jettredmont said:If I had to lay money, I'd say the U2-iPod is more likely to be a "Cool ... but why?" product like the TAM ... but to each his own. Others apparently are much happier with black/red than I am.
I strongly disagree. The color screen compares to the 4G iPod screen approximately as OS X compares to OS 9 in terms of "sex appeal", and that's a vital component of the iPod's popularity. Also, the additional information from the color screen (both in terms of color and in terms of resolution) is a Very Good Thing for the music player. Being able to see album art allows quick identification of the artist/album at a glance instead of squinting to read the text title.
I agree to the "sex appeal" and not only it is that, but rather the ability to better read the screen, have color coded information, highlighting, etc. Displaying the art work is awesome. I was all saying that in my posting, however I just can't see any fit for photos. IPod is an audio-centric device. Bringing in a video-centric product in the measurements of the audio-centric device is just not well designed. I don't want to say the idea of having photos on the road is bad, but it should have deserved a better design, a device by itself. something that should have been released further down the road as a "iPod Media" or something, with a screen that spans across the entire surface of the ipod and has video capabilities. It seems like the ipod photo is a cough of a little bit of future thrown at us.
jettredmont said:As for the photos themselves ... well, obviously *you* didn't want that, but *I* certainly would pay the iPod photo premium ($100) to get it with my next iPod (which, unfortunately, is a ways in the future...) And I know that's one feature that would get my dad to buy an iPod, which is saying quite a bit.
jettredmont said:Sigh. No. iTunes can see your iPhoto libraries, just like most OS X apps which want to hook into the iLife apps can see the other app's libraries. For instance, how iPhoto can see your iTunes library to accompany a slideshow. There's no "export/import". It's a matter of clicking on which (if not all) of the iPhoto albums you want to have available on your iPod.
Since iTunes has been the primary sync-point for the iPod, especially on Windows, it makes sense to not have to open up yet another application to do the synching (note that in Tiger the non-music/non-photo syncing of the iPod will be handled in the OS itself, not in iSync).
i strongly disagree. Syncing should be a background process that is running as a service. both itunes and iphoto should be sticking to their purpose: itunes = music, iphoto=photos. There shouldn't be anything that imports or selects or drags stuff from iphoto into itunes just for it to be synchronized. As to windows, there should be an iphoto for windows. In the picture library, there should be a functionality to select albums or photos to sync to the ipod , just like you do the same with songs in itunes.
Apple slacked here on sw development. They didn't spend the time to convert iphoto to windows and since they had their ipod sync routines embedded in itunes, they just thought it was easier from a software development standpoint, to have the user import the photos into itunes to then being synched to the ipod. Very lousy implementation.
jettredmont said:Ummm .... well, it does. About 89% more pixels than in the 4G iPod models. Not sure if that translates to more text on the screen, as the font has also changed; we'll have to look at them side-by-side to judge that.
As for the appeal of color ... I talked about that above. Sex appeal. Additional information (you sound like a DOS lover circa 1989!). Photo viewing. All really good features.
No, sounds like a digital camera user. Most weekends I'm in at least one round of "look at these pictures on my 1.5" back-of-the-camera screen". Other than the fact that changing most cameras to output to the TV is a feat of thumb gymnastics, the TV-out option would get more use around my family. As for the TV set not supporting an RCA jack connection ... come on! Practically every TV built in the last decade has an RCA jack connection on it, especially since DVD players became commonplace! And how do you f. up your channel presets by plugging in an RCA jack? Granted, tv's generally don't have the best interfaces for switching to the RCA inputs, but it's not anywhere near as difficult as you seem to believe it is!
In any case, obviously this isn't a product for you. Personally, I'll be dancing in the streets when I can get my hands on one of these puppies, and I strongly suspect my extended family will have at least three new iPod owners as a result of this. While it may not be useful for you, I think Apple's hit the market square on its head here.
I see it differently, however, I do think apple will increase sales with this. The fact is the color screen and the larger harddrive. Not the photos. People always want color. Same in the cellphone market, even before camera phones. color sells and that might be just their goal by releasing this product. geez, how are we gonna implement a color screen in the ipod and make it useful? .... hmmmm.. okay.