New iPods and Pro Machines?

[corywoolf]

I wouldn't be surprised one bit if the iPod mini was back, but with a color screen and a 40/80GB hard drive, all thanks to the new perpendicular technology from Hitachi.

So long, brick-sized iPod, you'll be missed.

that will never happen... Why would they call it a mini? A mini what? How can it be a mini iPod if there is no iPod? Lets call the next rev. iMac "iMac mini" and see what people think. The marketing team would have to be brain-dead to drop the "iPod" and only have the Shuffle, nano, and Mini. The reason apple changed the name of the mini to the nano is because people would be outraged if the newest mini's were smaller capacity then the older ones. I feel bad for anyone who bought a 2 GB nano, that will be the biggest joke in a year when apple releases 4 and 6 GB nanos. 2 GB with a color screen is just stupid. The 4 GB is fine, but 2 GB? Thats like 6 CDs! I a just glad I got the 40 GB Photo when it came out. It still looks just like the new ones, a tad bit thicker, but with the case on no one knows it isn't the newest one.

 

[steve_hill4]

I like it, although to make it widescreen viewable, you would have to turn it through 90º and I am not sure if I would want to do that. Also, the slick wheel appears a bit too small for me. Either way, I want to get my hands on one now and play around with the features.

I'm certain the video is coming, but it's whether it supports HD content as an output or not, (let's face it you wouldn't be able to view it on there, but an AV HD output would go down nicely, unless apple want to relaunch it within 12 months as a HD version). Also, what kind of accessories will they throw in before they remove them in Rev. B? There's just so many unanswered questions still. Roll on October 7th.

 

[Chundles]

I like it, although to make it widescreen viewable, you would have to turn it through 90º and I am not sure if I would want to do that. Also, the slick wheel appears a bit too small for me. Either way, I want to get my hands on one now and play around with the features.

I'm certain the video is coming, but it's whether it supports HD content as an output or not, (let's face it you wouldn't be able to view it on there, but an AV HD output would go down nicely, unless apple want to relaunch it within 12 months as a HD version). Also, what kind of accessories will they throw in before they remove them in Rev. B? There's just so many unanswered questions still. Roll on October 7th.

Why do you keep calling it a "slick" wheel? I know it's very slick looking but that's not what it's called.

 

[corywoolf]

It's just sad the PB hasn't hit 2 Ghz yet. I expected apple to at least hit 2 Ghz with the PB before mactel takes over. Anyone think apple may sell 6 versions of the powermac for a while (after mactel takes the stage)? I don't know if anyone would buy the PowerPC ones still, but would guess they would hit 3 GHz and would be more stable then the rev. a mactels. I guess it might not make much sense, but neither does the mac mini situation.

 

[Chundles]

that will never happen... Why would they call it a mini? A mini what? How can it be a mini iPod if there is no iPod? Lets call the next rev. iMac "iMac mini" and see what people think. The marketing team would have to be brain-dead to drop the "iPod" and only have the Shuffle, nano, and Mini. The reason apple changed the name of the mini to the nano is because people would be outraged if the newest mini's were smaller capacity then the older ones. I feel bad for anyone who bought a 2 GB nano, that will be the biggest joke in a year when apple releases 4 and 6 GB nanos. 2 GB with a color screen is just stupid. The 4 GB is fine, but 2 GB? Thats like 6 CDs! I a just glad I got the 40 GB Photo when it came out. It still looks just like the new ones, a tad bit thicker, but with the case on no one knows it isn't the newest one.

Er, you get a tad more than 6 CDs on a nano. Unless you're talking lossless codecs and in which case why would you try and put lossless onto a nano anyway? 2GB is pretty good, about 450ish songs at 192 AAC - that's good for a short trip away, an ultra-long bus ride, lots of things. It's quick to sync too so swapping songs in and out isn't much of a hassle.

 

[steve_hill4]

that will never happen... Why would they call it a mini? A mini what? How can it be a mini iPod if there is no iPod? Lets call the next rev. iMac "iMac mini" and see what people think. The marketing team would have to be brain-dead to drop the "iPod" and only have the Shuffle, nano, and Mini. The reason apple changed the name of the mini to the nano is because people would be outraged if the newest mini's were smaller capacity then the older ones. I feel bad for anyone who bought a 2 GB nano, that will be the biggest joke in a year when apple releases 4 and 6 GB nanos. 2 GB with a color screen is just stupid. The 4 GB is fine, but 2 GB? Thats like 6 CDs! I a just glad I got the 40 GB Photo when it came out. It still looks just like the new ones, a tad bit thicker, but with the case on no one knows it isn't the newest one.

They will always have one line still called just plain old iPod. I can see them bringing out a new mini sized iPod at some point, but I can't see it being called a mini. Since they skipped out micro between mini, (which some could liken to milli), and nano, perhaps a smaller version of the mini could be a micro. I can't see that either though as Creative have already been trading in Zen Micros for a while, so what to call it?

 

[Foocha]

One more for luck...

 

[ijimk]

will the ipods be the same size as the nano or similar in size to it?

 

[powerbook911]

Yeah that really makes a lot of sense?

Why would apple make the nano a chrome iPod and not an aluminum iPod if they were going to switch the regular iPod to aluminum? More likely, they will offer a black iPod as they do with the nanos.

"The black nano has been so popular and in demand that we are pleased to present the choice of a black iPod and the classic white iPod."

That is what my bet is on at least.

The traditional iPod design is now with the iPod Nano. I think they could go to a revolutionary design, with a new full-size iPod.

 

[Squire]

will the ipods be the same size as the nano or similar in size to it?

No, not quite. I guess we could expect...a 15% decrease in size?

The new PMR drives are just 5mm and 8mm thick, respectively, making the 40GB drive roughly 3mm thinner and 15% smaller in volume than the 40GB drive Apple used in an earlier version of the iPod.

Squire

 

[powerbook911]

I like ideas like these. I would want one.

If something like this comes out, I just hope someone makes a third party application, so that we can definitely put our own favorite TV shows and movies on it. It would be sad, if we were limited to iTunes music videos and podcasts.

I know a lot of us have said we wouldn't want to carry television shows and/or movies around. However, the more I use the iPod for audio entertainment, I start to think that *sometimes* I would enjoy doing the same, with certain video programs.

 

[Evangelion]

A cousin of mine had an Amiga 500 back in the early 90s...great little machine for games, I must admit...we had lotsa fun back then..!

Finest piece of computer hardware ever built, IMO . I still have mine, and I use it to play Speedball 2 (and some other games as well) now and then.

 

[PubGuy]

Well, I'll attest that PowerBooks are good for at least 5 years. I'm still running on a first-generation titanium PowerBook (G4-400 with 384 MB ram). Yeah, my battery is starting to get tired and not hold the same charge as when new, but I'm running 10.4.2 and have it imaged the same as my desktop system. Try doing that with a 5 year old PC running Windows XP SP2!

I really hope they upgrade the displays on the PowerBooks, especially the 12". If the 12" could get a resolution of 1152 x 768, then I'll replace my TiBook. If the updates don't include a better display on the 12", then I'll probably just get another 15".

I can't complain getting 5 years from this machine...and it will continue to serve me even after I get a newer machine.

 

[Foocha]

Movies on iPods

I imagine that a video iPod would support a variety of movie formats, but would definitely include QuickTime 7 H.264 - remember that Apple has made a big thing about it being suitable for everything from mobile devices to HD. Now that QuickTime 7 for Windows is out, everything is in place for Apple to launch an iPod Movie. Content supported by Apple would probably be:

- QuickTime movie trailers from the Music Store
- Home movies exported from iMovie
- Music videos from the Music Store
- Video podcasts from iTunes
- Other MPEG 4 movies from iPhoto

The focus of all the video functionality will be on shorter clips rather than full length TV shows and movies, since this will require a commercial negotiation task even more gargantuan than that involved in setting up the music store.

I do envisage a Movie Store from Apple at some point, but not necessarily at the same time as the iPod movie's launch.

 

[macorama]

The 4 GB is fine, but 2 GB? Thats like 6 CDs!

Nah, way more, there's this thing all the kids are using called MP3 apparently...

 

[steve_hill4]

I imagine that a video iPod would support a variety of movie formats, but would definitely include QuickTime 7 H.264 - remember that Apple has made a big thing about it being suitable for everything from mobile devices to HD. Now that QuickTime 7 for Windows is out, everything is in place for Apple to launch an iPod Movie. Content supported by Apple would probably be:

- QuickTime movie trailers from the Music Store
- Home movies exported from iMovie
- Music videos from the Music Store
- Video podcasts from iTunes
- Other MPEG 4 movies from iPhoto

The focus of all the video functionality will be on shorter clips rather than full length TV shows and movies, since this will require a commercial negotiation task even more gargantuan than that involved in setting up the music store.

I do envisage a Movie Store from Apple at some point, but not necessarily at the same time as the iPod movie's launch.

Yeah, after all the iTMS came later on than iPods and iTunes didn't it? We all coped fine. I also see the sense in trying to encourage smaller video files to start off with, just think how much room one full size HD movie would take up. It will come in time, but as the capacities increase still further and the Video Store comes along. Look how the iTMS changed music downloads. Many said mp3 players would lead to increased illegal downloads, and while that may be true, as a percentage they are decreasing in favour of legal methods. The same would happen with video content.

 

[SPUY767]

Nah, Picture the basic same design with a screenh on the left and a click wheel on the right, same resolutuion with the screen turned on its side.

And if it's got a screen that size, it'll have an updaed version of the iPod Media player, a very reduced Itunes, and perhaps simple visualizations. I will say however, that this most likely won't be the case. People like the iPod just like it is, adding video only increases cost and alienates part of the market who would rather have a small music player without all the bells and whistles that come with the video package.

 

[kirk26]

I like ideas like these. I would want one.

If something like this comes out, I just hope someone makes a third party application, so that we can definitely put our own favorite TV shows and movies on it. It would be sad, if we were limited to iTunes music videos and podcasts.

I know a lot of us have said we wouldn't want to carry television shows and/or movies around. However, the more I use the iPod for audio entertainment, I start to think that *sometimes* I would enjoy doing the same, with certain video programs.

This would never happen because it would benefit the customer and not Steve Jobs.

 

[50548]

Finest piece of computer hardware ever built, IMO . I still have mine, and I use it to play Speedball 2 (and some other games as well) now and then.

Hehe, I wouldnt go as far, especially because of the crappy parts and bad UI in the OS, IMHO...but for gaming nothing was close at that time, apart from the Atari ST and the Apple IIGS (a marvellous machine for me, albeit a bit underpowered in the MHz side...but its Ensoniq sound capabilities cannot be compared even to current machines)..!

I still play GS games once in a while with Bernie II to Rescue on my iBook...the emulation is simply perfect..! Airball, Dragon Wars, Task Force, Arkanoid II (THE best port ever)...good times!

 

[SPUY767]

Yeah, after all the iTMS came later on than iPods and iTunes didn't it? We all coped fine. I also see the sense in trying to encourage smaller video files to start off with, just think how much room one full size HD movie would take up. It will come in time, but as the capacities increase still further and the Video Store comes along. Look how the iTMS changed music downloads. Many said mp3 players would lead to increased illegal downloads, and while that may be true, as a percentage they are decreasing in favour of legal methods. The same would happen with video content.

They won't be full size hd movies, they will be less than half the resolution of HD movies, so that meant less than 1/4 the file size. H264 will go to bitrates far below divx and xvid. A true HD video at 1280x720 has a bitrate from 8mbps to 10mbps. If we do the math, and HD video is 921600 pixels. Now the OP expresses a screen size of 480x320, This may be so, but the movie will only be encoded to fill the screen on the longest side. This leads to the traditional 16x9 movie being encoded at 480x270. That figure yields 129600 pixels. This means that scaling down linearly from the original bitrate, we have a movie whose bitrate is between 1.125mbps and 1.4mbps. This rate is consistent with a filesize of about 500 and 630 MB per hour of video. Now, on a screen such as the iPods, they can afford to drop the bit rate even lower, probably to around 700kbps, seeing that most people are either going to plug these into a tube tv, which smoothes out imperfections by averaging pixels from source. Since the HD Gallery movies on apple's website are encoded to crystal clear specifications, we can expect that the 700kbps bitrate is about what we'd get. And 700kbps is equivalent to 315 megs per hour of video, so we'd easily get decent quality movies that would run about 600 megs. Furthermore, H.264's scaling algorithms are phenominal. If the iPod's processor were powerful enough, which it wouldn't be, the video output could be scaled up to 2x resolutino yielding a quality comparable to a DVD player run via a composite input.

 

[dloomer]

This would never happen because it would benefit the customer and not Steve Jobs.

I think it would benefit Steve because the customer is benefited. I might be missing where you're coming from, but it sounds like by your reasoning the current iPods shouldn't allow MP3s ripped from your own CDs either. If people have content that they'd like to play on their iPod, iPod sales would benefit by supporting that (exceptions: content bought from iTunes competitors' pay services; competitors' proprietary formats such as WMA).

 

[steve_hill4]

And if it's got a screen that size, it'll have an updaed version of the iPod Media player, a very reduced Itunes, and perhaps simple visualizations. I will say however, that this most likely won't be the case. People like the iPod just like it is, adding video only increases cost and alienates part of the market who would rather have a small music player without all the bells and whistles that come with the video package.

Whether video was added or not, it would be difficult navigating through iTunes with only a click wheel as your main input. It would be a scaled version yes, but if you scale it down too much to allow for the click wheel as your input, you have pretty much got the current iPod software. Some extra features and a better graphic interface would improve it, kind of make it look like iTunes, but still function as normal.

 

[hyperpasta]

Video? Maybe...

I wouldn't be dissapointed if we didn't get video. And it's very possible they show the 5G iPod in October so its still a hot seller over christmas. If we get double storage, thin-ness, Nano firmware features (stopwatch), and maybe a black version, that's good enough for me. I still think there's gonna be an iPod update of some sort at MWSF.

 

[steve_hill4]

They won't be full size hd movies, they will be less than half the resolution of HD movies, so that meant less than 1/4 the file size. H264 will go to bitrates far below divx and xvid. A true HD video at 1280x720 has a bitrate from 8mbps to 10mbps. If we do the math, and HD video is 921600 pixels. Now the OP expresses a screen size of 480x320, This may be so, but the movie will only be encoded to fill the screen on the longest side. This leads to the traditional 16x9 movie being encoded at 480x270. That figure yields 129600 pixels. This means that scaling down linearly from the original bitrate, we have a movie whose bitrate is between 1.125mbps and 1.4mbps. This rate is consistent with a filesize of about 500 and 630 MB per hour of video. Now, on a screen such as the iPods, they can afford to drop the bit rate even lower, probably to around 700kbps, seeing that most people are either going to plug these into a tube tv, which smoothes out imperfections by averaging pixels from source. Since the HD Gallery movies on apple's website are encoded to crystal clear specifications, we can expect that the 700kbps bitrate is about what we'd get. And 700kbps is equivalent to 315 megs per hour of video, so we'd easily get decent quality movies that would run about 600 megs. Furthermore, H.264's scaling algorithms are phenominal. If the iPod's processor were powerful enough, which it wouldn't be, the video output could be scaled up to 2x resolutino yielding a quality comparable to a DVD player run via a composite input.

Okay, I stand corrected, (mainly because I haven't fully looked into h.264 yet, I really should do). But I take everything on board what you said. I still think we will see an iPod with video capability soon, but HD? Not so sure still.

 

[blitzkrieg79]

Hehe, I wouldnt go as far, especially because of the crappy parts and bad UI in the OS, IMHO...but for gaming nothing was close at that time, apart from the Atari ST and the Apple IIGS (a marvellous machine for me, albeit a bit underpowered in the MHz side...but its Ensoniq sound capabilities cannot be compared even to current machines)..!

I still play GS games once in a while with Bernie II to Rescue on my iBook...the emulation is simply perfect..! Airball, Dragon Wars, Task Force, Arkanoid II (THE best port ever)...good times!

In the late 80s and early 90s nothing came even close to Amigas in terms of performance for the price(fast processors coupled with audio/video coprocessors) and OS (I didnt find the UI to be too difficult to navigate-remember we are comparing things that were available at the exact same time and Mac OS and Windows were no where close) and thats a fact (maybe except Atari ST), Jurassic Park was done on Amigas and Disney still uses Amigas to these day...

Anyway, it just shows how marketing is the most important aspect of the company, not the hardware/software... If hardware/software was what mattered the most we all would be running on Amigas right now... Too bad Commodore insisted on investing in their PCs instead of Amiga...