The BrownFury writes "At an invitation only event Apple has released their new MP3 player called the iPod. iPod is the size of a deck of cards. 2.4" wide by 4" tall by .78" thick 6.5 ounces. 5 GB HDD, 10 hr battery life, charged via FireWire. Works as a firewire drive as well. Works in conjunctions with iTunes 2. Here are Live updates". No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.
How about using it as a storage device for your firewire camcorder or digital camera (if there are firewiere still cameras).
5GB is about 22 minutes of DV video. It's easier just to pop in another 15GB DV tape.
Since firewire devices are peerless, it shouldn't be much of a problem to connect the devices.
They're peerless when they provide a unique service on the bus. FireWire video cams are DV publishers/consumers. The HD claims to be a mass storage device. The camera would need UI for selecting a mass storage device other than the one built in (the DV tape).
For example, hook 3 DV cammeras together with FireWire. Hit play on one, record on the other two, and you should get two perfect digital copies. Hit play on two of them, record on the other, and unless the recording camera provides a UI for selecting from multiple DV streams, it's probably random which one you'll get.
Apple is being distroyed by the rumors that are being created. When they announce that they are going to have a new product, everyone thinks it's going to blow their worlds. Rumors start flooding in about even the most outragous products ( I even heard a few "sources" mention teleportion) This is getting plain stupid.
Apple is a normal company. Why does the public constantly expect them do the impossible?
Apple is a normal company. Why does the public constantly expect them to do the impossible?
I think over history, Apple has shown with some regularity that they can pull "the impossible" out of their hat. Now with Jobs and NeXT genes on board, that sense is even more intense.
Whether Apple's products are brilliant successes or bizarrely interesting failures, nobody can deny that what they're doing as a rule seems more interesting that what Dell/Gateway/Microsoft et al are ever doing. And occasionally (Macintosh, NeXT, Newton, iMac) Apple/NeXT have done things that were completely mind-blowing and heretofore impossible.
I'm speaking as a longtime PC owner and Linux, not a Mac owner (though I do love my Newton)-- I have a healthy respect for the real innovation Apple has brought to the industry (compare to Microsoft's "innovation"...) and I have trouble understanding why Slashot users are such haters when it comes to Apple and Steve Jobs.
I need a fast, really small, 3GB+ hard drive, for software project transfers. This will do nicely, I think. Back in the day (early 90s) I used to use something called a Pocket Rocket, a SCSI HD about the size of a TV remote. When it comes to stuff that, for size reasons, really needs to be sneakernetted, this is the ideal solution. Any songs that I want to listen to can fit in the remaining 2GB with ease...
Less space then the Nomad yes, but also MUCH MUCH SMALLER. You ever try putting a Nomad in your pocket and go for a walk? The Nomad is only good as a psuedo stereo component, or perhaps in your car. Not to mention the horrible battery life!
Also, how many HOURS does it take to transfer your 6.4gb MP3 collection onto your Nomad? I know my USB player takes forever to even fill up its 64mb memory. Firewire let's you do it BLAZINGLY FAST.
This is a marvel of engineering, very useful and I give apple much credit for coming out with this device.//lame my ass.
Also, did I mention automatic playlist/sing library synching with iTunes2? THIS is what portable music should be.
And why does everything have to be wireless? I don't understand this.
1.) plug firewire cable into the back of your computer 2.) bring other end of cable on to desktop 3.) plug in MP3 player when needed
I don't get how this makes life easier. By adding a wireless recieving unit in the thing, it would be bigger, weigh more, and cost more. Probably be more complicated, slower, and use more batteries, too. Or to cut costs you could put an IrDA port in it, although I think less people own an IrDA port for their desktop than firewire, and it would be sitting there transfering data wirelessly so long, you might as well have taken the 4 seconds to plug it in. Why is this a good idea?
I guess i'm just not getting it. Mabey i'm too practical from a monatary standpoint, but i wouldn't spend $400 on a wireless setup for my apartment when i can run $6 worth of cat 5 myself anywhere it wants to go in the apartment. Wireless is for cell phones and possibly for laptops at how much it costs right now, and i can't even afford it at that. Beyond that its just extra gadgets.
Since when is Apple concerned about market share? They do what capitalism was born to do. Cater to a small market, and do it the right way.
I don't have an OSX box, and consequently, no firewire and iTunes, but if I/did/ (and many do/will have OSX within the next year), this piece of gear was BORN for that market. All while keeping Apple gear at the front of the pack in terms of usability, transfer speed, and respectable battery life.
Apple has never been about selling the most number of units. Just look at the market leaders for cars, OSes, books, movies, CDs.. you'll understand why having a big market share essentially garauntees tha you you have to give up innovation. Heck, Intel shipped their latest chip with features/disabled/.. so I, for one, am glad that apple is content to own just a small slice of the pie, because its the most/delicious/ slice.
And no, I dont own any Apple gear. I wish I could justify it tho; unfortunately, MS keeps underselling quality, thus keeping wk2 on the the corperate desktop, and *nix just happens to serve the 'net industry better than anyone else.
Bundled for free on every Mac sold in the last 18 months, and installed retroactively on god only knows how many other ones. Easily in the high hundreds of thousands, possibly in the millions.
Raise your hand if you have a FireWire port...
Every iMac, PowerMac, iBook and Powerbook sold in the last two years, plus almost every Sony VAIO and a good chunk of Compaq and HP's product lines. Easily in the millions.
Raise your hand if you have both.
See above.
Raise your hand if you have $400 to spend on a cute Apple device...
Looking at the sales of (picking three examples) Pilots, Rios and Digital Cameras, I'd say the number of people willing to spend $200-500 on a "cute" electronic device is "lots and lots."
There is Apple's market. Pretty slim, eh? I don't see many sales in the future of iPod.
I guess you don't. This is why Apple is a company with $4 Billion in the bank, and you're trolling on slashdot. Want fries with that?
Raise your hand if you have iTunes...
Raise your hand if you have a FireWire port...
Raise your hand if you have both...
Raise your hand if you have $400 to spend on a cute Apple device...
What, is there a large market for mp3 players with people who don't own computers?
Apple knows that their biggest market is existing Apple customers. If Apple sells one of these for every 5 iBooks they sell, they'll be sitting pretty.
Why should Apple fund a software team to port iTunes to Windows, just so they get a few $400 slim margin sales of an mp3 player?
Better to let the Windows users wish they had an iPod, and go out and buy an iBook to get it.
Apple's finally learning to bring the market to them, instead of chasing it all over the map.
Yeah, what about Lame? How else would you encode your mp3's?
Seriously, this device is far from lame in my eyes. 5GB is plenty of storage. I have like 20GB of mp3's anyway, not like they're really going to fit on anything out there. And uh... I never really need more that 5GB at a time, ya know.
The recharging via Firewire is cool too. The size is a plus... the Nomad is too big for me to carry around. And being able to use it as a portable harddrive is cool, too... burning CD's to ferry files back and forth is a pain. I'm gonna buy one if it works with other OS's.
I like it. iTunes, for those that haven't used a Mac, is REALLY slick. It is a great UI and makes things really easy and intuitive. My fiancee recently got an iBook, and she loves how easy it is to rip CDs into her machine and burn CDs. Rather than swapping applications, she does it all within iTunes.
Us geeks, who always acknowledged that Macs had a great UI (but we called them idiot machines) miss out on some of the impressive stuff that Apple does.
The Macintosh way is to organize things by things the users do, not the underlying file system. This is a HUGE paradigm shift from the Unix (everything is a file) paradigm, and from the Microsoft (everything is about something).
On a Windows box, you run a program to rip your CDs into MP3s. If you want to burn a CD, you use a program to convert them to WAVs, then you burn the WAVs to CDs.
On a Mac, you pop an audio CD in to your computer and add the songs to your library. If you burn a CD, you pop a blank in and hit burn CD. Now with iTunes 2, you'll have the option to make MP3 CDs (which previously would be done as burning a data CD).
In UNIX, you focus on the files. In a Mac, you focus on the activity. My fiancee doesn't have to think about file formats, she thinks about music. She barely touches her Windows PC or MIT's UNIX network anymore.
This device extends the Mac functionality. Instead of firing up Creative Lab's software and pick and choose which songs you want on it. Want to listen on the computer? Fire up WinAmp. Want to rip CDs, fire up that application.
With the iPod, it integrates into your system. You plug it in, it keeps your songs available. No need to mess with a clunky interface, the thumb-rolling thingy-ma-bopper looks like a clean way to use the device.
The Nomad Jukebox 20G with the batteries is about a pound. My brother loves his, but it mostly sits in the car now. He used to take it to the gym, but it wastoo big and bulky.
I realize that most Slashdotters are looking at the specs, but realize what this actually does. Its tiny, it'll fit in a jacket pocket (or pant pocket), its convenient.
Take it jogging, to the gym, etc. Sit in the park, walk around.
The Nomad Jukebox is too damned heavy.
This device rocks, I expect them to sell plenty.
I think that they should sell a Windows version of it with a Windows version of iTunes and a Firewire card, but that's just me.
I like it. iTunes, for those that haven't used a Mac, is REALLY slick.
I've used it. It's not insanely great.
It is a great UI and makes things really easy and intuitive. My fiancee recently got an iBook, and she loves how easy it is to rip CDs into her machine and burn CDs. Rather than swapping applications, she does it all within iTunes.
Uh, there are rip/(encode/decode)/burn scripts for UNIX... you see, when you have flexible tools it's trivial to make them work together.
Us geeks, who always acknowledged that Macs had a great UI (but we called them idiot machines) miss out on some of the impressive stuff that Apple does.
I will NEVER claim that the Macintosh is a "great UI". It is easy-to-learn. It is not easy-to-use for people used to a better interface (focus-follows-mouse? Multiple desktops? Remote display? Auto-select-to-clipboard? Give me my nice custom-configured X interface or give me death!)
Sure, it's easy to learn the Mac. I did when I was 5. But I need to be more productive now, and the Mac interface makes it too hard.
Speaking particularly of iTunes, how do I script it into apache? How do I use it from the command line? How do I run it on the machine hooked into my stereo from my desktop with the display that is in the other room? This is trivial and elegant in my UNIX environment.
The Macintosh way is to organize things by things the users do, not the underlying file system. This is a HUGE paradigm shift from the Unix (everything is a file) paradigm, and from the Microsoft (everything is about something).
The Macintosh way (much like the Windows way) is to have applications that do everything you want to do. All your word-processing needs in Word. All your web-browsing needs in Internet Explorer. All your audio needs in iTunes.
The problem with this way is that in the end it is too restrictive. If all you have is internet explorer, what if you want to do an ``internet-explorer -dump http://go-gnome.com | sh''
Or maybe you want to use internet explorer to recursively download a site for mirroring or archival?
Ahhh... you say... but with OS X or Cygwin I can use bash and lynx! True, true. But at the point you're using lynx and the bourne shell and scripts pulling together cdparanoia, lame, and cdrecord, you're not doing things the Mac or Windows way, you're doing things the UNIX way.
I do computer architecture as my job. It would be impossible for us to use Mac or Windows machines. Some of the things would work -- the assembler would be fine to do in Windows (and there's one that works in Windows) and the simulator would work... but there are times when we redirect the trace output of one simulator into another to verify things... piping *that* output into a scrpit that gathers statistics and such. You don't just open up the ``save trace as...'' dialog box when you are about to spit out a 100-gig trace file, you need the flexability of being able to stream it into another application. And you don't want to have to open dialog boxes for 80 different possible configurations and sit there and wait for them to run when you can script together doing all the configurations on all the test files spreading across several machines over the weekend.
The UNIX way is about flexible tools. Tools that work well together. Tools that are elegant and flexable. Tools that work well regardless of where you are, where you're coming from, or where you're going. This provides power for the UNIX user that surpasses that which someone using GUI tools on Windows or a Mac can ever know.
Sure, it takes longer to learn. Most of the best things do. The sharper the learning curve, the bigger the payoff. That's why most UNIX gurus use emacs or vi... they're not easy to learn, but they are powerful.
A UNIX guru can't take working with inferior tools. She can't stand sitting there doing a repetative task when she should be scripting it. She understands that her job is to be the master, and the computer is the tool to do the repetative job.
A few comments have already come in saying that this product isn't "innovative" enough. You can get more-or-less the same thing elsewhere.
But what does being highly innovative get Apple? Think Newton. It still runs circles around the Palm, but was a commercial failure. It was too innovative.
But, how about if you took the idea of an MP3 player, made it look nice, gave it a Firewire port for fast transfers and easy recharging, and made the whole thing sync seamlessly with iTunes.
Sounds like a pretty good idea to me. I imagine they'll sell quite a few. It's the right feature set at the right time.
First, let me preface this by saying, "this is not another Apple is going under" post. Apple has plenty of cash, I think they have some great products, and they aren't going out of business.
That said, I am both a shareholder and consumer of Apple products. When I read the announcement and specs I went straight to the Apple Store. At $199-$250, I would have bought two, immediately. Instead, at $399, I am buying zero, and expect that many other people will feel the same way.
I am very sad that Apple seems to be repeating the same mistake they made with the Cube - great, nifty product that anyone would love to own, except that it's burdened by an unbelievably poor price/performance ratio.
A laptop hard drive of that size in the quantity Apple buys is about $30 these days. I am more than willing to pay a premium for Apple designed hardware and software. This thing will undoubtedly have a great interface. But that is not worth $200 extra (double the price!).
I know Apple prices it's products to maximize profit. But I wish they'd realize they could make the same amount of money, and have more marketshare, if they'd sell 3 times as many at half the cost instead.
At $199-$250, I would have bought two, immediately. Instead, at $399, I am buying zero, and expect that many other people will feel the same way.
At first I thought it should be more in the $300 range. However, after looking at the link someone supplied for a device from smartdisk (that most likely uses the same harddrive), I have to realize I was wrong. The smartdisk device is a 5GB firewire harddrive. That's all and it's the exact same price. Suddenly, it looks like a good deal!
I submitted this as an article as well, but I must have been slightly behind the other guy.
I have two major problems with this. First of all, yeah, it's tiny (the length of a credit card and less than an inch thick.) However, what happens when it gets dropped on the floor? For now, hard-drive based players are bulky for a reason -- tiny laptop drives are FRAGILE and need to be protected! The spindles won't hold up to much abuse, and MP3 players are subjected to a large amount of abuses on a daily basis, from being shoved in a backpack to being put in a pocket while the person is running. How well does the Apple player stack up?
Secondly, the Apple player is competing with many others on the market. Steve Jobs makes it sound like Apple is the only player in the arena, but in reality, there are several. [cnet.com] Sure, Apple is the only one doing Firewire, and Firewire offers a faster transfer rate. But that's all for moot if my player pukes once I throw it in my bag.
If you're interested in finding a really tiny player, check out the Flash-memory based ones. Flash memory is getting a lot cheaper. MyDivaPlayer.com [mydivaplayer.com] is offering a 128MB player that also accepts Flash memory for $135 after discount. Plus, these things are about half the size of the iPod. Flash memory players can be neat as well -- infinitely expandable storage, rewriteablity, and most players automatically plug-n-play as removable drives on Windows systems. Plus, you can do voice recording and cart around lots of other files as well, so the players double as mini Zip disks.:) Sure, hard-drive based players do this as well, and they have a much higher storage capacity -- but they are much more bulky and require careful care and feeding.
The iPod has 32MB of RAM, which it uses to buffer data from the HD. So it only has to turn on the HD every 20 minutes or so for just a few seconds to refill the RAM cache. The drive spends most of the time off and heads parked.
Saves tons of power, and should make it tough as nails.
The Apple product has 83% of the storage space, 20.% of the volume, and transfers files 16500% faster (assuming 2.4 Mb/s USB spec and 50MB/s firewire, im unsure).
Just because Apple didn't choose to significantly increase its volume by adding a 802.11a antenna, just to add a *very* slow transmittal solution (compared to its firewire), means it's "lame?"
I don't have a religious bent for or against Apple; when intelligent people make these kinds of comments, it confuses me.
Can't believe noone's mentioned the PJB100 [pjbox.com] (Personal Jukebox) yet.
6GB/20GB models available now, apparently they're
messing around with 30GB ones too. It receives
rave reviews from everyone who buys it (including me), and the SDK's already open and being actively hacked on here [sourceforge.net] on sourceforge (it already does everything you need, and is stable AFAICS). There are kde and gnome frontends, not to mention my personal favourite, pjb-manager.el [kolumbus.fi]
for emacs!
What else?
It has a clever power-saving mode which spins up the disk, reads a whole track into memory, and powers down the disk immediately. That means 5 mins anti-shock (or was it 10? can't remember) and 10 hours listening per Li-Ion battery.
Support is nothing less than fantastic, with new firmwares containing features such as minesweeper:-) And I can upload via USB faster than I can rip CDs, so who cares about FireWire?
This is the hacker's choice of MP3 jukebox. It's a no-brainer.
This thing must get pretty warm after an hour of use. I've had a couple of laptop HD drives get pretty damn hot on me. I don't see any vents on this toy. For $400 I'de get cheesed off if it just decided to stop working.
Heh. While it has less capacity than the Nomad, it's also substantially smaller (and lighter). That 5GB would be enough for my current collection. Price it low enough, and I'd buy one. It would make a good substitue for my CD/MP3 player and a pile of CD's.
Sidenote - As a firewire drive, I'm assuming it should be pretty straightforward to hook it up to whatever your hardware religion is.
Sidenote - As a firewire drive, I'm assuming it should be pretty straightforward to hook it up to whatever your hardware religion is.
Yep. This is almost certainly the same.2x1.8" Toshiba mechanism as found in the SmartDisk FireLite for instance (I just posted the link in some other comment).
And their price is $399.95 as well... but they don't play MP3s.
Considering that it's got far more memory than your average 128MB MP3 portable, and that it's clearly smaller and more portable than a Nomad, I think this is a hasty judgement.
which by virtue of being firewire will be limited to Apple Mac owners
PCs have access to FireWire, as does Linux. The direct connection to iTunes is the only Mac-only feature that I can see; I should hope Apple will be smart enough to enable compatability with PCs, or if not, develop a Windows version of iTunes to do the same job.
but it has virtually no UI wizardry that might define it as an Apple product.
It has a six-line LCD display, backlit, a simple four-button interface, and a circular scroll wheel to navigate your songs (which can organize by CD, artist, or your own custom playlists). You call that "virtually no UI"?
Methinks some people's "first post" ambitions are getting in the way of a decent review of the features.
Yeah, this should compete favorably with the solid state units, but they've already lost to the CD-MP3 units, IMO.
Speaking of comparisons...
Let's compare the iPod to a sampling of other units that share its form-factor... that excludes all CD-MP3 based units AND it excludes units such as the Nomad.
So how does the iPod stack up to it's form-factor matched competitors? What are it's competitors? Looking at the ever-cool ThinkGeek's MP3 player selection [thinkgeek.com], here are the competition:
20 Gig Personal MP3 Jukebox (Designed by Compaq)
Price: $499 Capacity: 20 GB I/O Interface: USB Desktop OS Compatibility: Windows, & Linux (??) Battery Type/Life(playtime): Internal rechargable/ 12 Hrs Dimensions: 150 x 80 x 26 mm Weight: 9.9oz.
Archos Jukebox 6000: Price: $249 Capacity: 6 GB I/O Interface: USB Desktop OS Compatibility: Windows and Mac Battery Type/Life(playtime): 4 AA/ Max 8 hours Dimensions: 4.5" x 3.2" x 1.3" Weight: 12oz. Additional features: Can function as USB hardrive. Also, Archo's website is unclear as to whether the unit can charge "it's 4-AA rechargables" with the included power adapter but such is hinted at...
Archos Jukebox Studio 20 MP3 Player
Same as above, with 20GB of storage, for $349
Toshiba Portable MP3 Player - MEA210 Price: $199.99 Capacity: 32MB int. Expandable w/ SD card I/O Interface: USB Desktop OS Compatibility: Windows only Battery Type/Life(playtime): 1 AAA/ Max 4 hours Dimensions: 2" x 2" x 0.5" Weight: 1.5 oz w/out battery
Rio 600 64MB MP3 Player
Price: $159.99 Capacity: 64MB int. Expandable w/ add-on back of up to 340 MB I/O Interface: USB Desktop OS Compatibility: Mac & Windows Battery Type/Life(playtime): 1 AA/ Max 8 hours Dimensions: 3.5" x 2.5" x 5/8" Weight: ??
Rio 800 128 MB MP3 Player
Price: $219.99 Capacity: 128MB int. Expandable w/ add-on back up to 340 MB I/O Interface: USB Desktop OS Compatibility: Mac & Windows Battery Type/Life(playtime): 1 Ni-MH AA Rechargable (built in recharger)/ ?? Dimensions: 3.5" x 2.5" x 1" Weight: ??
Apple iPod Price: $399.00 Capacity: 5GB I/O Interface: Firewire Desktop OS Compatibility: Mac only (?) Battery Type/Life(playtime): Internal, (rechargable via external adaptor or via firewire bus)/ 10 hrs max. Dimensions: 4.02"x2.3"x0.78" Weight: 6.5 oz Additional features: may be used as firewire disk
General discussion:
First, why exclude such different form-factor units such as the nomad? IMHO, size plays a major part in dictating what one of these units will be used for. A CD player, or Nomad is simply too big for me to take to the gym and use while I am running, biking or using any of the machines. Therefore, it's gotta be small..
So how does the iPod stack up? It looks like it's middle of the road, but if certain features are or are not important to you, the choice may be easier (for or against the iPod.) For instance, the Mac only (??) status of this unit makes it unacceptable for many consumers (I love my macs but single OS support IS a handicap for any MP3 player and when that one OS is not the numerically superior one, it's a real issue. On the other hand, the iPod is the only unit that supports firewire. That speed advantage can be really big. Additionally, the iPod blows many of the other units away as far as storage goes (such as the Rio's, Toshiba's, Samsung's, Iomega's and Intel's offerings) but it is matched and exceeded by the Archos units.
My take, overall is that this is a good start and there is a lot of potential in the iPod, but for my $$, right now, I'd buy one of the Archos units.
but it has virtually no UI wizardry that might define it as an Apple product
You mean other then the scroll pad, and the seriously small number of controls and options on it? (yes, cutting down on choice is a UI feature, and one that Apple is very good at)
Having it all go through iTunes is also a good UI choice (a no brainer for Apple of corse), you don't need to deal with another little lame MP3 manager (my most despised part of my Rio). Of corse once you have more then 5G of music you actually have to do work...
Still, not the product for me. I don't really need all that much music when I'm not already next to my laptop, or my car stereo...
Well, with the disclaimer that I don't know much about how portable MP3 players implement their codecs, is it possible that someone could hack this device and add ogg capability? I mean, unless the MP3 codec is completely hardwired into a ROM, this device contains a processor, memory and bus sufficient to call and run one software codec, so why not another? It seems that if it can serve as a portable hard drive, it must have OS capability sufficient to operate as a file server, and may have a reasonably competent version of OS X running in there. Certainly the hard drive provides sufficient space for such an implementation, and the Firewire port would allow you to load an executable onto the device. And there seem to be many on/. who love hacking such embedded devices. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems theoretically possible, and people have done some amazing hacks on Palm, etc.
* * *
...Apple is the Mercedes Benz or BMW of the computer industry. They deliver the best-designed products with "why didn't I think of that?!" features that eventually become commonplace on the Fords and Chevrolets of the computer industry.
How many computer makers let you into the case without turning screws? How many include an incredibly useful and easy-to-use external connection port like FireWire? How many include digital video editing? How many ship an optical mouse standard? How many include a full productivity suite? How many include a DVD-R/CD-RW drive as standard? How many have given up CRTs and moved on to LCDs, the displays of the future? One.
Apple is the innovator in the industry. If you can't see that, then you're blind. Everyone else has been playing catch-up since 1984.
Neodymium magnets are nothing new. I remember that being listed as a feature in Sony headphones years ago. From a little quick reading on Google, they are just damned strong little magnets.
Apple (AAPL) essentially already violated that. The engineers, at least, seem to think they violated it when they added sound effects, speakers, and microphones.
Therefore, one of the original sound fx was called Sosumi ("so - sue - me")
So at what point does Apple violate the terms of the agreement with Apple Records for ripping off the name and logo?
1989.
Here's a nice summary of the whole thing. [mercurycenter.com] Basically, in 1981 (after years of squabbling) apple computer entered into a written agreement not to compete with apple records in any way. In 1989, Apple records decided that apple's computers had reached the point of qualifying as "musical editing equipment", and sued apple claiming that the agreement had been broached and Apple was infringing on Apple's trademark.
(I for some reason thought for a very long time that this was because 1989 was the year apple started putting built-in sound input ports on all shipping machines, but the apple-history [apple-history.com] site claims that the first apple machines to ship with onboard sound input-- the IIfx and the IIsi-- didn't come out until the beginning of 1990, so maybe that isn't it. Or maybe Apple Records was, in 1989, reacting to advance news from apple describing the upcoming IIfx and IIsi machines. I don't know.)
Anyway, all of this ended in 1990 when Apple and Apple settled; Apple computer had to something like 26.7 million dollars to Apple records, and in return Apple computer gained the right to do pretty much anything with the name "apple". The iPod would be, i am certain, covered under that 1990 agreement.
(There was, after the 1990 agreement, some rather long drawn out legal proceedings involving who paid for the settlement and legal bills from all this [lowball.com], Apple Computer or their insurance company; i think their insurance company finally won. I can't say i really care either way, though.)
Breaking news: Aplle doesn't CARE about windows, or about market share.
Last time I checked, they only sold hardware and software to the "tiny percentage" of Mac users, and yet they somehow manage to stay in business... unthinkable! We all know that market share is the only indicator of a company's success!
At the end of the year, look at who had a higher profit margin.... Dell, Gateway, or Apple.
Apple is making an MP3 player for the Mac users. It's an AMAZING product tied into the hardware they deliver (when will all Winderz boxes ship with firewire), OS X, and iTunes
If you have a Mac, this is a SWEEEEEEET thing. If you don;t have a Mac, guess what, Aplle does not care.
Apple is in the rich person's market now. Create expensive, beautiful, top of the line products. Market them to rich people as part of a "lifestyle" in elegant stores. Have extremely high profit margins.
The iPod is an integral part of Apple's "digital lifestyle" idea, and fits perfectly into their Apple stores. Apple may not be brilliant, but they are not Commodore. Commodore had no plan. Apple has a plan - it just might be the wrong plan.
Ok, listen the 1.8" drive apple is using in the damn iPod is $400 by itself (to purchase it in a firewire enclosure). The sucker has 32 megs of ram to load music then spin down the drive (which is something I was waiting for someone to start putting in their MP3 players).
It uses Firewire to transfer files and recharge. It can be used as a portable hard drive.
Apple is trying to add value to their current product base. Wow, all of a sudden all those machines apple just sold in the last 2 years are now able to interface with currently the coolest MP3 player ever. That is very significant for an "average joe user" trust me. So you don't like it, or don't want to spend money on it, big freaking deal, but I doubt Apple is going to lose big on this, and in a few months apple with probably announce a cheaper one, and put a 20 gig model in the $400 ones place. If the drives get there.
This is by far the coolest MP3 player out there. And yes, it is upgradable, so people can get Ogg working on it. And It is sturdy, if you have seen how much effort it takes to break one of the first ibooks, and usualy by break, it was a screen that broke, apple knows how to consumer harden their stuff. This thing will rock.
Firewire, in fact, is a total of 50 MB of transfer. Furthermore, it's QOS'd and has significant overhead, so you're likely to peak at 10 MB/s (although you can perform 4 transfers each of which is GUARANTEED 10 MB/s, so you'll have 4 quality video transmissions, for instance) But that is certainly less than ATA 100. Except that no single current hard disk or CD drive can match ATA 100. (and, incidently Apple's hardware is essentially the same now)
What you forgot is MP3 compression. IF you already have your whole CD transfered into your computer as MP3s, then you can transfer it in those seconds. This works well because the mac stuff is very seamless... So IF you've got your whole music collection already on your PowerMac, then it's 10s/CD.
FireWire Sexy though... (Score:4, Insightful)
I wonder if it's hackable for a bigger drive...
Plus, you can use it as a portable disk. No "content protection". Yay!
Re:FireWire Sexy though... (Score:3, Informative)
Toshiba, as found in the SmartDisk FireLite.
http://www.smartdisk.com/Press%20Releases/5GBHard
Re:iPod and Digital Camcorder (Score:3, Insightful)
How about using it as a storage device for your firewire camcorder or digital camera (if there are firewiere still cameras).
5GB is about 22 minutes of DV video. It's easier just to pop in another 15GB DV tape.
Since firewire devices are peerless, it shouldn't be much of a problem to connect the devices.
They're peerless when they provide a unique service on the bus. FireWire video cams are DV publishers/consumers. The HD claims to be a mass storage device. The camera would need UI for selecting a mass storage device other than the one built in (the DV tape).
For example, hook 3 DV cammeras together with FireWire. Hit play on one, record on the other two, and you should get two perfect digital copies. Hit play on two of them, record on the other, and unless the recording camera provides a UI for selecting from multiple DV streams, it's probably random which one you'll get.
Is anyone waiting... (Score:4, Funny)
...until Apple releases their new line of pastel contact lenses:
The iEye! [ducks]Re:Is anyone waiting... (Score:3, Funny)
The iEye!
Arr! iEye, Cap'n!
I happenned again. (Score:3, Insightful)
Apple is a normal company. Why does the public constantly expect them do the impossible?
Re:I happenned again. (Score:5, Insightful)
I think over history, Apple has shown with some regularity that they can pull "the impossible" out of their hat. Now with Jobs and NeXT genes on board, that sense is even more intense.
Whether Apple's products are brilliant successes or bizarrely interesting failures, nobody can deny that what they're doing as a rule seems more interesting that what Dell/Gateway/Microsoft et al are ever doing. And occasionally (Macintosh, NeXT, Newton, iMac) Apple/NeXT have done things that were completely mind-blowing and heretofore impossible.
I'm speaking as a longtime PC owner and Linux, not a Mac owner (though I do love my Newton)-- I have a healthy respect for the real innovation Apple has brought to the industry (compare to Microsoft's "innovation"...) and I have trouble understanding why Slashot users are such haters when it comes to Apple and Steve Jobs.
Parent
I'm buying one purely for the tiny firewire hd (Score:5, Interesting)
LAME? WTF?!? (Score:5, Insightful)
Also, how many HOURS does it take to transfer your 6.4gb MP3 collection onto your Nomad? I know my USB player takes forever to even fill up its 64mb memory. Firewire let's you do it BLAZINGLY FAST.
This is a marvel of engineering, very useful and I give apple much credit for coming out with this device.
Also, did I mention automatic playlist/sing library synching with iTunes2? THIS is what portable music should be.
Re:LAME? WTF?!? and hard drive (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:LAME? WTF?!? and hard drive (Score:4, Insightful)
And why does everything have to be wireless? I don't understand this.
1.) plug firewire cable into the back of your computer
2.) bring other end of cable on to desktop
3.) plug in MP3 player when needed
I don't get how this makes life easier. By adding a wireless recieving unit in the thing, it would be bigger, weigh more, and cost more. Probably be more complicated, slower, and use more batteries, too. Or to cut costs you could put an IrDA port in it, although I think less people own an IrDA port for their desktop than firewire, and it would be sitting there transfering data wirelessly so long, you might as well have taken the 4 seconds to plug it in. Why is this a good idea?
I guess i'm just not getting it. Mabey i'm too practical from a monatary standpoint, but i wouldn't spend $400 on a wireless setup for my apartment when i can run $6 worth of cat 5 myself anywhere it wants to go in the apartment. Wireless is for cell phones and possibly for laptops at how much it costs right now, and i can't even afford it at that. Beyond that its just extra gadgets.
~z
Parent
Re:LAME? WTF?!? (Score:5, Informative)
(OK, it's a semi-troll - it's just fun to theorize about CmdrTaco / VA Linux / OSDN conspiracies)
Parent
Re:LAME? WTF?!? (Score:4, Insightful)
Raise your hand if you have a FireWire port
Raise your hand if you have both
Raise your hand if you have $400 to spend on a cute Apple device
There is Apple's market. Pretty slim, eh? I don't see many sales in the future of iPod.
~LoudMusic
Parent
Re:LAME? WTF?!? (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't have an OSX box, and consequently, no firewire and iTunes, but if I
Apple has never been about selling the most number of units. Just look at the market leaders for cars, OSes, books, movies, CDs
And no, I dont own any Apple gear. I wish I could justify it tho; unfortunately, MS keeps underselling quality, thus keeping wk2 on the the corperate desktop, and *nix just happens to serve the 'net industry better than anyone else.
Parent
Re:LAME? WTF?!? (Score:4, Funny)
Bundled for free on every Mac sold in the last 18 months, and installed retroactively on god only knows how many other ones. Easily in the high hundreds of thousands, possibly in the millions.
Raise your hand if you have a FireWire port...
Every iMac, PowerMac, iBook and Powerbook sold in the last two years, plus almost every Sony VAIO and a good chunk of Compaq and HP's product lines. Easily in the millions.
Raise your hand if you have both.
See above.
Raise your hand if you have $400 to spend on a cute Apple device...
Looking at the sales of (picking three examples) Pilots, Rios and Digital Cameras, I'd say the number of people willing to spend $200-500 on a "cute" electronic device is "lots and lots."
There is Apple's market. Pretty slim, eh? I don't see many sales in the future of iPod.
I guess you don't. This is why Apple is a company with $4 Billion in the bank, and you're trolling on slashdot. Want fries with that?
Parent
Re:LAME? WTF?!? (Score:3, Insightful)
Raise your hand if you have iTunes
Raise your hand if you have a FireWire port
Raise your hand if you have both
Raise your hand if you have $400 to spend on a cute Apple device
What, is there a large market for mp3 players with people who don't own computers?
Apple knows that their biggest market is existing Apple customers. If Apple sells one of these for every 5 iBooks they sell, they'll be sitting pretty.
Why should Apple fund a software team to port iTunes to Windows, just so they get a few $400 slim margin sales of an mp3 player?
Better to let the Windows users wish they had an iPod, and go out and buy an iBook to get it.
Apple's finally learning to bring the market to them, instead of chasing it all over the map.
Lame how? (Score:5, Insightful)
iPod: 2.4x4x.78 at 6.5oz
I'll give up a gig for size and weight.
Lame? (Score:5, Interesting)
Seriously, this device is far from lame in my eyes. 5GB is plenty of storage. I have like 20GB of mp3's anyway, not like they're really going to fit on anything out there. And uh... I never really need more that 5GB at a time, ya know.
The recharging via Firewire is cool too. The size is a plus... the Nomad is too big for me to carry around. And being able to use it as a portable harddrive is cool, too... burning CD's to ferry files back and forth is a pain. I'm gonna buy one if it works with other OS's.
Looks impressive (Score:5, Interesting)
Us geeks, who always acknowledged that Macs had a great UI (but we called them idiot machines) miss out on some of the impressive stuff that Apple does.
The Macintosh way is to organize things by things the users do, not the underlying file system. This is a HUGE paradigm shift from the Unix (everything is a file) paradigm, and from the Microsoft (everything is about something).
On a Windows box, you run a program to rip your CDs into MP3s. If you want to burn a CD, you use a program to convert them to WAVs, then you burn the WAVs to CDs.
On a Mac, you pop an audio CD in to your computer and add the songs to your library. If you burn a CD, you pop a blank in and hit burn CD. Now with iTunes 2, you'll have the option to make MP3 CDs (which previously would be done as burning a data CD).
In UNIX, you focus on the files. In a Mac, you focus on the activity. My fiancee doesn't have to think about file formats, she thinks about music. She barely touches her Windows PC or MIT's UNIX network anymore.
This device extends the Mac functionality. Instead of firing up Creative Lab's software and pick and choose which songs you want on it. Want to listen on the computer? Fire up WinAmp. Want to rip CDs, fire up that application.
With the iPod, it integrates into your system. You plug it in, it keeps your songs available. No need to mess with a clunky interface, the thumb-rolling thingy-ma-bopper looks like a clean way to use the device.
The Nomad Jukebox 20G with the batteries is about a pound. My brother loves his, but it mostly sits in the car now. He used to take it to the gym, but it wastoo big and bulky.
I realize that most Slashdotters are looking at the specs, but realize what this actually does. Its tiny, it'll fit in a jacket pocket (or pant pocket), its convenient.
Take it jogging, to the gym, etc. Sit in the park, walk around.
The Nomad Jukebox is too damned heavy.
This device rocks, I expect them to sell plenty.
I think that they should sell a Windows version of it with a Windows version of iTunes and a Firewire card, but that's just me.
Philosophical differences, and the Unix Way (Score:3, Insightful)
Sure, it's easy to learn the Mac. I did when I was 5. But I need to be more productive now, and the Mac interface makes it too hard.
Speaking particularly of iTunes, how do I script it into apache? How do I use it from the command line? How do I run it on the machine hooked into my stereo from my desktop with the display that is in the other room? This is trivial and elegant in my UNIX environment.
The Macintosh way (much like the Windows way) is to have applications that do everything you want to do. All your word-processing needs in Word. All your web-browsing needs in Internet Explorer. All your audio needs in iTunes.The problem with this way is that in the end it is too restrictive. If all you have is internet explorer, what if you want to do an ``internet-explorer -dump http://go-gnome.com | sh'' Or maybe you want to use internet explorer to recursively download a site for mirroring or archival?
Ahhh... you say... but with OS X or Cygwin I can use bash and lynx! True, true. But at the point you're using lynx and the bourne shell and scripts pulling together cdparanoia, lame, and cdrecord, you're not doing things the Mac or Windows way, you're doing things the UNIX way.
I do computer architecture as my job. It would be impossible for us to use Mac or Windows machines. Some of the things would work -- the assembler would be fine to do in Windows (and there's one that works in Windows) and the simulator would work ... but there are times when we redirect the trace output of one simulator into another to verify things... piping *that* output into a scrpit that gathers statistics and such. You don't just open up the ``save trace as...'' dialog box when you are about to spit out a 100-gig trace file, you need the flexability of being able to stream it into another application. And you don't want to have to open dialog boxes for 80 different possible configurations and sit there and wait for them to run when you can script together doing all the configurations on all the test files spreading across several machines over the weekend.
The UNIX way is about flexible tools. Tools that work well together. Tools that are elegant and flexable. Tools that work well regardless of where you are, where you're coming from, or where you're going. This provides power for the UNIX user that surpasses that which someone using GUI tools on Windows or a Mac can ever know.
Sure, it takes longer to learn. Most of the best things do. The sharper the learning curve, the bigger the payoff. That's why most UNIX gurus use emacs or vi... they're not easy to learn, but they are powerful.
A UNIX guru can't take working with inferior tools. She can't stand sitting there doing a repetative task when she should be scripting it. She understands that her job is to be the master, and the computer is the tool to do the repetative job.
Not "innovative"? (Score:5, Interesting)
But what does being highly innovative get Apple? Think Newton. It still runs circles around the Palm, but was a commercial failure. It was too innovative.
But, how about if you took the idea of an MP3 player, made it look nice, gave it a Firewire port for fast transfers and easy recharging, and made the whole thing sync seamlessly with iTunes.
Sounds like a pretty good idea to me. I imagine they'll sell quite a few. It's the right feature set at the right time.
Geoff
oh no not again (Score:5, Interesting)
That said, I am both a shareholder and consumer of Apple products. When I read the announcement and specs I went straight to the Apple Store. At $199-$250, I would have bought two, immediately. Instead, at $399, I am buying zero, and expect that many other people will feel the same way.
I am very sad that Apple seems to be repeating the same mistake they made with the Cube - great, nifty product that anyone would love to own, except that it's burdened by an unbelievably poor price/performance ratio.
A laptop hard drive of that size in the quantity Apple buys is about $30 these days. I am more than willing to pay a premium for Apple designed hardware and software. This thing will undoubtedly have a great interface. But that is not worth $200 extra (double the price!).
I know Apple prices it's products to maximize profit. But I wish they'd realize they could make the same amount of money, and have more marketshare, if they'd sell 3 times as many at half the cost instead.
All I can say is, as an Apple "fan", I'm sad.
Re:oh no not again (Score:3, Informative)
At $199-$250, I would have bought two, immediately. Instead, at $399, I am buying zero, and expect that many other people will feel the same way.
At first I thought it should be more in the $300 range. However, after looking at the link someone supplied for a device from smartdisk (that most likely uses the same harddrive), I have to realize I was wrong. The smartdisk device is a 5GB firewire harddrive. That's all and it's the exact same price. Suddenly, it looks like a good deal!
http://www.smartdisk.com [smartdisk.com] (It's the firefly)
jason
Yeah, but can I drop it on the floor? (Score:3)
I have two major problems with this. First of all, yeah, it's tiny (the length of a credit card and less than an inch thick.) However, what happens when it gets dropped on the floor? For now, hard-drive based players are bulky for a reason -- tiny laptop drives are FRAGILE and need to be protected! The spindles won't hold up to much abuse, and MP3 players are subjected to a large amount of abuses on a daily basis, from being shoved in a backpack to being put in a pocket while the person is running. How well does the Apple player stack up?
Secondly, the Apple player is competing with many others on the market. Steve Jobs makes it sound like Apple is the only player in the arena, but in reality, there are several. [cnet.com] Sure, Apple is the only one doing Firewire, and Firewire offers a faster transfer rate. But that's all for moot if my player pukes once I throw it in my bag.
If you're interested in finding a really tiny player, check out the Flash-memory based ones. Flash memory is getting a lot cheaper. MyDivaPlayer.com [mydivaplayer.com] is offering a 128MB player that also accepts Flash memory for $135 after discount. Plus, these things are about half the size of the iPod. Flash memory players can be neat as well -- infinitely expandable storage, rewriteablity, and most players automatically plug-n-play as removable drives on Windows systems. Plus, you can do voice recording and cart around lots of other files as well, so the players double as mini Zip disks.
Yes, because the HD is rarely spinning (Score:5, Informative)
Saves tons of power, and should make it tough as nails.
Parent
Engineering Perspective (Score:5, Insightful)
Just because Apple didn't choose to significantly increase its volume by adding a 802.11a antenna, just to add a *very* slow transmittal solution (compared to its firewire), means it's "lame?"
I don't have a religious bent for or against Apple; when intelligent people make these kinds of comments, it confuses me.
not 50MB/s (Score:3, Informative)
Odds are, the drive can't handle the full bus speed.
If it's using the Toshiba 1.8" drive, you're looking at a top end of 12MB/s, which means a about 50x the speed of USB.
(assuming it's the same drive that someone pointed out in another post, is listed for $400, without the mp3 playing ability, at smartdisk.com)
$400, for now... (Score:3, Insightful)
In 6 months, hopefully the rest of us will be buying the 20GB version for $200.
hello? what about the pjb100?! (Score:3, Interesting)
What else? It has a clever power-saving mode which spins up the disk, reads a whole track into memory, and powers down the disk immediately. That means 5 mins anti-shock (or was it 10? can't remember) and 10 hours listening per Li-Ion battery. Support is nothing less than fantastic, with new firmwares containing features such as minesweeper :-) And I can upload via USB faster than I can rip CDs, so who cares about FireWire?
This is the hacker's choice of MP3 jukebox. It's a no-brainer.
The fine print? (Score:3, Insightful)
iPod and iTunes are for legal or rightholder-authorized copying only. Don't steal music.
Apple seems to have the right theory on "content protection"
Portable space heater (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Apple site has info on new device... (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:lame? (Score:3)
Sidenote - As a firewire drive, I'm assuming it should be pretty straightforward to hook it up to whatever your hardware religion is.
Re:lame? (Score:3, Informative)
Yep. This is almost certainly the same
And their price is $399.95 as well
Think before you gripe.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Considering that it's got far more memory than your average 128MB MP3 portable, and that it's clearly smaller and more portable than a Nomad, I think this is a hasty judgement.
which by virtue of being firewire will be limited to Apple Mac owners
PCs have access to FireWire, as does Linux. The direct connection to iTunes is the only Mac-only feature that I can see; I should hope Apple will be smart enough to enable compatability with PCs, or if not, develop a Windows version of iTunes to do the same job.
but it has virtually no UI wizardry that might define it as an Apple product.
It has a six-line LCD display, backlit, a simple four-button interface, and a circular scroll wheel to navigate your songs (which can organize by CD, artist, or your own custom playlists). You call that "virtually no UI"?
Methinks some people's "first post" ambitions are getting in the way of a decent review of the features.
Parent
Re:Think before you gripe.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, this should compete favorably with the solid state units, but they've already lost to the CD-MP3 units, IMO.
Comparisons... (Score:3, Informative)
Speaking of comparisons... Let's compare the iPod to a sampling of other units that share its form-factor... that excludes all CD-MP3 based units AND it excludes units such as the Nomad. So how does the iPod stack up to it's form-factor matched competitors? What are it's competitors? Looking at the ever-cool ThinkGeek's MP3 player selection [thinkgeek.com], here are the competition:
Price: $499
Capacity: 20 GB
I/O Interface: USB
Desktop OS Compatibility: Windows, & Linux (??)
Battery Type/Life(playtime): Internal rechargable/ 12 Hrs
Dimensions: 150 x 80 x 26 mm
Weight: 9.9oz.
Price: $249
Capacity: 6 GB
I/O Interface: USB
Desktop OS Compatibility: Windows and Mac
Battery Type/Life(playtime): 4 AA/ Max 8 hours
Dimensions: 4.5" x 3.2" x 1.3"
Weight: 12oz.
Additional features: Can function as USB hardrive. Also, Archo's website is unclear as to whether the unit can charge "it's 4-AA rechargables" with the included power adapter but such is hinted at...
Same as above, with 20GB of storage, for $349
Price: $199.99
Capacity: 32MB int. Expandable w/ SD card
I/O Interface: USB
Desktop OS Compatibility: Windows only
Battery Type/Life(playtime): 1 AAA/ Max 4 hours
Dimensions: 2" x 2" x 0.5"
Weight: 1.5 oz w/out battery
Price: $159.99
Capacity: 64MB int. Expandable w/ add-on back of up to 340 MB
I/O Interface: USB
Desktop OS Compatibility: Mac & Windows
Battery Type/Life(playtime): 1 AA/ Max 8 hours
Dimensions: 3.5" x 2.5" x 5/8"
Weight: ??
Price: $219.99
Capacity: 128MB int. Expandable w/ add-on back up to 340 MB
I/O Interface: USB
Desktop OS Compatibility: Mac & Windows
Battery Type/Life(playtime): 1 Ni-MH AA Rechargable (built in recharger)/ ??
Dimensions: 3.5" x 2.5" x 1"
Weight: ??
Price: $399.00
Capacity: 5GB
I/O Interface: Firewire
Desktop OS Compatibility: Mac only (?)
Battery Type/Life(playtime): Internal, (rechargable via external adaptor or via firewire bus)/ 10 hrs max.
Dimensions: 4.02"x2.3"x0.78"
Weight: 6.5 oz
Additional features: may be used as firewire disk
General discussion:
First, why exclude such different form-factor units such as the nomad? IMHO, size plays a major part in dictating what one of these units will be used for. A CD player, or Nomad is simply too big for me to take to the gym and use while I am running, biking or using any of the machines. Therefore, it's gotta be small..
So how does the iPod stack up? It looks like it's middle of the road, but if certain features are or are not important to you, the choice may be easier (for or against the iPod.) For instance, the Mac only (??) status of this unit makes it unacceptable for many consumers (I love my macs but single OS support IS a handicap for any MP3 player and when that one OS is not the numerically superior one, it's a real issue. On the other hand, the iPod is the only unit that supports firewire. That speed advantage can be really big. Additionally, the iPod blows many of the other units away as far as storage goes (such as the Rio's, Toshiba's, Samsung's, Iomega's and Intel's offerings) but it is matched and exceeded by the Archos units.
My take, overall is that this is a good start and there is a lot of potential in the iPod, but for my $$, right now, I'd buy one of the Archos units.
Re:A waste of time. Probably OEMed by someone else (Score:3, Insightful)
You mean other then the scroll pad, and the seriously small number of controls and options on it? (yes, cutting down on choice is a UI feature, and one that Apple is very good at)
Having it all go through iTunes is also a good UI choice (a no brainer for Apple of corse), you don't need to deal with another little lame MP3 manager (my most despised part of my Rio). Of corse once you have more then 5G of music you actually have to do work...
Still, not the product for me. I don't really need all that much music when I'm not already next to my laptop, or my car stereo...
Re:I would get one but (Score:3, Informative)
So you might not have to wait that long :-)
Re:I would get one but (Score:3, Interesting)
* * *
Re:As always, it comes down to price. (Score:3, Insightful)
No, $399.95 MSRP for a freakin'
http://www.smartdisk.com/Products/Storage%20Produ
Apple's version throws in the MP3 player for free.
Not such a bad deal looked at that way, yes?
People need to realize that... (Score:3, Insightful)
How many computer makers let you into the case without turning screws? How many include an incredibly useful and easy-to-use external connection port like FireWire? How many include digital video editing? How many ship an optical mouse standard? How many include a full productivity suite? How many include a DVD-R/CD-RW drive as standard? How many have given up CRTs and moved on to LCDs, the displays of the future? One.
Apple is the innovator in the industry. If you can't see that, then you're blind. Everyone else has been playing catch-up since 1984.
Re:Neodymium transducer magnets? (Score:3, Interesting)
~Philly
Sosumi (Score:5, Interesting)
Therefore, one of the original sound fx was called Sosumi ("so - sue - me")
Your daily dose of apple trivia.
Parent
Re:Apple vs. Apple (Score:5, Interesting)
1989.
Here's a nice summary of the whole thing. [mercurycenter.com] Basically, in 1981 (after years of squabbling) apple computer entered into a written agreement not to compete with apple records in any way. In 1989, Apple records decided that apple's computers had reached the point of qualifying as "musical editing equipment", and sued apple claiming that the agreement had been broached and Apple was infringing on Apple's trademark.
(I for some reason thought for a very long time that this was because 1989 was the year apple started putting built-in sound input ports on all shipping machines, but the apple-history [apple-history.com] site claims that the first apple machines to ship with onboard sound input-- the IIfx and the IIsi-- didn't come out until the beginning of 1990, so maybe that isn't it. Or maybe Apple Records was, in 1989, reacting to advance news from apple describing the upcoming IIfx and IIsi machines. I don't know.)
Anyway, all of this ended in 1990 when Apple and Apple settled; Apple computer had to something like 26.7 million dollars to Apple records, and in return Apple computer gained the right to do pretty much anything with the name "apple". The iPod would be, i am certain, covered under that 1990 agreement.
(There was, after the 1990 agreement, some rather long drawn out legal proceedings involving who paid for the settlement and legal bills from all this [lowball.com], Apple Computer or their insurance company; i think their insurance company finally won. I can't say i really care either way, though.)
Parent
Re:When will they learn? (Score:3, Insightful)
Last time I checked, they only sold hardware and software to the "tiny percentage" of Mac users, and yet they somehow manage to stay in business... unthinkable! We all know that market share is the only indicator of a company's success!
At the end of the year, look at who had a higher profit margin.... Dell, Gateway, or Apple.
Apple is making an MP3 player for the Mac users. It's an AMAZING product tied into the hardware they deliver (when will all Winderz boxes ship with firewire), OS X, and iTunes
If you have a Mac, this is a SWEEEEEEET thing. If you don;t have a Mac, guess what, Aplle does not care.
Re:cool but much too expensive (Score:5, Funny)
Damn straight! For four hundred smackaroos, I expect something at least as big and heavy as a brick!
Parent
Re:Apple reminds me more of Commodore every day (Score:3, Insightful)
The iPod is an integral part of Apple's "digital lifestyle" idea, and fits perfectly into their Apple stores. Apple may not be brilliant, but they are not Commodore. Commodore had no plan. Apple has a plan - it just might be the wrong plan.
Re:Apple reminds me more of Commodore every day (Score:3, Insightful)
It uses Firewire to transfer files and recharge. It can be used as a portable hard drive.
Apple is trying to add value to their current product base. Wow, all of a sudden all those machines apple just sold in the last 2 years are now able to interface with currently the coolest MP3 player ever. That is very significant for an "average joe user" trust me. So you don't like it, or don't want to spend money on it, big freaking deal, but I doubt Apple is going to lose big on this, and in a few months apple with probably announce a cheaper one, and put a 20 gig model in the $400 ones place. If the drives get there.
This is by far the coolest MP3 player out there. And yes, it is upgradable, so people can get Ogg working on it. And It is sturdy, if you have seen how much effort it takes to break one of the first ibooks, and usualy by break, it was a screen that broke, apple knows how to consumer harden their stuff. This thing will rock.
Technical Answers about transfers, firewire, MP3 (Score:3, Informative)
What you forgot is MP3 compression. IF you already have your whole CD transfered into your computer as MP3s, then you can transfer it in those seconds. This works well because the mac stuff is very seamless... So IF you've got your whole music collection already on your PowerMac, then it's 10s/CD.
This doesn't work for data, of course.