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

U2 iPod, Photo iPod and Additional iTMS Localizations Released

Penman said:
1) I spent $725 for the iPod (including extended warranty and tax) - why do I have to pay $40 for a remote which should come free. Is there not enough profit in $599 to support that? Of course there is - they used to be free.

2) Where's my carrying case. Even a cheap one. It was standard on my 30Gb - now I have to buy it.
Click to expand...

I have to admit, I never noticed these changes taking place. I bought an iPod before anyone really even knew about them, and it cost me £400 - this was over 2 years ago. Now, the top-end iPod costs £430. It seems like a step backwards, no matter what new technology they're put into it. Also, the removal of the remote control and carrycase. Seems a little unfair to remove this items that you'd expect to come even with a £100 MiniDisc player.
 
Diomedes said:
Apple's site has the 40Gb "regular" iPod at being .69 thick, and the iPhoto iPod at .75 thick. Does any one know if that .06" will really make a huge difference in terms of using current cases? I love my Contour Showcase, and I was wondering what people here thought. (Of course, being the geek I am, I had to order a 60 Gb...lol)
Click to expand...

how much play is there in your case? Can you close it with a folded piece of paper behind the iPod? You tell us - experiment!
 
Penman said:
check out the Epson 2000. 3.8 inch screen (which makes the iPods look pretty silly when it comes to resolution and quality) and a 40Gb drive for $500. It's essentially an iPod already (but cheaper and better - just not Apple). It's sad to see what can be produced profitably by companies that are a little less desperate (given that the other hardware is weak - namely PB's, the old cash cow.)
Click to expand...

Bingo, we have a winner - this is the sort of thing that I and most other travelling photographers will be after - its the most solid device I've seen so far from any manufacturer, and EPSON is a quality outfit unlike some of these no name device makers, it supports viewing RAW files as well as JPEG, has a CompactFlash slot built in and has a fantastic quality screen plus TV out. The only downer is that the battery life is low at 3 hours.

I note that it plays ACC files and MP3s as well.

Awesome device by the look of it.

Oh well, better luck next time Apple. I guess the casual snapshot crowd will be happy with the iPod Photo, but it seems to me Apple missed pitching it at its most obvious market.
 
CalfCanuck said:
It is a disappointment. Only thing we can hope is that Apple (or a third party) designs a "higher" speed device (high speed would be asking too much ;) ) to make it useful for photographers.

Non-photographers don't seem to get it. The color screen is far less useful than a portable 60 GB, 12 oz. storage device that fits in your camera bag. These types of products already exist, so Apple needs to solve this "upload" issue ASAP if they want a share of the photo market.
Click to expand...

iPod is just a consumer device, putting more advanced tech for more advanced imaging isn't logical.
This is designed for people who have a little digital camera who upload them into iPhoto, upload them to the iPod and share them around with their friends and family on TV.

Sure putting in RAW image file support would be good, but it's not designed to be a fully fledged image machine, it's just a music player with another feature.
 
MacMyDay said:
I have to admit, I never noticed these changes taking place. I bought an iPod before anyone really even knew about them, and it cost me £400 - this was over 2 years ago. Now, the top-end iPod costs £430. It seems like a step backwards, no matter what new technology they're put into it. Also, the removal of the remote control and carrycase. Seems a little unfair to remove this items that you'd expect to come even with a £100 MiniDisc player.
Click to expand...

Very true. Apple have seen that the iPod is profitable but risk alienating people by being greedy. When you buy a Honda the carpets are extra. When you buy a Rolls-Royce they come with the car. Charging for basic (and vital) accessories is just bad business. The iPod remote's a joke (no LCD and a useless clip) but that's another story.
 
Engagebot said:
who's going to pay that much extra to be able to view their multi-megapixel photos on a 2-inch ipod screen? even if it played videos, who cares?

it's a gimmick, and a weak one at that.

Yes, some of you macrumors people will think that everybody needs one, and its the greatest thing since running water, but the market won't support it. people just aren't going to spring for it. trust me.
Click to expand...


All I can say to this is 'iPod mini'. Everybody thought "Jeez, what a flop" - but now they're flying off the shelves and they're still fairly sparse in the UK. No doubt the xmas buying season is going to make them even harder to get.

I, personally, would buy that iPod photo just for the frikkin interface! Man that thing is beautiful! Of course, I have to go to the apple store in London first to see how thick it is.

While you may think the photo thing is a gimmick, you're wrong. My house is always the one used for family entertaining (xmas, bdays, new years) and sometimes theres 100-200 people here, and they all want to see the latest holiday snaps or whatever, or even photos that have just been taken - I used to show them on my little PB screen - now I can just hook the iPod photo up to the TV and leave them to it. It's a godsend!

Now, I'm gonna go iTMS crazy and spend more money than I have :D :cool:

Sorry for the long post ppl :)
 
Penman said:
Very true. Apple have seen that the iPod is profitable but risk alienating people by being greedy. When you buy a Honda the carpets are extra. When you buy a Rolls-Royce they come with the car. Charging for basic (and vital) accessories is just bad business. The iPod remote's a joke (no LCD and a useless clip) but that's another story.
Click to expand...

I would disagree that the remote is a vital accessory. I for one would never use it, so I'm glad they don't include it. (don't want to be paying for extra stuff I don't use.)

As for the carrying bag, they could at least have included an iPod-branded pouch or something, I can agree to that. What could it cost them? $1?

Maybe we'll all just have to get a sock! :D
 
Wardofsky said:
iPod is just a consumer device, putting more advanced tech for more advanced imaging isn't logical.
This is designed for people who have a little digital camera who upload them into iPhoto, upload them to the iPod and share them around with their friends and family on TV.

Sure putting in RAW image file support would be good, but it's not designed to be a fully fledged image machine, it's just a music player with another feature.
Click to expand...

Point is, it comes tantalisingly close to what we photographers want, and we'd really rather be carrying an iPod or apple device than something else.

And, don't forget, since we all only want to carry one device, and all these other devices do mp3 files as well, its therefore one less iPod that will be sold for music.

This IS how it's going to go, supporting these niche markets is an issue, because playing music files is too easy and generic, every portable device out there is doing mp3's now, including phones, which are the real threat to the iPods dominance, as everyone HAS to carry a phone, and no one is going to carry more than one portable device in 5 years time.

So there will be devices for every niche, strongly favouring some special function or other (Business devices, Photographers devices, Gamers devices), and all of them will also be phones, and mp3 players, and photo/video viewers, and dictaphones, and pdas, and any other digital function you can think of, and most of them will suck.

Hopefully Apple will stay at the forefront of this emerging swarm. But it's no good saying '...iPods should just be mp3 players...', because soon its not going to be enough of a reason to carry one around.
 
Penman said:
3) Where's Apple buying it's screens? My sony T3 has 230,000 pixels on a 2.5 inch screen and cost over $100 less than the iPod. Even given the differences in the items, Apple isn't using the same standard of screens as the camera guys. When did they get so damn cheap (and expensive).
Click to expand...

Thank you! At last someone else has realised that the screen resolution is way off the pace.

I'm not bashing these iPod Photos - I think it's great that we have the option of a 60GB capacity now, and for this alone I'm tempted. However the price difference is just too great for me over my current 4G 40GB, especially given that the screen is sub-standard next to my digital camera, which cost much less and is far better at displaying multi-megapixel digital images.
 
for my needs the photo features of the new ipods are useless. (almost) all i want is more capacity. larger HD. 60 GB is a good start. this will allow a pretty large chunk of CD quality audio along w/mp3's.

the feature i'd love to see added to the i-pod is a full bandwidth line/mic input. the griffin imic and the like are a joke for real recording. poor sample rate and bit depth. lousy for field recording.

every field recording geek (like me) w/a minidisc would EVENTUALLY get and ipod for field recording if it was possible to plug a decent stereo mic into it and record at 16/44.

anyway... i'm still very glad this thing is finally up to 60 GB as there are plenty of recordings i dont want to do a diservice by squishing them into mp3.

the photo features are certainly useful to some people but to me they are just 'neat'.
 
Poff said:
I would disagree that the remote is a vital accessory. I for one would never use it, so I'm glad they don't include it. (don't want to be paying for extra stuff I don't use.)

As for the carrying bag, they could at least have included an iPod-branded pouch or something, I can agree to that. What could it cost them? $1?

Maybe we'll all just have to get a sock! :D
Click to expand...

I'm guessing you haven't used an iPod much then. If you're on the move going into your pocket, unlocking the keys, and skipping a track is a complete pain. Likewise if it's secure and your exercising.

Not to provide the remote on a $600 device is ludicrous. That's as expensive as any (almost) music only device ever created. It would be fair to provide it and to give you the choice to discard it. To pretend it's too expensive is simply rude. Look at the Epson part - more expensive parts (screen and compact flash slot) and a cheaper price.

Apple are very proud of their margins but in consumer electronics you have to wonder. When there's an iPod Video will the top end model come in at $800?

On that point - I believe that the only reason there's no video support is because right now adequate storage for large quantities of video isn't available. Apple must be working on making videos available through iTunes - it's too obvious. As soon as we're at 100GB plus for portables they'll give us the functionality.
 
Centris 650 said:
No, it's the Hal 2001 Space Odyssey iPod. :D

Man, that thing is ugly.
Click to expand...

Meh, it's on my website now...
 

Attachments

  • website.jpg
    website.jpg
    33.6 KB · Views: 168
The iPod Photo works for me ....

Wardofsky said:
iPod is just a consumer device, putting more advanced tech for more advanced imaging isn't logical.
This is designed for people who have a little digital camera who upload them into iPhoto, upload them to the iPod and share them around with their friends and family on TV.

Sure putting in RAW image file support would be good, but it's not designed to be a fully fledged image machine, it's just a music player with another feature.
Click to expand...

I agree; I tend to do most of my digital photography with my SLR - sometimes in RAW, sometimes in JPEG. I use Photoshop CS a lot - but I still tend to use iPhoto for my organisation since I burn a lot of slideshows to DVD using iDVD.

Although I'd love the ability to directly connect the iPod to my camera, the iPod Photo still does exactly what I was waiting for. Being able to carry around all my slideshows and plug it in to a TV. I do that a lot but on my old G4 iMac it can take between 1-3 hours just to burn a couple of slideshows to DVD - something I don't always have time for. Now it will just be a matter of a quick sync to get my latest slideshow on the iPod - take it out to friends or family and show them. Maybe this is something that 30 somethings do more than 20 somethings and teenagers! (we also tend to have a little more disposable income!)

The iPod Photo doesn't really add to my 'taking pictures' kit - it adds to my 'sharing pictures' kit. Sure it would be nice to have an all-in-one device and that will come in future - at the moment I still have to carry my mobile phone + iPod + mini camera around everywhere.

Apple always seem to succeed when they evolve things at a sensible (and for them more profitable) pace - rather than add a whole load of poorly implemented features in one go - do a few new features but do them well. Let the market warm up to your vision naturally - they won't do it overnight.

I've had an (5GB) iPod now for nearly 3 years. With one replacement battery (£30), it still works brilliantly (with more features than it had when I first bought it) - I still use it everyday and it has travelled half the globe with me. It's introduced me to more music in the last 3 years than I probably experienced in the 6 years before it. Like my old Performa 200, I guess it will now get handed down to one of my siblings for them to enjoy for the next few years. Kudos Apple for making long lasting products (and as a result good value)

I've been waiting a while for the iPod Photo and now I'm lucky enough to have ordered one. Sure it could have a whole load more features and be more useful for when I'm taking pictures rather than sharing pictures. But it's still a step in the right direction and I'm sure it will help me share a lot more photos for the next few years to come.
 
Kill me,but I still think that a software update for the 4Gs giving them color screen capability is forthcoming. We still havn't seen any real new features on the 4G, even though it s a complete redesign from the 3G. I'M WAITING APPLE!
 
usb connection

It seems the greatest advantage of storing pictures on the ipod would be from downloading from a digital camera. Carrying the ipod around while taking pictures, it could serve as an unlimited storage unit for the camera's pictures.

I was really surprised to see Apple didn't offer this option.
 
StealthRider said:
Kill me,but I still think that a software update for the 4Gs giving them color screen capability is forthcoming. We still havn't seen any real new features on the 4G, even though it s a complete redesign from the 3G. I'M WAITING APPLE!
Click to expand...

Wow - I hate to be negative but that is never, ever going to hapen. The screen in the 4G's is not color. All that talk about 4G capability is what we've just seen - Apple clearly consider the iPod Photo to be 4G - not 5G. They've had the color capability a while and were just waiting to roll it out.

The next big redesign and the official 5G will be wireless capability - followed by video. You hear it here first.
 
StealthRider said:
Kill me,but I still think that a software update for the 4Gs giving them color screen capability is forthcoming. We still havn't seen any real new features on the 4G, even though it s a complete redesign from the 3G. I'M WAITING APPLE!
Click to expand...
If they had colour screens in them, they would have touted it at the time because it would be a major selling point. They wouldn't intentionally cripple it to B&W just for kicks....even Apple.

Wishful thinking though. :D
 
iPod Photo Antenna

Macworld.co.uk reports that the iPod Photo contains an integrated antenna.
macworld

I guess folks will be rushing to take these apart once they start shipping to prove if this is correct or not.
 
SHIPPED!!

WOOHOO!! :D

From: Do_not_reply@apple.com
Subject: Shipment notification for order # 7012xxxxxx
Date: October 27, 2004 7:20:37 AM CDT
To: keithbly@mac.com
Reply-To: Do_not_reply@apple.com


Buyers Name: Keith Bly
Web Order Number: W980xxxx
Apple Sales Order Number: 7012xxxxxx
Apple Delivery Number: 8015xxxxxx
Apple Customer Number: 90xxxx
PO Number: 409xxxxxxx


Dear Apple Customer,

The following products shipped on 10/27/2004. Transit time will
depend upon whether you have chosen standard or premium freight
options. If your order is shipping standard freight, it should arrive
within 10 days of shipment.

Product # Product Description Qty Ext Price
__________ ________________________________________ ____ ________________

_________________________________________________________________________
M9586LL/A IPOD 60G W/COLOR DISPLAY-USA 1 569.00
_________________________________________________________________________

The above products have been shipped to:

Keith Bly
xxxx Avenue xxxx
Galveston TX 77550


Carrier Name: FEDERAL EXPRESS
Carrier Tracking Number(s): 6877xxxxxxxxx


You can also check your tracking numbers at:
http://www.fedex.com/us/

For orders shipped Monday through Thursday tracking information will
be available on the carrier sites 12 to 24 hours after shipping.
For orders shipped Friday through Sunday tracking information will be
available on the carrier sites by the following Monday evening.

If your attempt to track this shipment on the carrier's web page is
unsuccessful, please contact your Apple Sales Support Specialist for
assistance.

If a partial shipment was authorized, additional items may ship
separately. This is a record of shipped items only.

Thank you for shopping at Apple.


You may check order status and get most carrier tracking information within one
business day of shipment by visiting the following web site:
<http://www.apple.com/OrderStatus>

If you have any questions concerning your order please call us at (800) 676-2775
Mon-Fri 8am-9pm, Sat-Sun 9am-6pm CT

To better serve our customers, Apple may ship products from multiple locations.
If there are other items in your order, we will send you a separate confirmation
email as soon as they ship.


Sales & Returns Policies:
http://store.apple.com/Catalog/US/Images/salespoliciesEdIndividual.html

=======================================================================

Would you like to keep in touch with Apple? Get the latest news and
information about iMac, the Mac OS, PowerBook, AppleWorks, iBook,
Power Mac computers, Quicktime, and lots more.

Then subscribe to Apple eNews--our free e-mail newsletter--and you'll
get news right from the source every other week. To sign up, visit:

http://www.apple.com/signmeup

Thank You.

=======================================================================
 
petej said:
Macworld.co.uk reports that the iPod Photo contains an integrated antenna.
macworld

I guess folks will be rushing to take these apart once they start shipping to prove if this is correct or not.
Click to expand...
Maybe there's hidden Wi-Fi capability? The rumoured AirPort Express remote?

However, hidden features like this would have to be declared on the Tech Specs page, wouldn't they? e.g. radio transmission :confused:
 
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