Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Upcoming Talking iPod?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah. I hate the idea of shuffling through songs, personally. I might as well listen to the radio in that case. There's no way I want to give up that control. I want specific songs at specific times. I want specific albums from start to finish when I want them. If I want a playlist of a bunch of different songs, I'll make one, and I'll put the songs in the order I want them so that I can control the transitions from one song to the next. I like a flow that makes sense stylistically in a playlist--not something random.Peace said:
If someone wants to shuffle? Okay. Go ahead and shuffle. It's just not the way I listen to music.
Lmac
macrumors newbie
Great for individuals with visual disabilities or reading impaired
🙂 Awesome! Now those who have been unable to learn to read or those who cannot see can use the iPod and know exactly where they are! Hurray! I remembered reading somewhere that the blind community felt that Apple had left them out with the iPod. If true, now they could enable this feature and enjoy their favorite music.
I am surprised that this has not been mentioned as a benefit of introducing such a product. Maybe MacRumors could mention this on their page 1.
-Lmac
🙂 Awesome! Now those who have been unable to learn to read or those who cannot see can use the iPod and know exactly where they are! Hurray! I remembered reading somewhere that the blind community felt that Apple had left them out with the iPod. If true, now they could enable this feature and enjoy their favorite music.
I am surprised that this has not been mentioned as a benefit of introducing such a product. Maybe MacRumors could mention this on their page 1.
-Lmac
WildCowboy said:
What's the point of text-to-speech if you end up with hardcoded files?
Do you really want an extra file for each and every song on your iPod? That doesn't sound like the Apple way of doing things...Doesn't make sense.
cruci said:
Go ahead and read the patent application yourself...apparently it is the Apple way.
Paragraph 0007: "One aspect of the present invention pertains to techniques for providing the audio user interface by efficiently leveraging the computing resources of a host computer system. The relatively powerful computing resources of a host computer system create audio files based upon text strings that are then transferred to a smaller computing platform, such as a hand-held device. The host computer system performs the process intensive text-to-speech conversion so that the computing device only needs to perform the less intensive task of playing the audio file. This approach of utilizing the host computer system in addition to the computing device allows for increased quality for the text-to-speech conversions and helps reduce not only the computational requirements but also the size and weight of hand-held computing devices."
SheriffParker
macrumors 6502a
cruci said:
I'm sure they could integrate a short audio clip into the original file, the same way that album artwork is integrated into the song file.
crees!
Suspended
The song titles and artists' names are "hardcoded" on your iPod. So what's your point if you can't alter the artists names/songs directly on the iPod? Which this now brings up something I don't think anyone has thought of.cruci said:
My guess is when there's wireless capabilities added to the iPod and if only your computer creates these text-to-speech files (and not iTMS) then we will NOT have an iPod that can remotely download music directly from iTMS. Unless Apple includes these files with your purchased tracks but then how would you keep it consistent with the voice you chose, unless there is just 1 standard voice?
I think its pretty cool. It indicates that the next ipod rev may come with bluetooth. So you can have your ipod in your case, integrated with you car stereo and you can say commands like: "pause"; "Next song", etc.
manic said:
That's actually the opposite of what this patent about. This patent is about the iPod speaking to you, not the iPod understanding what you are saying.
kcroy
macrumors regular
Sync with email
I think it would be helpful if the ipod could sync with Mail. In the morning, you could sync with your email. Grab your ipod and on the way to work listen to your important emails. (Of course it would be better if you could reply to them.) Just a thought.🙂
I think it would be helpful if the ipod could sync with Mail. In the morning, you could sync with your email. Grab your ipod and on the way to work listen to your important emails. (Of course it would be better if you could reply to them.) Just a thought.🙂
Talking iPods and Universal Design
Many of you are missing the primary aim of an option like this (speaking aloud song names, etc.). Current iPods are not accessible to users who are blind or visually impaired. There are roughly 10 million people in the U.S. who are legally blind; about 1.5 million are totally blind. In addition, the iTunes interface itself is not currently accessible -- even Mac OS X's own VoiceOver utility cannot read aloud song lists, etc. So Apple is most likely addressing these issues, which also provides sighted users with benefits for times when they are "situationally blind" -- e.g., while driving. This is simply adhering to good Universal Design principles: design which is flexible enough to meet the needs of all users.
So why the big fuss over a spoken interface for iPods or iTunes for songs? Because it's about more than music. Apple is positioning iTunes as a content management system for education -- take a look at their iTunes U site: http://www.apple.com/education/solutions/itunes_u/. iPods, iTunes, and podcasting are being used increasingly in the secondary and post-secondary system. By law, these educational materials must be equally accessible to all users. Printed material is also converted into MP3 audiobooks for use by students with visual impairments and learning disabilities. Apple developed VoiceOver to address needs such as these; they likely aim to do this with their other products as well. And as with all good accessible design, it benefits all users.🙂
Many of you are missing the primary aim of an option like this (speaking aloud song names, etc.). Current iPods are not accessible to users who are blind or visually impaired. There are roughly 10 million people in the U.S. who are legally blind; about 1.5 million are totally blind. In addition, the iTunes interface itself is not currently accessible -- even Mac OS X's own VoiceOver utility cannot read aloud song lists, etc. So Apple is most likely addressing these issues, which also provides sighted users with benefits for times when they are "situationally blind" -- e.g., while driving. This is simply adhering to good Universal Design principles: design which is flexible enough to meet the needs of all users.
So why the big fuss over a spoken interface for iPods or iTunes for songs? Because it's about more than music. Apple is positioning iTunes as a content management system for education -- take a look at their iTunes U site: http://www.apple.com/education/solutions/itunes_u/. iPods, iTunes, and podcasting are being used increasingly in the secondary and post-secondary system. By law, these educational materials must be equally accessible to all users. Printed material is also converted into MP3 audiobooks for use by students with visual impairments and learning disabilities. Apple developed VoiceOver to address needs such as these; they likely aim to do this with their other products as well. And as with all good accessible design, it benefits all users.🙂
aussie_geek
macrumors 65816
a big negative vote from me.
meh, sounds like a gimmick. if it does come to fruition it may be a sign that Apple is running out of ideas..... we need new stuff - not just add ons to their already released products.
aussie_geek
meh, sounds like a gimmick. if it does come to fruition it may be a sign that Apple is running out of ideas..... we need new stuff - not just add ons to their already released products.
aussie_geek
Mechcozmo
macrumors 603
Macrumors said:
It is illegal to drive while listening to an iPod, or for that matter, any sort of device that obstructs your hearing. Your hearing reflex is much faster than your visual reflex, and so hearing skidding tires is much more likely to provoke a reaction than seeing tires skid.
Everyone who is saying, "This will make a great driving mode!" better be using their iPods connected through a stereo.
Philberttheduck
macrumors 6502a
There goes trying to sneak my ipod during class.. boy will i look like a douchebag when i start cussing at my ipod for playing nsync when i want nelly (yes i have nsync for nostalgic reasons.. just have it on there when i feel like travelin down the 90s road).
the one joys about an ipod is SCROLLING through my library.
no touchscreen? it'd better at least be full screen. boy is apple going to no longer look "hip"
apple expects over 5 mil blind people to purchase new ipods? hmmmm what a marketing scheme.
the one joys about an ipod is SCROLLING through my library.
no touchscreen? it'd better at least be full screen. boy is apple going to no longer look "hip"
apple expects over 5 mil blind people to purchase new ipods? hmmmm what a marketing scheme.
Neuro
macrumors regular
I think it's actually a great idea. My whole 'problem' with the iPod is the fact you have to take it out your pocket and look at the screen to see what you're doing (cue lamp-post). Seems silly to require visuals for a state-of-the-art- mobile audio device? Basically I hate the touch-wheel. Buttons should click and have a single function.
The shuffle is actually the best of the lot for usability as it has dedicated hardware buttons which you can use without looking.
Seriously, why would anyone be against this if you can switch it off???
The shuffle is actually the best of the lot for usability as it has dedicated hardware buttons which you can use without looking.
Seriously, why would anyone be against this if you can switch it off???
I think Apple owes me an inventor's fee for suggesting the idea 18 months ago. I'll e-mail Steve Jobs my PayPal account info so he can pay me. If he'd rather handle it with royalties based on sales, that's OK too.
