iPod Jr. Rumors Become More Substantial

sdimbert writes "Rumors of a new, smaller, "iPodJr" have been floating around the Rumor Sites for a few weeks (as well a here at Slashdot). But now, the rumors have gained credibility and become more substantial. London's Evening Standard reports today (30 Dec 03) that "Apple has announced a cut-price mini version" of the iPod, "costing 65 [~115 USD], which will be able to store 800 songs." Despite the assertion that Apple "announced" the product, there is no mention of it at their official News Page or their product page for the iPod."

Comments

Aiming at the low end

[netwiz]

This is going to pretty much kill in the low end
Flash-based player market. I was looking at Fry's this weekend, and everything in the $49-99 range only came w/ 128MB, upgradeable to 640. Even assuming that the low-end Apple mini-iPod is only 1-2GB, it's got those other players beat by a mile, and hey, it works w/ iTunes!

I'm really looking forward to next year :)

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Ziviyr]

My song to gigabyte conversion tactics say 3.2 gigs for the rumored device.

Bah, just use DVDs instead.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Kenja]

Thats why the 1-2GB hard disk MP3 players allready on the market are so popular. Oh wait, their not. Seems people still find them too big and dont like having moving parts.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[bwalling]

This is going to pretty much kill in the low end
Flash-based player market. I was looking at Fry's this weekend, and everything in the $49-99 range only came w/ 128MB, upgradeable to 640. Even assuming that the low-end Apple mini-iPod is only 1-2GB, it's got those other players beat by a mile, and hey, it works w/ iTunes!

I just got a 10GB iPod for Christmas. If it were not given to me, I would never have purchased it. I have wanted an iPod since they were announced, but $300 is more than I think an MP3 player is worth. I looked at the sub $100 MP3 players several times, but none of them were as good as the iPod. It's just not even close (even when you ignore the storage capacity). If Apple truly delivers this product (1GB iPod for $100), it will be a smashing success. I think that I am not alone in looking for a low end iPod (of course, I'm looking no more).

Re:Aiming at the low end

[the Man in Black]

Bah, just use DVDs instead

When you can get me a DVD recorder/MP3 player that fits in my pocket, costs $100, and is super simple to use via iTunes, then sure, I'm all over it.

In the meantime though, my money goes to the R&D demigods over at Apple. The fact that it's miniature firewire storage ALONE would make it worth a hundred bucks to me, but it's also designed by the current most successful and easy to use mp3 player?

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Ziviyr]

Commercial success isn't tightly linked with having a good product, and deification often leads to disillusionment.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Frymaster]

you are exactly the target market apple is gunning for.

the ipod has been out for a while now and given its fairly long use-life just about everybody who was willing to get one at $300 has probably done so already.

now apple is gunning to pick up the people who wanted one but balked at the price point. kinda like publishers who put out the hardcover for the the $30 crowd and then eight months later release a paperback for the $7 folks.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[garcia]

It won't beat this player's price...

Re:Aiming at the low end

[netwiz]

Except that you lose the option of having playlists, the player requires more power per song played (the DVD's gonna have a _way_ higher rotational moment of inertia, so spinup and spindown are more costly), and it's still not as iTunes-compatible. Sure, the hypothetical DVD-player could still use iTunes, but now that we're up to a DVD-player, it's _going_ to be more expensive, esp. considering most of the rumors are fora sub-$100 device.

And CDs have the same playist issues, along with lesser capacity.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Anonymous Coward]

> you are exactly the target market apple is gunning for.

Or me, with my recently purchased Philips eXpanium (yeah, stupid name) which is a 50 UKP CD diskman which plays MP3s too. I'd have looked at the new apple iPod - if it had existed just before christmas, as opposed to just after it - but probably would have stuck with this. I have a pack of 15 cdrs containing the majority of my cd collection in mp3 format, and if I lost the whole lot tonight I'd simply re-order a replacement and reburn my disks while I'm waiting for it to arrive.

If they can do a 1 or 2 gig version for 65 UKP, then why does it cost 400 UKP for a slightly bigger drive? It's a purely technical problem, right?

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Monkelectric]

That's why I find the announcement hard to believe. Apple prices *above* commodity as a MARKETING STRATEGY (gee, it costs more, it must be better!). If apple were to make cheap IPODS to compete with other players (apple does not compete on price) that would be a huge shift in Apples overall strategy.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Anonymous Coward]

I just bought one of those for my sister for her birthday. She loves it, she uses it with her Mac and iTunes, to burn data CDs of MP3s and then play then in the portable. I don't think she could be happier with the gift than if I got her an iPod.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Tim C]

Chalk me up too. I'm currently in the market for some sort of personal audio device, and would *love* an iPod, but can't possibly justify that sort of expense. (Life gets expensive with a house, car, family to support...)

A cheap, lower-capacity model would be perfect. I don't need 10 or 20 gigs of storage - I only have about 5 gigs of mp3s as it is. Sure, the extra space would be nice, but I'd be happy enough with deleting/uploading some music every fews days or so if it means the difference between affordable and out of my price range.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[abacsalmasi]

A $100 minipod is definately a possibility either with a Flash a HD based system but my money is on a HD system with more or less the same look and feel as the original iPod. Apple isn't going to bring to market a product that lacks in design, usability, and ease of use. That's just not Apple. This might be a historacle moment for Apple, releasing something price competitive. I think Steve took a business course this summer and realised that they have such a good product on their hand that HE even knows he has to play the game. A 1" 2-4 G cheap HD seems very likely, it's already being done, and I am sure that Steve could convince some company to let them go at a good price because of the demand that exists for the iPods. He's got a lot of barganing chips and he'll use them. Remember, this is a guy who convinced the stingy money-sucking music whores to get on board with his idea and now look what happend. Coke and Walmart music stores? C'mon, what's next, a Staples or Home Depot online store? I think people are going to fall in line with Mr. Steve, he's proven time and time again that he can change the world of digital media wether it be through computers, software, or peripherals. Apple is always the first ones on the field ready to play, they might not make the most money, but they start the game. Why wouldn't a company take a chance and be the first to market with them, best price, best product, and dominate, all for a little price break on HD's? People believe in him now, and his reality distortion field. Hi mom.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[netwiz]

No, it won't. But I still don't get playlists. I don't get full iTunes compatibility. I've got less capacity than the rumored 2GB unit, and I have to change disks. I've also got to haul around a honking gigantic (by comparison) CD-player that doesn't fit in any pocket I own.

Those features are enough to justify another fifty bucks.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Rinikusu]

Damn skippy. I've been looking for a portable MP3* player recently, as I will soon have a job that requires frequent travel. However, $399 was/still is a bit steep. The ability to use it as a portable firewire HD is nifty, but useless for my usage. Anyway, $100, 800 songs, that's definately a keeper. I may have that in my change can. :)

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Anonymous Coward]

Who wants to cary around something as HUGE as that thing?

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Anonymous Coward]

oh wow, as big as a CD player, my god, who would want to carry that!

Re:Aiming at the low end

[ALpaca2500]

When you can get me a DVD recorder/MP3 player that fits in my pocket, costs $100, and is super simple to use via iTunes, then sure, I'm all over it.

there was the Compaq PM-1 miniCD mp3 player. (i believe phillips made one that was also a burner). if they could make one of these that read MP3s from a miniDVD, that would be pretty nice. i dont think they could make one for $100 to begin with though...

Re:Aiming at the low end

[jayhawk88]

I'm the exact same way. To me the $99 price point and 1Gig size is the key. At $300, it doesn't matter if it's 10 Gigabytes or 10 Terrabytes, I'm not paying that kind of money to listen to Dave Mathews on the treadmill. But give it to me for $99 and I'm all over it, and so is half this country.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Anonymous Coward]

I always balked at the SIZE AND WEIGHT.

Seriously, I thought the iPod was too big and heavy, so I got a 512 MB iRiver player for myself to hold me over until Apple releases smaller iPods.

If this thing comes in at least a 4 GB version, I'd even pay the same as what the "high end" versions cost. If not, I'll keep on waiting until it does.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is iTunes compatibility important? I use Windows, and iTunes isn't something I'm interested in. I had it installed for a few days and uninstalled it. I'd rather copy my Mp3s to the player like an external drive.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[wo1verin3]

After browsing around with my girlfriend for her birthday present, that is the exact same model of player she got. The ability to hold 700MB as opposed to other players which hold a few hundred megs (but are smaller), are also much more expensive.

If the new ipod was around at the time, it would have gotten our purchase.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[elmegil]

There are a lot of us out here....

Re:Aiming at the low end

[syntap]

> now apple is gunning to pick up the
> people who wanted one but balked at
> the price point. kinda like publishers
> who put out the hardcover for the the
> $30 crowd and then eight months later
> release a paperback for the $7 folks.

Which then gets OCR'd for the $0 folks.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Anonymous Coward]

The iPod only weights 5.6 oz... If you balking at that, you need to get some 1 lb weights and start liftin ya pussy.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple doesn't compete on price?

Could have fooled me. Apple's prices are among the best in the industry if you match the same hardware and software.

Apple doesn't make low-end cheapy products at cheap prices, but the products they sell are VERY price competative.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Ohreally_factor]

Which then gets OCR'd for the $0 folks.

I'll sell you a jpeg of my iPod for cheap.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[oscast]

"This might be a historacle moment for Apple, releasing something price competitive." All of Apple's hardware (and software) is price competitive. Apple simply doesn't sell low-end cheapy products, but of the products they do sell... they are VERY price competitive.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Anonymous Coward]

sarcasm aside, I agree with the previous reply. We're getting to the point where we think a 3lb notebook is just too much to be bothered with.

Gimme a break.

I've lugged some portable music device around with me since I was a kid. First a cassette player that was slightly bigger than a CD case. The back in my later college days, a portable CD player. Now I have an iPod, and it comes in at just over 5 oz. It's freakin light. There's more of a danger I'll lose it because I can hardly tell it's there.

I understand moving from a 20lb luggable computer to something in the 7lb range. But complaining about something that weighs less than a pound? and is the size of a CD? Let's all just stop being pussies, ok? (cuz you sure won't get any complaining like that.)

Re:Aiming at the low end

[homer_ca]

Guess again. They want to maximize the song count to boost their advertising claims. At 64Kbps 800 songs comes to 1.5GB which would be a match for the Rio Nitrus that uses a Cornice 1 inch hard drive.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Ohreally_factor]

To each his own. The 10 Gig model is useful to me as more than a music player. It's also my emergency boot disk and is useful for moving large files or large groups of files (I sometimes do video work, and it's a handy way to grab clips off of someone else's computer). I was able to get mine for $170 - it's a second gen.

However, for your sake and the sake of all those others who don't need this functionality, I do hope the rumors are true.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[tbone1]

A word of warning: I got my 10GB iPod when the options were 20GB, 10GB, and 5GB. I hemmed and hawed between 10 and 5, then decided that double the space (with the remote and case thrown in) made it worth the extra $100. Then the music store came out, and now I'm kicking myself for not getting the 20GB model.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[jafac]

You see, that makes a whole lot of sense except for one thing.

This is APPLE we're talking about.

Apple, who has absolutely flat-out refused to sell desktop machines into the sub $800 market (and for years, strongly resisted sub $1k.) Apple could sell old CRT iMacs (with high-end G3 or something a tad lower-end G4 than current eMacs) for $500. I think such a machine would sell like hotcakes to families looking to build home-LANs for Jimmy, Jake, and Suzie to do homework on. Such a strategy would also sell a buttload of AirPort base-stations. And a family-level server (to centralize iTunes library storage, etc) would be a great addition to such a line up as well.

Apparently, the marketing geniuses at Apple don't have as much vision as I do. But very few families are going to buy Jimmy, Jake, and Suzie, homework machines at $1500 a pop. A lot more families might be able to swing it at $500 a pop. It's a fairly obvious idea - and one that has been staring Apple in the face for about 5 years. And they stubbornly refuse to address the sub $800 market, and let WinTel eat their lunch there undisturbed.

So I really don't think iPod Jr is going to be sub $100. I think it will come in around $199, while the iPod Sr goes up to $499 at the bottom end, both will sell like crap, and Jr will get cancelled within 6 months.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Anonymous Coward]

You are right. The cost to custom fabricate a 1 button mouse without a scroll wheel for the PC will drive the PC cost up to over that of a Mac.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Anonymous Coward]

...$300...I'm not paying that kind of money to listen to Dave Mathews on the treadmill.

Damn straight. Hell, someone would have to pay me $300.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[spike hay]

When you can get me a DVD recorder/MP3 player that fits in my pocket, costs $100, and is super simple to use via iTunes, then sure, I'm all over it.

What is so wonderful about iTunes? I don't want to use any program to transfer songs to my MP3 player. I want it to mount as an external drive so I can transfer any song, MP3 or otherwise, onto the player. I don't see a reason to use iTunes. You certainly shouldn't encode with it. LAME is a far superior encoder.

The Archos and many other players do this. Although a $120 HD MP3 player is a killer deal, the current iPods are just beat out in features by the competition. A 20gb Archos AV 120 is slightly cheaper than an iPod, and it has a small but high resolution color LCD display. It can play back divx and xvid files at near dvd quality. It can even record divx video through RCA or composite. It also has TV-out. Quite a bit more features than the iPod. It also mounts as an external hard drive

I'd take a mini-dvd based MP3 player any day over an iPod. It would be tiny and hold a few hundred songs per disc. Transferring songs would be easy enough with Nero or something. I'm surprised nobody has done something like that.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[jasonbowen]

I thought it was because they weren't that much cheaper than ones with 10-20 GB hard drives.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[overunderunderdone]

I disagree, to some degree Apple's premium pricing as a marketing strategy is making a virtue out of necessity. Apple computers are a niche product, they lost the option of true mass marketting and big marketshare years ago. When the PC market exploded they chose to maintain their fat profit margins rather than maintaining or even expanding their market share - it's pretty clear that it was the wrong decision. They hauled in the cash for a while but they became more and more a niche player. At this point they're stuck in that niche. Cutting their margins to the bone wouldn't produce that many new customers.

The MP3 player market is a whole new ball game, and a second chance. Apple is again the market leader in an emerging market (just as they were in the long ago days of the Apple II). This time I think they are going to go for marketshare. They have to maintain the quality that people expect from the brand, and for that reason they're ever going to go for the very bottom of the bargain barrel. But if they can use superior industrial design/engineering and relationships with vendors to beat their competitors on price while still delivering high quality they are going to go for it.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[scottp]

This mp3 player is worth checking out as well. It will play OGG/mp3/wma, takes CF and mini drives, has FM tuner and is ~$115USD.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[javatips]

If you can afford to buy enough songs to fill the extra 10G, you can surely afford a new iPod!

(I'm being generous with file size)

10G/7M = 1428 songs * .99$ = 1413.72$

Re:Aiming at the low end

[mithras]

If this is true, then EVERYBODY will have one, and it won't be a way to get laid anymore.

Dammit.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[spike hay]

Could have fooled me. Apple's prices are among the best in the industry if you match the same hardware and software.

Really? That's weird. Because G4s are far lower performance than most low end PCs sold today. Yet they are far more expensive than low end PCs. G5s are high performance, but they are still beaten out by Athlon 64s. You can get a computer with an Athlon 64, a Radeon 9700, and other ultra high performance hardware for far less than the cost of a G5. Looks like you are firmly in the grasp of Steve Job's Reality Distortion Field.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[djdavetrouble]

he said:
You certainly shouldn't encode with it. LAME is a far superior encoder.

i have been using the lame plugin for itunes, since people in the trading 'scene' are a little anal about encoding / bitrate, the accepted standard seems to be LAME 192 full stereo. Honestly though, how much of a difference could there be between LAME and itunes. Lets be realistic, you are encoding with a lossy algorithm. Could you really pick which mp3 file was encoded with itunes and which was encoded with LAME in a taste test? They are both equally flawed, audio data has been thrown away in an effort to make a much smaller file.

I am also of the firm belief that mp3 will be irrelevent within 2 years. I am becoming interested in FLAC, because I am sensitive to the shitty quality of mp3's, especially the swishy highs.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Anonymous Coward]

uhh, the entry-level eMac is $800US (799). It's a 1GHz G4 w/ (admittedly a paltry) 128MB, 40GB HDD, and a relatively nice 17" CRT. It's enough w/a $50 mem upgrade to run Panther, and cheap enough such that buying a few won't break the bank.

However, you could build a PC that will run rings around it for about that much, and if ever the system or monitor dies, you're not stuck w/ an all-in-one solution.

But I'm off topic.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[-brazil-]

They are both equally flawed, audio data has been thrown away in an effort to make a much smaller file.

Exactly because it's lossy compression there can be a big difference. You have to select very carefully which data to keep and which to throw away.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Seth Finklestein]

One button is all that Joe Sixpack needs. Joe Sixpack can't even drive his GM SUV with OnStar whilst drinking his Starbucks coffee and talking to his mate on his mobile phone. How can you expect Joe Sixpack to use a scroll wheel?

Sincerely,
Seth Finklestein
Noam Chomsky fan #540982881

Re:Aiming at the low end

[rworne]

Frankly, I don't know what your definition of "commercial success" is, but the iPod *is* most definitely a commercial success and a great product as well.

As for the deification and disillusionment part (as a general rule), you are spot-on.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[tapin]

The trick isn't buying enough to fill the extra 10G, it's buying enough that the initial 10G isn't enough.

Put another way, it's that first byte after 10G that's expensive. The rest is dirt cheap.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Anonymous Coward]

In all seriousness, it's the convenience. It's not a matter of "Can I..." lug this CD-player sized thing around with me, it's a matter of "Would I". I doubt my iPod would follow me around if it wasn't pocketable - as it is, it has to compete with my mobile-phone and wallet, meaning it comes with me to work but not, say, to lunch.

There's no point in buying something because you technically can use something that you know full well you wouldn't. If the iPod didn't support playlists, had 32Mb of flash RAM instead of an HD, or had a non-rechargable battery, I'd probably not want it either, no matter whether it was $50 or $500 - I simply wouldn't use it.

(Why? Because without playlists, I would have difficultly finding what I want to play and would have to encode things like symphonies as full-length single MP3s. Yes, I can do it, but I wouldn't. With 32Mb of flash RAM, I would have to reload the player with music every morning or else listen to the same hour or two of music. I can do it, but I wouldn't. With a non-rechargable battery, I'd have to put the AAAs in a recharger every evening. I can do that, but I know I wouldn't.)

The iPod's genius, the reason it sells so well, is because Jobs ensured all the barriers to usage are minimised. I just have to encode my music once, and load it all onto the player, and set up the occasional playlist (which I can do automatically when I rip a CD by creating an empty list, highlighting the tracks from the CD, and dragging them onto the playlist), and make sure I plug it in once a day. Part of that obliteration of barriers was to ensure the thing would fit in a pocket.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Anonymous Coward]

you're right. and to anyone who thinks it isn't possible, take a look at Nokia. quality and quantity has always been the driving principle behind Nokia phones, and they've cornered the market.

c

Re:Aiming at the low end

[fyonn]

I don't want to use any program to transfer songs to my MP3 player. I want it to mount as an external drive so I can transfer any song, MP3 or otherwise, onto the player.

I don't know for sure, because I don't own one, but afiak, the ipods do mount as simple firewire accessable storage and you can copy any files you like to them. form what I hear, you can even install macosx on an ipod and boot from it. So from that point of view, it still fits your wishes (although it still doesn't play and record video).

the itunes interface is just nice to have, and of course, support for the itunes playlists etc.

dave

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Anonymous Coward]

this man [roesser.com] doesn't have a public key.

He also doesn't know the difference between I and me.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Jaysyn]

Ok, let's not be an idiot. If someone offers you 10 terrabytes of firewired, portable storage for $300, you aren't going to be all over it? I know I am, I don't care if it plays MP3s or not.

Jaysyn

Re:Aiming at the low end

[aldoman]

Wait until MacWorld, there is a rumor that a new form factor iMac will be released, which could possibly be headless.. which most people are waiting for (including me) to switch over to a Mac desktop. I'm currently using a Mac notebook, but I have a Linux/XP machine for desktop use...

Re:Aiming at the low end

[King_TJ]

Right.... I finally "bit the bullet" and got myself the big 40GB iPod - but damn, it is an expensive toy.

My only real justification for it is this: I figure I'll be doing much more with mine than just listening to music. I like the fact that you can actually put your entire OS on one, and boot from it via firewire as an external drive.

If you start using your iPod as a mass removeable storage device, buying the larger capacity models starts making more sense.

For the people who simply need a music player with a friendly interface, the new $115 or so offerings will be just the thing.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[aldoman]

No seriously, the trouble is actually finding a pocket to put it in. Usually the CD is just too big to fit in.. if it was a more rectangle shape (but the same size one way) it would be fine. But it's not.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[King_TJ]

True, except in the days of the Apple II, there were numerous personal computer makers. It wasn't the "Apple vs. IBM clone" world we have today.

I don't know that it's even fair to accuse Apple of making a poor decision when they opted to cater to the "high end" and keep higher profit margins? They made that choice in a world where it seemed like Atari, Radio-Shack, Commodore, and many others were all going to be competitors with fairly equal chunks of the "PC sales" pie.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[ducomputergeek]

Maybe so, but Apple being a niche player is something to be said. I mean in the video production business, sure one can buy an avid system and it will do more that a Mac and FCP, but its also about $200k vs. $15k for a fully loaded G5 and software.

Also, Apple puts out a quality product. I know a lot of people that's been having more trouble with the latest dell models in the past year then before. It is nothing for my consulting business to go in and help a small mom and pop shop recover from a windows melt down caused by a virus or just good old windows. We do this at least 3 times a month. Granted, if they had purchased a second harddrive and had the computer make daily back ups for a week's worth of data, things would be much less painful for them. In the past 6 months we've been called once to someone with a mac and it was a 5 year old blueberry tower and the HDD gave out.

In our daily operations, we have about 95% Mac on the desktop, a couple Linux boxes, and FreeBSD on the servers. Knock on wood, but we haven't had one of our macs crash yet. A couple lock up, yes, but then you just turn off and restart. My iBook's locked up 5 times in 18 months. Considering I only reboot for updates, that's not too bad. And 3 of those 5 times I was running an OS9 app in classic and the other 2 was I had just about everything open on my system and decided to open one more picture in Photoshop. Its enough that I have over a dozen clients seriously considering macintoshes for their next office computers. I have also overseen two offices switch to Linux as well.

In the MP3 market, Apple has a chance to reach mass market appeal, especially with this iPod Jr. My business partner owns one of the first iPods and loves it. The only complaint I have heard has been the price, and if they offered a cheaper version, I would even consider it. I am like a lot of people, I have a lot more things on my want list than an iPod for $300.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[jayhawk88]

Go look up "hyperbole" dude.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Trurl's Machine]

What is so wonderful about iTunes?

Smart playlists. When you have few thousands songs in your pocket, organization of this library becomes the main issue - or you have to dig the iPod out of your pocket (backpack etc.) any time you want to change the damned album, as if you'd still use some last-century walkman. It's like the Internet search engine: even if you know that a given information is somewhere on the Web, the main question is can you find it quickly and easily.

iPod has a solution for that: it is able to store and modify many interesting meta-data about the songs and albums. It "knows" that this particular song was last played Thursday on 13:34. As far as I know, no existing software can handle this metadata as good as iTunes. With iTunes, creation of a smart playlist like "the songs whose genre is rock, my rating is at least four star, and they were last played at least a month ago, in random order" is a matter of few clicks. You can't get it manually managing your songs and playlists.

In my case, my iPod is often hidden somewhere under my clothes (e.g. in the internal pocket of my jacket) or even in a special "walkman compartment" of my trunk&co backpack. Taking it out and manual selection of a song is a hassle - I use the remote control to play, skip or change volume, but the actual song seletion is done by a smart playlist created on iTunes, executed by the iPod.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Trurl's Machine]

(Life gets expensive with a house, car, family to support...)

Speaking of which: initially I had to, ahem, persuade my wife to allow me to shell out our cash for an iPod, but now she considers it a good investment. There are many household duties that I really HATED to do, especially lawnmowing - but with an iPod, I started to actually like them and my wife no longer needs to remind me. If you need to persuade your wife... try to tell her this story ;)

Re:Aiming at the low end

[djdavetrouble]

Exactly because it's lossy compression there can be a big difference. You have to select very carefully which data to keep and which to throw away.

Ok, I'll give you that, but (I don't exacty know what I am talking about here, so please feel free to enlighten me) isn't MP3 encoding done via the same algorighm/codec no matter who writes the wrapper?

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Anonymous Coward]

Just thought you should know that while what you said is true, you can't actually transfer music that can be played via that method. Apple decided that all music files that the iPod can play would be stored in a series of cryptically named folders containing crypitacally named files. This is most likely to make it very difficult to copy MP3s off the device manually (maybe they were planning ahead for the AAC DRM since I've been under the impression that iTunes decrypts the AAC file before dumping it on the iPod with those cryptic filenames, the reason being the cpu time required to decrypt in real time for playback. This is only a theory). So in conclusion, the ability to mount the iPod as a firewire drive does NOT allow you to actually transfer music to it that the iPod can play back.

Isn't Apple a smart company? Making things simple on the surface so they can make it needlessly complicated underneath?

Re:Aiming at the low end

[spike hay]

Ok, I'll give you that, but (I don't exacty know what I am talking about here, so please feel free to enlighten me) isn't MP3 encoding done via the same algorighm/codec no matter who writes the wrapper?

Nope. The LAME encoder is different and far superior to other encoders. Different encoders use different psychoacoustic models to determin which parts to throw away. Quality varies greatly between encoders. There are terrible ones like Bladeenc and Xing, which have quality more on par with Real Audio, and superior encoders like LAME which have quality more on par with Ogg Vorbis.

LAME is the only good way to encode. Anything else will produce inferior MP3s.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Kent Recal]

Is there an description of this item available anywhere else?
Preferrably on a server that respects my privacy?

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Refrag]

Apple prices above commodities because they don't sell commodities.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[EvilFrog]

I think that people who aren't familiar with the industry don't really have a clue as to how big of a deal Final Cut Pro is.

Avid systems are perhaps a little more powerful than a Final Cut Pro suite, but they're also a real pain. Avids are terribly finicky, and conflict with almost every other piece of software known to man. I swear, I've seen an Avid break down because someone breathed on it wrong.

The only video editor I know that is still using an Avid simply hasn't switched over to Final Cut because he hasn't had a chance to learn it yet. For so long Avid was really the only way to go, and now that there's serious competition, it's opened a lot of eyes, and wallets.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[arhines]

Winamp 5 does it. IMHO, it does it much better, too - if nothing else, it does it much quicker...

Re:Aiming at the low end

[nolife]

No. MP3 encoders have to decide what to get rid of and what to keep based on your desired bitrate and settings. They use a psycho acoustic, frequency cutoff, and can join channels based on frequency range[1]. Each mp3 compressor has a different model it follows to achive the smaller file, some are percieved better then others.

[1]
Lower frequencies are harder for a person to determine the location of the source. This is the basis for home theaters with one subwoofer running in mono placed anywhere nearby. You do not really need a left and right subwoofer and placement is not as important from an imaging perspective (although placement can efffect the speakers frequency response). You can save space in compression of lower frequencies by combining certain lower frequencies from both channels into one center channel. The low frequency analysis is just a small portion of of the audio spectrum and for good compression, the ranges are treated differently for different reasons.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Octagon Most]

"... G4s are far lower performance than most low end PCs sold today."

I hate to step into this type of argument, but the parent post said that, "Apple's prices are among the best in the industry if you match the same hardware and software." That's not the same as highest performance CPU. It means the totality of the package including the content creation software. I am not taking sides, but there is much more to a computer than performance benchmarks.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Anonymous Coward]

He was saying that just because the iPod is a bonafied sales success (over 1.2 million units sold), does not make it a good product (the M$ argument), in his not so humble opinion.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Octagon Most]

"What is so wonderful about iTunes? I don't want to use any program to transfer songs to my MP3 player. I want it to mount as an external drive so I can transfer any song, MP3 or otherwise, onto the player."

I'm not a heavy user of iTunes so I can't enumerate it's "wonderful" features, but I can address the issue of using it instead of manually dragging songs to a mounted drive. Maybe I am a freak for feeling this way, but I don't want anything to do with filesystems. I don't want to touch files, drag files, or otherwise manually manipulate files. I love opening iPhoto and having all my pictures there. I couldn't care less where or how they are physically stored. I just want to look at them, email them, or add them to my website. The program hides from me that which I do not want to deal with. I understand your, and others', desire for control, but many people (perhaps the majority of computer users) do not want to deal with dragging individual files onto a mounted drive. They (we) want playlists, synchronization, and integration with the iTunes Store. Your way works for you, but many people clearly like the way iTunes works.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[jafac]

Yes, the low-end eMac is $799. But add the RAM upgrade, and you're not addressing this "market" of which I speak.

Nor would a home-brew PC (or any PC, for that matter) - this is for a home (or even small-office) LAN, on AirPort, set up by a layman, so Jimmy, Jake, and Suzie, all have their own machine to do homework on. Set up with Rendevouz, and other low-admin, low-cost defaults.

Oh, and Apple's been producing iMacs for years - and the "all in ones suck because you're stuck if the monitor ever dies" notion has pretty much been disproven. Monitors are like the least likely component to die these days. I'm running an external 23" Mitsubishi monitor that I originally bought for my 7100. When the 7100 died, I moved it to my Beige G3. When my Beige G3 died, I moved it to my G5. I'm not worried about losing the monitor in any of my family's iMacs. More likely, the power supply or CD drive will go bad first. Or the Logic Board.

I'm talking about a (surplus) 600-800MHz G3 with 256 Meg RAM, 40 GB HD, no flat-screen CRT, no LCD, just a regular built-in CRT. Such a beast could be sold with a nice Apple-type margin at $499. Such a beast is also more than adequate for just about any General Purpose Computing Task. (ie. eMail, Web Browsing, School Term Papers, light gaming of the typical shareware ilk you find on the Mac platform - but probably not a good platform for Photoshopping, video editing, or high-end 3d shooter gaming). A machine like that won't be obsolete for at least 5 years.

But Steve Jobs is too stuck on the notion that "Apple isn't low-end" Which is why Apple won't "go there" with price. It's why the cube failed, and it's why the iPod Jr will fail.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[overunderunderdone]

In terms of criticising their decision to hold onto their fat profit margin I'm talking less about the days of Apple II and more about the late 80's to mid 90's. Apple maintained fat profit margins on the Mac while their share of the market plummeted. If they had lowered their prices back when they were competing with clearly inferior products but cheaper products (DOS and later Windows 3.x) I think they could have maintained their low double digit marketshare instead of the paltry ~3% they have now.

Of course the decision to hold on to their profit margins wasn't their only mistake. The biggest failure was that they let their technology stagnate for nearly a decade while they pursued and then dropped a variety of OS initiatives. Imagine if they had not wasted all that time with Pink/Taligent/Copeland. One failure in that area is perhaps to be expected but the string of them was unforgivable and nearly killed Apple. Given that more fundamental failure perhaps it's good they piled up a lot of cash while they had the chance. But imagine a world where Apple had something akin to MacOS X four or five years earlier, had hardware prices 10-15% lower than they were, and was starting with around 10-12% of the market. I think the personal computing world would look a little different than it does now.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[spike hay]

Nobody else sells the same hardware and OS. It's only Apple. Also, most of the content creation software, such as iMovie, have perfectly good PC equivalents.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[secolactico]

I dunno... I guess in the long run it makes sense. But it's still cheaper and more convenient for me to just pay one of the neighborhood kids to do it.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Hao Wu]

Yes, but I fear they will insult some of us (me) with a machine that's not really cheaper (as in less "quality"), but rather purposely dumbed-down. That's how I felt about the first iMacs; a great product that was needlessly slower than the main line, as if I shouldn't mind the difference in features and performance.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[juhaz]

I don't know what codec iTunes uses so I can't comment on that, but if it's Fraunhofer, it's pretty good.

However, I CAN comment on that there indeed are big differences on different encoders, only a deaf person wouldn't notice a difference between something done with Xing when compared do same song at same bitrate done with LAME or Fraunhofer.

If they were just wrappers to same encoder, then there'd be no difference but they're not.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[RevAaron]

or... if you're buying those songs in albums and not individually like a schmuck:

10 GB/7 MB = 1428 songs

1428 songs * (9.99 * 12 songs) = 1188.81

Re:Aiming at the low end

[afidel]

iPod's may be mountable as Firewire drives but you can't just dump music to it. The iPod has a database that keeps track of all of the songs and playlists currently on the player. If you don't update the db then it's as if the songs never got transfered. Luckily the format is either open or easily reversed because there are programs like ephpod that can rebuild it.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[RevAaron]

Yeah, the bigger drive is more expensive. The difference between a 2 GB and a 40 GB drive isn't "slight," especially at the size of the drive we're talking about. I bought a 2 GB PCMCIA drive (same kind as in the iPod) for $70 well over a year ago; at the same time, a 30 GB one cost $500. The drives are cheaper a year later, but there is no reason Apple can magically escape the price curve.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[RevAaron]

I think the source of this problem of yours is that no device that just plays Dave Mathews is worth any price, be it $99 or $399. Maybe 50 cents, but that's about where it ends.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Saeger]

I'll sell you a jpeg of my iPod for cheap.

I already downloaded the molecular blueprint for my 52X nano-assembler, but thanks anyway!

The MIAA (Manufacturing Industry Association of America) can go pound sand (into their outdated product molds).

--

Re:Aiming at the low end

[TheRaven64]

I disagree. Apple products are not very often price competitive, but they are value-competitive. My PowerBook was more expensive than a PC laptop, and so was not really price competitive. My criterion when purchasing it, however, was not price, but value for money and in this it excels. Apple often loose out on the price-competitive angle by ignoring the bottom segment of the market completely. I think with iTMS/iPod they may be coming to the conclusion that market share is important if they want to keep their margins high.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[El]

...the products they do sell... they are VERY price competitive.
iPod 20GB: $399.99
Creative Nomad Jukebox 60GB: 369.88
1/3 the memory but costs a lot more -- that's hardly what I'd call "price competive".

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Anonymous Coward]

i and eMacs damn certainly are low-end products and just as certainly are NOT competive with other low-end products.

They're even more expensive than lot of middle-class competitors.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[OverclockedMind]

heh, i would like to have an ipod, but i dont have that money and iTunes has rather restrictive DRM. If only i could convert .aac to .mp3, but hey, they want to sell more iPods so it isnt gonna happen!

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Trurl's Machine]

Winamp 5 does it. IMHO, it does it much better, too - if nothing else, it does it much quicker...

I don't question your words, sir, but I humbly beg you to elaborate. How exactly does the Winamp 5 determine what songs and when do I listen on my portable music player?

Re:Aiming at the low end

[ssstraub]

Have you used Creative drivers before? They suck. Their Live! series of sound cards causes all kinds of havoc with win2k systems at the time they were released.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[El]

No argument from me there. The CD ripping software that comes with the Nomad is useless; I use MusicMatch Jukebox instead. The driver to communicate with the MP3 player is incredibly slow, but appears to work.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Anonymous Coward]

so at 52X it would only take.............. 5 million years to make an ipod one atom at a time.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[smallfeet]

Say, where can I down load the molecular blueprint for that 52X nano-assembler thingie? Oh wait, never mind.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[TheKidWho]

1/3 the memory, 1/3 the size... thats what I call price competitive.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[BasilBrush]

Large HD Jukeboxes weren't that popular till Apple produced the iPod. Why do you think this market's any different?

Re:Aiming at the low end

[BasilBrush]

Your talking about the years when Steve Jobs wasn't there, and the years before Jonathan Ives was in charge of design. Apple is a very different company now.

But you know people are always going on about how Apple made all these mistakes. They seem to forget that there were many computer manufacturers in the 1980s and most of them didn't survive. Who's to say that if Apple took whatever different decisions you think would have been best, they might not have survived at all.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Triv]

If you don't care about the bookselling business stop reading now. :)

kinda like publishers who put out the hardcover for the the $30 crowd and then eight months later release a paperback for the $7 folks.

That analogy is absolutely correct and I applaud you for making it. However the specifics are a bit dated as to how the book market now functions.

It's true, that was the way the publishing industry worked a little over a decade ago, but things are slightly different now.

There used to be two different kinds of books - hardcovers (designed to take a beating) and mass markets (designed to be thrown away). Mass markets were approx. 1/3 the price of hardcovers.

But the publishers started to realize that there was another category of book buyer out there - people who wanted books to last but didn't want to pay hardcover prices. So the Trade Paperback was invented. Trades cost about half the price of a hardcover and are more sturdily constructed than mass markets.

Current books rarely hit the $7 price point you mentioned unless they're niche markets (sci fi, horror and romance in particular), they're INSANELY popular (Tom Clancy, Clive Cussler and the like) or they're classics (ie, in the public domain).

This isn't really a problem except that in the last few years book quality (the physical object, not the writing - that's a completely different rant) has decreased dramatically, so people are buying trade paper because of the illusion of permanence (and because they're less weight to tote around. Books are still primarily a portable medium). This feels kinda cheap to me.

Like I said, you weren't wrong by any means and the analogy still holds. Just being...well, a booknerd. :)

Triv

Re:Aiming at the low end

[calyphus]

Apple often loose out on the price-competitive angle by ignoring the bottom segment of the market completely.

So does Land Rover. Apple had decided to make higher-value products, and they're successful; a laudable example in these days of lowest price-pointvalue doesn't really matterbean-counter driven corporate cultures.

Apple builds a value-added product. Price-only buyers are going to be even less likely to use the 'other computer' than those who do appreciate the added value.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Saeger]

Say, where can I down load the molecular blueprint for that 52X nano-assembler thingie?

Sorry, but you'll probably have to buy the assembler unless you're among the 1% of the world population that is a DRM-free terrorist capable of making copies of things that AREN'T on the government approvied whitelist. :)

--

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Fermier de Pomme de]

Apple needed more of a profit margin than other hardware only vendors in order to support the OS it produced (even if it did get quite stale) and to feed R&D. For a while the extra cash even got you quality of components and build (IMO) - with some exceptions e.g. PowerBook 5300. I know that price and margin are 2 different things but they tend to get trotted out together.

There are numerous other vendors who tried to compete in the nascent PC market and quite a few aren't around today. Apple deserves credit for making it to this point (though sometimes it was close).

Is it possible that a commodity strategy would have paid off? Maybe. Even if it did I'm not sure you would recognize the Apple that would have evolved from that strategy.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[squiggleslash]

I've been under the impression that iTunes decrypts the AAC file before dumping it on the iPod with those cryptic filenames...

Nope. The m4p files iTunes puts on the iPod are identical to the ones stored (I just compared a m4p I downloaded from the iTMS with the one in iPod_Control - the "hidden" directory on the iPod that contains the music.)

Which is a big shame.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[SlamMan]

Right, but to encode with it uses way more juice than some of the inferior ones to play them. If I can get double battery life to have songs with a slight (and I do mean slight) hit in quality, I'm all over it.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[ProppaT]

Amen! I'm just waiting for a nice portable cd player that plays regular cds as well as MP3 dvds. Heck, if they even wanted to make it audio dvd compatible while they're at it, even better. But, really, if I could just have a good quality DVD MP3 player (one portable, one in my car) I'd be set for life. My 10 DVD MP3 collection could finally be of some use outside of my laptop.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[spike hay]

Right, but to encode with it uses way more juice than some of the inferior ones to play them. If I can get double battery life to have songs with a slight (and I do mean slight) hit in quality, I'm all over it.

No, that's incorrect. They will use the same amount of battery life. LAME throws away some parts, Bladeenc throws away other parts. At a given bitrate, like 128, they will both be throwing away exactly the same amount of data. The difference in quality depends on what the encoders throw away. It doesn't affect battery life. At all.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Anonymous Coward]

On the old-style iMac (and I'm assuming the eMac hasn't magically fixed this flaw), the monitors do burn out. I'm assuming this is something to do with the extra heat from the additional components, but it's far from a 'disproven notion'.

From a total of about 25 all-in-one CRT iMacs of varying ages, we've had 6 or 7 die permanently. All but two were from a dead monitor (excluding failed hard drives, which are simple enough to replace, and dead CD drives which are not worth our investment to fix, as we can scavenge them from the other corpses).

However, the high margin on the new iMacs has meant we've not bothered to replace those dead machines, and instead have a growing collection of cobbled-together PCs built for a pittance.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[zeno_2]

How to convert AAC to MP3:

Mac

Windows

I couldn't find anything for linux but im sure they are out there..

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Ziviyr]

You don't have to spin full tilt to read compressed audio in a timely manner.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[smaug195]

They actually are hugely popular in a retail setting. I work in a major electronics retailer, and the cheapest harddrive based mp3 player we carry is the 300$ ipod, so lots of people see 200$ for 1.5GB vs 180$ for 256MB, and find it an excellent value. We sold through our small harddrive based players first.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Scudsucker]

Also, most of the content creation software, such as iMovie, have perfectly good PC equivalents.

Like what. The free PC software sucks, and the good ones are very expensive. I doubt your "perfectly good PC equivalents" exist, at least as far as video editing goes.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[spike hay]

Like what. The free PC software sucks, and the good ones are very expensive. I doubt your "perfectly good PC equivalents" exist, at least as far as video editing goes.

Adobe Premiere and After Effects some good video editing solutions. Yes, they are expensive. But the money I save by buying a PC far outweighs the cost. Also, the Apple equivalent of Premiere, Final Cut Pro, costs $250 dollars more than Premiere. So by using Premiere on a PC, I save over $1000 dollars in software and hardware costs. I really can't see why Apple is the better option here.

If you are thinking about iMovie, is not what I'd call a professional video editing tool. It's great for amateurs. But it is totally and wholly beaten out by open source windows video editing programs such as Virtual Dub Mod.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Scudsucker]

iTunes has rather restrictive DRM

Um, no. The only DRM is on AAC files downloaded from Apple's music store, and its about the least restrictive DRM on the planet. iTunes has a built in mp3 encoder, which should be very good as Apple licensed the codec from Faunhaufer, and nothing stops you from having all mp3's on your 'Pod.

Go crawl back under your bridge.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Scudsucker]

LAME is the only good way to encode. Anything else will produce inferior MP3s.

Possibly among free encoders, but what about "official" ones? Apple licensed the Fraunhofer codec for Quicktime, which is the engine that runes iTunes.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[spike hay]

Possibly among free encoders, but what about "official" ones? Apple licensed the Fraunhofer codec for Quicktime, which is the engine that runes iTunes.

The Fraunhofer codec is definitely better than most codecs out there. But it is a distant second to LAME, which is constantly being improved all of the time. In addition, LAME is completely open source.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[amper]

Oh for God's sake, when will you people bother to actually read an honest performance comparison and then price out equivalent systems?

Go ahead, take any performance comparision between current (or past) Mac's and PC's. Then go to the Apple online store and the Dell/HP/whatever top-shelf brand PC mfg. you like.

You will find than generally, the Mac's come out slightly *cheaper* than the PC's.

The "Mac's are sooo expensive/overpriced/not-worth-the-money" argument hasn't held water for years.

And as far as your "Athlon 64" argument, by which I take it you mean the Opteron, you're still wrong. The G5, clock for clock, is faster than the Opteron in the vast majority of computing tasks running today's software. Go read it on Bare Feats.

Looks like you are firmly in the grasp of your own "Head Up My Ass" Reality Distortion Field.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Ohreally_factor]

After Effects is not a video editing solution. It's compositing software.

Premiere doesn't hold a candle to FCP. How many features have you heard of that were cut on premiere? If you're going to compare premiere to anything, compare it to FCE, which can be had for as little as $99.

Granted, your time isn't worth much, but I don't think you're really realizing a cost savings with your PC/Premiere bundle.

I've never tried Virtual Dub, but I'm sure it's a fine program. The fact that you mention it as comparable to iMovie, though, makes me wonder what sort of crunch you're smoking, and where can I get some?

Re:Aiming at the low end

[OverclockedMind]

then why does itunes tell me protected content cant be converted *confusded* please help!

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Anonymous Coward]

Stop spouting religious propaganda. Yes, LAME is a good encoder. So is iTunes. Also, iTunes AAC rips sound as good (or better) at 128 than LAME MP3 rips at 192, because, like Ogg Vorbis, AAC is a superior compression format over MP3.

In a nutshell:

Best: AAC or Ogg
Good: 192 VBR MP3 with LAME, iTunes or another good encoder.
Not good: MP3 from various crappy encoders.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[abischof]

I presume you're talking about their Nex 1A? It looks like a promising player and, while it does mention that it supports "multiple formats (MP3 and WMA) and emerging formats such as Ogg Vorbis through firmware upgrades", I don't see any confirmation that their firmware upgrades have Ogg support yet :-/.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[spike hay]

I've never tried Virtual Dub, but I'm sure it's a fine program. The fact that you mention it as comparable to iMovie, though, makes me wonder what sort of crunch you're smoking, and where can I get some?

I won't make the claim that Virtual Dub Mod is easier to use than iMovie, because it isn't. But feature-wise, it is excellent. It has numerous built in video filters, and hundreds more are available as plugins on the internet. It can capture video through a TV-IN card. It has full OGM and Matroska container support, which allows you do have things like multiple audio streams and subtitles. It lets you edit individual streams, encode MP3, Ogg, or other audio formats, correct audio skew, etc. You can demux individual streams or save audio streams as WAV files. It can read VOB files.

It is an excellent, fully featured program.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Scudsucker]

Adobe Premiere and After Effects some good video editing solutions. Yes, they are expensive. But the money I save by buying a PC far outweighs the cost. So by using Premiere on a PC, I save over $1000 dollars in software and hardware costs. I really can't see why Apple is the better option here.

Riiight. The only way its going to be cheaper is if you warez Premiere and After Effects, as together they are over a thousand dollars.

$800 eMac + free iMovie = $800
$600 Dell + Premiere + AE = $1700

Hell, you could buy an eMac with a DVD burner for what you'd pay for Adobe's software alone.

Also, the Apple equivalent of Premiere, Final Cut Pro, costs $250 dollars more than Premiere.

Three words: Final Cut Express. Price? $100. Basically most of power of FCP, but without some of the filters that drive up the cost. So for another $100 over the cost of Premiere and After Effects, you can get an eMac with a DVD burner and FCE.

If you are thinking about iMovie, is not what I'd call a professional video editing tool. It's great for amateurs. But it is totally and wholly beaten out by open source windows video editing programs such as Virtual Dub Mod.

As far as Virtual Dub goes, it is an excelent tool - if you're recompressing or croping a single video and audio stream. However, if you are trying to re-arrange clips to make a video, iMovie will stomp all over Vdub. Unless your time is completely worthless, Vdub is just not going to cut it for any kind of video project that needs chronological editing, unless its very small.

So, in summary: Apple stomps all over the PC in video editing, at the low end, the high end, *and* on price. And there's still no PC product that compares to iMovie for how much it costs and what it does.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Scudsucker]

The Fraunhofer codec is definitely better than most codecs out there. But it is a distant second to LAME, which is constantly being improved all of the time. In addition, LAME is completely open source.

That sounds more like LAME evangelism to me. (heh heh). Its going to be tough to prove that a third party compressor is better than the one made by the guys who came up with the codec in the first place, especially for something as subjective as audio quality.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Anonymous Coward]

How is a $100 player possible with either flash or HD storage?

Explain that one. If it could be done, don't you think the low-price Taiwanese makers would have done something with it by now?

The Cornice drives are supposedly $50 and up and 1 GB of flash memory is way more than $100.

So unless Apple was interested in losing money per unit sold, how is it economically viable?

If like the video games business or the cell phone business, there was a high-margin revenue stream associated with subsidizing hardware at a loss, it might make sense. But we know there are no margins on those 99 cents downloads.

Re:Aiming at the low end

[Ohreally_factor]

Thanks for the info. I apologize for the rudeness of my comments, although if you do have a line on some good crunch, I'd still be interested. =)

Anyway, I'll check it out when I get a chance.

Mini Me?

[XxtraLarGe]

I'm sure Apple will tap Vern Troyer to promote the new mini iPod :-)

Re:Mini Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

no doubt yao ming could join in the fun?

Re:Mini Me?

[Genady]

NO NO NO! Billy Boyd! Apple has to redeam the Pippin name in it's lineage. "The new iPod, hobbit sized." :: Cut to scene with Pip and Merry ::

Pip> Whatcha got there Merry?
Merry> The new MiniPod, 800 songs and it's mine, my prescious.
Pip> :: Sees a human pass with a regular iPod :: Wait. It comes in Pints? I'm getting one.

Re:Mini Me?

[mhore]

I'm sure Apple will tap Vern Troyer to promote the new mini iPod :-)

Just like how they had him promote the 17" Powerbook (which is frickin' huge!)...?

Mike.

Re:Mini Me?

[the Man in Black]

You, sir, need to get yourself a job. That would be an EXCELLENT way to capitilize on the success of the trilogy, as well as push their new product.

Plus, Merry and Pippin kick ass.

Re:Mini Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

While I agree it would be a great idea, dear lord that would be an expensive idea to implement.

You have to negotiate with the actors, the studio, and the Tolkein family.

Re:Mini Me?

[mrtroy]

If they have a commercial with mini me and yao again I will buy whatever they sell

Seriously, this is going to be a huge hit. Im tired of flash memory and it being able to hold 11 songs unless u spend 300 on flash memory, then it can hold 40 songs. And you dished out the price of an ipod. Flash memory hopefully gets big fast, or mini hd's get cheap fast ;)

The war of the worlds! Flash vs mini hds! Which can be produced cheaper/expand in size faster?

Re:Mini Me?

[NewbieV]

...just like he and Yao Ming did for the Powerbooks

Re:Mini Me?

[Ohreally_factor]

He was good in LoTR, but otherwise Pippen has sucked without Michael Jordan.

Re:Mini Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

No shit, master of the obvious. Sheesh. Thanks for the "insight".

Re:Mini Me?

[Soong]

The ironic part of this is that they'd have to build a large mockup of the minipod so that it'd be hobbit sized.

Re:Mini Me?

[Drakonian]

Easier said then done my friend.

Re:Mini Me?

[calyphus]

The iPod's gonna look tiny in Yao's hand.

Wow!

[djkitsch]

That could easily put the makers of solid state MP3 players out of business...If it's true.

It seems unlikely, however, unless they've got a really good deal with the miniature hard disc manufacturers....

Re:Wow!

[Anonymous Coward]

Like IBM perhaps!?!?!?

Re:Wow!

[Anonymous Coward]

While thats what the apple "crowd" and people interested by apple products (like me) would like to think, but fact remains that using flash memory MP3 players has an inherent advantage in terms of having no movable parts. This gives me plenty peace of mind when using MP3 player in the gym, running or like.

No matter how shock absorbent they make the hard disks but nothing beats flash in sturdiness.

Re:Wow!

[Svennig]

That could easily put the makers of solid state MP3 players out of business...If it's true.

Thats true, but no more than the other miniature-hard-drive MP3 players out there. Just because they dont have the IPod branding dont discount the Creative Muvo2 or Rio Nitrus.

Re:Wow!

[ALpaca2500]

a 2 gigabyte iPod for $150 and a 4 GB for $200 would beat the muvo and the nitrus. even a brand new (if you can find one) original model 5 GB iPod goes for less than $200

Re:Wow!

[Hawthorne01]

Or, maybe Just a cheaper hard drive.

VAT

[stang7423]

I wonder if that price includes VAT. If it is so then the US price would drop to about $100. just food for though.

Re:VAT

[Altima(BoB)]

I doubt it would include VAT, as the price quoted was an "Apple announcement." They don't usually bother with VAT calculations till it hits stores. Not to mention, if they're quoting an Apple announcement, the price was probably originally quoted in US$ and was then converted by them into Sterling Pounds, and a dollar price would not include any sales tax.

No announcement

[neverkevin]

there is no mention of it at their official News Page or their product page for the iPod.

Yeah, probably because Macworld expo is on the 6th, I would expect and announcement then.

Re:No announcement

[ankit]

True. But the article says:

"Apple has announced a cut-price mini version"

This appears to be a goof-up like what Time-Canada did a while back. This news should have been released on the 6th.

Re:No announcement

[cavebear42]

Apple has a habit of releasing at the Expo. Then the people at the expo order, well, all of 'em. Then it takes 6 months before they even start to have them again. The way I count it, this was released just in time for wide spread sales on Christmas... 2004. BTW, I saw one /.er guess at 1.5GB flash. Apple claims 10,000 songs on a 40GB, thats 250 songs/GB and 800 songs would be 3.2GB. If thats Flash, its the cheapest flash I've ever seen.

Re:No announcement

[neverkevin]

In This June 2003 article, this company claims to make 1.5 Inch 1.5 GB drive for $65 in quantities of 10,000.

The Evening Standard?

[Alan Partridge]

They don't even understand LONDON, you can't expect them too understand APPLE.

If you're looking for NEWS in the Evening Standard, you're looking in the wrong fucking place.

Re:The Evening Standard?

[SengirV]

And I'm sure that the ONLY place to get news in New York is the NYTimes? A more honorable newspaper has never been produced! HAHAHAHAHA!! Get your news from one source and turn into what they want, a non thinking automaton who laps up their editorial slant without question.

Re:The Evening Standard?

[bwalling]

If you don't trust that website, how about CBS Marketwatch or San Francisco Gate? They are both speculating, but they are larger press than MacRumors and ThinkSecret.

Re:The Evening Standard?

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me guess, you read the Post?

There's a reason it costs a third of the New York Times.

Re:The Evening Standard?

[squiggleslash]

Too right. Remember when the Evening Standard blew their credibility completely by predicting 15.4" G5 PowerBooks all summer, with them even splashing "Apple Releases 1.8GHz 970-based Jaguar Notebook with 512M RAM, 120G HD" on their front page some time in June?

No, I always get my Apple rumours from reputable sources. Like The Guardian and The Independent.

Re:The Evening Standard?

[Alan Partridge]

Funnily enough, this crappy non-story was first printed in the Telegraph this morning and merely picked up by the Evening Shiturd.

Re:The Evening Standard?

[Anonymous Coward]

We miss you and your whacky right wing opinions on deal chat. Drop in and say hello one of these days!

Press Release

[Arc04]

I want to know how the Evening Standard know about it, without Apple releasing a press release. And if Apple have released a press release, then why isn't it listed on their site?

Maybe someone at the Evening Standard is a /. regular and just nicked it from the earlier story.

Re:Press Release

[mekkab]

or rather, its a slow news week (all the good journalists on holiday) and someone saw it posted on 3 mac rumor mill websites, and decided "It MUST be news! That's my story for the week, its PUB TIME!"

Re:Press Release

[ankit]

Its a cycle!

It all started with thinksecret posting about the rumored mini-ipods. Then came macrumors, which simply linked to thinksecret as their source. Then it was slashdot, which again linked to thinksecret. Then it was macrumors again, which said that it had more sources (they did not disclose them). And then some London newspapers picked up the rumors, and posted them as such. This becomes news on macrumors.com again (see page 2). And now we are back on slasldot.

wow! And it all started with _someone_ hinting a possibility to thinksecret!

This reminds me of a time when it was rumored that the President of India had died. Everyone was thoroughly convinced. Even BBC carried this story. The poor president was completely healthy and very much alive!

Re:Press Release

[ianscot]

That basically was a press release, or pieces of it. As for how they had this early, try asking Time Canada about the iMac revamp, they may have something to tell you.

My experience working for a PR department showed me that newspapers, particularly smaller or less-renowned ones but the local "big" papers as well, just cobble together pieces of your press release and call it "reporting." This sure looked like some sort of variation on that, to me -- like the Standard's editors hacked up some original copy from Apple.

It's not like they came up with that story based on the rumor sites. It's plain not phrased like a rumor site would have it -- those sites have a clue about store media, capacity, and so on.

Probaby some fab time involved

[idiotnot]

Gotta ramp up the production before you make the announcement. I have a feeling that these will sell very quickly.

Re:Probaby some fab time involved

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure if you're a normal corporation. This is Apple we're talking about here.

They surely "think different" about how to manage their supply chain. There's the announcement, a hand full at most get out, a macsturbation feeding frenzy ensues, and they rack up the back orders. Then if you're lucky and they don't sell the product out from under you to fill a large 1100 piece order, you might get your product in 3-6 months.

As american as pie!

[actionvance]

Does this mark apples first true mass market attempt since the early 80's?! For some time now, price points have kept apple product away from "less-than-upper-middle-class". At just over 100 beans, my kid brother could buy one.

Hard Drive

[blackmonday]

I wonder if this new iPod will continue acting as a firewire HD. Or if it will work with the iPod accessories. So many questions. As others have posted, this gadget would essentially drive others out of business. I would have never guessed an iPod could be delivered at such a low price. Wouldn't the HD on the unit alone make up for 90% of the price?

Re:Hard Drive

[kevinvee]

The Rio Nitrus is 1.5gb and has sold for as low as $150. The price on these mini hard drives is dropping fast as IBM and others continue to refine the manufacturing process. I doubt Apple will earn as much margin as they are on the higher ends, but these Jr's will look attractive to buyers such as myself who don't need a 40 gig brick.

Re:Hard Drive

[h0mer]

I think it works more like this...

miniPod to get you buying songs from iTMS.
Buy a bunch of songs from iTMS, until they no longer fit on the miniPod.
Buy an iPod to be able to fit all the music.
Buy a G5 because you've taken a hit of that Mac crack and can't turn back.
World domination.

Re:Hard Drive

[phalse phace]

So in other words,

1. Buy miniPod
2. ...
3. Profit!

Re:Hard Drive

[nanimo]

This does not bring it to the price range being mentioned regarding the new iPod. The street price of the Nitrus seems to be more in the region of $200. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Re:Hard Drive

[greenskyx]

Yeah it's about $200... pricegrabber

I'll be first in line

[Slowtreme]

Apple hasn't said anything official at all about Mini iPods, and usually they kick thier Legal team into action when "half true" Rumors hit the web. The idea that they have done nothing at all makes this seem like they have resigned to let the leak become publicity, or free advertising.

As much as I'd love to have a 20g iPod to hold all of my music on, I'd be very happy with a resonably priced (about $200) iPod that will hold 2-4gig of music. 256mb flash players just are not big enough for the price.

Re:I'll be first in line

[gabe]

Apple's legal team is usually only tapped to deal with sites that offer images as proof that the rumors are indeed true. Since there are no sites that have acquired photos of the mini iPod, there's not a whole lot they can do about it, freedom of speech and all.

Re:I'll be first in line

[nytes]

I'll throw another theory into the other responses you've received:

Maybe Apple has gone after other rumors because of the risk that the rumor poses a risk to sales of their existing inventory.

However, from many of the reactions I'm seeing here, this new iPod serves a different need. Many/most of the buyers of the mini-iPod will be people who already own the larger capacity models, but want to supplement it with something more rugged.

This rumor, then, wouldn't cannibalize existing iPod sales, but it might cannibalize sales of their competitor's products.

First "announced", then "expected to unveil"

[burgburgburg]

Interesting how something that is initially described as fait accompli is then described as "expected to unveil".

I'm not saying Apple isn't going to have them. I'm just saying this is another glorified rumor (or rumour since it's a UK site).

Re:First "announced", then "expected to unveil"

[Anonymous Coward]

It means the news was embargoed until the 6th but the Standard fucked up and released the news early.

Re:First "announced", then "expected to unveil"

[TheRaven64]

I'm just saying this is another glorified rumor (or rumour since it's a UK site).

This is the Evening Standard. You could probably get away with `roomer'.

Re:Wow

[actionvance]

overpriced?!?! what are you babbling about?

iPod for exercise and iTunes rules?

[kevin_conaway]

I just got an 10GB iPod for Christmas and I was curious how the iPod holds up on a treadmill or a jog around the track?

Im also curious about how iTunes works? If i download some songs on my laptop and can move/play them on my home computer as well?

Re:iPod for exercise and iTunes rules?

[bwalling]

I just got an 10GB iPod for Christmas and I was curious how the iPod holds up on a treadmill or a jog around the track?

Im also curious about how iTunes works? If i download some songs on my laptop and can move/play them on my home computer as well?

Your question will probably be better answered here.

Re:iPod for exercise and iTunes rules?

[psxndc]

I got the armband holder from Marware and used to (before school started) run several miles a day with no problems. Watch it when it rains though because the one time I went when there was a lot of humidity in the air, at the end of the run the iPod sort of seized up for a few minutes. It reset itself and was fine, but that was a pretty scary few minutes.

psxndc

Re:iPod for exercise and iTunes rules?

[computerme]

Yes. to all your questions... if you have itunes you can set it up to stream to other computers on your subnet (house) or you can actually authorize those computers to use that music as well. I think the limit is five computers. If you sell your computer you can de-authorize the music on that system then re-authroize it on your new computer. It also "jogs" well.. Congrats. You got the best digital music expericence on the planet. (Be sure to sign up for new music on tuesday emails from apple. as well.)

Re:iPod for exercise and iTunes rules?

[superdan2k]

Heh. It kicks ass for workout purposes, be it cardio (running, etc.) or on the weights. Pretty much the only thing you wouldn't want to do is swim with it.

Re:iPod for exercise and iTunes rules?

[Hollinger]

As for iTunes, you can copy the songfiles from machine to machine if you like (I currently have my iTunes library mirrored on three machines), as long as you simply click "authorize this computer" when it prompts you and enter your Applestore password to play encrypted files.

As for streaming, you still have to authorize the computer to play back your encrypted (purchased) content, but the files stay put, removing redundancy and, if you disable the Windows firewall (or open up whatever ports) it automagically plays nicely with any other iTunes installs running (on Windows OR Mac). Your ripped songs will stream without authorization. You only have to authorize a machine to play protected content. This has been EXTREMELY useful when on the Univ. of Oklahoma campus network...

By the way, if you're feeling like pushing your luck, you might go bug whoever gave you the iPod, and tell them "I got this shiny new device, but it's empty! I need an iTunes Allowance to start filling it up and actually using it." Just an idea... ;-)

Re:iPod for exercise and iTunes rules?

[tetsuji]

What about bouldering? If I take say an 8 foot fall onto a pad, is it likely to mess it up? I'd be delighted to be able to drown out the crappy techno that they insist on playing at the gym. Would a flash-based player would be better for this particular case? I'd prefer to have the flexibility of the IPod

Re:iPod for exercise and iTunes rules?

[Anonymous Coward]

There are hard metal cases for the iPod made exactly for mountain climbing and biking. I can't think of the name of the top of my head, but most computer catalogs that sell iPod accessories feature them.

Re:iPod for exercise and iTunes rules?

[superdan2k]

I don't climb with mine...but I'm not sure an 8-foot drop would be good for it. I mean, I've dropped mine onto a concrete floor from 3-4 feet and it never missed a beat... But bouldering? I suppose it might be alright, as long as you didn't land on it.

Re:iPod for exercise and iTunes rules?

[MKalus]

I have a 10 Gig iPod now for a year and a half and use it extensivly on all of my long runs. (read 1 - 2 1/2 hours).

No problems there. Occationally it would lock up, but you can just hard reset it and you're good again...

Replaced the headphones though as sweat and Apples Headphones don't go well together.

M.

Re:iPod for exercise and iTunes rules?

[Anonymous Coward]

Bouldering? Hmmm... Sounds like me in the mornings.

We all know how this will end.

[shumacher]

It's gonna look like heaven in thermoplastic, and everyone here is going to want one.

What makes no sense is the timing. When a mainstream site makes an assertion about this sort of thing Apple is usually within days of release. If that were the case, why not launch before christmas.

I don't think we'll see this for some time. Previous rumors put stripes and patterns on the case. I suspect we'll see a Pepsi branded model some time in Feburary.

Super keen idea we'll probably never see:
Use the printing technology used on the blue dalmation and flower power iMacs, and tie in with iPhoto to let buyers have their photos molded into the case of their mini-ipod, rather than just simple laser engraving.

Re:We all know how this will end.

[mccalli]

When a mainstream site makes an assertion about this sort of thing Apple is usually within days of release.

Job's keynote speech is January 6th.

If that were the case, why not launch before christmas.

Pure guess on my part, but I'd suggest in order to shift stock of their high-margin existing players. Happy to hear better ideas though if someone has them.

Cheers,
Ian

Re:We all know how this will end.

[the Man in Black]

If that were the case, why not launch before christmas.

Because they were busy selling regular iPods at $300-500 a pop. Clear out all that inventory, take the profit, then announce a new product at MacWorld. Simple profit maximization; a pre-Christmas announcement would have hurt current iPod sales as people demanded the Jr. rather than the big boy (which may or may not have been available). If they couldn't get their hands on one, they'd just wait until after Christmas. Meanwhile, iPods sit dusty and alone on the shelves. Post- you have enough time to ramp up production and meet demand. People that were going to buy an iPod already have one, so you're not taking a loss.

The people that are going to buy this (in DROVES) are the people that looked longingly at an iPod but were much too broke to buy one (read: ME and several million other people).

Re:We all know how this will end.

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple's customers have 2 extra Christmases per year. The first comes in early January.

Re:We all know how this will end.

[Obiwan Kenobi]

If that were the case, why not launch before christmas.

My case in point: The GBA SP

On Christmas 2002, my wife got me a GBA, Metroid Fusion, along with a light attachment. I was enthused to say the least, and enjoyed it for about two weeks...

Until Nintendo announced, on January 6th, 2003 that their Gameboy SP was coming in February, complete with the why-didn't-they-include-it-in-the-first-place backlight and rechargable battery.

To put it mildly, I was fucking upset. Who would rather have the non-backlit and AA version when you could get a smaler and better designed alternative? While it didn't make me toss the GBA (it is a great system), it certainly put me in a mindset that any sweet geek toy I'm interested in gets a few more weeks of speculation from now on before I take the plunge.

Re:We all know how this will end.

[squiggleslash]

That's technology. The key thing is to look at a current product and say "Am I going to be happy with that?" and settle on it if you want it. If something comes out later that's better, well "lucky new customers". It doesn't change what you've got.

Re:We all know how this will end.

[gobbo]

in order to shift stock of their high-margin existing players

Unquestionably, riding the crest of popularity for awhile. Probably, also, they just couldn't make enough to sell... and they probably still can't, bet they're just ramping up. The design is probably in the can, though, and they'll be showing that off. They're trying for the US$100 price point, though as Jobs said in October to Steven Levy:

"Some think you wouldn't want to sell a $100 iPod because the profit margin would be so low.
What are you talking about? We'd love to have a $100 iPod! We just don't know how to do it right now. We're constantly trying to make cheaper iPods. We're working on the next step."

It's a pretty interesting interview... Apple's been thinking pretty hard about the music biz. The Rolling Stone interview from December 3rd is worth reading too, for his analysis of why the music industry's business model is broken.

Re:We all know how this will end.

[Hollinger]

Another point is that I'm betting Apple wouldn't be able to keep up with demand if they started selling them. $100(ish) is a VERY important price point for lots of people. It's a heck of a lot easier to rationalize a $100 investment rather than a $300 investment. If such a machine is produced, it'll sell almost as quickly as the iTMS sold it's first tracks, if Apple releases it with a big enough splash.

Look at some of the past product releases (pick a keynote, any keynote): The product is announced, and ordered are taken immediately after the keynote. Orders for higher end models are backordered and "expected to ship in ____." Something very similar might have happened if Apple released this device over a month ago (actually it would have had to have been 2 months ago to get volume up to hit Black Friday and make holiday shipments, in all liklihood). It makes sense to release it now, since they get to couple this with the Pepsi Superbowl spots, and they get all year to roll up production, release a point update for the iPod, iTMS, and iTunes itself, letting the product reach critical mass (if it hasn't already) in time for *next* year's holiday season.

Of course I don't have the foggiest idea what I'm talking about! This is slashdot!

Re:We all know how this will end.

[switcha]

I suspect we'll see a Pepsi branded model some time in Feburary.

Your kidding, right? It's one thing to leverage them to make money, but you're nuts if you think His Jobsness will allow his products to be sullied by logos for "sugar water"?

Re:We all know how this will end.

[NanoGator]

"complete with the why-didn't-they-include-it-in-the-first-place backlight and rechargable battery."

Price. Duh.

Re:We all know how this will end.

[drinkypoo]

Let us not forget also that post-holiday is when all the sales happen. Lots of people wait to spend the biggest chunk of their holiday money until after new year's.

Re:We all know how this will end.

[Vokbain]

I would love to have a Pepsi branded mini-iPod.

Re:We all know how this will end.

[gmhowell]

$100(ish) is a VERY important price point for lots of people.

Most importantly, $100 is a very VERY important price point for my wife. When I told her about this rumor, her comment was basically 'well, I guess you're finally allowed to get an iPod'.

I haven't told her that I'll also be 'forced' to pick up about $100 worth of accessories (to play the tunes through car and motorcycle stereos:)

Re:We all know how this will end.

[haut]

Add me to the list that would snatch up a $100 1gb+ music player from Apple in a heartbeat. I definitely wanted an iPod, but: a) couldn't really afford one and b) wouldn't feel all that comfortable carrying around a $400 piece of electronics with me everywhere. I think you're right about the "post" thing and also a lot of people get money for xmas (I did), so they might be looking for something like this to buy.

Re:We all know how this will end.

[calyphus]

why not launch before christmas

The inertia of habit, and production ramp-up timing, is my guess. Full market production might not be ready until Feb. or later (ramp-up), and they have a long-standing habit of waiting till MacWorld's to announce product (inertia).

Re:We all know how this will end.

[Scudsucker]

you're finally allowed

Are you that whipped, or does she also have to get your permission to get a new pair of shoes? :)

Re:We all know how this will end.

[gmhowell]

Are you that whipped, or does she also have to get your permission to get a new pair of shoes? :)

I'm that whipped.

iPod rumors could hurt

[Ham and Egger]

So much emphasize is on the iPod/iTunes right now if there isn't a major announcement the stock will probably take a beating. Even if there are several other great announcements, things like iLife.

*ahem*. rumour press.

[Amiga Lover]

Apple has announced hey? Despite not owning them, I remember when the press said apple has "announced" 68060 based macs. I remember when apple "announced" that their games machine was selling in the US market. I remember when they "announced" the release of a PPC 620 64-bit mac.

"announced" in quotes simply because the press want to get it right before anyone else, and throw guesses and suppositions around regarding beta or even non existent hardware.

Re:*ahem*. rumour press.

[baryon351]

> I remember when the press said apple has "announced"
> 68060 based macs

This is an interesting one, as back in the day apple was only beginning licensing their products, and Daystar had prototype boards licensed from Apple which were not PPC. No, they would have been the last 68k machines, COMPLETELY redesigned for the 68060 chip. Quite a lot of effort went into making the machines, and they were pulled because of efforts on two fronts. Mainly because the 603 was coming, and was to be available in such speeds and so cheaply that going on with anything more with the 68k line was a futile effort. Adding to the fact that Daystar was also moving ahead with 68k accelerators for Quadras, with replacement ROMs to be compatible with the new 060 caused licensing difficulties, and by the time anything productive began the project was out of date and shelved.

Something good did happen from it however. The changes to the MacOS ROM to support 68060s worked its way into one of the last of the machines, Performa, LC or Quadra 630 to 640 machines are 68060 compatible.

Combined with an adaptor such as this one from Emulation Tech, you get a cooler running and MUCH MUCH faster mac.

I've upgraded six Performa 630s now, and MacOS 8.1 feels like it was made for the 060. It certainly runs far more responsively under the 68060 than any other mac less than a 200 MHz 604.

It's a pity the 68k line couldn't push on a little further, it may have made the difference at one of the darker times in Apple's history.

Re:*ahem*. rumour press.

[isaac]

Something good did happen from it however. The changes to the MacOS ROM to support 68060s worked its way into one of the last of the machines, Performa, LC or Quadra 630 to 640 machines are 68060 compatible.

Combined with an adaptor such as this one from Emulation Tech, you get a cooler running and MUCH MUCH faster mac.

I've upgraded six Performa 630s now, and MacOS 8.1 feels like it was made for the 060. It certainly runs far more responsively under the 68060 than any other mac less than a 200 MHz 604.

If you have done this successfully, you should document it. Everything I've ever read suggested that no version of the Mac OS supported the 060, which was not fully backwards compatible and required certain 040 instructions to be trapped and emulated in software.

I would love to see proof that this has been done, if only to satisfy some sentimental curiosity.

-Isaac

Now it is a matter of time...

[Guano_Jim]

Before Jobs the iWhite sends out his Uruk-Hai to crush the rumor sites.

Re:Now it is a matter of time...

[buus]

And destroy all the free publicity/advertising that is generated? All the endless rumor debating makes people actually notice apple announcements and it's all free!

Re:Now it is a matter of time...

[Golias]

A rumor is a week of free publicity for the product.

A rumor followed by a C&D letter with the threat of a lawsuit is two weeks of free publicity for the product.

'Nuff said.

It's kind of... a bummer

[Muddie]

I went to update the firmware on my iPod, and... like, it went all 'beep-beep-beep-beep-beep' and started to smoke. That was kind of... a bummer. So I check my funds and realize that I don't have the cash to get a new one because I bought my week's worth of... herbs. So, I go to the store and see that they released this iPodJr, and I was all like... cool. So, I was able to still listen to Jerry while I was studying. That's like... cool.

I'm Ellen Feiss, and I have an iPodJr.

Re:It's kind of... a bummer

[the Man in Black]

I'm Ellen Feiss, and I have an iPodJr.

I think it's great the kind of things we as a community will take and run with. Ellen, the Star Wars kid, Libby Hoeler (oh, don't pretend like it was just me).

Now, let's start a PAC. Who's with me?

Ogg Vorbis support

[TokyoBoy]

I just can't justify buying one until it natively supports Ogg Vorbis. I have encoded my entire collection of CDs in ogg by choice and have been waiting until good hardware players for ogg were available before I purchased one. Now with several on the market (the Rio Karma being my top choice curently) it looks like Apple will not be getting my business.

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure that Apple will miss the business of you and the five other people that aren't buying an iPod for this reason.

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[Anonymous Coward]

I have encoded my entire collection of CDs in ogg by choice and have been waiting until good hardware players for ogg were available before I purchased one.

Sounds like you're an idiot. Enjoy your wait.

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[weez75]

You can play Ogg files in iTunes with a plugin:

http://www.illadvised.com/~jordy/

It's not native but it works. I don't want to get into the debate about file formats but I will tell you the experience with an iPod is far superior to any other player I've tried--perhaps good enough to switch formats.

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[Nexum]

[Ashen-faced shock]

Oh my God, how could Jobs and Apple have overlooked this? Man without Ogg support they are pretty much finished that's for sure, say goodbye to the reign of the iPod folks.

Why didn't you write and tell them that they were gonna miss out on your business? At least we stood a chance of saving them then.

Still, it's their fault I suppose, if they choose to ignore such an industry BEHEMOTH as Ogg Vorbis, what chance could they ever stand.

Seriously though, nobody wants to hear you whine self-righteously about a situation you actively chose and worked at to get yourself in. I'm sure Ogg Vorbis is great, it's not the codec I have a problem with, it's with people who whine about products not supporting it when, to be honest, there isn't the market pressure there.

It's like me going and running a RISC-OS machine, and then *EVERY* time someone releases software for the Mac or PC I chime in going "Pfft, no RISC-OS support? Oh, my, God. Well, looks like Microsoft/Apple/Macromedia/Adobe won't be getting my business then. [Nose-In-Air]"

In summary, Ogg Vorbis may be great, however there is little market pressure for supporting it, so stop whining.

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[TokyoBoy]

There are several good players on the market now. Please see Vorbis Hardware. My personal favorite being the Rio Karma which sports phone out, RCA out (much better than 1/8" out for hokup to external amps, ethernet with DHCP client for automaticaly grabbing an address for networking, 5 band parametric EQ (by far the most advanced eq in a portable player). Pretty nice product. 20 gigs are out now with 40 gigs coming shortly.

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[TokyoBoy]

Things never change if no one speaks up.

There is a market for Ogg support. Other smaller players are filling the demand right now. Just like APEX and other smaller DVD players were first to support jpeg, ogg, mp3 playback in their DVD players long before major manufacturers did.

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[Anonymous Coward]

And yet you haven't purchased it. Why is that? Are you still waiting to get an iPod?

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[TokyoBoy]

Money.

I have a buget that I try to stick to. I have mortgage payments, utilites, insurance, and other things which come before my toys. I try not to go into debt for toys. When I've saved enough for the things I want, after taking care of the things I need, I'll get one. Thanks for asking so kindly without any snide or rhetorical sland to your question.

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[CrazyTalk]

FINALLY, someone agrees with me here! I'm almost as sick of hearing about Ogg Vorbis as I am about hearing the whining about products that don't support bluetooth. In fact, its a standing joke around my office that anything (calculator, stapler, barcode reader, vending machine) that doesnt have bluetooth must be worthless.

Now if we can get people to stop putting those OBX stickers on their cars (this habit has always baffled me) the world would be a better place.

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[Anonymous Coward]

I have encoded my entire collection of CDs in ogg by choice and have been waiting until good hardware players for ogg were available before I purchased one.

You, sir, are an idiot.

ANY format will provide good enough sound on a portable device that you CANNOT distinguish between them. It sounds like you chose Ogg Vorbis to show your maverick spirit rather than because... gee I don't know, you want to listen to music?

I don't know which group has a bigger stick up their a**, Mac fanatics, Linux groupies or Ogg Vorbis freaks.

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[Raven42rac]

I agree. The Outer Banks are cool and all, but a sticker? I like those stickers that say something like "STFU no one cares where you are from".

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[Anonymous Coward]

of course you're probably 16 and dont realise the importance of the things tokyoboy brought up in his followup to your post like prioritising expenditures, budgeting, putting off wants for more important things - just keep posting first and then thinking - youre doing just fine

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[Euphonious Coward]

Nobody needs an iPod. Yes, Rio, but iRiver has some very nice hardware (iHP120, particularly), too, but like the vanilla iPod, it's pretty expensive. The world is still waiting for a good Ogg player under $100.

I guess if we want Ogg on the iPodJr (pronounced "hip podger") we'll have to hack it ourselves. The great thing about a hacked iPod is that you can copy music between yours to others'. Unfortunately, if yours only has Oggs on it, they can't listen to them; but you can listen to theirs. :-)

Hint to manufacturers: you could leave out the firewire, USB, disk, and flash memory, and replace it all with a Compact Flash slot. We don't really need a mic, or a radio. Battery life, a slot, and an efficient UI are what matter.

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[Anonymous Coward]

So in other words, you would not have bought one by now, even if it did support Ogg Vorbis. You have no point, so please stop talking.

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know which group has a bigger stick up their a**, Mac fanatics, Linux groupies or Ogg Vorbis freaks.

I do.

It's that thrid group.

By at least seven inches.

And it's a much wider stick, too.

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[switcha]

the Rio Karma being my top choice curently

Sweet! When you realize later that you bought a piece-of-shit player, and you want to get rid of it, you'll have...
wait for it... Karma to burn.

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[amper]

Don't all the RISC-OS machines run ARM (as in Acorn RISC Machine) processors? Doesn't Apple still own a goodly chunk of ARM?

Or did I miss something?

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[mattgreen]

You can speak up all you want, but your point is lost mostly because its yet another Slashdotism and its so damn trite now. It'd be far more productive to actually do something about it though, such as hacking firmware to add Ogg support in.

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[Anonymous Coward]

I hate to reply to my own posts but in re-reading them, I realised that I was rude and inconsiderate. I realise that this lashing-out is a result of my being abused when I was younger. I had been touched in my "private places" by some one I thought I trusted. My father was never really home and I have guilt from masterbating too much. Only one of the reasons above could be enough to justify my actions but the combination has been over bearing. I tend to take my anger out on others. I also find it easier to hide behind the anonymity of the internet since I can do these things without the burden of being accountable for my actions and what I say (I remain annonymous here because of the sensitive nature of this post). I am, very sorry.

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[TokyoBoy]

Yea, maybe you're right to some point. I won't get one until I can afford it. But when I do I plan one getting one that meets my needs. While I don't think your comment was very objective, thanks for speaking your mind.

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[TokyoBoy]

Thanks for the pointer. For playing my music via software on a computer, there are several solutions for all the OSes I use. So, as far as listening to my music collecion, I am doing fine. I have a 40gig USB HD that I use for holding my collection as well as storing other data. This has proven to be a fairly good solution for me since it can be moutned under most OSes and there are players for every OS I use, it's portable and convenient. I am either at work or at home for 60-80% of the time anyway so when I want to listen to music other than CDs or the radio, I am near a computer.

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[TheGax]

The real point is that no commerical digital music company is really going to support another non-DRM digital music format. The only reason they all support MP3 is because it is in large use already. Any support of OGG or any other format beyond WMA, AAC, and MP3 should be considered a bonus.
That is, it would be great to have, but don't hold your breath.
I will admit that of Ogg I know very little. So if it can be DRM wrapped, then it may have a future. Except that since it isn't controlled by someone they know, the RIAA will probably not be too excited about it either way.

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[TokyoBoy]

Aparently there is a progect to add DRM support for Ogg Vorbis:

http://www.sidespace.com/products/oggs

For more information on Ogg, here's the Ogg Vorbis General FAQ

Also here is a page that describes the quality of Ogg Vorbis encoding with comparison samples to listen to. Sound quality is subjective so listen for yourself.

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[Dixie_Flatline]

And, as I recall, the iTunes functionality to convert Oggs to AAC files once the plugin is installed works just fine.

I'm also (definitely!) no expert on this topic, but I've heard that the compression artifacts that Ogg and AAC introduce are somewhat orthogonal, so the loss of quality in converting an Ogg to an AAC file is supposedly fairly minimal. I certainly didn't notice anything when I made my 128kbit Oggs into 224kbit AACs.

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[TokyoBoy]

Apology accepted.

BTW, IMHO, slashdot is neither the place for confessions or therapy however, I do wish you the best of luck with your issues.

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, there is a project working on getting ucLinux ported over onto the iPod and has gotten it booting and some progress on playback. Ogg is only 80% realtime last time I checked, but the fact is... someone IS working on it and getting some positive results.

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[Anonymous Coward]

But those those pissants would either have to stop whining or stop sucking dick, and we all know what a grip they have on both of those activities.

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[Anonymous Coward]

You do that a lot don't you? Talking to yourself.

Now STFU, JapBoi

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey, JapBoi, didn't I tell you to SHUT THE FUCK UP allready? No?

STFU JapBoi.

Re:Ogg Vorbis support

[TheGax]

This is the greatest reply I have ever seen on Slashdot. I laughed the rest of the day.

Great, Ogg sounds better. I would be pretty safe to say that 99.9% of those who use Ogg (or any other digital music format for that matter) have neither the sound reproduction equipment nor a room with proper acoustics to actually distiguish between an Ogg file and anything else.

This goes on the list of things you can count on in the Slashdot replies:
1. Goatse
2. 1,2,3 Profit
3. ... in Soviet Russia ...
4. Any article about digital media will have a reply complaining that "there's no ogg support!"

No way

[gotpaint32]

It can't be a true Apple product if you don't have to sacrifice your first born for it... I just don't believe it. I may eat these words later, but for a 115USD a 1-2gb player that is smaller than the current ipod? Flash memory is certainly not that cheap, and as for hard disks, even a used microdrive goes for more than that. Start throwing in Li-ion cells, LCDs, apple's usual cosmetic frills and you've got $$$ just piling up. Buying in bulk will surely reduce costs but what kind of profit are we talking here catering to the low end, this seems too unlike apple?

Re:No way

[Kenja]

Well the Rio Nitrus is close. Its 1.2GB for around 200$. I do think the 100$ price tag is going to be way off, but it should still be close to what Rio offers.

Re:No way

[geekoid]

I would be surprised if it was smaller as well. Less disk size does not mean smaller disk encloser.
Plus there is a substantial cost on changing the form factor, and it would be too easy to lose.

OTOH an Ipod that was built into the head phones would be neat. ;)

Re:No way

[iomud]

I have a feeling a mini ipod could be subsidized by the larger ipods in an effort to get more users for the itunes music store. Get those users hooked on it and later on they may consider the larger player or at least continue using the music store.

Re:No way

[theLOUDroom]

I may eat these words later, but for a 115USD a 1-2gb player that is smaller than the current ipod? Flash memory is certainly not that cheap, and as for hard disks, even a used microdrive goes for more than that.

Exactly. I 100% agree with you. This is just plain not going to happen for near $100.

I CHALLENGE ANY OF THESE RUMOR-SPOUTING IDIOTS TO FIND ME 1-2 GB OF STORAGE FOR LESS THAN $100.


This is like someone saying that Ford "announced" a new Taurus that gets 100 mpg and costs $5,000.

It's B.S.
...obvious B.S.


If you understand the technology on the market right now, you can see through these claims almost instantly. Apple does not have Vorlon technology. McFly did not come back from the future and give them the plans. Scotty has not given them the formula for transparent aluminum.

The reason this rumor is doing so well is that people WANT to believe. To your average joe, it sounds plausible, and also like something they'd really like to have. It's like a short-term urban legend, maybe the one about the black ferrari and night vision goggle (check snopes), it's a cool idea, and we'd all like to have one, but it if you really think about it, it's silly to bevlieve.

Re:No way

[aftk2]

Especially if they

1. Buy lots of music at the store (slight profit, mostly inconsequential)
2. Need a larger device to carry it all
3. Realize they have protected AAC files for all of these, and can't play them on anything but an iPod
4. Buy a the 40-gig model

Granted, they could burn them to CDs...but as an owner of a failing portable CD player, I can certainly see why they wouldn't want to do that.

Re:No way

[akgunkel]

As many others have pointed out, enjoy the taste of your words.

"The 1.5 GB drive, which has been in volume manufacturing since mid-April, sells for $65 in quantities of 10,000. The company is aiming for $50, Magenis said. By contrast, existing standard 1-inch Microdrives from IBM sell for $219 at retail or more, while 1GB flash cards go for around $200."

Re:No way

[Bronz]

Not necessarily an infeasible price point. Let?s address a few of your assumptions:
.
a) ?Start throwing in Li-ion cells?
Who said Li-on? Everything else in this price range is a old-school AA.
.
b) ?LCDs?
They don?t need to be backlit. They don?t need to be color. They don?t need to be expensive.
.
c) ?cosmetic frills?
Need not be expensive, need not be present. This is the company that sells the ugly-cheap eMac.
.
d) ?microdrive?
This is the expensive part, yes? but consider this is really the only expensive part, it is not impossible.
.
From a bid-ness perspective, let?s assume Apple sees baby iPods (bipods?) as a stepping stone to their expensive siblings, or yet another insurgence of users for iTMS. Either way, even selling them at cost becomes viable.

Re:No way

[gotpaint32]

btw I forgot to include this link Macworld UK - One inch hard drives

Here's an excerpt for lazy people.

Toshiba should release sub-1-inch hard drives in 2004, with samples on view at Las Vegas' giant CES trade show in January.

The move could herald a move to a smaller form-factor for Apple's market-leading iPod music player, as Toshiba produces the 1.8-inch drives currently used in that product. Reducing iPod size would still be limited by that of the product's battery-pack, however.

Toshiba has furnished no further details of the drive, although industry sources say that Toshiba and several other companies, including Matsushita are developing drives with 0.8-inch or 0.7-inch diameter platters. That's smaller than the CompactFlash form-factor Microdrive produced by Hitachi, which is based on a 1-inch platter, and less than half the size of the 1.8-inch drive used in the iPod.

Re:No way

[Anonymous Coward]

No rechargeable batteries, no lcd, no frills period. Doesn't sound like much of an "ipod". Sounds like run of the mill junk everyone else makes.

Re:No way

[Elwood P Dowd]

A C|Net article: "The 1.5-inch GB drive, which has been in volume manufacturing since mid-April, sells for $65 in quantities of 10,000."

Cornice.

Currently, their device is only available in one Rio player, and that Rio costs $200. However, you just asked for the storage. I don't necessarily believe the rumors. However, I win your stupid challenge.

Re:No way

[MrAngryForNoReason]

I have a feeling a mini ipod could be subsidized by the larger ipods in an effort to get more users for the itunes music store. Get those users hooked on it and later on they may consider the larger player or at least continue using the music store.

I really don't think apple would be selling a new player at a loss in order to make people use iTunes again at a loss, so they can have a slightly higher chance of selling more iPods. It could increase sales of iPods when people upgraded, but not by anywhere near enough to make it a valid strategy.

Re:No way

[NatasRevol]

Maybe not you, but Apple could.

Google cornice drive price and see how many articles say OEM prices under $100.

There ya go.

BTW, Ford sucks.

Re:No way

[Dixie_Flatline]

It's probably worth mentioning that when Apple came out with the iPod, nobody thought that they could build such a small unit with so much storage that actually worked worth a hill of beans. We all know how that went.

If anyone can make a go of this, it's certainly Apple.

Re:No way

[TheKidWho]

Not to mention, Toshiba has just introduced new 1" hard drives in 2gb and 4gb capacities. Toshiba alos makes the HDs for the current iPods.

Re:No way

[FreakyGeeky]

Ding Ding Ding! We have a winner! Mod parent up.

If the rumours are correct, I guarantee the miniPods will be using these drives.

Rumors?

[Ianoo]

I'm sure there's some truth in this rumor, but isn't it possible that some "hack journalist" at the Evening Standard read these rumors (maybe even at Slashdot, if so HI!) and is just giving them more credence than they should receive so he or she scores "a scoop". It wouldn't be the first time a journo has been duped in this manner!

No mention of actual capacity or media...

[drayzel]

Dang.

I really want to know what sort of media they are using and how much!

Lets see, 800 songs, average of around 3 minutes a song, about 1MB per minute for average quality works out to be about 2400MB. Refactor figures for the obligatory "Best Case Scenario" marketing droid math that works out to be a 32MB Flash player containing short songs recorded at 32kbit/s!

In reality it sounds like a 1.5BG player using AAC to fit 800 songs on it. That's a definite buy at that price! BUt if it sounds to good to be true, chances are it is.

Or maybe it is a simple Flash player with a compact flash card? Inserting 2GB CF card would allow for the capacity for 800 songs yet still keep the initial price of the player low.

~Z

Re:No mention of actual capacity or media...

[PaintyThePirate]

It's almost certainly not going to use a compact flash card. The current price for a 2GB cf card is around $400. It is much more likely that Apple will use a Toshiba's or Cornice's 1 inch hard drives, which cost under $100 in mass quantities.

Re:No mention of actual capacity or media...

[myrdred]

They are probably using the same scale as for the rest of their product line. So 40GB is 10,000 songs, that means 4mb a song, so 800 would be 3.2GB, or more probable a round 3GB.

Re:No mention of actual capacity or media...

[John Harrison]

I bought a $150 mp3 player recently. It has 512MB of flash and doubles as a USB pen drive. I found a screaming deal on it though. As a downside it lacks a screen and you can only skip from song to song, not directory to directory. If Apple can sell a 2GB or 4GB model with a display at that price then more power to them. If it is flash based, even better, all the joggers will love them.

Re:No mention of actual capacity or media...

[drayzel]

What I was implying is that it could possibly be a flash device with 32MB built in and the OPTION of adding a 2GB flash card. A 32MB or even 64MB Flash drive for $99 would be inline with the "high price of Apple" that everyone has been gripeing about. BUt I like the idea of a ~$99 1.5GB HD based player much much more... as long as it doesn't mean some sort of new 1 year subscription deal to iTunes. ~Z

Re:No mention of actual capacity or media...

[BenFaremo]

Or....it's just a Rio Nitrus in a pretty pretty case, and Apple's claim of less than $200 equals.....the price of a Rio Nitrus.

Hardly news.

Also announced...

[Mr. Darl McBride]

I was more intrigued by the announcement of the "iPod Micro," which supposedly makes even -more- music available than the regular iPods. It's also got some kind of wireless technology built in, which is something that people have been speculating about forever. What's odd though is that it's not 802.11b/g or Bluetooth, but rather something called "frequency modulation" in an entirely different spectrum.

They said the memory technology was called "station presets" -- anyone know what this means?

Re:Also announced...

[Atryn]

Frequency Modulation... I can make an assumption about what that is referring to as I saw something similar when Christmas shopping. There are several accessories out that you can buy for your MP3 player. You plug an audio source into the device, select from a set of "station presets" of FM radio (usually in the low 88.1-89.9 range) and it broadcasts the audio signal over that band in a range of roughly 10 meters.

The beauty of this is being directly in the iPod is that you can turn it on and re-route the music through any radio (car radio for example) and have a decent wireless speaker system.

Great Price Point?

[rocketjam]

When the original iPods came out, people complained that the price was too high and no one would buy one. The iPod's success shows there are a lot of people with more disposable income than the critics thought. Still, $300 - $400 is more money than many people could afford/justify for an mp3 player. A $100 price point would make it much more attractive to middle-income people. I think I can probably rationalize the purchase of a $100 mp3 player to myself ;-) (especially an iPod).

Re:Great Price Point?

[burns210]

at $120 or less, you can be damn sure i will have convinced the girlfriend to get me one on or before Feb 14th :)

Re:Great Price Point?

[Leroy_Brown242]

Nothing says love, like a sexy apple product. ]:3)>

feature set

[gobbo]

I'd like an mp3/aac/wav/aiff player/recorder 'for the rest of us' -- one to replace my minidisc. I want to be able to record analog to aiff with a line/mic in, I want firewire external disk capability, I want iTunes ease and smart playlists, and I want to slap on accessories like fm transmitters (or a preamp, see above). I only need about 2 gb of storage and I only have about $200CDN to spend on a base unit.

Oh, and I want 12 hours of playtime out of two rechargeable AA batteries, like my minidisc (which also has a motor).

I don't believe in santa anymore so I'm praying to sainT Echno.

Re:feature set

[Anonymous Coward]

'd like an mp3/aac/wav/aiff player/recorder 'for the rest of us'

I would like a Pony.

Re:feature set

[geekoid]

since an AA battery wouldn't fit in an iPod, not going to happen.

Will they remove bloatware requirement?

[Anonymous Coward]

Also, for those of you that don't know, the Evening Standard is owned by the same people who own the Daily Mail, a very trashy and sensationalist newspaper, almost as bad as The Sun (arguably worse as it tries to be a proper newspaper).

I really hope you will just be able to copy files to these new mini iPods with ordinary file management software (i.e. Explorer on Windows, cp and friends) and have them playable on the iPod. I don't want to use iTunes or MusicMatch bloatware, especially as you need Win2k or XP to use iTunes on Windows (and yes, even though Windows 98 has been 'retired', there are still a heck of a lot of people using it. Trust me).

Re:Will they remove bloatware requirement?

[valkraider]

Does Windows98 support FireWire?

Re:Will they remove bloatware requirement?

[mattgreen]

Ephpod works and is hardly bloatware. There are also more minimalist programs than that available for Windows.

Daily Telegraph

[scifience]

According to this post on MacNN, this was also on the front page of the Daily Telegraph in London, which adds a little more credibility to the story.

Re:Daily Telegraph

[squiggleslash]

Ok, that says something about the iPod as a cultural phenomenon. There aren't that many commercial products that get newspapers that excited. I know the Telegraph, which traditionally has had a "Boring old farts" image, has spent the last 15 years trying to appeal to "yoof", but even still...

Apple's obviously doing something right with the marketing.

# Songs

[_aa_]

I dislike the "# Songs" metric (1GB = 200 songs). I understand that a portion of the demographic they're targeting might not know what a megabyte represents, but undoubtedly it's a small percentage of their target market. 800 Songs means little to me, as many songs I listen to are 10 or 15 minutes long. Some songs might be no more than 30 seconds. I also may want to store some songs at higher or lower bitrates than others. Given all the variables that vary within a "Song", I'd rather discuss the exact data capacity in Bytes.

1.44mb Floppy = 0.3 songs
250mb Zip Disk = 50 songs
650mb CD = 130 songs
4.7gb DVD = 940 songs

Re:# Songs

[karnal]

I'm guessing a lot of people are in the same boat. I encode my files from my personal collection in VBR at a pretty high rate, and never use the physical original CD ever again. With that kind of encoding, you can't even say "Well, it'll play for a gazillion minutes and you won't hear the same song twice", because with vbr, time != the same amount of space for differing passages of music.

I read a piece about a 128MB flash-based player -- will play 120-240 minutes of music. Me: "What??? Are you insane? That might hold one ten song album for me!"

Re:# Songs

[waldoiverson]

I would assume Apple estimates this using AAC and not Mp3.

PICTURES

[williwilli]

There hasn't been any official announcement yet; MacWorld keynote is January 6. Rumors are circulating of new, smaller iPods with 2gb and 4gb capacities and a lower price. There are some mockups and pictures here.

music, video, games, recipes, forums -- earth2willi.com!

Re:PICTURES

[izzo nizzo]

of the four pictures, I think the fourth looks most realistic. However, the second looks cheapest to build so maybe that's what it will be.

Looking forward to the macworld keynote - those things always blow me away.

Re:PICTURES

[Drakonian]

Hmmmm. Can a hard drive fit into that form factor? I don't know very much about HD form factors.

Re:PICTURES

[souja]

Sorry, the fourth one will never happen. Apple insists on having all visual design elements centered.

Remember how they took great pains to move the CD eject button to the middle of the tray a while back?

Re:PICTURES

[Big Dick Magee]

can you say ... microdrive?

Just The Facts, Man

[CBDSteve]

Hmmm... nice to see they're as accurate as usual:

It weighs less than two compact discs

Re:Just The Facts, Man

[qshapadooy]

From the Apple iPod Home Page:

The new super-slim iPod once again redefines what a digital music player should be. It's lighter than 2 CDs, can hold up to 10,000 songs, thousands of digital photos and works as a personal voice recorder. Now you can sync with iTunes for Mac and Windows at blazing speeds, and take your entire music collection with you wherever you go. Available for Mac and Windows starting at $299.

Blame Apple if the facts are wrong.

What kind of storage?

[questamor]

OK apart from the world's wishlist of "5GB iPod for $99", what's the reality of storage costs when it comes to RAM, flash RAM and HD?

presuming a 2GB low end model, with flash memory, what kind of price would that be?

And slightly off to the side, is the flash memory chips (the raw logic level itself) the same in Compact Flash as opposed to memory sticks, or SD or some such?

How about a HD? iPods started with 5GB drives, and now are up around 40. What's the cost for just one of the base base level drives? even IBM's microdrives?

I've seen a lot of theorising about this but not much in the way of reality to back it up. Even many arguments on Spymac were that the new iPod would be sub $99 with 5GB of flash memory. Is that even possible?

Any relevant answers will be appreciated :)

Re:What kind of storage?

[Nogami_Saeko]

Apple? Affordable? cawf cawf. I think the news article may have some details right, but I doubt the price is one of them.

Likewise those "artists conceptions" that are floating around. I doubt it will have a big screen and fancy touch controls like the current versions.

Re:What kind of storage?

[galaxy300]

"Even many arguments on Spymac were that the new iPod would be sub $99 with 5GB of flash memory. Is that even possible?"

Not possible. For 99 dollars retail the best you could do is 256 or maaaaaybe on the way outside 512. The cost of the memory alone is several hundred dollars a gig.. Most likely, it would be a very small hard drive like the Cornice that holds 1.5 to 2 gigs. The cost on those in bulk is low enough that the final product could sell for less than $200.

Re:What kind of storage?

[homer_ca]

There's only one storage device in this size and price range. The Cornice 1.5GB drive. Microdrive is too expensive and flash is even more expensive. There's not that many players yet with this drive. You have the Rio Nitrus that sells for around $200. It's 1.5GB and as small as a flash MP3 player, but with 15GB Dell DJs selling for $225 I'd expect some downward price pressure here. There might be a niche for 1.5GB players between the flash players and multi-gig HD players, but it'll be squeezed by cheaper flash memory on one side and cheap HD players like the Dell DJ on the other side.

Re:What kind of storage?

[weave]

Someone on macslash.org was speculating it could be cheaper DRAM memory. Basically, when the battery goes out, you lose contents. But big deal. With USB 2 or firewire, you plug it in, it charges and redownloads the songs in no time. No need for expensive flash memory.

Re:What kind of storage?

[Kent Recal]

Nice approach IMHO.
I'd like to see something like this as it might bring the players prices down (or the capacities up).

I mean, how much power do you need to keep two (four?) 512MB DIMMS alive. Could a reasonable battery last for a week or so without being plugged in?

For me a week (minus playtime) would be enough.
If it runs dead, well, reloading >1G takes a while even over firewire. But so be it.

If I can have a 4GB player for the price of four 512MB DIMMS plus maybe 100. I'll go for it.

No need to be upgradable (would only make the device bigger and heavier), just sell them equipped with 64M (low-end) up to 4GB.

Oh, while you're at it, make sure it plays ogg and if it could run off standard rechargables it'd be just great. ;)

But maybe it's technically a lot more difficult to use standard (or notebook) DIMMS in a device like that than I'm aware of. If anybody knows more, please enlighten me.

Re:What kind of storage?

[timeOday]

I've been waiting and waiting for somebody to reduce prices by using volatile ram in an mp3 player (seriously). Palm Pilots work this way, nobody seems to mind, and they hold real data - not just copies of songs from a computer like an IPod.

Re:What kind of storage?

[darc]

Palms use SRAM though, not DRAM. SRAM is much less expensive and uses much less power, since it doesn't have to eat power every cycle to refresh itself. I don't remember the figures, but DRAM uses much more power than SRAM, by some ridiculous amount.

Too many CDs?

[valkraider]

From the article:

It is intended to target people who want a digital music player but do not need one which can hold music from more CDs then most people could ever own

What are they talking about? "Most People" could easily own hundreds of CDs. I am not even a "collector" but since CDs have been around since the 1980's I have over 600... Now do I listen to all of them? Why - yes.... But that's a different discussion... I think many people have more than 800 songs, just no need (spelled not-enough-money) to have more than 800 songs in their pocket....

Really Funny Commercial

[Anonymous Coward]

I could see that as a really funny commercial.

Anything with MiniMe and iPodJr = Priceless.

Apple and the iPod would get instant widespread recognition (not to mention people would remember the product much longer).

Flash Based?

[Roofus]

If you follow the second link into some depth, there's a claim that the new mini-iPod will be flashed based instead of HD based.

http://www.appleinsider.com/news.php?id=334

Manifest Prophecy

[KFury]

Someone submits a rumor too two rumor boards, they report it, look at each other and say 'if they're reporting it too, then it's probably true!"

c|net and others write 'could be...' stories, and then one Macophilic reporter at a random paper (in this case, 'This is London', that bastion of Mac integrity?) writes that Apple 'has announced' the thing, though they say its 'unveiling' will be in a week.

Then Slashdot comes in and says the rumors are now probably true because an 'established paper' claims it as fact.

Bah. We'll see next week.

An iPodjr isn't gonna be that great...

[g_adams27]

This sounds like a good thing, but I heard that they're going to replace the regular buttons with chiclet buttons, and you'll have to attach bulky sidecars to it if you want any kind of expansion capability. Plus the headphones will only communicate with the main unit via a poorly designed IR port.

On the plus side, I heard they'll have some great games for it, like "Jumpman", "Zyll" and "King's Quest" by some company called "Sierra On-Line".

Re:An iPodjr isn't gonna be that great...

[IM6100]

3-Demon rulez on the PCjr.

(when you turn to face down a long wireframe corridor the game noticibly slows down as the machine struggles to render it.)

Re:An iPodjr isn't gonna be that great...

[Anonymous Coward]

You know, 3-Demon was one of the coolest games I've ever played. We had it on the XT as a kid. I never realized what connection the name had to the game until many years later.

Yes, I am dumb.

Re:An iPodjr isn't gonna be that great...

[Steve Cowan]

Or worse, it will start chasing around a kid named Oliver Wendell Jones...

"Junior" could still pack other files, though

[ianscot]

Article "It is intended to target people who want a digital music player but do not need one which can hold music from more CDs then most people could ever own."

And for the people who actually use all those gigs of space, it won't be a replacement backup tool. That wouldn't stop others from treating it like a glorified floppy, though.

800 songs is still some serious space. My 10gb model has, let's see -- 974 songs, with 5.5gb open right now. This'd obsolete my sister's keychain hard drive collection, at any rate.

I for one

[PHlLlPY]

am almost giddy about the prospect of being able to buy a cheap iPod as I have been putting off buying a full-blown one since they firtst came out.
I already marked my calendar for Job's keynote speech next week so that I can finally know if this rumor is actually correct.
to me the price just seems too low, so perhaps the rumor sources got it wrong in that it might cost $100 LESS than the current ipods? that would put it at $200 and be in the same price range as that latest Rio that has 1.5gig of storage.
Other thought, but less likely is that it might only play AAC files downloaded AND bought from the iTunes store. But I am sure that we will all work day and night to crack that restriction... "deAAC"
Or maybe it is more of an empty shell type of player that you can upgrade the onboard flash memory with a microdrive for storage up to 1-2 gigs...
Well that is enough speculation until next week

Re:I for one

[Anonymous Coward]

Just a small thing... If Apple were going to realease music store only ipods they would only be able to release them in the US, at least for now, as they havent made any announcement about an international service, in fact I think a european service isnt expected until 'sometime in 2004'.

substantial?

[dawker]

Its possibly not more substantial as these kind of papers would happily read something akin to the previous /. story and merrily report it as fact.

This just in...

[computerme]

Apple will own the MP3 market in few months:

http://www.macobserver.com/article/2003/12/30.1. sh tml

As soon as apple ships the ipod jr at the price points suggested then they will probably take all 5 top selling spots on the list. Not many people are going to be buying a "iriver" with 128mbs when they can get a iPod that holds 800 songs for the same price AND get the itunes music store AND the ID of ipods AND the ease of use that apple gives them... ...

The 10GB Apple iPod ($299) reportedly edged out the cheaper 128MB Digitalway ($140) in overall sales, with the remainder of the iPod models also being well represented:

1. 10GB iPod ($299)
2. 128MB Digitalway ($140)
3. 20GB iPod ($399)
4. 128MB iRiver ($119.99-$139.99))
5. 40GB iPod ($499)

Re:This just in...

[harlows_monkeys]

Interesting that the 10 GB iPod is number 1, since that is the worst deal of any of the iPods, if you measure by price/GB. I'm looking for a new player, and here are the price/GB for the ones I've looked at, and where I saw it:

1. $6.4/gig, 60 GB Creative Zen, Buy.com
2. $6.8/gig, 40 GB RCA Lyra, Circuit City
3. $7.8/gig, 40 GB Creative Zen, Buy.com
4. $9.0/gig, 30 GB Creative Zen, Newegg.com
5. $11.2/gig, 40 GB Apple iPod, Circuit City
6. $14.0/gig, 20 GB Dell DJ20, Dell
7. $15.0/gig, 20 GB Gateway DMP-X20, Gateway
8. $15.8/gig, 20 GB Rio Karma, Circuit City
9. $18.5/gig, 20 GB iRiver iHP-120, ThinkGeek
10. $20.0/gig, 20 GB Apple iPod, Apple
11. $30.0/gig, 10 GB Apple iPod, Apple

Re:This just in...

[computerme]

I think this is a case of the "its not the size of the boat...its the motion of the ocean" ;)

First there is brand name. Its almost like kleenex now. Second i guess people are looking at the overal consumer experience. The others just can't match the ease of use and the itunes music store.

When pepsi gives away 100 million itunes songs next month, the brand awareness is going to peak out somewhere around the stratosphere....

Re:This just in...

[IM6100]

I want something that plays low-rate MP3s and has 20 MB of storage for $20. I mainly use MP3 to play old radio programs, where a one hour program is compressed to 10 MB.

Re:This just in...

[ITR81]

Remember this was reported by DIC at the end of Nov.

More the likely the iPod pulled even farther ahead during the holiday season.

Re:This just in...

[Trurl's Machine]

if you measure by price/GB

Oh puh-leeeeze. It's the most useless measure for portable music players I can imagine. Size does count. Ease of use does count. Weight does count. Measuring by sheer price/GB you will get an old 486DX4 laptop with replacement harddrive as the best portable player!

Re:This just in...

[harlows_monkeys]

Second i guess people are looking at the overal consumer experience. The others just can't match the ease of use and the itunes music store

I'm pretty sure the 20 GB and 40 GB iPod match the 10 GB iPod for ease of use and having the iTunes music store. :-)

The 10 GB iPod is a horrible deal among the iPods. That's why I was surprised to see it on top. I would have expected the 20 GB to be on top...it is still not as good a deal as the 40 GB, but that is where I would have expected the balance between absolute cost and cost effectiveness to end up for most people.

Re:This just in...

[TheRaven64]

I have a 20GB iPod and have now ripped about all of the music I own and listen to (and some I hardly ever listen to). I encode at 256kbps (AAC), twice what Apple recommend, and I've filled 8.38GB of the iPod with music. If you

1. Only use the iPod to store music, and
2. Don't have much more music than me (or are happy with 128kbps)

then the 10GB is the best value, because the extra 10GB you could buy would be empty space. Personally, I dump a copy of my home directory on my iPod every so often, which takes up a few extra gigs...

Re:This just in...

[soft_guy]

Explanation: Kid asks for iPod for Christmas. Parent buys cheapest possible "iPod". End of story. Since parent is not buying it for self, they don't care about details other than price.

Interesting sidebar, when I bought my iPod, I was planning to buy the cheapest one - a 5GB model. I ended up buying the 20GB model which was the largest size at the time (and also was the only one with a solid state wheel at the time) because the store was out of 5GB models and had a 20GB model for $50 off that someone had returned. I could have bought the size down for $20 less, but I figured I could use the space. I was a bit worried there would be something wrong with the unit, but I've had it almost a year and it works fine.

I speculate the person brought it back because they wanted a Windows iPod and maybe bought a Mac iPod by mistake or they thought they could reformat it (you can) and didn't know how. I'm a real die hard Mac user, but I didn't buy an iPod in the first round because I figured I could just listen to iTunes on my PowerBook just as easily. The iPod is definately a good deal. I used to bring my PowerBook to work every day just to listen to music and using it in the car was a real pain compared to the iPod.

Radio sucks

[tepples]

"Station presets" means that all you're ever going to hear on it is what the RIAA plays Clear Channel to play.

Re:Radio sucks

[Mr. Darl McBride]

"Station presets" means that all you're ever going to hear on it is what the RIAA plays Clear Channel to play.

I am intrigued by the wealth of independent music available on iTunes.

Re:Radio sucks

[tepples]

<sarcasm>I am intrigued by the wealth of independent music available on iTunes.</sarcasm>

The iTunes player for Windows and Mac can play loads of independent music published on the Internet in MP3, Ogg, or AAC format. The iTunes Music Store claims to carry 200+ independent labels.

Re:Radio sucks

[Mr. Darl McBride]

Why do you add "sarcasm" tags around my statement?

So many Mac users get all defensive and uppity around even the tiniest perceived slight against their platform.

Hint: Apple has been approaching distributors like CDBaby who carry nothing but independent music since before the service opened. The fruition of this intrigues me, tepples. Try going back and reading my statement without adding your own spin.

If you were merely karma whoring or trolling, I apologize for taking the bait.

Or....

[Anonymous Coward]

They thoroughly researched* it.

*Made up.

The real question...

[neelm]

...will it have a user replacable battery?

Re:The real question...

[valkraider]

Yes.

Re:The real question...

[neelm]

heh, you realise you link to a page that says the answer is no?

from the FAQ:

Q: Is the iPod's battery user-replaceable?

A1: Yes and no. The iPod's case is not designed to be opened, so, in that respect, it's not what would generally be referred to as "user-replaceable". ...and some people may want to keep their warrenty as well...

Re:The real question...

[valkraider]

But they ALSO say (immediatly following your quote):

But, the case can be opened, and there are several third parties that offer replacement batteries for the iPod, such as iPodBattery.com (instructions, with pictures: original, non-"dockable" iPod, new, slim "dockable" iPod) and PDASmart, for as low as $49.

Re:The real question...

[valkraider]

Stop spreading lies. The iPod battery is no less reliable than any other Lithium Ion battery. It is a fact people, Batteries die if you don't maintain them, and even then - they have a finite lifecycle. I have had more battery trouble with our AT&T cordless phones and our DELL Laptop than with the iPod....

This is amazing...

[Osrin]

2004 is going to be the year of the device! finally we're starting to see prices and functionality that we can all afford and make use of.

I'm an owner of a current IPod, it would have been naive of me to imagine that it would not be undercut in price and out paced in terms of functionality within 12 months.

Now all I want is an affordable video version.

Another Mac rumor!

[rjelks]

Shhhhhhh. I just read about a secret version of OSX that can run on a PC! Apple has been developing it along side the PowerPC version. It's codename is "Marklar" or something like that.

Seriously, I'd love a $100.00 ipod, but I'll believe it when I see it.

.

Of all the Apple rumors that go around...

[o-hayo]

please, please, let this one be true.

It seems Apple has been listening to everyone who "would buy an iPod, but not for $300 - maybe for $200 - and at $100-150, where do I sign?"

Having an mp3 player with a storage choice from at-or-less-1G to 40G is a smart move. Hopefully this puts the features people want with the storage size they can afford/feel comfortable paying. I'm very eager to see if this comes true or not. If it does I'll be ordering one for sure, I bought the gf a 10gig last march and she loves it but I've been hesitant to buy one myself as having $800 or more invested in portable players (after accessories, extra dock or two, cases, etc) just doesn't sit right with me.

If I can pick up a 1g `pod for at or near $100, my only other question is where do I sign?

Bogus Article - Apple Legal Team are going to have

[xirtam_work]

I have emailled the Evening Standard and The Telegraph about their articles. It appears that they were based upon a rumour that has been reported by Reuters. Seeing as The Telegraph carried this story on the front page of their print newspaper I expect to see many red faces over this. The Evening Standard went further in their article which said that Apple had made an announcement, which they clearly haven't. I hope as well as getting my letters printed in the newspapers (which I'm hopeful of) that Apples' legal team will be in touch with the papers and we'll see a apology in print within days. It is really bad for a paper of record such as The Telegraph to print unsubstainiated drivel like this. Where were the fact checkers during this?

"more then normal people own"?

[nurb432]

Jobs statement ( if true ) is rather silly, as I own enough to fill more then 40gb easily.. ( over 500 cds + countless LP's from the 70s/80s ) I cant imagine I'm that much different then many ( especially if you can drop 500 bucks on an Ipod )

However 2gb is more than useable on the road.. as who needs to *carry* around more then 30 some odd albums at a time..

If they really do hit the streets @ 100 USD count me in for 2 ( in case apple is reading /. )

Re:"more then normal people own"?

[mr.capaneus]

Trust me dude. If you can easily fill a 40gb ipod you definitely own more music than most people. I would barley be able to fill a 2gb ipod.

Re:"more then normal people own"?

[mfender9]

I also own enough to fill a 40GB pod easily, but only regularly listen to about 5GB worth of it on a regular basis. Even so, I did ditch my original 5GB iPod for a new 40GB recently, purely for ease of use purposes.

I keep all of my music on one server, so I can come home in the evening, plug in the 40GB iPod, and have all of my music automatically copied over. With the 5GB, I had to constantly rearrange playlists, and pick and choose which albums I wanted on the iPod... it would be really annoying to suddenly have a craving to hear some album that I hadn't chosen to sync up that day. Not to mention that my server doesn't have a display permanently connected to it, making it all the more inconvenient.

So hi - I'm probably the guy that the 40GB iPod is aimed at. For me, the extra money is justified for simplicity, even though I don't need to be carrying all that music around...

Re:"more then normal people own"?

[sharrestom]

I think he meant "the norm" as in statistically. I also think that he meant those that only listen to a couple of CD's back to back, adinfinitum, you know, like Britney and Justin, or those country folks (but you will have to help me out with some names here).

Re:"more then normal people own"?

[angle_slam]

Depends on the crowd. If you go to music message boards, it will not be hard to find people with 1000+ CDs or albums. But I think the "typical" person can't fill a 40 GB iPod. I've never personally met anyone who has 500+ albums (besides me), so I think 500+ albums is on the high end of the curve.

the meaning of the word substantial...

[happystink]

I am no linguist, but I am pretty sure a british tabloid making a false statement (that something has been announced which hasn't) is maybe the opposite of the word substantial.

Go to hell.

[Anonymous Coward]

Go to hell.

Rio Has Beat Them To It

[PoitNarf]

The Rio Nitrus seems like it's very similar to whatever this iPod Jr. is going to be.

Here are some specs on the Nitrus:
Dimensions: 3" X 2.4" X 0.6"
Weight: 2.0oz
Battery: 16-hour continuous playback on internal Li Ion battery

I myself own a Rio Karma and have been loving it ever since Christmas day. There are worthy alternatives to the iPod and the iPod Jr. as well it seems.

Re:Rio Has Beat Them To It

[Seth Finklestein]

The Nitrus is very poor. I plugged it into my Linux boxen, and none of them (none!) would recognize the Nitrus as an external storage device. I had to bring it to an acquaintance's house and use proprietary, closed-source software to copy files to its very small hard drive. It wouldn't even play Ogg Vorbis files.

I would rate the Rio Nitrus very lowly. The new iPod will be much better than any Rio product ever were.

Sincerely,
Seth Finklestein
Audiophile Extraordinaire

Re:Rio Has Beat Them To It

[Anonymous Coward]

All I have to say is this: 219$ for the Nitrus...

Rumors say that the mini-Pod will be between 100-200$, making it cheaper than the Nitrus. Doesn't matter if you beat them to it, it matters if you can drop the price by about 100$ to match the mini-Pod.

But will it run Linux?

[jswitte]

Point made. The 3g Ipods seem to run the build according to the dev list comments, at least with some modification - there's some question as to whether the FW controller is the same for one. But I keep wondering if Apple tweaks something on each build to (sort of) keep the Linux people out.

Did you ever consider...

[AKAImBatman]

...how most of these rumors get out? My best guess is that Apple actually allows some rumors to be leaked intentionally, then uses their lawyers to make a stage show out of it. (There's no such thing as bad publicity, right?) The only problem was that using the lawyers was hurting their image. So it would seem that they've stopped. There have been plenty of Mac rumors in the past year or two, but I haven't heard a peep from the Apple lawyers.

Re:Did you ever consider...

[Anonymous Coward]

Mmm. I'd like to agree with you, but unfortunately the world isn't that controlled of a place.

Back when Jobs first came to power rumors sites were running wild, with extremely accurate information on future products.

Long story short Jobs cleaned house. They let a particular group know a particular piece of information, different information for different groups, and then waited to see what information got posted on rumor sites. Systematically they narrowed down the list of people involved until they knew who was doing it and voila, those people were no longer employed, as well as at the tail end of a lawsuit from a multi-billion dollar company.

After going through all that trouble, they still had leaks, but nothing like before.

People talk. Juicy chit-chat doesn't create itself.

link to story....Re:Daily Telegraph

[bucklesl]

Bypass forum. Go directly to the story. iPod buyers singing the blues

But that was clearly a press release

[ianscot]

All very well and good -- but like most newspapers, they basically seem to have cut-and-pasted bits of a press release from Apple. What, you think they made this up themselves, based on Web sites that're self-described as carrying "rumors"?

I used to work in an art museum, and the local papers would basically print our releases verbatim, with a few nips and tucks for pride's sake, as "news" in the entertainment section. Sure looks like that's what's going on here. (And whatever mediocrity you may see in the paper, well, try seeing it in the fact that they released this story well ahead of its publishing window, the dorks...)

Re:But that was clearly a press release

[tbone1]

Ah, nice to know that nothing's changed in 100 years. H.L. Mencken described this process as the editor of the Baltimore Herald, which went under in the wake of the 1906 fire. In fact, he described the same thing going on in his days as the editor for The Smart Set and American Mercury.

I guess we can add journalistic integrity to the list of oxymorons ... as if it weren't there already.

i can't wait!

[happystink]

I can't wait to see how this thing works in tandem with my iWalk!!

iCarPod

[vida]

This has to be next obvious step to take. There are no decent, fairly priced, good looking, easy to install mp3 players for the car.

If not a full player, maybe just an iPod dock w/ a led that you could permanently install in the car, and just plug (insert) your iPod in.

Just wonder how much time it will take...

-Facun.

Re:iCarPod

[PHlLlPY]

they made something like this for volkswagen when they were running that deal just this last year where you buy a new beatle and you get a free ipod. the car has a built in dock just like you are asking for. so you got $22k to spare and need a new round car?

Re:iCarPod

[vida]

nope, it connected to the stereo of the car using a tape. Yes, a tape. Not an iTrip or even Belkin's TuneCast.

They discussed this here .

Re:iCarPod

[gabe]

You know, I'd love something like that for my car. I'd just hop in the car, slide the ipod into a socket and press a button to play it.

I tried the TransPod with my 1st gen iPod, and well, it sounded like a spotty radio station. I just got one of those tape adapters and a cigarette lighter -> firewire adapter to power it. I can deal with the cables just fine and the audio quality is great.

Re:iCarPod

[the Man in Black]

I'd just hop in the car, slide the ipod into a socket and press a button to play it.

Or, with a Bluetooth-enabled iPod, just hop in the car, browse your music library via the car's LCD screen, and push to play.

The Toyota Prius does something like this with Bluetooth enabled cell-phones as a hands-free solution. The whole idea makes me randy.

Re:iCarPod

[elvum]

Except Bluetooth doesn't have the bandwidth for high-quality audio. You'd have to cope with your music collection sounding like it's being played to you over the phone.

Re:iCarPod

[nytes]

Except Bluetooth doesn't have the bandwidth for high-quality audio.

Bluetooth has an effective throughput of about 5.7Mb per second (from a quick Google search).

How much bandwidth do you need for a car stereo, what bit rate have you got your MP3's ripped at, and what the heck are you currently storing those monster files on?

Re:iCarPod

[cyberworm]

there's something kinda like this now, called an iTrip. It's an FM transmitter for the iPod. According to what i've read about it, you can even select the frequency that it uses.

Re:iCarPod

[elvum]

I've got the Bluetooth specification open in front of me, and I can't see how to get 5.7Mb/s, even without taking protocol overhead into account. Assuming you want synchronous data transfer, the maximum I can see is 384kb/s (one HV3 packet every time slot). 44.1kHz 16 bit stereo sound is 1.4Mb/s. You'd have to make a lot of compromises on sound quality to get it down to a transmissible speed. Unless you suggest transmitting the compressed audio and expecting the car to have built-in decoders for all current and future popular compressed audio formats?

Re:iCarPod

[nytes]

I've got the Bluetooth specification open in front of me, and I can't see how to get 5.7Mb/s,...

Ugh! Sorry, I misread the article. When it said 720Kbps I thought "K-bytes per second. Multiply by 8 and..."

But that's still enough bandwidth to stream MP3's.

Unless you suggest transmitting the compressed audio and expecting the car to have built-in decoders for all current and future popular compressed audio formats?

Actually, that is exactly what I was proposing, and I believe that is what the grandparent of my original post (by the Man in Black) was suggesting. We're buying portable music players left and right, and I'm seeing home stereo components that accept these compressed formats now. Why not commit to it in car stereo as well?

Quick fix

[eddy]

They should talk about minutes of music at some bitrate instead, that way both sides get what they want from the information.

Rumor sites?

[H0NGK0NGPH00EY]

Rumors of a new, smaller, "iPodJr" have been floating around the Rumor Sites for a few weeks (as well a here at Slashdot).

What I find amusing is that the above sentence implies that Slashdot is not a rumor site itself. Heh.

Plus, the juicy-fruit iPod cases rumor seems to...

[Anonymous Coward]

...fly in the face of reports that Jobs was against the use of color even in the iPod silhouette print ads.

Doesn't really make sense to me.

[Sans_A_Cause]

If your higher capacity iPods are selling like mad (and they are) then why cut into those sales and profits by introducing a cheaper model? I don't think Apple makes much money off iTunes, so the % profit off the iPod is where the money is, and a smaller HD model would bring in fewer profits. Maybe it would make sense when the demand for the iPod dropped, but I don't see that happening anytime soon.

Re:Doesn't really make sense to me.

[Anonymous Coward]

Fewer profits on the front-end maybe,
but think of the *millions* of new iTune Music Store customers.
Chi-Ching!

Re:Doesn't really make sense to me.

[Anonymous Coward]

'cept taht they aren't making money off of iTune Music Store. But nice try.

Re:Doesn't really make sense to me.

[tkokesh]

I think that the introduction of an iPodjr would mean that Apple's going to begin a "scorched earth" fight against WMA.

Right now, the iPod is the only player that supports AAC, and the iTunes Music Store is the only store that uses AAC. However, if Apple can make it unprofitable for companies to build cheap 128 MB (WMA) players, the WMA stores will have a major part of their demand cut off, which will lead to WMA store problems, which will mean that the WMA player demand will fold like a paper hat.

Apple has been on the wrong end of the "self-fulfilling prophecy" (Windows vs. Mac OS) before... this would be a dose of MS's own medicine.

Re:Doesn't really make sense to me.

[overunderunderdone]

If your higher capacity iPods are selling like mad (and they are) then why cut into those sales and profits by introducing a cheaper model?

Because technology keeps moving forward, and only so many people want a $300 music player. A $100 player will sell to a *LOT* more people and keep any competitors from sneaking up and stealing Apple's thunder.

They tried to hold on to fat profits before with the Mac and saw their marketshare drop, and drop, and drop.

Lame

[geekoid]

how do those compare to a Library of Congress?
how many can for on Rhode Island?

those are the real metrics! ;)

What Strikes Me as Funny

[Spencerian]

...is that while everyone is salivating (justifiably) at the possibility of lower-cost iPods, that no one seems to be wondering much about the other new hardware Apple may announce at the Macworld keynote on 1/6, especially an updated, faster, cheaper G5, and God knows what else that the CEO may surprise us with.

Yep, a good year for Jobs, and good year for Apple and Pixar as well. Give the man a cookie.

Re:What Strikes Me as Funny

[drinkypoo]

This is because no one cares about a faster G5, which will not be cheaper. We would be interested in a 64 bit operating system for it from Apple, though. And much like the iPod, we're interested in a smaller, cheaper G5. Lots of people would like to sit at MacOSX but don't want to pay the premium. Apple has never made better hardware and sold it cheaper, they figure if people are paying three grand for a dual 2 gig then they'll pay four for a dual 2.5. This could be the time, though. Actually what I would like is a G4 iMac that didn't look like some kind of retarded flower. A G4 is enough power to do what I want to do with MacOS, which is to say just knock around the desktop, do my mail, chatting, et cetera. I'll keep my Wintel (actually WinAMD) PC for games, and my Linux-on-AMD system for networking.

The fact is that you can only sell cheap Apples to most geeks unless you are willing to come up with a product which can be purchased the way geeks like to buy computers; in pieces. If Apple wants to sell an ATX G5 motherboard/CPU combo, and maybe even bundle it with MacOSX, they might sell a few copies. (I'm not going to pay for point upgrades mind you, but I'm willing to pay for the OS once.) But I'm not going to drop two grand on a system I don't even plan to play games on.

This is why the baby iPod is so much more interesting than new mac models. Apple's track record has not been good in terms of what geeks want to buy; The geeks who want to spend lots of money on a mac have mostly already done so. However Apple is certainly a paragon of excellence in UI design and so we are interested in a small inexpensive large-capacity (for the size and price) MP3 player from them.

Re:What Strikes Me as Funny

[mixy1plik]

I find this interesting as well. I received a 20GB iPod for Christmas and quickly made my way to the Apple store to exchange it for a 40GB 'Pod. They were very much out of stock, so instead I was able to get the full $400 on a gift card.

Now the cool thing is that the date on the receipt noted that I had until January 3rd to exchange it, but the gift card has a 2 year expiration.

I want to know what else might be happening on the 6th. Hopefully, I'll be able to pick up a 60 or *hey* maybe an 80GB iPod for the price of the current 40GB one.

Hopefully someone can chime in here- but I believe a few Macworlds back there were rampant rumors about a product release that everyone claimed was going to happen and it completely didn't. Steve-O even made a reference to the rumors in his keynote. I'd be thrilled if he hit us with a video-capable/OLED-screened iPod or some other great evolution of the beloved 'Pod!

Re:What Strikes Me as Funny

[gmhowell]

Well, a cheaper/faster processor is boring as shit. 10% faster, 5% cheaper. Ho hum. A half price iPod, however, is interesting. And, finally, a really nifty thing for $100 is cool, while a dull thing for $1499+ is boring.

From the article...

[Anonymous Coward]

Dedicated iPod cases have been designed by Pucci and Christian Dior.

Who the f..k is Pucci ?

If it is Gucci (most probable), I think the journalist over-heard the announcement while drinking in some bar.

Re:From the article...

[presearch]

Who's a Pucci?
You are.

Re:From the article...

[Anonymous Coward]

Pucci is your awesome pal.

Re:Wow

[SengirV]

But I'm sure you will buy the next $19292392939293 upgrade to M$ Office.

think number of songs, not capacity

[Anonymous Coward]

from an insider: say, hypothetically, that apple had developed a significantly better (albeit lossy) compression scheme and coupled with a good sized compact flash type storage device were able to squeeze 800 songs onto much less than 2-4GB.. say 1GB ;) - remember, you heard it here first..

But.....

[tie_fightertk069]

.....for at least 6 or 7 months now places have been selling the 5gb first generation iPods for ~170 bucks...deals are already out there if you've been waiting.

Pre-loaded iPod?

[Accidental Angel]

At that price, maybe they could package a couple CDs worth of material pre-loaded onto the unit to sweeten the deal. No doubt protected with AAC/FairPlay, but still, one could pay a premium for it the way people pay for boxed CD sets of their favorite artists.

Replace "Too broke" with "Not prioritized enough"

[Kjella]

The people that are going to buy this (in DROVES) are the people that looked longingly at an iPod but were much too broke to buy one (read: ME and several million other people).

Maybe there's some more, that now really can afford it in that sense, but it's mostly about what you're willing to prioritize. Mysteriously enough, pretty much everybody I know that claim they're really poor and broke end up finding money for beer, usually out on the town too ;).

I could easily afford to cash out for the most expensive iPod, but I simply don't think it's worth that much. I'd rather spend it on computer equipment/travel/entertainment/DVDs etc., my portable music needs aren't that big that I'd like to cash out even for the cheapest of iPods. That's where the droves are, and yep they'll be buying if this rumor is accurate.

Kjella

Re:This is related to indian programmers

[presearch]

This is offensive and wrong.

I think you mean Chinese programmers.

any color you like, as long as it's black

[Doc Ruby]

What is it with these fixed-capacity mobile devices? Why can't I upgrade the storage of this iPod Jr. to store more than 800 songs? Why can't I upgrade the iPod with a bigger HD? These devices are tapping the consumer desire to do whatever we want with the stuff we buy, like our CDs. Why stop with the data, when we can buy flashROM and HDs ourselves?

Re:any color you like, as long as it's black

[Anonymous Coward]

Um, I don't know it probably has something to do with the fact that you can't exactly go out and buy these mini hard drives at the local store yet so it really doesn't matter now does it. I can't believe that got modded up as insightful.

Re:any color you like, as long as it's black

[Hollinger]

Out of curiousity, have you ever looked at the guts of, say, a laptop vs. a desktop? How about actually opening up an iPod? How good are you with a screwdriver and a magnifying glass? Furthermore, where are you going to find the drives capable of fitting in these devices? The reason these are not upgradable is that each device is carefully custom-designed (thanks Johnathon!) pushing the absolute limit of "how much stuff can we cram in this tiny space." If you wanted an upgradable device, you can certainly build one with off the shelf parts -- it's called a PC.

Re:any color you like, as long as it's black

[Anonymous Coward]

Bingo! You're dead on there.

That guy's faulty logic could be applied to cell phones too. Maybe he'll understand this metaphor.

Whiner: Why can't I have a phone with twice the range of this one, with 10 times the battery life, and the ability to play to play Doom III?

You could have one, but it would cost more than your car (before all those ricer mods), or it would be the size of a suitcase.

Better, Cheaper, Faster -- pick any two seems to be the appropriate adage...

Damned idiots... go back to school and learn something...

Re:any color you like, as long as it's black

[Doc Ruby]

One insight is that these mobile devices are sometimes designing in hardware that is not available as commodity components, going against the DIY grain that has underlied the entire info industry. That culture war is being fought by consumer electronics and infotainment industries on every front, whether segmented consumers in a given market realize it or not. Whether the upgrade roadblock is proprietary HW, SW, hidden APIs, bundling, DRM in media/software/OS/players, the DMCA, RIAA witchhunts, or even wider sabotage of freedom, competing commercial interests are working against our rights to control our property as we see fit. Watch and learn, before the supply side of the technology gets the upper hand, forcing confrontations at every turn, and the chance to learn anything on our own is lost.

Re:any color you like, as long as it's black

[Doc Ruby]

I've got a half-dozen minitowers here in my office that I've re/built over the years, as well as several "up on blocks in the yard". There's a couple of notebooks I've kept on lifesupport over the years by netbooting, running "headless", etc. after scavenging them for parts or pushing them over the edge with overzealous experiments inside their cases. I remember building my first phone, with a rotary dial, and hooking it up to my stereo as a mic'ed speakerphone. Apple is getting the HDs from somewhere, as are the even more COTS-oriented MP3 players, not to mention TiVOs. You give a reason there's no upgrade to the edge-cutting new devices. But is that reason good enough? There's no privilege for being a HW engineer, when the component industry is globally competitive in every sales channel, and so many of us are good with a screwdriver and a magnifying glass, and even at publishing HOWTOs on the Web.

Re:any color you like, as long as it's black

[Dixie_Flatline]

Interestingly, it sounds like you make the argument against yourself, to some extent.

You're clearly good at working with hard-to-work-with hardware. Apple doesn't need to do anything to please you. You'll find a way yourself.

As for everyone else, you can't trust them to pump their own gas, let alone let them screw around inside their hardware. Most people can't build a PC from parts, so I'm unwilling to believe that they can modify an iPod - or would even care to. So why make the iPod more modifiable? What sense does it make to spend the extra money on it? The segment of the population that's 1) not as good with hardware as you seem to be and 2) really desperate to upgrade their iPod (or whatever) easily would seem to be vanishingly small.

Re:any color you like, as long as it's black

[Doc Ruby]

If anything, perhaps I should relish a backalley opportunity to aftermarket upgrade iPods, like the Finn or something ;). But I'd rather get access to the parts as upgradable from the get-go. I'd say that there's a large market of people want to upgrade their existing mobile device capacity COTS, especially rather than buy a whole newer, bigger model. That's why my post was a question, because I don't really understand why Apple, for example, doesn't design the iPod to tap that market. But then, even though I used to work for Apple, I've never understood their ruthlessly 100% proprietary designs. Including extremely late support for PCI, VGA, USB, ethernet, and everything else which has hugely expanded their market, cut their costs, and served their customers.

Re:any color you like, as long as it's black

[Doc Ruby]

I understand that mobile device makers are cramming the maximum tech in the minimum package, and maximizing integration. There's not much room for pluggable adapters. But these components are not all just soldered together. There's just no upgrade marketing plan, even when it's technically feasible, given available upgrade parts and willing technicians. Bigger HDs and flashROMs come out with the same formfactor and pinouts, but there's no option to use them. That's not whining about technology being too slow, but rather a consumer demand for the marketers to harness the available technology and allow us to buy it. Unless you're happy being spoonfed whatever the lazy marketdroids could get their kaffeklatch heads around this quarter. But that's the kind of attitude that really discredits a geek - better to ask "why not?" until something gives.

Re:This is related to indian programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

They have donkeys in India?

Hence the shitty ipod batteries...

[siskbc]

the ipod has been out for a while now and given its fairly long use-life just about everybody who was willing to get one at $300 has probably done so already.

...the only way they can get some repeat business on the thing.

Re:Hence the shitty ipod batteries...

[Llywelyn]

Stop trolling and start thinking.

http://www.ipodbattery.com/

Re:Hence the shitty ipod batteries...

[RevAaron]

iPod batteries aren't free. Therefore there will always be idiots who cry about them.

Most custom laptop and PDA batteries are $70-120, some even up to $200. It sucks, but what do you expect?

Re:Hence the shitty ipod batteries...

[gotw]

Most custom laptop and PDA batteries are $70-120, some even up to $200. It sucks, but what do you expect?
I Don't expect it, but it would be nice if people didn't abuse their monopolies, and if they do I should be able to expect the monopolies and mergers commission to stop them. I don't really know what sort of argument you are making.

Re:Hence the shitty ipod batteries...

[Anonymous Coward]

Monopolies. You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.

Re:Hence the shitty ipod batteries...

[geoffspear]

What monopoly, asshat?

They don't have a monopoly on MP3 players, and they aren't even the only ones selling batteries for their own MP3 player.

URL guessing the new iPod name

[LittleGuernica]

Surely if this is true, Apple has already registered a domain name for the new apparatus. So anyone with to much time on his hands can start URL guessing and report back here.. already tried: ipodjr.com ipodjunior.com Ofcourse if anyone knows a faster way to find out newly registred domains..

Re:URL guessing the new iPod name

[gsperling]

I use domainsurfer.com for checking out recently registered domains. The nice thing is that you can use the carat symbol (^) to anchor your search. In other words, searching with the text "^ipod" will look for everything with a word after 'ipod'.

http://www.domainsurfer.com/ssearch.cgi?dom=^IPO D& s=80&res=&se=wi

iPod Jr? Wouldn't a better name be iPo' ?

[Anonymous Coward]

iPo' -- I can't afford the $399 model.

RTFA

[sethadam1]

as well as storing music, holds digital camera images and can be used as a dictation machine and alarm clock.

Yes.

Re:Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess when you're that lonely, posting stupid comments on /. looks pretty good too.

Just like me! (except I know how to spell)

Seeya around, chubby!

What will we lose?

[truffle]

I seriously doubt the $115 iPod will look exactly like the 10gb model, but with a smaller hard drive (and form factor). It makes sense that the $115 iPod will lack some of the features that the higher end models have. This will better enable apple to upsell people to higher end iPods, and believe me, they want to do that.

So what could we potentially lose from the iPod?
- Firewire. It seems unlikely apple would cut their technology from a product, but this is something obvious to cut. These cheapo iPods are going to be heavily focussed on iTunes users, which are largely windows based. USB could be good enough.
- Built in rechargable battery. A good way to lower production cost is to make the unit require conventional batteries.
- The unit interface. The iPod's screen and dial for selecting music are great. A good way to cut production cost would be to remove these features.

In summary, my expectation is that apple will design their iPod jrs without many of the features which we have come to expect from iPod products. This will lower their production costs, and provide additional motivation for people to buy higher priced units.

Apple doesn't need to provide any of these features to sell iPod Jrs, the larger storage capacity, iTunes, and apple chic design will ensure these things just fly off the shelves.

Obligatory link

[michaelmalak]

Banana Jr. 2000

Re:Replace "Too broke" with "Not prioritized enoug

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, thanks for that insightful post. You truly are a genius.

Re:actual media - odds on a 2-3Gig toshiba

[jminne]

While we can't KNOW the media yet, I'd bet a bill it's a small harddrive.

The Rio nitrus already has cornice 1.5 gig harddrive:
http://www.corniceco.com/products/inde x.html

And then there's toshiba and hitachi:
http://asia.cnet.com/newstech/systems/0, 39001153,3 9161782,00.htm

The current ipods use Toshiba HD. That successful relationship should prompt Apple to go with them again. But no money on that one...

Unpossible

[alexjohns]

Me and the other main geek here at work have been going round-and-round with this for a couple of days. There's no way this is true, much as I might wish it were. It's very simple: What flash medium is out there in the 1GB-4Gb range that costs less than $100? If there is one, it's impossible to find on the web.

What are they doing, repurposing all those old 1-4GB hard disks that people are tossing out? Have they invented some new cheaper flash memory? If so, that's major. A lot more than IpodJrs are gonna come out of that if that's true. Somebody want to help me out here? Anyone? Bueller?

Re:Unpossible

[Dog135]

They could be using a HD solution. Not a Microdrive, but maybe a 2" model.

Another possiblility is they're using RAM. If they manufactured some cheap, low power, low speed RAM, they could get it to work cheaply with little drain on the battery.

Obligatory iRiver post...

[kotj.mf]

Hmmm... there's already something similar on the market: the iRiver iGP-100. 1.5 GB, $250, and, most importantly, PLAYS OGG VORBIS.

I've fondled one at Worst Buy; does anybody else have any real life experience with em?

And color me skeptical, but 800 songs (even at 64kbps) sounds like waaay too much for a measly 65-100 bucks. Especially from Apple.

Re:Obligatory iRiver post...

[rtilghman]

My Rio Karma has 20gb, cost the same as your iRiver iGP-100, and is both smaller and lighter. Oh, and did I mention its not only OGG but FLAC compatible? -rt

Better name than iPod Jr?

[cubyrop]

Will it be iNugget? iNiblet? Or perhaps more accurately for those too poor to afford the 20gb version, iPov?

Another Cornice 1.5 GB reference design...

[JesusHelper]

Iriver has one. http://www.iriveramerica.com/products/iGP-100.asp Rio has one. Now apple gets into the game. La-dee friggin da.

Re:Another Cornice 1.5 GB reference design...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, and its $250.00!!!! ...not $100.00

Re:Another Cornice 1.5 GB reference design...

[JesusHelper]

Neither will this iPid thingy. Wait and see. A flash player is still 200$ The way some people swallow unsubstantiated hype is hysterical.

Re:Replace "Too broke" with "Not prioritized enoug

[Tokerat]

I could easily afford to cash out for the most expensive iPod, but I simply don't think it's worth that much. I'd rather spend it on computer equipment/travel/entertainment/DVDs etc.

...or more beer! It's not like the bar doesn't have a jukebox! w00t!

Who needs ogg support?

[rocketfairy]

If Apple actually releases this thing -- and in the US$100-150 range -- all of those pretty little iRiver flash players with ogg support are going to get really, really cheap. Want ogg support? Hang on to your money and wait for the "Apple-killed-the-market clearance sale."

Seeing is Believing

[dalek_killer]

When Apple has it on there site, or Jobs announces it at keynote at macworld then I will believe not before hand.

I was ready for an iPod...

[mightymik2]

So i'm gonna see what the Stevenote has to offer. (Steve will be pissed if the cat IS out of the bag). I wouldn't mind having something to listen to while i'm at the cafe...so lets say they do get released, got budget for that...but lets also say Steve DROPS THE PRICE on the rest of the line? Could be fun deciding what to buy. I'm walking out with SOMETHING... :) 'New mini-iPods, and regular iPods priced to be more popular than ever'. :))

Re:I was ready for an iPod...

[tie_fightertk069]

So as someone who has waited, why haven't you opted for one of the now reletively cheaper first generation iPods? I paid $160 for my 5 gb first gen, and only $210 for my 10 gb second gen.

Re:I was ready for an iPod...

[mightymik2]

Cause i was good all year, and i get to buy a NEW one. :) I want a gen 3 w/ a dock if i can get it. Maybe Steve will start including the dock w/ the 10GB. We'll see how cute the new ones are.

Why the hell would anyone buy this?

[rtilghman]

Having just reviewed this tech space I'm kind of amazed at this device. Why on earth would Apple make it, and who the hell do they expect to bu it? The strength of the HD player market is that it allows people to digitize whole catalogs of music to take anywhere in a small form factor. it offers both physical and non-physical value. However, the wealness is the durability of the media, as I recollect each time i see some moron jogging or working out with a HD based player (can you say platter + arm = sensitive?). The strength of smaller flash based mp3 players is exactly the opposite. While they have much smaller storage capacities their media is WAAAAAY more durable, easier to power, and instant on lightning response. My honest opinion is that, assuming Apple is using an HD in this micro-player since flash would be way more than $111, they are making a classic boondoggle yet again (I seem to remember this one before in their laptop division). They are attacking the middle with a device that partially meets the needs of two groups. The problem is that those two groups are already well served by the products in the other segments, so they will see no reason to buy this player. The folks who don't care about size but want something small, fast, and durable will pick up an mp3 player for half what apple sells this thing for. The people who want to take their music everywhere but don't want to pay Apple's laughable prices (I mean really, I could buy a new machine for the price of that stupid little thing) will buy a Rio Karma or something (which has more features, is smaller, is lighter, and costs less). And the folks who need to show their artistic individuality and hipster status will buy the same $500 iPod as the all the other hipster posers. Now give me an 80gb media server for that price and then we'll talk. -rt

Re:Why the hell would anyone buy this?

[Ohreally_factor]

You seem to be misinformed as to how the iPod operates. When you select a song and press play, the HD spins up and loads the song into the buffer. (I'm not sure about the size of the buffer.) Then it spins down until more data is needed in the buffer. I believe this alleviates much of the problem of using a hard drive while engaged in physical activity, although I won't argue that it is less robust than a solid state device.

I have a friend who is waiting for the 250 GB iPod. He'll get his wish, eventually, but I'm not going to wait that long!

Re:Why the hell would anyone buy this?

[Anonymous Coward]

Having just reviewed this tech space I'm kind of amazed at this device. Why on earth would Apple make it?

To shut up the "But the iPod is sooooooo expensive!" whiners.

and who the hell do they expect to buy it?

The "But the iPod is sooooooo expensive!" whiners-- who are currently buying Rios and iRivers and trying to convince everyone that they are just as good as an iPod.

Re:Why the hell would anyone buy this?

[SengirV]

You are seriously out of touch with reality. Use me as an example

I have approx 2.5 gigs of music. My collection is pretty stagnant. I do not want a 10+gig iPod because I will never fill it with music. I already have a portable firewire drive so I don't really need the iPod for that. I can not justify paying $300+ for a super walkman, but I would pay $100-$150 for one.

Also, I know my neices and nephews will ALL get one of these $100 miniPods(if true). They currently do now own a single iPod between them. Sounds like a lot of sales/desires met with this miniPod.

Re:Why the hell would anyone buy this?

[rtilghman]

I think it really depends on what you want your player for. I know for a fact that the line in feature of the iRiver is much better, and that it is the preferred choice of most serious musicians who need a budget device.

However, having reviewed all these products pretty thoroughly it is my personal opinion that the Rio is better (hence the reason I bought one). The reasons?

1) POWER: Real world battery of 13 hours vs. 7 hours (lab tested)

2) CODECS: Support for ALL media formats (yes, FLAC and OGG aren't everywhere, but they are superior and likely eventually will be, so why would I rip to less now and have more work later?)

3) PRICE: The Rio can be had for $299 (or less), while the iPod is $100 more.

4) WEIGHT: The Rio is 1oz lighter than a comparable iPod. Doesn't seem like much till you remember that's like 1/6 the total weight.

5) SMALLER: Rio is square and a bit thicker, but overall smaller with the same size screen.

6) DHCP SUPPORT: Rio base station is ethernet ready (plug and play, literally) while the iPod isn't.

7) SOFTWARE OPTIONS: iTunes is good, but again no support beyond basic formats. Your also locked into Apple entirely.

I'm STILL not happy about things like the Rio having a fixed battery like the iPod. I'm also not happy that it doesn't have a line-out port; I mean WTH can it cost to tack on a simple line-out port so I don't have to deal with volume discrepancies?!?

However, all told the number of gains with teh Rio over the Ipod was pretty substantial, and enough to make it a clear winner for me. True, the iPod is slick and in keeping with the art deco resurection that seems to be everywhere (goes well with a motorola v60), but design alone doesn't outweigh all the other stuff and the Rio is pretty snazzy too.

-rt

Re:Why the hell would anyone buy this?

[rtilghman]

I think you've been bamboozled. So your audio collection comprises a grand total of 2.4 Compact Discs? A normal album with WAV files comes to about 675mb, and that works out to about 2.4 CDs. Or did you mean lossy mp3s ripped at a crappy rate to squeeze them down, totally undermining the music quality (which is pronounced when played on anything but crappy headphones)? Point being that yes, I could squeeze my 175-200 CDs down pretty well too, but at the bit rate I'd have to use they would suck. Why on earth would you want to listen to music you paid good money for in such a horrible format and sound? If you rip your music in mp3 at CD quality (192kbps) you come to about 70mb per CD. At that rate the mini-iPod will hold about 20 CDs. I'm assuming you have more than that in your collection? If so you'll need to go with a lower rate that undermines the sound quality. Point being that I think you'll find that once you have your music highly compressed and listen to the music of others at better formats you'll find yourself wanting more room for bigger files. I think you'll also find that you run out of space faster than you can possibly imagine, and that the 1.5 gb indicated isn't nearly enough if you plan on making this player your central music repository. But then again I'm an audiophile with sensitive hearing, so maybe I'm just more sensitive than you are. -rt

Re:Why the hell would anyone buy this?

[rtilghman]

I'm not misinformed at all. Assuming that the iPod doesn't have an equal amount of flash media to write the whole damned drive to memory at some point the arm moves to read data to play. When it moves it is a HAIRS breadth from the platter, a platter that is moving at high speed as well I might add. ANyway, it isn't a stretch to imagine a knock or bump causing the arm to move/snap/hit the platter, totally fragging the drive and making your player a paperweight. Of course if you don't believe me just copy 2gb of data on your computer and hit the hard drive a few times with your fist while its writing the data. Just seems stupid to risk destroying a $500 device like that. Hard drives are sensitive devices prone to damage. Once we have holographic media the point will be moot, but until then... -rt

Re:Why the hell would anyone buy this?

[Anonymous Coward]

Assuming that the iPod doesn't have an equal amount of flash media to write the whole damned drive to memory at some point the arm moves to read data to play.

The iPod has 32MB of cache. The average song (in my collection, at least) encoded as a 128k mp3 is about 4MB in size. So the cache will hold about 8 songs. So assuming constant operation and no skipping of tracks, at a minimum the drive spins up to refill the cache about every half hour minutes, significantly reducing the chances that a physical shock will occur while the drive is operating.

Plus I would imagine a hard drive that small was designed with mobile operation in mind, and can probably stand up to quite a bit more shock/vibration than the average drive found in a desktop machine.

Re:Why the hell would anyone buy this?

[Anonymous Coward]

What? Your music collection is in CDs and you call yourself an audiophile? Pffft!

Re:Why the hell would anyone buy this?

[TxdoHawk]

See, the problem with your argument is that you're pidgeonholing everyone into the bleeding edges of flash-based vs. hard-drive-based stereotypes. Not everyone who buys a hard-drive-based player is looking to make it into their personal music archive.

I'll put myself in for this example. I'm a commuting college student, that spends a lot of time on campus. So, in general, I'm going to be walking, driving, or riding in a shuttle. This means that a well-designed hard-drive player seems perfectly reasonable from a wear-and-tear standpoint. I love music, and I too cannot stand mp3's at 128kbps. But I don't think I could listen to 20 of even my shortest mix CD's in an average day on campus. After all, there's classes to attend and people to be social with. So to me, having my entire music collection along for the ride seems a little silly. Don't get me wrong, I can see the lure of having everything at your fingertips, but my tastes in music vary enough that I always keep a wide selection of tunes on my players. While I can understand not wanting to change compact CD's every time you want to hear a new album, to me, having to change the music around once a week is hardly a chore, especially when one considers the savings of not having to buy a huge-capacity player.

On the other hand though, picking up a 256mb flash-based player is downright ridiculous for my needs, because I'll quickly go through that small amount of music in the span of a day, and I have no need for the wear-and-tear protection of a lack of moving parts.

There's also the option of a CD/MP3 based player, but I find it a bit too bulky to carry around, and I don't particularly like any of the better players' remotes, so backpacking it isn't in my interest either.

Now, I hardly think I'm an exclusive case in this regard. There's plenty of college students out there that have a similar situation to mine, and I'm sure there's plenty of other people aside from college students that could benefit.

Pepsi iTunes starts January, right?

[johnpaul191]

i thought it was pretty understood (not just rumor) that the Superbowl (american football thing) was the kickoff for the Pepsi / iTunes promotion. Not being a fan, i am unsure, but i think the superbowl is in January sometime. I would assume, if that is the kickoff, that they won't say "start buying Pepsi in a few weeks to maybe win free songs!". Apple can unveil something that doesn't ship for a while, but that's not a TV ad..... by the time the product ships it has gotten decent press coverage on apple's site and Mac/computer sites. somehting like Pepsi contests would probably start when the commercials run.

super keen idea indeed!

[johnpaul191]

Super keen idea we'll probably never see:
Use the printing technology used on the blue dalmation and flower power iMacs, and tie in with iPhoto to let buyers have their photos molded into the case of their mini-ipod, rather than just simple laser engraving.

yes, this would be great because people would get iPods with a photo of their significant other... or the two of them and when they break up the "emotionally disturbing" iPod will end up on ebay where i can buy it cheap! i wonder if there are engraved ones on there now?
off to ebay!

What's next? Mouse Jr?

[xintegerx]

No-button mice?

So you were genuine

[tepples]

I apologize for confusing you with the "iTMS has only RIAA drivel" trolls. The "intrigued" part threw me, as that word often pops up in unmarked sarcasm on Slashdot.

Damn...

[DAldredge]

If this is true, this entire ipod jr. will be on 5 USD or so more than a BATTERY for the original IPod.

Doesn't anyone else think that is just a little crazy?

Is there really a problem here?

[Kjella]

It's never been any secret how many gb the hdd is. So if you know that, and the average size of your songs, you can make a better estimate. Hell, even if you just knew that 10-15 minute songs are not normal, you can correct the estimate. Same if you use unusually high/low compression.

The 800 songs quote is a guesstimate for people that have no concept of it beyond "there's X songs to a CD, how big is it compared to that?" "You mean I could put X albums from my collection / X of my favorite songs on this thing?"

Because face it, you and I may have a pretty good ballpark estimate of how much 1GB is, expressed as text, cd audio, mp3s, dvds and so on. But many people don't have a "grasp" of how large it is, for them it could just as well have been bits, bytes or double dwords. For them that is the meaningless number, not 800 songs.

Kjella

Re:Is there really a problem here?

[_aa_]

I don't disagree, but those individuals are not the target audience of an iPod/iPodjr. Portable audio players still require at least a basic grasp of computer use. Knowing the how quality affects file size and vice versa is important if you intend to maximize the usage of your device.

Re:Is there really a problem here?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, in general I don't even disagree with your assertion. But ease of use (as well as the astehtics factor) are specificially what makes Apple products special in the eyes of your average consumer. You won't see some USB stick/MP3 combo in a 50 cent music video -- the iPod is mainstream these days. Even gansta rappers, 14-year-old junior high kids and your grandparents know what an iPod is and should be able to operate one (= the iPod becomes synonymous with MP3 just the way Napster became synonymous with P2P file sharing back in the 90s).

Price points and predictions

[amper]

So, I think that by this time next year (and hopefully that actually means about 10 months from now, so Apple can actually get the damn things out the door *BEFORE* the Holiday season...), we'll actually get the iPod that we should have had in the first place?

Don't get me wrong, I love the iPod, and I actually have an original 5GB unit (which I did *not* pay full price for).

As we all know, HDDs don't go down in price, they just get bigger, because it costs about the same amount of money to produce a unit regardless of capacity. That's why the newer iPods with bigger drives cost the same as the original while having double the capacity. The iPod would be cheaper if Apple could find a way to build it cheaper while still maintaining the design goals.

So I'm thinking that if we see a ~2GB ePod/iPod Jr. at MWSF next week, then by next year, we should be seeing a ~5GB unit for the same price. By that time, Toshiba should have ramped up the new 1" drives to double the capacity or more.

I do think the predictions of ~100USD are maybe a bit optimistic. For what you're getting, it sounds to me like ~150-200USD is more likely. As in $149 for a 1GB model, and $199 for a 2GB...then next year we might see 2GB and 5GB models at the same prices, while the iPods step up even further in features and capacity at *their* same price points.

Personally, I'd have no trouble justifying $199 for a 2GB iPod, as long as it retains the same feature set as the current iPods do. (Read: FireWire drive capability).

Of course, what I'd really like to see, as a musician, is a multi-track iPod Studio about the size of a VHS tape with the inputs of a Digidesign Mbox (mmm...Focusrite). Since Apple owns eLogic, this shouldn't be too hard. Think of a cross between a Digidesign Mbox and a Digi 002 (FireWire), only made by Apple.

Remember...

[SuperKendall]

When the first iPod came out, it actually cost less than buying just the HD directly from Toshiba!!! So looking at the new smaller Toshiba drive cost might very well lead to a good estimate as to the price point a small iPod might arrive at.

I think Apple can cut some amazing deals based on projected volume of orders.

Yes, the ad goes something like this

[SuperKendall]

"Over Fifty station presets bringing you a total of twenty songs!! Get your iPod Micro today! Using our patented adNausium (TM) tecnology never before has music been repeated like this!"

Well, quite.

[Imperium]

You would of course be in the right place for drivel. Every shallow two-bit tabloid in the country (and I have to read the feckin' things for work) has had the "iPods sell out" story, illustrated by a "life-sized iPod" pic, over the last three weeks, reprinting Apple puff. Now it looks like everyone can have one (despite it appearing the Evening Lies), all those stories will be rehashed at short notice. Apple, we salute you. It won't get Jobs any closer to colonising the desktop, though..

Waa! I need a 100+GB iPod, not a teeny tiny one...

[crovira]

Oh woe is me. Apple is heading in the wrong direction.

I just, sort of, inherited about 4 cubic feet of CD and 8 cubic feet of vinyl.

I'm going to be rip-ping CDs for weeks and media shifting the vinyl for months.

This is on top of my own collections which have already been rip-ped.

My 160GB FireWire drive is about to start bulging at the sides. Okay, I exagerate... Backing this beast up will requires DVDs (good thing I got a burner :-)

Two different form factors

[Refrag]

I think that having two different form factors will destroy the iPod brand. It'll introduce descrimination between people with proper iPods and those with mini iPods and will confuse people when an iPod is mentioned. "Wait, which iPod?"

Re:Two different form factors

[Ohreally_factor]

"Oh, he's a Star Belly Sneetch. You can tell because he's got the cheap iPod."

Re:Two different form factors

[Refrag]

Precisely. But, I guess it'd be Plain Belly Sneetches.

IPod's Dirty Secret!!!

[DocBaker69]

A Friend of mine sent me this link....check it out!! IPOD

Re:IPod's Dirty Secret!!!

[gerardrj]

And when you are doens looking at that, go to ipodbatteryfaq.com and read the truth of the matter.

Junior is not necessarily smaller

[nanimo]

Many readers seem to think that the new iPod will be smaller. My guess is, it will only be smaller in capacity and price, not size. It is hard to imagine a 2GB capacity without a hard drive. And a microdrive unit is not going to be this cheap. So I would guess it will be the same size and possibly more flimsy, lower quality. That's all.

Re:Junior is not necessarily smaller

[whitegold]

There are new drives that have been produced, by toshiba, I believe. These are in the 2-4 gig range, and are substantially smaller than existing hardware, as they have a simplified mechanism which is soldered more or less directly onto the board. My understanding (and this is limited) is that these drives are substantially cheaper (maybe not in price per meg/gig, but in outright price), and are specifically targetted at PDA devices, digital music players, mobile phones, etc.

http://edition.cnn.com/2003/TECH/ptech/12/16/tos hi ba.tinydisk.ap/index.html

This could well be what is being used. If that IS the case, then they could be substantially smaller, and in fact would probably provide a nice balance of form factor vs capacity. I think the iPod (or any of it's competitors) are still slightly too big. Personally I'm waiting for that next step.

3.2 gigabytes?

[Anonymous Coward]

Based on the article, it holds 800 songs. Apple equates that to ~3.2 gigabytes (based on 2,500 on a 10gb iPod or 10,000 on a 40gb iPod). Anyone know a tiny 3.2gb hard drive cheap enough for that, or could this estimate be based on AAC over MP3?

Re:3.2 gigabytes?

[TheRaven64]

Based on the article, it holds 800 songs. Apple equates that to ~3.2 gigabytes (based on 2,500 on a 10gb iPod or 10,000 on a 40gb iPod)

According to ThinkSecret, it will be ship in a 2GB (400 songs) and a 4GB (800 songs) version.

or could this estimate be based on AAC over MP3?

Uh, a 128kbps AAC is exactly the same size as a 128kbps MP3...

Re:3.2 gigabytes?

[clarkcox3]

Quick, which weighs more: A ton of feathers or a ton of bricks? :)

Re:3.2 gigabytes?

[whitegold]

Actually, I think this comment is more valid than initially presumed.

No one actually SAYS it's a using 128kbps. A lot of companies will use a lower bandwidth as "standard" for a better quality codec, such as WMA, AAC, etc. This means that if they are taking 96kbps as a "CD quality", or equivalent to 128kbps MP3, then yes, more of them WILL fit. Not, of course, due to the actual amount of data, but because of the better compression for equivalent music.

That being said, anyone who thinks a 128kbps MP3 is "CD Quality" needs better headphones.

No faster G5s...

[Anonymous Coward]

Recent history points away from speed bumps (without shiny new cases) at MWSF. I expect the G5 line to be refreshed 2-4 weeks after MWSF.

Re:iPod Jr? Wouldn't a better name be iPo' ?

[SengirV]

Do you read without your lips moving? I don't think so. The prices are going DOWN not up. Maybe you should go back to Sesame Street - I hear Grover can help you out with the difference between 'up' and 'down'

How about "albums?"

[jcsehak]

I see your reasoning, but instead of expressing it in bytes (which would just confuse people more), the most useful unit would be "albums." After all, pretty much all CDs are between 40 and 80 min. long, and probably average out to 60.

At least, that'd be good if they're targeting people who are into fitting their whole CD collection on the iPod. "It holds 400 albums? I only have 350!"

If they're targetting the people that just have a lot of songs sitting in iTunes already, then I agree with their current strategy, because it says right at the bottom how many songs you have.

Sounds oK

[unwanted]

Sounds like a good thing for us cheapskates, just wish they could make iTunes available in europe ("you must enter a USA billing address to use the iTunes service") so we could have something legitimate to play on our iPodJnrs.

Grammar police

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean, "I think that the personal computing world would look a little different from how it does now."

Re:What's next? Mouse Jr?

[TheRaven64]

They also plan on releasing a on-button keyboard with a big red `do what I mean' button in the middle.

Lets see.

[jotaeleemeese]

600Cds/20years= 30 CDs/year or 2.5 CDs per month.

Or one every two weeks.

Not compulsive but aiming at it.

Nah,nah,nah. That is typical Apple fanboy speak.

[jotaeleemeese]

Look, I have dealt with Apple stuff since 1991.

The Apple mentality is tha there is none of your business to be opening their products. That has been true of computers, and peripherals, unsuprisingly it is so with their players.

There are plenty of examples in the market of players where you can change battery, media or both. (Check the Nex II player for example). No magnifying glass necessary.

Apple could design something that enhances the freedom of the consumer, but why do that if they can do as badly as many electronics' manufacturers that create incompatible stuff to corner out a niche market?

Why should I...

[siskbc]

Stop trolling and start thinking.

...when I have you to do it for me?

You macheads are the easiest trollbait on the face of the earth. It's just a computer, freaks.

By the way, not everyone has had success replacing the battery with after-market replacements.

Re:Nah,nah,nah. That is typical Apple fanboy speak

[Trurl's Machine]

Look, I have dealt with Apple stuff since 1991. The Apple mentality is tha there is none of your business to be opening their products. That has been true of computers, and peripherals, unsuprisingly it is so with their players.

That's very strange. I think that the family of the Apple Quadra minitowers appeared on the market somewhere around 1991 - and users were actually encouraged to "open these products" in Apple's very own ads. Quadras evolved into the PowerMac 8xxx/9xxx family, which evolved to PowerMac G3, G4 and G5 - all of them ready to be opened by just pressing one large button.

Contrary to what you wrote, it's not "Aple mentality is that there is none of your business to be opening their products". You are encouraged to open some of them; you are discouraged to open some another. You are discouraged if you can easily do yourself some costly damage, because the compact design of the device requires special skills to service it. Like in the case of the iPod.

Dude!

[Selecter]

the biPod! seriously, great name! I wonder if Apple was as inventive as you are? We have but a few days to find out.

iPod is already #1 #2 #3 on Amazon

[afantee]

Currently, all top 3 best selling jukeboxes are iPod . Would the mini iPod pushes everything else off the top 5?

Re:iPod is already #1 #2 #3 on Amazon

[gerardrj]

No, that's not at all what that page shows.

The page you linked to is the best selling music players of 30GB in size or larger. Strangely the 20GB iPod is listed there. Amazon can't do basic numerical comparisons I guess.

Anyway... When you go to the "all MP3 players" page and sort by "best selling", you'll find the first iPod at position #116, and it's the 10GB model. The top 5 best sellers are all 256MB or lower flash based players.

iLove the iPod as much as anyone (First gen 5GB still 8 hours on the original battery), but Amazon just ain't selling a whole lot of them apparently. But then again, they don't exactly explain the parameters of what "best selling" means, ie: since when, in units or dollars, etc.

Re:iPod is already #1 #2 #3 on Amazon

[afantee]

There is definitely something wrong with the Amazon pages. For instance, your link shows Nomad Zen 40GB at #11 and no iPod in top 100, but All Jukeboxes places iPod at #1 and #2, while Jukeboxes up to 15GB has 7 iPod models in the top 18 best sellers.

Re:iPod is already #1 #2 #3 on Amazon

[gerardrj]

Yup, Amazon seems to have some very screwey information. I get the same thing. Two lists show two different sortings of the same information.

Did the math...

[Anonymous Coward]

I did the math (10000 songs/40 GB iPod = 800 songs/??? GB mini-iPod) and if the article is correct (800 songs) then the mini-iPod will have about a 3.2 Gig storage capacity.

Two words: Pepsi promotion . . .

[lavaface]

Pepsi will offer 100 million songs as prizes come Super Bowl time. I imagine that will boost iTMS notoriety a bit. And how will people store these songs for portable playback? Gee . . .

Re:Nah,nah,nah. That is typical Apple fanboy speak

[soft_guy]

I have a PowerMac G4 Cube on my desk right now that is very easy to open. Jobs opened it himself when it was introduced. I also have a 15" TiBook on my desk. It is also very easy to open (lift the keyboard) to upgrade the memory or add an Airport card.

I used to have a PM G4. It had a big fucking door that you could open and add new hard drives very easily. I could do the same thing on both the PowerMac 8500 and PowerMac 9600 I had when I was a dev at Microsoft.

Yerricde is not a Mac user.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yerricde is not a Mac user.

(OT) "OBX"

[timothy]

Thanks.I've been wondering for years what those stupid stickers meant, but it's the sort of question that always fades from memory before getting a chance to ask someone who might actually know.

Maybe the word "PLACE" in a black-bordered white oval would be the right answer ...

timothy

Re:(OT) "OBX"

[Raven42rac]

Didn't even realize it was "the" Timothy. Holy crap, does this mean I live in close proximity to a /. editor? I don't know whether to be scared or proud. Just kidding. Those stickers always have seemed a little elitist to me. Like "I've been here and you haven't." Besides, abbreviating "ks" with "x" is too much like a teenage girl's lexicon to be taken seriously.

I dunno :)

[timothy]

I live at present in Seattle, but I've seen those OBX stickers all over the country -- for some reason I thought it was a sporting goods manufacturer rather than a place. (Reminds me of STX, lacrosse-stick makers ...)

timothy

800 songs? How many LOCs is that?

[LeoDV]

I know it's OT (somewhat), but I have to vent about this.

I'm getting sick and tired of people writing "A media player [sorry, "digital jukebox"] which can hold up to X songs". It's annoying when there are articles that go "It can hold 20 gigs of data (the equivalent of X songs)" but it's downright infuriating when you only get the figure in "songs".

I understand the need of a more "down to earth" unit of measure than gigs or megs for the non tech savvy (even though it could be argued that nowadays everyone should have an idea of what a gigabyte is), but the "it can hold X songs" is just preposterous. How long is "a song"? Encoded in which format? At which rate? It would make (a little) more sense if they said "it can hold X albums," because all albums have about the same length, and besides it's easier to visualize -- you know how many CDs there are in your collection, so it's quick to think about how much of that you can put on your iPod(Jr). Do people know how many "songs" they have? I sure as hell don't.

An other problem with that is the removable media MP3 players. A flash card player about which they say "can hold up to X songs" without mentioning that you have to use a 128 meg flash card to hold them, and Jane Soccer Mom or Kelli Cheerleader is going to be surprised when her 16 meg flashcard can't hold a Britney Spears album.

This whole thing is mind numbingly dumb, imprecise and misleading. Putting the equivalent of gigs and megs in albums/CDs, sure. But songs? It just makes no fucking sense.

Re:FP

[hesiod]

> FP (Score:-1, Redundant)

How can a First Post be redundant?

iPod? Nah...

[arothmanmusic]

I still prefer my $120 CD-RW/CD-R based mp3/wma player. It's portable, easy to use, and can hold an infinite number of tracks because I've got a nice CD case in my car. Plus if it breaks or gets stolen, I'm not out half a grand. :)

You can have one

[Anonymous Coward]

It has been done: Creative Muvo2. For 200$, you have a small 98dB MP3 player with a display. Storing either 512M in Flash or 1.5G on HDD. Just strip the label and put your own on it.
Apple has to follow the market, just as it had to market a Jukebox of its own.

Target

[MacFury]

I know that my Target, as well as CompUSA and Best Buy were all out of iPods during the three weeks before christmas.

Did they halt production? I know that my store lost a couple of thousand in sales simply because Apple didn't ship us any units to sell.

Re:PICTURES - at apple?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know what that thing is, but it's not the (current) iPod remote...

Canada Store

Check the picture on the top-left. Looks like one of the mock-up we see floating around... Then again I don't think even those Cornice drives fit into that form factor.

I know I'm late, but...

[StarManta]

If anyone is still looking at this thread, here's my take on the prices: Current lowest iPod: $300. This price is not going up. If anything, it would go down, but it probably won't. Lowest possible price for the new 2GB iPod: $100. This is pretty much out of the question, as it would be dirt cheap. We know Apple is all about everything but being dirt cheap. $130-150 seems much more likely for the 2GB version. Considering how apple's prices usually go, the 4GB is likely to be $100 more expensive than whatever the 2GB costs. I would predict $150 and $250, with the 10GB remaining at $300.

Re:FP

[hesiod]

> > FP (Score:-1, Redundant)
> Re:FP (Score:0, Redundant)

Wow, talk about abuse of power by a fucking asshat moderator who either thinks he's funny or thinks he's in control. You are neither, you clueless fucking dork. I don't care about Karma, but at least mod it CORRECTLY. Geez, grow a single fucking brain cell and LEARN TO READ. Redundant means it has been said over & over, neither of which these were since they were on the FIRST THREAD. Damn, you are stupid.

Re:PICTURES - at apple?

[Damon Campagna]

That's simply the iPod seen at an extreme angle.

Original post is correct

[xiaodidi]

at Amazon
for all "jubeboxes" iPods are at # 1, 2, and 4 link
for all "MP3 players" iPods are at # 1, 4, and 5 link

The ranking changes by the minute, so you may see a slightly different result.

Apple put up an official site

[vapid transit]

www.apple.com/ipodmini 250 bucks and 1000 songs. I'll pass kthx.

Re:Apple put up an official site

[old_mac]

Too expensive! There will be other drives with 10gig on the market this spring in the $299 price range. I would like to see the ipod mini at $199 to start and $149 by Christmas 2004. Oh by the way I also want an Apple PDA. Something to compete with Sony Clie but with the Hitachi minidrive. I would be happy with 4 gigs.