More Video iPod Reports - Now with Bluetooth?

[peharri]

There. I posted like three long winded posts and you summarized what I was trying to say right there. Thanks!

I agree that Bluetooth as a technology is not a bad idea... but what purpose does it serve in the iPod besides just "being there"? If you don't want to have to charge your headphones and you don't want to sync your music over BT what will putting it in the iPod do ? I highly doubt the auto-syncing of Calendars and Contacts (which is already a tacked-on feature of the iPod) is going to get another feature tacked on to it (especially one which would make it more expensive to produce therefore cutting into Apple's margins).

I guess I just don't get it.

Ahem. I think you do get it, you just don't see it as useful for you, which is fine, but, it's cheap, the fact you don't want it doesn't mean you're harmed by its inclusion. As you said: if you don't mind charging your headphones, then you benefit from wireless headphones. You can sync your music over BT, and auto-sync calendars and contacts (which would actually be useful. I, personally, dislike the whole formality of "I must plug in my iPod into my computer to get it up to date": in practice, I don't do it precisely because it's a PITA.

There are other long term advantages. Imagine if the speaker system in your car can automatically detect your iPod and interface with it. Right now, that's just not practical, the best anyone can come up with are those awful cellphone holder things adapted for iPods and the occasional 3.5mm input jack. Now, suppose you don't have to take the iPod out of your pocket, you can select the tracks from the car entertainment unit's console.

The real mystery is why the iPod didn't have BT in it years ago.

 

[peharri]

iPods will not in any shape or form contain Bluetooth technology. It is an expensive alternative to costs compared to wired headphones,

That's complete rubbish. It isn't an alternative to wired headphones, it's a radio standard. Bluetooth headphones are an "expensive" alternative to wired headphones, but that's an entirely different issue. If you're suggesting they're rejecting Bluetooth outright ("in any shape or form") because BT headphones are "expensive", then that's amazing short sightedness on Apple's part.

these rumor sites are HURTING the marketing efforts and promoting uneeded ideology for the consumer.

Whether rumour sites are "hurting" the marketing efforts is open to question, what's undoubtedly true is that speculation about Bluetooth support in iPods is completely irrelevent to issues of "ideology".

Although Bluetooth is a fabulous technology, it is charging two devices and most importantly providing SERVICE (not cost efficient) to a faulty Bluetooth unit, that is the main reasons for no further group discussions.

Bluetooth is an integrated technology, generally incorporated into the same chipset as the rest of the system. It's highly unlikely it would need a seperate battery (and hence "charging two devices".) And providing service to the additional 50c worth of silicon involved isn't going to make a massive difference in cost to Apple.

There is NO Apple events taking place in April. The new MacBook (smaller,lighter,thinner) will debut in spring but the Mobile Me event will not cover it unless that changes.

Fascinating. I'm going to put as much stock into this as I do into the rumours that something's planned for April 1st.

 

[mox358]

The nail on the head

Imagine if the speaker system in your car can automatically detect your iPod and interface with it. Right now, that's just not practical, the best anyone can come up with are those awful cellphone holder things adapted for iPods and the occasional 3.5mm input jack.

I really didn't get it until I read your post. But I can definitely see it as a welcome replacement for FM transmitters. That would be a big win in my book.

I still can't imagine them replacing the wired headphones with bluetooth out of the box though. For people who don't mind charging up their headphones as well as their iPod a bluetooth headphone option would be fine, but I can't imagine Joe Sixpack wanting to have something else to charge.

I think your car/streaming idea is the "killer app" for putting BT in the iPod. As far as wireless headphones/syncing I see where you're coming from, but I still think it'll be a minority group to use that functionality... but if we're putting BT on the thing it should at least be an *option* for those who want it. Just do wired out of the box though.

 

[dlpmaster]

Sorry if this was mentioned before but did anyone think of this:

Ok, lets say that the Bluetooth in iPod Widescreen is real..
So..

Since Our new Line of Mac have FrontRow in them, and allowing ipods to connect through Bluetooth... Maybe we can stream on other computers.. Movies (adding that feature to iTunes), Music Videos, and of course our Music... all through bluetooth and FrontRow..
(though I think that feature is only for WiFi prodcuts) But hey could happen couldn't it.. at this point everyone is getting their ideas out hopping we get the right answer to this one..
So far as to the April 1st event.. I really hope this happens.. but yeah its a bit weird to have an even on a sunday.. so maybe Tuesday!?

 

[sam10685]

but... won't bluetooth headphones suck? I doubt the sound quality will be that good.

never doubt Apple...

 

[TrenchcoatJedi]

My prediction is a new form factor for the vPod. It will have a bluetooth radio, but it will NOT come with bluetooth headphones. This way, you will be able to sync wirelessly, other manufacturers can make BT headphones, apple doesn't have to lower the battery life, and it'll save them money while getting publicity for having BT in an iPod.

Bluetooth might be used to sync contacts, calendars, low-res pictures and notes. BT transfer speeds are so slow that synching music, videos and high-res pictures would be slower than USB 1.0, take hours and probably drain the iPod battery long before an entire library can be synched. Maybe we'll get iTunes synching over BT when the tentative 4.0 spec codenamed Seattle is released and BT can run over UWB. This would be AT LEAST 2 years from now though.

 

[Atlasland]

If the video iPod uses Bluetooth for audio, I wonder if this would allow for enough battery life to play a feature length film. I.E. Does anyone know the power draw of a bluetooth broadcast versus having headphones at 75% volume?

Just a thought . . .

Excellent point.

Bluetooth headphones would mean that the power draw on the main unit would be lower, leaving more power for a larger display.

I'm still skeptical that they could design cool & comfortable bluetooth headphones though.

 

[dnedved]

Go BT on the iPod!

I've been waiting for bluetooth on the iPod for about 2 years now. Headphone cords are the bane of my iPod experience right now for sure... they're constantly getting snagged. The ultimate in retro-cool would be little chrome canisters that look like the earphone Lt Uhura was using 30+ years ago on Star Trek!

The one key idea that BT would add (that I haven't seen anyone else mention so far) is the idea of a BT remote control for the ipod. I want one built as a wrist-watch, with a small LCD display on it that shows which track is playing. I wouldn't care if the iPod had any screen at all on it then, it would stay in my pocket and I'd use the wrist-watch BT remote as the entire interface. Anyone who rides a bicycle can attest to how handy that would be! As bad as headphone cords are in general, the wired remote is absolutely impossible to use without huge loops of cable hanging everywhere to get snagged.

As far as charging, having an iPod, 2 headphones, and a remote would be a major pain to plug everything in. What I want is a universal charging tray... something you can just drop all the pieces in and they all charge electro-magnetically. I don't know the exact mechanism, but my electric toothbrush charges that way, so why can't my iPod?

Large wide-screen video would be cool and all, and so would pushing the envelope of what the iPod can do (don't get me started on how I want the iPod to integrate with a Mac tablet as its hard drive) but BT is my number one feature hope right now, and probably the only thing that would get an intant purchase from me (currently 60gb 4th gen, my third iPod).

 

[Chupa Chupa]

I'm not sure I'm buying the whole BT rumor. It's not that I wouldn't like it in theory, it's just that in reality it doesn't make much sense based on current BT specs and the hardware needed.

1. BT is slower than USB when it comes to syncing. So using BT as a wireless sync isn't really practical when you are talking about 60GBs of data.

2. BT stereo, while it exists, is really in an "early adopter" stage. Plus who wants to worry about having battery powered headphone. Most people have enough trouble keeping their BT headset charged up.

3. Putting BT in an iPod would make it a bit thicker and take a hit on battery power. I think most consumers would rather have slimer, lighter, and great battery life.

At this point BT in an iPod just seems like a gimmick, one that I don't think Apple will drop in, just to drop in. Maybe if they come out with a phone, but I think an iPhone will be a separate product, not something that will replace the 60GB iPod. That is what we are talking about right...what will replace the "at risk" 60GB iPod.

 

[Chacala_Nayarit]

I will stay with the refurb 4th gen 20GB for 170.00.

 

[Seasought]

It'd be great if it featured Bluetooth syncing as well. One less cable in the mix.

 

[tolly]

When

Ok, so of this thing isn't coming out on April 1st or whateva, then when??
a week after or what?? please enlighten (SP) me..

 

[MacMorgan53]

Wireless USB

What about the prospects for implementing a wireless USB2.0 capability that appears to be nearing release in the marketplace? Will this not be a useful technology for many Apple product users? In addition, what about the apparent controversy betwen the so-called 'certified wireless USB' backed by the Intel/USB Implementers Forum folks versus the Freescale.Icron-backed 'cable-free USB' approach? I am wondering where Apple users sit in relation to this situation? The way I understand it, anyone who wants to buy products based on the imminent 'certified wireless USB' platform WILL REQUIRE the Microsoft VISTA OS and only those products backed by the Intel-controlled USB-IF standard as it appears to be evolving?

 

[Sunrunner]

What about the prospects for implementing a wireless USB2.0 capability that appears to be nearing release in the marketplace? Will this not be a useful technology for many Apple product users? In addition, what about the apparent controversy betwen the so-called 'certified wireless USB' backed by the Intel/USB Implementers Forum folks versus the Freescale.Icron-backed 'cable-free USB' approach? I am wondering where Apple users sit in relation to this situation? The way I understand it, anyone who wants to buy products based on the imminent 'certified wireless USB' platform WILL REQUIRE the Microsoft VISTA OS and only those products backed by the Intel-controlled USB-IF standard as it appears to be evolving?

Any proposed peripheral hardware/networking standard that is fused to a specific OS is stillborn. Period.

 

[Bahama321]

iPod with Bluetooth

So does that mean if the iPod is going to have Bluetooth earphones, could you load songs on to the iPod wirelessly from your Mac? Now that would be sweet.

-Bahama321

 

[kretzy]

I think the important question is if bluetooth will be available in different colours.

 

[billyboy]

Anyone who rides a bicycle can attest to how handy that would be! As bad as headphone cords are in general, the wired remote is absolutely impossible to use without huge loops of cable hanging everywhere to get snagged.

I would attest to the idea that if you listen to an iPod on a bike you should get a bluetooth alarm direct to ER because that is where you will eventually end up listening to music with no idea of what vehicles are behind you on your bike.