New Apple iPod with Photo Capabilities 776
artlu was the first of many to submit: "I was just watching my Dow Jones streaming news wire, and I saw that Apple is releasing a new iPod that will have photo captabilities. The news stated that the new iPod will be able to hold 25,000 photos as well as your traditional iPod functionality." Apple's got a page up about the iPod Photo and of course a press release.
A LOT more new stuff... (Score:5, Informative)
- iPod U2 Special Edition [apple.com] ($349)
- The Complete U2, a digital box set of every song ever recorded by U2, plus some crazy and rare recordings, available in November for $149 via the iTunes Music Store, with a $50 certificate towards it with the iPod U2 Edition
- iTunes 4.7 [apple.com]
- QuickTime 6.5.2 [apple.com]
- iPod Updater 3.0.4 (2004-10-20) [apple.com]
- iPod-focused Apple Store: iPod Store [apple.com]
- EU iTunes Music Store added to 9 more European nations [apple.com], with over 700,000 songs
- iTunes Music Store is coming to Canada in November
- Press releases [apple.com]
Other cool things: in addition to its dock, the iPod Photo can also even output video via its own headphone jack with a special 1/8" AV cable, and the 220x176 65536-color screen also displays album art while playing, as well as color games, etc! (Don't have much/any album art? Get it! [ambitiouslemon.com])
While Steve Jobs talked at length during the presentation about why Apple isn't doing video on a portable device itself for reasons of battery life, device/screen size, weight, etc, now that this device has video output capabilities, I think it's a clear sign of the direction; that is, future devices - or future firmware - being able to output video content to an external monitor/projector. Imagine this: your iPod dock, already at your entertainment center. The iTunes Movie Store (or, your own iMovie content). H.264/MPEG AVC [apple.com] (Microsoft WMV9/VC-1 has hit some snags [slashdot.org] in its bid for standardization). Download a movie, sync to your iPod. Drop the iPod in its video dock at your TV (or ANY device that has video inputs). Done. And a LOT cleaner and easier than having a whole separate computer that needs to be maintained as a part of your entertainment center. Add 802.11g with things like AirPort Express [apple.com] to the mix, and who knows what might come...
Re:A LOT more new stuff... (Score:5, Interesting)
black earbuds (Score:5, Interesting)
sony makes some very nice earbuds that come in black. surprisingly good sound quality, and they don't hurt your ears one bit. i've had them on for hours at a time with no discomfort. sony has a lot of similar ones, but the mdr-ex71's [sonystyle.com] are great.
it helps to break them in a bit first. crank up the audio from the ipod to full for 5 or 6 minutes, and you're all set.
Re:black earbuds (Score:4, Informative)
Re:black earbuds (Score:3, Informative)
Is it really necessary to use headphones such as these for an iPod? Shouldn't a $100 pair suffice for a consumer device using lossy codecs?
Re:black earbuds (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:black earbuds (Score:5, Funny)
KIDDING! I'm just kidding!
Re:black earbuds (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:black earbuds (Score:5, Informative)
I tried to point this out once before, and got moderated down for my trouble.
It's not like the headphones (or speakers) are manufactured and shipped without ever being tested! The drivers are often custom manufactured for speaker & headphone makers by OEMs in Asia (and some in the US). Before the OEM ships the drivers to the manufacturer, the units are tested to make sure the driver meets the custom specs! 99% of the time, this testing will be enough to provide adequate break-in.
If you don't believe me, maybe this will convince you [google.com]. You can find similar statements fron Ken Kantor and John Dunlavy if you look hard enough.
Re:black earbuds (Score:4, Interesting)
As long as I'm posting, I think that this is a bad idea - the thing that appeals to me about the iPod is its very simplicity. There's none of this PDA-ness, the calendar is fairly crippled, and you just use it for *music* - not keeping track of your pictures and a million other things. iPods are a symbol of coolness, simple music, just being able to relax. When you add that other junk, it brings in the PDA factor - images of a busy, suited person dashing around trying to get to their next appointment.
Re:A LOT more new stuff... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:A LOT more new stuff... (Score:5, Informative)
I own an Archos gMini400 [archos.com]. It plays DivX/XviD videos (full movies -- got Lord of the Rings and about a dozen MST3K episodes on this thing right now), views photos on screen and on TV (just like iPod Photo), plays music with album art (just like iPod Photo) and has 10 hours claimed battery life playing music, 5 hours video (although I've had it run closer to 7 hours). I also got mine for $340 by using CNet's pricewatcher feature.
Aside from the bigger hard drive, there's absolutely nothing to sway me to the iPod Photo from my gMini. The price is right, the interface is good (not as great as iPod's but few are) but an interface isn't worth $140 to me. The Archos works on both Mac and PC flawlessly, and even has a built-in CF slot (something photo sites have already frowned the iPod upon).
Unfortunately, I thought Apple's first color would have a lot more revolutionary features. Instead, they're playing catchup to other companies, with an expensive and not-so-worthy introduction into colored screens (I mean come on... they don't even win on battery life anymore). I'm personally very glad I jumped Apple's iPod ship a few months ago.
Re:A LOT more new stuff... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:A LOT more new stuff... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:A LOT more new stuff... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's simply way too slow and clunky of a method for scrolling through long lists. That's why a wheel or something of the sort is absolutely necessary.
Re:A LOT more new stuff... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:A LOT more new stuff... (Score:5, Insightful)
Style and good design are not the same thing. Style changes every week. Good design is timeless.
Re:A LOT more new stuff... (Score:4, Interesting)
- Size
- Integration with jukebox software
The iPod wins hands down on both fronts. A comparable iRiver player (for example) includes an FM tuner, from my perspective a completely useless feature, and is 20% larger. 20GB is probably enough for me for the next few years, so I'm not interested in replacing it with a larger device. I use it for one purpose - playing music (both while I'm mobile and through my HiFi when I'm at home). I don't use half of the `features' my current (3G) player has, so I'm not interested in replacing it with a device suffering from feature creep. Battery life is acceptable most of the time (the only time I've ever wished for more was while I was flying to Japan, and that's not something I do regularly). There are two things that would persuade me to replace it:Re:A LOT more new stuff... (Score:5, Interesting)
Also, the article you mention is from someone that does NOT want to be recogonized by their iPod.. I would guess that's the minority.
Regarless, I would go with an Archos like device myself... of course, I'm too lazy to carry around a phone AND a mp3 player... That's why I'm waiting for the king-of-all-devices [motorola.com]
Re:A LOT more new stuff... (Score:4, Insightful)
I think the point is that fashion accessory or not, they're already passe in a lot of areas.
I live in NYC too and I agree with the OP; iPods are a dime a dozen around here. You end up looking more like a conformist walking around with one than anything else.
Which doesn't say anything about the quality of the device. It just says that this argument that people buy them to be "cool" doesn't really wash anymore, at least not in areas of the country where "cool" seems to even mean anything. (I'd imagine iPods are as ubiquitous in pretty much every large, cosmopolitan city these days.)
It's the same phenomenon as the cel phone. For the first few years they were expensive and exotic; if you had one, you showed it off. But at first, it was mainly a product for the elite. Eventually the prices came down to where at least the upper middle class could finally afford them, and Motorola's Startac both gave the cool kids a phone they could show off while simultaneously making cel phones a commodity. Nowadays, are you at all impressed whenever anybody whips out their shiny new clamshell phone? I'm not, and I doubt most people are - if anything you're probably annoyed at being bothered by the ringer or by the yapping going on next to you.
Apple's doing the same thing with the iPod. We've progressed past the point where iPods are considered "cool"; we're now to the point where they're almost boring, and are well on our way to the point where just seeing that white earbud cord looks pretentious and stupid.
I don't know if the whole mp3 player thing will play out exactly the way the cel phone thing did, but it's a pretty common pattern in technology - a product is invented, one company comes in and popularizes it with the kids, inadvertantly commoditizes it at the same time, and eventually loses market share as the whole category becomes passe and competitors take advantage.
This is obviously what Sony's counting on, and honestly, now that Sony's supporting mp3 natively (or said they're going to, at least), I'd probably rather have one of their somewhat more anonymous-looking Network Walkmans than an iPod. I don't think this stranglehold Apple has on the market is going to continue forever; somebody's just got to design a better product first. I don't think the iPod "brand" is as strong as Apple thinks it is, especially now that it's no longer as hip as it once was - their success right now is based on the fact that they've still got the product with the best combination of size, shape, and ease of use (though others may excel in one particular area, such as battery life, Apple's at least "pretty good" in all of them).
This U2 iPod's going to be a big dud. Pre-load it with all of their music for $350, then you've got something. But $50 off a $150 purchase, and it's $50 more expensive? Am I understanding that right? So in the end, you're basically just paying for a 20GB iPod, and the "box set" is another $100. How is this a good deal?
Photo iPod, also a dud. If you want to transport your photos around, you can do it just on your regular iPod (for like half the price). Who really wants to pay extra so they can look at photos on that tiny little screen? I may as well just carry my digital camera around and leave them all on that.
The regular iPods will continue being the bread and butter for the iPod line.
Re: Photo iPod a Dud (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:A LOT more new stuff... (Score:5, Funny)
Wow. I've got to get into New York. I can't find an iPod for under $100 anywhere around here...
Re:A LOT more new stuff... (Score:4, Interesting)
True. But even if you take out the people who are buying them to be cool, what about the people who don't know jack about technology and aren't going to research the alternatives and just buy what they see people using? Those people are (and will continue) flocking to the iPod, and they probably make up a huge portion of the population.
A lot like Windows - people go to buy a computer, and they get one that looks like their neighbor's computer or the one they have at the office. They don't necessarily even consider taking the time to see if OS X would be better for them. They just go to Best Buy or wherever and buy A Computer.
It's just that Apple has positioned themselves on the right side of that this time.
I think cel phones are a bit different, b/c often what phone you get depends on what company you're getting your service from. If they hand you a free Nokia, you've got a Nokia. If they hand you a free Motorola, you've got a free Motorola. If they've got a discount on the latest Samsung, you buy that. Again, most people just go get a cel phone, and in this case they pay less attention to brand name (or getting one like their neighbor's) and take what's presented to them. Yes, there are people who research the best phone and look at all the options etc, but the majority of the general populus takes what the cellular company offers them.
I do agree with you about the U2 iPod. Ok, so a small throng of die-hard U2 fans will get them, along with a few people who want to look cool by having a (OMG!) BLACK iPod! But then, I get the feeling they're not designed to be on the market for very long, and will probably be the first in a series of such "special editions."
Re:A LOT more new stuff... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, the Archos lets you watch xvid/divx movies on it, but I'm willing to bet they don't include a DVD ripper. So this is a niche product where they assume the buyers know how to get xvid movies (or rip them themselves instead of sucking them via P2P).
So if Mr. Jobs were to offer an iPod with video capability, he'd have to have the infrastructure in place to support it. iTunes offered out of the box MP3/AIFF ripping for the iPod.
Odds are, once he can convince the MPAA the way he convinced the RIAA that having digital movies available for download is not the equivalent to the "Boston Strangler", then we'll see an iPod Video as well as an iPod Photo. (Though, I am rather curious to see how an iPod video would handle battery life - a moot point at this stage.)
Re:A LOT more new stuff... (Score:5, Insightful)
Also judging by the tech specs (and perhaps deductive reasoning) the HD is spinning down less for slideshows (buffer is filled faster by photos and music). Battery life for slideshows is 5 continuous hours. Battery life for music playback is 15 hours.
Re:A LOT more new stuff... (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't really see the appeal of the ipod photo otherwise - I think my blackberry pager/phone has higher resolution
ostiguy
Re:A LOT more new stuff... (Score:3, Informative)
A complaint I heard when the Belkin adapter first came out was that it was unacceptably slow. If this has changed, then I think it would be better than directly plugging in the camera, but whatever. What would work for me might not work for you.
Re:A LOT more new stuff... (Score:4, Funny)
Answer: Make it look like a cat walking away.
Re:A LOT more new stuff... (Score:4, Informative)
More info (Score:4, Informative)
Advertised 15 hour battery life
65k-color screen
220 x 176 pixel resolution
Same click wheel as previous generation
Not mentioned (at least in my first pass) is that, the dock will connect to tvs [gizmodo.com] and display a slideshow.
Includes AV Cable (supposedly 3-plug RCA) The new ipods are slightly thicker. Each of the new ones is
Does anyone else think that this a bit overkill. 60Gb is a LOT when you are just talking about music and pictures. It would be one thing if this generation included video playback, but
In other apple news Apple Launches 9 Euro iTunes Music Stores [gizmodo.com]
Re:More info (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:More info (Score:3, Interesting)
Overkill? (Score:5, Insightful)
Think movies.
See the last paragraph here [slashdot.org].
Re:Overkill? (Score:5, Funny)
I can't! I'm still thinking different!
Re:More info (Score:5, Funny)
65k-color screen
220 x 176 pixel resolution
Same click wheel as previous generation
Still only a single click wheel? What a joke - they'll never be able to compete with Windows until they add a second one.
Re:More info (Score:5, Informative)
I could fill this up on a backpacking expedition or vacation.
290pics/gig *60 gigs = 17400 jpg
or 53pics/gig * 60 = 3180 raw photos from my d70.
That's not including the 5 gigs of music I might bring along too. Compare the cost of this (and an ipod CF reader) with other portable photo hardrive options and it should look very attractive.
Re:More info (Score:5, Informative)
Sounds like you're talking about storing photos as you take them, but the original poster was talking about photos stored for playback.
At 290 pics per GB, your photos weigh about 3 MB each. That's big - either you store them at high resolution, uncompressed, or both. For archiving, that makes sense, but you don't need that kind of quality for playing on a tiny color LCD or even on a television. You can shrink the photos down to NTSC 740x480 (slightly higher for PAL), and compress as JPEG at -q 75. On a TV or the iPod's 16-bit color, they'll look just as good. With those parameters, you can get thousands of photos per GB, not just a few hundred.
Re:More info (Score:5, Interesting)
That's only if you don't use the photo feature that you presumably paid an extra $100 to have. Battery life drops to 5 hours if you're watching slide shows while you listen to music. And they're warning customers now about the battery: "Rechargeable batteries have a limited number of charge cycles and may eventually need to be replaced. Battery life and the number of charge cycles vary by use and settings. See www.apple.com/batteries for more information."
Does anyone else think that this a bit overkill. 60Gb is a LOT when you are just talking about music and pictures.
So you're saying 40 gb ought to be enough for anybody? ;^) Seriously, I agree, this is overkill, but not for the same reason. I'm happy to see bigger drives on these things, but I don't really understand the need to make this into a photo device too. Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining, and I could see how it could be useful (esp. coupled with a tool to transfer digital photos from card media directly to the ipod without the computer, so you could keep re-using the card during a long photo shoot), but the screen size on an ipod is way too small to actually make it a useful photo viewer. Hell, the LCD on my digital camera (Sony T1) is bigger than the ipod screen. I'm not sure it's worth the loss in battery life -- I think I'd prefer a 60G ipod without a color screen for $100-200 less.
Then again, like I said, this could be really useful for photographers, especially given the ability to easily connect the ipod to a TV or monitor to show the photos. Again, crucial here would be the ability to easily talk directly to the ipod without having to go to your mac to transfer anything.
Re:More info (Score:3, Informative)
Re:More info (Score:3, Funny)
60 aint overkill (Score:5, Informative)
Last summer I shot over 3000 pictures in two days at a trap shooting competition - that's roughly 18 GB of photos. Everything fit in my camera bag and I got some great pics.
Overkill? I think not (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:More info (Score:5, Interesting)
I will consider getting the 60gb model, but I may just wait until 80gb models come out.
Bitch, bitch, bitch... (Score:3, Funny)
Sheesh!
We've been complaining about Apple not having a sub-grand machine, and now it's too much? Come on! It's got Firewire and USB 2.0, a generous 220x176 built-in display (with AV-out if a 2" screen is too small for you whiners), and comes with real games (my Ti PB can't touch this)! Plus, it's portable! Plug in a keyboard, mouse, and your 37" TV and you've got one mean machine.
N
Re:More info (Score:3, Insightful)
Based on that statement, I'd guess that you probably don't own an iPod. I bought one two years ago -- a 20-gigabyte 2nd-generation model -- and it's as much a part of my life as my wallet and keyring. It's that simple. This thing has done for music what TiVo has done for TV. If I can carry my entire porn^H^H^hoto library with me, along with my entire music collection, that's wor
You read it here first! (Score:5, Funny)
An iPod with picture capabilties: I dub thee The iPorn
Re:You read it here first! (Score:4, Funny)
-Particularly amusing when you consider that you can easily control an ipod with one hand.
Bart Simpson sez (Score:3, Funny)
Too expensive/not useful (Score:3, Insightful)
You can get cheaper products [dpreview.com] for $50 which will allow you to do more creative slideshows, effects, etc.
I think Apple missed the boat here. The killer function they should add to the iPod is a camera- which goes along nicely with the photo storage features. Nothing flashy or expensive, but for another $50 they could add a lens that's better than the cell phone cams.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Very true: (Score:3, Insightful)
How true, before all you cynics open your mouths remember when the iPod was first introduced; all the comments on
Now that Apple finally found a way to sink its teeth into the market, I think they're going to be careful about the moves they make
Re:Too expensive/not useful (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Too expensive/not useful (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think that would have worked. There's no market for a low-quality digital camera add-on, I think. You can get a "real" no-frills digital camera (ie: the equivalent of a 35mm point-n-shoot) for just about $100 at BestBuy, and probably for a lot cheaper with rebate. Or you can sometimes get one for free with a new computer or printer. That pretty much covers the price range of the cell phone cams.
The iPod appeals to people who already have a lot of gadgets. It's like a Sharper Image/Brookstone version of the walkman (yes, oversimplification, I know). That audience probably either has a real digital camera or a cell phone camera, and addding $50 for a decent camera lens on the iPod isn't going to help.
What I think they're doing here is offering a neat little feature that will be a plus when comparing models. It also plays up the "more than just a music player" aspect of the iPod (I've been using mine to backup my HD for a while now, but the average person probably doesn't).
If they're clever, they had a little chat with Belkin when coming up with the idea for this, since the photo feature evokes thoughts of the CameraLink [belkin.com]. Currently, all it does is provide a USB port to hook up a camera and function as a mass storage device. Assuming Apple and Belkin were smart, the new version of the CameraLink will copy the images to the iPod along with the relevant metadata to have them displayed by the Photo feature. Now *that* would be pretty darn cool. Except that my digital camera speaks serial, not USB :-(
Re:Too expensive/not useful (Score:5, Informative)
I also applaud the crew in the integration of photos and music in iTunes also. Apple is continuing to make the Mac look like the computer for the people.
Missing the boat (Score:4, Informative)
The iPod does miss the boat too, however; at least at the moment it looks like you can only tranfer photos via iTunes (if you want to be able to view them on the screen), which means you need a computer to connect between your camera and the iPod (and also means that they will be stored in whatever format iTunes uses, not in raw format). There is already a tool out that lets you transfer photos to an iPod for storage, but again, you lose any iPod interface to looking at the photos.
Honestly this would be a cool gimmick but I wouldn't see myself buying one. I could see buying a device that was made to store photos that had a bigger screen, smaller clickwheel (or put it on the back), and an easy way to get information from photo media (CF, stick, whatever) into the device in whatever format you want, as well as an easy way to plug the device into a TV to play back. The point would be to eliminate the computer as the intermediary, so you can just carry around your camera and this thing... no need to buy new media every time you fill up the stick, and no need to run home to your computer in the middle of a shoot.
Re:Too expensive/not useful (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Too expensive/not useful (Score:3, Interesting)
It's a poor example, although probably the best priced, of iPod Photo's competition, which, I believe, is way ahead of iPod Photo.
There are several personal media players with video playing capabilities out there with much, much better features (audio, pictures, video) and compatible pricing (if not at $50 a pop).
The iPod Photo will still, of course, sell well, becaus
You mean... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:You mean... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, because what the world is waiting for is a device that can store tens of thousands of shitty photos. Leave the image capture to the proper equipment. The portability is what's cool for sharing the pics, not taking them.
iTunes improvements too! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:iTunes improvements too! (Score:3, Informative)
Very frustrating. I hope they sync the catalogues fast...
I like the Album Art option (Score:5, Interesting)
New Audio-Related Features? (Score:3, Insightful)
Photos and contacts and solitaire sounds like fun stuff, but what about any new audio related features--you know, since it's an audio portable and all.
Something tells me they managed to overlook Gapless Playback and OGG/FLAC support again.
Santa? Are you listening? (Score:3, Funny)
I've always found... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I've always found... (Score:3, Interesting)
Happens again.. (Score:5, Insightful)
so close (Score:3, Insightful)
To borrow a phrase from television (Score:3, Insightful)
Granted some people like these new integrated all in one cellphone, photoholder, music player, portable video players, but I'm going to have to go with "more is less" in this case.
I think certain devices (like the GameBoy Advance and the iPod) do well because they do one thing and they do it well. As long as they don't cripple or obfuscate the basic functionality, the iPod will still do fine. But once a company loses sight of what the product was made for and start trying to make it a swiss army knife, things tend to go downhill (N-Gage?).
I still like the iPod and I don't think it's going away. But I think Apple's starting to toe the line on the border swiss army knife land...
Same thing was said... (Score:5, Insightful)
And they're runaway successes, to put it mildly.
On one hand, we had analysts and pundits of all types saying Apple will fail if it *didn't* include photo/video functionality in a handheld, and now we've got a luminary here predicting it will fail because it *did*.
Well, I think I'll trust Apple's judgment on this one, considering it seems to know what it's doing, thank you.
Huh. (Score:5, Informative)
The iPod has revolutionized music in the past few years because of its simplicity and style. It does one thing, it does it very well, and it looks damn good while doing it. The iPod Photo kind of blurs those lines. Obviously, the iPod could become the next-gen portable media center: music, video, a Belkin iTV something-or-other. This gives us a glimmer of where they plan to go with this. iCinema Movie Store?
It might not, also, but I'm leaving it up to somebody else to consider thinking of ways the IP could change the way we even think about our personal photography and wallpapers and whatnot -- like the iPod changed the way many people listen to music (albums out, playlists & shuffle in). That is to say, it looks weird as a product now, but somebody's in a room somewhere thinking of ways to make this thing awesome -- maybe. And that's why I question its branding as a separate entity, because it can't just be an iPod with a color screen, no -- it's iPod Photo!
I know that whereas I have a good number of digital pictures, a $500 device with a color screen can't be $499.75 better than a damn CD-R (e.g., most DVD players now will do the same TV sharing thing with a CD-R full of JPEGs). And I own an iPod already, so I can easily see the argument for convenience among others.
I also want to know, where does this leave iPhoto? "Now, you too can organize your pictures.. in iTunes! But you don't. You just download them there. You organize your pictures in iPhoto but you download them with iTunes, but you can also do it in iTunes if you want. Got it?"
Music, and the way that we deal with it, is such a rich site for interaction (music, audiobooks, speeches, recordings, class lectures, whatever) that it's hard to imagine where they could take photos. But then again, I mean, music, yanno, you listen to it. Photos, yanno, you look at them. So who knows.
Screw photos (Score:3, Insightful)
Presentations... (Score:5, Interesting)
http://www.apple.com/ipodphoto/ [apple.com]: "Use the included AV cable to connect iPod Photo to a projector or TV."
No thanks... (Score:5, Insightful)
Part of what makes my iPod so nice is that its interface is really simple. I think that this is due, in part, to the fact that it doesn't do a large variety of things. All it does is play music based on playlist, artist, or album.
I've seen similar cluttering on my TiVo. It used to be just about 4 or 5 menu items on the main screen. Now, it's packed from the top of the screen to the bottom.
My old Symbian phone did tons of stuff. Games, calendar, to-do list, camera, web browser... you could even make phone calls with it.
I don't want my iPod to become like my cell phone.
Good news for the base models? (Score:3, Insightful)
On a related note, I like the black model but I really wish it didn't come with all that U2 crap on it. Yes, they had several classic, groundbreaking albums, but they haven't been very relevant since what - the late 80s? How about the Little Feat model iPod, or the Stax/Volt collection model? I'd buy one of those.
Managed by... iTunes?! (Score:5, Interesting)
Maybe we're supposed to just deal with it until Apple gets Tiger out the door and Sync services are built into the OS proper? It just doesn't feel very Mac-Like this way...
Re:Managed by... iTunes?! (Score:5, Insightful)
There is no iPhoto for Windows, hence Apple had to embed photo management into iTunes to support the dual-platform iPod.
If Apple is indeed developing iPhoto for Windows -- which would take some time -- then it wouldn't make sense for Apple to wait and push the delivery of the new iPod past this Christmas season (esp. if they could simply hack iTunes to handle basic photo management).
I know more than Steve Jobs! (Score:5, Insightful)
No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame. -You know who...
15 hour battery life (Score:3)
The new iPod has a longer battery life than the old one did.
15 hrs is the new estimate for music use, and that's with the color screen. 5 hours if you do continuous slideshows.
I refuse to support this... (Score:3, Funny)
Here's what i want... (Score:3, Insightful)
integrated SD-memory reading (my dig camera uses SD cards, they're smaller than CF, and while not as flexible as far as legacy use and capacity, almost every portable device i've looked into purchasing uses SD or xD memory over CF.
REMOVEABLE BATTERY - for the love of christ would they get this one right. it would really ease my mind significantly if they'd make it interchangable at home, maybe on the fly, where i can keep a spare battery handy as i do for my cell phone and dig camera, (2 spares in teh case of the camera) and when one goes dead, i do a swap. the thought of having to send my 4G off in a year or two at the cost of an ADDITIONAL $100 because they found it more convienent to design an integrated battery on an otherwise superior product gives me shivers.
iCal and Address Book for Windows, or at the very least an iTunes extention that lets you manage these two precious entities. Oh, and a smart playlist parameter for whether or not a song is checked!
Adjustable click wheel sensitivity and a dedicated reset button. My wheel has the most annoying tendancy to NOT want to move ONE click. no matter how softly i caress it or how little i bump it i usually move 2 or 3. maybe it's because i have larger than normal fingers or something. idk. also, if the thing has the remote possibility of choking on a bad mp3 and crashing, i'd love to have a manual reset button that doesn't go through software. That process sounds like something M$ came up with. many times mine will crash and run itself dead because the reset method doesn't work. even docked.
If they're going to integrate a color screen onto the ipod they shouldn't have went the LCD route, but used emerging tech like full color organic Electro-Luminescent displays (think Pioneer's high end car stereos) Sony just released a PDA in japan based on this screen design, which is far superior to LCD for the parameters of a portable device. It requires no battery-hungry and heat generating back light. It has better viewability (word?) in direct sunlight than LCDs. It may not have the color detail, but the resolutions are comparable. It would be suitable for a small display like the iPod Photo's. This would ahve allowed them to retain at least somehwat more of the battery life.
Are you listening Mr Jobs? Some of these things are not that damned difficult to implement, and others would just take a bit of time and effort.
iPod Socks (Score:5, Informative)
iPod Socks [macobserver.com]
Added with Mini Pocket Warmers [campmor.com] you can go jogging in Faribanks, Alaska, with your iPod, and not fear frost-pod-bite. Probably not a real good idea
Thank God Slashdot members don't run Apple (Score:5, Insightful)
Every time Apple introduces a new product, there is an endless series of posts about why it sucks, why it won't sell, what features were left out, why the new features are worthless, why it's too expensive, lists of poorly selling products that are "superior" and have more features and on and on and on.
Apple's revenues are up, their profits are up, they have a slew of successful products and they have a lot of happy customers.
Give it a rest guys. Let the market decide if the latest offering sucks. Based on history, when Slashdotters say an Apple product won't sell, it ends up being a phenomenal success.
Re:Here's why it will fail... (Score:5, Interesting)
And every prediction was incorrect, to say the least.
The iPod Photo will be wildly successful, and evolve to be the standard by which all others are judged.
Re:Here's why it will fail... (Score:5, Interesting)
You're an idiot.
Sure if you had to edit some XML file it would never happen but Apple doesn't make you do that. It stores meta-data without you even noticing: meta-information from cameras is transparently copied over and used, other meta-data is attached just by dragging a photo to a folder.
The same is true of album art, drag and drop and it's there.
Not everything (fails to) work like Windows: that's why those of us who value our time pay a little extra to buy a properly designed system rather than some cobbled together crap from Dell and Windows.
Re:Here's why it will fail... (Score:3, Insightful)
Most digital cameras create basic metadata as the Exif tags [accusoft.com] embedded in standard JPEG files. They provide basic informations such as camera type, shutter, aperture and original photo creation date (not necessarily the same as when the actual file was created). It's enough for iPhoto to sort pictures "by (virtual) roll", probably iPod software will work in similar way. On the musical side, iPod allows you t
You can get one... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Missing Feature (Score:3, Informative)
Belkin makes this card reader:
http://macuser.pcpro.co.uk/macuser/reviews/4999
Re:Missing Feature (Score:5, Insightful)
Put readers for all of them in, and grow the iPod photo even further (already noted that it's thicker than the 4G iPod)
Build multiple versions of the iPod photo, each with a different card reader to minimize size impact, but complicating manufacture, inventory, and marketing (40GB/SD, 60GB/xD, 40GB/Memory stick, etc.)
Leave the card reader out to keep things simple (and less expensive to manufacture and support), and let third parties fill in the gap with an external device -- possibly like a revised version of the existing Belkin card reader
I'm not surprised Apple chose #3. Now, why Apple didn't design the iPod photo to download photos directly from a digital camera via a USB 2.0 cable, that's another question entirely...
USB download (Score:5, Informative)
USB Host support is much more complex than just being a USB device. Plus they would have to deal with multiple protocols and even some device drivers. Just look at the size of the code that makes up libgphoto!
Re:captabilities ... (Score:4, Funny)
I think the "shit all over the carpet" feature is for the next generation.
Re:iTunes Music Store still has some problems... (Score:5, Informative)
It IS possible to get your music off of an iPod, though, especially since you're using OS X.
Plug it in, and don't let it sync with iTunes. Leave it plugged in, as it should be mounted as a drive.
I'm not at home right now, so I can't tell you exactly what the mount point is, but it should be something like
Just go browsing through the directories. Copy the music off into a music directory in your home dir, and you've got your music again, minus the metadata.
Not to be preachy, but you should have made a backup of the files. Apple encourages this, and you can even find documentation (official documentation) on how to make iTunes burn discs with data on them so you can back up your files.
Re:iTunes Music Store still has some problems... (Score:3, Informative)
That is all.
Re:iTunes Music Store still has some problems... (Score:3, Informative)
http://hymn-project.org/ [hymn-project.org]
Get it now, before Apple shuts it down with the DMCA...
Re:iTunes Music Store still has some problems... (Score:5, Insightful)
It sounds to me like you are either trolling, or really didn't know what you were doing when you started this process.
Remember, data, especially purchased data, is important. Always back it up.
Re:iTunes Music Store still has some problems... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:iTunes Music Store still has some problems... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:The way data is handled. (Score:3, Informative)
If you mount your iPod as a disk the files are visible from the command line. Just open Terminal.app and cd to
Re:Apple will shoot themselves in the foot (Score:3, Insightful)
This model has been expected since March, when the news was spreading that Apple bought the 60 GB drives and didn't release a 60 GB iPod.
Aside from that, the price point is higher and this wouldn't have entered into the spectrum for many.
Re:dumb (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, the iPod would be smaller. But it'd be more convenient, and easier to show *many* photos to someone.
Personally, I like it. I think it's a good idea. Even with the color screen it's battery will last longer then my 3G.
If only the price weren't so damned steep for the color 60GB....