6G iPod & Apple's Future

belsin_gordon writes "CNET rounds up what we're going to get from the next iPod and where Apple is heading as a company and as a business juggernaut. [They have the] 100GB widescreen video iPods, Wi-Fi-enabled iPods capable of on-the-fly movie downloads over the air, unlimited downloads from iTunes for a flat fee and the UK finally getting its content-hungry hands on movie downloads. Apple has dropped the 'Computer' from its company name, and is making significant advances into the media-distribution business. It's bringing video to everyone everywhere with iTunes movies and now Apple TV, and the rumours and speculation we've discussed promote the theory that Apple is setting itself up as a major player in the media-distribution industry."

suure

[thesupermikey]

As totally hot as a wide screen ipod (more hopefully a phoneless iphone) makes me. I'll believe it when i see it.

Rumors are only that, rumors, and we have been hearing these same rumors for months (if not years now).

ml

Re:

[MikeBabcock]

And a new version of the Newton OS to run on the iPhone with full third party app functionality and and and ...

Yeah, I doubt it too.

Music subscriptions

[Albanach]

I presume by 'unlimited downloads' they mean music subscriptions a la napster, rhapsody etc.

I've always wondered why Apple have been slow to enter that market, but to do so now without opening up their DRM is surely asking for trouble. Real have been trying to get access to the iPod market for years. Apple have tried to stop them at every opportunity. If they now try and copy that distribution method, while refusing to allow anyone else the opportunity leaves them more open than ever to charges of anti competitive behaviour, especially in the EU.

Of course it could also be an indication that Apple are about to open up their DRM? That would be great news for Real and Napster, but could be terminal for the smaller manufacturers of 'mp3' players.

Re:

[ceoyoyo]

Of all of them, that's the rumor I think is least likely. The subscription music services aren't doing such hot business, certainly not compared to iTunes and the other services where you purchase tracks. The article uses the example of renting movies, but I think they fail to realize that music is different. Most movies you watch you have little desire to see regularly. For those few you do, you buy the DVD. BUT, most music people buy they DO want to hear regularly, so most people prefer to buy it out

Re:

[LKM]

Of course it could also be an indication that Apple are about to open up their DRM?

No. Jobs has pretty much ruled out that option. Apple wants no DRM on music, and they will not license FairPlay.

Re:

[nine-times]

I always thought that Apple stayed out of the subscription model and refused to open their DRM for roughly the same reason: they have no faith in DRM, even their own.

They assume that their DRM will likely be cracked, and will only be cracked sooner if other people know exactly how it works. Further, if you have a subscription model, then it basically means unlimited access to music that you can keep forever for a low monthly fee-- no content holders are going to like that idea.

Re:

[AndersOSU]

Further, if you have a subscription model, then it basically means unlimited access to music that you can keep forever for a low monthly fee-- no content holders are going to like that idea.

Which is really stupid. Unlimited downloads that I could keep forever and burn as I see fir for a low monthly fee would likely do it for me, and the many other people who's music buying habit has tapered off. If I could pay ~$20/month for unlimited downloads that would be about $15 more per month than the music industr

Re:

[gig]

> Well that obviously isn't the case given the number of subscription services which already exist, typically based on MS-DRM

Those services barely exist, and have no customers. They are not even on the level of the 8-track tape, they are less than a footnote in the history of recorded audio. Another attempt at subscription radio that failed miserably like all others.

There is this massive hubris in the tech industry in which someone like Bill Gates thinks that because music is digital and PC crapware is d

Unlimited?

[giorgiofr]

unlimited downloads from iTunes for a flat fee

I hope they know what they're getting themselves into. And I bet that pretty soon we'll see some restrictions and limits on how much you can actually download.

Re:

[Tim_F]

The summary is very misleading. If you actually go in and read the article it is talking about a subscription service. You won't get to keep what you download.

Re:

[cyphercell]

YUUUCK! This might work for movies which IMHO have very little replay value, but music is timeless, and this is disgusting.

Re:

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

"This might work for movies which IMHO have very little replay value, but music is timeless, and this is disgusting."

Depends on how you look at it. I'm a Rhapsody subscriber, have been for years. I've had a LOT of music come and go. (i.e. not all music is 'timeless'.) In the mean time, I don't have to store music on my machine, and if I really really wanna keep a song (and it happens sometimes) I just purchase it. The subscription service is really useful for finding new music without having to succumb

Re:

[owlnation]

Not necessarily. You're thinking microeconomics. Go macro. Yes, some individuals will download huge amounts of material, but others will only download a little.

Likely, there will be a huge rush of downloading at the beginning of a subscription which will tail off after a few months. There's only so many bands that the average user likes, and the wonderful world of the RIAA produces fairly bland material these days. So once you've got all your fave tunes, you'll only be picking up the odd song or album in

Re:

[StarvingSE]

Bad analogy. There is a very real limit on how much you can eat in one sitting (let's call it stomach capacity). Therefore, the buffet restaurant knows, on average, how many plates of food each customer will eat and how to price accordingly.

iTunes, on the other hand, does not have the same restriction. You are pretty much limited to your hard drive capacity, which gets cheaper by the month. You could theoretically just have your computer download their entire catalogue without some kind of restriction o

Re:Unlimited?

[KDan]

You obviously have not met that common animal called the Starving Student. It lives mostly around universities and is capable of eating many stomach capacities' worth of food in a single sitting. In fact, you could say that strange beast's stomach capacity goes up as the meal price goes down.

Daniel

Re:

[linguizic]

The animal that you speak of is more ravenous here in the Southeastern portion of the United States, where appetites in general are as large as their patriotic fervor. In my small college town I've seen many buffets start up and shut down after about a year or so. Interestingly enough, the only buffets that have managed to stay open are the Chinese restaurants. That really says something about the business model(i.e. only hire easily exploitable young relatives) of Chinese restaurants. Either that or th

Re:

[clickclickdrone]

>There is a very real limit on how much you can eat in one sitting
You haven't met my friends C & D. I suspect they digest at the same rate they eat. I've certainly seen them eat 3-4 large pizzas each at an all-you-can-eat place and at a Chinese one of them had 24 crispy duck rolls.

Re:

[guruevi]

Doesn't matter, you can't listen to them all at the same time (well you could, but it would be kakafonie of sounds) and I think you would have restrictions as towards use in commercial environments (DJ's, bars) and as for distribution through P2P: if it costs you $10/month to get a fast, free download of any music without any risk whatsoever, I think I would take that instead of the slow BT search-and-wait game which might get you caught/cut off if they do simple fingerprinting for example.

Re:

[Gilmoure]

You might remember HD209458b as a 'hot Jupiter' that boils under the glow of its very nearby star.

I'm Troy McClure HD209458b. You might remember me from such extra-solar planets as a 'hot Jupiter' that boils under the glow of its very nearby star.

wi-fi hangup

[sluke]

It seems to me that apple will resist having wi-fi in the ipod because it would break their grip on the interface to the ipod. They have a great revenue stream with all of the third party gadgets that connect to the dock connector and if they gave the ipod a meaningful wi-fi connection, it would be a lot easier to make such additions without paying a licensing fee to apple. It would be nice though...

Re:

[CrackedButter]

It will surely drive innovation where ipod skins are concerned!

Re:

[jellomizer]

Well most of the devices I have seen are just external speakers. I have a clock where a iPod Mini is hooked up to and it has a nice set of speakers on it so we play the iPod threw the clock. Wi-Fi wont effect that market much because it also doubles as an iPod charger. As do most of the 3rd party stuff. Other think like Radio Tuners, would probably still be best designed if hooked up via real connectors. Other devices hook up just to the Headphone jack (this has been standardized for many years) Wi-Fi

Portable Video

[Nerdfest]

For many of the same features being described in the future video iPods, check out the Archos 704. It's got the wifi, the browser, the big touch screen, the USB ports, etc. Personally, I think it's a bit big, but the features are amazing. Soem competition to keep Apple on their toes is nice to see too.

Re:

[CastrTroy]

Archos seems to have a nice line up of players. I don't see why they aren't more popular. They are defintely better than the current offering of video iPods. There's also a couple other companies like Cowon and Creative that have pretty good offerings. My guess is that not a lot of people see much of a need for a portable video player, as you can't watch TV while doing something else. But the iPod is marketed as an audio player first, with the ability to play movies, which to most people seems like a m

Re:

[tlhIngan]

Archos seems to have a nice line up of players. I don't see why they aren't more popular. They are defintely better than the current offering of video iPods. There's also a couple other companies like Cowon and Creative that have pretty good offerings. My guess is that not a lot of people see much of a need for a portable video player, as you can't watch TV while doing something else. But the iPod is marketed as an audio player first, with the ability to play movies, which to most people seems like a much b

Re:Portable Video

[escay]

Personally, I think it's a bit big

That's it right there. For portable devices, size does matter. On a quick comparison from the archos and apple websites:
Player - Weight - Size
Arch704 - 22oz - 7"x5"x0.8"
iPhone - 4.8oz - 4.5"x2.5"x0.5".

The primary drawback of archos players has always been size and weight - which also happens to be the primary requirement for these devices. if it does not satisfy this preliminary constraint, it does not matter what amazing features the archos provides.

Moron

[MCSEBear]

Let's See:

1. iTunes Subscription Service
How many times does Steve have to say that people prefer to own their music. How many different subscription services have to loose bucket loads of money before the media stops pretending apple needs subscription services just because they don't have one? If this was such a great fucking idea, then why didn't Naptster or Yahoo or one of the others make a big profit doing it?? Very lame, Crave.

2) UK iTunes Movie Downloads
Wouldn't Apple wait for the EU regula

Re:

[Lars T.]

2) UK iTunes Movie Downloads
Wouldn't Apple wait for the EU regulators to force the music companies to allow one EU wide Music Store before they open a country specific Movie store? I mena, really Crave.

But Apple has already said they would sell Videos in the European stores.

Sixfold *Apple* rumours?

[Heian-794]

TFA does indeed have six rumors about Apple, but they're all related to the iPod.

Call me a stickler for accuracy, but "sixfold Apple rumour round-up" implies six different rumours (tidbits, what-have-you) about various things related to Apple. If all six were connected to the iPod, as all six do indeed turn out to be, a more meaningful headline would have bee "Apple iPod rumour round-up" or something similar -- the Slashdot summary title improves on it at least.

There are several other reasons to be excited about Apple -- possible super-thin/light MacBooks, a new revision for the iMac, and of course the now-delayed Leopard. Updates on those much-anticipated items would also have been appreciated.

And the British media don't get it

[Flying pig]

There was an extremely feeble sketch on a supposedly humorous BBC program last Friday (I won't dignify it by naming it) which purported to be Steve Jobs meeting Bill Gates. While their wives are removed by studs for extra-curricular activities, Jobs works Steve up to orgasm by describing the hardware of the next Mac.

Whoever at the BBC approved it obviously hasn't got a clue about what Jobs and Apple are about (or, probably, Gates). Wildly extrapolating, if a media company like the BBC seems to have few people who know what Apple is about nowadays, how far does the blindness extend? Right up until Jobs and Branson jointly attend the funeral of the conventional media industry, I guess.

Re:

[CmdrGravy]

I'm not sure how far you can get using Harry "loadsamoney" Enfield as an indicator of the understanding the entire British media have of Apple !

Maybe the same distance you'd get using Kevin & Perry Go Large ! as the definitive guide to the Ibiza club scene except that's probably more accurate.

These things are supposed to be reviewed

[Flying pig]

By executives and also by lawyers looking for libel or defamation. (IANAL but if I were Jobs and had it brought to my attention I'd certainly pay Carter-Ruck to send a nasty letter.) None of them seem to have noticed. If they had, they might just have had the wit to substitute Michael Dell for Jobs (Dell is a recognised brand in the UK), which would have been more accurate. Conclusion: BBC execs and lawyers don't actually know who Jobs is or what he is doing. Nor does Enfield or his scriptwriters. I bet you

Re:

[CmdrGravy]

Are you familiar with much British TV ?

Re:

[NDPTAL85]

What part of comedy and parody do you not understand? You don't have to be accurate when you are making fun of people, in fact being INACCURATE is the entire point. Thus libel and defamation do not apply here.

6 Gig?

[CrazyTalk]

My iPod already has 8 Gigabytes, and is one of the smaller ones. Ohhh, you mean 6th generation. Wonder who else read this wrong.

Re:

[Bob54321]

I though they must mean the nano but there is already bigger ones out there... I really had no idea there had been that many iPod generations. Those things breed like rabbits!

Not the biggest apple fan

[prelelat]

I'm not the biggest apple fan but thats because I like to piss people off on a regular basis and apple cult people seem to be a good target. I've always thought that the iPod hasn't made any huge improvements over the years since it released the original iPod. It was always good and if someone gave me one I would probably keep it. But I never really had something from apple peak my interest as much as the announced 100GB widescreen video iPod. 100GB in a video player, this sounds fantastic, but then I r

MS saw this coming in the 90's when they ordered

[alfredo]

Apple to "Knife the baby." Of course they were talking about QuickTime. MS knew Apple was going to do an end run around them, but they had that pesky DoJ case against them and couldn't crush Apple like they wanted to. In the end Ashcroft gave MS all they wanted and more (as punishment), but it was too late. Apple had out maneuvered them. Even Ashcroft couldn't protect MS from Apple. (MS was a contributor to Ashcroft's losing congressional campaign*)

They knew Apple wasn't going after the bean counter business. Apple was heading to the living rooms, and MS could not compete against the axis of evil: Jobs, Ives, TBWA Chait-Day.

It has been fun watching this unfold. That's is what made me a fan of this company. Sometimes it is how you play the game, and Apple played it well.

* He lost to a dead man.

if sony was smart...

[insanius]

they would re-work the psp. shrink it down a little, add another analog on the right, and either dump the umd drive entirely for a hd or start selling psps with a big memory stick in the box(>=4gig). with a decent d/l service, it would be everything that apple is trying to turn the ipod into and more with the addition of running ps2 quality games on a screen that is far superior!

i'll probably get modded a troll for this as i was last week for questioning the crazy demand for the wii even though the

Mostly "duh."

[sootman]

1. iTunes Subscription Service - unlikely. Has been discussed ad nauseum. Some people love subscription services, most don't. Look at the numbers. Plus, Apple likes things simple. They wouldn't want to sell music two ways. Plus subscriptions = more complexity and more DRM. Apple's already making a killing. Why double their efforts for 5-10% more sales?

2) UK iTunes Movie Downloads - duh. Eventually, all services will reach all major countries.

3) Widescreen video iPod - duh. But don't look for it until 6-12 m

Re:

[JWW]

3) Widescreen video iPod - duh. But don't look for it until 6-12 months after the iPhone debuts--not "right around the corner." Anyone who thinks Apple would release a cheap widescreen iPod before the iPhone and let it cannibalize iPhone sales hasn't been watching Apple very long or very closely. Release the expensive, limited product first, let everyone fret and moan and bitch online, watch them sell like mad anyway, add one requested feature, lower the price a bit, lather, rinse, repeat.

I'd have to say th

Ipod wifi...

[Mockylock]

Jobs talked so much smack on the Zune's WiFi capability, that I doubt he'd throw wifi into an iPod that would have a stronger functionality and actually keep your battery from discharging on power-up. Granted, I wouldn't put it past Apple to innovate something clever as they've always done. But, if Apple went to WiFi, I'm quite certain Microsoft would enable a more complex access as well.

Why haven't they already(ms)? Nobody has WiFi yet, why up the ante 2 full steps when nobody else even uses it at all? I'm sure that WiFi enabled (network/internet connectivity) iPods and Zunes would not only waste batteries in wholesale fashion, but they would also be pretty iffy when talking about security. Granted, movies and music being hacked into aren't a huge ordeal... but having millions of iPods roaming around with WiFi would have to be a pretty decent target for some type of exploitation. There are tons of other wifi-enabled objects floating around, yes.. But, I'm sure the platform they're running on is a bit more complex than a handheld jukebox.

More power to them if they can pull it off... if they can, MS will follow as they always do.

As for iTunes... screw iTunes and everything around it. I own an iPod Video, 20G iPod, nano and a zune. Once I grabbed the zune, I realized how much of a pain the iPods were... resetting, getting it to recognize, having to erase all my music when I installed a new OS or go to a new PC... clearing out all my music in any error, and starting over... every month. And the only thing they had over the zune was the click wheel... and that wasn't even a plus when you didn't lock it and put it in your pocket. Again, Apple is innovative and I dig 'em for throwing out great products... but, there are too many other products that have more features and have better and more reliable interfaces to work with than the iPod and iTunes nowadays. Now, it's just people buying a name as a status symbol. The ipod is now cliche.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's a tip for you. Turn off the auto-sync and you can keep the data on your ipod when you hook it up to iTunes that doesn't have your songs on it.

Not understanding the practicality

[UnknowingFool]

It's nice to want things, but to me, it didn't seem that the author understood why things are the way they are. A lot of the article seems to dispel how difficult changes could be technically or practically.

1. iTunes Subscription Service
...
Music companies love these rental services, because they continually receive money without actually letting anyone do much with the music they buy. Why shouldn't iTunes offer a similar service? Well, maybe it will. It would certainly be a less agonising use for the DRM Apple is stripping from its library of tracks.

Yes the media companies would love this, but there are far greater technical barriers to this than the current system. To do this, Apple would have to develop a different way of securing and authenticating the files. Roughlydrafted went into detail how FairPlay works [roughlydrafted.com] and why there is no subscription service. Besides technical reasons, Apple has always argued against it on principle as it was anti-consumer.

2) UK iTunes Movie Downloads
iTunes users in the US have had access to a mountain of downloadable TV shows and movies since 2005, but why hasn't the UK? It's no secret that British consumers pay through the nose for media, so why aren't we having our love of moving pictures exploited too?

The main reasons are purely legal which translate into technical reasons. They don't have permission from the content providers. Groups like MPAA has always tried to maintain strict control of all aspects of release from time and location. DVD, HD-DVD, and BlueRay all have region encoding for a reason. FairPlay would have to match that. Now Apple has to devise a way to separate out all users based on location at the file level so that certain movies do not play for the users until the local release date. That makes things a lot more complicated for FairPlay. So the easiest solution is to limit purchases only to American users.

3) Widescreen video iPod
With our imminent access to movie downloads, Apple TV's recent availability and the iPhone's widescreen video talents, surely the ultra-desirable widescreen iPod should be right around the corner? All that video content being pushed and pulled around is just crying out for a better portable medium to enjoy it on and Apple knows how much everyone wants just such a device.

The iPhone is Apple's first attempt at a widescreen. I would expect newer generations of iPods to do the same as Apple works out the kinks.

4) Wi-Fi enabled video iPod
Microsoft's Zune has Wi-Fi, but it's hopeless beyond hysterical. Give the iPod Wi-Fi capabilities, coupled with on-demand video and the phenomenally successful iTunes Store, and you'll find yourself with the most capable portable media device ever created.

I suspect the main reason why no company has done it before MS was that it wasn't practical. They could have released wifi iPod but there would be a drastic difference in transfer rates. You and I might understand that 802.11g takes 10x as long as FireWire or USB2.0, but the average consumer might not and would hate it. "It takes hours to transfer my small collection. This sucks!" 802.11n is on the horizon. When that is in place, you will probably see a wifi iPod.

5) Flash-based video iPod
We've previously discussed the possibility of an all-flash video iPod before, but no further rumours or leaks have arisen since. Flash memory is significantly faster than the good old hard disk, but at a significant cost increase. We think Apple is going to focus on video this year, and video requires vast quantities of storage more than it needs flash read speeds. We expect a larger-capacity iPod long before any kind of all-flash version. Which brings us neatly to...

Th

Re:

[MyGirlFriendsBroken]

The main reasons are purely legal which translate into technical reasons. They don't have permission from the content providers. Groups like MPAA has always tried to maintain strict control of all aspects of release from time and location. DVD, HD-DVD, and BlueRay all have region encoding for a reason. FairPlay would have to match that. Now Apple has to devise a way to separate out all users based on location at the file level so that certain movies do not play for the users until the local release date. That makes things a lot more complicated for FairPlay. So the easiest solution is to limit purchases only to American users.

This issue is already solved, it applies the same to audio. Firstly, iTMS downloads are tied to a user. Secondly, the user it tied to a location and therefore a store, I understand this is done using the billing details of your payment card. So to solve the time issue all Apple has to do is to just make sure they release content into each store at the right time, like I guess they must do with some of the music already.

But you are right, the reason this hasn't happened yet is legal and content rights, i

Re:

[gnasher719]

'' Yes the media companies would love this, but there are far greater technical barriers to this than the current system. To do this, Apple would have to develop a different way of securing and authenticating the files. Roughlydrafted went into detail how FairPlay works and why there is no subscription service. Besides technical reasons, Apple has always argued against it on principle as it was anti-consumer. ''

Well, roughlydrafted is (1) the ultimate Mac fanboy, and (2) not at all stupid and often has goo

Re:

[sl3xd]

Groups like MPAA has always tried to maintain strict control of all aspects of release from time and location. DVD, HD-DVD, and BlueRay all have region encoding for a reason.

You're almost right.

HD DVD does not have region encoding. This is actually one of the reason some studios chose to support Blu-ray exclusively -- the studio demands region encoding, and HD DVD doesn't allow it.

The lack of region encoding (and less restrictive DRM in general) is why I choose to vote with my wallet for HD DVD instead of

What I would love to see...

[bhunachchicken]

Just one thing and that is plugin support for extensions and add ons. It means that people could easily write things like cross faders, support for additional codecs, etc. There could be official unoffical community website for getting hold of these plugins, providing users with source code, etc. to minimise the chances of malicious code.

Of course, there are probably some major security risks around stuff like that... But it would still be cool.

Re:

[gig]

> Just one thing and that is plugin support for extensions and add ons. It means that people could easily write things like cross faders,
> support for additional codecs, etc.

This exists one level down from iTunes, in OS X.

You can add codecs through QuickTime. Once you add a codec to QuickTime it is available in all of your applications from both Apple and third-parties, both playback and authoring apps.

The plug-in format for audio processing is called "Audio Units" ... it is part of CoreAudio. OS X sh

Wi not Bluetooth?

[argent]

Why would they use the relatively high powered Wifi instead of the low power Bluetooth for this kind of short-range wireless?

Re:Why

[rabbit994]

For Majority of people who run Windows or Mac OS X, iPods are braindead to use. Plug into computer, let iTunes replicate all the playlist and music over along with any TV Shows you have downloaded. Unplug, walk around with those white headphones and look chill. Why would you find dragging and dropping from explorer easier? Something tells me Apple Engineering and Marketing Departments know their main audience better.

Re:Why

[Hijacked Public]

Why would you find dragging and dropping from explorer easier?

l33tn355. If iTunes had a verbose startup screen no one here would be complaining.

Re:

[nine-times]

Also, it really doesn't seem necessary to make the iPod file system so opaque. For all Apple's touted simplicity on the surface, what's with the underlying maze of randomly-named and randomly-placed folders and and media files? How does that make anything easier?

iPods didn't start out with the opaque file system. Originally, Apple made no attempt to prevent users from transferring songs back and forth between the iPod and your computer. Then the content owners (record labels) complained that the iPod enc

Re:

[alanoneil]

Actually, in order to optimise hard drive seek times on the iPod (seek time == battery wasted) it uses a highly efficient tree structure. The database in the iPod OS makes sure that when you choose a playlist, the iPod knows exactly which sectors to load into RAM, and therefore you increase battery life and decrease possible damage (iPod user jogging while listening == possible HD crash during heavy seek)

Re:

[MrMickS]

I just want it to show up as a thumb drive, drop songs on it from explorer, in any directories I choose, and have it play the music

That's fine for someone that's computer savvy and wants to spend the time doing that. There is a problem with that for the general population though. It requires you, the human, having to be trained to do something that the computer could do for you. If you want to do that fine, the majority of people just want to be able to stick XYZ bands songs onto the player and don't give

Re:

[CastrTroy]

The problem is that if you want to use anything but iTunes to load up your content, then it becomes very difficult. Especially when iTunes is such a terrible program. Here's a bug. Enable fast user switching on windows. Start up iTunes on one user, transfer some songs to one ipod, then exit it completely. Then start up iTunes on another user, using switch user, so the other user doesn't log out. Try transfering songs to the second users ipod. It doesn't work. You have to completely log out the other

Re:

[mrbooze]

Here's a bug. Enable fast user switching on windows

Wow. Windows *still* hasn't removed that bug?

Re:

[rabbit994]

Since on Windows, iTunes doesn't do the transfer as much as it communicates with low level service call "iPod Service" to facilitate the transfer. I imagine something in Fast User Switching is fouling up this service and iTunes communication with it. I agree that it should work properly but it won't. Still for 99% of people, iTunes is both easy to use, easy to maintain and syncs with iPod without issue.

Re:

[CastrTroy]

No it's iTunes. It says there's another using still using iTunes and to log them out before it will even mount the iPod under iTunes. Nothing to do with windows specifically, Althouh, Maybe I should just try restaring the iPod service, that might fix the problem, and would be a whole lot less useless than logging the other user out completely.

Re:

[ceoyoyo]

I used to have all my music nicely organized in directories (okay, it was a mess), and ditto with thousands of digital photos.

For a while I told iTunes to just link to the music. Then one day I just let it organize it all. MUCH nicer.

Same with the photos when I bought Aperture. Both programs give you the option to organize things yourself, but trying it both ways you quickly realize what a pain it is doing it by hand.

Re:Why

[pq]

I just want it to show up as a thumb drive, drop songs on it from explorer, in any directories I choose, and have it play the music. I don't understand why they have to make everything more complicated.

Well, good for you. There are a variety of other players out there, as you point out yourself, and you are welcome to them. Apple seems to be targeting the market segment that does want their music player to organize their music and keep track of things (import date, play counts, skip counts, last played, rating, etc) for them. Based on Apple's market share, compared to the rest of the market combined, it looks like they have a better idea of what will sell than you do. But feel free to vote with your wallet.

Re:Why

[igb]

The huge advantage that Apple's model has is building the metadata database on the source computer. In the Apple model, the on-device menu of music is built on a fast computer with oodles of RAM and a fast disk, from a database containing all the information. For iTunes users, when you import a track into iTunes, the metadata goes into iTunes as well. When you sync the music onto the iPod, the last move it to construct the byte-image of iTuneDB and copy that to the device. That contains all the metadata, so when the time comes to display menus and titles it's all in one place. If, like me, you have home-brew software based on gnuPOD, you can for entertainment create tracks which have one set of metadata in iTuneDB and another in the ID3 tags: the ID3 tags are completely ignored. My homebrew solution uses a MySQL database for the same purpose.

In the ``drag and drop'' model, the device has to build that database itself, presumably by reading the ID3 tags. That's a nightmare. To build it incrementally is incredibly hard. To build it from scratch every time involves reading the tags out of potentially tens of thousands of files, grinding it into a database of some sort and writing it to disk. On a ~100MHz low-power CPU with a small amount of RAM, out of either flash or a slow microdisk. That'll take forever. And the moment you say ``ah, but there's this application you can run on the host computer'' then you're back essentially with the iTunes model. And that's before we consider the living hell that is parsing ID3 tags consistently, writing to FAT32 filesystems safely and all the rest of the tasks an iPod doesn't have to do.

ian

Re:

[p0tat03]

Mod parent up. This is incredibly true and immediately visible on my Xbox 360. Sometimes I connect my iPod to it, and it takes *forever* for the device to reconstruct the library on the Xbox interface. The speediness and responsiveness of the iPod is at least partially due to the fact that the system has a highly device-optimized database that's guaranteed to be there.

Re:

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

"Apple seems to be targeting the market segment that does want their music player to organize their music and keep track of things (import date, play counts, skip counts, last played, rating, etc) for them."

That doesn't preclude his suggestion. Rhapsody/Sansa users have this functionality.

"Based on Apple's market share, compared to the rest of the market combined, it looks like they have a better idea of what will sell than you do."

Would I be invoking a variant of Godwin's Law if I pointed in Windows' gene

Re:Why

[pq]

Why does making it work with iTunes preclude it showing up as a storage volume?

It does not [apple.com]. Every ipod can be used in disk mode, should you so choose.

Re:

[Kjella]

"Why does making it work with iTunes preclude it showing up as a storage volume?"
It does not. Every ipod can be used in disk mode, should you so choose.

If you go to that page, the first thing it says is that it doesn't work with the iPod functionality at all. It's just a way to embed a thumbdrive/external HDD, but you can't actually use it for anything but dead storage.

Re:

[ceoyoyo]

It does show up as a storage volume. You can drop anything you want onto it. BUT, mp3s you drop on won't play, because they need their metadata added to the iPod's database. Why? So the iPod can do all its fast scrolling, instant on and organize by this or that or the other thing tricks. For me it's more than worth it.

Re:

[norminator]

Why does making it work with iTunes preclude it showing up as a storage volume?

It doesn't. You can have your iPod show up as a storage volume. That's an option. You still can't copy songs to it and have them play on the iPod, but you can get other files on and off the iPod, and you can copy your whole library back off of your iPod.

Some applications, like Floola [floola.com] let you copy songs and videos to and from your iPod without using iTunes (under Win/Mac/Linux), so you're really only tied into iTunes if y

Re:Why

[p0tat03]

That's something I never quite got, the iPod hate. A friend of mine recently introduced me to his Cowon D2, which is a very slick piece of hardware: 52h battery life on music, 10h on video, smaller than an iPod and has a touch screen to boot. Why wasn't I sold immediately?

Because it meant the endless tedium of synchronizing my music with the god-awful "drag into Explorer" (or in my case, "drag into Finder") interface. The whole explorer drag-drop thing was fine when our music players were

The D2 also promised great things like album covers and even lyrics (which actually is a sweet feature), but both of which required you to maintain your own music library with their proprietary software - a bit of an attempt at cloning iTunes, except the software wasn't nearly slick enough to take over as my primary media player app - which would mean I'd still have to maintain two parallel libraries.

I keep explaining this to people: the secret of iPod's success is not only its marketing, but that it rolls the entire experience together from end to end. You play your music, download your music, play your videos, download your videos all from the same spot. The software provides all the features you need - album covers for example, and it also syncs automatically with your portable player. Slick.

I enjoy the end-to-end experience so much that even a clearly superior piece of hardware like the Cowon D2 has not converted me.

Re:

[CastrTroy]

Where Apple fails though, is that once something in that chain breaks, the whole system breaks down. You can use Cowon's software, but you don't have to, and when you don't, you may lose a couple features, like album covers, but it you can still put music/videos on it. Have you ever tried tranfering music to your iPod without using iTunes?

Re:

[p0tat03]

Theoretically true, but when's the last time iTunes failed on you? For me, never. I see it like a manual/automatic shift thing. Some people prefer to drive stick, because it gives them more control. For some of these people they truly need/prefer this level of control, others are just flaunting their ability to drive stick (Slashdot demographic anyone?). Some of us prefer to drive auto, because our point is to get to the destination, and the whole bit about driving there is rather irrelevant to us.

Re:

[CastrTroy]

But to the person using itunes, it doesn't matter how the music shows up on the iPod. It doesn't need to be laid out in a bunch of randomly named directories, with randomly named files, and only play songs that are put in some database file. It doesn't need to be that way, because it's transparent to the end user. So why not make it easier for those of use who don't want to use iTunes? Because it has failed them.

Re:

[MrMickS]

Because for the vast majority of users iTunes works. Providing a single method of putting media onto the iPod reduces support costs. All that is needed is to make sure that iTunes can populate the iPod. If there is a problem its either with the iPod not reading the database file from iTunes, in which case reset it and reload, or there is a problem with iTunes.

If you go down the model of allowing drag/drop then the player has to do more work. That require additional software on the player to handle this. T

Re:Why

[ParadoxDruid]

Have you ever tried tranfering music to your iPod without using iTunes?

Yes, I have, in fact. I regularly transfer music to my iPod from Amarok [kde.org], and it works flawlessly. Next question!

Re:

[norminator]

There are other apps that can transfer music and video to the iPod. I like Floola [floola.com] which can run on Windows, Mac and Linux, and you can keep the binaries on the iPod itself in disk mode, so I can easily copy whatever I want to and from my iPod, from any computer. It will also update the podcasts on the iPod directly (as opposed to iTunes, which updates the podcasts in your library on the computer, then syncs with the iPod to update it).

Re:

[CastrTroy]

I tried floola. It takes at least half an hour to fill up my 512 MB Shuffle. Do other users experience similar problems, or is it just me?

Re:

[Maserati]

Sounds like you aren't using a USB 2.0 port. 8 mbit in contention with mouse and keyboard sounds about right for a half hour for 512MB. How do non-iPod USB drives perform on that port.

Re:

[CastrTroy]

Nope, iTunes has no problem using that same port which is USB 2.0. Neither does Amarok. It's real USB 2.0. I'm pretty sure it's a floola specific problem.

Speed improvements

[norminator]

On the main Floola page I linked to above, if you scroll down to the "Latest Changes" section, the first item is "huge copy speedup", so it sounds like they've fixed whatever was giving you grief in the latest version... hopefully.

Re:

[Echnin]

Why would you want do? I don't. 100 million other people don't want to either. 3 people on Slashdot do. Fine, they can buy a Cowon or Creative or whatever. Apple is doing something right at least.

That said, this article annoys me. I'm getting an 80 GB iPod next week (father making business trip to the US, and I'll use the chance to get him to pick up one for 2/3 of what it would cost me here...). Here's hoping the widescreen rumors are false. :P Don't care much about the wireless though - what's the use fo

Re:

[OldeTimeGeek]

Because for most people, its far easier for to use Music->Playlists->Classical or Music->Playlists->Baroque or Music->Artist->Bach rather than /Classical if they want to hear all of their songs (assuming all of their Classical music is stored there) and /Classical/Baroque when they want to listen to their Baroque collection (again, all of their Baroque music has to be in that directory for this to work) or /Classical/Baroque/Bach if they just want to listen to Bach. Since iTunes tracks loc

Re:

[kisrael]

Just got an 8 gig Nano.
I'm in the club, but if I'd rather user old fashioned headphones instead of the white buds, am I out of the club?

Re:

[MyGirlFriendsBroken]

am I out of the club?

No way, but you have just reduced your risk of getting mugged. Certainly in London nothing says I have a lot of expensive electronics which is easy to fence than those white buds. Admittedly though as the iPod becomes more prevalent I expect it is becoming less of an issue

Re:

[kisrael]

yeah I remember hearing that story a few years ago.

here in Boston the buds are pretty ubiquitous.

Re:

[cayenne8]

Go take a look at the Grado [gradolabs.com] website, and click on the headphone link at the top.

I got a pair of the SR 80's after doing some research.

MAN...these things sound good and are reasonable in price.

Re:

[Gilmoure]

But I'd prefer anything to those shitty-ass white buds.

Ah, that's where you're supposed to wear them.

Re:

[mobby_6kl]

Thank you. Your check is on its way.

Regards, Apple PR department.

Re:

[Afecks]

Someone hasn't tried Reason.

http://www.farsipraise.net/blog/uploaded_images/ga rageband-723027.jpg [farsipraise.net]

vs.

http://namm.harmony-central.com/Musikmesse02/Conte nt/Propellerhead/PR/Reason-2-front-large.jpg [harmony-central.com]

Even better, runs on both Windows and Mac.

Re:

[Moggyboy]

Actually I have tried Reason, and found it didn't have the synthesizer and using-keyboard-as-piano capabilities of Garageband - well at least the demo didn't. I found using Garageband just on a G4, I could make up a track in 30 minutes that would require me to use my guitars, basses and electronic drum kit when I was on my PC at home, and I haven't found another program for PC that has anywhere near that functionality.

But I respect your opinion anyway.

Re:

[shotgunsaint]

As I own and use both of these programs, I feel obliged to comment. Reason, while it is more powerful for the beat and loop creation part of music production, is not a one-stop shop for recording professionals. Adding any kind of live instrument is completely beyond Reason's capabilities. It is a midi sequencer, drum machine, and pseudo-synthesizer. That is all. Garageband is a great program for quickie recordings that sound decent when they're mixed. However, the software instruments included with t

Re:

[carpe_noctem]

Which product did they buy and rebrand?

I really hope you're not referring to logic, because that's a totally different animal...

Re:

[0100010001010011]

If BMW started releasing some cars in the $20,000 price range they could totally crush Toyota and GM.

Re:But who buys Apple computers ?

[DJCacophony]

Archos already has Wi-Fi enabled players [archos.com], Widescreen players [archos.com], 160GB HDD players [archos.com], Touchscreen players [archos.com], Camcorder players [archos.com], and all [archos.com] the accessories [archos.com] you can think of, including a DVR station, a helmet camcorder, and an FM radio.
They can play back MPEG-2, .PS, .VOB [shoparchos.com], H.264, and AAC [shoparchos.com].

Archos is the real mp3 player pioneer, they paved the way for large hard drive mp3 players with their Jukebox Multimedia. If you want any of the features mentioned in this article, you don't have to wait for the next iPod, because Archos has had them for a while now.

Re:

[The Great Pretender]

But Archos don't have 'status' appeal. Sad isn't it that conforming looks sell more. It's sort of the same feeling of despair for the population that I had when a friend, who's a clothing buyer for a main street store, pointed out that the store had the next two years of fashion trends already planned out, in general. Sheep

Re:

[gnasher719]

'' But Archos don't have 'status' appeal. Sad isn't it that conforming looks sell more. ''

I don't know if it has so much to do with "conforming". The new iPod Shuffle does just look quite nice, and so does the Nano, and the iPhone. The other music stuff from Apple looks acceptable, but there is a lot of stuff out there that I wouldn't want to be seen with. Just my opinion.

And yes, looks count. Buying an iPod because it says "iPod" on the package is stupid. Buying it because you like the way it works or bec

Re:

[minus_273]

archos does not have the slick UI and the easy sync. It also does not have a legal content source. Where are you going to get movies from? Not everyone has the time to rip and reencode a DVD.

Re:

[Guanine]

If they're such a pioneer, why does their product weight over 4.5 times what an iPod does? As has been said in previous comments ... size _does matter_ in portable devices.

Re:

[dfghjk]

You've apparently never owned a BMW.

Re:But who buys Apple computers ?

[644bd346996]

Not all that many people care about expandability. Only the hardcore gamers and geeks who buy the latest-and-greatest cpus and graphics chips really have a use for the kind of expandability that you seem to want.

Most people don't know how or don't feel secure swapping their own cpu or graphics card. Even for those who do, it is hard to justify taking out and throwing away a perfectly functional cpu just because it is too old. It doesn't make economic sense. Just like people who buy a new car every other year.

The current Macs all have room to expand the RAM, and they can be bought with hard drives that are large enough for any normal consumer. As for the optical drives, the burners in Macs can write to any format that will be mainstream for the next several years.

To put it simply: for the vast majority of the computer market, the benefits of having a small and quiet computer completely outweigh the downside of not being able to expand it with pcie cards or extra hard drives.

Re:

[mattatwork]

Because they're fscking expensive. If they'd release decent and expandable $500-$1000 machines, they could probably crush Microsoft in just a few years.

They wouldn't crush Microsoft...lowering the prices on their hardware would put pressure on other PC makers like Dell and Sony.... Microsoft just takes advantage of the monopoly they have over the PC market. MS is the only company that will licence to them and has the OS most people think they have to have to run a computer. A good part of MS's profit is almost guaranteed from the income from licencing XP, Vista or whatever version of Windows that is out. In the long run, selling sub-$1000 machines h