1. Welcome to the new MacRumors forums. See our announcement and read our FAQ

Did The New iPod Just Get Less Compelling?

Discussion in 'MacBytes.com News Discussion' started by MacBytes, Oct 14, 2005.

  1. macrumors bot

  2. macrumors 6502a


    This "article" is utterly pointless. It's a brain fart that we got linked to fo some reason. What a waste of bandwidth.
  3. macrumors 6502a

    Agreed. To sum up for those who come and read the comments before the article....like me: :)

    Oh no the iPod video won't let you play video on your TV, just slideshows. Oh wait, I was wrong. You can play videos, but the resolutions sucks.
  4. macrumors regular


    That title should read: "Did we just write this article to get hits to our website?"
  5. macrumors regular

    i downloaded wed. episode of Lost last night and watched it on my G5 at 1280 x 1024 and it looked perfectly fine to me

    what kind of crap tv do these people have ?

  6. macrumors 604


    Does anyone wonder why Apple calls the new iPod, an iPod and not an iPod video or whatever?

    Throw away the video portion, and you got yourself a kick-ass iPod with a large color screen, 10GB extra HD space, new features previously only available on the nano, 31% thinner and more photo capabilities.

    Ah well, there'll always be complainers.
  7. macrumors G5


    It may be OK--and I'd watch it rather than miss an episode (if, say Battlestar Galactica were offered), but 640x480 would be noticeably better.

    Is 480x480 a typo at Apple? Can the iPod deliver 640x480 to TV (from your own clips) even if that's not the format of what you buy? That would be promising.
  8. macrumors regular

    I'm inclined to agree with this guy--I bought Thriller on the video store, and playing it fullscreen at 1024x768 on a CRT was basically an artifact-fest. Now, most videos aren't as dark as Thriller, so it might not be quite as bad on other videos since most digital compression schemes have trouble with lots of moving black, but the fullscreen quality on these things is generally terrible, IMO. They look perfectly fine at their default resolution or on the iPod's screen.

    (On Thriller: if by the next Stevenote he doesn't freak about that video selling a bajillion copies more than any other, I will be disappointed in humanity) :p
  9. macrumors 601



    H.264 video:
    - up to 768 Kbps
    - 320 x 240, 30 frames per sec.
    - Baseline Profile up to Level 1.3 with AAC-LC up to 160 Kbps, 48 Khz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4 and .mov file formats

    MPEG-4 video:
    - up to 2.5 mbps
    - 480 x 480, 30 frames per sec.
    - Simple Profile with AAC-LC up to 160 Kbps, 48 Khz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4 and .mov file formats

    Seems to me you can use those DivX and Xvid files with the new iPod (unless those DivX/Xvid files aren't MPEG-4 compliant or use non-AAC audio, which is most of them).

    I should've bought shares the morning and sold at the end of the day... Could've bought a 20" iMac and 60GB iPod. :(
  10. macrumors member

    wedge antilies

    In the words of the comic book guy....

  11. Guest

    Sky Blue

    wheres this cnn demo?
  12. macrumors 65816


    I also bought Thriller and there were a lot of arifacts but I've also bought a few other videos that looks fine. I think it's just all the black space in Thriller that make it look like that.

    In response to this article...does no one do ANY research anymore? I mean it states right on Apples site that the new iPod "plays video or photo slideshows on TV via the optional Dock." How hard is that to fact check? And instead the reference a CNN article. It's on the product page! Imagine that.
  13. macrumors 68000


    Bingo. It's last week's iPod, but thinner, with a better battery, the ability to record. And it plays video.
  14. macrumors regular

    What I want to know is when you plug the iPod into a TV if it will show the same lame iPod animation skin that came up on the projection screen when Jobs demoed it.

    If so it would be a huge waste of space, just so that those low res TV shows look decent on TV...
  15. macrumors 68020



    I don't think he was using the video-out thing. It sounded like he had that particular iPod hotwired, pixel-for-pixel to the projector, so he could show people what videos looked like on the ipod, not what videos looked like when the ipod played them on a TV.
  16. macrumors 68030


    ability to record? is there something i missed? anyone care to explain? did you mean record sounds with iTalk?
  17. macrumors 6502a


    I know spec-wise 320x240 sounds useless, but I tried the latest episode of Lost on my iMac G5, and it looks just fine fullscreen.
  18. macrumors 68020


    Well the title is actually a question based on the writters opinion.
  19. macrumors regular

    Can we all just agree that Apple Matters is the worst Apple Blog website and move on?
  20. macrumors Nehalem


  21. macrumors 603


    No. Because it didn't remove any features and what it added can be ignored if you want.
  22. macrumors 6502


    Bingo! No wait......nevermind. Can I change my answer back to the pervious....no I think I'm correct, yes, yes, I know now...

    You got to love them for trying tho. :X

    Did The New iPod Just Get Less Compelling?

    Did this article? lol ;)
  23. sjk
    macrumors 6502a

    What playback resolution? It would be "watchable" quality on my 20" 2GHz at 1400x1200 but the glitches during playback are too distracting. It's a better using QuickTime directly instead of going through iTunes (and pause/resume are more responsive) but I can't get smooth playback at that resolution. It even happens occasionally at 640x480.

    I thought the iMac G5 could do better H.264 decoding. I'll try it later on my 1.25GHz eMac for comparison.
  24. sjk
    macrumors 6502a

    Yeah, and the same goes for people who fill forums like this with redundant questions that are explicitly answered on product/spec pages. Then other people cater to them by answering instead of referring them to where they can find the answers. It's the same tired ritual with every product announcement. Oh well.
  25. macrumors G3


    That's no surprise. The old free iTMS videos ("large" versions) were encoded at about 1500-1600 kbps with so-so quality, and the new $2 videos are in the 600-700 range. (Yes, I've seen the H.264 hype. It's hype.) It won't matter. The RDF will prevent many from noticing how truly awful the quality is, and Apple will sell billions upon billions of downloads.

Share This Page