iPod 6G iPod Prediction

[needthephone]

Aren't mobile phone sales squillions ahead of ipod / mp3 sales like 10 to 1 or something?

To me if they had an ipod with wifi/multitouch (ie everything apart from the phone) then people would buy that and the phone wouldn't have a chance to establish itself.

I don't know if this is right just my gut feeling.

 

[Evangelion]

Aren't mobile phone sales squillions ahead of ipod / mp3 sales like 10 to 1 or something?

1 billion phones/year as opposed to... what, 50 million mp3-players a year?

To me if they had an ipod with wifi/multitouch (ie everything apart from the phone) then people would buy that and the phone wouldn't have a chance to establish itself.

if people want and need a phone, they would buy a phone. And since iPod is not a phone, it couldn't really cannibalize the iPhone in that regard. Only consumers that might opt for iPod instead of iPhone would be those who aren't really buying a phone but an mediaplayer. Would it be right to force them to buy a cell-phone when they are really just looking for media-playback?

 

[cyberone]

i doubt there will be an 6G ipod very soon.

apple will push the iphone at all means and the ipods are quite matured already, no need to upgrade.

 

[iToaster]

It has been a while since a major update, the most that we've seen is a 5.5 gen. but it has been quite a while. I'd like to see a Mac exclusive iPod with the return of firewire so I can actually use my firewire, cause it's not seeing much activity on my Mac. But firewire, Mac exclusive, special features on it, and then a universal version for the Windies amd Macies. That I would like to see, but that's unlikely. More likely: multitouch and maybe wifi, and some bluetooth earbuds would be cool, no wires, like the iPhone bluetooth w/o the little microphone stick. But I guess this is why we have our iImaginations...

 

[elppa]

I imagine the next iPod will run OS X, which may take some time to develop.

I doubt Apple will be stupid enough to let a product like iPod sit a gather dust.

They'll be working on things all the time.

Multitouch and full screen video will arrive at some point on iPod.

Not sure what more can be done with iPod nano, but they'll thing of something.

I imagine everything will be refreshed before Christmas (or "holiday" season).

 

[bluesman87]

I think you are grossly underestimating apple. The iPod is their biggest product ever...period. They are not going to have another one of their products (iphone with a drastically advanced ipod) sitting next to that lame fragile thing they call the iPod now. I really dont think they are gonna wait any longer than say july, and I would bet that they introduce a new pod with the emi drm-free announcement or with the iphone itself. I still don't think the two products necessarily compete, and with a company the size of apple, i doubt they have the ipod sitting on some shelf with no immediate plans to combat the thousands of people who are blown away by the ipod on the iphone. This is apple people...think differently

I imagine the next iPod will run OS X, which may take some time to develop.

I doubt Apple will be stupid enough to let a product like iPod sit a gather dust.

They'll be working on things all the time.

Multitouch and full screen video will arrive at some point on iPod.

Not sure what more can be done with iPod nano, but they'll thing of something.

I imagine everything will be refreshed before Christmas (or "holiday" season).

 

[Evangelion]

i doubt there will be an 6G ipod very soon.

apple will push the iphone at all means and the ipods are quite matured already, no need to upgrade.

I beg to disagree. As the Buyer's Guide says, iPod is due for an update. And while iPhone is potentially a huge win for Apple, iPod is a huge moneymaker to Apple RIGHT NOW. Letting it whither away would not be smart. And yes, the iPod is due for an update. The previous update wasn't really a new iPod, it was just a refresh of an existing product. So I would say that the iPod is overdue for an update.

And like I already said: iPhone and iPod are not really alternatives to each other. People who want a phone will want the iPhone instead of iPod. People who want large storage-capacity will want the iPod instead of iPhone. And there are people who are not in a position to switch phones/operators, but they would still want the new iPod. Right now iPhone is tech-wise the best iPod Apple has. But the problem is that it has some serious shortcomings when compared to the iPod. Namely, the storage-space and the amount of cash you need to pay for that space.

And competitors are getting closer to Apple in the mp3-market. And fact is that while iPhone _might_ bring huge amounts of cash to Apple, it will only be sold in USA initially. What about rest of the world? Europe is still 6 months away, while Asia is even further away. Is Apple simply going to abandon those markets to their competitors?

Many people seem to be thinking that iPhone is a replacement for the iPod. How else could we explain the comments that say stsuff like "Apple isn't going to do much with the iPod since they want to push iPhone instead". If that is the case, why didn't they simply call the iPhone iPod? That's because the two are two separate products. And while their target-market overlaps somewhat, the two devices are not 1:1 alternatives to each other.

 

[Evangelion]

It has been a while since a major update, the most that we've seen is a 5.5 gen. but it has been quite a while. I'd like to see a Mac exclusive iPod with the return of firewire so I can actually use my firewire, cause it's not seeing much activity on my Mac.

That's not a valid reason to add FW to the iPod. If you currently have no use for FireWire, so what? It's not like you are required to use every single port in your Mac. And in the iPod, USB does just about everything FireWire does, and it does it with less money.

 

[elppa]

I think you are grossly underestimating apple. The iPod is their biggest product ever...period. They are not going to have another one of their products (iphone with a drastically advanced ipod) sitting next to that lame fragile thing they call the iPod now.

I think you need to go back and re-read what I've written .

I pretty much said all of that a bit more concisely.

The only thing we disagree on is the timeframe by a few months.

 

[elppa]

That's not a valid reason to add FW to the iPod. If you currently have no use for FireWire, so what? It's not like you are required to use every single port in your Mac. And in the iPod, USB does just about everything FireWire does, and it does it with less money.

There are some things that Firewire can go that USB can't. Like startup a Mac from an external drive.

Firewire is also quicker than USB 2 (not theoretical speed, actually speed) and Firewire 800 blows both away.

 

[Evangelion]

There are some things that Firewire can go that USB can't. Like startup a Mac from an external drive.

While that might be a nice feature, it's far from being a critical feature. And since other OS'es boot from USB-drives just fine, I would point the finger at OS X rather than USB.

Firewire is also quicker than USB 2 (not theoretical speed, actually speed)

When used with hi-speed external hard-drives, perhaps. But when used with slow-spinning mobile hard-drive that is in the iPod? No way. USB is more than fast enough for the iPod.

and Firewire 800 blows both away.

And FireWire 800 would be utterly useless in iPod.

So why should iPod have FireWire?

 

[elppa]

While that might be a nice feature, it's far from being a critical feature. And since other OS'es boot from USB-drives just fine, I would point the finger at OS X rather than USB.



When used with hi-speed external hard-drives, perhaps. But when used with slow-spinning mobile hard-drive that is in the iPod? No way. USB is more than fast enough for the iPod.



And FireWire 800 would be utterly useless in iPod.

So why should iPod have FireWire?

I didn't say iPod should have Firewire.

At the moment it makes sense that Apple use USB 2.0 across the line.

Yes, you are right about USB 2.0 drives booting (should have done my research better! ), however I still believe that Firewire is the superior technology.

If there was an 100-120GB iPod, then Firewire 800 would be a cool feature to have.

 

[TequilaBoobs]

the ipod will be everything the iphone is sans phone.

 

[Osarkon]

If the new iPod was to include wi-fi then the line between that and the iPhone would become quite blurred, personally if it did include wi-fi then it should only be able to use it to send and download songs. It shouldn't be able to surf the net or anything like that; that's not the iPod's purpose.

 

[DCBass]

If the new iPod was to include wi-fi then the line between that and the iPhone would become quite blurred, personally if it did include wi-fi then it should only be able to use it to send and download songs. It shouldn't be able to surf the net or anything like that; that's not the iPod's purpose.

i think that the big problem with this train of thought is that it would royally piss off customers, including yours truly. if they include wifi, why not put the whole internet on there? it's only a software issue, not hardware, and they already have the software made.

if they didn't put wifi in there, that's one thing, and i wouldn't be surprised if they went that route, but there's no excuse for half-$$*&% work. i hardly think that apple would pull a zune, except it would be worse since they already put the work into it unlike ms.

all or nothing apple. i don't really care to buy songs on the go. i'm not that eager.

DCBass.

 

[Evangelion]

If there was an 100-120GB iPod, then Firewire 800 would be a cool feature to have.

Well, no. It would offer no benefit over USB2. What it would do is to make the device bigger (it requires a separate chip) and more expensive.

 

[Evangelion]

If the new iPod was to include wi-fi then the line between that and the iPhone would become quite blurred, personally if it did include wi-fi then it should only be able to use it to send and download songs. It shouldn't be able to surf the net or anything like that; that's not the iPod's purpose.

How would that functionality harm iPod? Because "that's not the iPods purpose"? Well, viewing photos wasn't originally iPod purpose either, yet we got it anyway. Nor was it originally meant to watch videos, yet we got that as well.

You said that "Wifi should only be used for sending and downloading songs". Why? What benefit would that offer when compared to having fully-functional Wifi? Hell, we already have library-sharing in iTunes, how about having that in iPod as well?

I absolutely hate it when some product has a feature, but it has been artificially crippled. When some device gets additional feature, they should be thinking of ways of taking maximum advantage of that feature, instead of thinking "how could we cripple this feature?".

 

[elppa]

Well, no. It would offer no benefit over USB2. What it would do is to make the device bigger (it requires a separate chip) and more expensive.

Didn't think about the extra chip. Good Point!

But how can you say transferring 100GB of media content at 480 Mbit/s is going go take the same time as if it was transferred at 800 Mbit/s?

 

[notsofatjames]

There are some things that Firewire can go that USB can't. Like startup a Mac from an external drive.

Firewire is also quicker than USB 2 (not theoretical speed, actually speed) and Firewire 800 blows both away.

i can boot into OS X from a usb drive. I can on my macbook, and i could on my iMac. Its really usefull! And really easy!! No modifications at all! Just used Disk Utility to make a complete copy of my start-up volume, then hold alt on a restart! (Just as a side point though, i boot from a drive which can connect via USB or firewire, but that shouldnt make a difference.) Performance wise its slightly slower than running from the internal harddrive, but its really useable!

I think iPod will get WiFi. iPhone is tied to cingular for 5years. Some people cant get cingular in their area. It woul be silly of apple to lose market share over the iPhone's carrier's coverage. They will want the features of the iPhone to hit everyone, like the ease of use of the iPod is what made it so successful (IMO)

 

[elppa]

i can boot into OS X from a usb drive. I can on my macbook, and i could on my iMac. Its really usefull! And really easy!! No modifications at all! Just used Disk Utility to make a complete copy of my start-up volume, then hold alt on a restart! (Just as a side point though, i boot from a drive which can connect via USB or firewire, but that shouldnt make a difference.) Performance wise its slightly slower than running from the internal harddrive, but its really useable!

Thank you, but I've already been informed it is possible and have admitted I should have done my research better.

 

[JesterJJZ]

I would love an iPhone, minus the phone part, and with a 100gig drive instead of flash memory.

 

[Evangelion]

Didn't think about the extra chip. Good Point!

But how can you say transferring 100GB of media content at 480 Mbit/s is going go take the same time as if it was transferred at 800 Mbit/s?

Because the hard-drive you are copying the media to is so slow that 420Mbit/sec USB2 is more than enough to feed it data. You could have 1600Mbit/sec connection between the iPod and the computer, and it wouldn't copy content one bit faster since the bottleneck is not the connection between the devices, it's the hard-drive in the iPod.

 

[Osarkon]

How would that functionality harm iPod? Because "that's not the iPods purpose"? Well, viewing photos wasn't originally iPod purpose either, yet we got it anyway. Nor was it originally meant to watch videos, yet we got that as well.

You said that "Wifi should only be used for sending and downloading songs". Why? What benefit would that offer when compared to having fully-functional Wifi? Hell, we already have library-sharing in iTunes, how about having that in iPod as well?

I absolutely hate it when some product has a feature, but it has been artificially crippled. When some device gets additional feature, they should be thinking of ways of taking maximum advantage of that feature, instead of thinking "how could we cripple this feature?".

Normally I'd agree with you, but seeing as the iPhone will be doing all that fancy stuff, there isn't going to be much to distinguish the two of them at this rate...

I guess i'm just happy with my iPod just playing music really. Besides, if they put wi-fi and all that in, then it's going to end up costing more I should imagine, and they cost enough as it is

 

[DCBass]

Normally I'd agree with you, but seeing as the iPhone will be doing all that fancy stuff, there isn't going to be much to distinguish the two of them at this rate...

I guess i'm just happy with my iPod just playing music really. Besides, if they put wi-fi and all that in, then it's going to end up costing more I should imagine, and they cost enough as it is

I know what you mean. If the 6G iPod is like the iPhone, but no phone and no wifi, that would be cool.

But if the 6G iPod does have wifi, it better have the whole darn 'internet communicator' that the iphone has.

Methinks Apple may release two 6G versions to satisfy these different tastes.

DCBass

 

[Evangelion]

Normally I'd agree with you, but seeing as the iPhone will be doing all that fancy stuff, there isn't going to be much to distinguish the two of them at this rate...

The iPhone has the phone and it has the camera. That might not sound much, but the phone is a pretty big feature. That said, while I would like to see WiFi in the iPod, I wouldn't be surprised if it didn't have it.

And besides: What I care about is what I can get for my money, not how Apple can differentiate it's various products. I want the best possible device for my money, and in that case it would mean fully-functioning WiFi, as opposed to crippled Wifi. The price-difference between crippled wifi and uncriplled wifi is zero o Apple.