considering the 5G iPods can, it's safe to say the new ones will.
http://www.apple.com/ipod/specs.html
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.
iPod Touch Details?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
considering the 5G iPods can, it's safe to say the new ones will.
http://www.apple.com/ipod/specs.html
Sounds like the reasoning of John Scully again. I sware my theory of the bug in OS Leopard's Time Machine swapping the consciousness of John Scully and Steve Jobs is sounding more and more true every day.
"Let's cripple our bestselling device so it won't hypothetically (not in reality) harm sales of a product that will only sell 1/20th of what the bestseller does."
Yeah, that makes sense.
It's not just a matter of crippling a product. I doubt Apple could make a $299 iPhone that had everything but the phone part, and have a 30GB HD (minus the AT&T revenue stream too.) The phone part doesn't actually cost that much compared to everything else in the iPhone.
I would probably guess that the iPod might run a slower CPU as well, if Safari and wifi are not in it.
Basically, I'll already be impressed as hell if Apple can do a fullscreen iPod with orientation sensor and touchscreen, running OS X with a 30GB HD for $299.
If the new high capacity iPod doesn't have tactile controls, a useful remote or some other way of operating it without looking at the screen I will not be interested.
running like hell to keep away from Apple lawyers and their cease and desist orders
that said, i'm kinda hoping these rumours of the new ipod are not true
cos if they are, i'm gonna have to get one cos it looks fantastic. and i can't afford it. and no doubt, it'll be available in the UK before the iPhone is. and then the iPhone'll come out and i'll have to get that. and then i'll need to carry both around in my pockets
Flash memory is expensive. Replace the flash with a hard drive and take out the parts that make it a phone and that's the $100 difference right there (which on Apple's end is a lot less than $100 difference). They could easily do it for $299.
And as far as AT&T revenue goes... I'm not understanding how that comes into play. Are you suggesting that apple needs that money to not lose money on the iphone? Or that it somehow keeps the cost of the iphone down? I think its highly unlikely that that money affects production costs at all. Only microsoft would release a product that couldn't pay for itself.
here are my two entrys into the 9to5mac.com mockup competition to replicate a 6th gen
http://www.flickr.com/photos/12069269@N06/1220950088/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/12069269@N06/1220953964/in/photostream/
what do you think?
on my flickr profile their are also gui mockups that i made
Post your own aswell
I hope they do release something like this becuase ive been wanting a touchscreen ipod ever since the rumors started like a year and a half ago .
http://www.flickr.com/photos/12069269@N06/1220950088/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/12069269@N06/1220953964/in/photostream/
what do you think?
on my flickr profile their are also gui mockups that i made
Post your own aswell
I hope they do release something like this becuase ive been wanting a touchscreen ipod ever since the rumors started like a year and a half ago .
If you made those, why do you claim here that you "found them on flickr"? And those mockups of your (posted in flickr under "dawnraid101") are 100% identical to those earlier "6G iPod"-pictures you found in flickr (that were posted under "simonbullwinkle").
So there are two possibilities here:
a) You were flat-out lying when you said that "you found the images in flickr", since you were the one who made them.
b) You did indeed find those mockups in flickr, and you are now claiming that you made them, when indeed you did not.
Which of those two options is the right one? Were you lying earlier, or are you now ripping off someone else's work? Let's hear it.
I don't know why everyone keeps suggesting the new ipod needs Zune squirting. It's one of the most badly thought out concepts ever.
Apple already has a music sharing concept which they've already worked out the legal details on. It's iTunes sharing. Share a playlist, or your whole library. Then when two iPods are in wireless range, an adhoc wifi network is defined between them, bonjour finds the shared playlist and you can stream it from one ipod to another. The'll also provide airtunes so you can stream to an airport express, or browse the music from your pc and mac. Final clincher will be the ability whilst out and about to hear a tune, use ipod to sample it and search for it & buy on mobile iTMS. Okay i'm stretching the last one, but apple do have a patent for this type of technology, so may just be a matter of time.
Battery life will be consistent with the iPhone, as the device is thicker to accomodate the 1.8" drive, you'll have more room in the other half for a deeper battery.
M.
Apple already has a music sharing concept which they've already worked out the legal details on. It's iTunes sharing. Share a playlist, or your whole library. Then when two iPods are in wireless range, an adhoc wifi network is defined between them, bonjour finds the shared playlist and you can stream it from one ipod to another. The'll also provide airtunes so you can stream to an airport express, or browse the music from your pc and mac. Final clincher will be the ability whilst out and about to hear a tune, use ipod to sample it and search for it & buy on mobile iTMS. Okay i'm stretching the last one, but apple do have a patent for this type of technology, so may just be a matter of time.
Battery life will be consistent with the iPhone, as the device is thicker to accomodate the 1.8" drive, you'll have more room in the other half for a deeper battery.
M.
If you check Apple's support website, in the section dealing with maximizing the 5G iPod's battery life, you'll see that Apple already DOES use a RAM cache as a means of reducing HDD activity and thus improving battery life (previously in this thread it was claimed that the cache was being used strictly for skip prevention).
Specifically, they say that fast forwarding or skipping around your playlist too much hurts battery life. The Shuffle feature does not hurt battery life.
http://www.apple.com/batteries/ipods.html
The return of the iPod mini
Hi,
Saw the new posts in this forum and many are now talking about the return of the iPod mini in the lineup... makes sense... lots of sense.... we'll see the MacBook mini in the near future also... clean and well named product lines at Apple.
The nano needs to stay small with a screen... make it bigger a bit but this is the entry level iPod with a screen...
The iPod mini, need to make a transition between the current nanos and the futur iPod... I would make the iPod mini all flash based, very thin, 8, 16, 32 gigs of rams, big screen like the current 5.5 gen iPod...
And the iPod, the top of the line product, need to be OS X based like the iPhone... less the connectivity-network functionnality....
JF
Hi,
Saw the new posts in this forum and many are now talking about the return of the iPod mini in the lineup... makes sense... lots of sense.... we'll see the MacBook mini in the near future also... clean and well named product lines at Apple.
The nano needs to stay small with a screen... make it bigger a bit but this is the entry level iPod with a screen...
The iPod mini, need to make a transition between the current nanos and the futur iPod... I would make the iPod mini all flash based, very thin, 8, 16, 32 gigs of rams, big screen like the current 5.5 gen iPod...
And the iPod, the top of the line product, need to be OS X based like the iPhone... less the connectivity-network functionnality....
JF
Is it just me... or do a lot of people in this thread not understand the way memory and storage come in certain increments?
2-4-8-16-32 etc.
Very few iPods, namely the iPod nano and mini, have had the capacities you listed. There have been 5, 6, 10, 15, 20, 30, 40, 60, and 80GB iPods. But yeah, 50GB seems a little weird.
A Hard Drive is the familiar spinny disk in an enclosure, like the hard drive in a computer. It has moving parts, and therefore uses up batteries faster. This is what you find in the big video iPods.
Flash memory is "Solid State" which more or less means that it has no moving bits. This is what you'd find in one of those USB drives, and also in the Shuffle and Nano. It's much smaller and doesn't work the batteries too hard. Flash is more likely to survive a drop or a good soaking, as I've discovered firsthand.
Downside, it's much more expensive. This is one of the reasons why the 8 gig Nano and the 30 gig Video are the same price.
So when you see the occasional wistful predictions of a flash-based Macbook "Nano," they mean a macbook that is much thinner, with days of battery life, that you'll have to trade in your car for.
Personally I'd like to see a move to Crystal memory in iPods, where you take a big shard of crystal and slide it into a tube and bam, you can listen to the collective knowledge of the greatest scientists and philosophers of the planet Krypton while ghostly images of Jor-El spin through coverflow.
If there is no web, no email and no IM (maybe I could live with no IM) I'm definately not going on that train :'(
Actaully, i think the iTunes Sharing Will Happen
Only thing is, when you update your iPod, all of that sharing goes away..
Only thing is, when you update your iPod, all of that sharing goes away..
I believe the next big step for Apple in the music department is over-the-air downloads. iTunes on iPhone, and even iPod, would be a big success in my opinion. Especially when pitted against other competition in that vein of the music industry--Verizon V-Cast (lol), for instance.
The main thing I want to see is wireless syncing between iTunes and the iPod. This wire business is nonsense. Such a hassle plugging in my iPod every time I want to sync it. I hope Apple has the wisdom to not hold such a rudimentary feature back, just because of the iPhone.
i never actually considered wifi on the phone such a great option..but then i thought about it:
at uni..in library/lectureD) and i want to look at some website..bam pull out iPod.
like i take my ancient POS tibook to uni everyday just so i can check my 6 or so websites every day. i dont really need it for anything else.
a wifi enabled iPod would be a godsend..but also so highly unlikely.
these 9to5 mac crew cropping up all of a sudden seems strange. about as strange as this whole year of Apple Inc. has been. something about 2007 and Apple doesnt sit well with me. i dno why..disappointing announcements/iphone/leopard delay/imac. does anyone agree?
at uni..in library/lecture
D) and i want to look at some website..bam pull out iPod.like i take my ancient POS tibook to uni everyday just so i can check my 6 or so websites every day. i dont really need it for anything else.
a wifi enabled iPod would be a godsend..but also so highly unlikely.
these 9to5 mac crew cropping up all of a sudden seems strange. about as strange as this whole year of Apple Inc. has been. something about 2007 and Apple doesnt sit well with me. i dno why..disappointing announcements/iphone/leopard delay/imac. does anyone agree?
I wouldn't have thought that, save for one recent thing: the ability to transfer purchased songs from the iPod back to your music library.
That would at least give the ability - some day in the future - to allow purchases via the iPhone/Wi-Fi enabled iPod and put them back into your library.