jared_kipe said:
Power won't be as big of an issue if it were to contain an OLED instead of a LCD. Of course they have an estimated lifespan of only 10,000 hours of continuous use. But thats still 417 days of always on time, so if you only use it for 4 hours a day you could get almost 7 years out of it. I think this is acceptable for an ipod screen's lifespan. OLEDs are cheaper and more energy effective, not to mention usually have better color response.
I agree. This is what I've been thinking as well. I just don't know if Apple has gotten hold of one that would meet their specs as yet.
The battery life shouldn't be an issue. There are batteries out there that already give the 40G model 23 hours. There's one that's supposed to give 40. I'm sure that with Apple's buying power, if they wanted to, they could use one of these, and solve that problem.
My thought goes further. I believe that Apple is going to split the two lines of iPods apart.
The mini will remain the music iPod, with increasingly larger HD's. They will always have a significantly smaller capacity. Their screen will also always be smaller, thus, less useful for higher resolutions.
The full size unit is a different matter. The HD's are approaching the size of desktop models of only a year or so ago with the 60. Toshiba, and others are, no doubt, designing 80's, 100's and even larger.
With this capacity, no one who puts music on the player can complain that new features are compromising their ability to store music.
With the new hires that Apple seems to be making, it seems as though they and others will be able to write apps that make this device even more versatile than ever. If, in doing this they include some API's from X, the device would be able to run simple versions of some software, such as Keynote (which someone suggested earlier), and others, not so much to build a presentation and such, but to present them.
With a small color screen this would allow control from these programs, even though the device itself couldn't be used directly as a viewer. I don't think that the application of viewing photo's on a Tv would be the end purpose of this, but rather a way of getting people used to the concept of hooking it up to something other than an audio system. Sort of a come-on. Kodak tried to do this when they originally came out with the Photo CD. It failed miserably for that purpose.
My conclusion (even though I have a lot more uses for it than I mentioned, for lack of space) is that this IS the digital center that Apple is coming out with. They are slowly sneaking it in. I believe that Apple had all of this in mind when they first came out with the iPod, but couldn't implement it, for the technology was not up to it. But that is changing.
Apple is being patient. When there are millions of these in people's hands, people in all walks of life, then Apple won't see the resistance to such a device that they would have if they simply came out with it, full born, like Athena, from the head of Zeus.
People will trust their iPods, and by extension, Apple. Therefore the reaction will be more of the order of "Hey, look at what my iPod can do now!" Rather than "What's this thing? It looks too complicated."
I do think that they will stay away from cameras though. There is nothing that Apple can add to that experience that would be compelling. Apple's first camera's were designed, and made by Kodak.
Other companies also make mp3 players etc...and images being viewed on portable cameras,etc... It didn't stop Apple to make the iPod, there have seen that it was done however not correctly according to Apple standards and so they created the iPod, I feel there will do the same for a digital camera.
