16GB Flash-based iPod Video Player?

Discussion in 'MacRumors.com News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Dec 6, 2006.

  1. macrumors bot

    MacRumors

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2001
    #1
    [​IMG]

    Barrons reveals a report by Daniel Amir, an analyst with W.R. Hambrecht, who expects NAND flash growth in the first half of 2007.

    Driving the sales of the Flash memory are cited to be the rumored Apple iPod Phone in 4GB and 8GB sizes... but also a "16 GB flash-based Apple iPod Video player" which is expected to be seen in the first quarter of 2007.

    Multiple reports have suggested a 4GB/8GB iPhone is ramping up for a early 2007 launch, but no information about a 16GB flash-based Video iPod has been previously reported.

    The accuracy of Daniel Amir's reports are unknown.
     
  2. macrumors 68000

    Spock

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2002
    Location:
    Vulcan
    #2
    Sweet! a Eyestraining video Nano!!
     
  3. macrumors 68020

    Unspeaked

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2003
    Location:
    West Coast
    #3
    16GB for a video player seems a little weak...
     
  4. macrumors 6502a

    Chef Medeski

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2005
    Location:
    New York, NY
    #4
    Thatd be a lot of money.
     
  5. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2006
    Location:
    Brisbane, Australia
    #5
    Yeah, would/should anyone really be into that? sometimes I feel like I'm numbing my brain with all this constant video stimulation. Even though I only watch things on my powerbook, that means I tend to watch things everywhere. It's taken away from my reading!
     
  6. macrumors member

    wkhahn

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Location:
    standing over your shoulder
    #6
    Maybe not a video iPod

    What if this is not flash for the video iPod, but rather the HD hinted to be in iTV? 16GB would be plenty to buffer a video stream.
     
  7. macrumors regular

    MrFirework

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2006
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #7
    I can see it...

    A player you load up with one or two movies you want to watch for, say, a train or plane trip. It could be ultra thin with a decent-sized screen. I see potential.

    Then again...
     
  8. macrumors 6502a

    Chef Medeski

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2005
    Location:
    New York, NY
    #8
    Hmmm.... interestin. That could be a possibility. Add Wi-fi and you will certainly have a swanky ipod.
     
  9. macrumors newbie

    sivancotel

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2006
    Location:
    New York City
    #9
    I think the advantage would be supreme battery life. think about it, 16gb is enough to hold a small number of movies and tv shows, and you could probably get like 15 hours of straight backlit full screen playback on one charge.
     
  10. macrumors 601

    Chaszmyr

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    #10
    Agreed. If this were true, they must not expect it to be used for music as well... and I don't see Apple coming out with a device that is exclusively for video.
     
  11. macrumors 601

    Yvan256

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Location:
    Canada
    #11
    You don't buffer streaming data with flash memory since it can only handle a limited number of rewrites (granted the limit is high, but if you use it as a buffer you'll hit that limit pretty quickly). Some type of RAM is usually used for buffering.

    Not to mention that 16GB would be enough to "buffer" about 8 movies in H.264, which is a bit overkill as far as caching goes, and easily puts 16GB back into the "storage" capacity.

    A portable, flash-based video player with 16GB that can hold 8 Hi-Def movies or 16 Standard-def movies, a few TV shows and a some albums of music? Seems plenty enough to me, considering the size of portable DVD players + 8 or 16 DVDs + burned MP3 CDs...
     
  12. macrumors 68000

    Spock

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2002
    Location:
    Vulcan
    #12
    It would also be able to hold a nice Mac OS X install for lets say MacBook and MacBook Pros??
     
  13. macrumors 6502a

    Chef Medeski

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2005
    Location:
    New York, NY
    #13
    Screen takes up a really large portion of the battery. The nano not only has flash but a small screen.
     
  14. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2006
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #14
    I think this one is bogus. I think someone who doesn't know and hasn't paid much attention is speculating based on some other rumors or something. Why a 16GB video player? What is the point? That's not enough space to store any kind of library.

    It's an interesting idea that the iTV may have a 16GB buffer. But that's a HUGE buffer. I mean, a 16MB buffer would be sufficient in most cases. If it's anything that needs more than 16MB in the buffer, you should probably do something a little more than stream it wirelessly to your TV.

    Perhaps the 16GB buffer could be used as a video queue? Transfer and store there for watching? Or download (dare I say Record?) and hold in the buffer until all of it has streamed over the 802.11 connection to your Mac's HDD? I could see that.
     
  15. macrumors 65816

    Shotglass

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2006
    #15
    I can't, but it sure would be a cool and original idea.
     
  16. macrumors 68000

    Spock

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2002
    Location:
    Vulcan
    #16
    Perhaps only the video part is bogus, i wouldnt mind having a 16gb Nano and it would strain the eyes the video part would be just a cool novelty if nothing else, a "Look what my iPod can do" type of thing.
     
  17. macrumors P6

    twoodcc

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Location:
    Right side of wrong
    #17
    yeah it does. but i guess some people would buy it. you could fit at least 13-14 movies on it. i guess that's not too bad
     
  18. macrumors 65816

    freebooter

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Location:
    Daegu, South Korea
    #18
    The iPod video with a hard disc is kind of slow, quirky, and heavy. (I have one) A flash video-pod would fix that. (I have owned nanos since they came out)
    One doesn't really need to carry all one's movies with one, does one? :) 16 GB is a suitable size.
     
  19. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 6, 2004
    #19
    Gosh, who'd a thunk it? Memory prices going down, capacities going up? This has to be a first.

    Seriously, a 16GB flash based player of some sort is inevitable, as will a 32, 64, etc. I'd speculate we'll see a larger screen size vPod nano (flash) and a vPod (120GB HD) coming out... a whole new line. Who knows... idle speculation is fun.:)
     
  20. macrumors 65816

    Clive At Five

    Joined:
    May 26, 2004
    Location:
    St. Paul, MN
    #20
    1) He's saying 16GB for the sake of using NAND Flash-Based memory. The HDD for portable devices is going the way of the walkman.

    2) DivX quality video of Season 2 of The Office is just over 3GB. That's several hours of video. Sure DivX isn't the greatest quality, but it's an exchange you make for HD-space.

    My guess is that battery life will be the limiting factor anyway, just as it is with high-capacity iPods. Even on an 80GB iPod, you can't listen to 20 days worth of music on a single charge or on several charges, in fact. One can assume that in several charges, at least one of them will be at a computer (as opposed to a wall outlet) and the movie/music selection can easily be changed to suit the users' needs/wants.

    NAND is the way to go for battery life anyway, ESPECIALLY if you're pairing it with a larger screen.

    -Clive
     
  21. macrumors 68010

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    #21
    There is no logical reason to put flash memory in the iTV for storage because you can easily put a hard drive in with far greater storage space for far less money.
     
  22. macrumors 68030

    Flowbee

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Alameda, CA
    #22
    It's kinda hard to figure out what this could be about. As others have said, a 16gb iPod for video doesn't seem make a lot of sense on its own. Sure, it's plenty of space for a bunch of videos, but I think it would have to be either tied to another product (like an add on for the iPhone, or the iTV device), or be an entirely new design to get people's attention.
     
  23. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #23
    Just like the Shuffle's 1GB is rediculous for any kind of music library?
     
  24. macrumors 604

    thejadedmonkey

    Joined:
    May 28, 2005
    Location:
    Pa
    #24
    That's why they would call this the iPod Video Shuffle.

    Actually, I this this guy might be onto something here...
    iPod is for music. It does music well, and only music. It doesn't do video so well, and the new 5th gen iPods don't even to music that well (the interface is too laggy).

    I think Apple may actually split up the line. iPod for music (with video playback as an added bonus) and an iTube (or whatever name they choose) for video playback (with music playback as an added bonus).

    That way, they only have to focus on doing one thing well, and everything else is an added bonus.
     
  25. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2004
    Location:
    Sugar Land TX
    #25
    All it needs to do is double again and I can fit my collection on a Nano. 32GB FTW!
     

Share This Page