the compression is accurate. It's very possible all compression took place after editing.

- Xidius

Anonymous Freak
Mar 8, 2006, 03:57 PM
I'm voting this new round is real. Look at the artifacting where the screen blends to shadow and then to the edge of the ipod. The artifacting continues through this area without any obvious break. There's no evidence showing where the "fake" screen was doctored into the image.

That's the joy of JPEG.

If you create the images as RAW OR TIFF, edit as TIFF, then save to a highly-compressed JPEG, the JPEG artifacting will be uniform and will help disguise any doctoring deficiencies. The fact that the JPEG artifacts cross over any logical edit boundary just means that it was JPEG compressed AFTER editing, not before.

What I would want to see is a JPEG of the device with proper EXIF tags showing that the JPEG came directly from a digital camera, with no editing. (Or, even better, a RAW image with proper EXIF tags.)

Yes, it's possible to edit EXIF tags, and yes, if someone was good enough to fake this kind of photo, they probably would be able to fake the EXIF tags, too... But it would be better than a random high-compressions JPEG.

Xidius
Mar 8, 2006, 04:02 PM
That's the joy of JPEG.

If you create the images as RAW OR TIFF, edit as TIFF, then save to a highly-compressed JPEG, the JPEG artifacting will be uniform and will help disguise any doctoring deficiencies. The fact that the JPEG artifacts cross over any logical edit boundary just means that it was JPEG compressed AFTER editing, not before.

What I would want to see is a JPEG of the device with proper EXIF tags showing that the JPEG came directly from a digital camera, with no editing. (Or, even better, a RAW image with proper EXIF tags.)

Yes, it's possible to edit EXIF tags, and yes, if someone was good enough to fake this kind of photo, they probably would be able to fake the EXIF tags, too... But it would be better than a random high-compressions JPEG.

Just to clarify, the images that were posted had very very low compression.

- Xidius

arn
Mar 8, 2006, 05:36 PM
OK - I did the adjustment to the video-iPod image. Using my original reasoning, the image would be a fake. If the image is actually real (and not a fake image of a real product), then my analysis may be wrong.

The 5G iPod is almost certainly a real picture. You could also do the same analysis on any random photo around of an iPod I suppose

arn

daver11
Mar 8, 2006, 05:51 PM
The 5G iPod is almost certainly a real picture. You could also do the same analysis on any random photo around of an iPod I suppose

arn

I really should have started by taking a "control" image (in JPG format) of a video iPod playing a video (preferably on a colored background).

I don't have a video iPod, but if someone else can provide a control image I will perform the test on it. If the artifact pixelazation is not uniform in the control image, that would prove that my original analysis is wrong.

Of course, even if my original analysis is wrong, that does not prove that the image is genuine.

moosecat
Mar 9, 2006, 09:16 AM
Macshrine says "screw the DMCA" and has posted another purported iPodAV image. (See http://www.macshrine.com/2006/03/07/screw-the-dmca-new-picture/.)

Edit: Turns out the pic is a couple days old and already in the MacRumors gallery. No breaking news then. Carry on.

jblodgett
Mar 9, 2006, 01:07 PM
How about this?


http://youtube.com/watch?v=B1H_d_7CVPc


Although - it doesn't seem that him running his thumb over it really DOES anything...

MarcelV
Mar 9, 2006, 01:26 PM
Although - it doesn't seem that him running his thumb over it really DOES anything...
Adjusting volume maybe? It did something, a top bar did show....

jblodgett
Mar 9, 2006, 01:54 PM
Adjusting volume maybe? It did something, a top bar did show....


yeah-- but it doesn't have a speaker - so what good would that do to adjust the volume like that?

Boingy
Mar 9, 2006, 02:11 PM
yeah-- but it doesn't have a speaker - so what good would that do to adjust the volume like that?

Headphones......

~V

jblodgett
Mar 9, 2006, 02:36 PM
Headphones......

~V

I am not seeing any in the picture.

MarcelV
Mar 9, 2006, 02:44 PM
I am not seeing any in the picture.
Not saying this is real, but a Bluetooth headset maybe? Wouldn't surprise me a bit.
And yes, I think this video is fake, but I think Apple's version is very close to this one.

Boingy
Mar 9, 2006, 04:22 PM
I am not seeing any in the picture.

I can still play music and mess with volume on my iPod without headphones plugged in, it just doesn't audio out to anywhere but I see what you're saying.

Re: Bluetooth~
I don't see that as viable because it's just one more bell/whistle that they have to cram into the unit and may or may not be used by all the users. They tend to keep stuff like that to a minimum which is what we love about the iPod in the first place.

~V

MarcelV
Mar 9, 2006, 05:20 PM
IRe: Bluetooth~
I don't see that as viable because it's just one more bell/whistle that they have to cram into the unit and may or may not be used by all the users. They tend to keep stuff like that to a minimum which is what we love about the iPod in the first place.Reason I think it will be bluetooth is that the Portalplayer PP5022 has a bluetooth controller. In that case, the headset won't be an add-on, it will be standard. because it will be initially the high-end iPod, the extra cost can easily be integrated into the price and margins.

Boingy
Mar 9, 2006, 05:28 PM
Reason I think it will be bluetooth is that the Portalplayer PP5022 has a bluetooth controller. In that case, the headset will will not be an add-on, it will be standard. because it will be initially the high-end iPod, the extra cost can easily be integrated into the price and margins.

How much would the Bluetooth hardware cost Apple? Add 25% to that, how much more then would it cost me (an arbitrary consumer)? That additional cost is why I would lean towards thinking that they wouldn't include it, but I could be entirely wrong. A Bluetooth headset would be fun, at least I won't be walking around talking to myself like most of the headsets folk have.

~V

knackroller
Mar 9, 2006, 07:37 PM
My guess is that the "virtual scrollwheel" will not be as sensitive as the normal ipods. I am using an O2 XDA Mini and already have the "large" screen with on screen buttons/scroll.



======================
Free music downloads http://www.apple-music.co.uk/

Zoch
Mar 9, 2006, 07:45 PM
How would a video like that be done? I think I know a way, but I don't know if it would work or if it is viable for your average joe.

1. Take an iPod and put a green sticker or contact paper or something on in the shape of the large screen.
2. Film the action of the thumb, and chroma key the "screen" out.
3. In a 3D program (I know this can easily be done in Maya) create a plane surface, and using an image plane, place a video file on the plane. On the plane's material properties, add a glow effect to simulate the backlighting. Create another plane and extrude it to the thickness of the LCD screen. Use a transparent Blinn texture with a light reflectivity for the plastic screen.
4. Create an animation of the plane moving in the same manner as the video clip (this seems the most difficult, but perhaps small reference markers could be used and later edited out. Since the iPod is slightly matte white, it doesn't seem difficult to edit it out) and use a video editing program to place that animation on the chroma keyed surface.

What do y'all think?

Wardofsky
Mar 9, 2006, 11:48 PM
I've been sent some photos of what I believe could possibly be the new iPod AV.

http://www.mytophat.com/200603/ipodvideo.jpg (http://www.mytophat.com/archives/2006/03/leaked_photo_new_ipod.php)

However, on a more serious and less photoshopped note, Engadget (http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/09/igame-supposedly-in-april-egm-scan/) is dismissing an article about "iGame" from a supposed scanned article from Electronic Gaming Monthly. (Station A (http://stationa.net/?p=216))

dejo
Mar 9, 2006, 11:57 PM
How would a video like that be done? I think I know a way, but I don't know if it would work or if it is viable for your average joe.

1. Take an iPod and put a green sticker or contact paper or something on in the shape of the large screen.
...

What do y'all think?

Okay, start with something like this:

john159
Mar 10, 2006, 06:55 AM
However, on a more serious and less photoshopped note, Engadget (http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/09/igame-supposedly-in-april-egm-scan/) is dismissing an article about "iGame" from a supposed scanned article from Electronic Gaming Monthly. (Station A (http://stationa.net/?p=216))

i saw this but if you read later down like update 9... its apparently a joke

UPDATE # 9 - Thanks to the many readers who have written in to fill me in on some of EGM’s past April Fool’s Day plants. Given the questionable details presented in the article (firewire on a new device when we are seeing Apple phase out firewire connectivity on new models of iPods?), and the fact it seems very highly unlikely that EGM would break the news on a release as big as this as opposed to his Steveness, it would appear that EGM has decided to pull the collective leg of the Mac faithful. Keep an eye on 1UP.com, EGM’s parent website, to see if they own up to their trickery.

had me going for a sec... games to download in itunes.... pretty cool:rolleyes:

djdarlek
Mar 13, 2006, 04:46 PM
How about this?


http://youtube.com/watch?v=B1H_d_7CVPc


Although - it doesn't seem that him running his thumb over it really DOES anything...

I'm going to go on record and say that it's the real deal. It just strikes me a little odd that if someone was going to spoof a video that they'd use such terrible footage in the first place. It is also larger than an iPod. This would make sense for it is still smaller than most portable video players, but this looks just the right size. It's also got full 16:19 ratio going on. It's also got the most obviously apple ish interface there could be in the demise of the scroll wheel as we know it.

I really feel this is going to be a completely different price bracket to the normal iPod, but still low enough to compete with portable film players.

4np
Mar 14, 2006, 06:44 AM
http://www.magikworld.com/iPodAVfake.jpg

djdarlek
Mar 14, 2006, 08:36 AM
I've always thougth that those two were fake - but what do you think about the video?

ToastMaster
Mar 14, 2006, 09:58 PM
I've been sent some photos of what I believe could possibly be the new iPod AV.

http://www.mytophat.com/200603/ipodvideo.jpg (http://www.mytophat.com/archives/2006/03/leaked_photo_new_ipod.php)

How in the heck would that work? Is the screen on the back? And why would you ever need two scroll wheels?

john159
Mar 15, 2006, 03:39 PM
How in the heck would that work? Is the screen on the back? And why would you ever need two scroll wheels?

i hope you are joking...

he made a joke... making fun of all the fake ipod videos pics... wow ok... you have to be kidding me..i have nothin else to say except wow

However, on a more serious and less photoshopped note... now that i look back he even said it was a joke haha

woodsie
Apr 15, 2006, 12:40 AM
4.) When are they going to change the name of the iTunes Music Store? The brand doesn't make much sense anymore, especially if they bust it out into a full fledged movie/tv/music store. Even the name of the application - iTunes, doesn't work anymore.

yep. it's alot more than tunes now.

not much forward thinking from Apple.

stcroixsailor
Dec 27, 2006, 01:42 PM
But I can't tell anyone, trade secret. But I swear to God and on top of my grandfather's grave that I know the release date.

zephead
Dec 27, 2006, 02:37 PM
But I can't tell anyone, trade secret. But I swear to God and on top of my grandfather's grave that I know the release date.

And what happens to your grandfather's grave if you're bullsh*ting us like everyone else who's said they knew? ;)