Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Does that mean that you've "volt"ed before?

but surely revolting is a bit extreme.

I'm dissapointed but then I've always been stuck in the (dare I say it) Windows camp. I bought Ipods cos I liked them and cos there was nothing better. I liked the Apple Newton and am committed to PDA's. I use Windows Mobile 6.1 which I find clunky but I can add apps and there is nothing for the iphone yet to matc the apps I've got (and the aftermarket for apps for Windows Mobile 6.1 is currently far better than that for the Iphone). I look over my shoulder at the Iphone and I like it. I love the interface but the hardware isn't sufficient to tempt me away from Windows mobile. This is the first ipod release which I haven't been remotely impressed with. I will not buiy any of the newest generation Ipods. Indeed having looked at the Creative Xen X-Fi I am considering buying a 32GB version with a 16GB SD HC card which will give me a larger capacity than the Ipod Touch in a small device. I'm not sure I understand what Apple is playing at. I carry all my music aroudn so that I have a choice. I need around 90GB just for music. Then if I had video etc it all adds up.

We are in similar camps. My first PDA experience was with a young lady in Denver... er it was with the ipaq 5455 or something. Since this is a rumors forum it is all about speculation and feeding on people's hopes. I believe the tablet holds the hope of being that killer Apple device that is just plain stupid for me not to own.

Really strange that Apple would make such a big deal of this event, telling media to cover it etc, and not introduce anything new.
 
WHY!?!? They are so awesome, but I just wish they'd work as replacements for the ones that came with my iPhone. Now I'm forced to look for third party in-ear headphones that have a mic for talking on the phone...DOH!

Shure do nice headphones and they also have a mic adapter option. Im using it on my iphone and its great for chatting on, plus you have the much better sound quality from shure!
 
Nano Screen

Is it me or do those photos make the fatty look like it has a bigger screen than the new nanos? Wasn't improving the screen the reason for making it longer again?
 
Could someone, please, kindly explain to me WHY iPod nano, iPod classic or iPod touch would ever need a mic in the new Apple in-ear headphones...:confused:
 
iPod Update was Lame

:mad:

So a few random points about Apple's lame show/announcement yesterday:

1)They needed 1 hour and live coverage of this event to introduce a few minor features to 2 iPods? I bet the reporters are wondering why they were begged to attend. I bet the audience wondered why they paid admission and/or even attended.

2)The Nano update added really 1 feature, the accelerator thingy that if you shake it will make it shuffle. Nice idea, too bad Apple didn't come up with it...it's been around for over a year with some cell phones being shaken to tell you how much batter life is left. Moreover, is such a feature even necessary? Is it that hard to use your fingers or use their new over-priced headphones that control a few functions? It's cool, but adding significant size jumps would have been better (in addition to essentially bringing back the older style which I like).

3)The Nano update to 16gig was the biggest flop (next to the Classic and iTouch which I will rant on next). That's it? 16gig? I've been waiting for some type of flash device from Apple that is 32gig, 64gig, or larger for over a year now. Sure, I can still buy the old $499 32gig iTouch or the new $399 iTouch but those are overpriced for a MUSIC FAN.

4)On to the Classic...so they killed the 160 and 80 and made a 120g. Ok. That's it. Lovely. With the physical size of the Classic they couldn't have made it flash at 120g? Sure they could have...I can buy 32gig Flash sticks for $45...and that's RETAIL...if Apple bought 100,000 of those or more to stuff 64gig or 128gig in the Classic, surely Apple's price would have been much lower than $45. Yes, I know there are technical differences between all flash media but let's not get into the weeds and nanoseconds. So all Apple did was make it 120g and drop the price a bit (which in effect is the same price).

4a)I think Apple has a feeling that the Classic does not sell well...well, it's probably because it's still the heaviest iPod, it's hard-disk which is not as fast as the flash based iPods, and the battery doesn't really last that long. Apple probably thinks it doesn't sell well "because who needs 160gigs?". I do! And others do! It's because I have a large music collection. It's also because other's out there may have large VIDEO collections.

5)Moving on to the iTouch (which is what I really wanted to buy after the announcement), what a totally lame update. I can play some buggy games? Boy, sign me up. Apple didn't increase the memory size (and they have plenty of physical space to do so) but did drop the price a bit.



Apple seems to be having an identity crisis with the iPod line. Over the past few generations, names have changed often (iPod, iPod Video, iPod Classic), some (iTouch) are seemingly trying to become gaming devices, some (Nano) radically change shape every generation.

My biggest beef is that there were no sizeable increases in memory storage. Apple touts being able to play all your wonderful music and videos (oh, and now games) on your iPod _____ but the sizes are barely enough to do any of that.

I own (yes, own) over 2000 cds. All ripped I have just under 20,000 192k mp3s. I know I am the minority here, but that eats up about 120gigs. Sure, I don't listen to every single song, but I also DO NOT WATCH videos. Therefore, if you were to give my 160gig Classic to an average MUSIC fan but an ABOVE average VIDEO fan, that fan is going to fill the unit more with video.

I was hoping to see:

-iTouch go to 64gig or larger (I would have stood in line the next day to buy)
-Classic to go Flash at 100gig or larger (would have raced to the store)
-Nano to go to 32gig (might have gotten one as a 2nd iPod just for fun)


Now I guess I have to wait (and pray) until March or so (it's been over a year since the iPod family were last updated).


Was anyone else as bored with yesterdays announcement as me?

-Eric
 

Classic's battery lasts quite long.

iPod Classic will NEVER have flash until 1.8" SSDs surpass the size of HDDs.

Do research into why the flash on the iPods is different from the crappy flash cards you get for $45 and why they are too big to stick in an iPod Touch.

The long post you wrote makes little sense. I understand your frustration, but there is little sense made in the post.

I personally am hoping that more of the update come from the background of iTunes. Glad that NBC retards came back to iTunes, and hope to see more music as iTunes plus so I can upgrade. Also hope there's a way to upgrade my current TV show collection to HD.
 
Classic's battery lasts quite long.

I personally am hoping that more of the update come from the background of iTunes. Glad that NBC retards came back to iTunes, and hope to see more music as iTunes plus so I can upgrade. Also hope there's a way to upgrade my current TV show collection to HD.

I agree. Apple needs to offer an upgrade path to HD TV Shows like they did with iTunes Plus.

iTunes Plus also needs to be standard across the board. Time for Apple to demand it and throw their weight around considering they are the #1 retailer in the US.
 
Makes sense to me

Classic's battery lasts quite long.

iPod Classic will NEVER have flash until 1.8" SSDs surpass the size of HDDs.

Do research into why the flash on the iPods is different from the crappy flash cards you get for $45 and why they are too big to stick in an iPod Touch.

The long post you wrote makes little sense. I understand your frustration, but there is little sense made in the post.


First, my response does make sense...tell me what you are confused about. What makes little sense to me is Apple's "all over the map" direction for their iPod line. What's next?...the Nano ships with a joystick so I can play a game? Or the iTouch doubles as an insulin tester?

I already stated I didn't want to get down in the weeds of the $45 flash memory. I am not going to. I *HAVE* done my research about these technologies. My example about flash memory was an example.

The battery on the Classic is good if you never touch the darn thing. Sure, it will run for 20+ hours if I just leave it on the desk. But I am an average user where I flip through songs, play an occasional game, turn the volume up/down, watch a 5 minute music video, whatever. The battery life is fair when those factors come in. The flash models have a better battery life in my opinion. I've used my wife's 2nd gen Nano for seemingly days without recharges. No, I do not have specific hard numbers but it seems to be a lot better than my 160g Classic for actually using the device and not plopping it on the counter and letting in play.

Overall Apple should have created iPods with larger storage capacities. The iTouch is 1+ years old and still has the same 32gig. The reason why I said I would race out to get a 100gig flash over the 120gig HDD is because (and I didn't explain then) I will take a nice big flash device any day. Some other posters here said the same things about expecting 60gig flash iPods and we got the shaft. New colors? Yea, that's exciting. How hard was it to pick 3 new colors and spray the cases? Innovative? Worthy of this type of announcement? Nope.

And who's gonna buy these $79 Apple-brand headphones when you can get a killer set for $99 (like Sony or Senheiser)? Nice offering but doubt the majority will buy.

Apple should have either quietly announced these updates or given us some REAL meat at this conference. Apple killed my expectations. I'll take the iPod Classic and iTouch large form factors but want some beefy FLASH storage.

-Eric
 
Could someone, please, kindly explain to me WHY iPod nano, iPod classic or iPod touch would ever need a mic in the new Apple in-ear headphones...:confused:
According to Stevie at yesterday's presentation, there's a voice notes app in the device - ergo, a need for an input means.
 
I agree. Apple needs to offer an upgrade path to HD TV Shows like they did with iTunes Plus.

iTunes Plus also needs to be standard across the board. Time for Apple to demand it and throw their weight around considering they are the #1 retailer in the US.

I think getting rid of all DRM for everything would be nice, but as for video, that's not going to happen anytime soon. Music may be possible. Apple really needs to compete with Amazon.
 
First, my response does make sense...tell me what you are confused about. What makes little sense to me is Apple's "all over the map" direction for their iPod line. What's next?...the Nano ships with a joystick so I can play a game? Or the iTouch doubles as an insulin tester?

I agree. I don't want the iPod to ever loose that original purpose of being a music player, then a media player, then a light game player. I don't need joysticks and accelerometers at all.

I already stated I didn't want to get down in the weeds of the $45 flash memory. I am not going to. I *HAVE* done my research about these technologies. My example about flash memory was an example.

It was a reasonable example, but when you look at what the tech industry has on the market currently Apple nor any other company is able to make a reasonable cost flash based player with more than 32GB of RAM that functions like the Touch does. The single (socket) 32GB chip at the iPod Touch/iPhone size hasn't been put to market just yet.

The battery on the Classic is good if you never touch the darn thing. Sure, it will run for 20+ hours if I just leave it on the desk. But I am an average user where I flip through songs, play an occasional game, turn the volume up/down, watch a 5 minute music video, whatever. The battery life is fair when those factors come in. The flash models have a better battery life in my opinion. I've used my wife's 2nd gen Nano for seemingly days without recharges. No, I do not have specific hard numbers but it seems to be a lot better than my 160g Classic for actually using the device and not plopping it on the counter and letting in play.

Trust me, we use if that way too, and I can go weeks without charging. I watch movies on mine constantly, and at my tedious newspaper job I do nothing for HOURS while I wait for photos to come through. It's actually been about three weeks since I put my Pod on the charger and it's about half way down, and I have gotten through Pursuit of Happiness and Touristas and the first episode of HBO's Rome, and a few good ole fashion games.

As for comparing the video playing, HDD toting 160GB classic to the 2nd Gen Nano, that's just not fair. Of course the Nano is going to go longer since it does half as much.

Overall Apple should have created iPods with larger storage capacities. The iTouch is 1+ years old and still has the same 32gig. The reason why I said I would race out to get a 100gig flash over the 120gig HDD is because (and I didn't explain then) I will take a nice big flash device any day. Some other posters here said the same things about expecting 60gig flash iPods and we got the shaft. New colors? Yea, that's exciting. How hard was it to pick 3 new colors and spray the cases? Innovative? Worthy of this type of announcement? Nope.

As many have said, when the chips become available en mass and the cost is right Apple will give us what we want. At least they lowered the price of the 32GB model. As far as Classics getting flash is concerned, forget about it, keep it Classic, give me a 500GB 1.8" HDD based Classic in three years. I do a LOT of video watching, and nothing can hold my video library save for the 160GB Classic, and now that NBC is back, I may need an even bigger player.

Other posters are I.G.N.O.R.A.N.T. when it comes to what most want. If they want a 60GB flash iPod Classic for $550 that holds their puny emo music library and corny YouTube porn video have at it. But the rest of us will take the still very perfect HDD. Sucks that Apple killed off the 160GB, but they had their reasons, and i can understand them. I will be picking up another 160GB Classic though, just in case.

And who's gonna buy these $79 Apple-brand headphones when you can get a killer set for $99 (like Sony or Sennheiser)? Nice offering but doubt the majority will buy.

Apple should have either quietly announced these updates or given us some REAL meat at this conference. Apple killed my expectations. I'll take the iPod Classic and iTouch large form factors but want some beefy FLASH storage.

-Eric

Yes, Apple branded headphones will always suck and crap out. Then again, anything smaller than the Bose on ear will suck in my opinion and anything less than $150 isn't worth sticking in my ears now that I have tasted the goodness of the Dre's.

I think Apple shouldn't have made a big deal out of the announcement, and in all reality I think they should have spent their time working on iTunes, and giving us more and better content to stick on our already adequate players.
 
I would pay an extra $100 for 64 gigs. That should cover cost.


The problem is: I don't know how many OTHER people would be willing to pay as much. And that's what Apple's concerned about.
 
I'd pay

I would pay an extra $100 for 64 gigs. That should cover cost.


The problem is: I don't know how many OTHER people would be willing to pay as much. And that's what Apple's concerned about.

I agree...if the 16gig Nano is $199, I would ****GLADLY*** pay $299 or $349 (maybe even $399) for a 64gig. Again, the iPod started off as a music player, slowly melded into media, and now is going to games and phones. Gimme my stupid music player please with a nice big Flash drive(s).

Or...

Take the $399 iTouch 32gig (with all sorts of other bells and whistles I do not need), stuff another 32gig chip (or 2 more 16s) and add $100 or so to get it to 64gig.

Maybe this will happen within 6 months.
 
New iPod Touch video out standard !

What I miss in all the announcements:

The iPod touch 2G now has 480p and 576p video !
The old iPod touch had 480i, and the nano and classic had 480p.

Thus, the new iPod touch is now perfect as a mobile video player, to be used with iTunes movies and all new HD ready TVs or beamers !!

I have been using a Nano 3G with my Optima Movietime DV10, which has a 480p beamer. Almost no DVD was as good as the iPod with its 480p output !

And now the iPod touch even goes up to 576p !! Time to get a new beamer ...
 
I agree...if the 16gig Nano is $199, I would ****GLADLY*** pay $299 or $349 (maybe even $399) for a 64gig. Again, the iPod started off as a music player, slowly melded into media, and now is going to games and phones. Gimme my stupid music player please with a nice big Flash drive(s).

Or...

Take the $399 iTouch 32gig (with all sorts of other bells and whistles I do not need), stuff another 32gig chip (or 2 more 16s) and add $100 or so to get it to 64gig.

Maybe this will happen within 6 months.

I was personally talking about the touch. And it would have to be two 32 gig chips, which are expensive - but $100 should MORE than cover it.
 
iTunes 8 SUCKS!

I am getting nothing but beachballs with iTunes 8... won't sync with my iPhone (keeps trying to do a full backup - 2x in one day?).

I even deleted iTunes 8 and the plist and did a full install... no difference! :mad:

Plus - they removed the "MUTE" option from the dock pop-up menuin iTunes 8.0!... I used it all the time to briefly listen to something else, like a YouTube video or new song sent to me, while maintaining a connection with a radio stream.

momoe :apple:
 
Perhaps its a silly suggestion but...

The touch is aimed at video and music content. It encourages video content. Why not actually make it useful by making it (shock horror) slightly fatter and shoving a 160GB or 240GB HD in it. Give it a decent e-book reader. Make the edges sculpted and curvy so it looks thinner than it actually is. Give us a replaceable battery (though this wouldn't be a killer for me. I for one would be there the day it was announced harranging Apple to get it in the stores.

I can't believe I'm the only person who wants this. I can't believe I'm the only person who is happy to accept slightly more bulk for far greater functionality.

Hey ho I guess I can whistle for it...
 
Nano Nice!

I stopped by Apple Store today in Norfolk, VA. They were putting out the 8GB Nano. I say the colors look nice, and the Nano felt great in my hand. I found it to be almost perfect. I like it better than the Nano Fat.

Color choices are awesome and make it hard to choose.
 
Genius isn't "Pandora-Like"

Comparing Genius mode to Pandora makes the effort Pandora is putting into their project seem fruitless- Pandora's guys and gals actually take apart songs and assign them a genetic code, spending about 20-30 minutes on each tune... all Genius does is take collective information and then offer you your own music back... oh, and look! You can buy more music that might be like it!

I wish Apple would just take over Pandora and help them with their undertaking.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.