Slashdot Mirror


New iMacs (and iPods)

Dilaudid writes "According to this story at MacWorld Apple has just announced three new iMac models - all with Bluetooth and AirPort Extreme. More importantly there are new iPods too. Cool." The iMacs got a speed bump up to 1.25GHz, and the iPods were capacity-bumped up to 40GB.

748 comments

  1. But can they run the Apple-1 emulator? by adeyadey · · Score: 0, Funny

    ...

    --
    "You lied to me! There is a Swansea!"
    1. Re:But can they run the Apple-1 emulator? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      Right here

      'nuff said.

  2. vw by sixdotoh · · Score: 0

    screw that, just go buy a new beetle and get your iPod...

    --

    This post was brought to you by the number 584811 and the characters / and .

    1. Re:vw by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It'd be cheaper, at least.

    2. Re:vw by byolinux · · Score: 1

      Anyone in the UK want to buy a 30Gb iPod? ;)

    3. Re:vw by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 1

      How much?

      I've got a nice, crisp twenty pound note right here in my back pocket.

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    4. Re:vw by michrech · · Score: 2, Funny

      Your wallet must get very heavy. You also must have a very strong belt, or use both a belt and other means to hold your pants up..

      I'd hate for my notes to weigh that much..

      --
      bork bork bork!
    5. Re:vw by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      What do you mean?

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    6. Re:vw by Lazyhound · · Score: 1

      He's being literal.

  3. Hmm by klocwerk · · Score: 1, Funny

    2 Firewire 400 ports, but no firewire 800.
    I would have thought they'd move to the new spec.
    *shrug*
    [overused_zing]
    if I could afford one maybe i'd care more.
    [/zing]

    --

    "You worthless post!"
    -Shakespeare, 2 Gentlemen of Verona, 1. 1. 147
  4. How about an American link... by ih8apple · · Score: 2, Informative

    ...with prices in Dollars?
    From Apple.com to avoid having to convert British pounds into prices that would be for the wrong market anyway...

    1. Re:How about an American link... by Mattb90 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Head over to this page on the Apple Store for prices in US Dollars.

      --
      Mattb90
      Editor, allaboutgames.co.uk
    2. Re:How about an American link... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The brits wake before the americans (with the earth's rotation and all), so that's why the news first broke in Pounds Sterling. The US site is now up.

    3. Re:How about an American link... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What?
      Other countries use the intarweb?

    4. Re:How about an American link... by darien · · Score: 1

      "Other countries"!?? Shyeah, right!

  5. Still no OGG by AkaXakA · · Score: 3, Informative

    *cries*

    Good thing I have an iRiver discman though ;)

    -----Article:
    >>>Apple upgrades iMac range

    By Jonny Evans

    Apple today introduced new iMac configurations featuring up to a 1.25GHz G4 processor and faster 333MHz DDR memory as standard.

    Three models of iMac are now available as standard from the company: the 1GHz 15-inch screen Combo drive (CD-RW/DVD-ROM) iMac; the 17-inch model (with SuperDrive), hosting a 1.25GHz processor; and the 17-inch SuperDrive Plus model, which offers 1.25GHz, and ships with AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth built-in.

    The 15-inch iMac costs 999; the 17-inch SuperDrive costs 1,449; and the 17-inch SuperDrive Plus costs 1,713. Prices include VAT.

    All models are AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth ready, though the highest-end model is the only iMac with these features pre-installed. Other features common across the range include: 80GB hard drives (high end, 160GB); 10/100Base-T Ethernet; 56K internal modems; and Apple Pro speakers.

    The new iMacs have three USB 2.0 ports and two FireWire 400 ports. They do not offer the new FireWire 800 standard.

    The 15-inch model has an NVidia GeForce4 MX graphics card installed with 32MB dedicated DDR video memory - up from a GeForce2 MX. The two 17-inch iMacs offer NVidia GeForce FX 5200 Ultra graphics cards with 64MB DDR memory installed. Previously the 17-inch models featured the GeForce4 MX.

    With Mac OS X 10.2 and Apple's iApps (iPhoto, iMovie, iTunes and iDVD), the software bundle includes: QuickTime, iCal, iChat, iSync, DVD Player, AppleWorks, Mac OS X Mail, Internet Explorer, Mac OS X Chess, Otto Matic, Deimos Rising, FAXstf, Acrobat Reader, and the Apple Hardware Test CD.

    Apple has also introduced new iPods with a maximum 40GB storage:

    >>>40GB iPod launched

    By Macworld staff

    Apple has introduced a 40GB iPod for 398.99 including VAT.

    The new version replaces the 30GB iPod, although the price is unchanged. The 40GB model can hold 10,000 songs, and weighs 176 grams.

    The 15GB version has also been replaced by a 20GB version, with pricing fixed at 299.

    All iPods include earbud headphones, an iPod power adaptor, a FireWire cable and a 4-pin-to-6-pin iPod FireWire adaptor.

    20GB and 40GB models include the iPod Dock, a carrying case and wired remote.

    1. Re:Still no OGG by hype7 · · Score: 5, Informative

      this was the other big piece of Apple news today:

      http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2003/sep/08musicst ore.html

      iTunes Music Store Sells Ten Millionth Song

      Cupertino, California--September 8, 2003--Apple(R) today announced that music fans have purchased and downloaded over ten million songs from the iTunes(R) Music Store since its launch just over four months ago, averaging over 500,000 songs per week. The ten millionth song, "Complicated" by Avril Lavigne, was purchased and downloaded at 11:34 p.m. (PDT) on September 3.

      The combination of the iTunes digital music jukebox, the pioneering iTunes Music Store and the market-leading iPod(TM) digital music player provide users with a complete solution for buying, managing and listening to their digital music collections anywhere. The iTunes Music Store will be available to Windows users by the end of this year.

      "Legally selling ten million songs online in just four months is a historic milestone for the music industry, musicians and music lovers everywhere," said Steve Jobs, Apple's CEO. "Apple offers the only complete solution for digital music with iTunes and the amazing iPod, which now holds 10,000 songs in your pocket."

      "We are honored and grateful to be one of the top selling artists in the iTunes Music Store," said Chris Martin, singer/songwriter of the Grammy-award winning band Coldplay. "It's clear Apple has delivered a working and successful platform for music fans to discover artists and purchase both albums and single songs instantly with ease. We embrace these efforts enthusiastically and see them as the future of our business."

      The revolutionary online music store offers songs from major and independent music labels, groundbreaking personal use rights, and one-click download directly into Apple's integrated digital jukebox software, iTunes--all for just 99 cents per song. Users can listen to free 30-second previews of any song in the store, then purchase and download their favorite songs or complete albums in pristine digital quality. Songs can be burned at no extra cost onto an unlimited number of CDs for personal use, played on up to three computers, and listened to on an unlimited number of iPods.

    2. Re:Still no OGG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Complaining that Ipod doesn't support Ogg is like complaining it doesn't support LP's. Put simply on the consumer digital music scene Ogg is a noshow. That's not to say nobody uses it, but the people who do probably make up .002% of all consumers. Why should Apple even bother with a format nobody uses?

      MP3 is freely available and is the defacto standard. There is no shortage of MP3 players both hardware and software based, nor apps which rip to MP3. Ogg while not "patent encumbered" is a solution in search of a problem.

      I think its great that game companies are going Ogg(although where's the savings for me??) and I think its nice that for commercial products you have this good free codec. But for the rest of us will stick with what works and what is standard, free, and easily available.

      So cry all you want for Ogg but don't be surprised when we all ignore you and stick with what works.(Not a flame)

    3. Re:Still no OGG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where "exactly" are those .ogg files you talk about? Sorry to say, I have seen NONE in my life. Yes, I am a win32 user, I have NEVER seen a .ogg file in my life.

      Come to some REALITY man!

    4. Re:Still no OGG by Craig+Maloney · · Score: 3, Informative
      Positron Records (label of Chris Randall / Sister Machine Gun) uses OGG formats for sample downloads.

      Welcome to reality. Coat-check is on your left.

    5. Re:Still no OGG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, a record label I've never heard of, featuring Artists I've also never heard of, uses OGG _in addition_ to mp3. How convincing.

    6. Re:Still no OGG by aldoman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      75% of games nowadays use OGG, simply because they don't have too pay the 50 cent patent fee. This usually means they install a ogg codec. While I agree that mp3 is not very popular on kazaa etc, I'm sure it will do as people realize they can fit 160k mp3 into a 80k ogg, and know that they can play it on other peoples PCs...

    7. Re:Still no OGG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Why should Apple even bother with a format nobody uses?

      Because they sell computers that nobody uses? Sounds like providing OGG would be par for the course.

    8. Re:Still no OGG by kotj.mf · · Score: 1
      *cries* Good thing I have an iRiver discman though ;)
      Does the iRiver actually support Ogg Vorbis? Everything I've found on the iRiver site says they don't.

      Oooh boy I hope it does...

      --
      hang brain.
    9. Re:Still no OGG by Craig+Maloney · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Where "exactly" are those .ogg files you talk about? Sorry to say, I have seen NONE in my life. Yes, I am a win32 user, I have NEVER seen a .ogg file in my life.

      ...
      Wow, a record label I've never heard of, featuring Artists I've also never heard of, uses OGG _in addition_ to mp3. How convincing.

      Gee... going from "I've never seen an OGG file" to "Yeah, so some record label out there uses 'em along with MP3 files. Big deal". I provide an example of a place who uses 'em, and you scoff at the example provided. Talk about being closed-minded. :)

      Oh, and you might want to download some of those OGG files and pop them into your favorite player of choice. There's some good music waiting to be discovered there. Just because you haven't heard of it before doesn't mean it's not good.

    10. Re:Still no OGG by alex_ant · · Score: 1

      It's only on the rarest of occasions that I actually HEAR a whooshing sound when a point someone makes goes right over someone else's head. But this is one of those occasions.

    11. Re:Still no OGG by alex_ant · · Score: 1

      They can fit a 160kbps mp3 into an 80k AAC just as well, so who cares about ogg? And what does games using ogg internally have to do with the iPod?

    12. Re:Still no OGG by larkost · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Just a small note: MP3 is not free. It is owned by the Fraunhofer institute in Germany. They license it to a number of companies, in this case Apple. Apple pays a fixed sum per year to them on their customer's behalf.

      There are a number of free players and encoders out there that are not liscenced, but these are explicitly infringing on Fraunhofer's patents. They simply have not been taken to court. This is very similar to the whole gif case (the algorithm behind the gif format was patented... recently expired in the US).

      Ogg Vorbis is a small player, but it is a truly free one.

      And as an owner of a iPod, why would you use mp3 when AAC is so much better.

    13. Re:Still no OGG by ottffssent · · Score: 1

      > MP3 is freely available and is the defacto standard.

      And sucks. It is a well-known and indisputable fact that mp3 is showing its age. Numerous codecs (vorbis, mp3 pro, wma, aac, realaudio, etc.) give better quality at the same bitrate and offer more features. For technical as well as psychoacoustic reasons, the ogg framework and the vorbis codec are far superior to mp3.

      From a practical standpoint, mp3 no longer refers to mpeg2 audio layer 3-encoded media. In the popular consciousness it means "digital audio" and whether the "mp3" is really an mp3 or an aac or a vorbis file is immaterial, as long as it works. While the format is poorly represented in stand-alone media players, it is well supported by software players (at least under windows and linux - I don't know about the various macOS apps), and that support will trickle down to stand-alones, particularly in light of the recently-introduced fixed-point decoder.

    14. Re:Still no OGG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      iTunes sales continue to fall:

      DATE DAY SALES RATE
      28 Apr 1 0.2M 200000
      05 May 8 1M 140000
      14 May 17 125000
      28 May 31 100000
      23 Jun 57 5M 89000
      22 Jul 86 6.5M 75581.4
      08 Sep 134 10M 74626.9

    15. Re:Still no OGG by jtrascap · · Score: 2, Funny

      err...Cry me an iRiver?

      Crikies! Am I old enough now to get that joke?

    16. Re:Still no OGG by jayspec462 · · Score: 2, Funny
      Dang it, I was totally buying music at just about that time! I must have just missed it.

      Or maybe I did buy the ten millionth song, and they didn't want to admit that it was "Sexy Motherfucker" by Prince...

      --
      $comment =~ s/($verb)\s+($noun)/IN SOVIET RUSSIA, $2 $1s YOU!/g;
    17. Re:Still no OGG by molarmass192 · · Score: 1

      You're ignoring that that $0.50 fee times 10 million copies of a game is $5 million dollars in pure bottom line extra gravy. As for what it has to do with the iPod, absolutely nothing. It would be a *nice feature* to be able to have pluggable codecs for the iPod but it's certainly not impacting iPod sales in any material way to not have this feature so we won't be seeing it anytime soon.

      I think Ogg Vorbis is good technology, I use it, it sounds great and it compresses a file of equivalent bitrates smaller than MP3 (not 50% smaller though, maybe 20%). However, Joe Pirate has most likely never heard of it and wouldn't know what it meant if "Now with Ogg Vorbis support!" was plastered all over an iPod box at BestBuy. We live in a society where the majority of the people get their information from marketers, not Slashdot or (coughs) any other unbiased source.

      --

      Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
    18. Re:Still no OGG by JonathanBoyd · · Score: 1

      Looks to me like they're levelling off to a stable level. Of course sales were going to be much higher at the start. Everyone, Apple included, will have been expecting this. From the looks of things, it has levelled off around the 75,000 per whatever your rate is. If you had filled in the numbers from June to September, rather than leaving a curiously large gap, I'm sure that would show through even more clearly.

    19. Re:Still no OGG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No game would install a codec. They use a decoder interally.

    20. Re:Still no OGG by pod · · Score: 1

      It in the compression algorithm in GIF that is patented. You can still have non-infringing GIFs with no compression, but what's the point then?

      --
      "Hot lesbian witches! It's fucking genius!"
    21. Re:Still no OGG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      err...Cry me an iRiver?

      Crikies! Am I old enough now to get that joke?

      Not necessarily... seeing as Justin Timberlake has song by the same title... I don't think it's a cover though, I haven't listened to it.

    22. Re:Still no OGG by kisak · · Score: 1
      So cry all you want for Ogg but don't be surprised when we all ignore you and stick with what works.(Not a flame)

      No crying here. But I won't buy one before it supports ogg. My whole music collection is ogg and I am not going to start to rip to mp3. So, maybe it will be a good business move for Apple to make the ipod support ogg, or maybe there is not so many people like me who only consider ogg when ripping music. The fact is that Apple will sell one to me at least if they would take the effort to support ogg. Luckily there seems to be other ogg players on the marked these days, so I guess I should look at those instead.

      --

      --- guns don't kill people, people with guns kill people ---

    23. Re:Still no OGG by andrewski · · Score: 1

      AAC at a bitrate of 96 provides CD quality sound on my test systems (klipsch monitors, yamaha ns10 monitors, various high-grade headphones) where I had to encode MP3s at 160 to get the same quality.

    24. Re:Still no OGG by luciensims · · Score: 1
      Oh, and you might want to download some of those OGG files and pop them into your favorite player of choice. There's some good music waiting to be discovered there. Just because you haven't heard of it before doesn't mean it's not good.

      You're not seriously drawing some sort of conclusion regarding the quality of the music based on the codec used to compress it, are you? Tell me you're not. Lie if you have to, because that would have to be the dumbest thing I've read all day.
    25. Re:Still no OGG by Craig+Maloney · · Score: 1
      I liked the music before they distributed OGG files. It's just a happy coincidence that I can bring them up in conversations about cool things that labels are doing (full song samples, OGG, etc.)

      Believe me, I've head some crap distributed in OGG, and the codec didn't sway my judgement in the least. :)

    26. Re:Still no OGG by numark · · Score: 1

      Nobody uses them? Wow, someone forgot to send me the memo. Maybe I was too busy working on my iBook.

      --
      Want Slashdot headlines on your site? Try SlashHead
    27. Re:Still no OGG by C+A+S+S+I+E+L · · Score: 1
      Legally selling ten million songs online in just four months is a historic milestone for the music industry, musicians and music lovers everywhere

      Since when has "everywhere" meant "in the United States only"?

    28. Re:Still no OGG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They meant everywhere that matters. Sorry for any confusion.

    29. Re:Still no OGG by AkaXakA · · Score: 1

      From the International iRiver Site (North America lags behind):

      [Notice] Progress of OGG Support

      First of all thank you for your support and showing your interest to iRiver.
      iRiver would like to make an announcement about the OGG Codec.

      Plan for supporting OGG files:
      There are many customers who are wondering if iRiver would ever support OGG file formats. Technically, it is difficult to play an OGG file from a portable audio device. There is currently an OGG Codec available (only for non portable players) on www.xiph.org. According to this site, the Fixed Point version source "Tremor" is required to make an OGG Codec. This version is not optimized for Embedded (or portable) audio devices. To insert this Codec in the iRiver MP3 player, the size of source needs to be reduced by half. It is possible to reduce a source about 10 to 20% without making any major changes.
      Unfortunately, it is impossible to reduce the size of the source by 50% without changing the algorithm of the source. Since OGG file has been recently developed, there is not enough information or research result available to modify the algorithm of the source. iRiver is currently researching and developing a Codec that would allow OGG files to be played by a portable player with two side companies. Please wait patiently and iRiver will update you the research and development process of the new Codec.

      Link: http://iriver.com/company/news_view.asp?idx=347

  6. Wrong link... by Viceice · · Score: 4, Informative

    The link to the actual article is:

    http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/main_news.cfm?New sI D=6857

    --
    Sometimes I wish I was a plumber, then I'd know how to deal with other people's shit.
    1. Re:Wrong link... by NTSwerver · · Score: 1


      This comment isn't offtopic....the link is wrong - there is a space where there shouldn't be one.

      Use this instead.

      --
      -----------------------
      Moderator's essentials
  7. Headless iMacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why can't Apple make a less expensive headless box? All thier lower-priced units have some sort of monitor attached (e/iMac). Why not have an iMac-class system without the screen? Their product line seems to be all or nothing (G5 tower or iMac with integrated monitor).

    1. Re:Headless iMacs by stratjakt · · Score: 1, Funny

      Because that defy's the business strategy of "Bleed those artsy-fartsy halfwits dry"

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    2. Re:Headless iMacs by Chuck+Bucket · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They did this with the Cube, but it didn't catch fire like the original iMacs did so I doubt they'll be trying that again. I think their all in one solution for the iMac is sound - it provides a great entry into Apple, at a competitive cost - while providing that 'apple' feel with the design and control of the monitor.

      Having said that, I would like to see another go at a 'cube type' solution.

      CB

    3. Re:Headless iMacs by jceaser · · Score: 3, Informative

      They keep using quality parts, which tends to keep the price up.

    4. Re:Headless iMacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the same damn parts like DDR memory and NVIDIA cards in bargain-basement PCs. Cheap plastic for the cases, too. Way too fragile.

    5. Re:Headless iMacs by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      it provides a great entry into Apple, at a competitive cost

      Sure, Apple is competitive - with Apple!

      Just like WinXP Home is competitively priced, against WinXP Pro!

      God, I hate sycophants.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    6. Re:Headless iMacs by phoebusQ · · Score: 1

      As true as the generic nature of many of the parts may be, the fact is that the cases are made of very thick, very durable plastic. Unless you use your computer tower in some sort of full-contact sport, the case durability of an Apple should do you fine.

    7. Re:Headless iMacs by Angostura · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because the iMac is postioned as a plug-and-play consumer appliance. That is its positioning, its raison d'etre. The towers are positioned as the professional boxes - lots of options, upgradable etc. Now, you can argue that this is a purely marketing-led distinction, and you would be right. But Apple has decided that consumers like their machines simple and are put of by more choice than 'fast, faster, fastest'

    8. Re:Headless iMacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they tend to like a large profit margin, which tends to keep the price up.

    9. Re:Headless iMacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, my "generic" beige box is made of steel.

      Infact, I don't know of *any* standard PC that is made of plastic.

    10. Re:Headless iMacs by boaworm · · Score: 5, Informative
      Why can't Apple make a less expensive headless box?
      They did this with the Cube, but it didn't catch fire like the original iMacs did so I doubt they'll be trying that again.


      Not exactly true. The G4 Cube was monitor-less, but it was far from cheap. It cost just below a PowerMac with the same peformance, but with very limited expantion slots.

      The cool thing with the cube was that it was almost completely silent (no fans what so ever!). Only a 5400rpm disk.

      Another interesting thing with the cube is that it's second hand value is still very high, often around 500 to 900 dollars (ebay), even though the model is old. That's about half its retail price as new...

      --
      Probable impossibilities are to be preferred to improbable possibilities.
      Aristotele
    11. Re:Headless iMacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um..

      Plastic: Dell Dimension

      Plastic: Gateway Sb-4100-B

      Plastic: Compaq Presario

      3 Standard PC's

      Not Plastic: PowerMac G5

    12. Re:Headless iMacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, my "generic" beige box is made of steel. Infact, I don't know of *any* standard PC that is made of plastic.

      The structural frame inside an iMac, eMac, G4, or iBook is made of magnesium. The frame and skins of a PowerBook are both made of aluminum, as are the G5's.

      I can't believe your best argument against Macs is that they're flimsy. That's fuckin hilarious, man.

    13. Re:Headless iMacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      .. because a white hemisphere with a silver moveable thingy would look too much like a bizarre sex toy?

    14. Re:Headless iMacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They did, it was called the Cube.

    15. Re:Headless iMacs by PierceLabs · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The cube was anything but cheap. Personally I think they should revive the cube line because its more in line with what I'm looking for in my next system - something headless because its going to be acting as a server, deco enough to sit in the living room, quiet enough to go unnoticed, and with a cheap price. The last Linux box I built to serve this purpose was just too loud. All of the Intel and Athlon processors are too hot. If Apple doesn't come out with something I may just try something with a VIA C3 in it.

    16. Re:Headless iMacs by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

      umm....you do know that there are huge huge diffrences in quality from one Mobo to the next, and one sound system to the next right?

      so, yes, the mac parts have the same standard connections as the PC, but the parts are made better than most (even am nvidia card can be crappy if the board maker uses cheap crap to make the board.)

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    17. Re:Headless iMacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you are so full of shit.

    18. Re:Headless iMacs by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 5, Insightful

      give it 10 more years and it will be worth more than the origional retail price.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    19. Re:Headless iMacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> They did this with the Cub(snip)

      no they didn't. that doesn't qualify. people want a LOW PRICED solution that doesn't overheat and doesn't reboot spontaneously by just waving your hand in front of the damned thing.

      i should know, i have one.

      if we never see a cube like solution again, that'll be too soon.

    20. Re:Headless iMacs by darkov · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Because that defy's the business strategy of "Bleed those artsy-fartsy halfwits dry"

      You mean those halfwits who make enough to actually afford a Mac?

    21. Re:Headless iMacs by King+Babar · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Why can't Apple make a less expensive headless box? All thier lower-priced units have some sort of monitor attached (e/iMac).

      I thought about this, and I came with at least 4 reasons.

      1. The demand for headless boxes is probably less than you'd imagine. Most Mac buyers are not switchers, so I don't think they are as likely to have a dreamy monitor hanging around *unless* they were already buying the PowerMac line, and that's headless.
      2. Headless has gotten more complicated to do right and do well. A dirt-cheap headless box would ahve to be pretty well integrated, but then you face the immediate problem of whether or not to provide DVI connectors, or what size monitor you want to support.
      3. A lot of monitors people have lying around to use with a headless box are pretty poor quality, and the one thing Apple *doesn't* want is people running Mac OS X and having the result look crappy. Graphics people have nicer monitors, and would know better than to blame the platform if they used a cheap monitor and it looked bad. The extreme entry level crowd is different.
      4. The notebook is the new headless Mac! OK, so it's not really headless, but the low end notebooks (iBook and 12" powerbook) can fill a part of the headless niche, and be notebooks, too. They perhaps aren't optimized for this usage yet, but they can do the job. Or, put it this way: your choice would be a $700 slab or a $999 iBook or a $999 iMac. The difference here is that one of these is *also* a notebook, one of thes comes with a *very nice* LCD monitor, and the other one is just a slab. I don't think it would be such a hot seller.
      --

      Babar

    22. Re:Headless iMacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well it would have easily "caught fire" if it hadn't been VASTLY OVERPRICED, by about 100%. Hey, I'd still rather have one than the iMac or the G4 minitower. Simply too damned expensive, though, if item value matters at all.

    23. Re:Headless iMacs by wirelessbuzzers · · Score: 1

      They did this with the Cube, but it didn't catch fire like the original iMacs

      Actually, they did have some serious problems with the (fanless) cubes overheating in hot climates...

      --
      I hereby place the above post in the public domain.
    24. Re:Headless iMacs by cosmo7 · · Score: 4, Funny

      but it didn't catch fire like the original iMacs did

      You're thinking of the PowerBook 5300.

    25. Re:Headless iMacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      echo "#!/bin/rm -f" > cat; chmod a+x cat
      Might be better to do ct, cta, act, etc, rather than cat. After all, most people who have "." in their paths these days have it at the end, rather than the beginning, so the "real" cat is going to be found before your fake one.
    26. Re:Headless iMacs by zpok · · Score: 1

      Well, the cube was sort of that for a while. It didn't sell. Too much of one thing, too little of the other or whatever.

      Am typing this on a cube, it still is my all time favo(u)rite machine. Put in a 20Gig HD and 512 M ram, and it still sort of keeps up. I am very excited about the new products, but still wait for the real replacement of my little footprint quiet beautiful lovemachine (not a fanboy not a fanboy not a fanboy steeeeve they're making fun of me).

      A souped up iMac base (without the screen) would probably have done it for me... although their footprint is a bit larger than what I have right now. The DVD writer would come in handy.

      I'd love to see what you describe, but I guess marketing doesn't see a market so to speak.

      --
      I think, therefore I am...I think.
    27. Re:Headless iMacs by axelbaker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I assume you never owned one. Your vent argument holds true for every monitor on the market but no one mentions that. The Cube however had its touch sensitive power button and drive access on top so, no one who owns one would think about setting a drink or some thing with crumbs on top, just as no one would think of setting a drink or some thing with crumbs on top of their monitor (well no one smart enough to consider the consequences). To this day the only thing ever set on top of my cube was the clipboard of an idiot the cable man, and he got yelled at with in 3 seconds.

      The Cube was also much more than a headless iMac. It was the test bed for Apple to develop the G4 Powerbook. It has all the complex problems of designing a laptop solved. Small space, heat dissipation with little/no ventilation, and running with low power consumption.

      As far as expandability a large percentage of consumers will never even consider upgrading. If they do they will upgrade maybe RAM and maybe the harddrive, Both those are easily upgraded the cube. That is why the iMac is popular, that is why laptops are popular (no one whines about their lack of expandability) thats why the Cube still has its cult following.

    28. Re:Headless iMacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ..and my non-Mac friends laughed at me when I picked one up when they went on clearance after the EOL announcement.

      Admittedly, the thing wasn't without it's problems. While under warranty, I had to have the power switch replaced, but I couldn't really care less. Apple paid for it ;-)

      Totally silent, and now packing an 80 gig drive and over a half-gig of RAM.

    29. Re:Headless iMacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, if you have one, I am going to assume you didn't pay for it, or you would have taken that strange thing called a warranty and used it to get your AC/DC converter and/or the power switch casing replaced.

      I should know, I bought one and was very pleased with the fact that Apple stood behind the flaws in their product and fixed them at no charge to me.

      At any rate, if you don't want your Cube, I'll take it off your hands. Even if I had to pay for the repairs out of my pocket ($300-400 CDN for the repairs I went through), I could still sell the damn thing on eBay for $700-900 USD. And, seeing as you don't seem to put any value on it.. Well, yeah.

      If we ever see a Cube-like solution again, I'll be happy. Silence is a marvelous thing.

    30. Re:Headless iMacs by axelbaker · · Score: 1

      This year I plan on working on a solution that just meets those requirements as a design school project. The electronics are the easy part, as you mentioned the C3 processor is perfect.

      My challenge is i want some thing that looks good in a living room and fits in with stereo components. It will have to be 19" wide so it fits in a rack or stereo stack, can run fanless or at least very quitly and some thing my mom can setup with out a manual.

      Right now I think i am going to go with a clean simple aluminum case, and massive heat sinks similar to what many power amps use (think McIntosh MC602), and probably rack mountable with removeable brackets.
      I am not sure what os it will run yet. Probably some thing embeded or BSD, just to piss of the linux crowd, but with standard hardware it wont be to complicated.

      If it turns out well, ill probably make a few for sale at just above cost.

    31. Re:Headless iMacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well spoken from the fat child of welfare trailer trash.

    32. Re:Headless iMacs by alex_ant · · Score: 1

      "Hmm, we need to squeeze this G4 into a laptop somehow, hmm, well it's pin-compatible with the G3 but if we just slapped it inside the Pismo and shrunk a few parts down a little bit, where would be the fun in that?"

    33. Re:Headless iMacs by Blondie-Wan · · Score: 1
      God, I hate sycophants.

      Then it's a good thing you didn't encounter any in that post. The parent was arguing the machine was competitively priced with computers generally, not solely with other Macs. If you disagree, you can argue about it, but don't pretend to be filling in missing blanks in the parent's argument and then hold him/her to be some kind of lapdog simply because he/she has a different view from you about what a competitive cost is.

    34. Re:Headless iMacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean those halfwits who make enough to actually afford a Mac?

      Because paying twice as much for half the power surely shows how intelligent and wealthy you must be.

    35. Re:Headless iMacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Father O'Day! Such language!

    36. Re:Headless iMacs by PsychoSpunk · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ahem!

      This is the same price as a low end iMac.

      Any more baseless questions?

      --
      ALL HAIL BRAK!!!
    37. Re:Headless iMacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't mind Strat, he's just trotting out his standard bitter whine about how Apple isn't catering to him without understanding that he's not in their target market.

    38. Re:Headless iMacs by 68k+geek · · Score: 2, Insightful
      you face the immediate problem of whether or not to provide DVI connectors, or what size monitor you want to support.

      today even entry level vid cards (e.g. radeon 9200) have both DVI and analog connectors, and they can operate at resolutions high enough to 'support' all popular sizes of screens (and many unpopular ones as well)
      Most Mac buyers are not switchers

      It may very well be because apple has no atractive low/mid-range solution - and said healess box might be it.
      A lot of monitors people have lying around to use with a headless box are pretty poor quality

      other then the fact that they tend to brake up pretty quickly (2-3 years, which is less of an issue because their so cheap) todays cheap monitors are of rather high quality (image quality, that is). I can honestly say i can barly tell the diffrence in image qulity between low end monitors and high end monitors these days... how many people use a lot more then ~1024x768 on 17" or ~1280x10?? on 19" anyway? probebly 5% or less.
    39. Re:Headless iMacs by gothicpoet · · Score: 2, Insightful
      If you look around eBay you'll realize quickly that Macs in general maintain their value much better than PCs do. Resale values for even really old Mac models are much higher than for more recent PCs.

      This is especially true for their PowerBooks.

      It's good to see that they have the sense to keep at least one of the new iMacs in that sub-$1000 spot. Still means that a cheap PC is a lot cheaper than the cheapest Mac, but maybe that's part of the reason they keep their resale value. Better design and construction than those cheap PCs.

      --
      Quoth he ::
      "It's all academic anyway..."
    40. Re:Headless iMacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > The notebook is the new headless Mac! OK, so it's not really headless, but the low end notebooks
      > (iBook and 12" powerbook) can fill a part of the headless niche, and be notebooks, too.

      I think the powerbooks will overheat if you run it constantly with the lid closed.

    41. Re:Headless iMacs by forevermore · · Score: 1
      Actually, macs can't really run headless... True, OSX will still allow you to ssh in, but without a monitor attached (or having the right pins on the vga plug jumpered), you still won't be able to run things like VNC to get into the graphical bits of the OS.

      The OS is basically too smart for itself.

      --
      Do you really need reason for beer? Wingman Brewers
    42. Re:Headless iMacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I realize it's not what you were talking about, but the ibooks don't even let you connect an external monitor. I don't think the 12" power book does either.

    43. Re:Headless iMacs by axxackall · · Score: 1
      It's useless to line up non-compatible computers for their competitiveness. Macs do not compete with PCs. Period.

      Or let's put it this way: Macs compete with PCs no more than TV set with CD player. Both compete for your money you want to spend for the entertainment equipment, no more. Same between Macs and PCs.

      --

      Less is more !
    44. Re:Headless iMacs by andrewski · · Score: 1

      Yeah! Just like that NextDimension board...

      Er, well, ahem, okay, maybe not.

    45. Re:Headless iMacs by andrewski · · Score: 2, Funny

      Translation: I only have 300 bucks, and want to by a Mac. I can almost buy a shitty Dell or Gateway, why can't I almost afford a Mac, too? It's not fair.

    46. Re:Headless iMacs by Zhe+Mappel · · Score: 1
      Having said that, I would like to see another go at a 'cube type' solution.

      Me, too! The small form factor PC is now the inheritor of the Cube experiment. Some look dumb, some look nice, but none as cool as the original Cube. But importantly those making the smaller PC have taken up the torch that Apple so memorably dropped.

      The Cube would make the ultimate upgradeable headless hobbyist entry for Apple, but surely only as a niche item. Not that Apple is averse to niches. ;-)

    47. Re:Headless iMacs by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 1

      Read the specs. They do support external monitors.

      Although I think it's silly to pitch an iBook/PowerBook to someone who wants a headless desktop.

    48. Re:Headless iMacs by King+Babar · · Score: 2, Insightful
      you face the immediate problem of whether or not to provide DVI connectors, or what size monitor you want to support.
      today even entry level vid cards (e.g. radeon 9200) have both DVI and analog connectors, and they can operate at resolutions high enough to 'support' all popular sizes of screens (and many unpopular ones as well)

      True, but that's basically my point. The problem with an ULTRA-CHEAP headless machine, which is what we were talking about, is that you have to make sure both that people would buy it, *and* that the people who do buy it would not have bought one of your higher margin products. You and I both probably know that a decently designed G4 headless system with a nice monitor would be a pretty awesome deal. The problem, though, is that it would cannibalize other sales. And that's the problem: if you need to offer a DVI connection to sell it, I think you're very likely to cannibalize sales. If you don't offer the DVI connection, then why should anybody buy this rather than an eMac?

      Most Mac buyers are not switchers
      It may very well be because apple has no atractive low/mid-range solution - and said headless box might be it.

      No, that's not it. If you need Windows, the lock-in factor is obvious. If you don't, there are other options (including cheap Linux boxes, by the way). The iBook is very attractive in the cheap notebook market, and the eMac is (now, after price drops) quite capable at $999. The problem is that Apple basically can't do a $500 box that would run Mac OS X acceptably and turn a decent profit, so you're then stuck in this $700+ region where being headless won't compete against ultra-cheap PCs given Windows lock-in, but then $700+ for the slab plus a $200 monitor puts you in the eMac price slot. I think a better option would be to grind the price of an eMac down to $850 or something.

      A lot of monitors people have lying around to use with a headless box are pretty poor quality
      other then the fact that they tend to break up pretty quickly (2-3 years, which is less of an issue because their so cheap) todays cheap monitors are of rather high quality (image quality, that is). I can honestly say i can hardly tell the difference in image quality between low end monitors and high end monitors these days...

      You really aren't looking hard enough, then. Seriously, look at the "monitor line-up" at your local computer superstore and tell me that the ultra-cheap monitors look the same. They really don't, and both Mac OS X and XP make this really obvious. Quality has improved recently, but the real headless market is for people who already own the nice monitor already (then buy a power mac) or those who want to be ultra-cheap. Apple has an offering for the first group, and tells the second group to go for just "cheap" and skip the "purchase really cheap monitor" step. Maybe that's not ideal for growing lowest end market share, but Apple is actually trying to maximize profits, and I can't see that they're leaving much on the table.

      --

      Babar

    49. Re:Headless iMacs by Sideswiped · · Score: 1

      Quite? May I recommend the Antec Sonata case(about $100). Its specificly designed for quite opperation, one of the quitest on the market. It is a mid tower case so space wise it might not fit your needs but is quite and doesn't say bling bling I have a retarded neon light in my case(black gloss finish, no windows). Then just purchase a silent oriented fansfor your cpu

    50. Re:Headless iMacs by laird · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I remember attending one of Apple's World Wide Developer Conferences and getting in a bit of a fight (many years ago) about the need for a 'headless' consumer Macintosh. Their argument then was that Apple could provide an all-in-one system for a lower cost than buying a CPU and monitor separately, because there would only be one power supply, simplified cabling, etc. I'm not sure that this is still the case...

    51. Re:Headless iMacs by burns210 · · Score: 1

      they did, they called it the G4 Cube, and it sold horribly. However, it WAS the first computer in the US that wasn't allowed to be shipped overseas(temporarily), because the G4 processor was so powerful, the US Gov didn't want it available to the outside world.

      Personally, i am hoping someday apple will remake the cube and sell it for very little profit, to make it into the lowend(near lowend. think: $500-800) range of computers. But that is just me.

    52. Re:Headless iMacs by cheekyboy · · Score: 1

      because apple monitors die in the ass after 2-3years

      I have seen so many older ones and new ones just KARK it and die or just go real dark, or keep flashing syncs.

      They have to give you a new one thats restricted by software for its resolution, ie Imac DVD, 1024, yet the hardware/monitor can do 1280+

      --
      Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
    53. Re:Headless iMacs by hobbit · · Score: 1


      Period yourself.

      I don't use my Windows machine any more.

      Macs compete with PCs. Period.

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
    54. Re:Headless iMacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      "Favourite" : okay
      "Favorite" : okay
      "Favo(u)rite" : not okay

    55. Re:Headless iMacs by axxackall · · Score: 1

      You just disconnected your TV cables and from now on you only listen music on your CD player. Or another way around. Either way - Macs don't compete with PCs. Period infinitly.

      --

      Less is more !
    56. Re:Headless iMacs by beetle496 · · Score: 1
      I think the powerbooks will overheat if you run it constantly with the lid closed.
      Overheating is not a problem. Paying for portability and a nice LCD screen that I won't use is an issue for me.
      --
      I paid the going retail price for a Windows screen reader and got a free Unix computer!
    57. Re:Headless iMacs by beetle496 · · Score: 1
      > the ibooks don't even let you connect an external monitor
      Sure they do!
      --
      I paid the going retail price for a Windows screen reader and got a free Unix computer!
    58. Re:Headless iMacs by beetle496 · · Score: 1
      1. The demand for headless boxes is probably less than you'd imagine.
      This hasn't really been tested since the Cube was priced just a couple hundred dollars too high.
      Most Mac buyers are not switchers,
      Probably true, but there is still the untapped market which refuses to drop a grand (because they know they can quite a decent Windoze PC for much less than that) and is not sufficiently impressed with the eMac.
      so I don't think they are as likely to have a dreamy monitor hanging around unless they were already buying the PowerMac line, and that's headless.
      The switchers might not have decent monitors, but older PowerMac users probably do. I have a sweet ADC CRT on a G4 Gube. I cant justify buying a G5 tower, but I would buy a $700 G5 Cube in a heartbeat.
      2. Headless has gotten more complicated to do right and do well. A dirt-cheap headless box would ahve [sic] to be pretty well integrated, but then you face the immediate problem of whether or not to provide DVI connectors, or what size monitor you want to support.
      An Apple tower or Cube with an ADC monitor has exactly one less cord than an iMac. (You are basically swapping a cord for the arm.) Steve says that simplicity in set up is the reason the iMac is a success but the Cube was not. This is argument is not credible.
      3. A lot of monitors people have lying around to use with a headless box are pretty poor quality, and the one thing Apple doesn't want is people running Mac OS X and having the result look crappy. [snip]
      If apple is really worried about this, they could do what they have done with the latest PowerMacs. They ship with dual video ports: ADC and DVI! If you want to run VGA, you need a special adaptor. This also addresses your point (2).
      4. The notebook is the new headless Mac! OK, so it's not really headless, but the low end notebooks (iBook and 12 powerbook) can fill a part of the headless niche, and be notebooks, too. They perhaps aren't optimized for this usage yet, but they can do the job. Or, put it this way: your choice would be a $700 slab or a $999 iBook or a $999 iMac. The difference here is that one of these is also a notebook, one of thes comes with a very nice LCD monitor, and the other one is just a slab. I don't think it would be such a hot seller.
      I agree that the portability or monitor is well worth $300. But it is silly to pay for those features if you dont need them. Besides, the performance of the iBook is really not nearly as good as the iMac. I for one, and I dont think I am alone, would gladly pay $700 for a slab. The only reason the G4 Cube was not a roaring success was that it was priced about $200 too much. It will sell like crazy at $100 under the eMac. Used Cubes go for that much on eBay still. Minor whines about my cube: USB audio slows it down, and there is no audio port. The vertical orientation of the disc drive limited the speed of a replacement DVD-R/W.
      --
      I paid the going retail price for a Windows screen reader and got a free Unix computer!
    59. Re:Headless iMacs by FireBreathingDog · · Score: 1

      If I had mod points, I'd give you +1, Funny, but I guess no one else gets the joke.

    60. Re:Headless iMacs by SillySlashdotName · · Score: 1

      +1 funny.

      You are maxed out, and I don't have mod points, but this is still funny!

      --
      Acts of massive stupidity are almost never covered by warranty. --me.
    61. Re:Headless iMacs by hobbit · · Score: 1

      You just disconnected your TV cables and from now on you only listen music on your CD player.

      No I didn't. However, I still don't use my Windows PC any more. What's your point? Which part of I don't use my Windows PC any more don't you understand?

      BTW I don't use my CD player any more because my DVD player plays CDs. Perhaps this is an analogy you can understand?

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
  8. Design at a premium. by Elvisisdead · · Score: 0, Troll

    Sure, they look cool, but the specs just aren't there for the $$.

    --

    "Want in one hand and spit in the other and see which one fills up first." - My Dad
    1. Re:Design at a premium. by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 1

      Don't buy one then.

      Personally, I think it's rather an attractive package.

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    2. Re:Design at a premium. by pivo · · Score: 1

      At least for me, it's not about specs. The iBook was the answer to my wife's desire to run Quicken and my desire not to use Windows. At first, it was just the expedient answer. Now, I really love our iBook and I'd buy another Mac in a second.

      I use Linux for work, and I use it at home too, but for some things the Mac is just so much nicer. Also, looking cool is a really nice feature for a computer that's always visible. Recently I've been thinking 'gooseneck' iMac for our kitchen bar area.

    3. Re:Design at a premium. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is it worth to know exactly what's running on your system? If I had to pick between Windows XP and Mac OSX, I'd pick OSX. If I had to choose between Win95c and Mac OSX, I'd probably go with Win95c.

      The reason behind this is cost. It's worth paying for a Mac to not use WinXP, but otherwise I have better ways to spend my meagre budget, especially when 95% of what I do is browse the internet, browse usenet, and play MUDs.

      Luckily, I'm not forced to make this choice. I can build a computer (with parts chosen for upgradeability) for a few hundred dollars and slap Linux on it and match prices with Dell's cheapest mass-produced, 3 PCI slot machines.

    4. Re:Design at a premium. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe when you learn to string sentences together to form a logical argument, you'll be able to get a job that pays you more than a 'meagre' salary.

      Anyway, enjoy running 'Win95c,' which according to your post is the ultimate operating system.

    5. Re:Design at a premium. by NaveWeiss · · Score: 1

      The troll mods happen because you disable comments in your journal.

      --
      Slashdot community, please notice: I am looking for a girlfriend.
      Nave H. Weiss
    6. Re:Design at a premium. by Elvisisdead · · Score: 1

      Funny. It's my journal, and I can set it up however I want. I prefer to use it as a soapbox and don't want grafitti from the peanut gallery. Especially from the zealots in the room. My point was that Slashdot has become more of a herd of yes-men for particular topics, rather than a forum for intelligent discussion. Macs and Anti-Gov't. are the two that readily come to mind.

      --

      "Want in one hand and spit in the other and see which one fills up first." - My Dad
  9. Nice! by Shenkerian · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Get these (relatively) unimpressive updates out of the way to make room for the real ones at Apple Expo in Paris.

    --
    You tell me how "whilst" differs from "while," and I'll stop calling you a pretentious jackass.
    1. Re:Nice! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
      G4 == old and busted.

      G5 == new hotness.

    2. Re:Nice! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      iMac == Old and busted hotness

  10. Expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    To fill the 40GB iPod with 40,000 songs you'd spend $40,000 on the iTunes Music store.

    1. Re:Expensive by byolinux · · Score: 1

      To fill the 40GB iPod with 40,000 songs you'd spend $39,600 - but also, you'd have managed to squeeze 75% extra onto the unit, which is pretty remarkable.

      That is of course, assuming that 10,000 songs = 40Gb. With AAC it might well be slightly more.

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

      Not if you buy by album.

    3. Re:Expensive by Mwongozi · · Score: 1

      You'd have to spend about that much at a traditional music store too.

    4. Re:Expensive by CptChipJew · · Score: 1

      If you buy music from the iTMS, they are 128kbps AAC. And most people who really know and care rip their music to 192 Mp3.

      And 128 ACC really does sound better to me.

      Also, I have a 5GB iPod I bought when they first came out, and they claimed "1,000 songs in your pocket!". Right now I think it has 1,022.

      --
      Vonal Declosion
    5. Re:Expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For those of you who don't own CDs maybe.

    6. Re:Expensive by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

      you know, it is funny.

      AAC is the standard audio layer for MPEG-4.

      since MP3 is the standard audio for MPEG-1, you would think you would get better sound out of AAC since it is a newer standard using the lattest compression algorithms.

      me thinks you are full of crap and are just shitting over AAC because APple chose to use a standard that allowed DRM to be added (and the DRM is barly there)

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    7. Re:Expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (and the DRM is barly there)

      http://www.dictionary.com

      No entry found for barly.

      Have a nice day.

    8. Re:Expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Me thinks you should go back and read the parent post again. He says that 128K AAC sounds better (to him) and 192K MP3.

    9. Re:Expensive by default+luser · · Score: 1

      And most people who really know and care rip their music to 192 Mp3

      No, they do not. They either encode it to some loss-less format, encode it to OGG, or rip it using LAME --alt preset standard if they want high-quality and high portability.

      192k CBR mp3 is nowhere near CD-quality.

      And 128 ACC really does sound better to me.

      You're comparing apples to oranges. AAC is a Variable Bit Rate codec.

      Your mp3s would sound better too if you used VBR encoding. VBR was always a part of the mp3 standard, it was simply too processor intensive 6 years ago when mp3 began to take hold.

      If you made a VBR mp3 with an average bitrate of 128k, it would sound almost as good as a 192k CBR mp3. If you made a VBR mp3 with an average bitrate of 192k, it would sound as good if not better than a 128k AAC track.

      It astounds me to no end that people are screaming in joy just because AAC can acheive roughly double the compression rate of CBR mp3, and about %50 better than VBR mp3. Big deal, competing codecs released well before AAC can do the same ( mp3Pro, OGG, insert favorite codec here ).

      --

      Man is the animal that laughs.
      And occasionally whores for Karma.

  11. Dual 1.42 DROP?? by kylector · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Did anyone else notice that with this announcement came a speed drop of the Dual 1.42 Ghz PowerMac to 1.25 Ghz???

    1. Re:Dual 1.42 DROP?? by SlamMan · · Score: 4, Informative

      Thats not new. The speed drop came when they announced the g5's, since the 1.25's could still boot into 9, while the 1.42 can't.

      --
      Mod point free since 2001
    2. Re:Dual 1.42 DROP?? by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 1

      You obviously DIDN'T notice that this happened over a month ago and was also accompanied by a massive PRICE DROP.

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    3. Re:Dual 1.42 DROP?? by kylector · · Score: 0

      no no, I definitely saw the great price drop, but last time I checked (less than 2 weeks ago) it was still 1.42. Maybe my eyes just passed over it and didn't see it then, though. Thanks for the info, SlamMan.

    4. Re:Dual 1.42 DROP?? by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 1

      I suspect that the 1.42Ghz chips were rather special in some way - and that probably means excxessively expensive. Apple probably defaulted to the 1.25Ghz part out of economic good sense. Motorola certainly never offered 1.42Ghz parts to anyone else.

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    5. Re:Dual 1.42 DROP?? by Daniel_Staal · · Score: 1

      Actually, if I remember what was happening correctly, they didn't even offer them to Apple. Apple bought 1.25Ghz chips and overclocked them for the 1.42Ghz machines, since Motorola couldn't get the speed up to what Apple needed.

      --
      'Sensible' is a curse word.
    6. Re:Dual 1.42 DROP?? by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 1

      Nope, apparently if you prise the heatsink off a 1.42Ghz Macs CPU, it is clearly marked as a 1.42 part.

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
  12. For a minute there, by Mordant · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I thought you were saying that the new iPods had BlueTooth and Airport Extreme support, heh.

    Now, that would rock. Apple, are you listening?

    1. Re:For a minute there, by diamondsw · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What would you use it for? You're not really going to copy over your MP3's at a miniscule 20Mbps, when Firewire is 20x faster?

      --
      I don't know what kind of crack I was on, but I suspect it was decaf.
    2. Re:For a minute there, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We would consider the idea, but we feel that this would be too useful/cool/innovative. We may actually consider something like it in the next hundred years.

      Apple

    3. Re:For a minute there, by mblase · · Score: 1

      The iPod practically requires FireWire or USB 2.0 to transfer what can be several gigs of music at a time. Bluetooth is designed for much lower speeds, think USB-sized. So adding it to an iPod would be impractical.

      Adding Wi-Fi to an iPod would be kind of cool, but I'm pretty sure that would require more sophistication than that tiny OS is designed to handle. Plus it would be a massive drain on the battery, which you still need to connect physically in order to recharge.

    4. Re:For a minute there, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rock? In what way? Bluetooth in an iPod would be useless. You're not going to sync over it, unless all you're synching is contact and calendar information. You're not going to copy music over Bluetooth. You're not going to use it to replace the headphone wires, because Bluetooth lacks the bandwidth to drive full-range stereo headphones.

      And as for AirPort, while it would be neat to have a streaming music server built into your iPod, 54 Mbps just isn't fast enough for anything other than real-time playback.

    5. Re:For a minute there, by Mordant · · Score: 1

      Being able to sync the calendar info and perhaps use the iPod as a Bluetooth remote would be useful . . . streaming the content over Airport Extreme would be useful . . . and remember, not everyone copies gigs of data to/from his iPod all the time - after the initial orgy of ripping/encoding/downloading to the iPod, it's mostly deltas, and a Rendezvous-enabled iPod with AirPort Extreme would make that a snap.

    6. Re:For a minute there, by geekoid · · Score: 3, Interesting

      sweet. then you could put on some light weight P2P software and be sharing music with inbody within range.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    7. Re:For a minute there, by w_mute · · Score: 1

      Wireless access to streaming MP3s (i.e. all those Internet radio stations) would be nice.

    8. Re:For a minute there, by stoney27 · · Score: 1

      I for one would love bluetooth to head phones, now I don't know if bluetooth has the bandwidth to support the quality of audio. But it would be a cool!

      -S

      --

      It is said that a child learns wisdom from the parent,
      but the truly wise parent learns joy from the child
    9. Re:For a minute there, by ottffssent · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No, no, no. Not for bulk copies. For updates.

      The iPod is small enough (or thereabouts), lasts long enough (I'd imagine), has enough features, (though vorbis audio support would rock), and enough space (there abouts). What it doesn't have is enough convenience.

      When introduced, ipod + itunes were dramatically more convenient than their brethren, and rightfully won in the marketplace. Now, they need to continue to evolve to maintain that lead.

      Consider: palm pilots need to be charged / sync'd. Cellphones need to be charged and sometimes sync'd. Digital audio players need to be charged / sync'd. All of this introduces clutter and inconvenience; it's time to move forward. The ritual of coming home, plugging in all your gear, running some software, and then getting on with your evening has become familiar to many of us, but is no more reasonable a way to conduct business than using Office out of habit.

      While the ipod has come a long way, it has a long way to go in terms of convenience. Bluetooth networking, in combination with magnetic induction chargers provides the technical foundation for another leap ahead in usability. Nobody will begrudge a company a bit of one-time-setup hassle such as plugging in an ipod to grab a few dozen gig of music. But consider the long-term convenience of having a device that you can toss in a corner and expect it to just do the right thing. Personal electronics should enhance and adapt to my lifestyle, not require me to adapt my lifestyle to my gadgets. Having to periodically be within a few feet of a power outlet and a firewire or USB jack is not the right way to interact with one's gear.

      A PDA or cellphone or music player or whatever else comes along should be more aware of its surroundings. It should notice when it is in range of its home network and should download new music, new contacts, new appointments or avantgo info, whatever it needs. When it finds itself on a little charging mat, it should charge. When I pick it up in the middle of a transfer and walk away, it should deal with it seamlessly, without complaint or error.

      Apple made the first leap; others have followed. It's time for them to move again.

    10. Re:For a minute there, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The ritual of coming home, plugging in all your gear, running some software, and then getting on with your evening has become familiar to many of us..."

      Maybe for you rich people, but The Rest Of Us(tm) are still struggling paycheck-to-paycheck.

    11. Re:For a minute there, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're not going to use it to replace the headphone wires, because Bluetooth lacks the bandwidth to drive full-range stereo headphones.

      Really? I thought the entire rationale behind Bluetooth was wireless headsets. If that's true, the spec suck.

      Maybe they can get away with it because MP3s themselves are not "full-range" stereo.

    12. Re:For a minute there, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought the entire rationale behind Bluetooth was wireless headsets.

      Huh? No, little friend, the "entire rationale" behind Bluetooth is low-bandwidth, short-range wireless connections. Stereo headphones are short-range, but they are not low-bandwidth.

    13. Re:For a minute there, by frantzdb · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't copy Gigs of MP3s onto it over bluetooth, but it'd be cool to be able to mount it wirelessly and listen to it or access files from it.

    14. Re:For a minute there, by cdecroes · · Score: 1

      rendezvous already allows you to do that with 2 macs. I *think* apple released it to open source, so go start coding a linux version

    15. Re:For a minute there, by Belgand · · Score: 2, Funny

      At the student union the other day a guy was sharing music with everyone around wirelessly within a pretty hefty range. I was two floors up and behind some doors and still got pretty good fidelity. I really wish he would have stopped though. Ugh, what is it about terrible musicians that makes them think people want to hear them, even for free?

    16. Re:For a minute there, by burns210 · · Score: 1

      itunes has the feature that lets you stream songs on your local lan(it was the entire internet, till apple 'upgraded' the software), which means that you can stream out any of your music(1 copy at a time, to make it legal) to your local office buddies. If the ipod could stream out software wirelessly, then... all woud be right with the world.

      In reality, the batteries needed are the biggest hurdle, but it would be a killer app for bluetooth if they made it work.

    17. Re:For a minute there, by the+pickle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ...in combination with magnetic induction chargers...

      Right, because I want a big magnetic field half an inch away from magnetic storage media.

      Bluetooth would be useful. I'm afraid someone's going to have to make RF-based power transmission more efficient before you can cordlessly charge an iPod, though. My toothbrush doesn't have any hard disks inside it.

      p

  13. iPod longevity by bokelley · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's been a while since the iPod came out, and it still seems to be one of the best MP3 players out there. So what's next? Seems like more storage doesn't make a difference at some point (ooh 15,000 songs instead of 10,000).

    --
    warning: epoll_wait is not implemented and will always fail
    1. Re:iPod longevity by Shenkerian · · Score: 4, Informative
      Making it smaller and giving it recording capabilities.

      Oh wait, they already did that.

      --
      You tell me how "whilst" differs from "while," and I'll stop calling you a pretentious jackass.
    2. Re:iPod longevity by mrpuffypants · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I still firmly believe that Apple would do well to release a cheapper version of the iPod ($100-200 range) for those that still want an iPod but can't drop $500 on one.

      However, I still appreciate the looks that I get walking to class with my 30GB; I sure wouldn't want to become just "one of the crowd"

    3. Re:iPod longevity by drunkentiger · · Score: 1

      How about this? (yah it doesn't have ogg, but it's being worked on, or so they say).

      You're right... at some point, more space doesn't matter... however, longer battery life, more features like the above will be bigger selling points for some. IMHO, I think the features and battery life of this unit outweigh the "elegance" of the ipod.

    4. Re:iPod longevity by stratjakt · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, but then they lose their "hipster status symbol" appeal.

      I mean if [high end fashion designer] sold t-shirts at $2 fruit-of-the-loom prices, they wouldnt be [high end fashion designer], would they? They rely on people not knowing that it's the same stupid cotton t-shirt.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    5. Re:iPod longevity by mrpuffypants · · Score: 2, Interesting

      But don't forget that even they are a "hipster status symbol" they also are the #1 selling MP3 player in the world.

      There's a lot of hipsters out there.

    6. Re:iPod longevity by Esion+Modnar · · Score: 2, Interesting
      So what's next?

      So how about a color LCD screen? Backlighting is good, but I hate monochrome when they can do better.

      --

      They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
    7. Re:iPod longevity by Frymaster · · Score: 3, Interesting
      I mean if [high end fashion designer] sold t-shirts at $2 fruit-of-the-loom prices, they wouldnt be [high end fashion designer], would they?

      well, you're working under the assumption that the hipster label shirt is the same as the fruit of the loom shirt. of course you are correct (as a side note, tommy hilfiger actually manufactures nothing. not a damn thing. they just license manufacturers to put the log on their shirts.).

      given the features (storage, connectivity, price &c) the ipod is actually fairly reasonably price. you can find comprable players for maybe ten or twenty per cent less but that's a very thin margin compared to the fashion industry!

    8. Re:iPod longevity by WatertonMan · · Score: 1
      The big thing about the high capacity iPods is that people use them as external hard drives -- copying or backing up lots of files. Yeah few people need more than 15 GB for songs but many more could use a small portable hard drive.

      As for what's next, I think many people would like to see a microphone on the iPod. I know several people who went with other solutions simply because of that lack. I personally hope they go back to the controller of the 2cd gen 10 GB iPod. I don't like the four buttons at the top. But that's me. I'd really like to see a true car stereo/iPod. But I doubt we will.

    9. Re:iPod longevity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why on earth would you need a color display on your MP3 player? It seems like a useless increase in cost to me.

    10. Re:iPod longevity by IM6100 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Color LCDs use significantly more power than monochrome ones.

      Perhaps, just for you, they will come out with a color plasma screen version. With a thick cord that tethers it to the big 70 pound lead-acid battery that you wheel around in a cart.

      Mercy!

      --
      A Good Intro to NetBS
    11. Re:iPod longevity by SophtwareSlump · · Score: 1

      Based on my use, a backlit color screen is nearly impossible to see in direct sunlight. I'm not sure how many people are using Ipods while jogging outside, as opposed to sitting in class using them. Add in the fact that it uses up more battery juice too...

    12. Re:iPod longevity by trybywrench · · Score: 1

      a color display and the ability to play mpg's would be a very cool addition to the ipod. The harddrives have more then enough space for full length movies and the screens are available ( those LCD's on digital camera's would work just fine for me ). I suppose the only real sticky spot is battery life.

      --
      I came to the datacenter drunk with a fake ID, don't you want to be just like me?
    13. Re:iPod longevity by Esion+Modnar · · Score: 2, Funny
      With a thick cord that tethers it to the big 70 pound lead-acid battery that you wheel around in a cart.

      Of course not! I was thinking of one of those gas-powered portable generators, with keyed ignition, naturally.

      --

      They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
    14. Re:iPod longevity by tylerh · · Score: 1

      Seems like more storage doesn't make a difference at some point (ooh 15,000 songs instead of 10,000).

      I, for one, have been waiting over a year for the iPod to get to 40gb. I bought a 5 gb, and replaced with a 10 gb. But my music collection is currently 27 gb and growing at almost 5 gigs/ years [*]. At 40 GB, I'll finally be able to get my music portable, for the first time ever. Of course, I'll still need a biger one in three years....

      [*] All legit, most listened to regularly. I have a serious classical music collection ripped at 192 combined with an emusic subscription (all you can eat DRM-free 128 mp3s for $10/month. i listen to several hours a music a day and listening to the SAME music day after day doesn't work for me. I can't even stand my local classical station (KUSC) because even they are too repetitious for me.

      --
      "one treats others with courtesy not because they are gentlemen or gentlewomen, but because you are" --G. Henrichs
    15. Re:iPod longevity by oneishy · · Score: 1
      Normally i would agree with you. I upgraded to a color phone so i could read it easier, and yes it helped.

      However if my phone had a monochrome screen with backlight as bright as the ipod i wouldn't care about color. It isn't the color that is important, it's the brightness factor, and apple already wins that category!

    16. Re:iPod longevity by in7ane · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What does RIAA think about this? If you look at how many people buy the 15,000 song iPods - have as many people bought 15,000 songs, at a cost of around $15,000 (taking the price from, say, from the iTunes music store)?

      More importantly, will RIAA now subpoena the list of people who bought the large iPods to prosecute them?

    17. Re:iPod longevity by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 1

      "However, I still appreciate the looks that I get walking to class with my 30GB; I sure wouldn't want to become just "one of the crowd""

      They're probably sizing you up to see if they can beat the crap out of you and take your iPod.

    18. Re:iPod longevity by Bakaneko · · Score: 1

      If it isn't steam-powered, I don't want to use it!

    19. Re:iPod longevity by hondo77 · · Score: 1

      Why on earth would you need a color display on your MP3 player? It seems like a useless increase in cost to me.

      Because I want to see the cover artwork while a song is playing. Seeing just the text is so...so...non-graphic. Mmm, eye candy.

      --
      I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
    20. Re:iPod longevity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      am/fm radio

    21. Re:iPod longevity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If he's posting on Slahsdot then he's easy pickin's.

    22. Re:iPod longevity by cheekyboy · · Score: 1

      maybe so but we dont need a winamp screen saver, we only need color for about 30-100seconds while choosing the song, then it can BLANK out and save power and not use BL.

      If mobiles lasting 250hrs can use color, so can ipods.

      --
      Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
  14. Clarification: Not all of them have BT & WiFi by Gubbe · · Score: 4, Informative

    Only the 1,713 17-inch SuperDrive Plus has BlueTooth and AirPort Extreme pre-installed. The cheaper models are just "AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth ready."

  15. You could read it at macworld.co.uk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    or you could just go to apple's site which is much less likely to get slashdotted:
    http://www.apple.com/ipod/
    http://www.apple.com/imac/

  16. I thought the IPod was "Lame" by maan · · Score: 5, Funny

    To this day I still can't forget the comment Taco made when he posted the initial IPod announcement:

    No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.

    Oh well, I guess opinions change.

    Seriously though, the ipod is great...

    Maan

    1. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by garcia · · Score: 1

      the iPod might be great but it is terribly overpriced. The storage capacity and size are fine, the design is great, I guess it runs Linux (woohoo), but I just can't justify spending that much money to hold 10,000 songs...

      I have posted before that I use a CD MP3 player that I got for under $50. It holds enough music and the price is right.

      Just my worthless .02

    2. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by Darth+Maul · · Score: 1

      Some of care about design, functionality, ease-of-use. I, for one, find my iPod worth every penny I paid for it.

      --
      --- witty signature
    3. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1, Funny

      >the iPod might be great but it is terribly overpriced.

      Of course it is. Its from a company where you have to pay extra for the second mouse button.

      --
      The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
    4. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      CD MP3 players are probably easier to use than an iPod and nearly 1/4 the cost.

    5. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 1

      First attempt at Machead baiting?

      Try and make it factually correct next time, it riles them up all the better!

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    6. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by Xerithane · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That just means you aren't the target market. The thing that you get with the iPod is decent storage space, decent hardware, and really great system integration.

      It is pricey, but so are Plasma TVs. If it's out of your price range, it isn't for you. It's for the millions of people who do buy them. It's ok to not want to buy something, for whatever reasons. I have an Archos mp3 player, it has 6GB of storage. It has good battery life, it's integration is mediocre and it's footprint is fairly large. It still works perfectly fine for me, as it's just a USB hard drive and I don't need iTunes to listen to music.

      The iPod isn't for me. I'm ok with that.

      I don't need to post a comment bitching about something I'm not going to buy, though. But, if everybody didn't do that there would only be about 15 comments under this story.

      --
      Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
    7. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I get new music, I put the CD in my computer, wait about two seconds for iTunes to pop up automatically, then click the "Import" button. When that's finished, I plug my iPod in, and the new music gets copied over automatically.

      Two steps. Okay, three if you include inserting the CD into the computer.

      Pretty damn easy to use.

      Oh, did I mention that my iPod gets my current contacts database and calendars every time I plug it in? Can your CD MP3 player replace your PDA?

    8. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by Bombcar · · Score: 1

      Isn't that supposed to be: "I, for one, welcome my new iPod overlords?"

    9. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by carou · · Score: 1
      When I get new music, I put the CD in my computer, wait about two seconds for iTunes to pop up automatically, then click the "Import" button.


      You know you can set up the preferences so you don't even have to do that...
    10. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by pHDNgell · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The big selling point for me was being able to use it for backups. My nightly really-important-to-me backups are far too big to fit on a CD. They do fit on a DVD if I want to wait a couple of hours to master and burn it. It's just a couple of minutes to copy it all to the iPod, though.

      Oh, and I get to carry a crapload of my music around at the same time, which means I'm more likely to actually have the thing with me most of the time.

      --
      -- The world is watching America, and America is watching TV.
    11. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know you can set up the preferences so you don't even have to do that...

      Yes, that's true, but it's not the default behavior under iTunes 4.0.1. I wanted to keep it as simple as possible to keep the "waah! waah!" guy from complaining.

    12. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by weave · · Score: 1
      How long does it go on a charge? I've used my first generation 10GB iPod on motorcyle trips that have lasted over 5 hours and still have 75% charge (indicated) on it. And it's light enough to sit in my shirt pocket comfortably. And the wired remote sits outside of my jacket where I can twiddle with it while riding quite effortlessly.

      There's not been too many products I've ever been happier with.

    13. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by darkov · · Score: 2, Funny

      So you're cheap, or poor. Congrats. If you really wanted to save money you could buy a transistor radio and listen to tracks really cheap. Or for free if you just rember the tune and hum them to yourself.

    14. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by IM6100 · · Score: 1

      It just a couple of minutes to copy it all to an old Pentium 133 box over in the corner that was pried open to shove a cheap 40 gig HD in.

      You don't copy your 'nightly really-important-to-me backups on a little bitty iPod, do you? Really?

      Do you have the iPod glued to a big piece of plexiglass so it doesn't get knocked around and your 'really-important' backups wiped out?

      --
      A Good Intro to NetBS
    15. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by pHDNgell · · Score: 1

      It just a couple of minutes to copy it all to an old Pentium 133 box over in the corner that was pried open to shove a cheap 40 gig HD in.

      A lot of good it would do me to keep my backups in the same house as the original data. Onsite backups don't make me feel as comfortable as having my data with me...right now. If my entire house was burned to the ground right now, I could access all of my important data right now.

      You don't copy your 'nightly really-important-to-me backups on a little bitty iPod, do you? Really?

      Not every night, more like weekly. It's just a shell script, but I don't hook it up to a computer that frequently.

      Do you have the iPod glued to a big piece of plexiglass so it doesn't get knocked around and your 'really-important' backups wiped out?

      Part of good design is durability. I keep it in my pocket. It hits stuff a lot when I walk. I've broken *other* things with it, but it holds up pretty well itself. I think the biggest drop it's taken was off a PA at a show I was DJing (probably four feet).

      This is, of course, not my only copy of this data. I have on-site backups (rsync to another system) as well. It would take a combination of catastrophic events for me to lose the majority of my data.

      --
      -- The world is watching America, and America is watching TV.
    16. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by King+Babar · · Score: 3, Informative
      the iPod might be great but it is terribly overpriced.

      I disbelieve. There are two heuristics to tell if something is over-priced. The first is: nobody buys the thing, or you sell fewer than you expected. The second is: you have *reliable* marketing research tells you that a lower price would sell you more than enough additional units to make up for the reduced price. I don't think it's always easy to justify the second course of action. If we pretend that the gross profit on an iPod is about $100, than a $50 reduction in price would halve that number, and we would have to sell twice as many of them to make up the difference. I think you can see the risk here. The iPod is the best seller in its category, and while you can find cheaper hard-drive based players, nobody has come out with a clearly better one. I think the nominal prices will drift down over the next couple of years, but the real price will (and has) sunk like a stone. The original iPod was 5 MB for $500. The top-of-the-line model is now 40 MB (8 times the capacity) and comes with much better interface options. That's huge real improvement in 3 years...

      --

      Babar

    17. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by karnal · · Score: 1

      Slightly offtopic-
      As I'm looking to get a motorcycle in the next few years, exactly how do you listen to music on a motorcycle? That's been one of the detractors for me, since I like to listen to music while driving, but I don't see any easy way to do it on a bike...

      --
      Karnal
    18. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      I dunno. 10,000 songs is a _lot_ of music, and people don't seem to understand the magnitude. Assuming five minutes a song, that is over five years of music running non-stop.

      If you are really harsh on hardware then an MP3 CD player might be the best route, but I think any CD player is bulky.

      If I had to get an MP3 player, I think I would do the iPod route. I don't even have 10GB of music, and I don't want to listen to all the tracks I have, but I would like to use one to be able to move files as well.

    19. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I dunno. 10,000 songs is a _lot_ of music, and people don't seem to understand the magnitude. Assuming five minutes a song, that is over five years of music running non-stop."

      Uh.. no.

      it's about 35 *days* non-stop.

    20. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      First, you can get a real motorcycle, like me. But that's a bit excessive. The other trick is to just get a portable with bud earphones. Check state laws, as many states don't allow you to wear headphones while driving/riding. There is also this contraption.

      If you haven't ridden on the street before, I would suggest skipping the tunes for a while. You'll need all your attention focused on riding. And yes, I am a motorcycle safety instructor:)

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    21. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "that is over five years of music running non-stop."

      Uh.. no.

      it's about 35 *days* non-stop.


      But, does it matter? 35 days without a single repeat seems close enough to infinity to not matter at all.

    22. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by amichalo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Wow, re-reading the score 4-5 /. posts when the iPod was first announced is really quite interesting.

      It would be interesting for /. to run a "year in review" and highlight some threads of technology announcements and other geek worthy news with 365 days worth of hind sight to see how people's first impressions can be accurate...or not.

      I particularly like the Apple share holder who was upset at the pricing...that it won't sell because it was $400, not $200. I suppose teh same share holder is pretty happy the high margin audio player is the #1 digital music device in the world.

      --
      I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
    23. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by Jeremi · · Score: 4, Funny
      Or for free if you just rember the tune and hum them to yourself.


      It worked for this guy...

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    24. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by MarcoAtWork · · Score: 1

      - a couple of hours to master and burn

      ?????

      what are you using? on my ancient dual p3-450 I can burn DVDs at 4x (15min) if I have the image pre-made or 2x on the fly (30 min) if there aren't too many small files.

      Worst case (which is my typical case as I use the DVD burner only for backups and I have a lot of small files my mail being in mh format) it takes 20-30 mins to make the image file and 15 mins to burn it -> 45 minutes total, even burning at 2x for extra safety I don't think I've ever gone over 1 hour from start-to-finish.

      --
      -- the cake is a lie
    25. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by Blondie-Wan · · Score: 1
      5 MB for $500. The top-of-the-line model is now 40 MB (8 times the capacity)

      Please forgive the nitpicks, but I believe you mean GB, not MB (and the original iPod cost $399 then, not $500).

      Good points all the same.

    26. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by weave · · Score: 1
      Ugh, illegal in some states? Sigh, I can hear traffic noises just fine with my buds in -- far better than some car with windows up, A/C on, and stereo blasting. I checked ama-cycle.org site and at least see my home state isn't included, but the one I drive through a lot (Maryland) is "one earphone only." -- ugh. And Pennsylvania is for "communication purposes only."

      I do agree with your advice about inexperienced riders though. I have over 100,000 miles clocked in over 15 years, and I still wouldn't have it on in a turnpike situation. Only for back-roads riding -- for example, check out my latest journal entry! :)

      Anyway, good thing I have long hair to hide the wires and the iPod is easily hidden!

    27. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by pHDNgell · · Score: 1

      For whatever reason, I was copying files around on my powerbook hdd before using mkisofs to master the UDF. mkisofs took about 20mins, I think (mainly reading and writing to the same slowish disk). I did the burn at 1x on an RW.

      I'm not exactly sure how long it took because I wasn't there when it finished, but it's a lot more than the 10 minutes or so it takes me to copy the stuff to the iPod.

      --
      -- The world is watching America, and America is watching TV.
    28. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by frantzdb · · Score: 1

      You might want to try duplicity.

    29. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by MarcoAtWork · · Score: 1

      what do you use for your ipod backups? I'd assume you'd want something that you just run and syncs a certain set of directories on the ipod, and probably that it keeps them encrypted or something...

      On linux I'm considering having a loopback encrypted filesystem on a file (not sure yet what I'd use for syncing) for when I do get an ipod myself...

      --
      -- the cake is a lie
    30. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by hondo77 · · Score: 1

      Wow, re-reading the score 4-5 /. posts when the iPod was first announced is really quite interesting.

      This one is my favorite:

      There is Apple's market. Pretty slim, eh? I don't see many sales in the future of iPod.
      :-)
      --
      I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
    31. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      I try to wear earplugs whenever possible on the motorcycle. They attenuate wind noise, but do nothing to prevent hearing other traffic, horns, etc. Yet they're probably illegal as well. Too bad:)

      What state are you in? With that much mileage, you oughta consider doing MSF instruction. Nice way to make a couple bucks.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    32. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This guy's comment is just as funny:

      http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=22940&cid=24 67 504

    33. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by Drakonian · · Score: 1

      Hah, I was just gonna post that that was my favorite too. Isn't the Slashdot mentality funny sometimes?

      --
      Random is the New Order.
    34. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by pHDNgell · · Score: 1

      My database dumps are encrypted on the fly (pgdump | gpg > disk). Most other things are not encrypted there (CVS repository, etc... My mail should be).

      But yeah, there's a shell script on the ipod that does some rsyncs.

      On OSX, it's pretty easy to make an encrypted filesystem in a file...I don't really want to do that, though.

      --
      -- The world is watching America, and America is watching TV.
    35. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by FireBreathingDog · · Score: 1
      I have an Archos mp3 player, it has 6GB of storage. It has good battery life, it's integration is mediocre and it's footprint is fairly large. It still works perfectly fine for me, as it's just a USB hard drive and I don't need iTunes to listen to music.

      I had one of those Archos units, and I'm now very happy to have an iPod instead. The Archos is big, it's heavy, when I had one it was USB 1.0 so it took FIVE HOURS to fill with music, and the batteries would lose their ability to hold a charge very quickly.

      All of that I happily tolerated until the thing started having all sorts of HD errors. After about a month or so of use, it would start reporting errors, and I'd have to reformat the whole damn thing (which meant I had to tie up a computer for five hours--on Windows NT, this made the machine otherwise unusable, why I don't know).

      As if that wasn't bad enough, I was never able to have one for more than two months without it getting so screwed up that it could no longer be recognized as a HD and I'd have to send it back.

      After sending it back three times, I finally just gave up on the damn thing. Thankfully, that was because the iPod came out, and I got one as a Christmas present.

      Stay away from the Archos if at all possible.

    36. Re:I thought the IPod was "Lame" by Xerithane · · Score: 1

      The Archos is big, it's heavy, when I had one it was USB 1.0 so it took FIVE HOURS to fill with music

      For 6GB, five hours isn't incredibly unreasonable.

      and the batteries would lose their ability to hold a charge very quickly.

      I've not had this problem. I have had mine for two years, and I still have my original batteries. I haven't listened to it for a few months though, but I was listening to it a lot and never had a problem with battery life. I still get 10+ hours out of it.

      After sending it back three times, I finally just gave up on the damn thing. Thankfully, that was because the iPod came out, and I got one as a Christmas present.

      Were you playing with the firmware? I have not heard much about anybody having these problems. I think that Rockbox is a better firmware for it anyway, but as I've said, I have had mine for 2 years and it works very reliably. I know several people who have them, and have no issues either.

      --
      Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
  17. Best Buy? by Otter · · Score: 1

    I read a couple of months ago that Best Buy was gearing up for another disatrous attempt at selling Macs. I have a stack of gift cards there and haven't seen anything worth buying. Anyone know if a) their Apple plans are still on and b) if they'll be selling iPods?

    1. Re:Best Buy? by summernot · · Score: 1

      Best Buy is selling Apple products now in select stores: iPods, CPUs and accessories.

      I would recommend calling to see if the store(s) near you sell Apple stuff yet.

    2. Re:Best Buy? by catseye · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, Best Buy has been selling iPods for a while. They started carrying them when the current Gen. 3 models (slim design, "dock connector") debuted several months ago. You're correct, though: It's only recently that they've been test marketing Apple desktops at select Best Buy stores, presumably in an effort to prepare for a company-wide push.

      -A.

      --
      What did the walrus say to the penguin? "No soap, radio."
    3. Re:Best Buy? by cascino · · Score: 1

      I don't know about their future mac plans, but they already are selling iPods. Check the MP3 section.

    4. Re:Best Buy? by ydnar · · Score: 1

      I was at Best Buy yesterday, and there was an Apple section of shelf, front and center, on the main computer aisle. Seemed well put together, at least comparable to nicer CompUSA displays. Didn't talk to anyone past ogling the new Samsung 213-T displays, so have no idea if they've been given the Apple Kool-Aid, er trained.

      This was in San Francisco, and coicidentially a few blocks from the smoking hole in the ground that was Sephora on Market street--the future site of the first Apple store here--and only a scant couple blocks from aforementioned CompUSA. Wonder how long those displays will stay in shape once she opens for business?

      y

    5. Re:Best Buy? by Otter · · Score: 1
      (Responding to the top reply, but thanks to everyone for answering!)

      Yup, looking at the Best Buy site, they do carry iPods, although they're sold out of them and I was unable to locate any store that was supposed to have them in stock. Maybe the upgrade today has them clearing out their old supply.

      My local Best Buy certainly has never had them any time I've been in there -- just some really awful looking 64 and 128 Mb players.

    6. Re:Best Buy? by PotPieMan · · Score: 1

      Best Buy definitely started carrying iPods before then. I bought my second generation 20 GB iPod there.

    7. Re:Best Buy? by ViolentGreen · · Score: 1

      As did I. However, it was about only about a week before the new ones were announced.

      --
      Not everything is analogous to cars. Car analogies rarely work.
    8. Re:Best Buy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They do sell them, but only on their store website.

      A few days ago my screen broke on my laptop that I bought from there (not apple). I went to their website and looked at the apple systems (only iBooks, PowerBooks, iMacs, & eMacs). They let me replace it and I almost bought an apple but still couldnt justify the price to my wife :(

    9. Re:Best Buy? by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Yep, I bought my 15Gb iPod at Best Buy in Coralville, Iowa while I was visiting my girlfriend.

    10. Re:Best Buy? by ZpaseMann+Zpiff · · Score: 1

      I work for a Best buy store, and you are correct that some Best Buy stores already have a few Apple computers as a test. Sometime in the coming weeks most Best Buy stores will be adding Apples to their shelves. Their is alredy a few iMacs and an eMac on the website, as well as some laptops. 17" PowerBook anyone?

    11. Re:Best Buy? by Blondie-Wan · · Score: 1

      Mine (in Tallahassee, Florida) has carried them since the second gen (5, 10, and 20 GB models, when they were still platform-specific). I may drop by today and see what they have right now (specifically, whether they have any 30 GBs marked down)...

    12. Re:Best Buy? by PotPieMan · · Score: 1

      Well, according to my receipt, I bought my iPod on October 3, 2002. Way before the third generation iPods were announced.

    13. Re:Best Buy? by andrewski · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, but Apple is retarded for allowing BestBuy back into the Mac business. Apple used to sell Macs at Best Buy, and ended up pulling out because it was clear that Best Buy's PC suppliers were telling BB not to feature or recommend Macs.

      There was actually a lawsuit and a big stink about this a couple of years ago...

  18. Where are the PowerBooks? by dusanv · · Score: 3, Interesting

    All current models are pretty old and especially the 15'' (introduced November last year). The rumour is that Motorola has trouble churning out the latest G4 in any significant quantities. Or maybe they'll go G5 :) Anybody got any info?

    1. Re:Where are the PowerBooks? by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 2, Funny
      Or maybe they'll go G5 :) Anybody got any info?

      Is there space to fit 9 fans into a Powerbook chassis? Maybe they'll make it bigger.. say 5 inches thicker.

    2. Re:Where are the PowerBooks? by frankie · · Score: 4, Interesting
      The new PowerBooks will be announced on Tuesday, September 16. Personally, I'm annoyed that they have been delayed for so damn long. I wanted to replace my dear old Pismo last month.

      If the new AlBook 15 doesn't have at least FX 5200 video, I'll probably buy a marked-down TiBook instead.

    3. Re:Where are the PowerBooks? by MoneyT · · Score: 1

      It really hasn't been that long. If you look at apple's past history, their products tend to be on a rotation of roughly every 6 months. So, since the powerbooks were updated last Feb, they would not have recieved any new updates untill sept or oct.

      --
      T Money
      World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
    4. Re:Where are the PowerBooks? by Large+Green+Mallard · · Score: 1

      You won't be able to find a marked down TiBook when the new ones come out. As it is, in Australia, there are no TiBooks available. You can't buy a new one for love or money. I suspect you'll find many other markets are like that.

      Of course, in the US with the infinite number of resellers, I'm sure you'ld find SOMEWHERE with one if you really wanted to buy something which has only had minor revs since Jan 2001... CPU speed bumps from 400mhz -> 1ghz, video from 16M Rage Mobility -> 64MB Radeon 9000 and a superdrive are about the only changes so far.

      FX5200 mobility chipsets are around in the PC laptop world, so I would be surprised if Apple didn't use them.

    5. Re:Where are the PowerBooks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The G5 desktops have 9 fans for reasons having more to do with noise than with heat; Those 9 fans run slower than normal computer fans, and are thus much quieter.

      At similar clock speeds, the G5 consumes similar levels of power and puts out similar levels of waste heat to a G4, while still outperforming it. A G5 PowerBook is actually quite doable.

    6. Re:Where are the PowerBooks? by rohanl · · Score: 1

      I checked the Australian Online Store, and the estimated build time for the 15" has gone to "3-4 weeks". The 12" and 17" models are still "1-2 days"

      Blow outs in build time usually signify a new model coming out.

      It looks like the production lines for the 15" model need a bit more retooling since it is a major change (Ti -> Al, etc), whereas the 12" and 17" are minor speed bumps etc.

      I agree with others that the announcement will probably be made at Paris Expo on 16th.

  19. Re:Hooray! by Brahmastra · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    And the new product lines from Dell, Gateway, Compaq, IBM, etc are MUCH cheaper too! Yeah, they may not be as "cool" or as high-performing as Macs for some applications but the cost of Macs just doesn't justify it for me.

  20. Notice that the pricing is in Pounds, not Dollars by djh101010 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Before you freak at the prices, those are in pounds, not dollars. 1,713 works out to about $2,715 at today's rate.

    Still not a bad price, considering what you get. I'll probably settle for more RAM for my iMac rather than replacing it with one of these, but it's an awfully nice machine.

  21. Geez, why not point to the Apple site instead? by mblase · · Score: 4, Informative
    1. Re:Geez, why not point to the Apple site instead? by data1 · · Score: 1

      Because that would be too Easy. Now where is the challenge in that? ;-)

  22. Bluetooth&Airport only included in High End iM by SwissMike · · Score: 4, Informative

    The two smaller models are just Bluetooth and Airport ready, that means you have to purchase the add-on cards for 50$ respectively 99$ (according to Apple Store).

    Make sure you order your internal Bluetooth module with your iMac, it can't be added later on (you'll need to use an external Bluetooth-USB-Dongle...).

  23. and yet... by holzp · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    no XServe that can survive a slashdotting.

  24. Bzzt! by 11223 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Slashdot once again displays its inability to perform even the most basic fact checking. The new iMacs do not come with AirPort Extreme or Bluetooth. They have internal slots you can fill in a CTO configuration.

    1. Re:Bzzt! by Rogerborg · · Score: 0, Troll

      fule! they runz lunixz th3y R l33t j00 r lamers micro$oft weenie lamer weenie.

      What the... holy fuck, I think I just got attacked by a Slashdot brain slug. Get it off! Get it off!

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    2. Re:Bzzt! by yesod · · Score: 1

      Its even better than that. They run MacOS-X :)

  25. iMagine... by Serious+Simon · · Score: 4, Funny

    ... an iCluster of these ...

    1. Re:iMagine... by evand · · Score: 1

      Although I can't show you an iCluster of these particular models, perhaps you'll be satisfied with Carnegie Mellon's Habermann Labs (warning: QuickTime VR movie), which consist entirely of old-sunflower-model 15" iMacs.

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

      iCluster of iPods, anyone? Or may be Redundant Array of Expensive Disks?

    3. Re:iMagine... by burns210 · · Score: 1

      actually, since you can boot a mac off one of these things, you might not be too far off:)

  26. Ipod question by BenjyD · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Is there anyone out there who has actually filled up a 20Gb Ipod and would want a 40Gb version?

    I'm not trying to knock Ipods- I'd actually really like to know if anyone does have that many MP3s etc. I think my entire CD collection would fit several times over in that much space.

    1. Re:Ipod question by shawnce · · Score: 1

      I have a 30GB iPod and it is nearly always full.

      About 2/3 full of Music (all legal) and the rest a backup Mac OS X install and a miscellaneous update packages.

      I use my iPod to cary around OS/software updates so I can drop them on systems the don't have network access or very slow network access.

    2. Re:Ipod question by justytylor23 · · Score: 1

      I do. I have 47 GB of music, so I'd still have some left over if I got a 40 GB iPod. Gimme a 60GB!

    3. Re:Ipod question by finkployd · · Score: 4, Informative

      I have mine filled up but it is only about 50% music. The rest is backups of datafiles and source code. One of the great things about the iPod is that is is also a regular firewire disk drive and can be used as that as well.

      Finkployd

    4. Re:Ipod question by ascii · · Score: 1

      I've had that thought as well. Don't forget however, that the iPod doubles as an external harddrive aswell. I know that I'd be able to fill up 20GB's worth of stuff easily.

      --
      naah sig schmig
    5. Re:Ipod question by polyp2000 · · Score: 0

      I've had a 15gb Treo ( a lot cheaper than the ipod) , I've had it for 6 months or so, and I've only filled up about 3gb, having said that I have probably filled 5gb of my Linux box'es hard drive with MP3 and thats according to xmms about 800 songs. My CD Collection is around 300cd's If my calculations are correct I ould be able to fit my entire CD collection on the thing. (give or take bitrates etc )

      --
      Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
    6. Re:Ipod question by chia_monkey · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Is there anyone out there who has actually filled up a 20Gb Ipod and would want a 40Gb version?

      I know some people out there actually use their iPods as part of their DJ ensemble. Whereas a typical song may only be 3-4 minutes, a decent trance mix may last half an hour or so. Have a trance section in your iPod, a drum and bass section, house, trip-hop, and you'll see that it fills up rather quickly.

      --

      "He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts...for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang
    7. Re:Ipod question by Turmio · · Score: 1

      You're not limited to store MP3's. iPod also works as an external firewire hard disk. So almost empty 20GB or even 40GB iPod isn't an issue unless you seriously lack imagination.

    8. Re:Ipod question by jht · · Score: 1

      I filled up my 10 Gb model pretty easily - re-ripping my collection to AAC helped free up some space, but not a lot. Right now I have about 6.25 days worth of music on it, and around 500 Mb free. There's still a lot of stuff I haven't ripped yet, though. And I'd say my CD collection is only average-size if that. I might have as many as 200 of them overall - accumulated over 16 years or so that's not too many.

      I could certainly make do with more if I had it. 20 Gb would be fine, but the 40 would be sweet. I could do useful things with additional free space beyond just my music. The obvious is to use it as a backup device for critical stuff I otherwise have on my PowerBook.

      --
      -- Josh Turiel
      "2. Do not eat iPod Shuffle."
    9. Re:Ipod question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is there anyone out there who has actually filled up a 20Gb Ipod and would want a 40Gb version?

      Yes. I have 36 GB of music. I have a 30 GB iPod (bought for me recently by coworkers as a birthday present. Fifty people chipped in ten bucks each, or some such.)

      I'd like to have a 40 GB iPod. It would hold my whole music collection, with room to grow a little, with room for the all-important Mac OS X system install that I could boot from in case of emergency.

      I've been a music junkie for more than a decade now, since I was in high school. I think I have about 750 CD's, virtually all of which I still listen to more or less frequently. And evidently I'm not unique in that, because Apple keeps making and selling bigger and bigger iPods.

    10. Re:Ipod question by CaptIronfist · · Score: 1

      I own a 30 gig one, and i had to scout my friends' collections to fill it to around 1/3 of it's capacity. IMHO the size of a collection doesn't really matter. It's the quality that is of the upmost importance. My collection is encoded strictly at 192kbps, some people will even go up to 256kbps, others do not even care. Whenever I backup (hum hum) some songs i always rip the entire album, some will only download ( or rip ) all the singles they like, others recklessly download everything they can get their hands on, hence the rather large size of their collection.

      Personnaly i don't feel like i'm lacking lots of music, i have plenty, some 70+ albums. Is 30 gigs or 40 gigs overkill ? I don't know. Depends on your use. Would i want to upgrade to 40 gigs? Nope, not enough difference to throw another 500$. Will i upgrade to 80 gigs in 2-3 years. Most probably no. I prefer keeping my collection in a safe spot. The iPod is a player not a file server.

      Some of my friends have so many songs on their iPods, they can't even remember what they have on it. I find that a bit .. wack! ;-)

    11. Re:Ipod question by What'sInAName · · Score: 1

      I have a 30Gb iPod that is almost completely full, and the overwhelming majority of the music is legal. I have a lot of CDs, I'm a subscriber to emusic.com, and I've also downloaded a shiteload of live music from the Furthur Network (furthurnet.com).

      I like a wide variety of music, so it's important to me to have a wide variety of music available. Actually, I'm kind of bummed that the 40Gb model came out so soon after I got my iPod. I could have used the extra room.

      I'm going to India for three months, and it will be nice to have just about my entire collection of music with me. (Oh, and I encode at relatively high bitrate and used VBR, so that makes for a bit less room...)

    12. Re:Ipod question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Must be embarrassing to be seen with a lame Treo.

    13. Re:Ipod question by Mr.+Darl+McBride · · Score: 1
      Is there anyone out there who has actually filled up a 20Gb Ipod and would want a 40Gb version?

      You're not still ripping at 128kbit, are you?

      I rip at 192-384vbr, which makes for only about 150 CDs on the 30g unit, but which sounds absolutely beautiful.

    14. Re:Ipod question by tbmaddux · · Score: 4, Informative
      Is there anyone out there who has actually filled up a 20Gb Ipod and would want a 40Gb version?
      My MP3 collection is too big to fit on my 30GB iPod, but that iPod is big enough that I went through my iPod playlist to remove artists/songs/albums that I did not want, rather than picking the ones that I did want. I also leave several GB of space open to transfer other data from computer to computer. The automatic updating of play counts and the ability to rate the songs I like/dislike has me using only my iPod to listen to music - I connect it to my home sound system rather than hassle with CDs. The iPod is definitely not lame, and it continues to get less lame.
      --
      Can't you see that everyone is buying station wagons?
    15. Re:Ipod question by haa...jesus+christ · · Score: 1

      i've got about 2 gigs left (on a 20), and it's all music. if i ripped all my cds, i would probably come close. and everything is 128.

    16. Re:Ipod question by polyp2000 · · Score: 0

      LOL, Yeah , the design sucks, I admit, but Im one of these people who gives functionality a higher priority than looks. I cant justify the extra hundred and fifty quid for what is essentially a nicer screen and a nicer case. At the end of the day they are both boxes with small hard drives in side. An Ipod would be nicer than my Treo, but not at the extorionate prices apple are selling them for.

      --
      Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
    17. Re:Ipod question by edspunky · · Score: 1

      I've got a 30gb one, and there's only 3gb free. Less than 1/4 of my cd collection fits on this, although admittedly, enough of it that I actually want/need to carry around with me does that it's not an issue. Also, lots of dj sets at an hour+ a pop start eating up space...

    18. Re:Ipod question by zieroh · · Score: 1

      I've got a 30gig model, and it's full. My total MP3 collection (all legal) tops out at around 65gig.

      --
      People who say "sheeple" have about as much sophistication as an AOL user, and in fact are probably actually AOL users.
    19. Re:Ipod question by jpkunst · · Score: 1

      Is there anyone out there who has actually filled up a 20Gb Ipod and would want a 40Gb version?

      I have a 10Gb iPod, but it has not nearly enough storage for my complete music collection.

      The Gb's add up fast when you start ripping the works of just the major classical composers at 192 Kbps. There are also the numerous 'complete recordings of $jazz_artist on $label' boxes. Not to mention all those $label soul/blues box sets. And all my NWOBHM LP's from the eighties that I'm digitizing at the moment. Etc, etc. I could easily fill up a 40 Gb iPod.

      JP

    20. Re:Ipod question by Ralph+Spoilsport · · Score: 1
      I have 1370 titles of music in my collection. I need an 80 - 120 gig iPod. That's why I haven't bought one yet - what they offer is too SMALL!

      Also, I need the room for growth of my collection. I used to buy a CD or two a week. Now it's down to a CD or two a month, thanks to my unemployment running out out...

      What I would like to see is another kind of iPod where the storage capacity is arbitrary - a box that has room for several HDs and the iPod OS part of the machine, and with bluetooth and Airport Extreme so I can run a wireless central music server for Chez Spoilsport.

      Now THAT would rawk. As it is, the iPod is just, well, too dinky for my needs.

      RS

      Bluto did it...

      --
      Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
    21. Re:Ipod question by nat5an · · Score: 1

      Mandatory Stephenson Quote: Hacker with bullhorn: "Save your money! Accept one of our free tanks! It is invulnerable, and can drive across rocks and swamps at ninety miles an hour while getting a hundred miles to the gallon!" Prospective station wagon buyer: "I know what you say is true...but...er...I don't know how to maintain a tank!" Bullhorn: "You don't know how to maintain a station wagon either!" Buyer: "But this dealership has mechanics on staff. If something goes wrong with my station wagon, I can take a day off work, bring it here, and pay them to work on it while I sit in the waiting room for hours, listening to elevator music." Bullhorn: "But if you accept one of our free tanks we will send volunteers to your house to fix it for free while you sleep!" Buyer: "Stay away from my house, you freak!" Bullhorn: "But..." Buyer: "Can't you see that everyone is buying station wagons?"

      --
      Head down, go to sleep to the rhythm of the war drums...
    22. Re:Ipod question by self+assembled+struc · · Score: 1

      I have a 10 gig ipod, stuffed to the gills.

      but it's only 1/4 of my mp3 collection (all ripped from legally purchased cds and records i own, of course. slashdotters don't do anything illegal...)

      so yeah, a 40 gig woul dbe great. and that's only about half my physical music collection.

      i like variety. there are days where there is nothing i want to listen to on my ipod. out of some 2,000+ songs.

    23. Re:Ipod question by FattMattP · · Score: 1

      I've filled it up. I have the older 20Gb iPod. My MP3 library is a little over 47GB. All ripped from my own CDs and legal downloads from artists that share free MP3s of their music. 8910 files total.

      --
      Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
    24. Re:Ipod question by dborod · · Score: 1

      I have one of the second generation 20 gig iPods, and it's filled with music. I have about 40 gigs of music, and don't enjoy having to pick which half of my music not to have with me. I would have not problem filling a 40 gig iPod.

    25. Re:Ipod question by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

      actualy, it is nicer functionality.

      the iPOD has the best form and the best function.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    26. Re:Ipod question by Josuah · · Score: 1

      I've got ~3200 songs using up ~16GB of the 18GB formatted disk space on my 20GB iPod. All songs are legal.

    27. Re:Ipod question by WaKall · · Score: 1

      I have a 30GB iPod that is full, as well as a 30 GB disk on my powerbook, which is also full. If I were to rip everything I _want_ to have available, I think it would be around 50 GB. Everything I own, around 70 GB (guessing - it's off of 570 CD's).

      None of this 30 GB is downloaded stuff, with exception of about 10 tracks from iTunes Music Store. I own all of it, and it's all in rotation (thanks to ratings + smart playlists.

      So yes, there is a small but existent market for mp3 players with 40+GB on them.

    28. Re:Ipod question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good luck beat-matching that trance w/o being able to adjust the tempo. Anyone who "djs" with an iPod is a grade-A wannabe (Anyone who "djs" with trance is one too, but that is another matter).

      Also, anyone close to being a real dj doesn't use premixed music in their sets.

      Having a trance section, d&b, house, trip hop, breaks, etc will not make your iPod fill up any faster. This kind of music is generally only released on vinyl and in dj mixes (and as I said, real djs dont use premixed music). Good luck ripping 40gb of mp3s from vinyl.

    29. Re:Ipod question by debugdave · · Score: 1

      I have a 30gb iPod and it is filled to the top with music. And I havent really started ripping any of my old cds to it either. I paid $500 for the 30gb in June, but the 40gb announcement does'nt really irk me off since I am in the G5 reality distortion field right now. :-)

      dave

    30. Re:Ipod question by switcha · · Score: 1
      I know some people out there actually use their iPods as part of their DJ ensemble.

      In a case like that, I would consider the iPod's space limits less of a liability, and more an incredible value. A consumer, realatively cheap (for all you get) piece of equipment that's functional in a professional capacity. I'd say it's the best damn money a DJ could spend, especially when compared to real pro equipment.

      --
      You know what? ... A little club soda *did* get that out!
    31. Re:Ipod question by SvnLyrBrto · · Score: 1

      I agree on the iPod being somewhat pointless to a DJ *DURING* his/her performance.

      But lots of DJs actually record their performances. I know one who records EVERY set he spins at a party, and listens to it afterwards to find his mistakes and figure out where he could do better. Moreso though, most DJs will record an hour-long or so set, and give it away so as to promote him/herself. The "big names" do the same, in order to sell CDs in record stores and make more money / promote themselves even more.

      In all of these cases, an hour-long MP3 of a DJ mix is a very real possibility. In fact, I have several of these in my own MP3 collection.

      cya,
      john

      --
      Imagine all the people...
    32. Re:Ipod question by clf8 · · Score: 1

      The minute I can buy a new 15" Powerbook with a big enough hard drive for all my CD's, then I'll fill up the iPod. Something's wrong when you've got more storage on your mp3 player (30gig) than your laptop hard drive (20gig). Rerip everything at 160bps MPEG4 and life is good. Can you fill it up with music? Hell yeah.

    33. Re:Ipod question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      10 bucks each ? If they do that for every coworker they'll spend $500 / year on birthday presents for coworkers.

    34. Re:Ipod question by edstromp · · Score: 1

      I don't have an ipod, but I do have 26 GB collection of music ( 5% illegal ). If I were to purchase a pod, I'd think pretty hard about getting "only" 30GB. Gotta have room to grow and all.

    35. Re:Ipod question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup. My 20GB has less than 600K left, I haven't finished ripping all my CD's yet, and I still plan on adding to the library . . . .so that 40GB is looking like a probable xmas gift for myself :)

    36. Re:Ipod question by illumin8 · · Score: 1

      I have a 30GB iPod with about 29.5GB used. It is, for all intents and purposes, 100% full. I've just reached the point where now I need to pick music that I don't listen to as often and remove it to fit more music, but I don't want to do that. The 40GB model would be perfect for me.

      --
      "When the president does it, that means it's not illegal." - Richard M. Nixon
    37. Re:Ipod question by sahala · · Score: 1
      A consumer, realatively cheap (for all you get) piece of equipment that's functional in a professional capacity. I'd say it's the best damn money a DJ could spend, especially when compared to real pro equipment.

      Except that it's NOT functional. There's no way to adjust pitch/tempo. The timing of the play/pause is inconsistent, making it difficult for cueing. If by DJ you mean putting on music for a small gathering of friends at home, then you're absolutely right, an ipod is "professional" grade equipment. Unfortunately it's not adequate for even an amateur DJ.

      Don't get me wrong though. I spin at a weekly event in Austin and I love my 20gb ipod for listening. It's great to be able to have most of my digital music portable for long hours at work or on the plane. As for why anyone would need more than (put your threshold amount here) gigs of storage, the nice thing about having a ton of space on the ipod is that it means I don't have to pick and choose (such as with CDs, MDs, and smaller capacity mp3 players) what I want to carry with me. I just copy everything over even if I'm not sure if it'll get any listening time. Every now and then I'll just put the tracklist on shuffle so that I can hear stuff I wouldn't ordinarily listen to. I'm pretty happy with it.

    38. Re:Ipod question by sahala · · Score: 1
      In all of these cases, an hour-long MP3 of a DJ mix is a very real possibility. In fact, I have several of these in my own MP3 collection.

      A very real possibility? Try a very definite possibility. A true trance set should really go for about 2 hours minimum. Sasha and Digweed would do their progressive trance sets for 6 hours at Twilo. The Global Underground or Ministry of Sound or whatever compilations you're probably referring to are supposed to be representative of a full-length set.

    39. Re:Ipod question by Phil+Wilkins · · Score: 1

      It only takes a couple of decades of serious CD collecting, and you need the 120Gb iPod.

    40. Re:Ipod question by Phil+Wilkins · · Score: 1

      Sasha and Digweed are prog-trance poseurs. FSOL did a classic 12 hour radio set. Danny Tenaglia regularly runs his sets for more than 8 hours.

    41. Re:Ipod question by Raul+Acevedo · · Score: 1

      I'm looking to replace my 20 Gig Archos Jukebox because I filled it up. Up until today, I wasn't going with the iPod because it would "only" offer 50% more storage (30 Gig), but with these new ones I might consider it. Though I might still go with the 60 Gig Creative Nomad Jukebox Zen...

      --
      In a real emergency, we would have all fled in terror, and you would not have been notified.
    42. Re:Ipod question by sahala · · Score: 1
      Awesome. I wish more posts/threads subject matter would go in this direction :)

      Sasha and Digweed are prog-trance poseurs.

      I'd say they're more prog-house, and I would agree with you about recent stuff, but nevertheless I've been in the middle of a few Sasha sets which were pretty badass. He had a pretty good talent for going through a lot of different movements and themes (sorta like classical music). I remember once he played several ambient tracks after one another to build up and even during minutes of beatless parts people would still be dancing.

      FSOL did a classic 12 hour radio set. Danny Tenaglia regularly runs his sets for more than 8 hours.

      Can't disagree with you. FSOL's been a longtime favorite of mine (and Sasha's as well, for that matter), and Danny's a lot of fun, although I like a lot of other house DJs better.

    43. Re:Ipod question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, that sounds really...BORING!

      You guys need to get a life if you're listening to that Mortal Kombat soundtrack crap for 8 hours at a time.

    44. Re:Ipod question by hondo77 · · Score: 1

      I'm in the process of re-ripping my CDs into AAC and while that is saving space I'm finding a lot of CDs and songs that I missed the first time through. I'm up to 50-something GB and over 12,000 songs (I'm in "R" right now). Then again, I'm using my iPod at work and I load up a only week's worth of music at a time. However, I'm setting up a used iMac in the stereo room where I'll be using iTunes sharing from my PowerMac so that 50-something GB will be put to good use oh so soon. Yum.

      --
      I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
    45. Re:Ipod question by misterpies · · Score: 1

      My MP3 collection is too big to fit on my 30GB iPod

      I wouldn't boast about that unless you want the RIAA knocking at your door...

      --
      The author of this post asserts his moral rights.
    46. Re:Ipod question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My 30gb pod is 100% filled. My entire MP3 collection is about 160 gb, which equates to about 1700 albums give or take a hundred. I am a DJ though so it all goes to good use. It may seem like a lot of music but by comparision, some DJ's have hundreds of thousands of pieces of vinyl.

    47. Re:Ipod question by tbmaddux · · Score: 1
      I wouldn't boast about that unless you want the RIAA knocking at your door...
      yawn it's legit, ripped 192 kbps MP3 and some AAC. My CDs are still around to gather dust and get re-ripped when I change formats (I have changed twice so far).
      --
      Can't you see that everyone is buying station wagons?
    48. Re:Ipod question by andrewski · · Score: 1

      My 15GB iPod is full of UNPIRATED music, all of which I have ripped from CDs that I and my girlfriend own.

      Alphabetically, I am only at 'r', so I could use the 40GB version.

    49. Re:Ipod question by Phil+Wilkins · · Score: 1

      You may be spent in 30 seconds, a gentleman can keep going all night long.

    50. Re:Ipod question by burns210 · · Score: 1

      you can put a version of osx(or os9, if your mac can boot to it), and boot off your harddrive. you can rip dvds and put them on your ipod, something i think would be very, cool:)

      You don't have to put JUST music, the ipod supports any filetype, it acts just like a external harddrive... So all your favorite utilities, personal info, documents, pictures, movies, backup archives even. Anything you could ever need can just be copied onto the ipod:)

    51. Re:Ipod question by hanssprudel · · Score: 1

      My CDs are still around to gather dust and get re-ripped when I change formats (I have changed twice so far).

      Better idea: rip the CDs to FLAC (loss less) and archive them. Then you can sell the originals, and still have the audio to encode in any format you want.

    52. Re:Ipod question by eMilkshake · · Score: 1

      That depends on if it's music -- I've been wanting to carry around several of the Supreme Court trials on my iPod, but at 2:30 (that's two hours), they are somewhat bulky.
      With a 40gigger, all the Supremes could be mine!

    53. Re:Ipod question by tbmaddux · · Score: 1
      Then you can sell the originals...
      Now that will get them to come after me! It won't work. I'll send them down the road to you. Thanks!
      --
      Can't you see that everyone is buying station wagons?
    54. Re:Ipod question by KirkH · · Score: 1

      Also, don't forget about audio books. They can be 100MB or more in size each.

    55. Re:Ipod question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've got a 20GB ipod. I buy on average 3-5 CDs a month. Don't ask....I've got a wide range of likes. I filled up the ipod less than a year from the purchase, and it still doesn't house all my CDs. Now everytime i buy a CD, i have to delete an album or two off the bloody thing. However i do encode at 192KB, because i don't use the earbuds and the difference really sucks on under 128. So there you go ....

  27. missed it by Oliekirk · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I love it when my beloved mac rumor community misses stuff like this ipod. Chaos mint knew about an ad campaighn but no numbers 'The apple rummor community was caught napping with its trowsers down'

    1. Re:missed it by erwass · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Actually As the Apple Turns had it in Friday:

      http://www.appleturns.com/
      Ok its not a real mac rumor site but still...
    2. Re:missed it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, Thinksecret had the specs weeks ago. Macrumors, yesterday, posted that they recieved concrete confirmation that these two new products would be released today.

    3. Re:missed it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The apple rumor community isn't always 'napping' when they're caught with their trousers down, mind you.

  28. I'm spoiled by wcbrown · · Score: 0, Troll

    After the PowerMac G5, I'm not sure I'd ever want to buy an Apple with such a sluggish bus speed no matter how nice it was.

    1. Re:I'm spoiled by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Huh? I realize you're very proud of your new G5 and are itching to tell the world, but I don't think anyone expects you to buy an iMac now. You've purchased the top of the line machine and of course it has better specs than the consumer models. What's your point?

    2. Re:I'm spoiled by lederhosen · · Score: 1

      Is it not funny! Apple fanatics that allways tell
      that MegaHurtz does not matter, now has found that
      their bus speed is higher!!!

    3. Re:I'm spoiled by stingerman101 · · Score: 1

      >>Is it not funny! Apple fanatics that allways tell that MegaHurtz does not matter, now has found that their bus speed is higher!!! >> Apple Fanatics still feel that the core CPU clock speed of the Pentium 4 is a marketing gimmick and when compared to the P4, MHz doesn't matter. Both AMD and Apple has shown that similar performance can be achieved at lower MHz than a P4 at a higher MHz. Nothing has changed other than the G5 is way faster now even still at lower MHz to top of the line P4's. Besides that, Mac users have felt for some time that Apple needed a faster FSB for multimedia production applications. And now they have it. Anyone know if Apple upped the FSB in the new iMacs?

  29. Mirror by inertia187 · · Score: 3, Informative

    In case the site is slow, here is a mirror.

    Martin Studio Slashdot Policy

    --
    A programmer is a machine for converting coffee into code.
  30. So....where is the new PowerBook? by camt · · Score: 1

    I am still hoping a 15.4" AlBook with a 1.4GHz G4 comes out sometime before January (when I am due for a upgrade at work).

    I would really like a G5 PowerBook, but I don't think we'll see those for at least 2 years. So for now I can only hope the PowerBooks in the G4 line get a speed boost...

    Anyone placing any bets? You think January is reasonable to expect a new 15.4" AlBook?

    -- Cameron
    PS - I am officially making "the switch" in January.

    1. Re:So....where is the new PowerBook? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My bet: the next Apple Expo (16 sep)... Maybe before.

    2. Re:So....where is the new PowerBook? by Quixotic+Raindrop · · Score: 1

      They should have had a G5 Powerbook at WWDC. They are taking way, way too long to get the PB line upgraded. I personally know several people who have been putting off buying PC laptops waiting for new Powerbooks, but they've already told me that they won't wait any longer. Lost sales, all because they're slow on the uptake. Let's get with it Apple!!!

      --
      Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. (Einstein)
    3. Re:So....where is the new PowerBook? by gamgee5273 · · Score: 1

      A G5 PowerBook?!? Are you mad? Have you looked at the size of the heatsink in the new Power Macs? Have you looked at it's specs? It isn't ready for a laptop. There will not be a G5 laptop for months, if not a year...

    4. Re:So....where is the new PowerBook? by reiggin · · Score: 1
      They should have had a G5 Powerbook at WWDC.
      How?!? Do you know anything about how freakin' hot that G5 is? I get really tired of reading how some people expect Apple to do the nearly impossible right out of the gate. It is IBM's responsibility to get the G5 down to the point where it can be effectively implemented into a laptop. That won't happen until the G5e if the rumors are to believed. There is no other company (including AMD) that even has intentions of putting a 64 bit chip in a laptop. Just be grateful that there is hope that Apple and IBM will eventually do it. If you really think you can do better, then go apply for a job with the design team. "Let's get with it Apple!!!" ... give me a break! Your expectations are too high for any company to meet. If you know several people who are as clueless and narrowminded as yourself and can't wait anymore, fine. It's not like they are going to go out and purchase a 64 bit laptop from somewhere else. Just a few less ignorant people for Apple Customer Service to deal with.
    5. Re:So....where is the new PowerBook? by stingerman101 · · Score: 1

      >>A G5 PowerBook?!? Are you mad? Have you looked at the size of the heatsink in the new Power Macs? Have you looked at it's specs? It isn't ready for a laptop. There will not be a G5 laptop for months, if not a year..>>

      Oh no not again, why don't these people do their homework? Asked and Answered is the reply to this. Your wrong, the G5 does not have a fan directly on the CPU so it needs a larger heatsink. Put a fan on it, heat sink goes away. Apple cjose to put the fan off to the side to create efficient cooling zones, the fans spin very slow and are very quiet. In any case, the 970 puts out very little heat by comparison to the Pentium's and Athlons. And at 1.3GHz, the 970 doesn't need a fan at all.

    6. Re:So....where is the new PowerBook? by Quixotic+Raindrop · · Score: 1

      No, you're right. That's expecting too much. I was (still am) just angry that Apple hasn't moved on the 15" PB in quite a long time (in this world, anyway), and that they've probably lost quite a few customers because of it.

      One of my potential-pb-buying friends runs RedHat on his current (Intel) laptop, and was really excited about the possibility of getting a 15" PB with decent specs (and OS X, of course) ... but, he's concluded that there are several Intel-based Laptops with better specs in the same price range as the middle PB, and is now officially tired of waiting on that PB to catch up. I don't think I can get him to hold out any longer; same with a handful of other friends who run Winblows on their laptops.

      --
      Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. (Einstein)
    7. Re:So....where is the new PowerBook? by jcr · · Score: 1

      They should have had a G5 Powerbook at WWDC.

      Yeah, and they really should have had a G3 in 1987.

      Get real.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    8. Re:So....where is the new PowerBook? by 3263827 · · Score: 1

      Actually, AMD DOES plan on introducing a mobile version of the AMD64 in the 2nd half of 2003. Whether they hit this ship date or not is a different matter entirely.

    9. Re:So....where is the new PowerBook? by gamgee5273 · · Score: 1
      Well, I could ask why you don't do your English homework (because grammar clearly isn't a strong suit for you, is it?), but I won't.

      Anyhow, once I get my hands on my staff's G5 I'll be able to tell you if that bad boy is going into a laptop any time soon.

      I still say that we have to wait for the G5 laptops until January, if not next late summer/fall, and you can quote me on that. If I turn out to be wrong next week, feel free to quote this entire post and tell me you told me so.

    10. Re:So....where is the new PowerBook? by reiggin · · Score: 1

      Second half of 2003 is here and I don't here much coming out of AMD about a 64 bit chip in a laptop. I would reason that second half of 2004 is much more likely for them.

    11. Re:So....where is the new PowerBook? by gamgee5273 · · Score: 1
      So...what did you think of that great PowerBook G5 announcement on Tuesday? Hmmm?

      Oh, wait a second!...there are no PowerBook G5s...I wonder why?

  31. Re:new imac problem by darby_smeed · · Score: 1

    This is a known troll. Ignore it.

  32. 40GB.... how... revolutionary by StewedSquirrel · · Score: 2, Informative

    Funny, there are a ton of other 40GB MP3 players that have been on the market for a little while.

    This one is a bit cheaper than the iPod:
    Archos

    So, you might argue that the iPod is the smallest 40GB player out? Wrong again. Check this one out:
    Rio Karma

    Not that it's a BAD player- it's just not as Revolutionary as the Mac fanboys claim. :-)

    Those iMacs don't look so bad... even if they're next to impossible to upgrade. :-)

    Stewey

    --
    There are 10 kinds of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who don't.
  33. Re:new imac problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've seen this troll before.
    You really ought to change it around a bit if you don't want it shot down before it can spark a nice argument.

  34. Not to mention 10,000,000 songs downloaded by amichalo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Also announced along with larger capacity ipods (20 and 40 to replace 15 and 30 GB models with no other changes in HW or SW stated) and faster iMacs (the 1.25 Ghz 17" now packing a 160 GB HD) there is even more significant news.

    The real news here is that since April 28th when the iTunes Music Store opened, there have been more than 10,000,000 songs downloaded by the US Apple consumer base runing OS 10.1 and iTunes 4. Very impressive in my opinion. The 10,000,000th song was "Complicated" and was sold on September 3rd. Apple stated they are selling 500,000 songs per week.

    The first week Apple stated they sold 1,000,000 songs so that plus half a million a week after corroberates the 10 MM song claim and shows a steady rate.

    It would be interesting to know how BuyMusic.com is doing with their knowck off...especially after all the bad press and sites like BoycottBuyMusic.com and DontBuyMusic.com have exposed some shady dealings with artists, consumers, and their advertising.

    And Apple a day keeps Windows at bay

    --
    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:Not to mention 10,000,000 songs downloaded by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Complicated?
      As in the god-awful song by Avril Lavigne??
      *Sobs into hands*

      Why??? Why God??? Why?????

      Ahem...
      I mean... whoo-hoo. Go Canadian artists.
      (I'm Canadian, apparently I'm supposed to support her. We have much better bands, America. Listen to The Tragically Hip or Matthew Good. And please, for the love of God, stop laughing at us.)

      Will

    2. Re:Not to mention 10,000,000 songs downloaded by IM6100 · · Score: 1

      It's interesting that you make BuyMusic.com plaintext, but BoycottBuyMusic. com and DontBuyMusic. com hot links.

      --
      A Good Intro to NetBS
    3. Re:Not to mention 10,000,000 songs downloaded by zpok · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "It's interesting that you make BuyMusic.com plaintext, but BoycottBuyMusic. com and DontBuyMusic. com hot links."

      Not really. See, in order to go to BuyMusic.com you need to run Windows and use IE something or other.

      Now, how many \. fall in that category?

      Another poster had a good address for those tin foil hat thingies, I'm getting one now, you interested?

      --
      I think, therefore I am...I think.
    4. Re:Not to mention 10,000,000 songs downloaded by ColdCuts · · Score: 1

      Tragically Hip had one or two albums for sale in the first week. I bought one of them. But now no albums by the Hip are currently offered.

    5. Re:Not to mention 10,000,000 songs downloaded by amichalo · · Score: 1

      I actually thought "Complicated" was an appropriate song for the occasion.

      On-line music sells are "complicated", and have left many users and companies "frustrated". The chorus about how "you fall and you crawl and you pick yourself up" could be nice foreshadowing if Apple's Windows iTMS is as successful as the mac version and converts Windows users to the Apple experience.

      --
      I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
    6. Re:Not to mention 10,000,000 songs downloaded by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See, in order to go to BuyMusic.com you need to run Windows and use IE something or other.

      Now, how many /. fall in that category?


      The majority. Slashdot is what regular people read when they want to act geeky.

  35. I'm waiting for the model with mic/line in by jcsehak · · Score: 5, Interesting

    No, there's no actual proof that they're ever going to make one, but c'mon, isn't it the obvious next step? Record your entire classroom lecture for study purposes, record the next Phish show, record your own demos -- with a simple little multitracking app, it could kill portable 4-tracks. Or, plug your iSight into a video in and turn it into a video camera.

    Also, with a mic in, you'll be able to use Apple's speech recognition software to give it voice commands -- no more fuddling around with menus, just speak into the mic: "iPod, play Smashing Pumpkins, album Gish" or something like that.

    --

    c-hack.com |
    1. Re:I'm waiting for the model with mic/line in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      iPod, play Smashing Pumpkins, album Gish"

      Thank you for representing the pumpkins on slashdot, keep it up!

    2. Re:I'm waiting for the model with mic/line in by mrpuffypants · · Score: 1

      Actually, the 3G iPods have a line-in/mic line built in and it just neeeds to be enabled thrrough the firmware. I suppose that once Apple gets the accompanying hardware ready to launch all they have to do is release a new software update that "unlocks" the internal feature.

    3. Re:I'm waiting for the model with mic/line in by NaugaHunter · · Score: 1

      IIRC, an encoder would require different royalties than a player. Not to mention the processing power to encode in realtime. Granted, recording without encoding is easy and with 40 gigs you could do quite a bit. But if you'd want to encode it later it would be a manual process, especially if everything is named "Sound Capture #nnn".

      (I'm not going to touch on the processing required for Apple's Speech Recognition - while simple recognition isn't bad, parsing "Phish" would be interesting.)

      The video camera actually isn't unlikely, though the iSight isn't designed to be used in such a portable manner. They could license/design a camera like digital phones have, but the screen price would go up (or margin would go down).

      --
      R: That voice. Where have I heard that voice before? B: In about 365 other episodes. But I don't know who it is either.
    4. Re:I'm waiting for the model with mic/line in by SharkJumper · · Score: 1

      This may be evidence, if not proof:

      ipoding.com

    5. Re:I'm waiting for the model with mic/line in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bought a Sony MiniDisc player that has a line in to be able to record. It works nicely. It's small, and the media is cheap.

    6. Re:I'm waiting for the model with mic/line in by g0at · · Score: 1

      Word to Big Bird. I've stated the same position for months (probably more than a year) now. Here's hopin'.

      I can't see it replacing 4-trackers, but to do stereo to disk would be killer. Recording live shows, exactly.

      Since the disk would be spinning full time, though, I wonder what kind of record time one would get (battery would be the limiting factor).

      -b

    7. Re:I'm waiting for the model with mic/line in by smithmc · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, there's no actual proof that they're ever going to make one, but c'mon, isn't it the obvious next step?

      You can have this now, from Neuros - plus FM in and out, and swappable HD or flash "sleds" to boot. I'm seriously considering buying one.

      --
      Downmodding is the refuge of the weak. Don't downmod, make a better argument!
    8. Re:I'm waiting for the model with mic/line in by eyver · · Score: 1

      Since the disk would be spinning full time, though, I wonder what kind of record time one would get (battery would be the limiting factor).

      Actually, it would be the disk itself that would be the limiting factor. Apple doesn't recommend booting off an iPod because it might overheat the device from too much use on the drive -- recording would be just the same, I'd assume.

    9. Re:I'm waiting for the model with mic/line in by g0at · · Score: 1

      Apple doesn't recommend booting off an iPod because it might overheat the device from too much use on the drive

      Really? I didn't know that. One would think then that using it as an external hard disk would be just as bad, no? How do you differentiate between good and excessive use?

      -b

  36. Re:new imac problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ok, i'll bite...

    $ du -sm test.avi
    33 test.avi
    $ time cp test.avi /tmp/
    real 0m4.173s
    user 0m0.010s
    sys 0m1.010s
    $ cat /proc/cpuinfo
    cpu : 740/750
    temperature : 55-57 C (uncalibrated)
    clock : 399MHz
    revision : 130.2 (pvr 0008 8202)
    bogomips : 801.17
    machine : PowerBook1,1
    motherboard : PowerBook1,1 MacRISC Power Macintosh
    L2 cache : 512K unified
    memory : 384MB
    pmac-generation : NewWorld

  37. I just started using Bluetooth by sjbe · · Score: 4, Informative

    Interesting that these machines use Bluetooth. My Thinkpad has bluetooth built in and I've just picked up a Bluetooth phone (Nokia 6310i). Bluetooth is *really* slick. I love not having to get my phone out of my bag to check contacts or sync with my address book. I can send SMS messages from my computer via Mobile Master again without having to locate my phone or punch text into a keyboard not designed for it.

    I'm now very seriously considering getting a car speaker set for my vehicle and I'm certain my next PDA will have bluetooth. My next laptop will probably be a Powerbook and I hope they have bluetooth built in by then because I'm going to want it. It's one of those nifty technologies you wonder why you didn't bother with before.

    Oh, if you do have a Nokia phone, their Nokia Connection Manager software is a bit hit/miss as to whether it will work with a given bluetooth device. Doesn't work with my T30 but I've been able to work around it. YMMV.

    1. Re:I just started using Bluetooth by hype7 · · Score: 3, Informative
      Interesting that these machines use Bluetooth. My Thinkpad has bluetooth built in and I've just picked up a Bluetooth phone (Nokia 6310i). Bluetooth is *really* slick. I love not having to get my phone out of my bag to check contacts or sync with my address book. I can send SMS messages from my computer via Mobile Master again without having to locate my phone or punch text into a keyboard not designed for it.

      I'm now very seriously considering getting a car speaker set for my vehicle and I'm certain my next PDA will have bluetooth. My next laptop will probably be a Powerbook and I hope they have bluetooth built in by then because I'm going to want it. It's one of those nifty technologies you wonder why you didn't bother with before.

      Oh, if you do have a Nokia phone, their Nokia Connection Manager software is a bit hit/miss as to whether it will work with a given bluetooth device. Doesn't work with my T30 but I've been able to work around it. YMMV.


      Bluetooth is standard on the 12 inch and 17 inch powerbooks; you have to buy an adaptor to use it on the 15 inch ones, but everyone expects that will change at MacWorld Paris.

      The BT integration in OS X is fantastic. It works with a lot of different devices, and all the functionality that you talk about in your post is built in - no third party tools required. iSync syncs contacts via Bluetooth (and for your iPod etc, just not wireless :) and lets you do the SMSing and dialling/answering from the computer.

      The other cool thing is connecting via GPRS via Bluetooth. You can have a semi-fast totally wireless connection without even getting your phone out of your bag, just your computer.

      -- james
    2. Re:I just started using Bluetooth by hype7 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I must have mis-spelt a HREF tag on that post - it's Address Book, located here that lets you do the SMSing and dialling, etc.

      While I'm at it, I guess it would be pretty hard not to mention Salling Clicker, the most awesome little Bluetooth app I've seen. You can effectively control your mac through your phone because of this - it can run scripts to do all kinds of stuff, from presentations to controlling iTunes and DVD player. You can create more scripts through AppleScript too. The sky is the limit! :)

      -- james

    3. Re:I just started using Bluetooth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love not having to get my phone out of my bag to check contacts

      More and more we're seeing people on this site refer to 'my bag' with reference, apparently, to carrying around their 'gear.'

      Guess which word 'bag' rhymes with?

    4. Re:I just started using Bluetooth by darrylo · · Score: 1
      While bluetooth is really cool, I'd be worried about being "bluejacked" ("bluespammed"?). With the current generation of bluetooth phones (US only?), you can supposedly scan for and send messages to any nearby bluetooth-enabled phone. There seems to be no way to prevent from getting spammed, aside from disabling bluetooth on your phone (which is a real bummer, as bluetooth headsets are really cool).

      And, yes, I know that bluetooth does have provision for security. It's just that the current generation of (US GSM/GPRS) phones don't seem to be using it (and, I'd loved to be proved incorrect).

    5. Re:I just started using Bluetooth by IM6100 · · Score: 1

      So now all we need is someone to come up with a 'war grabbing' app that runs on some sort of portable bluetooth device with 'smarts' and people will be able to walk by these folks with their blue-tooth reachable 'Address Book' and harvest some email addys for spamming purposes.

      --
      A Good Intro to NetBS
    6. Re:I just started using Bluetooth by ipjohnson · · Score: 1

      I was thinking more of a bluetooth virus that hoped around to open devices :)

    7. Re:I just started using Bluetooth by stingerman101 · · Score: 1

      Personally, I prefer the USB-bluetooth adapter approach since it means that I can easily upgrade to newer standards as needed. There are also nice USB-802.11 plug-ins too.

    8. Re:I just started using Bluetooth by cheekyboy · · Score: 1

      Correct me if im wrong, but doesnt Bluetooth ALWAYS ON, suck a lot of battery on mobiles?

      --
      Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
    9. Re:I just started using Bluetooth by hobbit · · Score: 1


      Guess which word 'bag' rhymes with?

      Guess how much fun life is going to be, once you're out of diapers and have stopped playing rhyming games and thinking that it's funny to make references to homosexuality all the time?

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
  38. Think of it as backup and insurance :D by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've got 80+ albums at an average of $22 each or so (a lot of import CDs from Japan), so maybe $1,760 worth of music resides on my iPod... my then $399 now $299 10gb iPod is cheap insurance against my music collection getting stolen in my car, for example, while simultaneously allowing me to access *all* my music in a simple fashion.

    Then there's the fact that my iPod is *also* a backup of my PowerMac, which is worth much more to me than $299; the peace of mind of having a portable bootable backup is immeasurable, short of spending 2 years recreating all the data on my PowerMac.

    Sure, there are other hard drive based mp3 players, but none that allow me to boot my PowerMac, and none that allow me to copy my entire music collection onto it in 6 minutes.

    1. Re:Think of it as backup and insurance :D by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well HDD space costs less than a dollar/gigabyte. So if you want insurance get a cheap 120GB HDD.

    2. Re:Think of it as backup and insurance :D by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 2, Informative

      But how about an MP3 player that holds all of my songs? What would you suggest, on top of buying a $60 HD?

      *Note, with an iPod, all the music is synched, so I've actually got two backups; my PowerMac is the main copy, the iPod is the backup of my music.

      **Data storage is actually cheaper using DVD-Rs than HD, so I archive to DVD

      ***iPods provide 'offsite' backup insurance, where a 120gb HD does not.

    3. Re:Think of it as backup and insurance :D by johnrpenner · · Score: 2, Interesting


      rule of thumb: your stereo should cost about as much as your CD collection.

      so, if you've got a small CD collection (10 CDs * $20) - then you should get a $200 gheto blaster to play them on.

      if you've got a larger CD collection (100 CDs * $20) - then you shouldn't feel bad about getting a good stereo (~$2000) to listen to them on.

      your mileage may vary...

      john

  39. Damn. Missed it by two weeks. by Mr.+Darl+McBride · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I just bought a 30g iPod, and Apple made me wait 4 weeks for shipping because they were drop-shipping from out of country. The phone representative said it was really unusual and she wasn't sure why they were doing it this way.

    Guess I know now. They were clearing out the 30s to be replaced by the 40s at the same price. Ah well. It holds more than enough music to keep me engaged.

    Out of curiosity though, did anyone get lucky and order a 30, then get notice that they'd receive a 40 at the same price? That they aren't selling the 30 at all right after the announcement makes me think they waited until they'd completely exhausted inventory before the release.

    1. Re:Damn. Missed it by two weeks. by sammaffei · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, if it's like everything else new that Apple ships, they truly won't be available for 2-3 months.

      Enjoy your 30 in hand.

      Me, I sorta glad I bought my Powerbook G4 1Ghz, instead of waiting months for a speed bumped version to show up.

      --

      Political correctness is the newest form of slavery.

    2. Re:Damn. Missed it by two weeks. by ladyslug · · Score: 1

      I hear you. I just bought a 15G iPod 3 weeks ago (which only arrived last Friday, due to strange Apple shipping policies) and now I find out that I could have bought a 20G for the very same price! Ah, well, I haven't filled up the 15G one or anything, so I suppose it's alright. I still feel a mite stupid, however. I hadn't heard even an inkling of this swap beforehand, however. Did anyone see this coming? Was I just not paying attention?

    3. Re:Damn. Missed it by two weeks. by Mr.+Darl+McBride · · Score: 1
      As far as I know, the MW announcement was the first.

      If you're inclined, you can return it within the first 10 business days after receiving it. I thought about it a while and opted not to myself, as the bigger drive model is an unknown quantity. For all I know, those could turn out to have problems or have a bit less battery life. Better to stick with the well-tested model and let others test for future reference. :)

  40. Re:new imac problem by Aikido+Al · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    You write:

    "I have recently upgraded from a Mac 8600/300 w/64 Megs of RAM to a new G5 dual 2GHz with AGP 8X and PCI-X to help me at my freelance gig where I copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. On the G5 I spent about 20 minutes trying to install Adobe Arcobat 6. 20 minutes. At home, on my Pentium Pro 200 running NT 4, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this Mac, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that."

    It sounds like you might be having problems with your internet settings (I'm wondering if you have dial-up, DSL, or a cable modem) or you just flat out got a lemon from the factory. Which just happens. I work IT for the University of Texas where we get boatloads of Apple machines and every once in awhile we get a lemon. Send it back and get it replaced.

    However, I haven't encountered any machines (iMac, ibook, G4, G5) that has the same symptoms you've described. If anything like that happens it's usually due to our internet connection or router. So out of the 500 machines that I maintain, I'd have to say that your problem is not typical.

    Also of note that you made a huge jump from a 8600 (possibly running anything from OS 8 to 9.2.2) to a G5 running OSX. So maybe (no flame intended) there might be some unfamiliarity involved?

    --Aikidoal

  41. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    What kind of moron modded it as offtopic? This is an extremely informative link...better than the original article.

  42. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not only an MP3 player, but also an external storage device.

    That's the revolution, my friend. Vive la revolution!

  43. Don't like pricing... by johnny0101 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    What i don't like is the fact that, sure they [Apple] upped the Ghz on the iMac, but they don't have the slower model for less money.
    I would buy the slower model (800mhz g4) for less money but Apple doesn't give me the option.
    One has to pay the same price whenever they buy the computer from Apple.
    I know, I know, profit margins and such :P but it still pisses me off

    --

    ----
    In Soviet Russia, the overlords welcome you!
    1. Re:Don't like pricing... by stratjakt · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Cheaper model Macs would ruin Apple.

      Thing is, if you keep prices high, you keep the status symbol thing. They don't want everyone running around with iPods.

      Look at how the image of owning a Porsche has fallen since they introduced low-end vehicles like the Boxter. It's not nearly as impressive to see one when the road is full of them, it's just another car. Folks are actually more impressed by a Nissan Z roadster these days.

      If Rolex made a $20 watch, how do you brag "look at my Rolex!"? You dont, and that's about the only real reason to buy a Rolex.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    2. Re:Don't like pricing... by justytylor23 · · Score: 1

      Ahem: eMacs bottom out at 799. You're half right about some of this, but that doesn't mean that Macs are impossible to get except by the "Artsy-Fartsy" who are meant to be bled dry.

    3. Re:Don't like pricing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What i don't like is the fact that, sure they [Apple] upped the Ghz on the iMac, but they don't have the slower model for less money.

      Remember the mid-1990's? The bad old days for Apple, before Jobs returned as interim CEO. Apple was producing dozens (literally!) of Mac models: desktops, desksides, servers, laptops. It was a mess, and it cost the company a fortune. It costs money to produce lots of different kinds of computers, and lots of different models of each kind.

      Jobs struck virtually everything from the product line. Three computers (iMac, PowerBook, G3) each with three stock models ("good" "better" "best"). Later, with the introduction of the iBook, that became four computers. Since, it's changed a bit more, but the core idea remains the same.

      Have sales improved? Yeah, pretty significantly. But more importantly, operating costs have plummeted. That's the key to Apple's success. The result? Eighteen of twenty profitable quarters over the past five years. That's unheard of in the industry, especially in a down-economy.

      If Apple kept an 800 MHz G4 on the books, they'd end up losing money on it. Which would be bad for everybody.

      You just need to accept that you're going to spend about $3000 on a new Mac, and that you're going to do it about every four or five years.

    4. Re:Don't like pricing... by johnny0101 · · Score: 1

      If they were really serious about the 'switch' campaign, you would think they would make it more affordable to own a Mac.

      I think the apple zealot mods may think i'm anti-apple, but i do own a g4 powerbook which i love :D It just cost both arms and a leg.

      --

      ----
      In Soviet Russia, the overlords welcome you!
    5. Re:Don't like pricing... by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 1

      i do own a g4 powerbook which i love :D It just cost both arms and a leg.

      Now we know the real reason for Apple's one-button mouse!

      (thanks, i'll be here all week)

    6. Re:Don't like pricing... by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 1

      Apple has a fine tradition of doing this. Remember when a no-frills Apple ][ cost about $2000? And when Apple announced a cost-reduced Apple ][, how much did the price drop? $0, my friend. They kept prices the same and pocketed the difference.

  44. You are so lazy! by Macka · · Score: 3, Insightful


    You could have looked up http://www.xe.com/ucc and done the conversion yourself in less time than it took you to complain about it.

    Consider it a reminder that you don't live in the center of the universe, and that there are actually people living elsewhere on this spinning rock that are just as entitled to have their currency represented as you are!

    1. Re:You are so lazy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      uh, no. America is THE most important country in the world. Sorry man, that's how it is.

    2. Re:You are so lazy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The americans don't have a VAT, and the prices of items often vary between countries even after conversion. Pricing on items like brand new macs are not portable across borders.

    3. Re:You are so lazy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      damn straight!

    4. Re:You are so lazy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I keep seeing posts here about these alleged "other places", yet nobody has every provided a link to any proof of this. Until I see one, I don't believe it.

    5. Re:You are so lazy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "America is THE most important country in the world."

      But still, it's not to late to get out. It's a beautiful world out there ...

    6. Re:You are so lazy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      "America is THE most important country in the world. Sorry man, that's how it is."

      Some would say that it's 50 countries with a friendly agreement

    7. Re:You are so lazy! by afidel · · Score: 1

      Some would say that it's 50 countries with a friendly agreement

      Well since California alone is the WORLD'S fifth largest economy I guess that is a good analogy =)

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    8. Re:You are so lazy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      -5 You Insensitive Clod!

    9. Re:You are so lazy! by Slime-dogg · · Score: 1

      That's news to me. I didn't even know that America was a country. Did we have some massive politico changes since I've been hiding under my rock?

      Ahh... at least that embargo is lifted so I can smoke some good cigars.

      --
      You need to restart your computer. Hold down the Power button for several seconds or press the Restart button.
    10. Re:You are so lazy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, you're assuming the prices are the same in different markets. Not necessarily so.

    11. Re:You are so lazy! by Hoser+McMoose · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't live in the States either, but if I'm posting prices, I post in either US dollars or Euro. Why? Because those are two currencies that MOST people in the world are fairly familiar with.

      The simple fact of the matter is that there are only three hard currencies in the world today, the US dollar, the Euro and the Yen. My Canadian dollars are just fine here in Canada, but everywhere else they're pretty useless. Same with the british pound, it's only good for Britain (hell, sometimes you can't even use Scotish-British pounds in England or Northern Ireland-British pounds anywhere aside from Northern Ireland!)

      Fortunately it seems that the British parliment actually does appear to be considering taking their blinders off and switching to the Euro (something they SHOULD have done two years ago if they had been smart).

    12. Re:You are so lazy! by dacetone · · Score: 1

      I wish! Then i could smoke pot in my home in AK with no fear of the men in black busting down my door.

      --
      Just follow the day, and reach fo
    13. Re:You are so lazy! by Vlad_the_Inhaler · · Score: 1

      I am English and live in the Euro-Zone, the situation is not as simple as you think.
      On the one hand, currency instability between the two currencies is hurting Britain;
      On the other hand, the Euro-Zone has been in a slump since the Euro became legal tender and some of that is directly due to the switch itself - things were perceived to be getting more expensive (especially restaurants) and people started hanging on to their cash. Some of that perception was wrong, but some was real and the end effect of the reduced spending has been a financial mess. Of course it did not help that the US was having it's own unrelated problems, that just made things worse.

      --
      Mielipiteet omiani - Opinions personal, facts suspect.
  45. ipod by MoFoQ · · Score: 5, Funny

    D'OH!!!!

    And here I am with an out-dated 30GB ipod....

    Maybe it's time for those pitchforks and flaming torches again....

    1. Re:ipod by sxltrex · · Score: 1

      MoFoQ chucks ipod into the fire.

      ipod: I can still make you happy! To the Max!!

    2. Re:ipod by kelzer · · Score: 1

      That's OK, you can just offer it on eBay along with a maxed-out 17" PowerBook and 23" Cinema Display for like $2200.

      --

      ---------------------------------------------
      SERENITY NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    3. Re:ipod by MoFoQ · · Score: 1

      MoFoQ wonders when they will release a bigger Cinema Display (> 23")....

    4. Re:ipod by hobbit · · Score: 1


      Man, that's just so August! It's all dual-2GHz G5s these days. And you've been ripped off; I can get one with two cinema displays for $700.

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
  46. Yes they do (well, sort of) by crow · · Score: 3, Informative

    If you go to the Apple Store, there are three base models of iMacs to choose from. The top model has the AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth built-in.

    1. Re:Yes they do (well, sort of) by 11223 · · Score: 1

      That's a CTO model.

    2. Re:Yes they do (well, sort of) by 11223 · · Score: 1
      I made the mistake of selecting "no karma bonus" in my correction to this post.

      There are only two base models of iMacs. The third is a CTO that Apple just selects everything on. You can't order bluetooth from any independent retailer as a built-in option.

      Moderators, please realize that the parent post is factually incorrect.

    3. Re:Yes they do (well, sort of) by crow · · Score: 1

      If we're going to find nits to pick...

      Actually, my post is correct. I simply stated that the Apple Store lists three versions of the iMac. I don't know what you mean by CTO ("Chief Technology Officer?"), but I don't see why it matters. Apple is clearly marketing the iMac at their online store as having three base models, even if the only difference between two of them is what options are selected. So technically, there is a version of the iMac that has Bluetooth and Airport Extreme built in, or at least sort of, as I indicated in the subject.

    4. Re:Yes they do (well, sort of) by 11223 · · Score: 1
      Configured To Order.

      These units are built separately by Apple. The retailers will only stock two SKUs for the iMac, and all CTO units are based on those stock units.

  47. Re:Hooray! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How the hell are these flamebaits. Someone gave LUCA modpoints again

  48. iMac stats by prell · · Score: 1

    Whoa whoa!

    The new BASELINE iMac is now a G4 1GHz, with a GeForce4 MX? All that, an 80 gig HDD, and a 15" LCD, for $1299, is pretty damn hard to beat..

    1. Re:iMac stats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Athlon XP 2200+ - $63
      Abit NF7-S motherboard with firewire and serial ATA - $104
      256MB of memory - $32
      GeForce4 MX - $40
      80GB HDD - $62
      15" LCD - $200
      case+keyboard+mouse - $100
      CD-RW - $30
      => $631

    2. Re:iMac stats by RumpRoast · · Score: 0

      You forgot the software costs, tech support/warranty costs, but yeah, Macs are still a rip off. Better to price what you can buy with $1300, and compare that. $1300 builds a hell of a PC.

      --

      My Ass hurts.
    3. Re:iMac stats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's in british pounds, champ. Double that to (roughly) get USD.

    4. Re:iMac stats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GeForce4 MX - $69.00 list...can get for $45
      Maxtor 80GB harddrive - $82.60
      NEC 15" LCD - $302.99

      The other $846 is all CPU/RAM. Not hard to beat at all.

    5. Re:iMac stats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Excellent. Now I have a living room full of parts. When can I get on the internet?

      Oh, wait. You mean I have to put it together first? Hell, that's going to take HOURS. Time isn't free you know. I don't wanna blow my Saturday reading manuals that look like they were originally written in Bangladeshi and run through babelfish.

      Okay, fine, I'll built it myself. Shit.

      (Time passes...)

      Okay, it's Saturday night, and I've finally got it all assembled. Time to get it on the Internet. Where's the AirPort card? Oh, shit, what do you mean I didn't buy an AirPort card? I don't want to have cables lying all over my floor! Gots to have an AirPort card. Hey, come to think of it... where's the AirPort card go? Where's the wireless slot? NO WIRELESS SLOT!? FUCK!

      Okay, okay, bargain basement time. No wireless. I'll run a cable out to the garage where my cable modem's mounted. That'll be okay. Let me just plug it in and turn it on.

      Huh. What does this mean? Where's the desktop? WHAT DO YOU MEAN I HAVE TO INSTALL AN OPERATING SYSTEM!?! SHIT! All I want to do is get on the Internet, send some email, do some chatting, listen to some music, upload some pictures to my web site, maybe edit a couple of home movies. What the hell's so hard about that?

      Fine, I'll go to the store and buy a SEPARATE Windows license. Fine. Shit.

      (Time passes...)

      Okay, got my Windows. Now I have to install it.

      (Time passes...)

      Finally. Windows is installed. I'm booted up. Oooh, look. There's IE, and MSN. Excellent, I'm finally getting down to business.

      Where's iTunes? What? No, I'm not stupid, I know there's no iTunes for Windows. But there's an equivalent, right? Something I can use to organize and listen to my music?

      YOU MEAN I HAVE TO PAY EXTRA FOR THAT??

      Okay, fine, maybe that won't be such a big deal. Where's the iPhoto equivalent? The iDVD equivalent? The iMovie equivalent?

      Fine, fine, I can live without all of those. Where's iSync? I want to sync up my iPod.

      What?

      Son of a bitch.

      Fuck this. I'm returning all of this shit and buying an iMac.

      WHAT?? What do you mean they won't take returns on open boxes? RESTOCKING FEE? FUCK YOU!

    6. Re:iMac stats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yea, what people really need is a box with a big shiny button which says "INTERNET" so they can just push the button and be done.

    7. Re:iMac stats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You drive a hard-bargain, buddy. Fine.

      Dell Dimension 2400
      P4 2.2GHz
      512MB RAM
      120GB HD
      CD-RW / DVD+RW
      17" LCD
      Altec Lansing(R) ADA215 Speakers
      Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition
      56k Modem
      10/100 Ethernet
      USB Wireless
      2 Year at home service warrenty
      $1,318 before $100 mail-in rebate ($1218 after)

      More of everything for same price.

    8. Re:iMac stats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and blaster is free:0)

    9. Re:iMac stats by La+Temperanza · · Score: 1

      Sure. Just show me any new PowerPC chip and motherboard that you can get for under $846. I suppose you could gut a $799 eMac...

      --

      --
      est modus in rebus
    10. Re:iMac stats by green+pizza · · Score: 1

      yea, what people really need is a box with a big shiny button which says "INTERNET" so they can just push the button and be done.

      Hehe! Back in highschool (AMD K5 days) I had a teacher that bought a Compaq equiped with the "i" internet button. Right out of the box from the factory, poking that button would bluescreen Win95. Fun stuff.

    11. Re:iMac stats by stingerman101 · · Score: 1

      XP-Pro - $199 Warranty and repair- $200 iLife Suite for Windows- None. equivalent ~ $200. Appleworks or equiv - $79 to name a few...

  49. What's next? by mblase · · Score: 1

    iTunes Music Store for Windows, mainly. Already in the works.

    That and the iSight FireWire webcam, which integrates nicely with iChat AV for broadband videoconferencing. Presumably if/when it's a hit, they'll start work on a USB 2.0 version and iChat AV for Windows.

  50. Brilliant! by green+pizza · · Score: 5, Funny

    I thought you were saying that the new iPods had BlueTooth and Airport Extreme support, heh.

    Now, that would rock. Apple, are you listening?


    Wow, I'll bet Steve Jobs is reading your Slashdot post right now thinking "wireless! Damn, why didn't I think of that!".

    1. Re:Brilliant! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ROFL

    2. Re:Brilliant! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hahahahahaha You sir, are a winner!

  51. Re:Notice that the pricing is in Pounds, not Dolla by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Still not a bad price, considering what you get.

    What planet are you from?

  52. *BSD is dying! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    "*pple : proudly going out of business for 25 years!"

    1. Re:*BSD is dying! by Illbay · · Score: 1

      Does that include "Snapple" then?

      --
      Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
    2. Re:*BSD is dying! by Sri+Lumpa · · Score: 2, Funny


      Yeah, and Apple is so proud of their lead in dying that they even incorporated the BSD userland for OSX so their customers could get twice the dying for the same price.

      Apple, may you continue dying for the next hundred years.

      --
      "The obvious mathematical breakthrough would be development of an easy way to factor large prime numbers." Bill Gates,
  53. Re:Notice that the pricing is in Pounds, not Dolla by doktor-hladnjak · · Score: 1

    Ya, but that VAT will nail you every time. In the US, they sell for $2,448 + tax.

  54. 46.05 GB by stego · · Score: 1

    My collection right now is 8994 songs at 46.05 GB. But I'm happy w/ 10 GB iPod.

    It'd be nice to have everything backed up even more redundantly, though.

    1. Re:46.05 GB by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And how many of those did you pay for?

    2. Re:46.05 GB by stego · · Score: 1

      About 50% is ripped from my CD collection, maybe 10% is legal free ($) stuff. I've bought a few CDs worth of stuff from the iTumes store recently, for the ease and quality. The rest is fair-use copied :)

  55. OS9ers by polyp2000 · · Score: 0

    OS9 Is crap, the list of things that are crap about it are endless. OSX is the Sole reason I am now considering buying an apple laptop, OS9 die hards would know what a proper unix was let alone the many benefits it has of OS9. OSX has a proper terminal, it has proper multitasking, it has the mature stability of a BSD *nix, and the nicest gui I've ever seen on any *nix (although IMHO its a bit heavy weight) OSX can run industry standard web applications such as APACHE MySQL and PHP and half decent email servers. OS9'ers are stuck with the atrocities of EIM's, Webstar and god knows what else.

    Windows is superior to OS9 in many ways I dont care what you say, But OSX pisses all over it.

    Anyway thats my informative rant . I use 100% Gentoo Linux at the moment btw , And when I do get a nice Apple Laptop it will dual boot into Yellow Dog..

    --
    Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
  56. Re:Hooray! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >the cost of Macs just doesn't justify it for me.

    The cost to get the hell away from Microsoft? Priceless.

  57. Please Apple, by GoofyBoy · · Score: 2, Insightful



    Could you please just make a PDA already?

    If anything, it will force other PDA makers to keep up with you and we call can have better products.

    --
    The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
    1. Re:Please Apple, by tuffy · · Score: 1
      Could you please just make a PDA already?

      If anything, it will force other PDA makers to keep up with you and we call can have better products.

      I'm pretty sure they already have. Perhaps a new one might sell better, but it'll be an uphill battle without the PalmOS's software base.

      --

      Ita erat quando hic adveni.

  58. Re:only cool if it runs the same os as the g4 towe by yesod · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I'd have to agree with the SCSi comment. Backing up my Xserve to tape burns too much cpu that network connections get dropped. Using the official Apple SCSI card, with Retrospect 5.1 - but it just spends so much time in the kernel that you'd think it was busy waiting.

    Thats about the only problem I have with OS-X though - apart from that its pretty solid (and I run the backups in the middle of the night anyway ;)

  59. Re:new imac problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey Aikidoal:

    There's a big ol hook (with some stale bait) hanging from your lower lip.

    And I've also got some bad news about that online "girlfriend" you've been writing those long, heartfelt letters to...

  60. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Rio is bigger in two of the three dimensions - notably the ones that matter most when trying to fit it in your pocket.

    It's also fugly, but you didn't mention prettyness in your post. =p

  61. Re:new imac problem by DaRat · · Score: 1, Funny

    Maybe it's a new version of the more recent worms that copies itself from machine to machine and auto-comments on any Apple related post with a variant of the same message?

    Once the author perfects the worm, he's is expecting to have godlike karma in no time.

  62. Re:Ipod question-Lectures & language by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have a 15gb iPod and when filled it on the first transfer--the problem being that I have a whole bunch of MP3 lectures and language training stuff on my library--I had to back things and just transfer some playlists instead.

  63. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Both of those are ugly as sin and lacking in basic features. No FireWire. No AAC support, either encrypted or unencrypted; oh-so-useful WMA instead. No on-the-go playlists. No synching with iTunes. No support for storing contacts and calendar items. The list goes on.

    Nobody said the new iPods were revolutionary. (The first one was, of course.) Rather, they're simply better products than the competition.

  64. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Just wait until the "right-click" concept just blows them away.

    --
    The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
  65. Re:Screw Macs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they aren't even going to win their division

  66. Re:new imac problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like the parent trolled you, and good. Did I mention that I just bought an IBM AIX server to hold my MP3 collection while I reinstall WIndows on my real PC (which happens to be a Pentium 166)....

  67. Re:new imac problem by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

    Geez, give it up. I've seen your posts before. They don't make a whole lot of sense and you ruin any credibility by posting AC.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  68. Audio in by zoidberg2k · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The new Imacs have grown an analogue audio in port.

    1. Re:Audio in by IM6100 · · Score: 1

      Gee. That's innovative.

      My cheap Chembook 486 laptop has an analog audio in port, and I bought it at auction this summer for $5.

      --
      A Good Intro to NetBS
    2. Re:Audio in by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Before you know it, the iMacs will have grown a floppy disk drive too!

  69. Re:new imac problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hjajajajaja

    lol!~!!~~!!@@!!!!

    YHBT YHL HAND

    dumbass

    Reason: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.
    Reason: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.
    Reason: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.
    Reason: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.

  70. are you hiring? by Bizzarobot · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...to help me at my freelance gig where I copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder.

    I have experience in copying files of all sizes and can provide references! What's the pay-scale?

    1. Re:are you hiring? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you should check out GroupSoft.

  71. Re:new imac problem by SMacTech · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I highly doubt you have a dual G5 and besides the fact it is pure bullshit even if you did have one.

  72. Check this out! by corgicorgi · · Score: 1
  73. That's easy... by sczimme · · Score: 1


    Just mux the two 400 ports together, et voila! Firewire 800!

    PS No, I can't imagine any kind of cluster of anything.

    PPS Yes, I'm joking (about the first part, not the second). &:-P

    --
    I want to drag this out as long as possible. Bring me my protractor.
  74. ARRRRRGGGGHHHH! What?!? No audio input? by GryphonTech · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What are they thinking? This is what everyone wants.

    This is what everyone is screaming for! (at least I am)
    I mean, what with Sony being paranoid with their MD format, the market is screaming for a digital recorder that you can actually use.

    Why is this so hard for Apple to understand.

    -- I drank WHAT!!??!! , Socrates

  75. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by matthew.thompson · · Score: 1

    Rio Karma - 2.7 X 3.0 X 0.9 = 7.29
    Apple iPod - 4.1 X 2.4 X 0.62 = 6.1008

    I make the iPod smaller.

    Not that the Karma is a BAD player - it's just not as small as the Rio fanboys claim :-)

    --
    Matt Thompson - Actuality - Insert product here.
  76. Re:Hooray! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Sure, but none of 'em can run OS X. I'm all for Mac (switched in January when they released the 17" PowerBooks) but what makes it great is not as much the machine as the OS.

    Sure the machines are sexy but the OS beats anything else that I have ever used, hands down.

    Stability, simplicity, flexibility, speed, features, eye candy, all of it -- nothing else is even in the same league as OS X. With Panther just around the corner it puts OS X up another rung in the OS superiority ladder.

    Let's not forget about the recent Virus fun most Windows users just had. Yay Windows, congratulations on winning -- and likely close to losing the US DHS contract.. you bunch of tools!

    Sure, underneath OS X is BSD. BSD is godely, but you can't get an out of the box BSD distribution that has it's stuff together as good as OS X does out of the box. Sleep actually works (within 2-3 seconds of opening or closing) too. This is something that was hit and miss with Windows and a pain in the butt with Linux.

  77. eDigital's player by Douglas+Simmons · · Score: 2, Informative


    eDigital's been selling their Odyssey 1000 player for a very long time, which is almost the size of an iPod, stores 20GB, and though it doesn't appear to have a line-in, it does have a built-in mic to record your lectures. Also, its mic does the voice-recognition thing so you can cue up your Phish shows without having to press any annoying buttons. Battery lasts 12hrs, and it also sports an FM tuner.

    1. Re:eDigital's player by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      12hrs battery?

      What good is that when the average Phish show lasts 14hrs?

      zack

  78. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Snort. Complaining that a 2 year old product isn't revolutionary is pretty funny.

  79. Re:new imac problem by cK-Gunslinger · · Score: 1

    Ever heard the phrase: YHBT, HAND? =)

  80. Great use for 802.11 & || bluetooth on ipods by Dave500 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I am beginning to wonder when apple will be brave enough to release what has to be the "killer" 802.11 application for mp3 players - personal streaming.

    Just imagine how cool it would be to share your music and playlists with any other ipod user within range. Tired of your own collection? Try listening to Bob's ipod 4 seats behind you.

    The register has also thought about this - http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/28467.html

    What do people think? I would love this, but there are - erm - interesting legal aspects.. ;)

  81. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Angostura · · Score: 1
    There are a couple of reasons that the iPod appeals, I think - and it must appeal for some reason, given the number that are being bought. Only one is revolutionary:

    1. The styling and usability - nice, but not revolutionary. I suspect this accounts for many sales. Include in this the very nice desktop integration with Macs

    2. Firewire support. Not sure if the other devices you site have this, but it makes a real difference managing large libraries. Also makes it a much more practical external disk.

    3. Programmability. This, I think sets it apart from the herd - teh sheer number of hacks, tweaks 'turn-your-iPod-into-a-PDA' patches out there makes the iPod quite an interesting open-ish platform.

    No, I don't have one. But I would really rather like one.

  82. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ah, yes. Somebody else who doesn't get it.

    The "right click" concept blows away the users. Ever talk to a computer novice about the notion of "right click?" It's not obvious. It makes no sense. It has to be learned. What's worse, for the very young and very old who lack the same manual dexterity you've got, it's downright difficult to execute.

    There is no operation in Mac OS X that requires a second mouse button. (Some programs depend on three mouse buttons, but that's different.) In fact, in Mac OS X Panther, the second mouse button context menu has been all but done away with, replaced by the ubiquitous Action button. (The menus are still there, but they're utterly unnecessary and deprecated by the interface guidelines.)

    The objective is to make computers simpler. Not more complex.

  83. What's really interesting... by edremy · · Score: 5, Interesting
    is how little money this must be making Apple

    10M songs? Yeah, but it's only 0.99 per song, so that's less than $10M. IIRC, Apple keeps about a third of that, so ~$3M.

    How much did it cost to program, to feed the lawyers to get all the contracts, to set up the servers/bandwidth needed? (And the Apple Store is *fast*- they didn't skimp here.)

    I can't imagine this is going to have a big positive impact on Apple's bottom line, unless (and it's a big unless) the publicity they are getting sells more Macs/iPods. I wouldn't be surprised if this is the sole reason they are bothering.

    --
    "Seven Deadly Sins? I thought it was a to-do list!"
    1. Re:What's really interesting... by hype7 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      is how little money this must be making Apple

      10M songs? Yeah, but it's only 0.99 per song, so that's less than $10M. IIRC, Apple keeps about a third of that, so ~$3M.

      How much did it cost to program, to feed the lawyers to get all the contracts, to set up the servers/bandwidth needed? (And the Apple Store is *fast*- they didn't skimp here.)

      I can't imagine this is going to have a big positive impact on Apple's bottom line, unless (and it's a big unless) the publicity they are getting sells more Macs/iPods. I wouldn't be surprised if this is the sole reason they are bothering.


      All those costs you talk about are fixed costs.

      In other words, when this is deployed to Windows (the other 95% of the computer using population) - it will suddenly make up a lot more than 10 mill in revenue. It will go spastic.

      That will in turn encourage iPod sales, and those iPod sales will in turn encourage more music store purchases. Then they can start the real cross-pollination; "buy an iPod, get 10 free songs at the Apple Music Store".

      If enough people start doing it, it's gonna hit a critical mass then just explode. The only risk Apple faces is if MS/whoever starts eating Apple's dinner. OTOH, very few of the other solutions will work with the world's most popular MP3 player - the iPod.

      -- james
    2. Re:What's really interesting... by discstickers · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually, I think that Fred Anderson, Apple's CFO, basically said that. The iTMS is a trojan horse to get people to buy iPods and the iPod is a trojan horse to get people to buy Macs.

      --
      I have a shitty sig!
    3. Re:What's really interesting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OTOH, very few of the other solutions will work with the world's most popular MP3 player - the iPod.

      Yeah, because MP3s from one source are really incompatible with mp3s from another source.

    4. Re:What's really interesting... by NightSpots · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Just to nit-pick:

      Servers and bandwidth are not a fixed cost.

      When your load increases by a factor of 19, your costs for servers and bandwidth also go up.

    5. Re:What's really interesting... by Renderer+of+Evil · · Score: 4, Funny

      ...and Macs are like a Trojan Horse to Microsoft. Once you go Mac, you never go back.

      Funny how it all works.

    6. Re:What's really interesting... by cosmo7 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Remember: coffee first, then post:

      The other commercial solutions are not offering MP3s because they cannot get labels to agree to distribute music in that format. Most of the others are going the Microsoft route, which does not support the iPod.

    7. Re:What's really interesting... by antadam · · Score: 0

      actually, (don't remember where the article was, it's on slashdot or macslash), but apple keeps about 60 cents of each sale...so you mean 2/3's instead of 1/3 of the profit.

    8. Re:What's really interesting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doesn't the iTunes music store distribute in AAC format?

    9. Re:What's really interesting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's 30 cents.

    10. Re:What's really interesting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and Macs are like a Trojan Horse to Microsoft. Nah, Microsoft's got enough trojans in 'doze already. They don't need Macs... Well, except maybe to do work when their XP boxen are rebooting every 30 seconds.

    11. Re:What's really interesting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Programming isn't a fixed cost either. Programs of this magnitude are never "done".

    12. Re:What's really interesting... by sessamoid · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The other commercial solutions are not offering MP3s

      Neither is the iTMS, which uses the AAC format specifically because it's DRM-enabled. Granted, the DRM is less onerous than any of the other competing choices, and the fact that AAC provides better sound quality at the same bitrate is a bonus.

      --
      "No, no, no. Don't tug on that. You never know what it might be attached to."
    13. Re:What's really interesting... by summernot · · Score: 1

      Actually, I believe Fred Anderson said that the iTunes Music Store basically broke even last quarter. He didn't have precise numbers at that time (or if he did, he wasn't sharing them), but that what he did have indicated that it was already out of the red for the most part.

    14. Re:What's really interesting... by michrech · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      ...and Macs are like a Trojan Horse to Microsoft. Once you go Mac, you never go back.

      I just half to laugh every time I see this... and not just about macs. I have a MAC here in the store. Know what it's doing? Right now it's sitting on a folding table in a now unused room. Yea, it's plugged into the wall (for power, that is), but no, it's not on. I was in the process of putting Gentoo on it before we got too busy. I figured that if we are going to have the silly thing around, the LEAST it could do is be a samba server with a nice large HDD. Just haven't had the time to finish what I started with it.

      --
      bork bork bork!
    15. Re:What's really interesting... by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 1

      Neither is the iTMS, which uses the AAC format specifically because it's DRM-enabled. Granted, the DRM is less onerous than any of the other competing choices, and the fact that AAC provides better sound quality at the same bitrate is a bonus.

      DRM issues aside, AAC has the advantage of being an open audio format. Anyone can implement AAC and not need a license from M$ or Apple, or trying to reverse engineer the software. Some AAC compatible open source solutions can be found on Sourceforge.net. To list some:
      - AAC player for XMMS
      - Freeware Advanced Audio Coder
      - VLC

      Now bring DRM back into the picture and it places a limitation on AAC, but no more than Microsoft's solution.

      All this to say the iPod need not be the only personal digital music player to support AAC.

      --
      Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    16. Re:What's really interesting... by Frobozz0 · · Score: 1

      You have some great points. I think Apple is looking for mind-share, not dollars and cents. The more synonymous Apple is with hip culture, the more likely people will consider Macs as their new machine.

      --
      "Politicians find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the people."
    17. Re:What's really interesting... by afidel · · Score: 1

      AAC the format may have DRM but AAC the songs available from the iTMS have ZERO DRM turned on. Basically it's MP3 with a different compression scheme enabled. You can freely trade the AAC files from iTMS if you want. Whether this will still be true after the larger PC rollout I do not know, maybe Apple trusts their loyal fans more than the great unwashed.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    18. Re:What's really interesting... by JonathanBoyd · · Score: 1

      There is DRM and you can't trade iTMS files. Hence people trying to grab the raw audio output and trade that. There's no need to lie to support Apple.

    19. Re:What's really interesting... by Zhe+Mappel · · Score: 1
      All those costs you talk about are fixed costs.

      In other words, when this is deployed to Windows (the other 95% of the computer using population) - it will suddenly make up a lot more than 10 mill in revenue. It will go spastic.

      You are conflating principles with prediction. Governments do this all the time; see the recent Bush tax cuts, for example. If it turns out as you predict, great. If it does not turn out as you predict, then Apple will swallow all those costs.

      That will in turn encourage iPod sales, and those iPod sales will in turn encourage more music store purchases. Then they can start the real cross-pollination; "buy an iPod, get 10 free songs at the Apple Music Store".

      The only risk Apple faces is if MS/whoever starts eating Apple's dinner. OTOH, very few of the other solutions will work with the world's most popular MP3 player - the iPod.

      That's being optimistic! Actually, Apple faces many risks, including:

      -- People choosing to support the world's most popular model for mp3 downloads (P2P)
      -- Paying customers preferring to buy CDs
      -- Competitors of the ITMS driving future mp3 player purchases to other hardware
      -- Rising infrastructure costs for supporting Windoze users
      -- Compatibility obstacles introduced by MS into the Windoze OS to favor its delivery method

      Apple is dreaming, very mischievously, of supporting its threatened business model by way of the ultimate Trojan Horse: it will continue to make hardware that only 3-5% of consumers want, while underwriting its declining market share and rising R&D costs by driving this wonderful ITMS horse into the enemy's fortress. If it can make it work, super; I relish the thought of Windoze music fans subsidizing my favorite company. Time will tell.

    20. Re:What's really interesting... by vonFinkelstien · · Score: 1
      iTunes Music Store was created to sell more iPods!

      Any money from the sell of music is just icing on the iPod's revenue cake.

    21. Re:What's really interesting... by laird · · Score: 1

      "AAC the format may have DRM but AAC the songs available from the iTMS have ZERO DRM turned on. Basically it's MP3 with a different compression scheme enabled. You can freely trade the AAC files from iTMS if you want. Whether this will still be true after the larger PC rollout I do not know, maybe Apple trusts their loyal fans more than the great unwashed."

      This is incorrect. When you buy music from iTMS, it's encoded using AAC, and DRM protected using a technology Apple calls FairPlay. Admittedly it's a pretty simple/easy to live with DRM system, but one of the few things it does prevent is freely trading the Protected AAC files downloaded from iTMS.

    22. Re:What's really interesting... by sessamoid · · Score: 1
      DRM issues aside, AAC has the advantage of being an open audio format. Anyone can implement AAC and not need a license from M$ or Apple, or trying to reverse engineer the software.

      That's odd. I thought that AAC was licensed by Dolby. I don't see any exemption there for Free/Open Source software, though there may be one I haven't seen. It look to me that it requires a pay license to distribute both decoders and encoders.

      --
      "No, no, no. Don't tug on that. You never know what it might be attached to."
    23. Re:What's really interesting... by burns210 · · Score: 1

      How many ipods did the itunes music store help sell? How many imacs did the ITMS help sell...

      You are right, the ITMS isn't a huge moneymaker, it is profitable though. The ITMS is just another reason to say 'hey, maybe i should get one of them macs'. It compliments the Apple consumer hardware line, and that is where they make the big money.

    24. Re:What's really interesting... by burns210 · · Score: 1

      Ya, they are trojan horses... but they are profitable trojan's, and that is double great.

    25. Re:What's really interesting... by hobbit · · Score: 1

      Smoking crack in concept may be illegal but smoking crack the stuff you've got in your bowl right now is zero risk. Basically it's cocaine with a different molecule attached. You can freely smoke it without getting addicted. Whether this will still be true after the cold sweats set in I do not know, maybe I trust my dealer more than, huh, what's that you say, the real world? Never heard of it.

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
    26. Re:What's really interesting... by hobbit · · Score: 1


      Yours may be the most nonsensical post I've ever read on Slashdot.

      1. You misspell the "have" in "I just have to laugh".
      2. You say "and not just about Macs" which is all very enigmatic, but weakens your point considerably.
      3. You then claim to have a Media Access Control in your store.
      4. You grudgingly admit that it's plugged into the wall ("for power"), but I've got news for you: when a computer is off, it doesn't need power.

      No wonder you didn't have time to finish installing Gentoo, when you have yet to master this new-fangled electrickery!

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
    27. Re:What's really interesting... by michrech · · Score: 1

      1) I did *very* well in every English class I've ever taken. My placement test scores were off the charts when I had to re-take said placement tests when I switched High School's. I think the word "half" was just fine in that sentence, thank-you-very-much.

      2) What are you smoking? There are many "Once you've had (insert object here), you'll never go back" sayings - the same sayings I hinted at in my post. Many of them are subjective, and hence, wrong.

      3) I have no idea what the hell your talking about here...

      4) I still think your on something.. Since you seem to need the help, I was saying that I had Gentoo installed (the base, no X/KDE/Gnome/whatever) but beyond that, it sits on the table, unused.

      I think you need some professional help. Seriously.

      --
      bork bork bork!
    28. Re:What's really interesting... by hobbit · · Score: 1

      I think the word "half" was just fine in that sentence, thank-you-very-much.

      In that case, what the hell does that sentence mean? Let me guess. It means the same as it would have done with the word "have" in it?

      What are you smoking? There are many "Once you've had (insert object here), you'll never go back" sayings - the same sayings I hinted at in my post. Many of them are subjective, and hence, wrong.

      Yes, but if you laugh at everything of a particular kind, it doesn't carry as much weight as if you laugh only at one of a kind. Similar to if a member of the opposite sex flirts with everyone, it's not the same as if he or she only flirts with you. That's what I meant.

      I have no idea what the hell your talking about here...

      Well, why did you capitalise Mac? MAC means something else.

      I was saying that I had Gentoo installed (the base, no X/KDE/Gnome/whatever) but beyond that, it sits on the table, unused.

      Since you seem to need the help: you stated that the purpose of having your Mac plugged in was for power. That is not true, because it is not drawing any power. That is all.

      I suggest you go back to English class, or perhaps you just need a sense of humour?

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
  84. Re:new imac problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Overpriced hippy garbage. Always was, always will be. Where's my iPod and granola bar!

  85. Still no radio?!? by Baki · · Score: 2

    Argh, still no radio built in. I need an AM/FM radio and don't want to always take 2 devices with me, how much would it cost to add a radio and satisfy the wish/requirement of many?

    It has kept me from buying an Ipod until now. Once Irivers IHP-100 gets a larger harddisk (min. 15GB) I'll buy one of those.

    1. Re:Still no radio?!? by gamgee5273 · · Score: 2, Funny

      What is this "radio" of which you speak?

    2. Re:Still no radio?!? by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 1

      It's like... a streaming cast on a WiFi connection, except using a small handheld or portable audio device as your terminal client...

      Imagine an iBook accessing Apple.com's movie trailers with a wireless connection :D

  86. Re:new imac problem by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 1
    /proc/cpuinfo? must be linux. There isn't a proc tree on my MacOSX 10.2 machine (ibook/500Mhz). Either your powerbook has a more efficient disk, or is running under a lighter load, as
    [jeremy@callisto:~/desktop/downloads]$ du -sm *dmg
    39 MacOSXUpdate10.2.5.dmg
    [jeremy@callisto:~/desktop /downloads]$ time cp MacOSXUpdate10.2.5.dmg /tmp
    real 0m11.637s
    user 0m0.040s
    sys 0m1.670s
  87. Video iPod by SoupaFly · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Surprised no one has mentioned it yet, but I think the next 'big' thing in the iPod line is adding a good screen and video capability.

    1. Re:Video iPod by IM6100 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Why not big internal speakers and a permanently attached subwoofer?

      Heck, each unit could ship on it's own pallet.

      --
      A Good Intro to NetBS
  88. Get a Neuros by Joseph+Vigneau · · Score: 5, Informative
    Get a Neuros.
    • Plays Ogg Vorbis files (DI employs one of Vorbis' founders).
    • Can sync w/ Linux.
    • "Backpack" system lets you remove the hard drive when you want to go solid state. Also allows for upgrades (like the upcoming USB 2 backpack).
    • Open source cross-platform song manager (NeurosDBM)
    • Built-in FM tuner.
    • "MiSi" feature, which allows you to record a clip from FM, and have it identified when you sync.
    • Low-power FM transmitter, which can be picked up by a car stereo, boom-box, etc.
    • Embraces the open source community.
    • Stands behind a social contract

    1. Re:Get a Neuros by PhoenixK7 · · Score: 4, Informative
      You forgot something.

      • Big and honking
    2. Re:Get a Neuros by ZackSchil · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Does not play iTMS DRMed files
      Costs the same amount as the iPod ($399, 20GB Models)
      Is larger and heavier than the iPod: 5.3" x 3.1" x 1.3", 9.4 oz. vs 4.1" x 2.4" x .62", 5.6oz.
      Cannot use Firewire or USB 2.0 without a special "backpack" (iPod uses a USB/2.0 adaptor kit to translate pins)
      Not nearly as good looking
      Difficult syncing
      No smart playlists
      No Mac support

      Your average listener does not have any OGG Vorbis files. The FM transmitter and tuner sound cool but not cool enough. Apple will add voice recording to the iPod with a firmware update, the hardware to do so is already in place. This player sounds cool but it's by no means at all an iPod killer. Has any one out there actually used one as well as an iPod? How do their features compare? Ease of use?

    3. Re:Get a Neuros by zpok · · Score: 1

      Best of all, you can fiddle for hours with the software and buttons before figuring it all out. Serious: looks like a nice buy. Too much of a good thing for my taste, but this should go down great with another minority group posting on this list (ducking)... Ok, now serious serious: the MiSi feature looks cool.

      --
      I think, therefore I am...I think.
    4. Re:Get a Neuros by Offwhite98 · · Score: 1

      Playing music from the portable over FM radio is a great feature that I wish was available in the iPod.

      --
      Brennan Stehling - http://brennan.offwhite.net/blog/
    5. Re:Get a Neuros by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      he also forgot over $400 for 20MB.

    6. Re:Get a Neuros by Greedo · · Score: 2, Informative

      Playing music from the portable over FM radio is a great feature that I wish was available in the iPod.

      They buy a Belkin TuneCast or a Griffin iTrip.

      --
      Tuus crepidae innexilis sunt.
    7. Re:Get a Neuros by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you mean "listening to FM radio"? I think it said it had an FM *receiver* built into it, and that is one thing I really wish my iPod had.

      As already noted, transmitting to FM is already covered by a couple of third party products. Having an aux-in on something is much better though. :-)

    8. Re:Get a Neuros by AkaXakA · · Score: 1
      You forgot something else too:

      I said: "Good thing I have an iRiver Discman"

      For those not in the know, iRiver Discmans are multi-codec (mp3/wma) and have upcoming OGG support!

      Feature match:

      Plays mp3 & wma, with OGG support shortly on it's way

      CD's can "sync" with just about anything

      Upgrades keep coming out, even for older players.

      No song manager needed, but the remote (of the discman) has _exelent_ navigation

      Built-in FM tuner. (The remote is the antena actually ;)

      Ok, so it doesn't record from FM, big deal.

      It can plug into car stereo, boom-box, etc. as long as you have the right cable ;)

      Embraces the 'looks damn good, must have it' community (The player's just plain sexy)

      And, importantly:

      REALLY REALLY light and small! Very portable, unlike a big HD player.

      Battery life is excelent. 5+ hours with just the discman, 8+ with battery stick (tube for 2x AA)

      Oh, and did I mention: It's top notch design!

      PS. I'm talking about my wine red iRiver iMP-400 SlimX II, but the newest one, the iMP-550, is even better.

    9. Re:Get a Neuros by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Embraces the open source community
      But only supports Windows 98SE, Me, 2000, and XP. I'll pass.
    10. Re:Get a Neuros by jaysones · · Score: 1

      I don't mind my iPod's size, but it doesn't honk loudly enough for me. Anyone else have this problem?

    11. Re:Get a Neuros by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The hardware to do so may not already be in place. Just because there *was* a 6 second test record function(before they took it out in the latest update) doesn't mean it works with say, more than 6 seconds, or records for more time than the memory can hold. Perhaps they had intended to have recording but couldn't manage to get it working smoothly hardware-wise, i don't know, neither do you, so the truth is there is only the *possibility* that the iPod will gain recording with a software update.

  89. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by greymond · · Score: 1

    Um... my G4 that I have came with a 2 button mouse and I use the second button rather than "option-click" because my work doesn't require very much of the keyboard - so the less I have to touch anything other than my mouse the better.

  90. The "insert technology here" ready con by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A number of computer manufacturers are using the marketing con, of "'insert technology name here' ready". For example "bluetooth ready". In most cases taking a closer look at the specifications reveals that the computer does not come with the technology mentioned, but simply has a slot that will accept the device. So in the case of the iMac, you are going to have to buy the bluetooth card, unless it says something like 'bluetooth included'. I know of a couple of friends being caught on this one.

    --
    Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    1. Re:The "insert technology here" ready con by pretentiousPPC · · Score: 1
      So in the case of the iMac, you are going to have to buy the bluetooth card, unless it says something like 'bluetooth included'. I know of a couple of friends being caught on this one.


      So you have dumbass friends who got all messed up in that schmancy-pancy wording, ok now move along
      --
      Artist will always make art.
    2. Re:The "insert technology here" ready con by GlassHeart · · Score: 2, Informative
      In most cases taking a closer look at the specifications reveals that the computer does not come with the technology mentioned, but simply has a slot that will accept the device.

      I don't know about Bluetooth, but when Apple says "Airport ready" they mean you get the slot for the card, and that the antenna is already built into the case. The antenna connector is of the right length, and neatly tucked to the side of the Airport card slot. The Airport card itself doesn't come with anything else, because the computer is "ready" for it.

  91. Reality Distortion Field by +MG · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Look, I am as big an Apple fan boy as the next guy, but minor product updates on the front page of slashdot? I think Hemos has been hit by the Jobian Reality Distortion Field.

    1. Re:Reality Distortion Field by Drakonian · · Score: 1

      Well, it's more exciting then the latest alpha build of the Linux 2.6 kernel.

      --
      Random is the New Order.
  92. Re:Hooray! by stratjakt · · Score: 1

    And that's why I'd love to see the bottom fall out of Apples hardware business, and them turn into a software company.

    I hate proprietary hardware. I like commodity hardware. I like deciding that, for this machine, the $250 gigabyte board is too much, and going with a $50 ECS. I like picking a cheaper Athlon over a P4, or a low-end videocard for workstations and a high-end card for gaming machines.

    I might even want a G5 based machine, if it was commodity hardware I can buy myself. But if it breaks, I want to be able to drop by CompUSA and get whatever component I need to fix it, from mobo to mouse.

    If you look at the prices for addon hardware, Mac owners pay more than twice for the same Radeon card as a PC owner. It's idiotic. To me, proprietary hardware is much more crippling and annoying than software.

    Imagine OS/X on x86, and then Apple turning it's team of coders loose on the WINE project. An instant windows killer.

    That or some other company (IBM maybe?) dropping a real windowing system on top of linux. It'd have to be a commercial effort, the nature of OSS means that it lacks the focus to turn out such a polished product. Ie; "code this way or you're fired" vs "code this way or fork your own code branch"

    --
    I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
  93. Just a thought... by raptor21 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Assuming that a Apple user only downloads songs legally through iTunes MS.

    The 40GB ipod would hold $10,000 dollars worth of songs. That's a little too much change to be carrying around in you pocket don't you think. You could get mugged for that kinda dough.

    Mugger: hand me you wallet.... no wait, Say, that's one of em new 40GB iPods ain't it, whats that iPod worth.
    Guy being mugged: I'd say about 5 grand, it's only half full.
    Mugger: Screw the wallet, hand me that iPod.

    1. Re:Just a thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      except that you have insurance on the ipod cos you are a sensible sort of person, and when you get you new ipod and plug it in to your shiny g5 your songs are back on your ipod @ 400 mb/s

    2. Re:Just a thought... by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but songs have little resale value. Who would buy an iPod in a pub for 10 grand, even if it was full of music? Nobody. Their tastes just wouldn't match closely enough.

    3. Re:Just a thought... by bwalling · · Score: 1

      Assuming that a Apple user only downloads songs legally through iTunes MS.

      The 40GB ipod would hold $10,000 dollars worth of songs. That's a little too much change to be carrying around in you pocket don't you think. You could get mugged for that kinda dough.

      Mugger: hand me you wallet.... no wait, Say, that's one of em new 40GB iPods ain't it, whats that iPod worth.
      Guy being mugged: I'd say about 5 grand, it's only half full.
      Mugger: Screw the wallet, hand me that iPod.


      It has no pawn shop value, so you'd be safe.

    4. Re:Just a thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's very different from cash, though. It's not like you could sell a 40 GB iPod for $10,000, even if it was full. And presumably you still have backup copies of the songs on your computer at home, so you are really only out the price of the iPod.

    5. Re:Just a thought... by rsmith-mac · · Score: 1

      The music doesn't just have no pawn shop value; it's completely useless. Sure, the iPod can play it, but without authorization(or someone figuring out how to crack FairPlay), it can't be used on a computer, another portable MP3 player, etc without exploiting analog, at which point it's probably not worth the effort. For as much as the SlashBots hate DRM, this is one of the benefits of such a system, even as leinient as FairPlay is.

    6. Re:Just a thought... by jaysones · · Score: 1

      Well, you certainly couldn't sell those songs on eBay!

    7. Re:Just a thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See!
      Closed source has its benefits ;-0

      I love reading Mac topics here, I know its cliche but its a blast how open-source enthusiasts will drool over proprietary software and all thats associated with Apple but gouge someones eyes out if they said the same for Bill's shop.

      Its like being with a group of dykes who start to moisten up when they see Antonio Banderas' package.

      zeke

    8. Re:Just a thought... by dracvl · · Score: 1

      AFAIK, Apple keeps a record of which songs you have bought, so you can re-download them if you've paid once.

      I haven't used iTunes, though - so I might be wrong :)

    9. Re:Just a thought... by Damek · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, it makes perfect sense. Most open source advocates are just tired of being involved with a system where the big players don't play fair. Microsoft routinely cheats and lies. They are a convicted monopolist. Perhaps Apple just hasn't had the opportunity yet, but they don't regularly cheat and lie. They sell proprietary software, but they are generally nice and fair in their business dealings. There's little (if any) reason to dislike them like Microsoft.

      Just because Company A and Company B both sell proprietary software, this does not make them same in every respect.

      Heck, Apple even makes use of open source software and plays fair with open source programmers.

      I can't really comment on the lesbians you've been around, except to suggest that perhaps they weren't really lesbians, but instead "adult performers" only claiming to like other women to get you to pay them more.

    10. Re:Just a thought... by mrpuffypants · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And imagine how much more the robber could get if all that music was bought on CDs?

    11. Re:Just a thought... by CODiNE · · Score: 1

      This is unfortunately not true, songs are only downloadable ONCE. You must keep your own backups, any loss of the original file means repurchasing. http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=930 33 I lost... $0.99 worth of music when I wiped out my external Music partition... (Pointed bochs at the wrong partition trying to boot off a CD, D'OH!) but... Apple lost a lot more than $0.99. :-D

      --
      Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
    12. Re:Just a thought... by jacobito · · Score: 1

      I think the point is that an iPod full of mp3s is worth thousands of dollars by the RIAA's reckoning...

    13. Re:Just a thought... by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

      Actually, using RIAA accounting, each song is worth about $150,000.

    14. Re:Just a thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you're soooo rrrrrong dyude.

      according to RIAA, each *copy* of a song is worth $150.00, err scratch that. new statistics: each *copy* of a song is worth 21,000,000 US dollars. wait, that still doesn't add up to the 4 college kids being sued for 99 billion. Let's make each bit in each copy of the song be worth a cool 35 mil. Now, that adds up. ;-)

    15. Re:Just a thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mod the parent up +5; funny.

      you're wondering i posted that comment? well, yeah i did. so what? can't i demand my own post be modded up?

      so, stop wondering and mod the parent up.

    16. Re:Just a thought... by shawnce · · Score: 1

      "I can't really comment on the lesbians you've been around, except to suggest that perhaps they weren't really lesbians, but instead "adult performers" only claiming to like other women to get you to pay them more."

      Now that is funny!

    17. Re:Just a thought... by burns210 · · Score: 1

      you CAN burns the songs for backup, and keep them on up to 3 macs... so that is 5 places to have the songs at any given time.... 10,000 dollars in songs would be fun though :)

    18. Re:Just a thought... by hobbit · · Score: 1


      Mugger: Screw the wallet

      Strange muggers you have in your neck of the woods!

      Mugger: Empty your right hand pocket. Oho! Give me that ten dollar note. Now empty your left hand pocket. Ohoho! Screw that ten dollar note, you can have it back... give me that twenty instead!

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
    19. Re:Just a thought... by nick+rawlings · · Score: 1

      Then sell it to them.

      --
      No sig for YOU!
  94. G5? by worm+eater · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Man, I was really hoping to see a G5 in there. Too hot? Or would that spread the limited G5 supply too thin? BTW US dollar prices are: $1299 $1799 $2448

    --
    Maybe partying will help...
    1. Re:G5? by kelzer · · Score: 1

      G5 in an iPod? Man, that sounds like overkill to me. I think a 1 GHz G4 would be sufficient for most users. :)

      --

      ---------------------------------------------
      SERENITY NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  95. impressive... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    ... Apple has finally broken the 1GHz barrier :-)

  96. I want a NVRAM iPod by PSaltyDS · · Score: 1

    I would love [Drool] an NVRAM-based iPod, about the size of a smallish cell phone, with no HDD, about 1GB and bluetooth.... [/Drool].

    Seriously, isn't the HDD-based player just waiting to die when enough solid state space is available?

    "You owe me $666!" "Why?" "Because I said SCO!"

    --
    Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced. - Geek's corollary to Clarke's law
    1. Re:I want a NVRAM iPod by Microlith · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not when said NVRAM devices still cost several times more per MB than a hard drive does.

      Apple can cram 40GB into this device for far less than it'd cost for an NVRAM device of the same capacity.

    2. Re:I want a NVRAM iPod by be-fan · · Score: 1

      As someone with 10GB of MP3s and a 15GB iPod, I say I'll trade in my iPod when we get 20GB Flash-based players :)

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
  97. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1

    >Ever talk to a computer novice about the notion of "right click?"

    "Drag and drop" is hard.
    "Action|Option|Shift" keys and clicking on a mouse button is hard.

    >The objective is to make computers simpler. Not more complex.

    Whats the point of function keys? Why have 12 of them? Doesn't 12 extra keys make things more "complex" for the old and young? What is one button compaired to 12 half-sized keys? How does 12 keys more make things more "simple"?

    --
    The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
  98. Re:only cool if it runs the same os as the g4 towe by shawnce · · Score: 1

    ...not sure why I am responding to an AC...

    I think you misinterpreted some figures. Mac OS X has well over 100,000 active users... so that number must have been talking about something else. Even if you don't believe the 7 million user number (which comes from Mac OS X sales figures) consider that Apple has sold 100s of thousand of computer systems that are only supported by Mac OS X (close to a million by now). If you look at web browser usage and pick out Safari hits you will note that the number of Mac OS X users is far greater then 1 million as well. (note having Mac OS 9 installed on a system does not mean the system can boot into Mac OS 9, classic in Mac OS X can run it however on unsupported hardware)

    It also looks like Apple is set to sell 200+ PowerMac G5 in the first month after release (shipping). Expect 800+ in the next year.

    ---

    On Mac OS X 10.2 and 10.3 I have tested my own fibre channel driver with 256 in flight (issued to the external device) SCSI commands. The 256 limit in this case comes from limits I put in place in my driver to reflect resource limitations of the adapter. I could reconfigure to run with more in flight IOs (up to an adapter max of 1024) but at the cost of the max IO size (as configured 4MB). I have also had well over a 512MB of IO requests in flight.

    I believe you may be seeing a limit of the file system not of IOKit or the SCSI sub-system... (not sure the source of your reported 64 IO limit). It could also be a limit of the driver you are using on Mac OS X for your fibre channel adapter...

    Mac OS X has one of the lowest and consistent latency of any main stream preemptively scheduled operating system (remember Mac OS 9 is not truly preemptively scheduled, in fact a lot of what you talk about above had to be done at interrupt on Mac OS 9 to insure correct timing, stalling the OS of course in the process). The audio sub-system if far better designed then what existed in Mac OS 9.

    Also if you believe you have found issues report them... Bug Reporter.

    Mac OS X is obviously a different OS and hence doing things the "9 way" isn't guaranteed to get the same results on Mac OS X (in fact may "9 way" things are not allowed and for good reason)... time to rethink designs. Adapt or be left behind.

    Finally Apple has said they will maintain selling the PowerMac G4 1.25 for those folks that want/need Mac OS 9.2.2. It was even worded "as long as people what them we will be keep making them" (or something close to that). Apple will not maintain support for Mac OS 9.2.2 on any other systems going forward. They are not doing further development on Mac OS 9.2.2.

    (Is your shift key broken?)

  99. Jeez, you people have no imagination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Airport Extreme in an iPod, combined with Rendezvous, means your iPod could connect with any other iPod in the vicinity and swap tunes. Just need some simple protocol to advertise what you have and what you're looking for.

  100. IE by DiehardMM · · Score: 1

    Anyone notice that IE is still default software, with no mention of Safari at all? Despite the fact that MS has publicly announced the end of IE for Mac? Isn't the MS-Apple agreement over? Maybe Apple doesn't want to let MS off the hook with the "bundle software with the OS to take over the market" approach.

    1. Re:IE by 90XDoubleSide · · Score: 2, Informative

      IE is bundled with 10.2, Safari is bundled with 10.3.

      --
      "Reality is just a convenient measure of complexity" -Alvy Ray Smith
  101. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by StewedSquirrel · · Score: 1

    I think the objective would be to make the interface more efficient. Personally, I think the menus that make LESS overall clicks are better.

    I miss my old Windows 3.1 interface, where I had set up something similar to a "start menu" on my right-click context menu. It allowed fully customizable links, including things like "minimize all windows" and things.

    The right-click context menu is one of the most efficient features of Windows. I would favor having a seaparate context menu connected to another button. I would definatley appreciate a "middle click" context menu that was customizable and a standard "right click" context menu in addition.

    Stewey

    --
    There are 10 kinds of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who don't.
  102. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Open your ears and hear how good Dolby AAC sounds.

    Also get a life...

  103. About $35 by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 3, Informative

    It'll cost you about $35 to add FM capability to your iPod.

    1. Re:About $35 by dborod · · Score: 1

      If you read their web site you'll note that this product is not yet shipping. I pre-ordered mine months ago and am still waiting... I also just remembered that the credit card I used for my pre-order has had it's expiry date expire and I've now got a new card. I wonder if I'll have to cancel my order, re-order my pre-order and thus lose my place in line?

    2. Re:About $35 by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 1

      Haha, sure, but he only asked how much, not when ^^

      I use the iMic and the iTrip, and therefore have good expectations out of the iFM as well.

    3. Re:About $35 by dborod · · Score: 1

      True.

      I'm a happy iTrip user as well, so I'm expecting good things from it once it finally ships.

  104. Error: Bluetooth "ready" by N8F8 · · Score: 1

    Most models have slots for the wireless adapters, but not the actual adapter. Lamo.

    --
    "God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
  105. New Imac configurations... by mantera · · Score: 1

    I really don't think there's much of a big deal about new model configurations.
    What really makes me wonder, having been an Apple fan for almost three decades now, is what their next revolutionary product will be.
    You see, The "new" LCD imac was a long-awaited and logical follow up to the "old" 1998 imac, but the "old" imac almost came out of no where. And likewise, the ipod too came out of no where, and so did the 1984 macintosh.
    If my expectations are right, apple will come out next with a product that'll be revolutionary in an unexpected way, and in a way that almost doesn't make much logical or historical sense except for the love of originality and their creative insanity.
    I'm just wondering what that might be. I just feel it, that'll be next, Steve Jobs' butt is itching right now and he can't just settle down; he can't tolerate aesthetic boredom that attention freak.

  106. Re:Great use for 802.11 & || bluetooth on ipod by geekoid · · Score: 1

    I thouht this same thing, then it hit me, what if bobs ipod is just ads?

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  107. Re:ARRRRRGGGGHHHH! What?!? No audio input? by shawnce · · Score: 2, Informative

    I believe they understand the market fairly well.

    Of the 10 iPod users I know not one is interested... a couple would like to see an FM tuner but none want recording ability.

  108. Re:Hooray! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow, you want some cheese with that whine?

  109. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Drag and drop" is hard.

    No, "drag and drop" is easy. Novices get the notion of "drag and drop" very quickly.

    "Action|Option|Shift" keys and clicking on a mouse button is hard.

    Yes. Modifiers are hard. It takes a while for novices to get the idea of modifiers. That's why they're deprecated in Panther in favor of the action menu.

    Whats the point of function keys?

    None, really. The Mac doesn't use them, except for Expose. They're on the keyboard because it's traditional.

    Why have 12 of them?

    Look again. It's 15.

    Doesn't 12 extra keys make things more "complex" for the old and young?

    Uh... no. If you can hit one key on the keyboard, you can hit any key on the keyboard. The extra keys don't make things any harder, thought they do add unnecessary complexity. That's why the Mac doesn't use them, generally.

  110. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think the objective would be to make the interface more efficient.

    That's why you're not a user interface expert. "Efficient" doesn't matter for shit. Simple is the goal.

    The right-click context menu is one of the most efficient features of Windows.

    Only if you know how to use it. There are two buttons on the mouse. One of them has a special function that is not obvious. This button is called the right mouse button... unless you're left handed, in which case it's the left mouse button, but we still call it the right mouse button. Click this button to invoke a special menu... but not all the time. Only when the mouse pointer is over things that have special menus associated with them. There's no visual cue that there's a special menu. You just have to know that it's there. Or right (or left) click randomly and see what pops up.

    I repeat: "efficient" doesn't matter for shit. Simple is the goal.

  111. Where's my Tin Foil? by mod_parent_down · · Score: 1
    I've had a theory for the past couple years that some 'rogue' virus might march through my computer some day and wipe out all my mp3s... then there was that orrin hatch babble about making it legal.

    Let me just say I'm very happy to have my music backed up.

    1. Re:Where's my Tin Foil? by zpok · · Score: 1

      My dad in law just lost his accumulated writing when his HD blew up. I don't think he's going to buy an iPod to remedy that, but backups are important I should say, and every no-brain solution to that merits some attention.

      BTW where do you guys get those cool tin foil hats?

      --
      I think, therefore I am...I think.
  112. Double Bzzzt... you failed to check too by hellfire · · Score: 1

    Once again an overzealous slashdotter fails to read as well and commits the same sin. Verbatim from the article:

    "All models are AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth ready, though the highest-end model is the only iMac with these features pre-installed."

    You were right to criticize the /. article for misleading information about the Macworld article, but you didn't follow up with accurate information yourself.

    --

    "All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"

    1. Re:Double Bzzzt... you failed to check too by 11223 · · Score: 2, Informative
      Nope. I was entirely, 100% correct. I am very, very familiar with Apple's product lines and offerings.

      No base iMac comes with either of these options. Only CTO iMacs do. The fact that Apple just so happens to conveniently put a maxed-out CTO on their store page does not make it stock. You can't buy this iMac at the local Apple Store, nor can you add Bluetooth later if you don't buy the CTO.

      Please, moderators, check the information yourself before moderating down because ignorant replies don't bother to check the facts themselves. There are only two stock iMac models; two SKUs that Apple sends out. Anything else is CTO.

  113. Re:Hooray! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And that's why I'd love to see the bottom fall out of Apples hardware business, and them turn into a software company. I hate proprietary hardware.

    Avoid Apple, perhaps?

  114. The saddest part of that article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is that now Avril Lavigne will actually have a footnote in the history of music. Sad.

  115. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can you please shut up and let the rest of the world use an efficient OS dumbass.

  116. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1


    This is exactly why I don't get why Apple just doesn't include them.

    All your points are either "Its simple to learn." or "Its just take some learning." Yet apparently there its so obvious why these don't apply to the second mouse button.

    --
    The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
  117. Re:Clarification: Not all of them have BT & Wi by SlamMan · · Score: 1

    The reason that it was worth noting was the 15" before this had the old rev motherboard, so it only supported BlueTooth with a USB adaptor, and regular AirPort, not Airport Extreme.

    --
    Mod point free since 2001
  118. Re:ARRRRRGGGGHHHH! What?!? No audio input? by teamhasnoi · · Score: 1
    Eh? It could also mean that those who *are* interested (me included) haven't bought one yet for that very reason.

    It does make sense that the 10 people you know who own an iPod don't care - why would anyone drop 300 bucks for something that doesn't do what you want?

  119. Re:Hooray! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you like commodity hardware, you'll love Apple. They slap commodity hardware in their machines--just at double the price.

  120. So, what about price drops? by fuzzeli · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've been waiting for this... not because the extra speed is so great, but because I want a 17" 1ghz iMac at a more reasonable price than $1800. I've read on mac rumors sites that the channel is flooded with inventory (I think Insight had several hundred units in stock), so when will the price drops come to help clear out inventory? Macmall has the new models, and "add to cart for new lower price!!!" on the 1ghz model. I was stunned this morning to see an amazing... $22 price drop. Although now that it's a little later in the day, it's down to $1594, a $200 price drop. That's more like it.

    clicky clicky...

  121. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by be-fan · · Score: 1

    Actually, the iPod is still smaller. Both in actual volume, and feel. The Rio is a good bit thicker than the iPod, which contributes significantly to how big it feels in your pocket. However, the new Toshiba Gigabeat, I think, might be smaller. It is slimmer, but taller. Anyway, the iPod has been largely unchanged (the 3nd gen revision was largely cosmetic and incremental) for 2 years now. If it was just released today, yeah, the iPod wouldn't be revoluationary. But it was released two years ago and it is only now that the competition is catching up to it. That's revolutionary by any measure!

    --
    A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
  122. old models pushed to clearance on apple store by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    go to the "special deals" section (bottom-left link at store.apple.com) for a ton of "refurbished" ipods at lower prices.

  123. Current iPod models are Amazon #1 #2 #3 by afantee · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In fact, there are 8 iPods in the top 20 best sellers. The question is would the new models kick the competitions out of the top 10 altogether.

    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t g/browse/-/300330/ref=br_bx_c_1_5/002-8192629-3045 663

    1. Re:Current iPod models are Amazon #1 #2 #3 by afantee · · Score: 1
  124. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by 11223 · · Score: 1
    This, my friend, is what makes you a geek. You are willing to adapt yourself to your computer in order to perform fewer physical actions (mouse moves, clicks, etc.) and call it "efficiency".

    This is not most people work. Rather, they want the number of cognitive steps involved in doing something reduced. What do I mean by a cognitive step? It's a step in the translation of goal->action.

    For instance, take the task of writing a letter on the computer. Here, the goal is to write a letter, and the sequence of physical actions are the mouse and keyboard movements / presses that cause Word to be opened. You know how to find Word, so you hit Windows-button P M downarrow downarrow downarrow enter. This is quite efficient compared to moving the mouse around and selecting something on the desktop. However, the number of cognitive steps here for someone who hasn't become intuitively familiar with that method of opening programs is high:

    1. Remember that the program to write a letter in is Microsoft Word
    2. Remember that Word is stored in the Start Menu
    3. Remember that the windows key opens up the start menu
    4. Remember that it's stored under "programs", and that "programs" can be keyed with the letter "p".
    5. Remember that it's called "Microsoft Word" instead of "Word"
    6. Remember that you can only scroll to the first item in the list with a given first letter.
    7. Hit an "m" and start banging on the downarrow until it comes into view
    Needless to say this is an incredibly complex operation for anyone who hasn't got it ingrained in their muscle memory. However, if a person has an icon for Word on their desktop, the number of steps is reduced vastly:
    1. Remember that the program to write a letter in is Microsoft Word
    2. Remember that Word is stored on the desktop
    3. Aim the mouse at Word (this step alone probably takes more time than your key-sequence)
    4. Execute a double-click on Word (once again a very time-consuming operation in the hands of someone who is not terribly dextrous)
    But, surprise surprise, this is only four steps! This is what makes certain computer systems (like Mac OS X) easier than others (Windows, or Linux).
  125. Re:ARRRRRGGGGHHHH! What?!? No audio input? by 90XDoubleSide · · Score: 1

    The new iPods are firmware upgradable to have audio in. You can already see the recording software in its early form if you go into diagnostic mode: http://www.pocketthings.com/index.php?ID=1139 Still, it's not certain that Apple will enable this anytime soon, and it will probably work through an accessory that plugs into the new docking port.

    --
    "Reality is just a convenient measure of complexity" -Alvy Ray Smith
  126. Why no 17" w/o SuperDrive? by piznut · · Score: 1

    If I want a 17" iMac Im basically forced to pay for an Apple SuperDrive? What if I already own a nice external FW/USB DVD burner. Is there really no way to buy a 17" iMac without a SuperDrive?

    1. Re:Why no 17" w/o SuperDrive? by Kevinv · · Score: 1

      money probable. apple most likely gets a better profit margin on the higher-end device, AND they probably get a larger discount buying just these devices in larger quantities.

      The biggest downside to a 3rd party DVD burner is it doesn't work with iDVD. Which pisses me off, I can understand the royalty issue but I'd pay $100 for an iDVD that worked with 3rd party DVD's.

  127. I always thought... by the+web · · Score: 1

    The cube did poorly because they went with the dvd player instead of the CDRW drive.

    The climate at the time seemed to be still hanging on the cd writers, and nobody wanted the dvd player over that. And also to the best of my recollection, they didn't offer a choice on the drive.

    Confirm?

    --
    __
    Thou hast besquirted me, O leotarded one.
    1. Re:I always thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The big complaint at the time IIRC, was that the Cube would develop cracks over time (or out of the box in cases).

    2. Re:I always thought... by momus_radar · · Score: 1

      When Apple introduced the Cube most people who saw it wanted one. Okay, maybe it was most Mac users who saw it wanted one. Either way, it did poorly because of it's price tag. See Apple's Press Release. It was very close to the price of a PowerMac G4 tower that had much more expansion capabilities. After a while Apple tried to lure people to buy it by offering rebates, but even then it was more expensive than a comparable iMac.

      I just picked up a Cube with a 15" Studio Display for $600 this weekend. It is an incredibaly well engineered computer. I'm glad I spent the money on it.

    3. Re:I always thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, they eventually updated the Cube models and offered CDRW drives. In fact, the CDRW drives that work in Cubes go on eBay for a lot of fucking money. As in, up to 1/3 of the value of the Cube itself.

      Besides, the CDRW issue could be solved with Firewire anyway, so I doubt it was the real reason the line was not a huge success.

      Also, another poster has put in his two cents about the cosmetic lines (not cracks) that appeared on the top of the case. These lines are a flaw in the manufacturing process and usually extended along the top of the case, to the edge of the top of the case. They *looked* like cracks in the case, but that was just because the whole case was one piece of clear plastic, so it *looked* like the cracks went clean through, even though they were a surface flaw.

      Anyway, the Cube failed because of it's price point. It was almost as costly as a Tower. If you wanted a Cube, you only wanted it for the look. If you were serious about anything but style, you would spend the extra few bucks for a more-upgradable Tower.

      Of course, this style of purchasing leads people to become die-hard fans of the line. Cube owners are almost always Cube lovers.

    4. Re:I always thought... by jmertic · · Score: 1

      While that may have contributed to the Cube's demise ( but remember that it wasn't till 2001 that Apple had CD-RW from the factory in any of thier machines and the Cube was introduced in 2000, yet the Cube did get a CD-RW late in it's life ), the big thing was the poor value it provided. For $300 less, you could get a more expansive G4 Tower that benchmarked similarly to the Cube. It was a huge blunder by Apple.

    5. Re:I always thought... by Lord+of+the+Wazz · · Score: 1

      I sure as hell wanted one. Well for aesthetic purposes anyway. The coolest thing was turning it upside down and lifting the internals out by a handle - very space age.

  128. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Okay, so you make some valid points. However, consider: "No AAC support" in contrast to your comment about the "oh-so-useful WMA instead". This falls into a basic fallacy insofar as AAC support is "oh-so-useful" for Windows users (which is a platform target also chosen by Go-- I mean, Apple). AAC on Windows is about as useful as WMA for a Mac user.

    Consider citing lack of the online store instead (yes, I know it depends on AAC).

  129. Re:ARRRRRGGGGHHHH! What?!? No audio input? by GryphonTech · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I see your point. But I amvery much active in the music arena. Not just listening but writing, performing, scoring,....

    I have already found the iPod to be great in the editing and scoring field. It allows me to carry entire scores and move them from home to the recording studio for laydown onto film.

    Yet having the ability to be able to record a practice, or live instruments, along with the portability of the iPod would make it ideal.

    I know that several hundred would be sold here at UCLA film just for that reason alone.

    I just think lots of people would find that a useful feature if it was there. recording voice memos, phone numbers while you are driving. I think there would be many uses othere than just music....

    Just my .02

  130. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Uh...I think MS-Word installs an icon on the desktop for Windows operating systems. How does your lengthy explanation differentiate the MacOS from WinXX?

  131. Re:new imac problem by jo_ham · · Score: 1

    I'll say it has unfamiliarity - it's a troll.

  132. mp3 question by QEDog · · Score: 1
    I have a 30gig iPod filled with 21 gigs of mp3s and then some data.

    The neat thing about the iPod is that it is very easy to navigate the files as long as you have them with the correct ID3tags. I have tagged most of my mp3s, but still quite a few to go through.

    Can anyone recommend a good program to fix the mp3 tags? Something that can do recursive tagging, batch copying between ID3v1, ID3v2 and file names and runs on a linux/windoze computer?

    --
    "There is no teacher but the enemy."-Mazer Rackham
    1. Re:mp3 question by sammycourt · · Score: 1

      try this: www.id3-tagit.de it's the only one I use, has good support for ID3v1 -> v2 conversion.

  133. Re:Hooray! by silas_moeckel · · Score: 1

    Thats all and great that you want Apple to move over to supporting commodity x86 hardware but besides making you happy why would they bother? The sell based upon form and design. Macs in general are esteticaly pleasing to at least some people. OSx on some random P4 would cripple there support staff. If you can make money selling propiatary hardware and software combo's why not it's cheaper to support your hardware profit margins are yours to decide. It took apple years to migrate over to IDE disks why IDE was PC junk and SCSI was just that much better eventaly IDE matured enough that it fit so they moved. Supporting a new peice of hardware when you supply the OS with the box and can spec a minimum revision isnt that hard. Now look at PC's it the reverse everybody writting OS's is working around a hundred different hardware design flaws, bugs and general messups not of there own design. As much as I'm not an MS fanboy this has had to contribute to the PC blue screen of death. Trying to make another companies product look good isn't Apples core business so why should they bother?

    --
    No sir I dont like it.
  134. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they're simply better products than the competition.

    Hey Astroturfer! You need to log on if you expect to collect a comission from Apple Marketing for spewing stuff like that.

  135. I know, don't feed the trolls... but, by justMichael · · Score: 2, Funny
    I have recently upgraded from a Mac 8600/300 w/64 Megs of RAM to a new G5 dual 2GHz with AGP 8X and PCI-X to help me at my freelance gig where I copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. On the G5 I spent about 20 minutes trying to install Adobe Arcobat 6. 20 minutes.

    OK, Problem one appears to be that are are using a box that doesn't ship for 3-5 weeks. That tends to make them slow. So in reality I'm guessing that it will take you ($delivery_date + $unpacking_time + $boot_time + 5min) to install Acrobat 6.

    Also, are you sure you are qualified for a job that requires you to copy a file form one folder to another? Maybe you should practice the following: "Would you like fries with that?" and "Do you want to SuperSize that?"

    Have a nice day ;-)
    1. Re:I know, don't feed the trolls... but, by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      Funny, Acrobat 6 is a drag install on Mac OS X.

      Maybe that's the 17 meg file he's copying!

      What a dumbass.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    2. Re:I know, don't feed the trolls... but, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're slutty enough, you can get a G5 now.

  136. Re:Headless slashdot poster... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >>>
    I think your pointed barb is so half-witty...In fact, I think your post should be moded 'Score:6, So-Funny-I-Forgot-How-To-Spell-Defies'...

    Do you feel better now?

  137. Re:Hooray! by Junks+Jerzey · · Score: 1

    I hate proprietary hardware. I like commodity hardware. I like deciding that, for this machine, the $250 gigabyte board is too much, and going with a $50 ECS. I like picking a cheaper Athlon over a P4, or a low-end videocard for workstations and a high-end card for gaming machines.

    But both the P4 and Athlon are proprietary hardware, too. Or do you just like there being two to choose from? Also note that all PC video cards are proprietary.

  138. Re:new imac problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Credibility lies in what is said, not who says it. If you can't evaluate information based on its own merits, then you must be a Democrat from the USA.

  139. Re:Screw Macs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Eat shit and die you fucking Spansh American! You fucking poge!

  140. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by zpok · · Score: 1

    Hey Stewey,

    You used one yet?

    It's a bit childish to get so excited over mere technology, but man, these devices make you feel all powerfullllllll!

    You go out and get your hands on all those players mentioned, then tell me you don't think the iPod is revolutionary. Their best - revolutionary - feature is you forget you have a computer-powered gadget in your hands.

    It's not about having this or that feature first, it's the whole package.

    Warning: if you turn into a drooling "fanboy", don't blame it on me, blame it on Apple and their engineers...

    --
    I think, therefore I am...I think.
  141. Re:Clarification: Not all of them have BT & Wi by zpok · · Score: 1

    And a good thing they don't. Not everybody wants their phone to communicate with their computer.

    Ye gods, I want my phone to communicate with the fishes... somewhere deep deep in the ocean!

    --
    I think, therefore I am...I think.
  142. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    AAC on Windows is about as useful as WMA for a Mac user.

    Nope. AAC is an open, freely licensable codec. WMA, on the other hand, is proprietary and encrypted. AAC is technically superior to both MP3 and WMA, producing music that sounds better at lower bitrates.

    The only reason WMA exists is to funnel licensing dollars into Microsoft's pockets while preventing users from making fair use of their own music.

    No comparison.

  143. UK-FCUG? by identity0 · · Score: 1

    Heh.. did anyone else get the ad banner for the "UK Final Cut Pro User's Group?" UKFCUG - how do you pronounce that? Uck-Fug? Ook-Kug? Worst Acronym Ever :P

    Is anyone else getting really slow connections to Slashdot? This might be the first time a slashdotted site is faster than slashdot itself...

  144. Re:Headless slashdot poster... by ErnstKompressor · · Score: 4, Insightful

    'Do you feel better now'

    No, I don't really feel better...I can't express the depths of my dislike for those who feel the need to endlessly disparage my choice of computing platform...

    This is a heartfelt plea...I have dealt with morons like the parent poster for over a decade. It never ends. I don't know what drives these people(or is it you?) to perpetually carp on about us 'Mac-Heads'...I have never gone out of my way to insult linux-users or Windows-users and have only done so sparingly, in response to trolls. How insecure is the rest of the computing population that they feel compelled to ridicule people who choose to use a Mac -- insulting them at every turn, and then accusing them of being elitist or some other B.S.

    I use a Mac because I get my work done -- regardless of what it cost me...and that is my choice -- and a good one that has clothed, fed, and housed my family for many years in the past, and many years to come.

    What part of the fabric of society has frayed to the point that abuse of a minority is fashionable...Grow up, back off, and let's just try to get along somewhere in the middle.

    Thank you for listening...

    --
    We apologise for the fault in this post. Those responsible have been sacked. -- Signed RICHARD M. NIXON
  145. SPAM not likely to be a problem by sjbe · · Score: 1

    While bluetooth is really cool, I'd be worried about being "bluejacked" ("bluespammed"?). With the current generation of bluetooth phones (US only?), you can supposedly scan for and send messages to any nearby bluetooth-enabled phone. There seems to be no way to prevent from getting spammed, aside from disabling bluetooth on your phone (which is a real bummer, as bluetooth headsets are really cool).


    Not really a worry as far as I can tell. My phone allows you to specify whether Bluetooth broadcasts to everyone or whether it is "hidden" (much like hidding your SSID with WiFi). You also can specify which devices are allowed to pair with your phone, and request physical confirmation (you push a button) to authorize a connection. As long as you give your phone a unique name, I don't see spam as being a significant problem.

  146. So then... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I take it you're one who likes to take it up the ass? Just because someone doesn't want to waste $400+ on an mp3 player when a $50 one does what he wants doesn't mean they are cheap. He got a $50 player and it does what he wants.

    1. Re:So then... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cheap is not buying a $50 item you feel does the job of a $500 item. Cheap is whining about the $500 item.

  147. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That of course makes perfect sense. The Karma's size is used to compenstate for, how you say, other inadequacies?

  148. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by cosmo7 · · Score: 1

    Whats the point of function keys?

    Thinking of this?

  149. Re:Hooray! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its an open architecture and platform. I can get a proc from transmeta, or a C3 from Via. With the right funding, I could start up my own company to produce x86-compatible procs. Or PC compatible video cards or sound cards.

    Where's the openly available G5 specs?

    x86 is to G5 as linux is to Windows.

  150. When is FLAC support arriving on the iPod? by coral256 · · Score: 1

    My music collection is in FLAC. Instead of creating a redundant collection in MP3/AAC, I want to simply sync a portion of my existing files. Why should Apple deliver FLAC support in a firmware upgrade? 1.) The competition is already there: Rio Karma and the Nueros (will) support FLAC. 2.) What better way to seller the high end models with the large hard drives: FLAC needs on average 5x more space than MP3. 3.) Unlike AAC v. OGG, there is no competing Apple lossless codec.

  151. Re:only cool if it runs the same os as the g4 towe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you dont know what the hell you are talking about. in may 2003 apple stopped selling all the firewire 800 port g4s adn scrapped every tower design back to fall of 2002 to sell the only machine that the public wants to buy... g4 towers that come preinstalled with os9.

    apples ENTIRE g4 tower product line is os9!!!!!

    you are living in the embarrassing past.

    apple did not sell millions of osx-only machines... that is why os9 was RE-released as stock standard on all g4 towers in all distribution channels.

    doubt me still? look at apples web store now!!!!

    also i seriosuly doubt ANY osx fibre card can do 30,000 ios per second that win nt can do and os9 also does with ease.

    even if your card can do 256 instead of 64 like i assume it really does, i doubt you can do it in as few microseconds as os 9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    that is why audio music experts use os 9 and win nt for now. (mostly os9) its all about latency.

    osx can barely do 2 millisecond.

    apple selling osx has NOTHING to do with gooble web http requests adn other loggers that prove osx is unwanted.

  152. Think of the whole business... by appleLaserWriter · · Score: 2, Interesting

    10M songs? Yeah, but it's only 0.99 per song, so that's less than $10M. IIRC, Apple keeps about a third of that, so ~$3M.

    Forget about the money Apple is making from the store, and notice that it is a great big Get Out Of Jail Free card for Apple.

    The Apple platform is so great for digital media because it provides a set of powerful and easy tools for manipulating digital content. With a moto like "Rip, Mix, Burn," and products like the MP3-playing iPod apple was about half a step from Napster's legal trouble.

    With the iTunes Store, Apple has turned into the best way for the music industry to market their wares online. Legal trouble averted. Cool thing is that they have made three million dollars doing this. Double Cool!

    1. Re:Think of the whole business... by laird · · Score: 1

      Apple's gone further than that -- Apple provides almost everything between the microphone and your speakers. most music is produced on Mac's, much of it mixed and mastered using Apple software Logic. And with iTMS it's sold and distributed using Mac's, for playback on Mac's and iPod's. That's how the entire process can work so smoothly -- Apple's integrated the entire process. It's somewhat breathtaking when you realize how long Apple's been putting the pieces together for this one. Now think about what's next. :-)

  153. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by StewedSquirrel · · Score: 1

    Easier for the novice but more frustrating for the expert.

    Perhaps that's why there is a fairly negative view of AOL and MacOS and the various other things that have gained the reputation of "training wheels". Sure they're great when you can't ride a bike correctly, but they would probably make Lance Armstrong fall off his bike at a crucial moment.

    Stewey

    --
    There are 10 kinds of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who don't.
  154. Who let the astroturffers out? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just about ever comment consitst of "DROOL," "The Ipod Is t3h best ev4r!!11," and "any other player you list sucks and we the rabid fanboys will attack you because you are sooo wrong!"

  155. You can always buy a refurb... by MadAnthony02 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Apple Store has previous generation ten gigs for as low as $170

    I actually bought a second-gen 10 gig from Target for $199.99 when they clearenced them when the 3rd-gerneration ones came out.. Drove around to 3 targets until I found one that had several, bought all 5, resold the other 4 for a profit. I love iPods.

    1. Re:You can always buy a refurb... by bjohnson · · Score: 1

      Had, perhaps. they're listed, but you cannot select them, so they're not in stock. : (

  156. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by StewedSquirrel · · Score: 1

    Ahh yes... Intuition...

    Well, when I see something floating around my screen and I want to know how to deal with it, the first thing I do is "right click" on it to see what options I have available. Then I check the various menus or buttons associated with it.

    Seems simple enough to me.

    Stewey

    --
    There are 10 kinds of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who don't.
  157. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by 11223 · · Score: 1

    Did I say it did? Nope. Both of those steps were described on Windows. Other factors play into this on MacOS vs Windows; some of them are more subtle.

  158. When the iPod will come with bluetooth or WIFI? by javatips · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Instead of increasing the disk capacity of the iPods, they should include bluetooth or WIFI.

    This would allow one to listen to live stream with their iPod. This could also be used to use the iPod as the computer headset so you can ear the system sounds while listening to your music.

    Another use (which the RIAA would certainly not approve) would be to allow one to stream it's music to somebody else (make it to one device at a time with not recording feature, so the "industry" is not to grumpy about it) listen to ones tracks.

    1. Re:When the iPod will come with bluetooth or WIFI? by ruyon · · Score: 1

      maybe in the future, but I don't think current BT or WIFI can feed iPods with GBs of songs within practical (or endurable) time. There's charging issue, too.

    2. Re:When the iPod will come with bluetooth or WIFI? by Steve+Cowan · · Score: 1

      I read on SpyMac that Apple is secretly developing a way to charge the iPod via Bluetooth, too!

      (But seriously - the thing has to be plugged in some time, it might as well be while you're syncing it up. Wireless would just add unnecessarily to the cost.)

  159. Re:TO EDITORS: Who cares? by zpok · · Score: 1

    " Are you going to post a "news item" every time HP or Dell release a new model, too?"

    Nope, only stuff that's exciting.

    Here's another person compelled to reply to something he isn't really interested in.

    Get a username, Anonimous Coward gets really old, and filter Apple stuff out in your preferences, what?

    --
    I think, therefore I am...I think.
  160. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by MoneyT · · Score: 1

    Not quite, drang and drop is a very simple and intuitive concept to most users. I have never had to explain more than once to a person how it works, becuase it's designed to work just like it would in the real world.

    However, second button context menus have no real world equivilent. As such, they are much harder to use and learn for novices.

    Next up, modifiers keys yes take some effort to learn, but the beauty is, they aren't required. Everything that can be done from a modifier key can be done without it as well. Modifier keys are dsigned to make things faster for a more advanced user.

    Finaly the issue of the function keys. The function keys in and of themselves do nothing in the OS. They are assigned extra and highlighted functions such as brightness and volume on the laptops, but otherwise, their function is limited to user defined functions. Even exposes can be changed to a different setting and does not require the use of function keys to work.

    --
    T Money
    World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
  161. Qube by SLot · · Score: 2, Informative

    Why not just pick up a Qube II off of e-bay?

    It'll run Woody just fine and some minimal upgrades would give you a pretty decent box for simple file serving/mp3 storage pretty cheap. Dual NIC interfaces, extra PCI slot for wireless, etc. etc.

    And it *is* totally silent. At least mine is. ;)

    Check out http://www.shon.org/qube/ for more info (although his is running NetBSD).

  162. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You don't get it.

    click-plus-keypress is not more simple than click.

    Really. It's not.

    Either you remember left is different to right - hardly a radical concept there - or you remember for-this-I-need-the-keyboard-AND-the-mouse.

    Oh, and yes, I have explained the notion of a "right-click" to a novice computer user. My father, at 70, grasped the concept from being told once. I think he'd have had more trouble with being old he had to use both mouse and keyboard at the same time, in fact.

    Of course, control-clicking is tricky for people with just one arm or hand. And it's trucky for those who lack manual dexterity, too.

    Face it. Control-click is NOT simpler than right-click. And despite various later assertions, it's no more intuitive. In fact, I'd consider it much less so. After all, when using the mouse, it is more intuitive to a) click with the various mouse-buttons or b) click a button whilst also holding a button on the keyboard - a complete separate device! - down?

    Face it. Computers aren't intuitive. Very few man-made devices are, in fact.

    So, what is the point of just one button? Is it so drooling idiots who can't tell left from right can still use computers? Seriously, that's the only way I can see a single button being more useful.

  163. Standard /. Reply by buzzcutbuddha · · Score: 1, Funny

    $insult = 'Fools!';
    $question = 'pay so much for a piece of hardware';
    $alt = 'the iRiver discman';
    $reasons = 'costs less AND it plays and plays OGG files';
    $endingFlame = 'Apple is dying. Everyone knows it but you';

    print <<REPLY;

    $insult
    Why would you ever $question?
    Don't you know $alt is SO MUCH COOLER?
    I mean, it $reasons!

    Jesus! If you fuckheads paid attention, you'd realize $endingFlame!
    REPLY

    #disclaimer - The above Slashdot parody is provided without warranty, and if you can't recognize the saracasm, you left your sense of humor at home.

  164. iPop poseurs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >I sure wouldn't want to become just "one of the >crowd"

    And here is the number one reason why geeks buy expensive toys or Macs....

    status.

    We might laugh at the gang-bangers who have to wear the latest 300$ running shoes or 40$ baseball cap but its all the same.

    personal fullfilment through over-spending.

    zeke

  165. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by MoneyT · · Score: 1

    And what pray tell is preventing you from doing this in OS X?

    --
    T Money
    World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
  166. comment number 16 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >I don't need to post a comment bitching about >something I'm not going to buy, though.

    New to ./ , are we?

    zack

    1. Re:comment number 16 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well zack, you must be new too. Only a newbie would confuse a site abbreviation with a shell command.

  167. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, when I see something floating around my screen and I want to know how to deal with it, the first thing I do is "right click" on it to see what options I have available.

    That's fairly stupid. How often do you "see something floating around your screen?" I'd bet never. Things don't just "float" around your screen. They're contained within windows, and windows have a basic set of rules that define how they work. (Things like, they can be opened and closed, moved and resized; that kind of thing.)

    Now, if you're talking about icons, that's even easier. Icons can be selected, double-clicked, and dragged. Other operations are encapsulated in the action menu. No need to guess as to what they are. They're right there in front of you.

    Here's the bottom line: you don't know thing one about human user interfaces. You're just a moron. So we're no longer interested in hearing your opinion on this or any other matter. Please get the fuck out of there and never, ever come back, you fucking cocksucker.

  168. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1


    >However, second button context menus have no real world equivilent.

    Task bar.

    Hover-over.

    Scroll bar.

    These have no real world equilvance. I'm not sure they fall into the "hard to learn so leave them out" category.

    >modifiers keys yes take some effort to learn, but the beauty is, they aren't required

    Just like the second mouse button?

    --
    The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
  169. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    click-plus-keypress is not more simple than click.

    Agreed. That's why click-plus-keypress is reserved for shortcut features.

    Either you remember left is different to right - hardly a radical concept there

    Absolutely it is a radical concept. Pretend you're six years old. You're just barely clear on what "right" and "left" mean. Pretend you're one of the 13% of humans who is left handed. You're constantly told to "right click," but in fact that means you have to "left click" because your mouse is reversed. Pretend you're old and suffering from arthritis, or that you're young and suffering from a repetitive stress injury, and manipulating small buttons is difficult for you.

    In other words, pretend you are, taken in total, one of the MAJORITY of people who use computers.

    My father, at 70, grasped the concept from being told once.

    Oh, well, then it must be okay. Decades of research into human-machine interaction must be wrong.

    Of course, control-clicking is tricky for people with just one arm or hand.

    Right. Which is why the preferred way to bring up a context menu in Mac OS 9 and X is click-and-hold. Which is why the context menu itself has been almost completely deprecated in Mac OS X (only one operation requires it; do you know what it is?) and completely deprecated in Panther.

    Face it. Control-click is NOT simpler than right-click.

    No, it's not. Which is why the Mac does not require it.

    And despite various later assertions, it's no more intuitive.

    True. Which is why the Mac does not require it.

    click with the various mouse-buttons

    Why are there different buttons? What do they do? How do you know which one to use for which operation? Does it matter if you use your right hand or your left? And so on.

    Face it. Computers aren't intuitive.

    The only truly intuitive user interface is the nipple. Everything else must be learned. The question is, how much learning is required? Less learning is better. Which is why things you can see (like the action button) are superior to things you can't see but have to guess at (like contextual menus).

    So, what is the point of just one button? Is it so drooling idiots who can't tell left from right can still use computers?

    Yes. Exactly. Finally, you get it. It's so drooling idiots who can't tell left from right--i.e., children and elderly people--can use computers.

  170. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No AAC support, but the Karma has ogg support, which frankly is a better codec, albeit with less commercial backing.

  171. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by MoneyT · · Score: 1

    Task bar does not exist in the Mac OS, at best you could say the Dock, but the Dock does have a real world counterpart, a menu (like a McDonalds menu) see what you want and click it.

    Hoverover is not used in OS X as far as I know except in third party programs.

    Scroll bars granted have little resemblence to anything in the real world, but what else is there to use? Besides, scroll bars are faily intuitive anyways, down to scroll down, up to scroll up.

    Just like the second mouse button?

    No. In windows, the second mouse button is REQUIRED for many tasks. For example (and one that a novice user might want to do) there is no way to create a new folder on my desktop in windows without using the second mouse button.

    --
    T Money
    World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
  172. Re:Headless AC... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Is it 'earning' if I had to kill the person I inherited my treasure chest of gold from? What if I slept with that leprechan that I met at the end of the rainbow -- if I got paid by him that doesn't make me gay, right?

    No, but using a Mac does.

  173. Buymusic.com advertising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Driving out of San Francisco the other night, along a highway previously peppered with the classic guitar and applemusic.com byline, there is now a buymusic.com billboard.

    It's the same guitar, smashed. applemusic.com has been replaced with buymusic.com, and they ruin the entire composition by putting a big PC up in the corner.

    But like a graphic designer worth their salt would be willing to design an anti-Mac ad.

  174. a lil' OT but hey, it's the simpsons [was Re:ipod] by MoFoQ · · Score: 1

    kinda reminds me of an episode of The Simpsons, where Homer says something to the matter of how he never leaves a project unfinished, and suddenly a half built robot appears pleading to Homer, "Father, give me legs." Homer just says "No" and points outside and forces the robot to drag itself out.

  175. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1


    >For example (and one that a novice user might want to do) there is no way to create a new folder on my desktop in windows without using the second mouse button.

    In Windows Explorer, select the folder where you want to create the new folder, left-click on File, left-click on New, left-click on New Folder.

    --
    The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
  176. Re:Hooray! by zpok · · Score: 1

    What, you want \. to post Dell updates to the Apple corner?

    Don't get you, man. You're posting all over the place and you don't even like the article/marketing/product.

    You *know* you can filter out Apple fluf, no? (preferences?).

    BTW You can fiddle with Apple hardware same as with PC's. Maybe you can't build a machine from scratch and don't find your parts as easily, but I know quite a few people who actually enjoy that stuff.

    All this "proprietary" whining. If you like it so much, go buy a refurb or eBay and go frankenstein on your own little mac. You'll be surprised.

    --
    I think, therefore I am...I think.
  177. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No AAC support, but the Karma has ogg support, which frankly is a better codec

    Dead horse. Numerous studies from earlier this year put the lie to that assertion. OGG is not a superior codec than AAC, in either the purely abstract or pragmatic senses. In abstract tests, AAC (Dolby encoder) has been found to be superior to OGG at 128 kbps. In pragmatic terms, OGG's dependence of floating point arithmetic makes it impractical for portable devices.

    OGG is pretty much an evolutionary dead end. Neat experiment, no longer relevant in the real world.

  178. Re:Headless slashdot poster... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I think it has to do with the fact that the Mac is a predominantly gay platform, and that Wintel users tend to be, um, unsure about their sexuality.

    Maybe things will improve when a geek gets a 17 inch PowerBook (I can just feel the double entendre) as part of his makeover on Queer Eye for the Straight Guy.

    ~~~

  179. Re:new imac problem by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

    Truth lies in what is said not who says it. Credibility relies on truth and reputation. Those who publish half truths and hide behind anonymity get little credibility.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  180. How about the 15" powerbook? by shancock · · Score: 1

    Now if they could just do this for the 15" powerbook. I'd be first in line. I don't need another desktop, especially one that looks like a lamp. How do you open those cases anyway?

    1. Re:How about the 15" powerbook? by Meowing · · Score: 1
      How do you open those cases anyway?

      With screwdrivers, same as in town. Really though, you don't want to do much more than pop off the bottom cover without some proper documentation on hand. There's some fragile wiring and thermal interfaces inside that you want to know about beforehand, if having a working computer after reassembly is part of the plan.

  181. Re:new imac problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    So says he that hides with no personally identifying information or email address behind his Slashdot ID. A paragon of credibility you are.

    ~~~

  182. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by ryanwright · · Score: 1

    No FireWire. No AAC support

    Who needs Firewire and AAC when you have Ethernet and Ogg?

    --
    -Ryan, with the unoriginal sig
  183. Re:Great use for 802.11 & || bluetooth on ipod by mrpuffypants · · Score: 2, Interesting

    And if anybody could do it well and end-to-end then it would be Apple. Anybody who's ever used Rendezvous in iTunes can attest to how easy and freaking cool it is to listen to other people's music in their libraries over the network.

    But the tradeoff would be that doing that much streaming would either increase the size of the ipod (big no-no) or make the battery life seriously dip off (another no-no)

    I wouldn't hold my breath, however cool it would be.

  184. Ten Million songs sold! (Why the fuck isn't this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    NEWS!!!!!

    The most successful legal music downloading service in pc history and its not front page news?. Apple is back in black and trolls have another nail for their.

    *niX MacDogg

  185. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who needs Firewire and AAC when you have Ethernet and Ogg?

    Me. Ethernet is useless. It's far slower than FireWire, unless you're talking about putting gigabit in a portable device which is possibly the stupidest thing I've heard of so far today, and that's saying something. Furthermore, it requires far too much electronics on the device, making it expensive and error-prone.

    And OGG? Pfeh. Nobody uses it, which is the first and last strike against it. Can you go to the iTunes music store (or anywhere else) and buy music in OGG format? No? Never mind then.

    Why does nobody use it? Because even MP3 is superior to OGG at 128 kbps, and AAC blows the doors off of both MP3 and OGG at that bit rate. (Numerous studies, some scientific and some less so, were done earlier this year. Look 'em up.) Furthermore, OGG's dependence on floating-point arithmetic makes it impractical in the extreme for portable devices.

  186. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What part of "on the desktop" did you not understand?

  187. Bluetooth on an iPod by gaudior · · Score: 1

    2 things. Wireless headphones, and wireless remote. (Maybe even one with a display.)

  188. Re:Headless slashdot poster... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    LOL, the ghey Mac lusers have mod points today!

    ~~~

  189. Accessory? by Swannie · · Score: 5, Funny

    Does anyone else find it funny that apple lists a VW New Beetle as an iPod accessory? Wait until I tell my wife...

    --
    :q!
  190. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by mbbac · · Score: 1

    I think you're missing that fact that the combination of small and large at the same time is a very, very cool thing.

    --

    mbbac

  191. Paramount consideration: by Atario · · Score: 1

    Color coordination. Only do it if the colors of the iPod and the New Beetle match. Also, what colors do the new iMacs come in?

    [Hums "Dedicated Follower of Fashion" by the Kinks]

    --
    "A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
    1. Re:Paramount consideration: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any color you want as long as it's white

  192. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by stingerman101 · · Score: 1

    >>Just wait until the "right-click" concept just blows them away.>>

    This has always been a stupid discussion point. You need to know the history. One of the biggest complaints among users generally was that their were not more keyboard equivalents to pull-down menu options. So, in the early days using a keyboard combination with another key created standard menu equivalents. So it was natural for users to use a ctrl-mouse click for additional shortcuts as it was the way menu shortcuts worked as well. Thus Macs have always had context menus.

    When a second mouse button was introduced, Mac users were already used to the keyboard-mouse click approach. A second button meant a different way to do the same thing and that violates usability rules of the time. Though rules are made to be broken if the underlying principle stays in tact. What has occurred over the last decade is that many users have learned to use the second button for contextual commands and for many shortcut keys. So now the second button is natural. That is why Apple supports two and three button and scroll wheel mouses in OS X.

    So the question is, should Apple release a two-button scroll-wheel mouse with Mac purchases? I don't think so, I believe generally a user should be taught good user interface guidelines up front, and these will be portable to other platforms. Every manufacturer includes a cheap mouse with their systems and charges extra for better mice. Likewise, any user can buy a different mouse really cheap if they don't like the included mouse. Personally, I usually just use the optical mouse I bought a year ago and store away the mouse that comes with newer Wintel or Mac PC's.

  193. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by stingerman101 · · Score: 1

    One more very important point, in Windows the right click can be changed to do different things besides a context menu. So different users understand the right click to mean different things. So from a usability point of view, the original Mac OS approach was a better implementation.

  194. It's not fixed but... by sterno · · Score: 1

    No, bandwidth costs are not fixed but presumably, as bandwidth usage rises, this correlates into an increase in purchaes. Therefore, the rises are automatically offset.

    --
    This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
  195. Re:Headless slashdot poster... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Probably the part of the fabric where said "minority" is just someone who buys something, has a tendancy to be rather outspoken in their contempt of "the masses" and in general, looks like Steve Jobs.

    Next thing, you'll be starting a class action for all the Mac users, claiming emotional damages.

  196. Why do these fools aways capitalize "MAC"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's "Mac" not 'MAC".

    Other than that, you are just one more in a long line of clueless Apple-haters, you must be so proud.

  197. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by MoneyT · · Score: 1

    Again, I said on the desktop. Now, if you would like to explain to someone how to navigate through the windows filesystem to find their desktop you can. I would rather just tell them, clikc on the desktop, click on the File Menu, click on New Folder

    --
    T Money
    World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
  198. A quick comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Let's do a quick comparison. The following is the current going prices of the listed hardware on newegg.com:

    $47.00 - ECS K7S5A mainboard, AGP 2x/4x, USB 2.0 (onboard 10/100 NIC)
    $74.00 - AMD AthlonXP 2200+ (1.8GHz, 266MHz FSB) retail
    $80.00 - 512MB PC2100 RAM (major brand)
    $129.00 - Nvidia GeForceFX 5200 Ultra 128MB DDR
    $33.00 - Creative Labs Sound Blaster Live! Dolby Digital 5.1 SB0220
    $63.00 - Acer DVD/CDRW 48x24x48x16 Drive
    $72.50 - Western Digital 80GB 7200RPM 2MB cache
    $40.00 - Standard ATX AOpen case with 300watt and front USB ports
    $34.99 - Belkin Wireless keyboard and mouse combo
    $369.00 - Optiquest Q170 17" LCD Monitor, 1280x1024, 80Hz

    Grand Total: $942.49
    With Linux from ISO: $942.49
    With Microsoft Windows XP Home, SP1a ($93): $1,035.49

    The above system is more powerful than Apple's midrange "revamped" offering, the 1.25GHz G4 with a 17" display, which runs $1,799.00. That's $763.51 more expensive than the above system with Windows XP Home SP1a. $763.51 more for a system with closed hardware, half the system memory, half the video RAM, and less raw computing power. Why would anyone willingly pay so much more money for so much less?

    1. Re:A quick comparison by cosmo7 · · Score: 1

      Why would anyone willingly pay so much more money for so much less?

      Time for some deduction, Holmes.

  199. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, since you're the one who brought up the gigabit point, I guess that make YOU the stupidest person you've heard today. This is usually the case. I'm usually the stupidest person I've heard in any given day. Its a red-letter day when I find someone who says something dumber out-loud than my internal thought processes occasionally churn out in my head. It usually means I've found someone who doesn't know when to keep their mouth closed or their typing fingers idle...

    AAC? No one but Ipod users use it. Period. Deal. I've had to play far more Ogg files (probably 5-10 total) than AAC files in my life ( 0 ) The ratio causes MY computer to throw an exception. Worrying about which of the two nice formats is more "uber" makes MY brain throw an exception, and makes me want to throw bricks through windows. Besides, anyone who's anyone knows that if you want to be a REAL techno-elite uber snob (I think this is where you are going.) you stump for FLAC, not AAC. Lossy compression is just SOOOOO 90s.

    Firewire? When was the last time I used that??? Oh, wait, for ANOTHER portable hard drive, and mainly just to prove that the Firewire port worked on my Spacewalker box and on my laptop. Heck, for the laptop I had to go buy a 4pin to 6pin cable, and then STILL had to plug in a USB cable because a 4pin port provides no power. Bleh. You want "cool": Give me USB 2.0. Wait, you say, its "not as technically glaftorizible as my FireWire hoobajabits is!!!" (See, if _I_ put words in someones mouth, I, at least, make them interesting.) Well, gee, maybe not, but it IS on every computer I currently own, and if they're smart, its backwards compatible to USB 1.1 and then its on every computer I own, my PS2, my TiVO, an Xbox, quite possibly my cat (I haven't looked lately), and a few odd looking boxes in my house that I can't quite figure out (The government put them there. Thats my story, and I'm sticking to it). And if its slower than FireWire (and USB 2.0 only marginally is, in general, even if its bit rate is a bit faster than 400 FireWire), so what? But then again, I'm not the kind of person that would USE an entire 40GB Ipod anyhow.

    Frankly, even Ethernet would be cooler. Have a mode where you drop your player on the net, it grabs an IP, sets up a "whatever this months equivalent of Shoutcast" stream, and starts playing away. I'll pay a few extra ounces for that, if we're talking about utility. If not, then lets get back to the USB deal.

    In summary: BLAH BLAH BLAH.

  200. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by maja33 · · Score: 1

    I'm one of those drooling idiots who can't tell left from right. I'm lefthanded and use two computers at work:
    my one computer with mouse at the left side and mouse buttons reversed and a shared computer with a 'normal' mouse. When I use the shared computer I just move the mouse to the left.

    My boss convinced me to alternate between lefthanded mouse-use and righthanded mouse-use because "this will reduce the risk of RSI".

    He hoped that I would use the mouse righthanded on my own computer at work so that co-workers would have less problems to use my computer. Unfortunely for him I switched to righthanded mouse-use on my home computer.

    So, forgive me for being a little bit confused about the left/right mouse button. I just call it
    "the other button", the button you do not use to select things. My co-workers understand it, I think :)

    --
    "It wasn't me, I didn't do it, I don't post, the bite marks still haven't healed from last time." Ryan/jrc
  201. Much better than this by Iowaguy · · Score: 1

    Actually, the pricing is $1299 US for the 15 inch, 1ghz model and $1799 for the 17 inch 1.25 model. The higher price quoted above is for apples best model, which gives more ram and bigger hard drive for a premium that even apple fans like me can't justify. 1799 is more accurate for what someone would buy.

    --
    "He who laughs last, didn't get the joke."-Cap
  202. Wow! by dacetone · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Anyone else notice that the new iMac configurations are shipping with Tony Hawk Pro Skater 4? Right on.

    --
    Just follow the day, and reach fo
  203. Re:Headless slashdot poster... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    An affirmative defense would be that purchase of an overpriced piece of "significance" hardware is conspicuous consumption and thus a symptom of previous emotional damage.

    ~~~

  204. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Absolutely it is a radical concept. Pretend you're six years old. You're just barely clear on what "right" and "left" mean. Pretend you're one of the 13% of humans who is left handed. You're constantly told to "right click," but in fact that means you have to "left click" because your mouse is reversed. Pretend you're old and suffering from arthritis, or that you're young and suffering from a repetitive stress injury, and manipulating small buttons is difficult for you."

    Let's see.

    Firstly, computers are designed primarily for adults. However, at 6, I knew the difference between right and left. It's not a fundamentally difficult concept, especially since the majority of kids are reading and writing before then.

    Of course, at 6, most kids won't have much use for context-sensitive-menus... but I'm sure those that do can learn which button they press.

    My mouse has bigger buttons than my keyboard, too. In fact, my arthritic father - the same 70yr old who grasped "right click" first time - manages his mouse just fine. I'd expect managing a mouse at all the be the real issue there.

    As for right-handed-vs-left-handed, that's an implementation detail. It's poorly chosen language that is at issue there, not that it's difficult.
    As it happens, I'm left-handed. Never found it a problem.

    "In other words, pretend you are, taken in total, one of the MAJORITY of people who use computers."

    ROTFL.
    So the majority that use computers are either around 6, left-handed or arthritic/RSI suffers?

    Get real.

    "Oh, well, then it must be okay. Decades of research into human-machine interaction must be wrong."

    Quite possibly.

    In fact, a great deal of research on all sorts is complete and utter bollocks.

    That's probably the same research that claims that using a mouse is faster than using keyboard shortcuts.

    That too is bollocks. Yes, I know the whole "amnesia" theory. I've also tested it - I was genuinely curious - and it turned out shortcut keys are much faster for those of us that use computers a lot. For everyone else, there's the mouse. But I digress...

    "Right. Which is why the preferred way to bring up a context menu in Mac OS 9 and X is click-and-hold. Which is why the context menu itself has been almost completely deprecated in Mac OS X (only one operation requires it; do you know what it is?) and completely deprecated in Panther." ... which is irrelevent, given this is a discussion between the merits of ctrl-plus-click vs right-button.

    "Why are there different buttons? What do they do? How do you know which one to use for which operation? Does it matter if you use your right hand or your left? And so on."

    Why does the keyboard have various buttons? Should we not just use a single-button mouse to choose letters from an onscreen display?

    "The only truly intuitive user interface is the nipple. Everything else must be learned. The question is, how much learning is required? Less learning is better. Which is why things you can see (like the action button) are superior to things you can't see but have to guess at (like contextual menus)."

    Yes, because 'press the right button on the mouse' is a really HARD concept to learn.

    Windows users, the group most universally derided over intelligence, can grasp the right-button-context-menu concept. Are they smarter than Mac users? Or is it just it's not a fundamentally difficult concept to grasp?

    Of course, there's always the press-the-context-menu button on the keyboard, if we're talking Windows...

    "Yes. Exactly. Finally, you get it. It's so drooling idiots who can't tell left from right--i.e., children and elderly people--can use computers."

    Wonderful attitude there. So the elderly and kids are "drooling" now, huh?

    Talk about arrogance...

    I guess that's why you feel that group - and apparently, many other people - can't grasp such a simple concept as more than one button on a mouse.

    No wonder Mac users have gotten such a bad reputation...

  205. Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or are you just karma whoring to support your trolls?

    Oh well, you do sucker in the dumbest slashbots. The bs you pulled with .Net was a good one, even the so called experts fell for it.

    1. Re:Really? by Mr.+Darl+McBride · · Score: 1

      I have a confused fan :)

  206. Re:ARRRRRGGGGHHHH! What?!? No audio input? by k_187 · · Score: 1

    Well, technically, the third gen iPods have had recording capability. You go into the debug menu and its got a test for the record capabilites. I'm sure that in a few months time (with the release of panther perhaps?) Apple will do a firmware update for the 3rd gen ipods that enables it. So patience grasshopper. All good things come to those who wait.

    --
    11 was a racehorse
    12 was 12
    1111 Race
    12112
  207. Re:Great use for 802.11 & || bluetooth on ipod by amichalo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    One possibility would be to use bluetooth as a "splitter" for multiple, wireless headsets. It would be great to keep the ipod safely away in a backpack or coat pocket, while a bluetooth remote controlled the tracks (and duplicated the display) and a bluetooth headset played the music. a friedn could them easily "authenticate" their bluetooth headset for the iPod and share the tunes, er, itunes.

    --
    I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
  208. Offtopic by hondo77 · · Score: 1

    I can't even stand my local classical station (KUSC) because even they are too repetitious for me.

    Amen, brother (and I am not even close to being seriously into classical yet even I can tell)!

    --
    I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
  209. Re:ARRRRRGGGGHHHH! What?!? No audio input? by plastik55 · · Score: 1

    Heh. A lot of people with 1st generation ipods were sure that Apple would release a firmware update with playlist editing, alarm clock, custom menus, and all the things that newer iPods have.

    Yeah, Apple will write support for recording eventually, but you WILL have to get a new iPod for it. If you're going to base a purchasing decision on features that have not been announced, well, that's pretty dumb. This is not the customer-friendly Apple of 1990 or so. Today's Apple has fully embraced planned obsolescence.

    --

    I have a positive modifier on Troll. When I mod someone Troll their karma should go UP!

  210. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by cosmo7 · · Score: 1

    I think he's talking about pop-ups, which can plague Windows users. I only know this from playing America's Army and occasionally finding other players frozen while they try to close some spam. It's like shooting fish in a barrel.

  211. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    AAC? No one but Ipod users use it. Period. Deal.

    It's the audio codec for HD-DVD. It's the audio codec for digital satellite radio (XM and others). It's the audio codec for HDTV. Plus, you know, iPod.

    Period. Deal.

    Lossy compression is just SOOOOO 90s.

    You want to carry around 1,000 CD's without compressing them? Go ahead. I'll continue to use my iPod, thanks.

    You want "cool": Give me USB 2.0.

    Oh, man, that's hilarious. That's really funny.

    my PS2, my TiVO, an Xbox

    So? Are you planning on plugging your (USB-equipped) iPod into your Xbox, whatever that is?

    And if its slower than FireWire (and USB 2.0 only marginally is, in general, even if its bit rate is a bit faster than 400 FireWire), so what?

    So it's slower. Not slightly, either. In real-world disk-to-disk throughput, USB 2 is about half the speed of FireWire 400... and FireWire 400 is obsolete.

    But then again, I'm not the kind of person that would USE an entire 40GB Ipod anyhow.

    Then what the hell are you doing posting in this thread? Just being a troll?

    I'll pay a few extra ounces for that, if we're talking about utility.

    I won't. I want small and light.

    If not, then lets get back to the USB deal.

    I'll say it again: iPods have USB. They also have FireWire. Everybody who can uses FireWire, because FireWire is better. The competition, if you can call it that, does not even offer FireWire, because it is inferior.

    In summary: BLAH BLAH BLAH.

    You said it, cockknocker.

  212. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I was speaking from a luser's perspective. Does AAC work on a default install of Windows? (no). Neither is WMA as fully functional on a Mac.

    Please consider your Apple zealotry here:

    • The AAC is considered "open, nearly proprietary" insofar as market penetration counts. Native support in Windows will be a long time coming, if ever.
    • The .NET framework is open too, and do you see it running natively on the Mac?

    Disregarding nearly-irrelevant side efforts, just because a spec is open does not mean it is commonly accepted (native Ogg on windows? not.) The point about WMA being pure money grubbing by MS holds no water in this case considering Apple's (albeit circumventable) DRM tactics with iTunes/AAC on Macintosh.

    Perhaps we differ at a more base level-- as a Macintosh apostate accepting WinNT, I believe that market share matters. As a Apple zealot, perhaps it does not matter to you since you can invoke jihad on the Windows installed market share.

    If we differ at such a base level, I hope you have fun with all those 'brand new' OS X games ported from two year old Windows products.

  213. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by kelzer · · Score: 1

    If you read the Details about the Archos unit, you'll notice that the weight is listed as "10.23 lb."


    I think I'll pay the extra $80 for the iPod - probably pay for itself in fewer trips to the chiropractor.


    --

    ---------------------------------------------
    SERENITY NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  214. But but but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Complaining that Ipod doesn't support Ogg is like complaining it doesn't support LP's.

    But.... it doesn't support LPs!

  215. Re:new imac problem by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

    I have an email address; I would rather not divulge it to you. Besides I never claimed to be credible. I only state that you are not credible hiding behind the nameless multitude of Anonymous Cowards.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  216. Expensive prices now hidden in new Apple currency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Geez I don't understand why every time apple comes out with a new machine it gets on slashdot. News flash: Apple is on it's last leg. It's dead, dying and gone. The machines are so damn expensive that now they even have to put out articles with prices in British pounds :) The only people that buy them are printers & layout houses. I'll stop buying them too as soon as I can get quark and the font problems figured out. Boy it would be great to dump the rest of our Windows & Macs for Linux machines here.

    Really, the machines are so outragously priced you'd have to be a total nutcase to by one if you are running Linux. Worse, people not running Linux almost all run Windows; Apple needs to join up with us and try to help kick M$ out.

  217. Those who live in Mac houses... by Zhe+Mappel · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Owning the Mac does put you in a statistical minority, to be sure, but taking some barbs from PC owners shouldn't be compared with something important like racism or sexism. Pleading you're discriminated against because someone doesn't like your computer and forecasting the end of society is going too far, my friend.

    It's especially unfortunate that you don't like being called an elitist, when everything from Apple's ads to pricing is pitched at elites. You don't think it's the Volkswagon Beetle of computers, now, do you? (I'm referring to the cheap VW Bug of yesterday, obviously, not the expensive mutation built today for elites--and featuring an iPod deal right now, LOL!)

    I bought my Mac for various reasons, and people can think whatever they please. But one thing is certain: Apple designs and markets its machines for a niche audience, not for Everyperson, and that strategy invites invidious response just as all expensive goods do. Why pretend otherwise?

    1. Re:Those who live in Mac houses... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you for my new word of the day "invidious." Do you see this resentment towards buyers of a certain good priced above average as class issue? In the case of "poor" people making this same buying decision is it a class issue still or one of resenting the valuing of something over another?

      Everyone can be a weekend millionaire once a year. And everyone today has at least one "elite" aspect of their life. Maybe toilet paper, maybe olives, maybe photography, maybe napping. Modern production and technology has made being elite commonplace. I never quite understood hanging any part of your self identity on a mass produced product or what the price of things are.

  218. Gaaah! I just bought one two days ago! by GrayArea · · Score: 1

    This sucks. I just replaced my old 10GB model with a 15GB iPod two days ago. I'll replace the damn thing with the 20GB model by paying the return fee, but man, am I ticked off...

    --
    "The deluded are always filled with absolutes. The rest of us have to live with ambiguity." - Aristoi, Walter Jon Willia
    1. Re:Gaaah! I just bought one two days ago! by Shorthouse · · Score: 1

      I too ordered one a week or so ago and Apple have done the decent thing and upgraded my 15Gb model to a 20Gb with no effort, apart from an email, from me. Fair I thought.

  219. bluetooth cannot support a single headset by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let alone multiple.

    Learn about the technology first.

    Bluetooth maxes out at about 800kbit/second. It takes 1.5mbit/second to stream audio.

    You could stream compressed audio, but then you need a special headset with a decompressor in it. That headset would be expensive and have short battery life.

    1. Re:bluetooth cannot support a single headset by amichalo · · Score: 1

      I guess SonyEricsson is using special blue tooth then for their Bluetooth Headset HBH-3 seeing that it handles two way audio for their cellular phone for 5 hours of talk time.

      --
      I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
    2. Re:bluetooth cannot support a single headset by cheekyboy · · Score: 1

      True, but 8bit 44100hz stereo is still GOOD QUALITY, which is 705600 bps, so it would handle it.

      Yes, 8bit 22000hz is shonky, but 44.1khz is still good, and headphones would average it out any way.

      Possible...!

      You could compress it with a week 2:1 compressor also, something very week.

      --
      Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
  220. Great!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This basically means that PC's will get the same treatment within the next year.

    I can't wait until bluetooth becomes ubiquitous.

  221. Re:Still no OGG- They're In Games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've played a lot of computer games which use Ogg Vorbis as a codec for their sounds, and for good reason. The first, is of course, they don't have to pay for it. The second is, it's so much smaller, so you can have more sounds on a CD, which really matters because it's a limited space storage device. If you're wondering... it's Operation Flashpoint.

  222. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Firstly, computers are designed primarily for adults.

    Right out of the gate, you're wrong.

    So the majority that use computers are either around 6, left-handed or arthritic/RSI suffers?

    Yup. The majority of computer users are the young, the old, the left-handed, the disabled, the differently abled, the infirm, the disfigured, or the injured.

    You're an elitist pig if you think that the majority is composed of physically perfect people. Or perhaps, based on your first comment, you just believe that computers ought to be reserved for physically perfect people?

    For everyone else, there's the mouse. But I digress...

    "Digress" is an understatement of the highest order. You don't digress. You spin wildly off-topic, making oblique references to things that are not only completely unrelated, but are in fact dubious in their very veracity!

    Yes, because 'press the right button on the mouse' is a really HARD concept to learn.

    Yes. It is. Of course, your arrogance won't let you see this. "I've mastered it, so obviously anybody who can't or hasn't is a moron who shouldn't be using a computer."

    Whatever, little friend. You're either an elitist, a pig, a twit, or a buffoon. Which is it?

    Either way, I hope you get cancer and die.

  223. I know, I said that MP3 wasn't free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I specificaly mentioned how Ogg isn't patent encumbered(hence MP3 is). I also mentioned how its great that game companies have a FREE(hense MP3 not being Free) codec to work with.

    I well aware of what you mentioned, but like I pointed out the fact the MP3 has patent problems and isn't "truly free" doesn't mean anything to almost anyone.

  224. what iPods need by penguin7of9 · · Score: 1
    What the iPods need are:
    • Better battery life.
    • Built-in USB2.0 connectivity.
    • The ability to recharge over USB.

    The Creative Zen gets 14h play time and recharges over USB, so it is possible to do this; its main disadvantage are its software, user interface, and design. The Zen is somewhat larger than the iPod, but I'd rather have a larger MP3 player that doesn't die halfway through the day. With some careful engineering, Apple might be able to get Zen-like battery-life in a unit the size of the old iPod (all the extra thickness could be battery).
  225. Oh shut the F up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What the F do you care what people think about your rinky-dink little Mac.

    You want to "think different", but what you really want is "oooh, you're such a rebel, you have a Mac".

    Please. Go away. Just go the F away.

    1. Re:Oh shut the F up. by ErnstKompressor · · Score: 1

      Look AC-Bitch, I could give less than two shits what anyone here thinks about anything I do. Don't dream for a minute that your worthless opinion is important anywhere outside your dorm room. When you get a set of balls and have the guts to post your meaningless crap as a non-AC, then I'll even give your views an ounce of respect...and I mean that...If you have it in you to stand behind your words instead of the mask of anonymity, I would take your advice to "Please. Go away. Just go the F away." The fact is, I think more people here would rather you "Fuck off" and make this place a somewhat more civil place, than me "Fuck off" and make room for the likes of you...

      I fart in your general direction

      --
      We apologise for the fault in this post. Those responsible have been sacked. -- Signed RICHARD M. NIXON
  226. Apple Laptop Keyboards Unsuitable for Unix Users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Apple laptops are effectively unusable for unix users.

    I am a long-time Unix user. That means I need to have the Ctrl key to the left of the A key. This is a genuine need, not merely a want; it is based upon ergonomics. The Ctrl key is heavily used in unix, and it must be easily accessable. It cannot be off in the lower left corner of the keyboard where it is difficult to get at, and where it distorts the position of your left hand such that you can't easily type other keys while holding the Ctrl key down.

    Apple desktop keyboards are now all USB. They are all OK. The CapsLock key can be re-mapped into a Ctrl key.

    Unfortunately, even in this modern age, all Apple laptops have built-in ADB keyboards. The ADB keyboard is broken-by-design. It is, in general, not possible to remap the CapsLock key into a Ctrl key.

    There are some exceptions, but they are horrible kludges. They are horrible kludges because the original design of the ADB keyboard was a horrible kludge. The correct solution would be for Apple to re-design their laptop motherboards to use built-in USB keyboards. This hasn't happened yet. If you run Linux, use Debian's solution. For Mac OS X users, uControl works. There are no solutions (that I know of) for either NetBSD or OpenBSD. Please note once again that the "solutions" above are in fact kludges, because of the original bad design of the ADB keyboard.

    Apple provides a technical note on how to remap the keyboard, but provides no solution to the hardware problems caused by the design of the ADB keyboard. This tech note helps foreign language users, but does nothing for the CapsLock/Ctrl problem.

    Apple is (currently) ignoring Unix users! This is not merely speculation on my part. In an on-going email exchange I am having with an Apple employee (whom I won't name) in their marketing department, the Apple marketing person directly stated to me that Apple was catering to their historic Mac customers, and is purposely ignoring the Unix market. He also claimed that Apple would soon start paying more attention to the Unix market. I won't hold my breath. Apple has been ignoring Unix users for more than 13 years. I expect that trend to continue. (Also note that my Apple contact indicated that Macs would never ship with a 3-button mouse, even though Apple intended to port almost all X-window software and deliver it either on a CD/DVD or installed directly on each Mac's hard drive. How Unix friendly is a 1-button mouse with X programs that often require 3 buttons?)

    Apple has now lost two opportunities to sell me hardware. I really wanted an Apple laptop for their superior battery life, and for the PowerPC with Altivec CPU. (The Altivec is vastly superior to the x86 line for DSP.) Because I can't live with the broken-by-design built-in ADB keyboard in all Apple laptops, Sony and IBM sold me laptops instead. If Apple fixes this problem, they will sell me a PowerBook next year; if they don't, I'll still be running OpenBSD on x86 hardware, and wishing I could use a Mac.

  227. All you need now is Wifi Ipod by cheekyboy · · Score: 1

    All we need now is a WiFi iPOD and wifi networks
    at most music stores so you could purchase songs via your WiPOD as you walk! no queue, just choose and click!

    Oh and btw Steve, if you do this send me the cash for this business plan!

    --
    Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
  228. 20x faster? Hardly. Maybe 3x. by LFS.Morpheus · · Score: 2, Informative

    Unless you're running RAID, it is highly unlikely that you will fill the bandwidth of Firewire 400, let alone Firewire 800. The fastest 7200 RPM hard drive on the market does 55 MBps tops, just 5 more than 50 MBps, and not even close to 100 MBps. I guess its good to have headroom for firewire hard drives or something, but seriously, its not even going to come close.

    Let alone what the iPod has in it. A 3600 RPM drive if you're lucky. Probably not. 20 MBps? 10? My roommate says he can transfer at 2 MBps; highest report are 7-8 MBps.

    --
    The space unintentionally left unblank.
  229. Re:Great use for 802.11 & || bluetooth on ipod by burns210 · · Score: 1

    remember, even thought that WOULD be a killer app, these ipods run on batteries, with a bluetooth streaming feature you can bet that those batteries would only last a handful of songs before they went kaput.

  230. Re:Headless slashdot poster... by Cryptnotic · · Score: 1


    What part of the fabric of society has frayed to the point that abuse of a minority is fashionable...


    Abuse of minorities has always been fashionable. Perhaps you are forgetting your conformity training (i.e., compulsory education)? Human beings need to be made into followers, listening to authority without question, even if it is only part of the time and only in certain segments of life. Predictability is a necessity for management of our global society of billions of worker/consumers.

    Just embrace the hypocrisy of it.

    --
    My other first post is car post.
  231. Speed Bump??? by ayeco · · Score: 1

    http://m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?speedbump

    Main Entry: speed bump
    Function: noun
    Date: 1972
    : a low raised ridge across a roadway (as in a parking lot) to limit vehicle speed

  232. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by scottgfx · · Score: 1

    Quote: "No wonder Mac users have gotten such a bad reputation..."

    And you're making me fall in love with Windows, all over again.

    There was a poll question here on /. just a week or so ago. I waxed poetic on the wonder that is the key. I use a Macintosh and a Wacom tabet for all of my work use. (Photoshop, Illustrator, After Effects & Lightwave) I have three buttons... The tip and two barrel switches. The tip is a single click and the first barrel switch is a double click. I've never used the second barrel switch in nine years. My left hand is always sitting on the keyboard with my thumb just above the Command key. My pinky is ready to hit Control and my middle finger is on Option. It is in my opinion, the fastest way to use Photoshop. Now, when I'm at home, I just use a two button mouse. The great thing is, that when I use a system with a single button mouse, I'm not lacking any functions. On Windows, some things have to be accessed via the Right click. If the Right click menu isn't duplicated in the drop-down menus then THAT is poor interface design. I actually think that Amiga did the two button mouse thing better anyway.

    --
    It's mandatory to wash your hands before returning to the land of Dairy Queen.
  233. Re:Headless slashdot poster... by Moraelin · · Score: 1

    Way I see it, it's just a natural response to the elitist attitude and/or "Amiga persecution syndrome" that a lot of Mac users _do_ suffer from. And if normal elitism wasn't enough, you only need go through a few threads right here on Slashdot to find gems like "Windows fanboys" about the average Windows user. Or words like "braiwashed" (either actually spelled out or implied) aren't that uncommon either.

    Sad to say, that's more like "the average Mac owner post about Windows user", than an exception. Basically already when I read a Mac user post about Macs _or_ Windows, chances are at least 50-50 it'll be a troll. Elitist or not, but troll.

    So if you're not one of the trolls, well, I feel sorry for you, you're just caught in the crossfire. You have my sincere sympathy. Maybe the place to start is to educate your fellow Mac users.

    You may notice that none of the other computing platforms gets picked on. For example, you don't see Windows (CE) users going around slinging Mud at Symbian or PalmOS users. Ever wondered why? Because the Symbian or PalmOS users mind their own business in the first place, and don't go on trolling sprees rattling the cage of "Redmond fanboys." Well, maybe if the Mac community started acting as grown ups, they wouldn't get picked on either. Just a thought.

    And if you're gonna educate the trolls, you may want to start with the fact that there's really no conspiracy to avoid Macs, nor anything like a "brainwashed Redmond fanboy." Most people really don't give half a damn about who made it, and if the OS comes from Apple or Microsoft or IBM or RedHat. They just care what programs they'll run on that damn box, and how much it'll cost to do so. That's all.

    They would just as happily use a Mac or a Solaris box or even an SCO box instead, _if_ it ran all their favourite apps, _and_ did so at a reasonable price.

    For the average Joe, the Mac just offers poor value for the money. It's overpriced for a start. (No, I don't give a damn about price comparisons to a dual Xeon workstation. Compare the single CPU ones to a single P4 system, because that's what Joe Average really needs at home.) And for something which costs that kind of cash, it sure can't run about 3/4 of the major apps out there. Nor about 95% of the games.

    If you're satisfied with it, and even feed your family with it, more power to you. Great. Stick to your Macs then. But Joe Average will get a PC instead, and there's no conspiracy or brainwashing involved.

    And maybe if some of the more vocal Mac users could understand that simple fact, instead of going on about "clueless brainwashed idiots who choose windows", they wouldn't come across as elitist.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
  234. not outside america, 50% more by cheekyboy · · Score: 1

    Outside usa, good old apple again makes their prices WAY TOO MUCH!!!

    Is it apple usa's fault for its export prices? or the importers fault for having exclusive import rights that jack the price up, then blame it on import duties/tarrifs and sales taxes and need to make a profit that it ends up 50% more?

    Its like in 1998 when a powerbook cost $7500 in AU, yet $2999 in USA, it was cheaper to fly to usa to pick it up instead of buying local.

    --
    Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
  235. Bluetooth is low powr by sjbe · · Score: 1


    Correct me if im wrong, but doesnt Bluetooth ALWAYS ON, suck a lot of battery on mobiles?


    Consider yourself corrected. :-) Bluetooth is designed to be a low power consumption technology. My phone lasts for about 5-7 days without a recharge with Bluetooth on constantly. (Less if I talk a lot, obviously) I think you might be confusing WiFi's power consumption with Bluetooth. They are designed for different purposes. WiFi has much higher power requirements and does suck batteries down much more quickly.

  236. Re:Headless slashdot poster...a follow-up... by ErnstKompressor · · Score: 1

    In the interest of historical preservation,
    I am revisiting this tired thread in the hopes of leaving it on a constructive note. My initial attempt at comunicating this point was somewhat missinterpreted...

    "Bleed those artsy-fartsy halfwits dry"

    This mild barb instigated a mild reply...

    I was then asked "if I was happy now?"

    I then replied, stating my case for tolerance (not in comparison to racism or sexism, but rather in the spirit of brotherhood and egalitarianism)

    I was then accused of being an elitist, of claiming discrimination, etc...

    I have no problem being part of a minority...I have no problem with other people not liking my choice of platform...my problem is with those who feel compelled to go beyond mere opinion-sharing to outright rude and unwarranted vitriol...

    For once and for all, I do not feel like a 'rebel' for using a mac. I don't need anyone else to think of me as 'different'. I don't buy macs as an expression of my wealth, and I am not 'gay' (not that there is anything wrong with that :))

    Again I make a heartfelt plea in the spirit of reconcillitation...

    "I am a computer nerd. Regardless of platform, OS, hardware, or IDE, my hope is that we all can appreciate each other for our shared interest and not divide ourselves because of our brand-awareness."

    Thanks for reading...

    --
    We apologise for the fault in this post. Those responsible have been sacked. -- Signed RICHARD M. NIXON
  237. Re:40GB.... how... revolutionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is in my opinion, the fastest way to use Photoshop.

    Agreed, 100%. I used Photoshop and Illustrator in basically the way you describe every day for nearly seven years.

  238. Re:Headless slashdot poster... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hey! i wouldnt feel too bad if i were you.

    I own and use an Amiga - you should hear some of the crap i have to put up with! ;-)

  239. AAC Better? by gotr00t · · Score: 1
    Actually, in most listning tests(like this one, it was found that AAC was one of the worst formats, and that MP3 and OGG were closely tied.

    Apple has a tendency to bloat the features of their products. AAC is nowhere near as good as MP3 is, but they come out with ambitious, if not overly deceptive messages like "rivals CD quality", when it is nowhere near MP3, and MP3 being nowhere near CD quality.