Slashdot Mirror


Windows Firmware Update 1.3 Added

TechnoPope writes "Apple has finally released the 1.3 Updater for older Windows iPods. It claims UI improvements and longer battery life, but the much desired and asked for on the fly playlist feature is absent. It should also be noted that there is a web petition asking for new firmware for the older generations of iPods." It's a shame that older iPod owners have to live with the functionality that was advertised to them when they bought it.

124 comments

  1. Haha by Wuffle · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Fat lot of use an online petition will do.

    Anyways, if the new features are so damn important to you buy a new iPod, quit whining.

    1. Re:Haha by TClevenger · · Score: 1

      Actually, I created a throwaway address specifically for use with an online petition. If you sign one, expect spam--lots of spam.

  2. How is this a shame? by EvlG · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Being an owner of 20GB touchpad iPod, I have been waiting for this update to come out for months, ever since it was announced as soon back in May. I want the battery life and sound improvements it promises.

    I don't expect Apple to give me more features for free. After all that is why they are selling the new product. I would have loved it, sure, but I don't fault them for it.

    To expect otherwise is unrealistic.

    1. Re:How is this a shame? by dhovis · · Score: 4, Insightful
      How is this a shame?

      Methinks Pudge was being sarcastic. Still, Apple continues the provide the advertised functionality (and more) for 1G and 2G iPods. The few added features in firmware 2.0 are all pretty minor anyway IMHO.

      --

      --
      The internet is the greatest source of biased information in the history of mankind.

  3. Hmm by CptChipJew · · Score: 5, Informative

    I don't recall Apple ever advertising on-the-fly playlists as a feature for the old iPod. They didn't even talk about it until the new iPod came out.

    The on-the-fly playlists and new games are features that are part of the new iPod only, and I'm pretty sure they'll never be added to the old iPod. That's just how it is.

    --
    Vonal Declosion
    1. Re:Hmm by WCityMike · · Score: 2, Informative

      I don't recall Apple ever advertising on-the-fly playlists as a feature for the old iPod. They didn't even talk about it until the new iPod came out.

      The on-the-fly playlists and new games are features that are part of the new iPod only, and I'm pretty sure they'll never be added to the old iPod. That's just how it is.


      That was his point. He was being sarcastic.

      *whooooooooooooooooooooooosh*

    2. Re:Hmm by WatertonMan · · Score: 2, Interesting
      The problem with that kind of sarcasm is that it overlooks all the many, many whiners who actually think that way.

      That's why I gave up on sarcasm on the net. Whenever you say something you think no one would take seriously you find people do. Then you find out that the reason they take you seriously is because there are people who actually believe such ridiculous nonsense. It's just that somehow I never meet them in regular life. Only on the net.

      I'm not sure what to make of this. It almost makes me think that sometimes there really is a significant number of net users who really do rarely go out, have friends, date, or otherwise experience "real life." They are so used to living with Mom who takes care of them (and may still be living with their parents) that they manage to retain these weird beliefs about how everyone owes them, along with the other odd concepts.

    3. Re:Hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I find it interesting that you make it sound like people who don't "get" sarcasm in writing are somehow defective or abnormal.

      Earth to WatertonMan: sarcasm is not an appropriate device for use in writing. In writing, sarcasm is a complete failure. It is no more appropriate to use sarcasm in writing than it is to attempt to describe a melody with words.

      People who attempt to use sarcasm in writing, this example very much included, are just too lazy to craft their message properly.

    4. Re:Hmm by addaon · · Score: 1

      I'm glad that you manage to find enjoyment in literature even without comprehension of written sarcasm.

      --

      I've had this sig for three days.
    5. Re:Hmm by Zifnab32 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I believe I detected a hint of written sarcasm in that statement, and I would have you know that I did not enjoy it in the least and find it entirely inappropriate.

    6. Re:Hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      And which example would that be, Earth?

    7. Re:Hmm by ChuyMatt · · Score: 1
      that is why you employ the use of "verbal meaning" tags. Many common ones are as such:

      /rant

      /sarcasm

      /troll and

      /im a normal /. user who has never read the articles before posing in my life. while the last one is not used as explicitly, it is easily inferred by accounting for their user no. and the amount of asinine content in their post.

    8. Re:Hmm by carpe_noctem · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's why I gave up on sarcasm on the net. Whenever you say something you think no one would take seriously you find people do.

      Are you being sarcastic here? I can't tell!

      --
      "Quoting famous computer scientists out of context is the root of all evil (or at least most of it) in programming." - K
  4. uhh... by asteinberg · · Score: 0, Redundant
    It's a shame that older iPod owners have to live with the functionality that was advertised to them when they bought it.

    Unless I'm misunderstanding something, shouldn't that be "without"?? Seems like a pretty ridiculous statement otherwise.

    --
    The first ever Ultimate Frisbee video game: here (now
    1. Re:uhh... by gsabin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ummm...no....I think it is called sarcasm...

    2. Re:uhh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, "with" is appropriate. It's a sarcastic dig at the "my purchase of a product with a clearly defined feature set entitles me to all improvements and enhancements future iterations bring to the product line in perpetuity till I die" crowd that most recently regained prominence when Apple made the mistake of not charging full price to update to OS X.1. Apparently buying an Apple product once makes Apple your vassal for all eternity.

    3. Re:uhh... by asteinberg · · Score: 1

      Whoops - serves me right for posting before noon. Guess I'm the dumb one here. Disregard the parent, please.

      --
      The first ever Ultimate Frisbee video game: here (now
  5. Its a shame, but... by NetCurl · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I really don't simpathize with the older iPod owners. It was the functionality offered at the time of purchase. If you are really itching for a the functionality, you have a couple options...

    1) When the new 30GB came out, I sold my 20GB touch-wheel for almost $225. That made the 30GB 'upgrade' almost nothing. A lot of people with pay $200 for a 20GB MP3 player that is still better than all the competition, and acts like a tiny Firewire disk.

    2) Complain, sign petitions, and try to get Apple to change policy.

    3) Be content in the fact that you still have a 20GB MP3 player that is really cool, and sounds good. It is still better than what the other companies are offering currently, and you'll get many more years of life from it.

    4) Shell out the cash and give the used 20GB iPod as a gift to a friend/relative.

    --

    It's only when we've lost everything, that we are free to do anything...

    1. Re:Its a shame, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      There's a version of Linux for the iPod. Perhaps some of the people signing the petitions should see if they can write their own firmware using the system. Then they'll not be dependent on Apple for new functionality...

    2. Re:Its a shame, but... by avalys · · Score: 4, Funny

      When the new 30GB came out, I sold my 20GB touch-wheel for almost $225.

      Hee hee hee...
      When the new 30GB came out, I sold my 10GB iPod for $250.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank.
    3. Re:Its a shame, but... by FattMattP · · Score: 1
      It is still better than what the other companies are offering currently, and you'll get many more years of life from it.
      That's your opinion. After using an iPod for the last six months I'm going back to a first-generation Nomad Jukebox which I had before getting an iPod. The iPod only has two advantages in my opinion; It's small and the firewire makes for faster transfers. I don't like the UI on the iPod as much as I like the Nomad's UI. Because of the scroll wheel, you can't operate the iPod without looking at it. It also reverts back to the "now playing" screen before I'm done doing other things. I've lost count of the times I've turned the volume up way too loud because I was fast-forwarding through a song but it thought I was idle too long and took me out of that mode.

      Don't get me wrong, it's a nice unit. But the issues that I listed above along with a lot of other nitpicks makes it not my idea of an ideal MP3 player.

      --
      Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
    4. Re:Its a shame, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, you must be like the first person in the world to switch FROM an iPod. I'll bet you're a real butt-licker.

    5. Re:Its a shame, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Wow, you're really insightful. I'll bet you're a real mature guy.

    6. Re:Its a shame, but... by capmilk · · Score: 1

      When the 60 GB iPod comes out, I will sell my 5 GB iPod for $350. ;)

    7. Re:Its a shame, but... by byolinux · · Score: 1

      60gb? Woah. Imagine a Beowulf Cluster of those... ;)

    8. Re:Its a shame, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oooh! A sarcastic star trek fan! You must get ALLLLL the ladies!

    9. Re:Its a shame, but... by rootofevil · · Score: 1

      thatd be a trick, selling it for more than you paid for it, years later.

      --
      turn up the jukebox and tell me a lie
  6. Reason... by Zifnab32 · · Score: 5, Informative
    The head of the iPod software group, I can't remember his name now though, gave a session at MacHack this year, and the subject of bringing the latest firmware enhancements to the older iPods was discussed.

    He basically said "no way."

    the reasons he gave for this were:
    1. Push new iPods - because Apple likes money.
    2. Reduce testing expenses - because every update needs to be tested on every version of the iPod, which would have added 5 models (including a silent rev of the original 5-gig) to the three they have to test now.
    3. Money from 2 better spent adding even more features to latest iPods.

    Oh, and the next iPod game is going to be Doom 3, with network games over BlueTooth.

    1. Re:Reason... by Zifnab32 · · Score: 1
      Aparently I use a Mackintosh computer...

      The correct link is MacHack

    2. Re:Reason... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So if I go out and by a G5 today, should I be upset if it won't run OS 10.3 when it is released?

      I understand that testing costs money. Why not charge for point releases? It works for most software on the market today (1.0 to 1.3 is free, 1.3 to 2.0 costs $20 or $30). Most of Apple's customers are not cheap (if they were they would all be using eMachines), but they understand the concept of a fair value. Locking me out of software improvements in hopes that I will replace my hardware is entirely assinine. Moreso when the hardware in question is less than a year old.

    3. Re:Reason... by localman · · Score: 1

      the reasons he gave for this were:
      1. Push new iPods - because Apple likes money.


      Oh well, I guess that's why Apple is always just struggling along. Unhappy customers are less likely to spend money. Make them euphoric about their purchases and they'll keep opening their wallet.

      I don't think Apple should update indefinitely, but if you give a customer a little more than they expected (at minimal expense to Apple) it builds trust -- something Apple sorely needs after a decade of floundering.

      It's just like dating: desperation is a turn off. You try to force them to play it your way and you won't get nearly as much action.

      Cheers.

    4. Re:Reason... by burns210 · · Score: 1

      "Oh, and the next iPod game is going to be Doom 3, with network games over BlueTooth."

      Yes, i know you are joking....

      Bluetooth, if correctly used, could be awesome for syncing with your mac/windows box or even better, stream music to 'local' ipods within range, similar to how iTunes lets you stream music to other users on the same network.

      And doom 3? no. but a first person shooter, like the orignal doom, wirrten the right way could be playable on the ipod. using the scroller to turn, and the 4 buttons for forward / back / shoot / change gun... again, bluetooth would allow for local lan games being played, highly bad ass.

      ofcourse battery life would be drained like mad, so a solution would be required. but never say never, apple is just crazy enough to try it.

    5. Re:Reason... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And who the hell says Apple is floundering? They're profitable with money in the bank. If that's floundering, I'll take it any day.

    6. Re:Reason... by Zifnab32 · · Score: 1

      The big problem with a FPS or anything fast on the iPod is the screen. The refresh rate is too low. It can't even keep up with breakout, it draws three balls on every pass.

    7. Re:Reason... by hondo77 · · Score: 1

      I don't think Apple should update indefinitely, but if you give a customer a little more than they expected (at minimal expense to Apple) it builds trust

      Be fair. On-the-fly playlists would be nice but it's hardly a must-have. Upgrading my old 5GB iPod to be able to play AAC files is a very big deal and I am thrilled that I can play them without buying a new player or paying for an update. It sounds like Apple is wisely allocating their resources. That's just good business. Floundering, indeed!

      --
      I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
    8. Re:Reason... by localman · · Score: 0

      They're floundering because their business is not making them any money. The "profit" you speak of is from interest on the "money in the bank". But their core of selling computers and software is losing money and has been for a while.

      That said, I expect this to turn around if they keep up the good work. But Apple should be a little less stiff about these things, IMO.

      Cheers

    9. Re:Reason... by drsmithy · · Score: 2, Informative
      Reduce testing expenses - because every update needs to be tested on every version of the iPod, which would have added 5 models (including a silent rev of the original 5-gig) to the three they have to test now.

      Microsoft manage to test Windows and various other applications with thousands of pieces of hardware and hundreds of combinations thereof. I find it mind boggling anyone would suggest Apple are incapable of efficiently testing a miniscule number of hardware platforms with software of very limited functionality.

      Reasons 1 and 3 are logical, if somewhat discourteous. Reason 2 is either brown-nosing or incompetence.

    10. Re:Reason... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On a crap scale from 1 to 10, with 10 being the crappiest, you are a 9.

    11. Re:Reason... by Zifnab32 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      He wasn't saying that it would be impossible to do, just that it saves them a large percentage on testing, and that that money is better spent on adding new features to the new iPods.

      Anyway, how many pieces of consumer electronics have as many features added to them as the iPod has? I bought my 2nd gen 10 gig as soon as it came out, since then I have had a clock, address book and a calendar added, along with the biggie, AAC support. How many other MP3 players have had as many software upgrades distributed by the manufacturer? My iPod now does far more than I was promised when I bought it, and I was more than happy to pay the price I did.

      Besides, shouldn't it be considered bad luck to complain that, while the value of an electronic product I purchased has actually INCREASED since I purchased it, it hasn't increased as far as I wanted it to?

    12. Re:Reason... by byolinux · · Score: 1

      Microsoft manage to test Windows and various other applications with thousands of pieces of hardware and hundreds of combinations thereof.

      Yeah, and look what a piece of crap Windows is...

    13. Re:Reason... by SandSpider · · Score: 2, Insightful
      No, in fact Reason #2 is the absolute best reason of the three. It takes a lot of money to test. Whereas Microsoft can, get this, sell new copies to windows on older machines, Apple cannot sell the ipod update for older ipods. In fact, they would have to spend the money testing in order to give the product away. This is the opposite of making money, and it doesn't make a lot of sense.


      Also, and I know I'm clearly in the minority here, but I don't believe that Windows is actually a rock solid OS that works solidly on every piece of hardware out there. Therefore, I believe that they are not spending as much money on testing as they otherwise might. They are certainly not testing to make Windows and the other applications as solid as the iPod is.


      I think it's more likely that you are with the majority of the software industry in thinking that shallow testing on a lot of devices is better than deep testing. Testing is expensive, and Apple wants to do it right. But there's no good reason to double the expense just to give away a free product.


      =Brian


      P.S. I was being sarcastic about me being in the minority believing that Windows is bug-ridden. You see, Microsoft is famous for buggy and security-hole ridden software, and my saying that I'm the only person who believes that is a bit of, as they say, a lie, in order to make a humorous point. I only mention because a lot of sarcasm has already been missed on this thread, and I feel that perhaps I should be clear about my feelings on the subject.

      --
      There is nothing so good that someone, somewhere, will not hate it.
    14. Re:Reason... by localman · · Score: 1

      Thank you!

    15. Re:Reason... by zpok · · Score: 1

      You are really confusing the issue here.
      The iPod is an appliance, you know, a machine that's supposed to work - always, not just when the planets are in alignment.
      Put plainly, the iPod is a toaster. It's supposed to make toast. Your computer is an artist. On good days it performs. We live with that.
      Making A Great Toaster(tm) is both simpler and harder to do.
      While it doesn't have to perform as many tasks as a computer, it needs to do what it can with ease and elegance, and especially, it needs to do it every god damn time you use it.
      And while the iPod is not cheap, it's situated in a much more competitive space, so the issue is not "is Apple capable of doing this", it's "is it the way to maximize profit and user satisfaction". I'll kill the suspense: It' is not.

      Cheers

      --
      I think, therefore I am...I think.
    16. Re:Reason... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh. My wife's primary email is at mac.com, but her mom still routinely sends to mack.com by mistake.

      Just thought I'd let you know that.

    17. Re:Reason... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot to say Cheers.

    18. Re:Reason... by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1
      Microsoft manage to test Windows and various other applications with thousands of pieces of hardware and hundreds of combinations thereof.

      Oh, so that's why it works so well! Oh wait, I forgot. No written sarcasm.

  7. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    please. This guy knows what he's talking about.

  8. You're misunderstanding something. by wirelessbuzzers · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's a sarcastic statement. The older iPod never had that feature and never advertised it, and now that it's in the newer ones, the owners of the older iPods are petitioning Apple to backport it.

    Apple doesn't have any real reason to do so. It'd be nice PR to add the feature, but not adding it is incentive to buy a new iPod. Although I don't own an iPod, I personally think they should add it for PR reasons (it makes the company look friendly, improves people's view of the quality of its products, etc). Who knows whether they will.

    That said, pudge is still being an asshole. When users request a new feature in a project, the developers should either reject it for a reason (even if that reason is "No, we want you to upgrade"), or put it on the to-do list. What they shouldn't do, and what bystanders especially shouldn't do, is sarcastically slag those users because they got what they paid for.

    --
    I hereby place the above post in the public domain.
    1. Re:You're misunderstanding something. by ealar+dlanvuli · · Score: 1

      What they shouldn't do, and what bystanders especially shouldn't do, is sarcastically slag those users because they got what they paid for.

      Wait, isn't that what we do to Windows users all day long?

      --
      I live in a giant bucket.
  9. almost nothing? by commodoresloat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The 30Gb iPod is $500. So youy're saying roughly $275 -- more than you got for your 20GB model -- is "almost nothing." Not to mention that the older 20GB model probably cost you around $500.

    And by the way I have the older 20GB model and I plan to keep it. We don't need no steenkin' on the fly playlists! Real men listen to all the songs on their iPod in alphabetical order without taking breaks!!

    1. Re:almost nothing? by FatRatBastard · · Score: 1

      Hell, I have the orig 5 and while the thought of playlists on the fly is nice, for the most part I just put my baby on random and let it go to town. The only thing I would fix if I could would be to have the non-rotating thumbwheel (since mine is getting a bit crusty from so much use), and no firmware update is going to fix that.

  10. We're too "upgrade happy" by chia_monkey · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Seriously, people seem to think upgrades should be free or available to anything and everything. It's almost reminding me of all the hubub about the other updates too. You get 300 new features and you're shocked you may have to pay for them?

    Back to the main point though...You buy a Maxima. It has it's list of features. Then the new one comes out with new features (better speakers? better seat adjustments? better cup holders?). We don't expect Nissan to say "bring your car in and we'll 'upgrade' to all the new features for free". You can buy the new Maxima. You can buy a better stereo and install it. You can be happy with the features that came with your car. Your 2001 Maxima is still better than the 2002 Sonatas that are out there.

    --

    "He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts...for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang
    1. Re:We're too "upgrade happy" by WCityMike · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Since the OS upgrade debate is being brought into this, let's just point out: many people aren't saying they want it free, they'd just appreciate a slight discount. Even a $30 upgrade discount'd bring the price down to $99, which is far more palatable ... especially for 10.3, which from all accounts and purposes isn't going to have half the improvements that 10.2 did over 10.1. Hell, even the dreaded M$ offers upgrade pricing for their OS. Surely it's in Apple's interests ...

    2. Re:We're too "upgrade happy" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're analogy is extremely poor. Imagine other people who bought your car 3 months later, with 'alloys', got a free upgrade which made their cars more reliable and faster for no cost. And you didn't. And they don't give you a reason.

      Companies will get away with what we let them. Shoddy service, deliberate 'running down' of products to push the new range.

      Products should be supported for their life, and certainly if you pay a premium, you deserve the best possible service.

    3. Re:We're too "upgrade happy" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You have a flaw in your analogy. I could buy a better stereo and install it in my car. That's true. I can't do anything similar for my iPod. I have to replace the entire thing to get new features. Apple is the only reasonable source for ipod software enhancements. If Apple was offering upgraded firmware to older iPod owners for $40 or something, then at least I'd have the option.

      Yeah, so I had to pay to upgrade from 10.1 to 10.2. If I was willing to spend money on the software, I could upgrade. With the iPod, I am willing to spend money on the software, but that's not good enough. I have to spend a whole lot more money on new hardware. I just got my iPod in December. I'm not about to go buy a completely new piece of hardware for a few more features.

      Honestly, I would just love to have solitaire on my iPod. They make cellphones now where you can upload new games to it, why can't I do with with my $400 iPod? There's no technical reason. i'm even willing to pay a reasonable amount of money for it. It's aggravating.

    4. Re:We're too "upgrade happy" by localman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We don't expect Nissan to say "bring your car in and we'll 'upgrade' to all the new features for free".

      No, but you'd expect it to be possible to pay a fair price for new speakers and install them. If the new features on the iPod were somehow beyond the abilities of the old machine nobody would feel slighted.

      If apple offered the new software for a fair price ($20?) most people would be fine with that. But as it is they are not providing the customers what they want at a price the customer accepts when it is obviously possible to do so.

      Their motivation is to try to get more money from the customers than they are willing to spend. Does Apple have the right to do this? Of course. But it's stupid of them.

      I would be glad to give them $20 for this, but instead I give them nothing. And if I had gotten the upgrade (for pay or free) I'd be unlikely to even consider another type of mp3 player in the future. As it is I will check my options, since I know that other companies give you goodies like firmware upgrades.

      Cheers.

    5. Re:We're too "upgrade happy" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "As it is I will check my options, since I know that other companies give you goodies like firmware upgrades." Good. Apple doesn't want free-loading butt chunks like you as customers anyway. "Yes ma'am, I came here the other day and had a Cheeseburger but now I see you've released the Double Cheeseburger so you owe me another patty THANKS."

    6. Re:We're too "upgrade happy" by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "You buy a Maxima. It has it's list of features. Then the new one comes out with new features (better speakers? better seat adjustments? better cup holders?). We don't expect Nissan to say "bring your car in and we'll 'upgrade' to all the new features for free". You can buy the new Maxima. You can buy a better stereo and install it. You can be happy with the features that came with your car. Your 2001 Maxima is still better than the 2002 Sonatas that are out there. "

      I am really sick of people using metaphors like this to explain something in the digital world. I don't mean to be down on your post here, I think you make a good point, and I agree with it. However, I have seen this type of reasoning used all the time.

      But man I'm just sick of the comparisons to 'real-world' business. The reason why people expect software stuff for free is:

      a.) Computer-related hardware, despite the cost, has a very limited lifetime. It's hard to spend $500 for something and feel the need to spend it again a year from now.

      b.) Computers run software. Want your computer to do something new? Use new software. You don't need to drill holes in your iPod to make it do new things.

      c.) If the core of the iPod is software, then why need to buy a new one a year from now just to get new features?

      I'll say again, I respect and agree with your point. But you (and everybody else who uses these lame metaphors) need to realize that the digital world is not the same as the physical world. The perceptions are always going to be different. Apple is probably doing the right thing, but they really need to do a better job of communicating that to their users.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    7. Re:We're too "upgrade happy" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Flawed by one simple fact - requesting on-the-fly playlists is a software addition, not a hardware one.

      Customers aren't asking for Apple to take their Ipods back and send them back brand new shiny ones, they're just requesting a software addition that I'm not entirely convinced would take much work adapting from the new firmwares.

      Course, you'll be happy to front the money when MS (or, insert obscure OS that you'll claim to use over MS) start charging for service packs. Right?

    8. Re:We're too "upgrade happy" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's called "planned obsolescence" and every company with half a brain does it. Companies always need to give customers a reason to buy again.

    9. Re:We're too "upgrade happy" by localman · · Score: 1

      This reply is not for the AC, but for anyone who might think he's got a valid point:

      In my post I indicated that I'd be happy to pay for the upgrade, if offered. So what you're really saying is "Apple doesn't need my money". That's a funny thing to claim a corporation doesn't need.

      I also said that if they offered the upgrade for free (like other mp3 makers have) that they'd increase customer satisfaction. Another thing Apple needs, as this usually leads to more money as well.

      And how could anyone who purchased an iPod six months ago (20GB, no less) be a "free-leading butt chunk" in Apple's eyes? Do you work for Apple? Is this how they percieve their customers?

      Cheers

  11. Re:Apple Section? by zpok · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Where should they put it? on the MS site? On the Rio site? Whether the owners like it or not, the iPod is an Apple product, and the manufacturer's site is the best place to post relevant info and updates me thinks.

    --
    I think, therefore I am...I think.
  12. Like the XBox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "It's a shame that XBox owners have to live with the functionality that was advertised to them when they bought it."

  13. Re:Apple assholes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They're happy to push a product at an inflated cost, then refuse to support it three months later, forcing an upgrade.

    Interesting. "Support" means "improve" now?

    I can't understand why they're selling iBooks for more than $1000 when in a few months Jaguar will make them useless for Apples internet apps

    That's okay. I can't understand that either.

    In other words... huh?

  14. Sensitivity Love Understanding Appreciation by kolombangara · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's all us Classic iPod'rs want. We at one time not so long ago had been wooed, courted, impressed, flirted, tickled, aroused by funny talking nerds on Quicktime ads, then #$&-BaBAAM! bitch-slapped and Koby'd in the rear.

    The cries you hear are only emotional outburst, not a demand for personal programmers on each of our iPods perpetually, really because, what part of the interface needs improvements? Not 1.3.
    1.3(not to be confused with 1.3) is fine. It is void of that commercial interface, thank goodness.

    The Classic iPod ruled the world. It was the darling of the rodeo. It had all that class. It was neat-0.

    Early 2003, the iPod was given plastic surgery, admittingly better than Christina Applegates, and shoved along into the big world, fending for itself, lacking the original charm. Now it's specifically designed to withdraw finances from the owners like a high maintenance fake boobied hustler.

    I'll take a Classic iPod anyday! Update all you want you wannabe New iPod'rs, you still lack the one single thing that matters, a sense of free love and happiness, that which sadly was used by it's pimps to beget this hideous PayTunes4 monster. Toil New iPod with your excessive wires, cables, games, address books, calendars, proprietary formats, Windows software and docking station assemblies, not to mention the pretentiousness that is overbearing, while riding on the laurels of the Classic.

    I'll keep my old Classic, you can continue updating your 'New' Apple mp3 Player with the latest "New and Improved" methodical software and watch your money slip away even faster than ever before; the money all goes to the largest demographic of longhaired dope fiends, queers & draft dodging musicians and entertainment executives.

    Long live the iPod Classic - King of ALL MP3 players, yes, it still reigns over Apples new model mp3 player.

    1. Re:Sensitivity Love Understanding Appreciation by johram · · Score: 1
      the money all goes to the largest demographic of longhaired dope fiends, queers & draft dodging musicians and entertainment executives.

      wow.. you must have really hated WWDC 2003.
      with the iChat AV video conference with France and Gore and all..
      nader was in there too!

      you think being an apple fan would say something about folks...then again wasn't Rush Limbaugh a mac fan??

      but at the end of the day your enthusiasm for the last generation has more to do with you not having the latest iPod and wanting to compensate and rationalize your jealousy.

      the new ipod: smaller, faster, brighter and classier too!
      --
      "Fighting for peace is like fucking for chastity."
    2. Re:Sensitivity Love Understanding Appreciation by valkraider · · Score: 1

      the new ipod: smaller, faster, brighter and classier too!

      and with less battery life to boot!

      Now I can store my entire music collection - but I have to go back to the computer every three hours anyway to recharge the dang thing.

    3. Re:Sensitivity Love Understanding Appreciation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      longhaired dope fiends, queers & draft dodging musicians and entertainment executives.

      As a gay republican I take offense being lumped together with the pot heads and draft dodgers.

    4. Re:Sensitivity Love Understanding Appreciation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ron?

  15. It depends if the iPod is a computer or not by amichalo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It all depends if the iPod is seen as a consumer elecronic device - a TV, home stereo, alarm clock - or a computer.

    This makes a big difference because a computer implies the ability to manage the software it runs, including the OS. If Apple decided panther would not be supported on my PowerBook G4 you better believe I would be livid - but that I don't have enough video ram to use Quartz Extream is a "sucks for me" situation. It doesn't cause an uproar becuase people are used to upgrading computer software until there are hardware limitations.

    But back to the iPod, it evokes an interesting issue. If the iPod was marketed as a device capable of firmware upgrades (that were expected to be released by the manufacturer, just as software is released) then it should live up to that promiss and support the upgrades. Of course they need not be free unless stipulated they would be.

    To conclude: If the iPod is a consumer electronic device, then quit the complaining and realize you enjoyed your iPod more an a year longer than those who just bought one. If it is a computer than it should be able to have software upgraded, fee determined by manufacturer, as long as the hardware is capable. That is the modem we IT people are used to. Don't screw it up.

    --
    I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
    1. Re:It depends if the iPod is a computer or not by shamino0 · · Score: 1
      It all depends if the iPod is seen as a consumer elecronic device - a TV, home stereo, alarm clock - or a computer.

      This is the big question, isn't it? Let's see if we can extrapolate from a few non-computer devices that I have had personal experience upgrading:

      My modem was purchased with the K56Flex protocol in it. Later on, I got a firmware upgrade to v.90 - which was promised when I originally bought the thing. But they're not offering me an upgrade to v.92 protocol. (Of course, ever since I got broadband, the modem isn't used anyway, so it's a moot point for me.)

      Another example: my gateway router. It comes with PPPoE protocol support. Some early models had bugs in the PPPoE stack. Firmware updates were released to fix it. But the first-generation models that didn't offer PPPoE at all didn't get updates to add the protocol.

      And yet another. I have a Kurzweil K2500 synthesizer. Kurzweil periodically releases system software updates. Mostly to fix bugs and stuff. A few years ago, one of their updates introduced a completely new feature - Hammond B3 emulation. To their credit, this feature was made available free of charge, which I did not expect. They did not, however make this feature available to users of the older K2000 models even though the K2000 chipset could probably have supported it with most of of the same functionality.

      Note that in all three cases a corporation released a firmware update that was applicable to some customers and not others. They made a product-level decision about how far they would extend support. Some customers are denied upgrades because their hardware can't handle it (e.g. a 33.6K modem user who wants an upgrade to 56K), some because the development effort would be substantial (e.g. Kurzweil not porting their B3 mode to the K2000), and some for purely business reasons (wanting to sell new units, testing effort, etc.)

      These kinds of decisions are made all the time. I apprecitate it when companies take the extra effort to give me features that they had no promised me, but I don't expect this, and I certainly don't expect it to be free.

    2. Re:It depends if the iPod is a computer or not by bonaldi · · Score: 1

      This is the big question, isn't it? Let's see if we can extrapolate from a few non-computer devices that I have had personal experience upgrading

      I've been livid about the upgrade ever since the first new iPods came out - I'm dying to get rating on the go, as I use my iPod to listen to review new CDs, and have to mark tracks so I can find them again later from the sea of sounds.

      But this is the first post in that whole time that has convinced me I'm wrong. The 10-year-old in me still sniffs that they could and should do it [1], but I appreciate this not-a-computer line. Nice one, shamino0

      [1] Like, it is such an incremental upgrade I don't see that anyone will buy a new iPod for it, and the fact that they didn't offer it to old users isn't great PR for first-timers choosing a new one.

  16. But the older iPods *did* get feature upgrades by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 3, Insightful

    When I got my 5GB iPod, it didn't have any contacts, a clock, calendars, iSync support, EQ support, sound check support, album shuffle, or a browse menu. I got all that (and probably more) and an update that improves my battery life for free.

    What's the bitchin' about again?

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    1. Re:But the older iPods *did* get feature upgrades by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about those of us who bought our iPods just before the new ones came out? Where are our toppings?

      You got all of those nice upgrades you list right after you bought yours. But if you hadn't? I am quite sure YOU would have bitched.

      For those of you who say we got what was advertised- we are not looking for a hardware upgrade. Just a little software. If this had been about your relatively new PowerMacs (my iPod is only 7 months old) not being able to run OS 10.2.6 when it is already running 10.2.3 then I am sure you would be whistling a different tune. Having to spend another $500 to pick up a few measly features (albeit quite nice features) is ridiculous.

    2. Re:But the older iPods *did* get feature upgrades by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's life, dumbass. Happens every time a new and improved product version is released by any company. Somebody always buys the old version the day before the new one comes out, and it's just tough. Deal with it or stick your face in a blender.

  17. iTunes Music Store is Comming? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Could this mean the iTunes Music Store for Windows is coming sooner rather then later?

    1.3 - Adds AAC support (a requirement to playback iTMS songs)

  18. Re:Apple assholes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think the poster meant that iBooks have a G3 and Apple's internet apps (esp. iChat) require G4 or greater to function completely.

  19. The petitioners are fucktards! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When I bought my first brand-new car nine years ago, they did not offer a moon roof option at the time that I bought it. Six months later, the 1994-and-a-half model did-- but nobody from GM ever came out to install my sunroof, those bastards!

    Last night, I was hungry, so I went to a restaurant. The meal made my hunger go away. This morning, I was hungry again, so I went back to the restaurant and asked them to once again make my hunger go away, for free. Can you believe they had the nerve to refuse?

    I look at that petition, and to me it says, "We, the undersigned, are whiny assholes."

    Here's an idea: SELL your old iPod on eBay, and put the proceeds towards a new iPod, you fucking retards. You were perfectly happy to plunk down money for your iPod however long ago, knowing and accepting its feature set-- Apple doesn't owe you shit.

  20. Re Panther runs on G3s by giaguara · · Score: 1

    As a small note to the first phrase, Panther does run on G3s. If you want more material about that, go to http://macintosh.fryke.com

    1. Re:Re Panther runs on G3s by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uhm, really?

      WTF are you smoking? Apple still sells iBook's with G3 processors, they're hardly going to abandon that right now are they?

    2. Re:Re Panther runs on G3s by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your an idiot.

  21. Re:Its not a shame by giaguara · · Score: 1

    I bought a 20 G ipod in January, and never bothered to sell it and buy the 30 G model.

    It does what it is supposed to do, and I don't see it lacking any features I'd want it to have in it (or which woudl be in the new models).

    I am still completely happy with it.

  22. Re:This is my last post on this topic. by hondo77 · · Score: 1

    MY point is that it is SHITTY that Apple has decided to intentionally ignore older iPods

    Jeebus, we're talking about on-the-fly playlists! Because you can't rank your Linkin Park songs as 5-stars with your iPod, Apple is suddenly shitty? Despite that fact that you can now play AAC files for a $0 upgrade. Yeah, life is pretty unfair...

    --
    I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
  23. Re:This is my last post on this topic. by Cinematique · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    And I assume you're cooler than I simply because you listen to RATT instead?

  24. Re:ipod problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't reply to trolls you fucking mactard

  25. Re:This is my last post on this topic. by MalleusEBHC · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I know why Apple is doing what they're doing... but this is like saying Panther will only run on G5s and up because they're too lazy to make it work with G4s and G3s.

    Actually, it is more like saying that Safari will only run on 10.2 and up. Safari and iPod firmware updates are both free pieces of software that Apple has provided, and they only run on certain generations of machines/operating systems.

    And before any of you tell me that Apple isn't obligated to make the older iPods work in any way, shape, or form different from the way they were originally advertised... why'd they add AAC support? To make $$, duh! And why aren't they adding the other new features? To entice people to upgrade! Stating the obvious, I know... but it really pisses me off that they'd shit on the pioneering owners just for the sake of planned obsolescence.

    Planned obsolence would be if the original iPods were made poorly with the plan of breaking down in the future in order to force an upgrade to a newer iPod. As an owner of the original 5 GB iPod, I must say that it is still running as good as ever. Apple didn't shit on me one bit. In fact, the firmware updates they've released have made it even more functional with a longer battery life.

    OH! But my iPod still plays MP3s just fine, you say. Quit playing devils advocate. MY point is that it is SHITTY that Apple has decided to intentionally ignore older iPods... not that I hate capitalism, or Apple trying to make money, or whatever else some of you people like to pull out of your ass for the sake of argument.

    So let me get this straight. I bought an iPod from Apple with certain features. After I bought it, Apple, under no obligation, provided me with new firmware that added more features to my iPod at no cost. Repeat this firmware upgrade process twice more. Now it is shitty that Apple has stopped providing me with more free features? Of course, I should go bitching about not getting new feature foo even though they gave me bar1, bar2, and bar3. I got hosed.

    Remember - the original iPod didn't have a clock, calendar, or a handful of other random crap, but Apple added it. Asking that they do so for other features shouldn't spark a flamewar.

    Asking that they do it shouldn't start a flamewar. However, calling Apple on the carpet and describing their actions as "shitty" should.

    Alas, this whole thing is trivial as there are much more important things to worry about in our world, but Apple really dropped the ball on this, IMHO. At the very least, Apple should open up the (old?) iPod API so people can do whatever the fuck they want with their own hardware.

    You can do whatever you want with your own hardware. You want Apple to freely give out trade secrets so that you don't have to do as much work to make your hardware do stuff it wasn't intended for.

    This issue really only seems to bother people with older ipods. Gee, I wonder why. Then, those that don't have older iPods are angry because they're tired of listening about the issue altogether...

    I own the original iPod, and this issue doesn't bother me at all. In fact, I am so satisfied with my iPod ownership experience that I plan on upgrading to a new 30 GB iPod when I get more money.

    What's keeping someone from hacking the new software into old iPods? Afterall, the Non-US volume limit was just hacked...

    What's keeping you from putting your code where your mouth is?

  26. Re:Apple assholes by ProfessionalCookie · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sorry this is offtopic but I just have to answer this troll...

    ...Jaguar, which only reasonably runs on a G4...

    I run Jaguar on my B&W G3 (a petite 400Mhz) and it runs great! It's particularly fast with Mail, Safari, iTunes and iTMS. The only thing I've upgraded is graphics card and only to a cheap Radeon 7500. Word on the street is that Panther is even quicker.

  27. Re:This is my last post on this topic. by Cinematique · · Score: 0, Troll

    At least you tried to enter in a coherent debate, so I'll bite on this one.

    Actually, it is more like saying that Safari will only run on 10.2 and up. Safari and iPod firmware updates are both free pieces of software that Apple has provided, and they only run on certain generations of machines/operating systems.


    At least your analogy wasn't flawed. Thanks for that.

    Planned obsolence would be if the original iPods were made poorly with the plan of breaking down in the future in order to force an upgrade to a newer iPod. As an owner of the original 5 GB iPod, I must say that it is still running as good as ever. Apple didn't shit on me one bit. In fact, the firmware updates they've released have made it even more functional with a longer battery life.

    Planned obsolescence can be due to the material and physical makeup of any given object, but also because of software. If Microsoft were to make a new version of Word that made files that only worked with other new versions of Word, that'd be planned software obsolescence. But that wasn't my point. What I meant was that Apple has shown that the older iPod doesn't matter to them anymore. So why can't they just open up the API for people to do what they want? Again, they added calendar features... a clock... both of which were hacked in by coders outside of Apple. I can't program, and if I could, I'd be tinkering with my Pod. So my message was more or less a cry for help.

    You can do whatever you want with your own hardware. You want Apple to freely give out trade secrets so that you don't have to do as much work to make your hardware do stuff it wasn't intended for.

    Wishful thinking, I know.. hence the whole hacking iPod thing I mentioned towards the end.

  28. Re:Apple assholes by Laplace · · Score: 1

    Whoops. I meant Panther. I guarantee that Panther will run like shit on G3 machines. Jaguar does run fine on my iBook.

    --
    The middle mind speaks!
  29. one more time by commodoresloat · · Score: 1
    Oh well, I guess that's why Apple is always just struggling along. Unhappy customers are less likely to spend money.

    Yeah, Apple is really beleaguered. They're dying I tell you!

  30. Re:Apple assholes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Odd statement... So far Panther DP1 feels faster on all my systems.

  31. Must be one of the few by noewun · · Score: 1

    who don't care if their 2G iPods can use On the Fly Playlists, or whatever. I don't even use playlists.

    --
    I am a believer of momentum and curves.
  32. Re:This is my last post on this topic. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, this is like saying: I bought 10.2, but now 10.3 has Expose, and I demand that Apple update Jaguar with Expose.

    These are new features, for a new iPod. Sorry, but this is the tech. industry, yes 6 months after you buy something, it WILL be obsolete. The iPod is no different. Apple updated some things, AAC, the organizer functions. I do not see any argument that hey must keep old iPod software up-to-date with new iPod features. It's also possible that old iPod hardware/software will not support new features.

    This is what you bought, these are the features that came with it. Hey, you even got AAC and some organizer stuff, cool. It puts you in no position to demand that the features from a new product be added to yours.

    Product updates require time and money. Instead of testing and tweaking software updates for old revisions of the iPod, Apple can be spending that developer time and money working on new features.

    If there are features advertised for the old iPod that were not delivered, then by all means, bitch whine and file a class action law suit to get what you want. But no one is going to take pity you because you have an iPod and god damn, it doesn't have on the fly playlists. Seriously, step out of the box you are living in, and realize that there are more important things to bitch about, than on the fly play lists, which IMO, YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO.

    Apple is not the super-good-ghandi-inspired-wonder-company. Take your head out of your ass and realize they've most likely spent more time on that old ipod than some other company like diamond. god damn.

  33. Re:This is my last post on this topic. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought you said that other post was going to be your last. Pretty SHITTY of you to go back on your word like that.

  34. Re:This is my last post on this topic. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yet another post after your "last" post on the subject, and you still have yet to make the case that we should actually be disappointed with Apple in any way. They gave owners of older iPods a crap-load of features that they never even promised, but just because they didn't add all the features that appear on the new iPod, you are trying to tell us we should call them "shitty." Please stop talking, as you are not making your case very well, and it does not appear that you are capable of ever doing so.

  35. Wishful thiniing by am46n · · Score: 2, Insightful

    1. Apple never promised "on the go" playlists for 2.0 iPods. To be honest they're not that great; there is only one "on the go" playlist, and it gets reset when you dock the pod.

    2. Apple couldn't provide the funcionality even if they wanted to. The OS development for the 2.0 iPods was contracted out. It'd make no business sense for Apple to contract out an update/rewrite. People forget that in a capitalist economy, the firm in the marketplace must make a profit to survive.

    The 2.0 iPod is a completely different piece of hardware, running a re-written OS that was developed in-house, and would not be compatible with the 2.0 hardware. Just because it looks similar and has the same generic name doesn't mean that the guts are the same.

  36. Re:This is my last post on this topic. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously, step out of the box you are living in, and realize that there are more important things to bitch about, than on the fly play lists...

    Didn't he cover that by saying: "Alas, this whole thing is trivial as there are much more important things to worry about in our world, but Apple really dropped the ball on this, IMHO. At the very least, Apple should open up the (old?) iPod API so people can do whatever the fuck they want with their own hardware."

    Did you forget how to read or something? You missed the point entirely. But good work there, Colombo.

  37. Re:Apple assholes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You obviously have no idea what you are talking about. Go back to your Wintel box and never use a Mac ever..... ever again...

  38. Re:This is my last post on this topic. by Cinematique · · Score: 0, Troll

    It's shitty that they didn't add some new stuff because they wanted to sell more new iPods, yes. Way to go pointing out the fact that I was moved by the response to my original post enough to make a few more. What an idiot I must be...

  39. Re:Apple assholes by ProfessionalCookie · · Score: 1

    Whoops. I meant Panther. I guarantee that Panther will run like shit on G3 machines. Jaguar does run fine on my iBook.

    I hate to bite twice but Panther is actually a bit snappier than Jaguar. Anything that supports Quartz Extreme (ie iBook with 16MB Graphic Card) runs absolutely wonderful.

    ....F9... F9.... F10....F10 ...... F11....F11 So much fun!!

  40. A prick who is just baiting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh soooo clver trying to bait responses...

    I guess you have tooooo much time on your hands, coming into discussions with you copy and paste snipit which you add to each story...

  41. Sorry...had to be done by trianglecat · · Score: 1

    I run Jaguar on my B&W G3 (a petite 400Mhz) and it runs great! It's particularly fast with Mail, Safari, iTunes and iTMS. The only thing I've upgraded is graphics card and only to a cheap Radeon 7500. Word on the street is that Panther is even quicker.

    Bah...you call that impressive?? We run the developers preview of panther on an Apple IIe, with a raid of floppy drives, as our primary webserver with a 2800 baud modem and it works just great. ;-)

  42. Panther runs just fine on my Late 2001 iBook... by Xenex · · Score: 1

    Your belief that Panther doesn't run on G3 systems is incorrect.

    Panther runs just fine on my Late 2001 iBook, and here's the screenshot to prove it.

    Perhaps you need a new source of Macintosh information...

    1. Re:Panther runs just fine on my Late 2001 iBook... by giaguara · · Score: 1

      i assume your comment was to the previous one, the one i commented (but your reply appeared on my post's reple)? i said it runs on g3s, and i have a mid 2002 ibook with the same configuration. also, uf you had a look on http://macnews.net.tc (r macintosh,fryke.com?) that i linked, you noticed fryke has made all his experiments on a late 2002 ibook. :)

  43. Apologies. by Xenex · · Score: 1
    [11:07:39] <fuzzie> uh
    [11:07:41] <fuzzie> Xenex
    [11:07:50] <fuzzie> "As a small note to the first phrase, Panther does run on G3s"
    Apologies for my mistake. For me, this has served as a harsh reminder to re-read things before going off on a tangent.

    At least I'm now prepared for the moment someone does claim that Panther will not operate on G3s, and I've added yet another screenshot to the pile...
  44. Re:This is my last post on this topic. by hondo77 · · Score: 1

    No, I'm cooler than you for lots of other reasons.

    P.S. Nobody listens to Ratt.

    --
    I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
  45. Re:Apple assholes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Panther runs great on my Dual USB iBook.

    The optimized PDF Viewer is amazingly fast!
    However, Mail.app behaves weirdly. Oh, and I don't get the cube spin effect when I do fast user switching.

  46. On the go playlist by sulli · · Score: 1

    Of course they didn't promise it, but it sure would be nice if they made it happen. I'm not planning to upgrade in any case, but I'd gladly pay $10 for this functionality. Any hackers want to try it?

    --

    sulli
    RTFJ.
  47. MOD THIS DOWN PLEASE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The "I'm with Stupid" crowd once again came out to play :-(

  48. Re:Its a shame, but...you're still redundant by ChuyMatt · · Score: 1

    i believe there are several hundred posts to this tune. It has been out for several months now and the firmware is rather solid on this little machine and being "dependent" on apple is not too bad. they try to keep up with problems as much as possible and do well at it. Yah, it is the stuff that was publicized, get over it. that is what you payed for and nothing more.

  49. Re:This is my last post on this topic. by DebianDog · · Score: 1

    I think it it funny you replied to your "last post" after saying it was your "last post"! hahaha

    >What an idiot I must be...

    You said it best!

  50. $69 iPod Apple Higher Ed Special by good+soldier+svejk · · Score: 1

    Apple is currently offering a $200 discount on iPods for educational users who buy a Powerbook or iBook ($300 if you get a qualifying printer). Through my edu vendor that meant a $1099 900MHZ/CD-RW iBook for my wife and a $69 iPod for me. Your pricing may vary.

    --
    It is cowardly, and a betrayal of whatever it means to be a Jew, to act as a white man

    -James Baldwin
  51. "It's a shame": but is it? by Zhe+Mappel · · Score: 1
    It's a shame that older iPod owners have to live with the functionality that was advertised to them when they bought it.

    LOL! As snitty irony goes, the Swedish Judges give that a 9.2

    Look, mod me down for dissenting, but it has to be said. The question is not, "Did you get what you paid for, and if you did, why are you spoiling my perfect Stepford Wife day with your complaints?" If it were, the answer, as the petitioners see it, would be a qualified "Well, sorta, but..."

    The real question is why one set of owners is being treated with such indifference in a field where features are commonly added after purchase.

    As a contented Apple owner, I'm disheartened by the level of shilling here when it brooks no complaint from other owners. Some view these threads as little more than an occasion to be self-appointed kapos for Apple, a mistaken strategy that brings us no closer to a solution while only increasing public dissatisfaction that hurts Apple in the long run.