With the iPod problem, can OS X read a windows formatted iPod just as a hard drive without using iTunes? I backed up all of my songs by putting them on the iPod HD as well as the normal iPod sync method. So, I'm able to just get them off as both a music file and a file that plays on the iPod. Would that be a viable way to have them transfer their music? Just save them as files to the iPod, transfer them to the iMac as files without using iTunes. Then, you just re-format your iPod in OS X form, and re-sync.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
$499 Headless iMac?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
iTunes on Mac can work with a windows formatted iPod so surely you jsut connect up the iPod, set itunes to sort music manually and sync by jand for the first time. THen if you really want you can reformat the iPod to Mac format (thought I don't know of any advantages.
Andy
Andy
Yvan256 said:
The Mac can mount an NTFS volume (read only).
The Mac can mount a FAT32 volume (Read/Write).
Using Disk Utility, a Mac can format a non-system disk to FAT32, HFS, HFS+ or UFS.
AFAIK, Windows iPods are formatted FAT32. No problems there.
SiliconAddict said:One problem I foresee. Airport security. I randomly get stopped and asked to power on my laptop. I don't know how carrying a portable desktop system fits into the almost random equation of airport security but it might be a problem for the scenario you suggest.
Why are they asking you to power on your laptop? Clearly, it's an Apple laptop, so it doesn't have Weapons of Mass Infection...
Yvan256 said:Why are they asking you to power on your laptop? Clearly, it's an Apple laptop, so it doesn't have Weapons of Mass Infection...
The issue is that any electronic gear needs to be able to demonstrate that it is operable in order to pass security checkpoints if so asked.
MacSA said:
I wouldn't be surprise to see the eMac axed by Apple as a result of the headless Macs. The headless Mac makes more sense to educational insititutions. Or, I guess the headless Mac might be the new eMac, depending on how you look at it.
Yvan256 said:
There is the possibility that if you try to carry it on, it would be denied. Now in your situation, as long as the computer booted into an "error" they might allow you on board.
jakemikey said:
Same here. I am thinking that hey will offer an monitor that gives you the ability to "piggy-back" the CPU to the monitor for EDU purposes.
jakemikey said:
i doubt that because the current emac just got a price drop here (because of the -$)
the only prices which weren't adjusted were those from the iPods so if products will get axed on tuesday then it's products from the ipod line (or new ones will be introduced..
)but thats only wild guessing (because it doesn't make sense to me to drop the prices of one product just to scrap the product the next week anyways)
dasdasein said:
Nice! Although it's basically a big iPod mini tipped on its face.
And with a slot-loading drive instead of audio port/hold switch
dasdasein said:
Outstanding, great design. I would like to see more of this in this thread, 70 pages and almost 2k replies, and only about 3-4 possible designs? Ack, there are more posts on peoples IT departments
Now, lets talk about this one:
Ipod like design, great tie in for the "Halo" effect. Slim, clean, very apple like. Probably inexpensive to produce, given the fact that its also done on a low priced portable. The internals from an Ibook would slip in here very nicely.
Any others, bring on the designs!
DMann said:
It's also really awesome for people who are die hard mac fans, but can't afford those pricey G5s. People like me who want to upgrade their now outdated G3 iBooks. Most of you seem to have relatively new macs though, I need to get new software to keep up, but I can't afford it, nor can I run it on my G3. This is a great way to get users with older hardware to upgrade.
macmessiah said:
yesss
headless iMac will come with all the software you would ever need... the new iLife, mac os 10.4 tiger, safari, mail, isync, ical, etc... and for those who complained... "but i still need to buy microsucks Orifice" ..... iWORKS !!!! yeahhhhhhhhh bring it steve .... YEAHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Office and Boot speed mac v pc
There have been a lot of numbers thrown around here, so i decided to do a little test during my prep period at school today. My 800 mhz G3 ibook (OS 10.3) on ***auto processor *** speed v. or compaq evo (win 200 pro) 2.8 GHz P4. Boot and Office v.X/Office 2000
iBook PC
Boot time 50 sec. 60 sec.
Login time 12 sec 10 sec.
word open(1st) 6 1
word open(2nd) 4 1
PP open (1st) 4 1
PP open (2nd) 3 1
Excel (1st) 4 1
Excel (2nd) 3 1
(note: used a the "watch method" with a sec. hand)
Not bad considering the disparity of the systems and the graphics the Mac has to push. Don't know how some can say that Macs (esp. office) are sooooo slow compared to Wintels. I don't think waiting 2 or 3 secs more is bad at all considering the systems (think 800 Mhz G3 (laptop) - which would be roughly a 1.6 Mhz P3- v. 2.8 GHz P4 (desktop).
IMHO any "slowness" of Office lies on MS not Apple. but then again Office X. is much better functionally and visually than the Win. version, which means there's more to process. also consider the GUI a mac is pushing v. Windows 2000 and even XP
I'll follow up with my iMac G5, just to show how these trolls are full of sh**.
Poff said:
There have been a lot of numbers thrown around here, so i decided to do a little test during my prep period at school today. My 800 mhz G3 ibook (OS 10.3) on ***auto processor *** speed v. or compaq evo (win 200 pro) 2.8 GHz P4. Boot and Office v.X/Office 2000
iBook PC
Boot time 50 sec. 60 sec.
Login time 12 sec 10 sec.
word open(1st) 6 1
word open(2nd) 4 1
PP open (1st) 4 1
PP open (2nd) 3 1
Excel (1st) 4 1
Excel (2nd) 3 1
(note: used a the "watch method" with a sec. hand)
Not bad considering the disparity of the systems and the graphics the Mac has to push. Don't know how some can say that Macs (esp. office) are sooooo slow compared to Wintels. I don't think waiting 2 or 3 secs more is bad at all considering the systems (think 800 Mhz G3 (laptop) - which would be roughly a 1.6 Mhz P3- v. 2.8 GHz P4 (desktop).
IMHO any "slowness" of Office lies on MS not Apple. but then again Office X. is much better functionally and visually than the Win. version, which means there's more to process. also consider the GUI a mac is pushing v. Windows 2000 and even XP
I'll follow up with my iMac G5, just to show how these trolls are full of sh**.
SiliconAddict said:The one thing I hope is that they don't skimp on the hard drive or at least let users upgrade it. The rumor is either a 40GB or 80GB hard drive. Well I have a 60GB iPod Photo with 43GB of songs on it. Maybe I'm doing the math wrong but I think I would have a hard time fitting 43GB into a 40GB drive.
Even 80GB would kinda suck since between OS, iWorks, iLife, iTunes tracks etc it might start to get a tad tight on even an 80GB drive. Yah hopefully I can flip open a panel on the bottom or back and simply upgrade the RAM to 1GB and the hard drive to a 100GB drive. That would be sweet.
siliconAddict, this headless iMac is not 4 u
what average JoeSchmoe JillMainstream would be already thinking of upgrading to 100GB, would have 43GB of songs? 60GB minimum is my guess in any case.... hell, my dad's been running off a 40GB iBook G4 933mhz 256mb RAM... since i've ummm... taken it over and loaded it up with multimedia apps and my songs... still about 15-20gb left...
Off with his head!
I don't know if anyone has mentioned this or not, but would this machine really be headless? My question is rooted in my long term belief that the "head" of a computer, if we are going to incarnate such technology, is the case that houses key components such as the motherboard, hard drive, video card and so on. So what part, exactly, does a screen or monitor serve as? Its key functions are to display that which is going on in the head. On a human, what is happening in the human head is displayed all over one's body through body language and facial expressions. With an all-in-one machine, one could argue that the monitor serves as the "face" for it is directly connected to the head. Thus, we are left with the "talking heads in jars" from futurama. I am assuming this new machine could only be described as a Mac without a face. This concept was most obviously developed after the team at Apple had finished watching Mel Gibson in "The Man Without a Face" and Nicholas Cage and John Travolta in "Face Off" . I have successfully wasted some of your time if you read this. Tschüs!
I don't know if anyone has mentioned this or not, but would this machine really be headless? My question is rooted in my long term belief that the "head" of a computer, if we are going to incarnate such technology, is the case that houses key components such as the motherboard, hard drive, video card and so on. So what part, exactly, does a screen or monitor serve as? Its key functions are to display that which is going on in the head. On a human, what is happening in the human head is displayed all over one's body through body language and facial expressions. With an all-in-one machine, one could argue that the monitor serves as the "face" for it is directly connected to the head. Thus, we are left with the "talking heads in jars" from futurama. I am assuming this new machine could only be described as a Mac without a face. This concept was most obviously developed after the team at Apple had finished watching Mel Gibson in "The Man Without a Face" and Nicholas Cage and John Travolta in "Face Off" . I have successfully wasted some of your time if you read this. Tschüs!
dasdasein said:
Too sterile... It has no "face"... Too plain.
Also, if the target is iPod users/switchers, it has to somehow look a bit like an iPod casing. I imagine a "flattened headless eMac". I hope it's sturdy enough to put a monitor on it.
Or just to be different, I'll mount it ABOVE the monitor.
A friend of mine...
When I told a friend of mine about the rumors wafting about on all the forums of this new product, he told me what he though it would look like. The G4 iMac minus the arm and screen. A little dome of happiness. I am doing a mockup now, and I will post it when I finish.
When I told a friend of mine about the rumors wafting about on all the forums of this new product, he told me what he though it would look like. The G4 iMac minus the arm and screen. A little dome of happiness. I am doing a mockup now, and I will post it when I finish.
Yvan256 said:Too sterile... It has no "face"... Too plain.
Also, if the target is iPod users/switchers, it has to somehow look a bit like an iPod casing. I imagine a "flattened headless eMac". I hope it's sturdy enough to put a monitor on it.
So how does it look?
Did you ever see an iPod mini?