Become a MacRumors Supporter for $25/year with no ads, private forums, and more!

iPod How bad is the Classic's performance?

storage

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Jun 4, 2005
275
0
Is it really that terrible? I've read many reports that the whole interface is really unresponsive.

Just wanted to make sure before I place my order.
 

72930

Retired
May 16, 2006
9,060
4
Not that I've used it, but the comments on responsiveness I've read are about CoverFlow, saying that it can lag...
 
Comment

sharp65

macrumors 6502
Sep 7, 2007
441
0
I find the performance to be great so far, the only part that lags is coverflow.
 
Comment

Passante

macrumors 6502a
Apr 16, 2004
860
0
on the sofa
I was in the Apple store on Saturday and I was surprised at how unresponsive the 80 gig model was. There were delays accessing menus and such. The delays for me were not just in coverflow. Because I have not used my iPod with touch wheel for a while so I have nothing to compare the 80 gig model with. I suggest that you try before you buy. I was going to get the 80 gig model but decided on nano because of the slow response.

I wonder what hard drive is in the iPod classic. Has anyone taken it apart yet?

Edit

Tried my iPod touch wheel and my wife's mini. Both are "snappy" compared to the iPod classic. Of course they don't have color screens.....
 
Comment

Vidd

macrumors 6502a
Mar 7, 2006
989
71
The iPod or iPod Classic will always lose out to the other models simply due to its harddrive. It can't compete on a speed basis with the flash storage.

I noticed the difference myself with the 2G nano and 5.5G.
 
Comment

storage

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Jun 4, 2005
275
0
Thanks for your replies! :)

I'll probably go check it out in person, if I can find some place where you can actually try them out. Most retailers over here just have them turned off for you too look at :(.
 
Comment

Shotgun OS

macrumors 6502a
Dec 18, 2006
505
4
Ohio
The iPod or iPod Classic will always lose out to the other models simply due to its harddrive. It can't compete on a speed basis with the flash storage.

I noticed the difference myself with the 2G nano and 5.5G.

I have noticed this also. My 5.5 gen 30 gig is very slow compared to my Mini. I can just tell by the seconds of delays the 5.5 gen has.
 
Comment

gloss

macrumors 601
May 9, 2006
4,811
0
around/about
The iPod or iPod Classic will always lose out to the other models simply due to its harddrive. It can't compete on a speed basis with the flash storage.

And yet people still complain that the Touch uses flash. Can't have it both ways, folks.
 
Comment

peter32892

macrumors member
Jul 16, 2006
92
0
Compared to a flash play it's relatively sloooooooooow. Maybe it is just the 80gig because my apple store only had the 80gig so I couldn't test the performance of the 160gig model. Like others where saying menus where unresponsive at points coverflow is bad and I am afraid to say that the I pod nano is way faster loading wise.
 
Comment

Matto1020

macrumors member
Jun 21, 2007
80
0
Its not nearly as bad as people say.

Coverflow is the worst...but Ill never use it. When you choose "ALBUM" it takes a quick second to load up all the album covers...and when you try to go back to the main menu it also takes a quick second to load up the floating pictures.

I am sure this will be addressed via firmware soon enough. Until then I am perfectly happy with my Classic and am very glad I upgraded from my 5.5 gen!
 
Comment

jsw

Moderator emeritus
Mar 16, 2004
22,909
41
Andover, MA
I played with both a Classic and a nano and found both to have unresponsive click wheels compared to my 1G nano and 4G iPod. I played with maybe 5 different ones, and all seemed problematic. It struck me as a bad omen. I don't think HD or flash-based has that much to do with basic menu responsiveness... given that my iPods seem to work much better. I think the new interface is a huge drain on the CPU, perhaps. I'd hope a new update will cure them.
 
Comment

72930

Retired
May 16, 2006
9,060
4
Its not only the fact that its HD based, the OS is heavy. My 3G iPod's OS is smooth...they didn't want to give the Classic less OS features than the Nano, even though the hardware is not quite up to CoverFlow...
 
Comment

synth3tik

macrumors 68040
Oct 11, 2006
3,951
2
Minneapolis, MN
Cover FLow can lag. It's the name of the game really. No matter what iPod you have or what computer you are on Cover Flow can lag. It is a huge resource hog compared to the other file views. That said I think it not a good idea to think of the iPod as classic, even though thats what Apple named it. The "classic" gives the impression that it is out dated. Considering the HD size I think the iPod "classic" is a good buy.
 
Comment

storage

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Jun 4, 2005
275
0
I have noticed this also. My 5.5 gen 30 gig is very slow compared to my Mini. I can just tell by the seconds of delays the 5.5 gen has.
Isn't the mini also hard drive-based, though?

Its not nearly as bad as people say.

Coverflow is the worst...but Ill never use it. When you choose "ALBUM" it takes a quick second to load up all the album covers...and when you try to go back to the main menu it also takes a quick second to load up the floating pictures.

I am sure this will be addressed via firmware soon enough. Until then I am perfectly happy with my Classic and am very glad I upgraded from my 5.5 gen!
Thanks, those were some encouraging words :). I'll probably use CoverFlow very little, too.

I played with both a Classic and a nano and found both to have unresponsive click wheels compared to my 1G nano and 4G iPod. I played with maybe 5 different ones, and all seemed problematic. It struck me as a bad omen. I don't think HD or flash-based has that much to do with basic menu responsiveness... given that my iPods seem to work much better. I think the new interface is a huge drain on the CPU, perhaps. I'd hope a new update will cure them.
Are the clickwheels unresponsive, or less sensitive than the older iPods? I actually find my current 5.5G a little bit too sensetive.
 
Comment

Vidd

macrumors 6502a
Mar 7, 2006
989
71
Isn't the mini also hard drive-based, though?

The mini had a simpler system with factors such as a lower, monochrome resolution in its favour.

Since this was a comparison between the nanos and the classic, I didn't feel it necessary to mention other factors since they're running the same OS, essentially. If I was comparing them to other models I would have mentioned the fact that I've noticed the menu transitions of my 4G running a lot smoother compared to the 5G.
The fact remains that there are inherent advantages to flash-based storage in terms of performance. For example, loading an image in the notes feature of the 5.5G seems to take an age, even accounting for time taken for image-resizing.
 
Comment

Matto1020

macrumors member
Jun 21, 2007
80
0
Regarding the unresponsive clickwheels...

I noticed when I first popped mine out of the box that the click wheel was a little different feel as far as responsiveness goes. After about 2 hours I've adjusted and now have no problems scrolling with the click wheel.
 
Comment

flying dog

macrumors newbie
Sep 5, 2007
27
0
The only time my classic pauses is for under a second when I hit a button and the hard drive has to spin up. I can feel it move and that's just the nature of hard drive-based storage. My 3g did the same thing.

About coverflow - when I scroll for 100+ albums or so they'll start appearing as the no cover art picture *briefly* until the pics catch up. But there hasn't been a delay in terms of me pushing a button and waiting for response.
 
Comment

clevin

macrumors G3
Aug 6, 2006
9,095
1
please, the speed difference is from flash vs. HDD? did you see coverflow lagging in your mac?
 
Comment

milo

macrumors 604
Sep 23, 2003
6,888
518
please, the speed difference is from flash vs. HDD? did you see coverflow lagging in your mac?

Yeah.

But I don't think it's the storage format as much as coverflow needing to load up the images and cache them - I'm sure to run well it needs to get all images into memory at once instead of trying to load as them as the user scrolls to them. It's probably more of a memory issue than anything else, and can probably get optimized with firmware updates.
 
Comment

wordmunger

macrumors 603
Sep 3, 2003
5,124
2
North Carolina
I can't believe anyone actually uses cover flow. ITunes only has a fraction of my album covers. In addition, sometimes it presents a new album cover for every track on an album, sometimes one album cover for the entire album, so scrolling through is incredibly irregular -- sometimes there are 20 pictures for each album, sometimes just one. It's absolutely pointless. Also, it lags on my dual 2.0 iMac.

When *doesn't* it lag is the question. Maybe the flash-based devices don't lag, but they still have all the other problems with coverflow. For me it's a completely worthless feature.
 
Comment

carve

macrumors 6502a
Feb 25, 2006
643
0
Yeah, I was at the Apple store in MN and the 80 gigs were REALLY unresponsive, like it felt as if you had to apply a large amount of press to the scroll wheel for it to move.
 
Comment

milo

macrumors 604
Sep 23, 2003
6,888
518
sometimes it presents a new album cover for every track on an album

That's usually easily fixable by setting the album to be a compilation, although I've found one album that insists on appearing as two covers.
 
Comment

storage

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Jun 4, 2005
275
0
That's usually easily fixable by setting the album to be a compilation, although I've found one album that insists on appearing as two covers.
Just put the same "album artist" on all of the albums songs.
 
Comment

Bern

macrumors 68000
Nov 10, 2004
1,854
1
Australia
.. sometimes it presents a new album cover for every track on an album, sometimes one album cover for the entire album, so scrolling through is incredibly irregular...

Actually what you need to do is go to the album in question, highlight all the songs in that album, then drop the album artwork into the small square on the lower right hand side. Then each album will display the same cover for every song.

If you have a compilation album, then you can have different names for the category "Artist" but make sure you put "Various Artists" for every song under "Album Artist" for that album. Then check the box "Compilation - Yes"

For albums that are all the same artist make sure you have the same artist's name in both categories "Artist" and "Album Artist" then make sure the box "Compilation" is not checked and the drop down states "No".

Also for each album make sure you indicate for "Disc Number" if it is "1 of 1" or "1 of 2" or "2 of 2" etc

I spent the last few days doing all these and Coverflow works really well and accurately as a result.
 
Comment

swwack91

macrumors 6502a
Jan 28, 2007
736
23
New Jersey
well even in one of the classic's demos on apple's website shows a short lag in the cover flow load time.

it's not gonna be perfect.

and the apple's stores demo iPods are being played with all day long and are prolly near full of media. so that should account for lag.
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.