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

When and What Ipod Classic Update?

Dustman said:
...I don't think that you need to have 80 GBs of music on you to be a "true music fan". I get along just fine with my 8 GB Nano... and I'm a true music fan.

I think they should replace the Nano with a small, multitouch iPod similar to the touch, and make the iPod Touch's with an HDD and make them a bit thicker, and axe the classic.
Click to expand...

But that's all still personal opinion (like my statement) and others will disagree. The Classic will be here for many years to come. If Apple does give it the axe there will be a lot of upset music fans.

Plus, putting a HDD in the Touch will make it unbearably slow.
 
heatmiser said:
The classic's not getting replaced any more than the nano is; most people primarily listen to music with their iPods, and many would switch to different products if they no longer had the ability to control their music without visual contact.
Click to expand...

Totally. As great as the Touch is, it definitely is an additional product line and not a replacement of the iPod Classic. There are TONS of iPod users who would not want a touch over a Classic. Anyone who exercises with an ipod needs instant one touch no-look control of their music. Lots of us bikers (regular bike, not motorbike, and I don't like the wimpy sounding 'cyclist') use ipods while we ride. We need to be able to stop songs, skip songs, change volume, etc instantly and without looking. Heck, many bikers and runners strap their ipod to their biceps, if you did that with a touch it would constantly be flipping between horizontal and vertical orientation mode! (depending on the screen you left it in when you strapped it on)

The main reason why I went with a Classic instead of a Touch was the classic's LACK of internet features. I use my iPod as a way to escape the buzzing drone of modern life. I specifically want my iPod to just be for escaping into my own world. I would definitely NOT want my iPod to have the ability to be a constant temptation to go check emails, or see if anyone responded to my forum posts, or see if any new tech news came out, or any other tempting but not enriching internet distraction like that. The main thing I want from my PMP is specifically so I can escape all that other humdrum stuff!
 
I got my classic because it was just the best music player around. The UI was updated and the size went up to 160GB! I had over 80GBs of movies so there was no other choice. At the time the iPod Touch went to 16GBs which wasn't even enough to hold my favorite music let along movies and music videos.

And yes, I do access all those movies every once in a while, especially when someone doesn't believe me when I say something happens in a certain movie. :D
 
how do you want to replace the classic with the touch? people want the big hds. the touch can only have so little space
i think the touch is a ipod show-off
 
heatmiser said:
You guys are missing the point. People who use their iPods for music (as in, primarily music, and none of the extra crap added to iPods) aren't going to buy iPods if they can't operate them solely by hand. I know I'd never buy another iPod if the only options left were versions that required you to stare at the iPod just to change the volume, nevermind to pause a track. I'd find another device and move on--as would the millions of serious music listeners who bought iPods to replace their CD/minidisc players. As long as the touch requires visual contact to operate, it will *never* be a viable replacement for the regular iPod, regardless of its capacity, storage format, or other marketed fads pushed by Apple.
Click to expand...

Totally totally agree with this this is important for me, mainly for biking reasons as another poster mentioned before.

The question I had still remains, when will the classic be updated, and what will the update be?
 
Tallest Skil said:
Ignore the Buyer's Guide for iPods.

September is iPod month.

The classic is confusing, because it can't be updated. There aren't any 1.8" drives with larger capacities than that which are out now. I can see them changing the 80 to a 100 or something of that nature, but they can't get any bigger than the 160 that's out now.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure about that, I could have sworn reading a couple months ago that new single platters in 120GB were to be available from the manufacturer of the present drives, meaning a size update could be store to make the lineup 120GB and 240GB...

That being said, I don't see the Classic having any major revision other than the capacity or perhaps battery performance boosts. The size/functionality with the click wheel seems to have been set, and the moniker of "Classic" would suggest little change is in store for this line.
 
i have a touch and i have to say the lac of physical buttons is sad. I miss the rime i had with my nano when i could switch pause lower/higher volume i\all in my pocket now i have ot physically take out my ipod touch and do all the above. espcially because the screen gets smuged because i have very moist fingers. In my highschool every one who has ipods which is like every kid in the school they have nanos and touch not many classics or videos.
 
Maybe they will update the classic by lowering the click wheel and then making the screen larger..hmm...
 
queshy said:
Maybe they will update the classic by lowering the click wheel and then making the screen larger..hmm...
Click to expand...

Now that would be very very strange because the 4;3 size would disappear and the screen would look terrible since videos have certain formats.
 
motulist said:
I can imagine new features that could be added to the Classic form factor.

- smaller size
- lighter
- better battery life
- wifi
- wireless email receiving, and email reading
- wireless itunes purchases for music, podcast, games, etc.
- wireless tie-ins with starbucks, etc.
- remote control of AppleTV, Front row, etc.
- multi player ipod games whever you are with anyone else with an iPod! (how cool would that be!)
- touch screen in addition to scroll wheel for coverflow, games, etc.
- speakers
- camera

etc. There are still plenty of awesome drool-worthy upgrades that could be done to the iPod Classic even if drive capacities are already at their maximum current technological limits.
Click to expand...

I think it also needs
- Built in Mac Pro
- 2 x 30 inch ACD (touchscreen)
- Fold-out Ferrari
- iMansion
- Sarcasm Detector

:p
 
Digital Skunk said:
But that's all still personal opinion (like my statement) and others will disagree. The Classic will be here for many years to come. If Apple does give it the axe there will be a lot of upset music fans.

Plus, putting a HDD in the Touch will make it unbearably slow.
Click to expand...

The MacBook Air handles it just fine.
I can understand the lust for a tactile iPod so you can operate it without looking. But theres ways around it, such as multi-touch gestures.
 
Dustman said:
The MacBook Air handles it just fine.
I can understand the lust for a tactile iPod so you can operate it without looking. But theres ways around it, such as multi-touch gestures.
Click to expand...

Agreed, but the Air has 2GB of RAM and an Intel Core 2 Duo backing it up. Not the tiny mobile processor that's in the iPod. Even the HDD speed would make the device heat up too much, which is why the drive in it isn't even running at 5400 rpm, only 4200.

As another poster said, it may as well remain the same size and style since it's now a "Classic" and it's very welcomed to do so IMHO. Just updating the capacity and battery life is great for me, and putting out a 240GB model will satisfy the travelers that tote HD content with them.

I don't think it needs to be smaller or have a bigger screen or multi touch or anything cute and gimmicky, just keep it as an iPod Classic.
 
No matter what direction the rest of the ipods go, the "Classic," aptly named, remains iconic. And capacitywise cannot be matched, obviously, by other ipods. I have a touch which is fun and great for wasting time..but Classics just seem a bit more serious to me.
 
Tallest Skil said:
The classic is confusing, because it can't be updated. There aren't any 1.8" drives with larger capacities than that which are out now. I can see them changing the 80 to a 100 or something of that nature, but they can't get any bigger than the 160 that's out now.
Click to expand...
Don't forget that the 160GB model is dual-platter, 2x80. There's been a single platter drive of 120GB out for almost nine months, so I think that it'll be possible to see either 100/200 or 120/240 at the next update. HDD upgrades will probably go on until flash can surpass the sizes of HDD models with lower prices.
 
I am ultra curious to see the 120GB single platter drives that are out. I have been searching for them and can't find any. All the news and reviews I get say that there are dual platter 120s and 160s but no single platter 120s.

The only news for a 240GB drive is just a newly announced manufacturing process that won't be around until God knows when in 2009.

mBurns said:
I hope the Classic remains.
Click to expand...

It will. Long after even a redesigned iPod Touch comes to market, the iPod Classic will still be here.
 
macsander said:
Yeah, of course, but than the Ipod has to be wider so e few extra inches have to be added, would be annoying in your pocket I can tell you.
Click to expand...

Why does the form factor have to change? Just take the current Classic, lower the click wheel, and use the extra space for a larger screen.
 
queshy said:
Why does the form factor have to change? Just take the current Classic, lower the click wheel, and use the extra space for a larger screen.
Click to expand...

Please man I already told you, Then you would get a screen size which is no video format as 4:3 as it is now, video's wouldn't fit in a normal size with only lowering it, try imagine what would happen if you only paste a bit of screen at the bottom of your TV, would be a strange size to watch Dvd's right?
 
macsander said:
Please man I already told you, Then you would get a screen size which is no video format as 4:3 as it is now, video's wouldn't fit in a normal size with only lowering it, try imagine what would happen if you only paste a bit of screen at the bottom of your TV, would be a strange size to watch Dvd's right?
Click to expand...

I think are missing the point. If the screen was extended vertically, it could still have an aspect ratio of 4:3, but the screen would be vertical rather than horizontal.
 
Tom B. said:
I think are missing the point. If the screen was extended vertically, it could still have an aspect ratio of 4:3, but the screen would be vertical rather than horizontal.
Click to expand...

So like this?
 

Attachments

  • images.jpeg
    images.jpeg
    2.2 KB · Views: 147
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