Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

'The Beat Goes On' Rumor Wrapup: Winners

PCMacUser said:
I can't quite understand how you could struggle with 30gb of space. That's dozens of days worth of non stop music, 24/7, isn't it?

Half of the success story behind the Apple iPod is its seamless syncing with iTunes, but I get the impression that a lot of people here don't really use it much anyway. Which means we should all go out and buy something else ;)

But seriously, I'm also a bit disappointed with the 8/16gb options in the iPod Touch. Even my 4th gen iPod Photo has 60Gb (of which I'm only able to fill a third with music, and the rest with data).
Click to expand...

I am one whose 80GB is overflowing. I have about 110GB of music only on my Mac and want it all with me....always. I ordered a 160 Classic which is on its way. Of course with smartlists, playlists we could edit what we take, but there are many who are on the road or have their iPods at work and at the office and want to have everything with them. You really never know what musical mood you may find yourself in at any particular time.
 
PBUser167 said:
I suspect it was more for battery life. Flash uses much less power. Just like the iPhone, the iPod Touch has that really large screen it has to power. So not only would the iPod touch have to be bigger for the HDD, it would have to be bigger for the battery. I think they made the right trade-off personally, but your opinion may vary.

What I think is interesting about the $200 price drop on the iPhone is that is the exact amount it costs to get out of my T-Mobile contract... It is a sign!

-PBUser167
Click to expand...

1 jjust orderd a 160GB HD classic. What 4o hours is not enough?
 
nemaslov said:
1 jjust orderd a 160GB HD classic. What 4o hours is not enough?
Click to expand...

Right, so you get 40 hours on a 2.5 inch screen with the classic. The point I made was that the screen is larger on the iPod Touch. It has a 3.5" widescreen display. It is almost 2X the area of the iPod Classic's screen. The LCD probably draws more power than any other individual component.

This means that a HDD version of the iPod Touch would have to be substantially deeper for the HDD and the battery. I wasn't saying that the battery life of the released products was not sufficient, just commenting the reasons why you wouldn't want to make a HDD version of the iPod Touch technically speaking. Those technical reasons would be what forced it to be aesthetically displeasing too. ;)

-PBUser167
 
iPod HI-FI is dead...

TitoC said:
I hear everyone saying how the iPod Hi-Fi is dead ("ThinkSecret predicted the iPod Hi-Fi's demise. - Macrumors"). I really don't think so. Think about it. The webpage is STILL up there. It's been three days now and it's still up there. Sure, the Apple Store has it down, but that's usually the case when a product is getting revamped, not gone for good. If this was the case, there would no longer be a iPod Hi-Fi page at all. Also, the iPod Hi-Fi page has taken the "BUY" button down. If they did that, why not take the whole page down as opposed to making a minor change to it, but still leaving it up.

Mark my words, iPod Hi-Fi is getting revamped, not nixed.
Click to expand...

iPod HI-FI is dead according to Engadget (who said they got directly from a Apple representive). Yes. the Page is still up because iPod HI-FI can still be bought at places like Best Buy. But once they're all sold you would be able to buy a retail version.

Sure Apple has to be working on more products. I want Apple to build my perfect A/V receiver. It would probably help if told them what features I want :rolleyes:
 
PBUser167 said:
Right, so you get 40 hours on a 2.5 inch screen with the classic. The point I made was that the screen is larger on the iPod Touch. It has a 3.5" widescreen display. It is almost 2X the area of the iPod Classic's screen. The LCD probably draws more power than any other individual component.

This means that a HDD version of the iPod Touch would have to be substantially deeper for the HDD and the battery. I wasn't saying that the battery life of the released products was not sufficient, just commenting the reasons why you wouldn't want to make a HDD version of the iPod Touch technically speaking. Those technical reasons would be what forced it to be aesthetically displeasing too. ;)

-PBUser167
Click to expand...

GOT IT!!
Yes I agree. For me it's only for music. Don't watch anything on my iPods...
 
agreed on Apple tv

Curtis72 said:
What is up with the AppleTV? Will it suffer the same fate is the iPod HI-FI within a year? I have seen any commerials for it awhile (not since the iPhone release). I was hoping for some news on the Apple TV front this Wednesday like software update and movie rentail service. I just spent $10.58 at Blockbuster to rent two Blu-Ray movies. I whether spend $11 to read three HD movies from iTunes.
Click to expand...

I agree, I was really hoping for 720P content. Apple TV and others like XBOX have the 'potential' to make the Blu-ray, HDdvd debate moot. If Apple TV could offer 5.1 and higher resolution it would be a killer. I think the rumor that Apple wants to work with studios to cut pricing is a GREAT idea...if shows were only $99 cents, I would ditch cable and just buy content. Even still if 720 p happens then I would consider buying season passes. The key here is the ability to watch it on tv, iphone, ipod, or computer.
 
golfstud said:
I agree, I was really hoping for 720P content. Apple TV and others like XBOX have the 'potential' to make the Blu-ray, HDdvd debate moot. If Apple TV could offer 5.1 and higher resolution it would be a killer.
Click to expand...

720p would be a good intermediate step. Storage can be a killer. I can fully take advantage of 1080p and see the difference, but I think most people can't, there isn't much point to making bigger files for a smaller niche.

I think the rumor that Apple wants to work with studios to cut pricing is a GREAT idea...if shows were only $99 cents, I would ditch cable and just buy content. Even still if 720 p happens then I would consider buying season passes. The key here is the ability to watch it on tv, iphone, ipod, or computer.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking about changing my satellite arrangement myself. I can't resubscribe to Comedy Central on analog satellite anymore, and once my current subscription is up, then I need to go elsewhere to fill my TDS and CR cravings. While The Daily Show & Colbert Monthly Pass isn't that unfair on its own, but that's as much as $20/mo on top of my current $22/mo to get the rest of the channels I get over satellite. It would be nice to get it down farther than that to justify that route, otherwise, I can switch satellite providers and get access to a lot more.
 
Even Don Bagles wasn't far off with his *cough* "insider information" :D

The rumours were just so prevalent that they had to have a certain degree of accuracy, although I'm surprised at how accurate they were.

Has anyone thought that perhaps Apple uses sites like this for ideas? As excellent a product as it is (and I've ordered one), the Touch does seem to me like a bit of a rush job, quickly whipped up from iPhone parts so that they wouldn't disappoint people when this announcement came along. I mean if they'd just released the new Nano Fatpod and the "Classic" with the new interface then there would've been a lot of disappointed people and Apple would've been a laughing stock.

What better place to get some great design ideas than rumour sites.
 
morphineseason said:
That's the problem I ran into with the iPod touch. When I read that it would only come in 8gb and 16gb capacity I kind of let out a sigh. I have a hard time fitting my stuff on my 30gb ipod as it is. I have to constantly think, "Would I listen to this that much if I put it on there?" just because I have to conserve space.
Click to expand...

I don't think that space is that much of an issue. Liki I said in anothe thread: I have a 5GB music-library that has around thousand songs. It's not huge, but I guess it's a bit bigger than average. Anyway. I have all those songs in my iPod Mini, and when I shuffle through them, I find myself hitting "next" all the time. So yesterday I created a smart playlist that only includes songs that I have listened three times or more. What happened? My 5GB library shrank to 1.25GB. I think I will be limiting myself to just those songs from now on. Not only does it save loads of space, it makes shuffling through my library a lot more pleasant, since I only have the songs I actually listen to.

It would be interesting to see what happens with you who have 20+GB music-libraries. Create a smart-playlist that only includes songs that you actually listen to, and see how much space that playlist needs.

OK, there's still the argument of "but I might want to listen some of those other songs when I'm away from my computer!". But is that realistic? After all this time, you havent listened to them, what are the odds that you will suddenly get the urge to listen to them now? And if you really want them on your iPod, they would still be just one sync away.

What about video? Again: no problem. Take me for example: last year when I visited my family and friends in the countryside, I decided to bring few movies with me, so I would have something to do when I had time by myself. Did I take my entire movie-collection with me? No. Did I take 20 movies with me? No. What I did take was 2-3 movies that I thought would be nice to watch. I had no need to take gazillion movies with me, even though I could have.

morphineseason said:
I still don't really understand why the iPod touch wasn't hard drive based.
Click to expand...

Because it would consume too much power. Add the large screen, wifi, multitouch and HD together and you get a device that just plows right through batteries. iPod Classic gets better battery-life with HD than touch gets with flash. So I guess that 700Mhz CPU touch has eats A LOT more power than the CPU in classic does. And the screen eats A LOT more power than screen on the classic does. And we still have Wifi as well. Currently touch is 8mm thick and weights 120g. With 80GB HD and beefier battery to support it it could very well be twice as thick (approaching 2cm) with weight being around 170g and still with significantly less battery-life than what classic gets.

People seem to think that adding HD to the device is as simple as slapping it in. But that is not the case.
 
Does it bother anyone else that there is only 7 icons on the touch home screen? Maybe I just have a minor case of OCD, but anyone with an iPhone, can you let me know if you can adjust the home screen? If not I am going to look for an app to add just to make that screen even..:)
 
Rhosfelt said:
Does it bother anyone else that there is only 7 icons on the touch home screen? Maybe I just have a minor case of OCD, but anyone with an iPhone, can you let me know if you can adjust the home screen? If not I am going to look for an app to add just to make that screen even..:)
Click to expand...

OCD?
 
What happened with the education discounts??? I'm noticing that all of them are disappearing or not much of a discount anymore. The ipods used to be all discounted as well as their warranties ... Now none of it is. iWork and iLife used to be $49 for education, now it's $79... Tiger was $69 for me and I'm betting that it won't be that cheap.. I bet it'll be at least $99 for education.. I just don't understand why they are taking all of the education discounts away.
 
Loge said:
ThinkSecret weren't so good this time round. The day before the announcement they said they expected HDDs in the touch.
Click to expand...
I didn't say they were TOTALLY accurate, just that they were UNUSUALLY accurate (for them), which, in this case, is getting at least one thing right...
 
SirOmega said:
I'm also surprised how much info leaked out of Apple with this release. I wouldnt be surprised if Apple's internal security folks start pushing harder to find leakers. I'm sure Steve doesn't like mockups and UI videos online weeks before a product launch.
Click to expand...

I still remember in late August-early September 2006 that Apple would unveil the second-generation iPod nano, an MP3 player that looked like a reduced-size iPod mini. In short, there were pretty substantial leaks on what became the 2G iPod nano.

However, it appears that 9to5mac.com got their hands on a picture of of the real 3G iPod nanos and processed them through PhotoShop (remember, the picture was a .PSD file) so people thought it was a fake. This was especially true with the light shadows behind the players in that picture.
 
I have a Western Digital World Book HDD in my home network. I have stored all my files (music, videos, photos, etc.) on this drive and can access all those files from any computer I want that has internet access.

If I can do this with the ipod touch; I really don't view its' storage space as limited.

I think we need to look at these portable wifi devices differently, if they can access our home networks where we keep our files, why would we need the device to have storage space bigger than 8-10GB?
 
gear71428 said:
I think we need to look at these portable wifi devices differently, if they can access our home networks where we keep our files, why would we need the device to have storage space bigger than 8-10GB?
Click to expand...

I hear what you're saying, but I think the key word right now is "if". I believe wifi access and such will need to mature a bit before this will be a no-brainer for everyone.
 
This is so cool! So exciting! Unfortunately we're all sitting around watching paint dry so it's hard to pull people away to read the article.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back