Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > iPhone, iPod and iPad > iPod

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Jun 9, 2009, 11:28 AM   #1
atoothelex
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Send a message via AIM to atoothelex
iPod classic in September?

What can we expect come September? Will the iPod classic finally get the memory boost of 250GB that we've been waiting for, or will the classic be killed?
__________________
15" MacBook Pro, 2.66GHz, 4GB DDR3, 500GB HDD, 2TB External Western Digital HDD, 240GB 5.5G iPod Video (Modded by iPod Zens)
atoothelex is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 9, 2009, 11:48 AM   #2
JonHimself
macrumors 68000
 
JonHimself's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Maybe they'll turn it into a competitor of the Flip HD video recorder. Who knows at this point if they'll even keep it? I've got to assume they're still a little ways away from killing it off (if they ever do) but I think bump in hard drive space is likely the only "guarantee" as far as rumor-site guarantees go.
__________________
shambo, Changing the definition of "future proof" since April 2009.
JonHimself is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 9, 2009, 11:50 AM   #3
ecstasy
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
From my own perspective, I think the Classic will slowly be killed off, leading way to the iPod Touch/iPhone dominating the scene.
ecstasy is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 9, 2009, 10:13 PM   #4
ghostee
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Villa Park, IL
Considering they went down in size from 160 to 120, I doubt they'll be increasing it to 250. I'd guess they'll retire it either this September or next.
__________________
iPad 2, iPhone 4S, 2006 15" MacBook Pro, 2012 Mac Mini
ghostee is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 10, 2009, 06:19 AM   #5
pooryou
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Well if they finally have an OS for the device that can handle large amounts of music files, they can start upping the capacity again. I'm pretty sure that the 160GB was discontinued because the iPod Classic OS can't handle it (mine sure can't).
pooryou is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 10, 2009, 07:19 AM   #6
JonHimself
macrumors 68000
 
JonHimself's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Quote:
Originally Posted by pooryou View Post
Well if they finally have an OS for the device that can handle large amounts of music files, they can start upping the capacity again. I'm pretty sure that the 160GB was discontinued because the iPod Classic OS can't handle it (mine sure can't).
I think the reason it dropped from 160gb to 120gb is because of the hard-drive "plates" (or platters or something). The 80gb was 1 of those so it was small, the 160 was 2 so it was thicker. They were able to then up the 80 to 120gb because the hard drives got bigger (in terms of space) and presumably could have put out a 240gb in the same size as the 160gb previous model but just didn't.
Maybe it does have to do with the OS but I just assumed it was a dimensions issue.
__________________
shambo, Changing the definition of "future proof" since April 2009.
JonHimself is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 10, 2009, 07:34 AM   #7
Ivan P
macrumors 68030
 
Ivan P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Home
Send a message via AIM to Ivan P
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonHimself View Post
I think the reason it dropped from 160gb to 120gb is because of the hard-drive "plates" (or platters or something). The 80gb was 1 of those so it was small, the 160 was 2 so it was thicker. They were able to then up the 80 to 120gb because the hard drives got bigger (in terms of space) and presumably could have put out a 240gb in the same size as the 160gb previous model but just didn't.
Maybe it does have to do with the OS but I just assumed it was a dimensions issue.
Apple said why at the iPod keynote - the wanted to make it thinner while keeping it at a capacity that everybody (read: most) would love. Plus the 160GB classic was officially the worst-selling iPod ever.
__________________
Black 64GB iPhone 5 / Black 3rd-gen iPad, 64GB Wi-Fi
17" 2011 MacBook Pro, 2.4GHz Core i7, 750GB HDD, 6GB RAM
11" 2010 MacBook Air, 1.4GHz, 128GB SSD, 2GB RAM
Ivan P is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 10, 2009, 07:40 AM   #8
instaxgirl
macrumors 65816
 
instaxgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Edinburgh, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan P View Post
Apple said why at the iPod keynote - the wanted to make it thinner while keeping it at a capacity that everybody (read: most) would love. Plus the 160GB classic was officially the worst-selling iPod ever.
And while the Apple obsession with thinness is usually really annoying, it's true that the 160GB classic is a beast. I only know one person with one.
instaxgirl is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 10, 2009, 10:35 AM   #9
JonHimself
macrumors 68000
 
JonHimself's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan P View Post
Apple said why at the iPod keynote - the wanted to make it thinner while keeping it at a capacity that everybody (read: most) would love. Plus the 160GB classic was officially the worst-selling iPod ever.
I think that's what I was getting at? 120gb was the biggest hard drive available to keep it at the same dimensions. I have to assume part of why the 160gb didn't sell was because of the size when added to the fact that most people probably don't have libraries that big? (I'm aware that some people do, I have 110gbs of music and close to 1TB of video, but I'm likely in the minority of most iPod purchasers).
If they could fit 180gbs/240/150 whatever it may be in the same size iPod for the same price I'm not sure why they wouldn't (well I mean, I wouldn't be surprised if they left it, but if price and cosmetics don't change it's reasonable to assume they'd bump specs)?
__________________
shambo, Changing the definition of "future proof" since April 2009.
JonHimself is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 10, 2009, 10:36 AM   #10
JonHimself
macrumors 68000
 
JonHimself's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Quote:
Originally Posted by instaxgirl View Post
And while the Apple obsession with thinness is usually really annoying, it's true that the 160GB classic is a beast. I only know one person with one.
I'd like to see the nano sales vs classic sales. I've always had the classic (since 3rd gen) and only once bought a refurb 2gb nano for nike+. Most people I know have nanos and not the classic and I think Apple has long acknowledged the nano as being the most popular (amazon charts, itunes store charts etc) but I'd like to know how close it actually is (or isn't).
__________________
shambo, Changing the definition of "future proof" since April 2009.
JonHimself is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 10, 2009, 06:24 PM   #11
TheNightPhoenix
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by instaxgirl View Post
And while the Apple obsession with thinness is usually really annoying, it's true that the 160GB classic is a beast. I only know one person with one.
Well I bought 2
TheNightPhoenix is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 10, 2009, 09:14 PM   #12
slu
macrumors 65832
 
slu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Buffalo
I also bought one and was dissapointed when they dropped the capacity, but I also understood why they did.

I expect them to keep it the same unless they can get a larger capacity drive in the same size.

I don't think they can drop it until you can get a touch with over 100 gig. There are just too many people that want a music player that holds their entire collection.
__________________
MacMini 2.3 GHz i7 / Nexus 4 / iPod classic 160 GB / iPad 2 / Nexus 7 / AppleTV2&3
slu is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 10, 2009, 09:49 PM   #13
DaftUnion
macrumors 6502a
 
DaftUnion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Send a message via AIM to DaftUnion
Eh, I'm really hoping they "update" it back to a 160gb drive or larger (if they make a single platter 160gb drive or bigger by September). Hell, now that the iTunes store is double the bitrate than before it's like dropping a 120gb iPod down to 60gb for the people that only used to encode/buy at 128kbps. And I really can't see that the 120gb is going to be big enough for everybody due to this.

I've almost finished ripping all my cd's onto the computer and it's going to be around 120-130gb's so that 120gb classic just isn't going to do.

And to the people that say that you don't need all your music with you, I already have an iPhone that only holds a portion of my collection so I want one that does (as I'm sure others do too). When your in the car and somebody wants to hear a random song it's nice to know that it's most likely there.
__________________
iMac G5 Rev. B/20"/2Ghz/SuperDrive/1GB RAM/400GB HD/Mac OS X.4.11
Switched 8/25/05
Custom 2.4Ghz Core2Duo/1GB Ram/NVIDIA 7600
iPhone 8gb
DaftUnion is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 10, 2009, 09:55 PM   #14
Chundles
macrumors G4
 
Chundles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: The Gong, Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonHimself View Post
I'd like to see the nano sales vs classic sales. I've always had the classic (since 3rd gen) and only once bought a refurb 2gb nano for nike+. Most people I know have nanos and not the classic and I think Apple has long acknowledged the nano as being the most popular (amazon charts, itunes store charts etc) but I'd like to know how close it actually is (or isn't).
In my iPod sales experience the nanos and the touches fly off the shelves while the classics gather dust.

It's massively skewed towards nano and touch, like 10 or 15:1
__________________
This is going straight to the Pool Room
Chundles is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 10, 2009, 11:18 PM   #15
SactoGuy18
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sacramento, CA USA
Send a message via Yahoo to SactoGuy18
I don't think Apple sells that many iPod classics because 1) they're pretty big units by iPod standards and 2) the vast majority of iPod owners don't need the 120 GB storage capacity of the player unless they want to store most fo their music collection on the player.

I do think that Apple may be preparing to replace the iPod classic with a new touchscreen player with 64 and 128 GB flash memory that does not have the full functionality of the iPod touch (many of the features of the iPod touch are overkill for the average iPod owner).
__________________
3G iPod nano (8 GB teal blue case), 7G iPod nano (16 GB blue case), 4G iPod touch (32 GB), iPad Air "Silver" (32 GB)
SactoGuy18 is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > iPhone, iPod and iPad > iPod

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Resolved: Old iPod classic won't play music: New iPod classic Frozen Scepticalscribe iPod 3 Feb 19, 2014 04:18 PM
ipod classic update on september 10th tomtanojevic iPod 50 Sep 17, 2013 01:57 AM
Weekly Photo Contest - September 9th - September 16th (Theme: Numbers) emtrey Digital Photography 18 Sep 18, 2012 12:22 AM
Nano Watch Mock Up. Return of Classic iPod Classic Controls jozero iPod 2 Sep 6, 2012 12:09 PM
Apple Planning 'All-New' iPod Touch and iPod Nano for September Launch? MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 52 Aug 7, 2012 10:15 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:58 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC