PDA

View Full Version : Apple Releases iPod Classic




smurfy
Sep 5, 2007, 12:31 PM
It's now called the iPod classic and is not a touch screen model.

http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2007/09/dsc_7628.jpg



bartelby
Sep 5, 2007, 12:32 PM
AWESOME!!!

New iPod time!!!

Applespider
Sep 5, 2007, 12:33 PM
It's bigger than my Mac's hard drive :rolleyes:

Just imagine - I could carry a backup around with me :D

thugpoet22
Sep 5, 2007, 12:37 PM
is this legit or the work of a photo shop expert

MaskedPhantom
Sep 5, 2007, 12:52 PM
is this legit or the work of a photo shop expert

Are you seriuosly asking this question?

MacRumors
Sep 5, 2007, 12:58 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Apple released the iPod Classic at the "Beat Goes On" special media event today, revamping what was the current full-size iPod in the lineup. It features a thinner, full metal body. Capacity has been increased to either 80GB or 160GB versions. Specs are as follows:

80GB - $249
160GB - $349 - 40 hrs music playback, 7 hrs video playback
Available today



Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/09/05/new-ipod-story-3/)

odinsride
Sep 5, 2007, 01:00 PM
This is freaking great. Enough space for all my 35gb of music, a bunch of videos, AND the functionality of an extremely portable, spacious external drive.

Woohoo!! Go Apple :)

stuff99
Sep 5, 2007, 01:01 PM
I have a feeling the classic line will suffer in sales when there is the iPod touch line now

Lycanthrope
Sep 5, 2007, 01:01 PM
Personally for me a 160GB 'Pod is perfect, just what I have been waiting for :)

Small White Car
Sep 5, 2007, 01:04 PM
I still love my mini, so I'm thrilled to see the large iPod take on the metal case.

Can't wait to see it in person!

bigandy
Sep 5, 2007, 01:04 PM
i'm tempted by that battery life :)

Lycanthrope
Sep 5, 2007, 01:05 PM
I have a feeling the classic line will suffer in sales when there is the iPod touch line now

Except for those like me that have 120GB+ of MP3's, until a large capacity iPhone comes along anyway.

thejadedmonkey
Sep 5, 2007, 01:05 PM
Does anyone remember when the classic iPod was this one?

thejadedmonkey
Sep 5, 2007, 01:07 PM
It's bigger than my Mac's hard drive :rolleyes:

Just imagine - I could carry a backup around with me :D

I wonder if you can use the new iPods with Time Machine... that'd be wickeddd

stuff99
Sep 5, 2007, 01:08 PM
Except for those like me that have 120GB+ of MP3's, until a large capacity iPhone comes along anyway.

that is a lot of music dude lol

do you even get a chance to listen to all those songs

haha

Lycanthrope
Sep 5, 2007, 01:13 PM
that is a lot of music dude lol

do you even get a chance to listen to all those songs

haha

Not all at once but I have a wide choice to pick from. It's one of the advantages of being old and still also liking the stuff you were into thirty years ago while adding all the new in the meantime :)

ziwi
Sep 5, 2007, 01:26 PM
Not a big fan - big capacity, but who can listen to 40K songs? Who needs the whole library? Getting cross-eyed at watching video - the touch is where it is at, but the price is too high.

SthrnCmfrtr
Sep 5, 2007, 01:30 PM
Hey, it's that "split" UI from that mockup :confused:

Dagless
Sep 5, 2007, 01:31 PM
iPod Classic? Ugly as hell (IMO), but 160gb? jeez. That would just about hold my entire iTunes library!

kitki83
Sep 5, 2007, 01:35 PM
iPod Classic? Ugly as hell (IMO), but 160gb? jeez. That would just about hold my entire iTunes library!

I think the metal finish is a way for the iPod to stay cool since its quite larger capacity, am I right?

bloodycape
Sep 5, 2007, 01:37 PM
You would think at 40hours of playblack you would also get more than 7 hours of video. I get close to 20hours for audio out of my A2 and 9 for video and that has a 4in screen. Hmm, something sounds odd there.

johnmcboston
Sep 5, 2007, 01:39 PM
Not a big fan - big capacity, but who can listen to 40K songs? Who needs the whole library?

I never will. But I don't have to decide any more on which playlists to put on the ipod and which to leave off due to capacity. Or worry about which playlists to remove in order to fit those photos or videos onto the ipod.

I'm just happy "the classic" is still here. I'd hate to have had to choose between a touch and a nano if the classic was gone. Now I just have to wait for the weekend for them to be in store :( Wonder how they'll look IRL...

fastbite
Sep 5, 2007, 01:39 PM
Now nobody can really complain about capacity -- can they?:rolleyes:

johnmcboston
Sep 5, 2007, 01:41 PM
Now nobody can really complain about capacity -- can they?:rolleyes:

You forget where you are...:cool:

Dexists
Sep 5, 2007, 01:43 PM
I want dimensions of the 80Gb.. it's the only one that's interested me out of today's line-up. I see no point in the nano, seriously, what a completely pointless generation leap (more capacity? No of course not) and I plan on getting an iphone to replace my 2g nano (thus the touch is of no purpose either)

MaskedPhantom
Sep 5, 2007, 01:43 PM
Now nobody can really complain about capacity -- can they?:rolleyes:

Well, certainly not about the classic, but the whining is just getting started about the touch's capacity.

parkds
Sep 5, 2007, 01:44 PM
Any signs of the 160GB Classic in stores yet?

i make movies
Sep 5, 2007, 01:45 PM
Now nobody can really complain about capacity -- can they?:rolleyes:

Go over to the ipod touch thread. The capacity-bitching is so hot over there, my screen starting smoking.

zioxide
Sep 5, 2007, 01:48 PM
160GB, 40 hours of music playback, sexy silver, and the click wheel?

/me orders

technicolor
Sep 5, 2007, 01:52 PM
I have a feeling the classic line will suffer in sales when there is the iPod touch line now No way the nano is more likely to suffer since they are closer in capacity size. REAL music people will still want the classic, 160 gigs of space!

milo
Sep 5, 2007, 01:55 PM
Do these models still support video out over the cable?

The apple website doesn't mention it on the specs page.

stompy
Sep 5, 2007, 01:56 PM
It's now called the iPod classic and is not a touch screen model.

http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2007/09/dsc_7628.jpg

Not that it matters much, but with the iPod Classic, Apple has eliminated white from the iPod lineup. This almost mirrors the new iMac revision, even down to the out-of-place looking white accessories (imac --> white keys on alu keyboard + white mouse; ipod --> white earbuds.)

daneoni
Sep 5, 2007, 01:57 PM
Hmmm....iPod touch now and snub iPhone till gen 2 or iPod classic now and get iPhone gen 1....if only ipod touch had Mail but hat would've cannibalised iPhones sales.

Sigh.....decisions decisions

Small White Car
Sep 5, 2007, 01:57 PM
I think the metal finish is a way for the iPod to stay cool since its quite larger capacity, am I right?

It's much easier and cheaper to recycle. It's looking like more and more companies are going to be held responsible for recycling their goods by governments around the world soon. Either by actually recycling them or buy paying a tax when each is sold to cover the cost of doing so by the government.

Apple's trying to get a head start so any law changes down the road won't affect them much.

mkrishnan
Sep 5, 2007, 02:09 PM
Not that it matters much, but with the iPod Classic, Apple has eliminated white from the iPod lineup. This almost mirrors the new iMac revision, even down to the out-of-place looking white accessories (imac --> white keys on alu keyboard + white mouse; ipod --> white earbuds.)

Apple seems to slowly be doing a good job of figuring out how to integrate the silver and white ... their OS designers have done such a great job in terms of using several different design motifs that pretty transparently co-exist. I know not everyone likes that, but in general it's considered less glaring than the white and aluminum. But if you look at, say, how well the white accessories work on the Powerbook or the Macbook Pro, to, now, how the aluminum/white keyboard looks and how the silver iPods look, Apple is improving.

But yes, now there are very few white products left in the line that do not use aluminum as a primary aesthetic. The white Macbook, the AEBS and Airport Express... that's about it.

homeboy
Sep 5, 2007, 02:09 PM
Since I haven't had a DAP for almost 5 months and waited for a high capacity iPod touch I'll be picking this up instead. a white 80GB iPod classic.

tripperharrison
Sep 5, 2007, 02:14 PM
Does the iPod Classic have Cover Flow?

Cygnus311
Sep 5, 2007, 02:15 PM
Seriously, why are they still using these shinny, scratch-crazy backs? Now they ADDED them to the Nanos too!

mandoman
Sep 5, 2007, 02:23 PM
Awesome update IMO. I'm really glad the classic is still
around for the music people. 160gb, holy smokes batman!

Let's face it, nothing beats the scroll wheel interface, not
even the touch, for zipping through your huge music
collection super fast.

Still going to be a hard decision, touch with wifi or classic
for capacity...

0racle
Sep 5, 2007, 02:30 PM
I'm wondering whether it's better to get a new Classic or find an older iPod on eBay. Mainly I wanted an iPod to take all my MP3's with me on the road and was eyeing the VW iPod adapter, but I'm not sure that the new classic will fit the adapter.

mugtastic
Sep 5, 2007, 02:31 PM
i want coverflow but i want my ipod white.

Doylem
Sep 5, 2007, 02:34 PM
160gb?? Hmmmm... this may be the right moment to whittle down my music collection to what will fit on the iPod Classic. If i want to add some music, that means I have to get rid of something (it's the curse of being 55... and loving so many kinds of music!). Still got my 2G iPod, it still works perfectly...

MattG
Sep 5, 2007, 02:34 PM
Cool. Just ordered a brand new, shiny, black 160GB classic. Can't wait!

Not a big fan - big capacity, but who can listen to 40K songs? Who needs the whole library? Getting cross-eyed at watching video - the touch is where it is at, but the price is too high.

I for one like having all my music at my fingertips. Never know what I'm going to be in the mood for. In addition to that, I like having this as a backup. When I think about how many CDs I've ripped to my computer, and how long it took me...if my computer crashed tomorrow and my hard drive was unrecoverable, I'd have to re-rip all that music. I'm glad to have the capacity. I wanted the "Touch" capability, but not with only 16GB of storage.

Stridder44
Sep 5, 2007, 02:35 PM
Personally for me a 160GB 'Pod is perfect, just what I have been waiting for :)



Amen. Couldn't of said it better myself.

stompy
Sep 5, 2007, 02:35 PM
in general it's considered less glaring than the white and aluminum. But if you look at, say, how well the white accessories work on the Powerbook or the Macbook Pro, to, now, how the aluminum/white keyboard looks and how the silver iPods look, Apple is improving.



Agreed on all points. Also, I'm not totally against white, but I'd certainly like to see Apple make a keyboard / mouse that doesn't show grime so easily.

simontarr
Sep 5, 2007, 02:40 PM
I'm so glad there's an iPod classic. The touch is cool n all but to me, it's just not an iPod. I'll be getting the 160GB one I think...plenty of room to grow into :D

milo
Sep 5, 2007, 02:46 PM
Does the iPod Classic have Cover Flow?

Yes! All the new ipods has it.

Davowade
Sep 5, 2007, 02:47 PM
Dear apple.

RE: New iPods.

Meh.

Regards,

Dave.


Seriously, I had my heart set on a 160GB touchscreen model.
I don't know what to think.

mkrishnan
Sep 5, 2007, 02:48 PM
Agreed on all points. Also, I'm not totally against white, but I'd certainly like to see Apple make a keyboard / mouse that doesn't show grime so easily.

The keyboard is sort of one of those glaring points of modern design... unless you use a cover like the iSkin, even if you are meticulous, the keyboard shows signs of wear and accumulates dust and junk over time. And they are not easily amenable to cleaning. The new Apple design is better on both fronts, but it's always a limitation. Ahh, well, I guess this is a limitation until it becomes feasible to make a keyboard-sized iPhone screen and then just use that. :D

Does your mighty mouse get dirty easily? Is it the ball, or the whole thing?

As for my white Apple stuff... my AEBS and iMac just have to be dusted periodically. The mouse bottom ring gets grimy, but the top just needs to be wiped off once in a rare while. The keyboards both stay clean and I just wash the iSkins periodically, although particularly the skin for the old style Apple Wireless Keyboard does hamper touch typing. The only thing that really gets intensive cleaning to stay new looking is the iBook.

Mgkwho
Sep 5, 2007, 02:49 PM
OK-

So I had predicted the "classic" form to go away, as there wouldn't be anything differentiating besides capactiy. But the capacity increase is so large, and the case is redesigned, that it's probably fine.

-=|Mgkwho

PCMacUser
Sep 5, 2007, 02:49 PM
Seriously, I had my heart set on a 160GB touchscreen model.
I don't know what to think.

If Apple don't make a product you like, then look at other brands, etc. Someone might.

bslax28
Sep 5, 2007, 02:50 PM
i bought 30gb video ipod august 11th. feeling stupid. i called and begged to no avail. oh well. such is the modern age of constantly updated technology.

Chupa Chupa
Sep 5, 2007, 03:00 PM
Does anyone remember when the classic iPod was this one?

Ha ha! I still have mine, though haven't used it in years. Funny it's 6 years old but looks so dated with that tiny screen. But I do still have an affection for the moving scroll wheel.

Chupa Chupa
Sep 5, 2007, 03:04 PM
i bought 30gb video ipod august 11th. feeling stupid. i called and begged to no avail. oh well. such is the modern age of constantly updated technology.

You have about 2 hours to get it on eBay before the rest of the world figures out there are new iPods. (Seriously, go, go, go).

javisan
Sep 5, 2007, 03:05 PM
What is wrong with Apple?

The "new" iPod line is a mess. Where did their innovation go???

Take the iPhone and take the away the phone features and what do you get? A new iPod. WOW, how innovative.

Take the iPod 5g and put a bigger hard drive and a metal enclosing and what do you get? A 6g iPod. WOW, I could not see that coming.

This is depressing. They could even update the firmware for existing iPods so they can get the new GUI.

Where is the RADIO and the BIGGER SCREEN???

mkrishnan
Sep 5, 2007, 03:06 PM
Where is the RADIO

Still back in 1970. Where it belongs.

MaskedPhantom
Sep 5, 2007, 03:07 PM
Seriously, why are they still using these shinny, scratch-crazy backs? Now they ADDED them to the Nanos too!

C-A-S-E.

jklps
Sep 5, 2007, 03:08 PM
Sign me up for a silver 160gb right now...a major upgrade in capacity over my 160gb. :)

8bitrevolution
Sep 5, 2007, 03:09 PM
Not a big fan - big capacity, but who can listen to 40K songs? Who needs the whole library? Getting cross-eyed at watching video - the touch is where it is at, but the price is too high.

It's all about variety. You never know what you might want to listen to at any given time.

heswa
Sep 5, 2007, 03:10 PM
Ha ha! I still have mine, though haven't used it in years. Funny it's 6 years old but looks so dated with that tiny screen. But I do still have an affection for the moving scroll wheel.

I still have mine too, and I still use it!

nemaslov
Sep 5, 2007, 03:10 PM
PERFECT! Ordering the 160GB. Everyone is happy exceot iPhone buyers from the past two months, Those of us with huge music collections can take it all with us... NExt year 240GB!!! :p

I have a feeling the classic line will suffer in sales when there is the iPod touch line now

Not so. They don't hold much. Yes they will sell more but there are many who want alot of music only with them.

Not a big fan - big capacity, but who can listen to 40K songs? Who needs the whole library? Getting cross-eyed at watching video - the touch is where it is at, but the price is too high.

My 80 gigger is full and I have 120GB of music on my mac. I keep my pod at my studio and hooked into a stereo and play all kinds of music. Each day a different genre or artist or playlist. Many of us want it all with us. Think about bars, restaurants who have iPods hooked up. DJs can bring huge collections to choose from, :ppeople with second homes or on extended tours!!

stompy
Sep 5, 2007, 03:15 PM
And they are not easily amenable to cleaning. The new Apple design is better on both fronts, but it's always a limitation. Ahh, well, I guess this is a limitation until it becomes feasible to make a keyboard-sized iPhone screen and then just use that. :D

Does your mighty mouse get dirty easily? Is it the ball, or the whole thing?

As for my white Apple stuff... my AEBS and iMac just have to be dusted periodically. The mouse bottom ring gets grimy, but the top just needs to be wiped off once in a rare while. The keyboards both stay clean and I just wash the iSkins periodically, although particularly the skin for the old style Apple Wireless Keyboard does hamper touch typing. The only thing that really gets intensive cleaning to stay new looking is the iBook.

I've seen about the same as you, but since I don't have a cover on my keyboard, it rarely looks... spiffy. (Interesting note on the iSkin, btw.) I swapped the mighty mouse for a logitech bluetooth, to be honest, but before that, the mouse didn't get grungy fast, like the keyboard.

I've taken the keys off my old iBook once, and gave it a thorough cleaning, it still looks great, and agree on the AEx.

Now the iPod Classic silver should be a great improvement over the white iPod in keeping up appearances (mine is in an invisishield, so what do I know?)

8bitrevolution
Sep 5, 2007, 03:18 PM
What is wrong with Apple?

The "new" iPod line is a mess. Where did their innovation go???

Take the iPhone and take the away the phone features and what do you get? A new iPod. WOW, how innovative.

Take the iPod 5g and put a bigger hard drive and a metal enclosing and what do you get? A 6g iPod. WOW, I could not see that coming.

This is depressing. They could even update the firmware for existing iPods so they can get the new GUI.

Where is the RADIO and the BIGGER SCREEN???

It seems to me that there's a certain point where a user interface has reached a point where very little, if any, can be done to improve it. For example, cars today still use steering wheels much like the same ones used what, 80 years ago?

I'm not saying the click wheel is the pinnacle of user interface design but for browsing and controlling music on an iPod? I can think of none better including the touch screen.

As for your wider screen, that's on the iPod touch. And as someone else said, your radio is back in the 70s.

Seriously, didn't we all buy iPods because we like our music much better than the radio?

Roy Hobbs
Sep 5, 2007, 03:20 PM
C-A-S-E.

That is a stupid reply. I and alot of other people don't want some cheesy case on their iPods.

There is no reason why Apple didnt make the back at least like the iPhone.

jklps
Sep 5, 2007, 03:22 PM
It's all about variety. You never know what you might want to listen to at any given time.

EXACTLY.

For people with diverse musical tastes who pick artists/genres/decades/etc by their mood/whim.

8bitrevolution
Sep 5, 2007, 03:23 PM
That is a stupid reply. I and alot of other people don't want some cheesy case on their iPods.

There is no reason why Apple didnt make the back at least like the iPhone.

invisi-shield.

Picked up one for my 5th gen iPod and it works great.

nerdeus
Sep 5, 2007, 03:24 PM
So the article says 40 hrs of music and 7 hours of video..
but that simply doesn't make sense for a 160GB iPod.

The Apple site says this:
"With 80GB or 160GB of storage and up to 40 hours of battery life, the new iPod classic lets you enjoy up to 40,000 songs or up to 200 hours of video or any combination wherever you go."

That's better ;)

uv23
Sep 5, 2007, 03:25 PM
Just ordered my silver 80gb iPod Classic. Terrible name, great deal, and a fab replacement for my outdated mini.

Chupa Chupa
Sep 5, 2007, 03:30 PM
Not a big fan - big capacity, but who can listen to 40K songs? Who needs the whole library? Getting cross-eyed at watching video - the touch is where it is at, but the price is too high.


Ah, variety is the spice of life. Sure, I'm not going to listen to 40K songs in one Metro or plane trip BUT it's sure nice when you have that song suddenly playing in your head you can listen to it with a couple clicks. Plus now with a 160GB iPod you can easily partition off 20 or 30GB for use as a portable drive w/o sacrificing media storage.

javisan
Sep 5, 2007, 03:30 PM
It seems to me that there's a certain point where a user interface has reached a point where very little, if any, can be done to improve it. For example, cars today still use steering wheels must like the same ones used what, 80 years ago?

I'm not saying the click wheel is the pinnacle of user interface design but for browsing and controlling music on an iPod? I can think of none better including the touch screen.

As for your wider screen, that's on the iPod touch. And as someone else said, your radio is back in the 70s.

Seriously, didn't we all buy iPods because we like our music much better than the radio?

That's why cars dont come with radio anymore right?? because that's so 70s. That is a fanboy opinion/argument.

If other players can include the radio as a feature, why can't the iPod also have it? (Reason: lazyness and aspiring for a bigger profit margin by not incurring in additional costs) I decide if I want to listen to the radio, not Apple.

So, fanboys now have two decide from:

an iPod with a small screen and big capacity

or

an iPod with a large screen and small capacity

Was it impossible to make an iPod touch (which is really an iPhone with no phone) to have a 30gb hard drive? It would still have been very thin.

I am not complaining about the new GUI, I thinks it nice, but the point was that that was the only new "feature" (if you can call that one) that the ipod classic has. Apple did not improve on the only thing people were complaining from the day the 5g iPod came out: screen.

and no, with an iPod Touch with 16gb is not the solution.

MacsRgr8
Sep 5, 2007, 03:31 PM
160GB, 40 hours of music playback, sexy silver, and the click wheel?

/me orders

Me ordered too!

Wow... I love the Silver look, and the 160 GB is simply... SUPERRRB!! :cool::apple:

Hattig
Sep 5, 2007, 03:35 PM
I'm glad that Apple kept this product available.

Still very happy that I bought the 4GB iPod Nano 1G on the day it came out, it's still relevant in the marketplace. I was considering replacing it with a 16GB nano if that was announced, but it wasn't. Now I have to wonder about getting an 80GB iPod Classic (hah, 30GB Zune looks rather anaemic after all of today's announcements, even if they come out with an 80GB in a month or two) or an iPod Touch (this really appeals to my inner techno-lust) but 269 is a bit much for a 16GB iPod + Mobile Web Browser. The 159 80GB classic is far more agreeable.

Official capability for custom applications on the touch however ...
(also the 8GB Touch is a nice value upgrade over the 8GB nano IMO).

Hattig
Sep 5, 2007, 03:40 PM
Was it impossible to make an iPod touch (which is really an iPhone with no phone) to have a 30gb hard drive? It would still have been very thin.


Well it could have had an 80GB hard drive I'm sure, using the 1.8" single platter drives as a base.

The product would have been thicker as a result - probably 12mm?

However the rest of the space could have been used for more battery, which would have been needed for powering the hard drive, and for better battery life than 20 hours.

However the future is flash memory, and the touch is the iPod's future, and it will be flash because it's small, low power and thin. Next year's touch with 32GB of flash will be when sales pick up for this product, right now it will be the boutique iPod product that lets us all laugh at other media players. Until they tell us they have FM radio and can view divx files anyway ...

8bitrevolution
Sep 5, 2007, 03:52 PM
That's why cars dont come with radio anymore right?? because that's so 70s. That is a fanboy opinion/argument.

Last time I checked, when you buy a car, you're buying a car, not a digital music player. There's nothing fanboy-esque about it. I bought a digital music player because I want my music with me every where I go and not some dumbass radio host blathering on about hollywood gossip.


If other players can include the radio as a feature, why can't the iPod also have it? (Reason: lazyness and aspiring for a bigger profit margin by not incurring in additional costs) I decide if I want to listen to the radio, not Apple.

If you want radio and someone else offers it in their player, then go buy their player. End of story. No one forces you to buy an iPod. There are other alternatives out there - why don't you seek them out?


So, fanboys now have two decide from:

an iPod with a small screen and big capacity

or

an iPod with a large screen and small capacity

Was it impossible to make an iPod touch (which is really an iPhone with no phone) to have a 30gb hard drive? It would still have been very thin.

I am not complaining about the new GUI, I thinks it nice, but the point was that that was the only new "feature" (if you can call that one) that the ipod classic has. Apple did not improve on the only thing people were complaining from the day the 5g iPod came out: screen.

and no, with an iPod Touch with 16gb is not the solution.

So basically you've just branded yourself a fanboy.

The iPod Classic is an evolution of the 5th gen iPod which, for me, is fine. I wanted a bigger harddrive without it getting any thicker. The 80gb iPod Classic does just that for me and with no compromises. So that's what I ordered.

If you want radio, get a different player or buy a radio tuner for your iPod. It's that simple. Or you could save a lot of cash and buy a handheld radio.

uv23
Sep 5, 2007, 04:13 PM
Well it could have had an 80GB hard drive I'm sure, using the 1.8" single platter drives as a base.

The product would have been thicker as a result - probably 12mm?

However the rest of the space could have been used for more battery, which would have been needed for powering the hard drive, and for better battery life than 20 hours.

However the future is flash memory, and the touch is the iPod's future, and it will be flash because it's small, low power and thin. Next year's touch with 32GB of flash will be when sales pick up for this product, right now it will be the boutique iPod product that lets us all laugh at other media players. Until they tell us they have FM radio and can view divx files anyway ...

Yep, I have 40 gigs of music but only 18 of it is listenable (4 or 5 stars). The iPod touch is below the threshold. I just ordered an 80gb iPod Classic but may very well sell it and get an iPod Touch next year when the 32 gig comes out. That's a perfect size.

oilster
Sep 5, 2007, 04:25 PM
is there any technical reasons for not having an software update including these functions in the 5g ipod? Would be great, even with 30giga looking for songs by searching would be a great advantage...

nemaslov
Sep 5, 2007, 04:28 PM
Think this way, Burn lossless and get a 160GB. Beautiful music always!

flying dog
Sep 5, 2007, 04:34 PM
So does this mean that prices for the current 80GB model will drop to below $250? I don't see any big difference between the 5.5 and new (5.75?) model. What I really wanted was a widescreen ipod with larger capacity but that didn't materialize today. But my 3rd gen died 3 months ago and my old 512MB iriver... I hate swapping out what's on it every day and the buttons are getting really flaky.

Davowade
Sep 5, 2007, 05:09 PM
If Apple don't make a product you like, then look at other brands, etc. Someone might.

Have you read my signature by any chance? I have no problem with apple products, I haven't for many years now. It just seems to me that they really didn't hit the mark this time. IMHO they have diversified the product line too far.

realityisterror
Sep 5, 2007, 05:10 PM
When Steve said it'd be available in "many stores" this weekend, do you guys interpret that to include Fry's and Best Buy stores as well?

bloodycape
Sep 5, 2007, 05:14 PM
Seriously, didn't we all buy iPods because we like our music much better than the radio?

That maybe so but some people would like to listen to FM radio because some FM statios broadcast sports, which is nice if they are somewhere with no radio, or FM talk(like NPR) for those who want to learn something(I guess). Then there is FM radio we can use at the gym, so we can watch what is on the tv, like ESPN, CNN, or some other network they have things programmed to.

Personally I would like to get this new ipod in 80gig, but a few things are holding me back. 1. the I am not to fond of the casing, and the design with the casing looks odd to me; 2. no ums/msc support as I rather not deal with any intermediary sotware; 3. no built in fm radio for the times i want to watch what is on ESPN at the gym 4. divx/xvid, ogg, and flac support would be nice as I have files in those formats. But good job for Apple.


However the future is flash memory, and the touch is the iPod's future, and it will be flash because it's small, low power and thin. Next year's touch with 32GB of flash will be when sales pick up for this product, right now it will be the boutique iPod product that lets us all laugh at other media players. Until they tell us they have FM radio and can view divx files anyway ...

Lets not forget some other media players have SDHC support, which means up to 48gig of space(16gig internal and 32gig SDHC card) depending on the player and no lag. Granted 32gig sdhc the card will cost as much as the player, but I guess that is the price you pay for having that much flash space.

bilbo--baggins
Sep 5, 2007, 05:15 PM
Just ordered the 160GB iPod classic.

I honestly didn't expect this one. I though there might be an 80GB touch screen iPod, and in that case I wouldn't have ordered one to replace my iPod Video.

Due to my lifestyle, my iPod spends 98% of the time in my car - I will be able to fit all of my music, in Lossless format, on the 160GB iPod, whereas I cannot fit it all on my 80GB - annoying when you're away and want listen to a particular song and find it's not on there.

An iPod touch would be nice, but the capacity rules it out for me, and I'm not into mobile video. Anyway, I'll have it's functionality as soon as the iPhone makes it to the UK...

offwidafairies
Sep 5, 2007, 05:15 PM
does anyone know if the size and weight are the same as the previous 5G models? thanks!

chillywilly
Sep 5, 2007, 05:23 PM
does anyone know if the size and weight are the same as the previous 5G models? thanks!

Almost identical. The new classic is .02 inches thinner and .1 grams heavier. I would bet that any device that holds the 5G iPod would fit the new model without any modification.

offwidafairies
Sep 5, 2007, 05:31 PM
Almost identical. The new classic is .02 inches thinner and .1 grams heavier. I would bet that any device that holds the 5G iPod would fit the new model without any modification.

thats awesome. geez i really want to upgrade my 60Gb
i use it as a hdd to store my files and 160Gb would be AMAZING :)
i was going to buy a 2.5" external this week... maybe i wont have to!

chillywilly
Sep 5, 2007, 05:48 PM
i was going to buy a 2.5" external this week... maybe i wont have to!

I don't know about the 2.5" external drives, but you can get a Western Digital 250gb portable drive for under $170 now. Even the 160gb is around $120.

Although, that adds another device to have to carry, but the other thing to note is something I heard some time ago: the iPod was never really meant for heavy duty storage, just more of a drive to have to copy some data to. Maybe things have changed with these new models, but I'd be more willing to use a separate external for any data backup or other important purposes.

As for the iPod classic, that 160gb drive could hold a lot of movies and music, even if this day and age of 1TB drives.

mihiruthere93
Sep 5, 2007, 05:49 PM
Just ordered the 160GB iPod classic.

I honestly didn't expect this one. I though there might be an 80GB touch screen iPod, and in that case I wouldn't have ordered one to replace my iPod Video.

Due to my lifestyle, my iPod spends 98% of the time in my car - I will be able to fit all of my music, in Lossless format, on the 160GB iPod, whereas I cannot fit it all on my 80GB - annoying when you're away and want listen to a particular song and find it's not on there.

An iPod touch would be nice, but the capacity rules it out for me, and I'm not into mobile video. Anyway, I'll have it's functionality as soon as the iPhone makes it to the UK...

there could be an 80gig touch, but the battery would be used in less than half an hour. believe me, I would be happy with a slightly thicker touch with more space and battery.

mihiruthere93
Sep 5, 2007, 05:52 PM
man, apple is offering one great deal! 250 for 80gigs and 350 for 160! im getting an 80 gb model cuz I'm only a freshmen and I have a pretty tight budget... good thing I've been saving up.:D

Nuks
Sep 5, 2007, 05:57 PM
It seems strange that there are no more white ipods... it's always been such an iconic ipod (and mac in general) colour...

twoodcc
Sep 5, 2007, 06:09 PM
dang 80 and 160! great stuff ;)

OllyW
Sep 5, 2007, 06:09 PM
The 160GB model is perfect for me, I was hoping for a 120GB for the same price as the old 80GB and we get an extra 40GB for 10 less :)

It has come at just the right time for me, the battery is failing on my 60GB photo and the disc has been full for 18 months. I'm sick of having to delete music every time I need to load new songs.

I'm hoping that the Currys store in the Birmingham airport departure lounge has them in stock by Saturday so I can save a few quid as I head out on holiday. If not, I'll have to wait a week until I get back home.

AppleiMac
Sep 5, 2007, 06:15 PM
The iPod lineup is so diverse now, there's an iPod for everyone. I'm glad they kept the Classic around for those who need a huge amount of storage for all their songs, videos, etc. Makes everyone happy!

Nuks
Sep 5, 2007, 06:18 PM
I wonder if the new "split" UI is mandatory... i think i would find it really annoying and somewhat pointless... maybe when I actually got my hands on one I'd feel differently, but right now I think it's a bad idea.

WannaGoMac
Sep 5, 2007, 06:29 PM
is there any technical reasons for not having an software update including these functions in the 5g ipod? Would be great, even with 30giga looking for songs by searching would be a great advantage...

Am wondering the same thing?

I bet Apple will NOT. Otherwise it wouldn't be a nice improvement over the prior gen and be a way to encourage upgrade purchases...

p0intblank
Sep 5, 2007, 06:36 PM
I'm so glad Apple kept the regular iPod for those who don't want/need a touch screen model. And plus, flash storage is only up to 16 GB (maybe 32?), so the iPod classic is obviously here to stay for a while.

ordo1980
Sep 5, 2007, 06:42 PM
Hah, so check this out guys, bought an iPod 5.5g, 30gig, almost 2 months ago, first one failed (freaky faulty battery - factory flunky i guess), so I took it back and got a new one on 8/11 ... thanks to 30-day money back policy at best buy, I just took it back now and got a refund. :p Hello 80 gig model. I'm excited. The touch would have been cool, but the flash memory just hasn't come along far enough yet, and it's too $$$, 8gigs for $300? No thanks. I'll take my 80gig model in a few days, get a shuffle for running, and then get an iPhone in a couple of years or whenever they get rid of AT&T exclusivity to replace my classic... and when flash memory is way larger and less expensive. Now I will continue to yearn for a new Blackbook... :D

rockosmodurnlif
Sep 5, 2007, 07:19 PM
Buying a 160 for lossless? Lossless? Pfft, whatever. Don't need it, my ears aren't that good anyway.

Coverflow? Also useless. I want music not pretty pictures. Is there a way to turn that off in these new iPods? I have no album cover art in my collection and I'm not about to start because I don't miss them that much to care. But at the same time, I don't want half my screen taken up by a black box and a music symbol.

If I could separate where iTunes looks for my my audio files and my video files in the iTunes Library then I may start storing my digital video files in iTunes. Is that available in the new iTunes?

Still no radio. I did not buy an iPod to not listen to the radio. And I want more than FM. Let's get some AM on there too.

But damn that 160 is as big as my hard drive. Though I must think that would make more sense in the iPod Touch. That's the one with the huge video screen right?

This is an update that has potential. The best deal out there is the 160 iPod Classic. If you think otherwise, you're lost in the sauce.

synth3tik
Sep 5, 2007, 07:31 PM
IMO the best hardware related news. Even though I have my iPhone and have not used my 80G iPod, damn a 160G portable drive....

Chef Medeski
Sep 5, 2007, 07:32 PM
thats awesome. geez i really want to upgrade my 60Gb
i use it as a hdd to store my files and 160Gb would be AMAZING :)
i was going to buy a 2.5" external this week... maybe i wont have to!

I wouldn't go that route. While yes its nice to pack it all in one place. 1.8" HD are very slow. And have a much higher rate of failure. And while for a backup these usually aren't too important (I find speed to be important, but I mean rate of failure) since you don't use backups often. Since an iPod HD is almost constantly used for music, maybe more than a regular computer HD, the higher rates of failure could catch up with you. I just think if its goin be your sole source of backup, I would be aware. I wouldn't feel save. Maybe a periodical backup until a real external and use this for daily backups.

slabwax
Sep 5, 2007, 07:33 PM
Can you still upload raw files from your camera to the new classic ?

Chef Medeski
Sep 5, 2007, 07:34 PM
Am wondering the same thing?

I bet Apple will NOT. Otherwise it wouldn't be a nice improvement over the prior gen and be a way to encourage upgrade purchases...
They did it with the 5.5g. They updated the software to add a few nicities and they did it for all prexisting machines. But if you haven't noticed on your computer, CoverFlow takes quite a bit of processor capacity. So I think the previous gen's chips would def. limit the possibility of porting it. It wouldn't be able to handle it properly.

Chef Medeski
Sep 5, 2007, 07:39 PM
I'm quite happy. 80GB is a great size. I always wanted a new ipod. But refused to buy a 5G ipod, since it felt like such crap in comparison to the 4g (software was a direct port, but with crappier scroll wheel and just videos). So I've been stiving buying a new ipod. But I've been feeling the pinch on my 40GB Photo. But with this I could put all my music, plus all my photos and still have plenty of space for files or what not. PLUS ITS SUPER THIN, which is great. Battery life is great. But the best part is the price. I mean thats the price to get a 8GB nano. Thats crazy! So now instead of paying $400 to get 80GB, I can pay $250. Thats a huge decrease plus its super thin and has a much better battery life! While its not revolutionary, I would say a great evolution. It definetely hit the 5G where it faulted, low battery life and same old software. With some nice surprises such as even thinner and great price. I dont think anyone can complain, except the people who wanted that in a Touch. I almost agree. I would have possibly can for the Touch if it had 80gb. But hey, in my thoughts an 8GB Touch would be perfect for movies and internet while a classic would be it for music. I mean 3.5" is the smallest in my opinion you can watch a movie on.

BWhaler
Sep 5, 2007, 07:57 PM
Still back in 1970. Where it belongs.

Funny and true.


Radio sucks nowadays. Thanks ClearChannel.

penter
Sep 5, 2007, 08:29 PM
Im so psyched!

80GB for what 30GB previously cost :eek:

I had been forever waiting for the iPod Touch, but this is even better!
Though gorgeous and huge, the Touch's screen is not gonna keep me from going after the Classic's HUGE HD!!

The HD upgrade is just "Amazing, in my opinion" as Steve kept saying.
This iPod will be the sure bet for the hardcore iPod users who are looking for more storage, rather than more gadgets (most of which are not going to be used by the average iPod owner).

SactoGuy18
Sep 5, 2007, 08:39 PM
Folks,

Unless you're going to plug in the iPod Classic to an expensive high-end external headphone amplifier and use a high-end in-ear headphone like the Etymotic Research ER-4 or Shure SE530, you really don't need to go above 256 kbps data rate (VBR) when you rip your CD collection for your iPod. At 256 kbps data rate, that should be more than enough to put in several thousand songs into your iPod Classic 80 GB player. :)

acrahm
Sep 5, 2007, 09:22 PM
anyone know when they will hit target or BB or CC?

zap2
Sep 5, 2007, 09:25 PM
160Gb...SO MUCH! Thats all my media, plus tons of empty space!


But an 80Gb smaller then the size(and price!!) of the 30Gb! Thats great


but which one to buy!

BWhaler
Sep 5, 2007, 09:30 PM
Well, I haven't finalized my decision on what, if anything, I am going to buy, but I suspect I am going to buy the 160gb iPod classic.

I really wanted that drive on the iPod touch, but I think I am going to go this way since my 5G 60gb iPod doesn't hold its battery well anymore and is really banged up.

I figure 2 more hours of battery life and almost 3x the storage for my videos and pictures is worth it.

Not sure though. It's peculiar that while I think Apple did some major upgrades today, I am confused what to buy and not that enthusiastic in general with the updates.

What do I want?

An iPhone with a 16, 32, or 64 gigs of flash. I would be willing to pay accordingly.

An iPod touch with a 160gig hard drive. Again, I would be willing to pay accordingly.

An iPod nano with 16gig flash.

Everything Apple rolled out today just seems to be flawed in some small way which prevent making a purchase.

The iPod classic solved a minor problem for me right now, so it'll have to do, if I buy anything at all.

As others have pointed out, it seems like this is a mid-stream update, with many shortcomings, not the pre-holiday release...

dornoforpyros
Sep 5, 2007, 09:33 PM
awesome, time to upgrade to an 80gb, only 120mb left on my puny 30gb.

rockthecasbah
Sep 5, 2007, 09:47 PM
I will be purchasing an 80GB model when they get to the Sagemore store (i assume by Saturday). The pricepoint:capacity ratio is phenomenal, and to get the significantly increased battery life 30/40hrs audio is quite nice. Also the software facelift is pretty great, and i assume that with the metal casing scratching will be a non-issue for the most part (except maybe on the screen). This is the best value iPod hands down.


There is something, however, that seems foreign and cold to me about the Classics. Perhaps it is maybe the lack of visual innovation in design that frustrates me, or the elimination of the white iPod. Silver and the subdued matte black just doesn't inspire or captivate me (though this is an issue with all of the iPod lines now, not just the Classic).


Apple mutilated their iPod lineup in my eyes, but the Classic sustained the least loss of them all... It will have to do i guess :(

WannaGoMac
Sep 5, 2007, 09:56 PM
They did it with the 5.5g. They updated the software to add a few nicities and they did it for all prexisting machines. But if you haven't noticed on your computer, CoverFlow takes quite a bit of processor capacity. So I think the previous gen's chips would def. limit the possibility of porting it. It wouldn't be able to handle it properly.

I didn't see coverflow on the iPod classic.

redfirebird08
Sep 5, 2007, 10:28 PM
Seeing as how it's going to take a while for them to finally get a 80+ gig iPod Touch due to the limitations of Flash pricing, I ordered a black 80 gig iPod Classic from Amazon.com earlier tonight. $249 with no sales tax like from Apple's online store. I have a 30 gig iPod Photo and the main features I'm glad to have are more storage, gapless playback, and of course cover flow. The video playback isn't too big of a deal to me because it's such a small screen, but I'll put a few videos on it. Hopefully my guess is right and it takes a while for the pimped out iPod Touch to arrive (probably 2 years, perhaps 3 years away). :)

spine
Sep 5, 2007, 10:38 PM
Maybe this has already been mentioned....but today is the first day that NO iPod is white. Kinda sad. Does anyone else agree?

cuestakid
Sep 5, 2007, 10:46 PM
while I(and likely everyone else) would have loved to have had that 160 GB in the ipod Touch, I am still so psyched about the 160 which I plan on picking up as soon as they are at my local store(san luis Obispo).

Regardless of our gripes one thing is clear; Apple has put everyone else back at square one and we are right back to where we were when the first iPod came out

redfirebird08
Sep 5, 2007, 10:50 PM
while I(and likely everyone else) would have loved to have had that 160 GB in the ipod Touch, I am still so psyched about the 160 which I plan on picking up as soon as they are at my local store(san luis Obispo).

Regardless of our gripes one thing is clear; Apple has put everyone else back at square one and we are right back to where we were when the first iPod came out

Well not quite. We do have choices, even though they are limited. We all want a high capacity iPod Touch, but it ain't coming for another year at the earliest unless the Flash memory market collapses overnight. My guess is, we will not see a 80+ gig iPod Touch for at least 2 years. At least at this stage, we do have the choice for hard drive based iPods with huge capacities whereas the original iPod was limited by the fact that even hard drives were once really expensive to produce and difficult to produce at small sizes. We now have a 80 gig device that is slightly smaller than the previous 30 gig iPod, and a 160 gig iPod that is slightly smaller than the previous 80 gig iPod. That's a pretty nice leap and if you care more about music than video, you're in great shape with these iPods for a while. I was hoping for a 100+ gig iPod Touch today, but I'll stick with the 80 gig Classic until there is finally a 80-100 gig iPod Touch available, which isn't likely for quite a while as I said.

Mac One
Sep 5, 2007, 11:18 PM
I'm very glad they kept the "Classic" whilst still introducing the touch. It will make my decision hard before I go to Uni - functionablity vs trendy toy!
It's sad the lowest model has 4x the storage capacity of the computer I'm currently on!

appleSA90
Sep 5, 2007, 11:41 PM
sorry if this question has been answered before but I couldn't find it, I just bought a 30 GB iPod less than 2 weeks ago and now I see that they've come out with new ones, what I'm wondering is if I take my iPod (which has only been used a few times with a case on it) and all the packaging and receipt they would be able to "trade it in" for an 80gb ipod classic? I've heard of people doing this but never knew if it was true or not
thanks

redfirebird08
Sep 5, 2007, 11:51 PM
sorry if this question has been answered before but I couldn't find it, I just bought a 30 GB iPod less than 2 weeks ago and now I see that they've come out with new ones, what I'm wondering is if I take my iPod (which has only been used a few times with a case on it) and all the packaging and receipt they would be able to "trade it in" for an 80gb ipod classic? I've heard of people doing this but never knew if it was true or not
thanks

Not sure what the time period is on it, but I think you might be out of luck.

Gen3tix
Sep 6, 2007, 12:01 AM
The specs on this thing are amazing! My 5.5g iPod's battery life is holding up, but not very well. And it's pretty affordable while giving more storage space than I need. Definitely tempted to check this out.

Only thing that makes me a little upset is that there's no more white iPods. :(
Brings back memories of my first 3G iPod. Thought the signature iPod white looked great!

powerbook911
Sep 6, 2007, 12:48 AM
sorry if this question has been answered before but I couldn't find it, I just bought a 30 GB iPod less than 2 weeks ago and now I see that they've come out with new ones, what I'm wondering is if I take my iPod (which has only been used a few times with a case on it) and all the packaging and receipt they would be able to "trade it in" for an 80gb ipod classic? I've heard of people doing this but never knew if it was true or not
thanks

Did you buy from an Apple store? If you did, take a look at the receipt, it should tell you the return by date.

If it hasn't passed, yes, you can return for a refund. They may very well charge you the 10 percent restocking fee, approx $25, but that would be worth it, to get the new one.

If you got a nice manager or something, they might let you swap with no restocking fee. However, I don't think $25 is that bad for the new mode.

powerbook911
Sep 6, 2007, 12:50 AM
Only thing that makes me a little upset is that there's no more white iPods. :(
Brings back memories of my first 3G iPod. Thought the signature iPod white looked great!

Yep. It's the end of an era no question. The classic iPod isn't very classic without the white.

I'm not furious though because the silver with white click wheel is very slick. Furthermore, I had missed the white click wheel. I found the grey dreadful.

Overall, I think these new iPod Classics are true winners. Incredible storage, a wonderful value, and just overall really nice looking iPods. I hope they aren't lost amongst the small factor of the nano and touch of the touch and phone.

To me, the iPod Classic really is the best standalone iPod out there. All your music and probably all your video, right in your pocket. Fantastic.

redfirebird08
Sep 6, 2007, 01:09 AM
Yep. It's the end of an era no question. The classic iPod isn't very classic without the white.

I'm not furious though because the silver with white click wheel is very slick. Furthermore, I had missed the white click wheel. I found the grey dreadful.

Overall, I think these new iPod Classics are true winners. Incredible storage, a wonderful value, and just overall really nice looking iPods. I hope they aren't lost amongst the small factor of the nano and touch of the touch and phone.

To me, the iPod Classic really is the best standalone iPod out there. All your music and probably all your video, right in your pocket. Fantastic.

It's probably the pinnacle of hard drive based iPods, that's for sure. Like with the hard drive players, it appears that it will take a while for the Touch to mature and hit its pinnacle in the flash department. Does it have a ton of great features? Heck yeah, but STORAGE is incredibly important for a supposedly awesome video player.

DaftUnion
Sep 6, 2007, 03:53 AM
I'm just waiting for someone to start a thread complaining about how even the 160gb iPod is still not big enough. I need about 100gb to fit all my music so it looks like I'll be buying this one sometime in the near future.

BWhaler
Sep 6, 2007, 04:56 AM
I'm just waiting for someone to start a thread complaining about how even the 160gb iPod is still not big enough. I need about 100gb to fit all my music so it looks like I'll be buying this one sometime in the near future.

Well, I certainly am not complaining, since a 160gig iPod has enormous storage.

My iTunes library is about 600 gigs at this point--no, not one single stolen song, video, or movie.

But I certainly don't feel like I need to complain.

Seriously, do you really expect people to complain that there is not a 1 terrabyte iPod? What would the slogan be? 100,000 songs in your backpack?

Megabyte
Sep 6, 2007, 05:03 AM
Doing some quick math, the 160Gb model gives you the equivalent of a 468 CD disc changer for your car! (Assuming ~50% compression in lossless format).

I think some people underestimate the importance of this to serious music lovers, now your entire collection , can be taken anywhere, and yes plugged into an external amp if need be, with the quality of the original retained.

For me this means no longer keeping multiple iTunes libraries , one for the iPod and one for Sonos (lossless). Now I can just manage one, and take it with me , coverflow an' all.

Compression was always a compromise because storage technology couldn't cope, not because we can't hear the difference, because we can, especially with classical music. (some people even say they can't tell the difference between SD and HD video!). The point here is of course it makes no difference if you only listen to your music on the iPods ear buds, but if the iPod is just the container and the music is played externally it really matters.

The technology has finally caught up!

Next step for technology is to achieve this with no moving parts ie without the HDD.

Lycanthrope
Sep 6, 2007, 06:24 AM
Compression was always a compromise because storage technology couldn't cope, not because we can't hear the difference, because we can, especially with classical music.

I've always considered myself very fussy about reproduction quality but I'll be honest that I don't hear a lot of difference if any between the original WAV file and AAC at 160VBR.

When I re-ripped my collection following the purchase of my first Mac I did a test taking a WAV from EAC then encoding using different engines, iTunes, Lame etc. and bitrates, I found the above format indistinguishable from the WAV. Maybe I was using the wrong type of music, this was on some intense metal and accoustic tracks, I didn't try classical.

I did have a problem with my iPod photo with piano music as the impedance of my Bang & olufsen earphones caused the whooshing problem with the headphone amp to become apparent but this was solved by uograding to a 5th gen.

Could be I have bad ears of course...

MacAodh
Sep 6, 2007, 07:21 AM
If you want radio and someone else offers it in their player, then go buy their player. End of story. No one forces you to buy an iPod. There are other alternatives out there - why don't you seek them out?...

...If you want radio, get a different player or buy a radio tuner for your iPod. It's that simple. Or you could save a lot of cash and buy a handheld radio.

Yes, no one forces us to buy an ipod but i think, being on a mac related site, we all agree that the ipod is probably the best mp3 player out there. I've had two and will get a third once i can afford it. At the same time, even though i love listening to my own music, i do like not having to bother choosing the songs every now and then. Therefore, a radio would be really nice for me at least. Plus, from what i hear from an electronic engineering student friend of mine, it would cost next to nothing, in terms of both space or money, for apple to put one in

SactoGuy18
Sep 6, 2007, 08:22 AM
Compression was always a compromise because storage technology couldn't cope, not because we can't hear the difference, because we can, especially with classical music. (some people even say they can't tell the difference between SD and HD video!). The point here is of course it makes no difference if you only listen to your music on the iPods ear buds, but if the iPod is just the container and the music is played externally it really matters.


Actually, once you reach 256 kbps data rate VBR in either MP3 or AAC format, it's almost indistinguishable from the original unless you have a really high-end home stereo system that is way beyond the reach of most iPod users! :) I'm going to pick up the iPod Classic 80 GB either today or tomorrow will probably rip my entire CD collection into 256 kbps VBR High quality MP3 to copy to my new iPod.

johngordon
Sep 6, 2007, 08:59 AM
It's all about variety. You never know what you might want to listen to at any given time.

Exactly - there's loads I never or rarely listen to - but having my entire collection with me on the go so I can listen to whatever might pop into my head on a whim is the killer feature.

Have a 60GB 5G, with around 30GB of music - can't really justify a new one now, but very probably a touch in a year or two when they'll have a bigger capacity.

MrCrowbar
Sep 6, 2007, 09:11 AM
They should offer the touch in 16GB (flash), and 80 GB (HDD). Make the 80 GB one thicker to fit the larger battery and hard drive. I doubt many people will buy the 8GB model anyway since you can't fit a whole lot of video on it and the classic or nano are fine for podcast viewing.

I say the new nano is the sweet spot for most people. Those who did not want a nano before because it can't play video unlike other brands' player can get a nano now.

iTunes is great for organizing music and podcasts, but for video, it really sucks in my opinion. Can't even play back stuff efficiently, I always do the "reveal in finder" and watch with quicktime or vlc so the image is fluid and in sync.

8bitrevolution
Sep 6, 2007, 09:27 AM
Yes, no one forces us to buy an ipod but i think, being on a mac related site, we all agree that the ipod is probably the best mp3 player out there. I've had two and will get a third once i can afford it. At the same time, even though i love listening to my own music, i do like not having to bother choosing the songs every now and then. Therefore, a radio would be really nice for me at least. Plus, from what i hear from an electronic engineering student friend of mine, it would cost next to nothing, in terms of both space or money, for apple to put one in

I think the iPod is the best player hands down. But if you're sitting here complaining about no FM in the iPod and say "Hey, other players have it!", then buy the other player. It really is that simple.

The Apple Store sells an iPod FM Radio Remote for $49 bucks. If FM is that important, then you should invest in it.

Personally, for me, if I don't know what what I want to listen to, or don't want to bother picking something, I just use the "Shuffle Songs" option from the main menu.

As an aside - a lot of people seem genuinely disappointed over the iPod Touch not having a huge capacity hard drive. Did anyone really honestly expect one? For me it was a "that'd be awesome if they did it" scenario but I didn't expect to see one at an affordable price point.

WannaGoMac
Sep 6, 2007, 09:33 AM
IMHO, they must have had a reason for no HDD based iPod Touch.

mpuck972
Sep 6, 2007, 09:44 AM
How long should I wait for the 33% price drop? I'm thinking that 68 days should be about right, then I can get one for a reduced price!

mkjj
Sep 6, 2007, 09:55 AM
IMHO, they must have had a reason for no HDD based iPod Touch.

Could be somthing to do with response times, HD vs Flash, I suppose the flash based iPod touch has instant response times, on my 3g pod you car hear the HD spinning like crazy sometimes, wouldn't be good for Cioverflow etc

Cloudane
Sep 6, 2007, 09:58 AM
They could've picked a better name for it. Surely anyone who's used Macs before about 3-4 years ago will shudder at the name "Classic" and associate it with obsolescence and a product that's basically on death row.

I wonder if all these colours are actually coloured metal, or if they're painted on? (thinking of the joys of my Powerbook with its disappearing paint on the wrist rest area)

flying dog
Sep 6, 2007, 10:27 AM
They could've picked a better name for it. Surely anyone who's used Macs before about 3-4 years ago will shudder at the name "Classic" and associate it with obsolescence and a product that's basically on death row.

My thoughts exactly. Classic = old and obsolete... hate the name and it reminds me of OS 9 backwards compatibility. I said this yesterday...

The classic model I see as being an item to only help bridge the gap until flash storage cost comes down; to me it's not even a 6th generation (that would be the touch model) but something between that and the 5.5th.

The Classic model feels obsolete out of the box compared to the touch. Even the name Classic coming from a technology company should tell you which direction they want the market to move towards, and that's flash storage. Releasing a hard drive-based touch model probably would've sold well but gone against Apple's big picture for the next few years.

That said, I'm picking up a Classic one this weekend. My choices are to keep my dying 512MB iriver, get something that will drive me crazy with transferring music off and on, or pick up the classic model and ebay it when what I really want becomes available. It'll probably be an 80... I really need to figure out just how big my itunes folder got after my 3rd gen died.

jklps
Sep 6, 2007, 10:41 AM
My thoughts exactly. Classic = old and obsolete... hate the name and it reminds me of OS 9 backwards compatibility. I said this yesterday...

The classic model I see as being an item to only help bridge the gap until flash storage cost comes down; to me it's not even a 6th generation (that would be the touch model) but something between that and the 5.5th.

The Classic model feels obsolete out of the box compared to the touch. Even the name Classic coming from a technology company should tell you which direction they want the market to move towards, and that's flash storage. Releasing a hard drive-based touch model probably would've sold well but gone against Apple's big picture for the next few years.

That said, I'm picking up a Classic one this weekend. My choices are to keep my dying 512MB iriver, get something that will drive me crazy with transferring music off and on, or pick up the classic model and ebay it when what I really want becomes available. It'll probably be an 80... I really need to figure out just how big my itunes folder got after my 3rd gen died.

160GB, which is the big selling point for me, won't be in a flash product for awhile..in my uneducated estimation, at least early 2009.

flying dog
Sep 6, 2007, 10:54 AM
Absolutely, it'll take a while to get there. It just seems like Apple's bigger strategy is to move in that direction all across the line. It's unfortunate for us who like to take a ton of video, music, data or whatever with us. I think the best thing that could happen for those who want a large capacity touch model is for the current one and other flash players to sell like crazy and increase the market and production for the bigger chips.

Is the classic model supposed to hit the apple stores by this weekend? I've been looking forward to having all my music with me at work for a while now.

Tom B.
Sep 6, 2007, 11:34 AM
So the article says 40 hrs of music and 7 hours of video..
but that simply doesn't make sense for a 160GB iPod.

40 hours of music or 7 hours of video on 1 charge, they're talking about the battery, not the capacity.

Cloudane
Sep 6, 2007, 11:50 AM
The classic model I see as being an item to only help bridge the gap until flash storage cost comes down; to me it's not even a 6th generation (that would be the touch model) but something between that and the 5.5th.

Exactly.

(Hmm, so it's a 5.75th gen then!)

To me, it states Apple's intentions loud and clear: they no longer "like" HDD-based storage. They will by all means continue supplying it to meet demand until they can come up with the best of both worlds, but as far as they would like, it's on its way out. This would also explain why the Classic model didn't get anything new (storage is easy, and the interface was just a port of the one the designed for the Nano) - they don't want to put too much energy into updating a condemned product.

Kind of like the Mac Mini :D

djkirsten
Sep 6, 2007, 01:06 PM
I really just want to know if the software for the new ipod classic and nano will be available on the "old" (5.5gen) ipods. if not...call me when the hack comes out cause the software looks SWEET!!!

Roy Hobbs
Sep 6, 2007, 01:19 PM
I really just want to know if the software for the new ipod classic and nano will be available on the "old" (5.5gen) ipods. if not...call me when the hack comes out cause the software looks SWEET!!!

don't hold your breath

bilbo--baggins
Sep 6, 2007, 01:29 PM
Well, I certainly am not complaining, since a 160gig iPod has enormous storage.

My iTunes library is about 600 gigs at this point--no, not one single stolen song, video, or movie.

But I certainly don't feel like I need to complain.

Seriously, do you really expect people to complain that there is not a 1 terrabyte iPod? What would the slogan be? 100,000 songs in your backpack?

I think 160GB's for the iPod is great. Even with most of my music in Lossless format I'll be able to fit it all on. That doesn't include video. I think that 160GB for the Apple TV isn't great - but I have the 40GB model and I've finally configured my network to give me reliable streaming, so hard drive size isn't an issue. In fact I'd rather have reliable streaming, than an Apple TV with a huge hard drive that duplicates my library.

OllyW
Sep 6, 2007, 01:32 PM
40 hours of music or 7 hours of video on 1 charge, they're talking about the battery, not the capacity.

It's actually 30 hours music and 5 hours video for the 160GB, the other figures are for the 80GB model.

tmoney468
Sep 6, 2007, 01:36 PM
It's actually 30 hours music and 5 hours video for the 160GB, the other figures are for the 80GB model.

Nope, you're wrong:

160GB iPod
http://images.apple.com/ipodclassic/images/specs_160gbbatterydiagram_20070905.jpg

http://www.apple.com/ipodclassic/specs.html

heisetax
Sep 6, 2007, 05:03 PM
I have a feeling the classic line will suffer in sales when there is the iPod touch line now

'The iPod Touch is more closely related to the iPod Nano in storage capacity. Thus I would expect that to be the most competition. Price wise the iPod classic is closest. But the iPod classic is geared towards those that want a lot of storage.

Bill the TaxMan

technicolor
Sep 6, 2007, 05:28 PM
'The iPod Touch is more closely related to the iPod Nano in storage capacity. Thus I would expect that to be the most competition. Price wise the iPod classic is closest. But the iPod classic is geared towards those that want a lot of storage.

Bill the TaxMan
Exactly. They are two different products entirely. The capacity on the touch is what "cripples" it. A lot of people want storage and arent too concerned with the bells and whistles.

Chef Medeski
Sep 6, 2007, 05:43 PM
I didn't see coverflow on the iPod classic.
http://www.apple.com/ipodclassic/

chillywilly
Sep 6, 2007, 05:49 PM
Exactly. They are two different products entirely. The capacity on the touch is what "cripples" it. A lot of people want storage and arent too concerned with the bells and whistles.

While this is true, you would think that a widescreen and battery life would be bigger priorities over storage. What good is 160gb if your battery life is less than 10 hours per charge for audio or 2 hours for video?

I think the iPod touch would end up looking like a Sony PSP if it had the storage and battery life it needed, which IMO, would draw more criticism.

Thus, stick with the tried and true model/form factor for the most storage and longest battery life.

blueflower
Sep 6, 2007, 11:24 PM
Hi guys, I have a question why is it that Apple has decided to scrap white coloured Ipods?

Is it a cost reason because I thought white paint was the cheapest which is why in Japan white cars are the most popular and cheapest.

Or it is that they want to create a new colour mark with history now or something? Deciding to scrap white just for the heck of it?

SkyBell
Sep 6, 2007, 11:58 PM
IMHO, they must have had a reason for no HDD based iPod Touch.

From what I've heard, the hard drives vibrations and heat would seriously screw with the touch screen.


Excellent move Apple, love classics. :)

odinsride
Sep 7, 2007, 08:36 AM
Hi guys, I have a question why is it that Apple has decided to scrap white coloured Ipods?

Is it a cost reason because I thought white paint was the cheapest which is why in Japan white cars are the most popular and cheapest.

Or it is that they want to create a new colour mark with history now or something? Deciding to scrap white just for the heck of it?

They're discontinuing the use of PVC and other non-green materials in their products from what I've heard. That's most likely the reason.

johnmcboston
Sep 7, 2007, 09:53 PM
Now, if the stores would actually carry the blasted things. ;-)

Sol
Sep 7, 2007, 10:21 PM
My iTunes library is about 600 gigs at this point--no, not one single stolen song, video, or movie.

I guess that is uncompressed or lossless, right?

For the iPod Classic I could re-rip my library in 320 kbs AAC and there would still be room for movies on the 80 GB model.

Amazing to think 5 GB was the high end when the first iPod came out.

uv23
Sep 8, 2007, 01:44 PM
I ordered an iPod classic immediately after the keynote on Wednesday and Apple still hasn't shipped it. Irritating!!!:mad::mad::mad:

MacsRgr8
Sep 8, 2007, 01:49 PM
I ordered an iPod classic immediately after the keynote on Wednesday and Apple still hasn't shipped it. Irritating!!!:mad::mad::mad:

Relax... so did I.

I even had to wait almost 24 hours before getting my order-confirmation email.
I expect mine to arrive here in Holland sometime next week.

Man.. can't wait to get the full 160 GB!! Yeehaa! :cool:

justhemusic
Sep 8, 2007, 02:07 PM
has anyone heard rumors about a possible price drop on the previous flagship 30 & 80gig iPods now that the new 80 & 160 gig Classics have been released?

psychofreak
Sep 8, 2007, 02:09 PM
They're probably going to be sold refurb for a low price :)

Blue Velvet
Sep 8, 2007, 02:16 PM
Now I want a 160gb one just after buying my 80gb one a few months ago... is there no end? ;)

Guess I'll wait for the 200-250gb one, but what I'm really after is something about 600gb in size to hold my Lossless collection with some room to spare.

mihiruthere93
Sep 8, 2007, 09:19 PM
Relax... so did I.

I even had to wait almost 24 hours before getting my order-confirmation email.
I expect mine to arrive here in Holland sometime next week.

Man.. can't wait to get the full 160 GB!! Yeehaa! :cool:

dats too bad for you guys! I was at tyson's corner today and i saw an apple store and I went in there and got one right away :D if there's an apple store near u guys go for it instead of ordering online... so worth it. so far, the ipod seems great! definitely worth the money! :D:D:D i luv u :apple:

zap2
Sep 8, 2007, 09:25 PM
Now I want a 160gb one just after buying my 80gb one a few months ago... is there no end? ;)


I know! I had the 60 5G, told myself that 20 extra GBs was not worth the upgrade...but then I saw the brighter screen. I just said no to 5.5, but now the 80GB is SO slim....but I really want 160Gb(once I'm done importing this round of movies, I'll need the 160Gbs

MaskedPhantom
Sep 8, 2007, 11:04 PM
invisi-shield.

Picked up one for my 5th gen iPod and it works great.

;) :p