PDA

View Full Version : iPod Photo Packs A Few Surprises


MacBytes
Nov 2, 2004, 09:04 AM
Category: Tips and How To\'s
Link: iPod Photo Packs A Few Surprises (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20041102100436)
Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)

Approved by Mudbug

Peyote
Nov 2, 2004, 09:44 AM
This person's articles have time after time had misleading headlines to increase readership, and articles filled with info most mac users already know.


What...she didn't know that iTunes imports the photos into the new iPod Photo? Did she read anything about them before she bought one? I don't plan on buying one, and I knew THAT much...some surprise.

This article is just another review.

Another disappointment from Mac360. MayBytes needs to verify that her article titles match her articles, or stop linking to them. I'm fine with having a review up there...but I can't stand underhanded tricks like a deceptive article title, and I think MacBytes is above that.

bpd115
Nov 2, 2004, 10:11 AM
Not to mention the site is SLOOOOOOOOOW

Wigletbill
Nov 2, 2004, 10:23 AM
That site always does that crap. And it takes an afternoon to even load it up. I just don't know why but those pictures of the female author just upset my digestive process. Silver is only good on hardware.

FosterKanig
Nov 2, 2004, 10:46 AM
That was just painful.
Besides being painfully slow, that was totally worthless. I am surprised the reviewer knew that photos could be put on the iPod Photo. And I love the part where the reviewer pointed out the the iPod "might do this or might not. I'm not sure. If anyone knows please let me know".

The upside is, I am going to start my own Mac site so I can buy this stuff and write it off as a business expense. My reviews can't be worse than that one.

mfeldman
Nov 2, 2004, 10:48 AM
I tried loading images direct from a card reader and could not get them to show up on ipod photo. The instructions vary from the enclosed booklet and the user manual on the CD but it looks like it should work.

Anyone else able to get images into ipod photo direct from a card reader? I cannot figure that one out.

FWIW: I think she should put up her real photos. The ones at terapatrick.com. Those are MUCH better.

:eek:

zelmo
Nov 2, 2004, 10:52 AM
After waiting an incredibly long time (possibly 7 seconds or so), I decided reading the review was probably not worth my time. Not because I think tp is an idiot or anything, but because what I've read to date (4 or 5 pieces) suggests that she is a Mac user like me, not someone privy to inside (or insightful) information.
Maybe her articles are incredibly beneficial to a new Maccite, but I find most of the info they contain is already common knowledge here at MR.

jchen
Nov 2, 2004, 11:01 AM
I've about read enough on the new iPods over this past week. I suppose we'll hear plenty more when the Limited Edition U2 iPod shows up. How much can you write about something that's black and red? Too bad it wasn't out in time for Halloween.

Tera's "review" was fine with me and gave me a few pointers. I ordered the 40 gig iPod photo. I didn't know it would import photos from a card reader. That's a nice touch if it works.

Check the AV cable in the photo. That doesn't seem to be the same that came with my iBook. The video "out" quality is poor on the iBook which explains why the iPod has s-video out on the dock. I'd like to know if there's much difference in quality between the two. Has anyone tested the battery life yet?

Oh, one more thing for all the grumblers... where's your web site and examples of your reviews of Mac products? Show us the goods, dudes. It's a web log, for crying out loud.

Peyote
Nov 2, 2004, 11:18 AM
I've about read enough on the new iPods over this past week. I suppose we'll hear plenty more when the Limited Edition U2 iPod shows up. How much can you write about something that's black and red? Too bad it wasn't out in time for Halloween.

Tera's "review" was fine with me and gave me a few pointers. I ordered the 40 gig iPod photo. I didn't know it would import photos from a card reader. That's a nice touch if it works.

Check the AV cable in the photo. That doesn't seem to be the same that came with my iBook. The video "out" quality is poor on the iBook which explains why the iPod has s-video out on the dock. I'd like to know if there's much difference in quality between the two. Has anyone tested the battery life yet?

Oh, one more thing for all the grumblers... where's your web site and examples of your reviews of Mac products? Show us the goods, dudes. It's a web log, for crying out loud.


I can't speak for anyone else, I don't have a problem with a review. Those are posted on MacBytes all the time, and occasionally I read them. But this isn't a review. This is a review disguised as an article about new features of the iPod photo. These are features she claims are "surprises" and therefore allude to them being unknown features. These are known features. She does this a lot and her articles are more often than not a waste of time. If this is a blog, she should present it as a blog, and stop trying to increase her readership with deceptive titles. That's my beef with that website.

tpatricks
Nov 2, 2004, 11:21 AM
I tried out the s-video cable on the iPod Photo late last night. Video quality is notably better than with the composite video connector. Apple provides just the composite video and R/L audio cable in the iPod Photo, not the s-video cable.

There's only one transition-- wipe left going forward in the slideshow, wipe right going backwards. It'd be nice to have dissolves and others.

One more thing: the thumbnails are ridiculously small. Scrolling is rather quick unless you've got 2,000 images in the Album. Even with my glasses I had a hard time figuring out what photo was being represented by the thumbnails. Don't let Apple's full color iPod Photo graphic fool you. Those pix are tiny.

BTW - the site is getting slammed kinda hard this morning (it's still morning here) which surprised me considering it's election day, and the topic. After all, how many iPod Photo pieces can one digest in a week? That indicates lots of interest from Mac and iPod users who don't know as much as the elite MB readers. :)

Mac360 is hosted on a dual 2.5 ghz PowerMac sitting behind my desk (the one in the photo). Interestingly, the Mac handles the traffic with no problem and CPU usage seldom breaks 25-percent even at peak times. It's the maxed DSL circuit from Verizon Hawaii that may cause a slowdown in the AM (a problem we have every Mon and Tue morning in Hawaii). More bandwidth means more money out, not in. For the critics-- get your own Mac and create your own site. Lets see what you can do besides be a critic. Mac OS X runs Apache, MySQL, PHP, so the tools are all available and free. The site ran on a low end eMac for awhile. I'll even give pointers on setup.

rbarrett
Nov 2, 2004, 11:44 AM
Picked this up in tera's comments...

"Reading about you losing some photos on your flash card reminded me about a nice little utility from http://www.datarescue.com/ called Photorescue. It saved the content of one of my flash cards when it was seemingly lost to the ether. I just plugged in my card to the reader and ran Photorescue. It salvaged all the images and put them in a special folder from which I was able to "import" images to iPhoto. Great sighs of relief!"

I have used that, too, and it worked fine for me. I thought I had trashed all my photos.

nagromme
Nov 2, 2004, 12:35 PM
There seems to be some overreaction going on here :D MacBytes itself could be criticized for just collecting links to other sites--but some people find it useful then where's the harm?

As for the heinous crime of catchy article titles... what site doesn't do that? All it made me expect was a review that uncovered things that surprised the reviewer. That's what I got--and I'm always happy for one more review of something I'm likely to spend big bucks on. That headline sure didn't make ME expect anything earthshaking. Anyone who felt assured of a BIG surprise hasn't read many headlines :D And they paid the high price of veiwing a page that didn't interest them.

(The site loaded fine for me, too--and I'm on modem. You're welcome not to click if you don't want to, though, so it's hardly the end of the world if you don't like the site. I seldom visit it but I have no objection to seeing it on MacBytes.)

macridah
Nov 2, 2004, 12:41 PM
Not to mention the site is SLOOOOOOOOOW

yup ... i thought i lost my network connection or something!

But good to know you could import pictures from your digital camera to the iPod photo ... bad to know that it's not straight forward on how to view those pictures in the iPod photo, just store them. Maybe she just can't figure it out?

iMeowbot
Nov 2, 2004, 01:00 PM
MacBytes itself could be criticized for just collecting links to other sites
But that's pretty much all it's supposed to be, isn't it? :confused: :D

Speaking of that, overly picky readers would do well to read articles from the macbytes front page (http://macbytes.com) instead of through the forums. The site URLs are included there, making it easy to avoid the anguish and horror of reading newbie-oriented material.

nagromme
Nov 2, 2004, 01:08 PM
But that's pretty much all it's supposed to be, isn't it? :confused: :D

Exactly--and I think MacBytes is a great idea :)

(I also never realized you could get to the headlines from the forums. Not that I would--the home page bookmark is easier.)

iMeowbot
Nov 2, 2004, 01:11 PM
I'm just assuming that people are clicking on the redirector links from the tops of forum threads rather than the front page, because there seems to be an awful lot of shock and surprise whenever a mac360 article turns up.

edesignuk
Nov 2, 2004, 01:17 PM
I have a cunning plan!

http://upload.yo-momma.net/uploads/forums/mac360.jpg

tpatricks
Nov 2, 2004, 01:23 PM
...it just cracks me up every time I see it. Saw it again on the news and couldn't stop laughing.

BTW - I'd be happy to run a "guest writer" piece from Peyote, or Wiglet Bill, Foster, PM666, et al. That'd be interesting, eh? First come, first served...

:rolleyes:

FYI -- iPod Photo's been playing now for about 13 hours and still shows battery life... that's a welcome improvement I'll take.

"THINK TWICE?" Yeeesh, hits just went up again. Thanx!
-

mslifkin
Nov 2, 2004, 01:43 PM
I tried loading images direct from a card reader and could not get them to show up on ipod photo. The instructions vary from the enclosed booklet and the user manual on the CD but it looks like it should work.

Anyone else able to get images into ipod photo direct from a card reader? I cannot figure that one out.

:eek:

I think the card reader the manual is referring to is the Belkin Digital Camera Link ...

"Storing Digital Photos From a Photo Card Reader
Note: Using an optional iPod photo-compatible photo card reader (available for
purchase at www.apple.com/store) and a standard digital camera and photo card, you
can store photos on iPod photo, then delete them from the photo card and take more
pictures."

I don't think any CF card reader will work.

Regards,
Marc

iMeowbot
Nov 2, 2004, 01:47 PM
Another thing about using card readers with the iPod photo: you won't be able to display them straight off the camera. The photo files have to be pushed back to your computer, to be processed into a format the iPod can display :( I suspect that the iPod doesn't have enough memory to do this well enough on its own.

Stella
Nov 2, 2004, 01:58 PM
IMO, there is nothing wrong with this 'review', its informative.

I think the "surprises" that is being talked about is the import options on the actual iPod that at the moment don't appear to do anything.

These options are intriguing - why are they there? If they served no purpose Apple would have surely removed the options. Perhaps Apple are going to let 3rd party develop new card readers that can import photos into the iPod AND be available to view. None of the current card readers, i.e, Belkin does this - it only copies photos on to iPod but you can't view them. Maybe there will be card readers forthcoming that will copy photos from your memory card AND produce thumbnails that can be viewed from within iPod - i.e., it manipulates the iPod photo library.

Peyote
Nov 2, 2004, 03:09 PM
...it just cracks me up every time I see it. Saw it again on the news and couldn't stop laughing.

BTW - I'd be happy to run a "guest writer" piece from Peyote, or Wiglet Bill, Foster, PM666, et al. That'd be interesting, eh? First come, first served...

:rolleyes:

FYI -- iPod Photo's been playing now for about 13 hours and still shows battery life... that's a welcome improvement I'll take.

"THINK TWICE?" Yeeesh, hits just went up again. Thanx!
-


I don't have the time to write reviews...but I'd be happy to title your articles for you. :D

That's all that I find lacking anyway.

tpatricks
Nov 2, 2004, 03:34 PM
...start with about a dozen on different topics. Keep it related to Apple, Mac, related hardware/software, Microsoft. Feel free to share...

;)

mfeldman
Nov 2, 2004, 04:01 PM
This person's articles have time after time had misleading headlines to increase readership, and articles filled with info most mac users already know.

What...she didn't know that iTunes imports the photos into the new iPod Photo? Did she read anything about them before she bought one? I don't plan on buying one, and I knew THAT much...some surprise.

Strange. I read the same article and it didn't say anything like that at all. Maybe you were reading something on another site... I'm having difficulty finding anything troubling with... "ipod photo packs a few surprises."

This article is just another review.
Another disappointment from Mac360. MayBytes needs to verify that her article titles match her articles, or stop linking to them. I'm fine with having a review up there...but I can't stand underhanded tricks like a deceptive article title, and I think MacBytes is above that.

What? Another ipod review? How revolting! And shame on her for pointing out some things about the iPod we are SUPPOSED to know (but do not). How does she know that? You are right. The title is soooooo deceptive it even fooled you!

All seriousness aside, I would like to see a comparison of Mac vs. Dell or Gateway. How about: "Cheap: The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly!"

Has anyone done a comparison between ipod and the Rio carbon?

Peyote
Nov 2, 2004, 04:23 PM
...start with about a dozen on different topics. Keep it related to Apple, Mac, related hardware/software, Microsoft. Feel free to share...

;)


Well for this article, an appropriate title would have been "Tera Patricks reviews the iPod Photo."

I'm not about to title your articles, I was being facetious, which I thought was evident. That's your job, and I think you should rethink your strategy. This by far isn't the first article that I and others have felt had a deceptive title.

redAPPLE
Nov 2, 2004, 04:41 PM
it goes to show you, you can't please everyone. i'd say, do your best, tera. it's a cruel world. especially if dubya gets re-elected. :eek:

well where was i (got kinda carried away there)...

i actually was expecting something new. after reading the article, i thought, well, that was 5 minutes wasted :D

Peyote
Nov 2, 2004, 04:46 PM
What? Another ipod review? How revolting! And shame on her for pointing out some things about the iPod we are SUPPOSED to know (but do not). How does she know that? You are right. The title is soooooo deceptive it even fooled you!



Would it be correct for a reviewer to claim that an iPod (which has been known to have secret features) had surprises, and in the review claim that the battery life was a surprise? Since he or she did not know the battery life, it was a surprise, right? Therefore it's ok to claim the iPod had surprising features, inferring that there are features that have previously been undiscussed. Would you have a problem with the title then?

I think some people are looking at my criticism a little simplistically. Like I said, I don't have a problem with another iPod review. I just saw something going on that I thought was wrong, and pointed it out that this is a recurring tactic. The fact that journalists and other reviewers may use the same device has nothing to do with this. The fact that others are doing it, doesn't make it right. And of all of the reviews, articles, and everything else posted on MacBytes...the Mac360 articles are the only ones I've seen use this device on a regular basis...not every time, mind you...but regular enough.

For those of you that don't understand why I would find that the title is deceptive...think about the special features that have been discovered on previous iPods before they were made public. A new iPod was just released that is very different than previous ones. I don't think it's a stretch for one to be under the impression someone had discovered an hidden feature, which is what I think Tera was banking on when she wrote the title. Anyway, I'm moving on, this has taken up way too much of everyone's time already. Sorry if I offended anyone, I just see something happening, and don't think it's right.

iMeowbot
Nov 2, 2004, 04:53 PM
Bleah. I *like* the Mac360 style, it has kind of a campy supermarket tabloid look and headlines to match. Who needs another dry, dull tech rag? I give Mike Magee's Inquirer high marks for similar reasons.

tpatricks
Nov 2, 2004, 06:07 PM
Anyway, I'm moving on, this has taken up way too much of everyone's time already. Sorry if I offended anyone, I just see something happening, and don't think it's right.

Inquiring minds want to know... where? Those Nader guys are all over.

Nah, just kidding. I'm off tomorrow; either licking wounds, drunk, and celebrating, or all three-- depending on how the rest of Election Day goes. Jack took the previously thrown down gauntlet and is working on a Mac vs. Dell comparison for Wednesday.

Any good title ideas? How about "Jack compares Mac to Dell?" Exciting, no? Or, "eMac Farmer and a Dell. E-eye, e-eye, oh!" Catchy?

Really, it's the hair isn't it? As "dubya" says, "Viagra corn doritos, y'all."

nagromme
Nov 2, 2004, 07:56 PM
Better avoid newspapers, magazines, CNN.com, in fact all web sites... pretty much anything with headlines :D Headlines are meant to stand out--"deceptive" is an extreme exaggeration. And Mac360 is hardly worse that average even if you DO think catchy headlines are wrong.

solvs
Nov 2, 2004, 08:50 PM
Once again, I find myself saying: if you don't like it, don't click it. Not everything is for the ubergeek (no offense ubergeek) who reads MacRumors everyday and knows everything ever about the iPod. I for one enjoy sites like these and As The Apple Turns that add a little comedy to the "news". It's not just you Tera, but I swear sometimes people click on these links just to complain about them. It's not like she's CNET or anything. Sheesh! At least she didn't call it the IPod, we'd never hear the end of it. :D :rolleyes: :p

On the other hand, were this (terapatrick.com) really you, I would be visiting your site everyday... sometimes twice. :eek: (warning, graphic adult natured link)

tpatricks
Nov 2, 2004, 09:31 PM
I for one enjoy sites like these and As The Apple Turns that add a little comedy to the "news". It's not just you Tera, but I swear sometimes people click on these links just to complain about them. It's not like she's CNET or anything. Sheesh! At least she didn't call it the IPod, we'd never hear the end of it. :D :rolleyes: :p

On the other hand, were this (terapatrick.com) really you, I would be visiting your site everyday... sometimes twice. :eek: (warning, graphic adult natured link)

Those must be photos of me in my younger years. ;)

All this noise and opinionating comes with the territory. The idea of a site like 360 is multifold; to share something with the Mac community, have fun, inform and entertain, play with toys, and put the pieces of the technology together (it's a site made on a Mac, served on a Mac...) and make it work.

It ain't the money. That comes from side jobs (http://www.terapatrick.com/). :rolleyes: Wait'll I get enough posts to upload a photo. I'll pull one from my private "Ipod foto" just 4 u.

:D