New iPod Design Pictures Leak

Brian Hoyt writes "Apple's new iPod design will be announced Monday. A cover picture depicting the new design from Newsweek has been discovered early. MacRumors broke the story - MacRumors and more specifically the cover itself - NewsWeek"

Comments

New Design:

[Oculus Habent]

It's not a big stretch from the iPod Mini to the design shown in the picture. I'm pleased with the new design... kind of back to it's roots.

My biggest problem with the previous design is the unapparent secondary button function. When the buttons are arranged around the wheel, the special combinations (Menu & Play/Pause to reset) make a fair sight more sense. Holding Menu for the backlight is especially obscure. I discovered this intuitively on my Original iPod - all of the buttons on the Original had an important Continuous Press function before the first several updates that gave us a new time search for the songs. My friend didn't know about the Menu Backlight - he used the automatic backlight - until I told him with his 30g. He's not stupid by any means, there just wasn't any reason that the second button over would also be a special Backlight control.

Re:New Design:

[SpooForBrains]

What, did you or your friend ... you know ... RTFM? :)

Seriously though, the first thing I do when I get a new piece of kit is read the manual front to back. Usually on the loo, but that bit's not essential.

Re:New Design:

[Oculus Habent]

Link to the Newsweek article. The one at MacRumors isn't quite working.

Highlights:

• Click Wheel
• 12-hour playtime
• Multiple on-the-go Playlists
• Delete songs from OTG Playlists
• Audiobook tempo adjustment
• No more 15 gig model
• $100 Cheaper

Speculations:

• Uses the same processor as the iPod Mini.
• There will be a 60gig iPod to fill the top price slot later.

Re:New Design:

[Anonymous Coward]

Now THIS is big news. An MP3 player. Wow.

Re:New Design:

[N3koFever]

12 hours? Great, they've broken the barrier of half the battery life of the competition. Look out, iRiver, Creative, and Rio!

Re:New Design:

[MrBoombasticfantasti]

I'm pleased with the new design... kind of back to it's roots.

I, for one, do NOT welcome our wheel-clicking overlords. Normally I use my iPod without really looking at it: while driving (car or bicycle) or without getting it out of my coat pocket (to avoid getting too much attention of thugs).

By having separate buttons and wheel there is almost no clicky-where-no-clicky-was-intended. With this new old approach this is no longer working.

While I can understand that Steve wants everybody to rejoice the iPod in the open, I prefer mine hidden.

After all, it's mine! Mine! My preciousss!

Re:New Design:

[Belgand]

Of course a proper manual would help solve many of these problems as well. When I got my 2g iPod it was still a matter of at least a month or so before I managed to figure or find out about everything.

Then again, I've always been the sort to read completely through the manual before doing anything with a new piece of equipment. Video games, computer stuff, vaccuum cleaners. Hell, I even read the full manual for the blender before plugging it in.

It's not because you can't figure things out on your own, but because you shouldn't have to. Not communicating the features of a product and how to use them properly is just sloppy, not a sign of how supposedly easy to use it is.

Re:New Design:

[lpontiac]

My friend didn't know about the Menu Backlight - he used the automatic backlight - until I told him with his 30g.

I read about it in the manual. The manual wasn't massive - just a little 16-small-page leaflet.

Re:New Design:

[CrackedButter]

Thats where you pull that odd shiny device back out of the box and connect it between the ipod and the headphones, the remote.

Re:New Design:

[ALpaca2500]

a significant update to the most popular hard-drive based mp3 player.

Re:New Design:

[MrBoombasticfantasti]

Yeah, that would work. I completely forgot about it, time to climb into the attic to search for it...

Still, I would prefer to have a wireless remote. And wireless headphones, btw!

Re:New Design:

[Talez]

While I appreciate your concern and I've only used a mini at the store, there is no way you can press the click wheel accidentally.

You have to apply quite a bit of pressure. It's quite a stiff, tactile click.

Re:New Design:

[jaoswald]

Look out, iRiver, Creative, and Rio!

Yeah, those players are going to get even further ahead of the iPod in market share....

More like, "look out, the iPod might get so far ahead, you can't even see it from the back of the pack."

Re:New Design:

[CrackedButter]

Oooo, wireless remote would be nice, you can already get such things for digital cameras!

Re:New Design:

[Glonoinha]

The day you can plug in the USB plug into my Wintel computer and just dump .mp3 files onto the iPod - have the iPod figure out what they are and let me play them is the day I go buy one.

This business of 'let Apple install a bunch of shit on your computer and force you to move your files onto the iPod using our proprietary software and interface' is a bunch of crap. Every other player out there does it (except Sony's mini-disk, which can eat a bag of dicks) so I can't fathom why Apple doesn't.

I really want one, but I'll be damned if I'm going to install some loader to move .mp3's over the USB onto a hard drive when it really isn't necessary.

Re:New Design:

[Anonymous Coward]

How true.

Where I work, we had a Rio on the shelf for about 9 months. I bought it on colse-out (w/ employee discount). When I opened it, it worked without charging! When I took it out of the drawer 6 months later - it STILL worked! In fact, it has never been charged. I assume it still has some charge left now. I should really put it up on eBay.

That's unlike my iPod, which I charge EVERY day.

Re:New Design:

[Anonymous Coward]

Um, I just copy the files to my iPod. No need for special software. Works great with USB. What exactly are you talking about? Some other product? The old D-Link DMP-110 piece of crap?

Re:New Design:

[Glonoinha]

Copy the mp3 files to the iPod - check.
Via USB - check.
Have iPod add the mp3 files to the playlist and play them when I push the play button - no worky.

If I only wanted to transport files I would burn them to DVD and take them with me. The whole appeal of the iPod isn't moving files around, it is playing them as music - and to do that you need to upload them using some bullshit loader. Perhaps the linux crowd has rubbed off on me a little, I'm thinking Free as in Freedom.

Maybe I'm wrong, but according to the documentation if you are going to play the file as music, you are putting it on the iPod via the AppleSoft loader software.

Re:New Design:

[That's Unpossible!]

WTF are you talking about? It is possible to do this with the ipod now, and has been for a long time.

Re:New Design:

[Lewisham]

Dude, seriously, you have a problem with that? Windows is, has, and always will be, completely non-standard, for good reason. Jesus, the drivers you need to even see the screen will be some third-party, propreitary, non-free thing. Having some drivers for your iPod is the last thing that should be bothering you about Windows. At least they run a small chance of crashing your machine.

You really need to chill out. Hit the decaff, and get over it.

Re:New Design:

[Pfhor]

Well, part of how the ipod is so fast is that itunes actually generates the file database on its end for the ipod. There is a specific file structure on the ipod that is meant to streamline the listening experience. Instead of having ot read file names with long extensions, possibly none english characters, all of that information is stored in a database and the song files are give just a number.

You can get yourself an Archos which you can just drop mp3s onto and play it back that way, but the battery life from my experience is shorter, its bulkier, and it still takes a while just to browse the disk for files. Also, the ipod has two processors, one for audio playback and one for the gui. So it makes sense that apple would make as simple streamlined file structure that the gui processor can feed to the audio playback (ie, user selects to play "Bob Marley - No Woman.mp3" and the gui system feeds /1234/456/32.mp3 to the audio processor).

Its ingeniously simple: why make processor on the ipod built for effeciency have to do all this directory / database management (althou the 3g ones do this now) when you can get a desktop computer to do it in a snap.

And i believe there are third party programs out there which you can mount on the ipods "data share" that will easily let you drag and drop files back and forth from the playable section of your ipod.

Re:New Design:

[Apaturia]

Just curious: did you even TRY iTunes?

Re:New Design:

[Pirogoeth]

I agree. I've felt the same way about OpenOffice. I've got a dictionary sitting above my desk. Why should I have to load up a bunch of well-designed software to do what I want to get done? My computer should be able figure out what words I want and arrange them for me automatically.

Don't even get me started on the spreadsheet...

Re:New Design:

[Anonymous Writer]

Normally I use my iPod without really looking at it: while driving (car or bicycle) or without getting it out of my coat pocket (to avoid getting too much attention of thugs).

There's an iPod Jacket specially designed with controls on the sleeve, so you don't have to pull it out of your jacket to access the controls. And if you use it while driving, well then you can get an Alpine system or a BMW that works with it! Ofcourse, with the money you'd be spending, you could simply hire a live band to follow you around.

Re:New Design:

[NiceGeek]

Well, at least based on the 2G iPod (with a new battery) My wife's Archos (Studio 10) seems to have about a 2 hour edge over my iPod.

Re:New Design:

[sockonafish]

Go grab a copy of Anapod Explorer from http://www.redchairsoftware.com/. If you value drag and drop functionality (and among other things, using your iPod for Shoutcast streaming) that much you can pay Red Chair the $25 they're asking for their awesome software. I bought Dudebox for my Dell DJ, its a great product.

iTunes doesn't DRM your existing mp3 collection, its just as free as anything else. It just happens to be not so great on Windows cause it's not integrated so well with everything else as it is on the Mac.

Oh yeah, anyone wanna buy a Dell DJ?

Re:New Design:

[Jesus_666]

You know, I'm quite happy with my little iPod look-alike.
So it does not have gigabytes of storage space or multiple playlists. I don't need that, I'm quite happy with my 128 MiB CF card (accessible as a standard USB storage device) and one playlist. And with the fact that sometime people ask me whether the thing was an iPod.
Not bad for a product I bought used for just about 30 bucks.

Now if they only would get the promised OGG support working...

Re:New Design:

[Pfhor]

You can get a new 2000mAh battery for that model if you want to drop $90 on it.
Various iPod batteries
I may pick one up myself for this 2G i just got from my sister (first ipod owner too, im such a nerd but I can't afford to buy one myself).

Re:New Design:

[Anonymous Coward]

Most MP3 players (including the Archos) do not use the main processor for actual audio decoding and instead of dedicated DSP chips for decoding in hardware. You should not imply that the use of two processors in the iPod is unique.

Re:New Design:

[bigHairyDog]

3rd party programs? Man you can use cp -R in the Terminal.

Re:New Design:

[harlows_monkeys]

More like, "look out, the iPod might get so far ahead, you can't even see it from the back of the pack."

This assumes you believe Apple's market share claims. However, there is something that doesn't add up. We can believe Apple's unit sales claims, because if those aren't accurate, they would get in serious trouble with the government (becuase they are a public company).

However, if you take Apple's market share numbers, use those to calculate the total portable player yearly unit slaes, and then take that and subtract it from the total yearly unit sales of MP3 decoder chips, you have a bunch of chips left over. Subtract out all the other uses you can think of for MP3 decoder chips...and you are still left with a vast amount that are unaccounted for.

Apple has way more mindshare than any other player, but I don't think their market share is as big as most people think.

Re:New Design:

[harlows_monkeys]

Copy the mp3 files to the iPod - check. Via USB - check. Have iPod add the mp3 files to the playlist and play them when I push the play button - no worky.

If I only wanted to transport files I would burn them to DVD and take them with me. The whole appeal of the iPod isn't moving files around, it is playing them as music - and to do that you need to upload them using some bullshit loader. Perhaps the linux crowd has rubbed off on me a little, I'm thinking Free as in Freedom.

Maybe I'm wrong, but according to the documentation if you are going to play the file as music, you are putting it on the iPod via the AppleSoft loader software.

I've got nothing to add...just repeating that guy's comments so the "Mod anything that doesn't kiss Apple's ass as 'troll'" crowd will have to waste more of their moderator points.

There is Linux software to do the magic necessary to get an iPod to recognize music that you copy to it, so you can basically get around this flaw of the iPod.

It may surprise some Mac users, but some of us actually have our music organized on our hard drives using directories. When we want to play an album, we go to the directory that it is in, and tell our MP3 player software to simply play all the files in that directory. We don't need or use playlists. When we use a portable, we don't want fancy syncing software. We just want to copy our files from our hard disk, organized the way we've organized them there, and then on the player select directories and say "play everything there".

Re:New Design:

[pediddle]

If that's true then it will be far better than the current design, where the slightest touch by a conductive material will activate the buttons. I can't even put my 3G iPod in my pocket without its case because the skin on my thigh clicks the buttons through my pants!

Not that I don't love my iPod. But normally I just have to keep it in the case and use the remote. I long for some tactile buttons.

Re:New Design:

[Anonymous Coward]

You really need to chill out. Hit the decaff, and get over it.

Note: When telling others to chill out, don't post an incoherant, reactionary flame rant.

Re:New Design:

[TagPopper]

What functions weren't explained in the manual? Apple's manual are usually very good, the iPod's is excellent. The backlight thing with the Menu button and the turn off with the play button are clearly explained in both the printed quick start guide and the printed user's manual. The only thing they don't really explain is that the battery is going to die if you use it hard.

Re:New Design:

[benedict]

I think I read somewhere that Apple computes market share
by *price*. Since their units are more expensive than others,
naturally that calculation makes their share look bigger.

Re:New Design:

[TechniMyoko]

Windows has nothing to do with this you flaming f***tard. The iPod was designed to require a loader.

Re:New Design:

[ischorr]

iTunes also sorts files into directories, and you're also able to simply navigate to an artist (or album or whatever) and just hit "play" to cause it to play all tracks. No need to build a playlist unless you really want to... However, if I DO want some kind of special order, I can build playlists to do that, and can organize songs in a bunch of different ways in the playlists without affecting the way they're stored on disk.

I fail to see how your way is any better (or much different)... Though if you want to use another program to play your files, by all means do it.

Re:New Design:

[ischorr]

Er, the only manual I got with my G4 or G5 was a big, shiny, 12-page "How-to-use" document that described virtually nothing. Considering OS X's help system still stinks, users really don't have much in the way of good documentation for new systems. I'd have to disagree that "Apple's manually are usually very good", that's why the "Missing Manual" series has been such a success.

The iPod's documentation was pretty sparse too, though I'd have to admit that it did cover nearly everything I'd want to know as a "normal" (non-hacking) end user...

Re:New Design:

[TechniMyoko]

The Toshiba MobilPhile gets 18 hours, 12 just doesn't cut it

Re:New Design:

[Pfhor]

I meant as something to add the music to the music portion of the ipod, you copy a file over to your ipod's data track, it wont play it, unless there is something that has changed dramatically since the last ipod stats i looked at. You still need to add the file to the database, and have the pointers setup right to go to the right file, etc.

Re:New Design:

[uhlume]

Because iTunes doesn't organize my MP3s the way I organize my MP3s, and offers no mechanism to modify its sorting logic. Worse, because when I point it to my already carefully organized MP3 collection, it automatically and without asking me -- in fact, without providing any feedback at all -- reaches into my directory structure and re-organizes it as it sees fit, permanently destroying my existing file hierarchy.

Why do I care? Because (on Windows particularly) I have more than one option for MP3 playback, CD burning, and other tasks, and iTunes' re-organization of my directories to suit its purposes is not universally convenient to the rest of the applications I use to do so. iTunes simply presumes sole proprietorship of the users's MP3 collection in a way that simply isn't acceptable to a lot of users.

Re:New Design:

[Anonymous Coward]

iTunes:Preferences:Advanced

Uncheck the boxes labeled Keep iTunes Music folder organized and Copy files to iTunes Music Folder when adding to library.

There. Now it no longer organizes in any fashion external to the playlists. It does put any music it encodes itself into its usual directory structure, but that can be altered with ease.

Re:New Design:

[harlows_monkeys]

Copy the mp3 files to the iPod - check. Via USB - check. Have iPod add the mp3 files to the playlist and play them when I push the play button - no worky.

If I only wanted to transport files I would burn them to DVD and take them with me. The whole appeal of the iPod isn't moving files around, it is playing them as music - and to do that you need to upload them using some bullshit loader. Perhaps the linux crowd has rubbed off on me a little, I'm thinking Free as in Freedom.

Maybe I'm wrong, but according to the documentation if you are going to play the file as music, you are putting it on the iPod via the AppleSoft loader software.

OK, let's give more Mac trolls a chance to waste some moderator points.

Re:New Design:

[tyrione]

Yeah you know those MP3 Decoder Chips you can't seem to find? Try looking in your DVD player that supports MP3 on the fly.

DVD Player Market is separate from the portable MP3 player market and millions upon millions of MP3 Decoder chips are in standard DVD home entertainment units.

HVAC Systems for commerical and home use aren't in the same market as automobile A/C units but you get the point.

Re:New Design:

[uhlume]

Yes, I'm aware of this, but it still ends up generating extra work, especially as compared to other software (*cough*WinampPro*cough*) which allows me to explicitly define a directory structure for encoded music. It's why I stopped using iTunes a couple of weeks after installing it, even though I liked a handful of its features.

Re:New Design:

[Anonymous Coward]

First off all the recent versions of iTunes let you disable the reorganizing feature at first startup before you point it at your directory structure. It just adds them to the library however you manually have them arranged. So your argument has been moot since version 4.2.

Secondly, I used to organize stuff my way, directory for artist, then the album, then the tracks starting with a leading zero number. I used to have a various artists directory, with the albums under there. So let me go through the differences between how I did it and how itunes does it. iTunes does not insert an hyphen between the track number and track title like I was doing, and instead of calling it various artists it calls it compilations.

SO the reality is, they are organized by itunes in the manner I always did...but automatically, assuming good tagging. Some of the music i um... download from elsewhere has crappy tagging and I need to use a program to strip the tags out and then redo them a bit. Oh well, not my fault that whoever ripped them was a moron. I ought to just go through my collection and delete a bunch of stuff i never listen to anyway.

Re:New Design:

[Doppler00]

You're saying that by obfuscating the filenames internally that it is somehow so much more efficient? Sure, if we were talking about 4k of RAM, but that's unilkely. Are you suggesting that the Archos has shorter battery life just because of how it browses for files? that's odd...

Its ingeniously simple: why make processor on the ipod built for effeciency have to do all this directory / database management (althou the 3g ones do this now) when you can get a desktop computer to do it in a snap.

Because it's bad design.

Re:New Design:

[afidel]

There are TONS of open source iPod file loaders. Part of the reason the iPod works so well is the file database, since people figured out the format within about a month of the initial iPod's launch I wouldn't be too worried about losing the ability to use your iPod.

Re:New Design:

[Moofie]

So marketshare only doesn't matter in markets where Apple has a dominant marketshare?

OK, that's cool. Just making sure I understand the double standard.

Re:New Design:

[jx100]

You can actually get 2100 mAh batteries for the Archos Recorder (and I think Studio) V1 from just about any store that sells photographic equipment for $20. It uses standard Li-Ion AA batteries. 2100s give you a couple more hours life compared to the 1500s that it normally comes with.

Re:New Design:

[Necr0maN]

any self-respecting techie instantly ditches the manual and goes messing around with the device right away.

Re:New Design:

[Zhe Mappel]

Normally I use my iPod without really looking at it: while driving (car or bicycle) or without getting it out of my coat pocket (to avoid getting too much attention of thugs).

By having separate buttons and wheel there is almost no clicky-where-no-clicky-was-intended.

The thugs don't need to see the iPod. They're on the prowl for convoluted cute-talk, too, and if any hear your little treatise on clicky-clicky, pal, the jig will be up.

Re:New Design:

[pmcc]

That's what the handy little switch on top labelled "Hold" is for, so that very thing doesn't happen. :)

Re:New Design:

[Anonymous Coward]

FYI nobody cares what mp3 player you use. Stop acting like they do.

Re:New Design:

[mbourgon]

Yup - bad design. Instead of scroll wheel & buttons, it's a moded button. The first one is absolutely intuitive. This one isn't.

Hopefully the price drop will bring down the price of the old ones - I was debating whether to wait, this decides me... I get the old-style.

Re:New Design:

[Jord]

You read wrong. Apple's market share on portable players is based on units sold. Review the keynote at the WWDC for confirmation.

Re:New Design:

[Squozen]

My music's organised by band/album as well. Using iTunes allows me to play only my top-rated stuff, or the stuff I've listened to least-recently, automatically. Using a system without a playlist won't work for that.

Re:New Design:

[mebob]

Actually I find the lack of mechanical buttons cumbersome sometimes. Like in the car, you can't keep your eyes on the road and feel around for buttons without accidentally annoying or changing songs. I actually find the light annoying to while driving. A dimmer would be nice for the night time and also an option to keep it on while it's powered. Inverting the display would be cool as well bit it wouldn't fill to the edges.

I really wish I had my own company big enough that it could take on creating product like this.

Re:New Design:

[Ohreally_factor]

I happen to think you've got a valid complaint. I got over it, and find I like the way iTunes does things better, but I'm me and you're you. It's too bad that there isn't an option to satisfy you, something like "follow my directory structure".

I had kept a back up, but after 2 weeks I actually liked the iTunes way better. You gave it 2 weeks, so no one should fault you. It can be frustrating when software seems to embody the idea, "It's easier if you just do it our way instead of your way", but I just stopped resisting and found it was really easier. Oh, and Kool Aid helped.

Re:New Design:

[Belgand]

Depends on the iPod you have perhaps. With my 2G iPod I got a small, glossy manual that looked like a promotional brochure. Very much an issue of style over substance and preaching to the choir. It told me how easy to use it was and how to press "play" to make it play and "fast forward" to make it skip a song. The feature I remember specifically not being mentioned was "scrubbing". I noticed that clicking on the button in the middle of a song changed the display, but I honestly just didn't mess with it since whenever that happened I was typically trying to change the volume. At the same time I complained about only skipping 5 seconds at a time :). Eventually I figured it out.

I don't have it around at the moment, but I do believe it mentioned that holding play/pause would put it into sleep mode (NOT 'off', the iPod never, ever, ever turns itself off, it can just be manually put into sleep) and menu activating the backlight. I don't think it mentioned the very important menu/play combination to reset it though. Something I've found I use far more often than I should (i.e. it skips and locks up on me when I walk around at a reasonable pace with the iPod in a cargo pocket, I can't imagine actually jogging with it).

Re:New Design:

[sootman]

Correct. I was at the WWDC keynote and specifically remember Jobs saying "iPod has X% of the market measured in units... even more when measured in revenue." OK, OK, so I forget the exact percentage, but it was well over 50 (70%?) and I got a good chuckle out of that at the time--IOW, "we have most of the market *and* we've got higher margins than everyone else."

watch the keynote for the exact figures & quote.
http://stream.apple.akadns.net/

Re:New Design:

[Da Penguin]

Actually, I could see this.

It is a common trick to pad/contract data blocks to the same length. That way, if you all of a sudden want block number 17382 you can do some simple arithmetic instead of reading it.

I was wondering why they modified the filenames (although it is more like "f04/08 Styx Mr Roboto"

Re:New Design:

[chromaphobic]

That thing looks like an iPod in the same way that Rosie O'Donnell looks like Jennifer Garner. :)

But, as long as it does what you need it to do, who cares really?

Re:New Design:

[beowulfcluster]

Thanks, I've had my second gen iPod for a year and a half and I didn't know about the menu -> backlight button until now. RTFM is for suckers! Ahem. It was so easy to start using it I didn't feel the need for it, it's so thin I didn't think there was much point. I found the menu + play/pause for reset thing online when I needed that. This eliminates one of my little peeves with it: having to go back to settings and turn the auto backlight off when using it in sunlight. Wohoo!

Re:New Design:

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget about the others:
- hold play 5 seconds and it powers down.
- hold prev & next after reset and it comes on in disk mode only - this will suck the battery dry if it's not charging b/c the drive keeps spinning.
- hold prev & next & the select button after reset to enter diagnostics.

Re:New Design:

[dnahelix]

My iPod is stolen, you insensitive clod!








Note to law enforcement: I'M KIDDING!

Awww crap

[NetCAM]

Makes me wish I didnt just buy a 40gig iPod in Ginza. Damn damn damn

Re:Awww crap

[Pythagorus]

Shopping in Ginza isn't the best move anyway though their Mac shop is tight and there are some great places to drink around the station(which station, right?) If you'd really played it smart you'd notice there's a contest on Suntory's Oolong Tea(since you're apparently in Tokyo) to win an iPod...You could've at least given that a shot before throwin' down money...

Re:Awww crap

[trboyden]

You forgot the golden rule, never buy Apple products within a month or so of an Apple Expo (unless your looking for a bargain on their existing products). Apple Expo Paris begins August 31st. Apple traditionally releases new products around their Expo event scheule.

Re:Awww crap

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, me too. But I got mine while I was visiting southeast asia. They had the most remarkable things in those markets! I got my IPOD for just $3.99! That's THREE DOLLARS AND NINETY NINE CENTS! I guess apple is making a killing on these things. And... let's see how it sounds... bring it up and...

wtf? CANDY?!?!

^$447FDASUGFFAF67$f$FA5ff$faa$F54AF3@!!!!!111!!!

first post

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey commander beeftart, I didnt know you were still here.

features

[the_unknown_soldier]

the site is down, but the article has all the new features http://dogmatic.typepad.com/ http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5457434/site/newsweek/ if it ever comes back up... it looks nice, cheaper longer battery etc. no 60 gig promised by toshiba though

Re:features

[jimbolaya]

You gotta wonder if Apple pulled the 60 gig iPod to "teach Toshiba a lesson," as they did years back when ATI essentially pre-announced new PowerMacs, but saying their video card would be used in an upcoming Mac. Macs shipped shortly there-after--with NVidia cards.

If that's so, I'd say that's a little childish on Apple's part (and clearly not in the interest of the company, nor shareholders), but if you believe the folklore, The Steve isn't above this sort of thing.

Re:features

[Blondie-Wan]

I'm sure they'll have the 60 GB iPod out shortly after the 60 GB drives become available in quantity.

Re:features

[mbourgon]

They'll probably be listed tomorrow, just not mentioned by Steve.

Oh, and one other thing people. THEY'RE NOT CHEAPER! There's still no $200 iPod. They just did a size rev. Instead of being 5/10/15 for 299/399/499, now it'll probably be 20/40/60 for 299/399/499. More for the same price, but the prices haven't dropped.

Re:features

[Squozen]

Well, I paid $600 Australian for my 20Gb iPod a couple of months ago, and the same 20Gb unit will now go for $450. That's cheaper in my book.

close up

[catwh0re]

i'm sure this is going to flood someone badly, but here is a close up http://www.spymac.com/upload/gallery/f_0/user_117/ medium/upload_200466.jpg

Re:close up

[JonathanF]

I like that backlighting effect! I was thinking they would drop it when they went to the clickwheel.

Either that, or it's a very clever fake.

Re:close up

[catwh0re]

It looks like spymac.com block referred URLs, copy/paste into a new browser window to get the image.

Re:close up

[Patik]

They're checking referers, so make sure you browse to the homepage, then paste in the image URL, and it will work.

Re:close up

[Anonymous Coward]

What a disappointment. The one thing I and most people I know want in the iPod and apple are still to cheap to include it

HOW ABOUT A COLOR SCREEN.

I'm saving my pennies for the next generation 'Pod.

Re:close up

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a clever fake, according to the forum-goers at MacRumors. The author herself said as much actually.

Re:close up

[Anonymous Coward]

It's entirely faked by the owner of http://www.danamania.com/gallery/vhacks/

THe origenal picture on the newsweek cover is real but the backlit one was done by this photoshop editor

Re:close up

[btrapp]

Yeah, because all my mp3s sound really crappy in black and white...

Re:close up

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, if you think MP3's sound bad with that black and white screen, you should try with AAC's - it's even WORST!

Re:close up

[catwh0re]

The thickness and power requirements of a colour screen make it a poor choice for a device that is designed to play music. What use is colour? Perhaps some minimal labelling or to flitter visualisations at me here and there?
When you see people using their iPods, the behaviour is that the interface lets them choose music quickly, with little/or no need to look at the screen after this.

A colour screen would be nothing more than an eyecandy waste.
Reality is most of an iPod's life is to live in someone's pocket. Apple realise this, moving the buttons back to a previous arrangement where a user does not need to look at the iPod to press each button, which was a common UI issue with the former generation iPod.

Re:close up

[crackshoe]

the screen appears to be monochrome - its just happens to be tinted blue (my friend is convinced its an OLED, i'm willing to wait a few days to find out). and i don't really see the trouble with remembering that, say, the top of the wheel is play, the sides are back and forward... memorizing where the buttons are is no differant (depending on how they implement the clickwheel - but who can say since we don't know anything yet)

Re:close up

[Xyde]

1000 songs, in your pocket.

I'm sure my pocket lint would really appreciate a colour screen.

Re:close up

[Greg Mote]

Looks like a regular electroluminescent backlight behind a nice high contrast LCD to me. What I do like is that it seems to be possible to do a little more menu rearranging. I like the shuffle option on the main page. Also it looks like there is now a music menu rather than a playlists and a browse menu.

Re:close up

[timbloom]

Another, probably most important, drawback to a color screen is that it is very difficult to read in daylight. Since many people use iPods outside, it would probably be very frustrating.

Re:close up

[jimbolaya]

Where a color screen would be useful is if the iPod could double as a digital photo album (to off-load photos from a compact flash, or other format, card). Unlike other enhancement ideas, like video playback, this one actually fits into Apple's "Digital Hub" strategy and iLife software suite, since it would integrate very well with iPhoto. As an avid photographer and an iPhoto user, this is the feature I'd love to see.

Re:close up

[catwh0re]

This was the only good idea to come about from the colour screen. After all with the belkin photo card reader adapter for the ipod, many were left curious if the ipod would in the future be able to view these photos.

The problem here is that it begins to turn the iPod into an all in one convergence device. All in one devices are generally a pretty bad idea, when you can just make a PDA instead. Now since the PDA market appears to be shrinking, this isn't really the direction the player should be making. Alot of extra cost, for very little benefit and only marginally more sales (or possibly: less)

Re:close up

[pyrrhonist]

Where a color screen would be useful is if the iPod could double as a digital photo album (to off-load photos from a compact flash, or other format, card).

I'm surprised that Apple hasn't jumped on this one. Archos has had this for a few years now.

Re:close up

[goon america]

Gosh, don't you know that color is always better! It's more advanced! And it looks nice!

In other news, voting on a computer system is much more advanced! And therefore it's better than the primitive methods that preceded it! Just look at these exciting menu animations!

no anodized metal?

[BobWeiner]

The only signifcant drawback to the current material used in the regular iPod is its tendency to pick up scratches/fingerprints on its back.

I was also hoping that the new iPod would have an easy-access compartment for replacing batteries.

Still, looks interesting. May have to break down and get the 20GB model...

Re:no anodized metal?

[jomas1]

Although I have not really heard any complaints about scratches on the ipod mini, anodized metal scratches too. People who don't understand anodizing often complain that the paint on their Sony Clies is coming off even though the Clies are made with anodized magnesium. Anodized metal is better than paint because you can buff the scrathches out to some extent but people who like to whine will still do so.

Re:no anodized metal?

[Midnight Thunder]

The only signifcant drawback to the current material used in the regular iPod is its tendency to pick up scratches/fingerprints on its back.

Sure, but then again that applies to most portable devices. On the other hand you get some case for the iPod. Did a search with google:

- Applinks review
- iSkin evo, which even come in a choice of colours

[quick blink, "you must be kidding me"] looks like even Gucci is offering an iPod case. Now that's saying something.

Re:no anodized metal?

[(mandos)]

I found that a screen protector designed for my iPaq fits nearly perfectly over the back of my iPod. Works quite well in preventing problems on the back. :)

Mike Scanlon

Re:no anodized metal?

[Doppler00]

The only signifcant drawback to the current material used in the regular iPod is its tendency to pick up scratches/fingerprints on its back.

I guess this isn't much of a problem though as people seem to be buying new ipods every couple years...

Haven't we had enough of these ipod stories ?

[phoxix]

bleh

I wonder what Apple is paying slashdot to post so many ipod stories

(Yes yes, cue in the "just block the ipod section in your preferences" responces. Its not an issue of blocking anything, but how every small thing about a single product is getting posted on to the front page.)

Sunny Dubey

Re:Haven't we had enough of these ipod stories ?

[superdan2k]

Yeah, gee, I wonder what SCO is paying Slashdot to post so many SCO lawsuit stories?...Oh wait! They're not! Slashdot is about technology and geekery and all things associated with it, including things like Intellectual Property and MP3 players and so on.

If you have some sort of evidence of Slashdot stories being paid placements, please share said information with the rest of us...otherwise, stop speculating in such a way as to call into question the ethics of the editors.

Re:Haven't we had enough of these ipod stories ?

[catwh0re]

I think this article legitimately makes it to the front page.
The reason for that is, slashdot is about technology, the iPod happens to be an example of technology that has become a growing cultural icon.
When the three headlines for a huge publication are "9/11", "Iraq", and "iPod", with the "iPod" leading. It's almost surprising that slashdot doesn't have _more_ articles about it.

Despite the lack of significance (it is, after all, simply a music player), there are many surrounding wider effects that have come from it, and this is where the publicity is deserved.

Re:Haven't we had enough of these ipod stories ?

[psergiu]

It's because of the small i at the beginning.
Iran & Iraq should change their country names in iRan & iRaq to get more leading headlines.

Re:Haven't we had enough of these ipod stories ?

[Anonymous Coward]

i'd like to see bush on the cover holding up a little white map of iraq with earplugs in his ears...

Re:Haven't we had enough of these ipod stories ?

[Refrag]

The Xserve was going to be called the iRack until George started talking smack about Iraq.

Re:Haven't we had enough of these ipod stories ?

[Jesus_666]

Iran & Iraq should change their country names in iRan & iRaq to get more leading headlines.

Do iRan and iRaq give you portable audio? Can you plug them into your PC? Do they have sleek designs? Are they kind-of status symbols? Last time I checked they lacked all of that. No wonder people are more interested in the iPod.

Re:Haven't we had enough of these ipod stories ?

[BlueStraggler]

Iran & Iraq should change their country names in iRan & iRaq to get more leading headlines.

They're way ahead of you...

Has anyone heard anything?

[atheken]

Asside from the new exterior, what's changed on the interior? 60GB? Any new features, let the Rumor mill take hold.

Re:Has anyone heard anything?

[plj]

Hopefully larger battery! I don't have an iPod... but I wouldn't be surprised, if I one day decide to buy one. Still, the batteries of the current models seem to last only about some eight hours, which isn't really that much.

Re:Has anyone heard anything?

[Belgand]

That eight hours is only for perfect use and just like birth control perfect use is rarely what you end up with.

In reality the iPod (and I'm talking about the 2G here) tends to last around 4-6 hours depending on use. I personally keep mine on shuffle and skip through songs at a rate of perhaps one skip for every 5 songs or so. This gives me about this range of total battery power. This is all because the only way it gets 8 hours out of the battery is by spinning the hard drive up as little as possible and instead only feeding data into the cache every 20 minutes or so. Thus the often erroneous claim of 20 minutes of skip protection, in particular if the hard drive is set to spin again there is absolutely no skip protection in my experience. Anything you do to make the hard drive spin up (e.g. skip songs, thus running through the buffer faster, randomize songs, etc.) will lower your listening time.

Don't forget that it constantly loses power (albeit in a low-power sleep state) no matter what you do as there is no way to turn it off. I doubt this is ever a significant factor although you'll probably find it dead or close after a week or so without charging.

Overall though the battery is, I've found, good enough that if you start fully charged in the morning you can carry it around all day without incident.

Re:Has anyone heard anything?

[BasilBrush]

Apple claim "up to 8 hours" with the iPod, but I did a test about amonth ago with my 18 month old iPod. Overnight charge to empty on continuous play of all tracks lasted 10 hours 25 minutes.

However, the more you play with the UI and change tracks rather than just listen to a playlist, the shorter the battery life will be, as the HD will have to spin up more than once in 20 mins. This is why you get some people who have recently got iPods complaining that the battery life isn't good. They are still at the stage of playing with it like a toy, and that's what is lowering the battery life for them. When they settle down after a few weeks to just puting on a playlist and letting it play, they'll get the battery life.

Re:Has anyone heard anything?

[3263827]

Hmm, that's funny. I manage to turn mine off by holding down the play button for five seconds. The "sleep" mode you're referring to is activated when the unit is paused for more than approximately 5 seconds.

Re:Has anyone heard anything?

[BenjyD]

Surely running on shuffle can't use that much more power - all the iPod has to do is preselect the random songs, read them into cache and then spin down. It might need a bit more seeking, but that can't use that much power compared to spinning the disk.
It's not like the iPod doesn't know what song it's going to randomly play next.

Re:Has anyone heard anything?

[Bwanazulia]

I put my 2.5 year old iPod 1st gen through the random-all-day-play-test and it got over 9.5 hours.

BZ

Re:Has anyone heard anything?

[BasilBrush]

Quite right. Shuffle doesn't use any more battery than striaight play. The iPod does queue the songs up in the cache every 20 mins either way. It's using shuffle then skipping songs that you don't want that reduces battery life.

Re:Has anyone heard anything?

[atheken]

I have a 3rd gen, I seldom listen to it more than about 3 hours at a time. But, I almost always have about 50% life on the indicator when i am finished. I haven't had any real issues. I think that the algorithm the iPod uses to figure out it's remaining battery power is like M$'s "Time Remaining" bars... it's WAY OFF. It should account for the long term trend more than the localized trend. You can seek a few songs with 200 left on the indicator (out of about 500) and the iPod will think it's got less than 50, putting it into "no power left" mode. This seems like it should be an easy fix.

Re:Has anyone heard anything?

[BasilBrush]

Battery remaining indicators are always an inexect science, and they do rely on you cycling from absolute full to absolute empty every once in a while (say once a month). All I can tell you is that when I did my timed test with the iPod, the bars disappeared at about the right rate.

Re:Has anyone heard anything?

[atheken]

right, but did you do any seeking of tracks? or did you just let it run? I do discharge the ipod periodically, but like I said, I can have about 40% left and seek 5 tracks and be "done" - this is simply not a realistic estimate, no matter how "inexact" the "science" is.

Re:Has anyone heard anything?

[Belgand]

That was what I would have thought as well, but apparently shuffle reduces battery life. I would need to run my own test of this to confirm it, but the annecdotcal evidence states it to be the case.

Re:Has anyone heard anything?

[thatguywhoiam]

Don't forget that it constantly loses power (albeit in a low-power sleep state) no matter what you do as there is no way to turn it off. I doubt this is ever a significant factor although you'll probably find it dead or close after a week or so without charging.

I have a theory about this actually... I think the lithium battery the iPod uses has been geared to run down on fairly quickly, quite intentionally. Lithium ion batteries have very few drawbacks - no memory, good life, etc. but the one thing they all do is they run out of juice in a logarithmic way, and they all do it after X number of charges. Also, as with any rechargable batteries its a bad idea to try and re-charge the thing when its still mostly full, as that shortens the lifespan.

Considering - in everyday use - that you want to be able to essentially leave the iPod plugged in/docked for an indeterminate amount of time, but be 'ready to go' the second you decide you are going out the door, it makes sense to have the iPod run down fairly quickly by itself, playing or not. My iPod wakes up every night right at midnight (noticeable if you leave the auto backlight turned on) and I think its checking the power to see what kind of top-up it needs.

Just a half-assed guess, mind you.

Re:Has anyone heard anything?

[Belgand]

That does not turn the unit off, it merely puts it into a manual sleep. If you do that to an iPod and then leave it on your desk for two weeks or so you'll come back to find that what was originally fully charged is now almost assuredly drained or quite close to it.

As Apple puts it (link):
"Charge the battery every 14 to 18 days when not in use. Even when iPod is off it is in a sleeping state that requires power. Without use, iPod's battery needs to be charged about every 14 to 18 days to be ready for use."

(link)
" If iPod is inactive for a period of time, it turns off to save battery power.

To turn iPod on, press any button. To turn it off, press and hold the Play button. "

As far as I've been able to tell the primary difference between the two is that when you manually put it to sleep it loses track of where you were in a playlist.

Re:Has anyone heard anything?

[BasilBrush]

On that test, no seeking of tracks whatsoever. Just playing my library from the top. But then that's pretty much what my iPod does all the time, I just start it playing, and stop when I want to stop listening, I don't do much browsing or skipping around.

Yes, battery meters are notoriously inaccurate on most devices. It's a guess based on voltage and history of usage. As I say, my usage is probably more predictable than most.

Re:Has anyone heard anything?

[the_2nd_coming]

umm, no, a Lithium Ion Battery is actually better when you charge it when ever possible, not when it is drained. Full recharges shorten the life of the battery.

Re:Has anyone heard anything?

[mithras]

Who would pay that much for an iPod, and then leave it in a drawer, unused, for 14 to 18 days?! Or more?!

I've got a 3G 40GB model and I think the longest it's gone unused is when I'm sleeping. Say, 6 to 8 hours a night (I know, I know, I'm lazy).

Re:Has anyone heard anything?

[TagPopper]

Lithium Ion Battery is actually better when you charge it when ever possible

Yep - "The battery prefers a partial rather than a full discharge. Frequent full discharges should be avoided when possible. Instead, charge the battery more often or use a larger battery." http://batteryuniversity.com/parttwo-34.htm

Re:Has anyone heard anything?

[Blondie-Wan]

Apple claim "up to 8 hours" with the iPod, but I did a test about amonth ago with my 18 month old iPod. Overnight charge to empty on continuous play of all tracks lasted 10 hours 25 minutes.

This fits with what I remember reading about the iPod when it first came out. I recall seeing a number of reviews that cited charges lasting about an hour more than Apple was claiming (something like eleven hours instead of ten) under fairly normal use. That was pretty amazing a couple years ago, when the iPod was new.

Re:Has anyone heard anything?

[amichalo]

I don't think it wise to state experiences from teh 2G against this 4G that is stated to be far more silimar to the Mini (3.1G if you will).

My iPod Mini has very good battery life. I have never timed it as I have never used t for that long in one sitting but I sync the Mini once every two weeks and I leave it connected over night. Doing this has meant that I have never had the iPod Mini run out of juice. Now my usage is less than the person who walks to work listening to the iPod. I am more of a weekend hamock / mowing the lawn / working out listener.

And you can turn off the Mini. Just hold down play/pause.

Re:Has anyone heard anything?

[Belgand]

I'm a student, or rather, until graduating recently, was a student. During the week I'd use it pretty consistently as a source of music when walking around campus or working in my lab. Now that I've graduated and am merely looking for a job I rarely use it as I'm always at home.

Personally though I leave it on my desk, not in a drawer.

Re:Has anyone heard anything?

[Belgand]

I've said this before, but perhaps people aren't reading the documentation or Apple is being vague about it or something. Hell, maybe the Mini is somehow different, but I doubt it.

The iPod will NOT turn OFF. Holding down the play/pause button merely manually puts it into sleep mode. It still loses power, but at a rather low rate.

Re:Has anyone heard anything?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not like the iPod doesn't know what song it's going to randomly play next.

I think maybe you aren't up to date on the definition of the word RANDOM. If the ipod knew what it was going to play a head of time, that doesn't sound very random to me. Gambling wouldn't be much fun if the randomness was like you think it is.

Re:Has anyone heard anything?

[BenjyD]

The level of slashdot drops again. Imagine the algorithm to choose a random song:

1) Generate random number, X
2) select Xth track and read from disk
3) play track X
4) Repeat

Do you think this could possibly be replaced by:

1) generate N random numbers (where N is the playlist length), as a list X1...XN. We could refer to this as a, erm, playlist maybe.
2) select and read as many songs from the 'random' playlist, just like a normal playlist.
3) play the tracks
4) go back to 2 when the cache runs out.

Re:Has anyone heard anything?

[beowulfcluster]

Sounds like my experience. When I go to work in the morning the battery is full. I play it all day and it still has power left to play in the car on the way home 9 hours (or so) later. It's about 18 months old and has been put through this 5 days a week most weeks since then.

I just choose some playlist or artist and let it play, I seldom fiddle with it more than that.

Nice one.

[Reverant]

I had a gen 3 iPod. I was very pleased with it, but the 10GB I had was somewhat limiting, considering that my music is at a mere 12-14GB in the last 3 years. So I sold mine, which was very scratched, and I'm now waiting for the new 20GB model. What I really like, is the mini's jog dial/key combo. It works REALLY well, I've tried it first-hand and I could really say that it's the only thing I would really want the gen 3 iPod to have.

Re:Nice one.

[psergiu]

> So I sold mine, which was very scratched,

I will not buy this iPod, it is scratched.

Re:Nice one.

[macmastery]

"My G5 iMac is full of eels"

Re:Nice one.

[rworne]

"My G5 iMac is full of eels"

So was this one particular Japanese chick on a particular internet video...

I am very pleased.

[samrolken]

I always thought that the radial design of the 1G and 2G iPods was superior to the "row of buttons" of the 3G iPod. I thought that the iPod mini was even better with the combining of the wheel and the buttons.

Another notable difference here is the darker buttons. I've yet to decide if that's a good or bad thing, as far as design goes. What do you people think?

Re:I am very pleased.

[CrackedButter]

I agree with another statement as well, saying the design has gone back to its roots.

Re:I am very pleased.

[mangophreek]

I believe the "dark buttons" are because they are transparent to allow for an optional backlight for the wheel.

Price drop?

[Flyboy Connor]

Hopefully the sale of a new iPod will make the price of the older versions drop considerably. I really want one, but I think they currently are ridiculously overpriced. Especially here in the Old World. Is a 15Gb iPod for 100 euros too much to ask?

Re:Price drop?

[super awesome]

The new ones are supposed to be priced lower than the current models, so you might be able to pick one of the new models up. And if not, the introduction of the new iPods will dramatically drive down the price of the 3G ones.

Re:Price drop?

[CrackedButter]

Why are they overpriced, state the reason rather than just say it? I would like to know why.

Re:Price drop?

[Brackney]

WAHHH! And I just bought a 20GB model! Admittedly I love it, but... :p

Re:Price drop?

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple is not likely to drop the price of the current iPod. Apple will most likely no longer be shipping the current generation of iPods to resellers after monday. As 3rd party resellers are able to make almost no money on the iPod as is because of Apple's price fixing, you are not likely to see a decrease in price. Apple is however running an educational rebate of $200 to liquidate the current stock of iPods. http://store.apple.com/Catalog/US/Images/rhs_cramj am.html Its a pretty nice deal for the $269 educational priced 15 gig.

Re:Price drop?

[Rhone]

I got the impression that by "overpriced" he really meant "more money than I can reasonably afford." It's not like he was making some thorough criticism of the iPod's cost/value ratio in comparison to other mp3 players or something.

Re:Price drop?

[cryptochrome]

Unfortunately, due to the way hard drives are constructed, the major part of the cost is the base cost of the hard drive mechanics. Using multiple platters (the actually disks) for large capacity costs relatively little in comparison; using denser platters raises cost virtually not at all. Thus small hard drives still cost a lot, and larger ones cost only marginally more, and the cost of the cheapest models never really drops even as capacity increases. Likewise, the cost of the rest of the iPod electronics is exactly the same for all same generation models.

I've been waiting for my magic price point, $200, for some time now. I'm probably going to keep waiting.

Re:Price drop?

[Flyboy Connor]

Overpriced, compared to the value of the components. Apple would make a very nice profit when selling them at half-price, especially considering the huge number of sales.

Re:Price drop?

[crackshoe]

200 dollar price drop IF YOU BUY A POWERBOOK. which, as far as savings go, utter shite.

Re:Price drop?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep, they're still overpriced everywhere. 20Gig model should cost 110 to 160 US$ at the most.

Re:Price drop?

[gamgee5273]

Define "just." A co-worker of mine bought, and took delivery of, a 30GB two days before they unveiled the 40GB.

I think they may upgrade you if you bought it in the past week or so. If you consider "just" as being in the past month... well, then, no soup for you. :)

Re:Price drop?

[Anonymous Coward]

you get education discounts on the powerbook too. so you can get a 12" pb wtih combo drive for 1399+ ipod for 269, then 200 rebate. hell you could resell the ipod and then you would only be paying 1200 bucks for the pbook.
(which has airport and bluetooth standard, btw)

Re:Price drop?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's good to see somebody who knows how to sell iPods better than Apple. Here's a clue - Apple sells every single iPod they make. There is NO reason they should drop the price, as long as people are buying. You /. retards are really ridiculous. You just can't seem to grasp the whole supply/demand thing. Shut up, loser.

Re:Price drop?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you take a look at the Apple quarterly earnings you will find that this is not true. Their profit is relatively small (something like 60 million on 2 billion sales or about 3%.) If they cut the price of their products in half (as you suggest) they would no longer make a 3% profit, they would make about a 47% loss.

The margin on Apple products is said to be somewhere in the range of 20 to 30%. However, that money goes into R&D, advertising, and other business overhead. The 3% profit is what is left over after all of that. So, if they were to stop advertising, stop all R&D work, and fire as many employees as possible, they could sell the iPod for maybe 25% less. Somehow that doesn't seem like a valid option.

Is there a way to reduce cost? Probably. They could invest R&D money into reducing cost but what this likely means is 1) design a custom ASIC that has the CPU, LCD drivers, USB/1394 interfaces, and *hard drive control* circuits all on a single chip and thereby 2) attach the hard drive heads, servo, and spindle motor directly to that custom chip. (In other words, eliminate the extra controller circuit board that normally comes as part of an "off the shelf" hard drive and truly make the hard drive part of the iPod custom circuitry.) There are certainly undesirable aspects of this approach - for example, it becomes much more difficult to increase the device storage capacity as you have essentially taken on the R&D that would normally be done by a hard drive manufacturer.

I think it is much better to spend the R&D money on enhancing the device in other ways.

Re:Price drop?

[Anonymous Coward]

LOL @ disgruntled Ipod owners who try to justify how much they dropped on a half price junket

Re:Price drop?

[Aqua OS X]

Ya, but they'd be loosing money. Those things are expensive to produce.

Re:Price drop?

[iowannaski]

I don't know where to begin. 1. Apple doesn't only make iPods. They make other shit that costs even more and sells even more poorly. For all we know, they made $100 million on iPods last year and lost $40M on everything else. 2. R&D and advertising are known as "overhead" or "fixed costs." They do not effect the marginal cost of producing the 3,000,001st iPod. In theory, reducing the price could increase profits by increasing sales. I can't say whether this is true of the iPod, but by your logic Apple would be losing money if they sold the iPod for anything less than $20M per unit. After all, they have to pay for R&D and advertising.

Re:Price drop?

[Anonymous Coward]

my college was clearancing the 3g 15gb ipod for $199.00 since they are being phased out. I bought it last week since $200 was the only price I would be willing to pay (and still seems a bit too high).

It might be worth talking to your college bookstore, etc. to see if they have a similar deal.

Hint: so.ca. trojans

Re:Price drop?

[Blondie-Wan]

Not to mention they already do just fine selling them at the prices they sell them at now; hell, they're selling the minis about as quickly as they can make them, and they're backordered up the wazoo. At the current "overpricing," demand still exceeds supply. Apple has no incentive whatsoever to lower the price to what Flyboy and the AC want to pay.

Re:Price drop?

[Aqua OS X]

They have a large enough incentive. If iPods were cheep, they would easily saturate the market.

Steve has been itching to sell a cheep iPod; however, no one is producing a small cheep hard disks. The capacities are going up, but the manufacturing process is still expensive.

Slashdot is full of trollish geeks who think prices on 10 gig Toshiba drives drop as soon as 20 gig drives hit the market. But, fact of the matter is Toshiba stops selling smaller capacity drives when larger capacity drives come out.

One can only hope that it features Bluetooth

[CrackedButter]

For starts you could sync small amounts of information with the iPod, contacts, address and such and plus it could drive bluetooth into more homes because it rides on the back of a more successful product. I already understand it doesn't have the bandwidth to transfer the mp3's fast enough, and its only the small information I would want it to transfer
A better battery might be nice.
Its also nice they havn't added colour or appeared to make it into some video ipod. The market is still young and the waters need testing more, glad to see Apple have kept things simple and as they alreayd are
I'll be buying one as well if what i hope for holds true.

Re:One can only hope that it features Bluetooth

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps getting the Ipod to pair with another device would be a pain in the arse with such the Ipod's simple interface?

I can't imagine a way of doing it that would fit in with the way the Ipod currently works.

Re:One can only hope that it features Bluetooth

[CrackedButter]

Who says the interface would allow you to do this other than turn it on or off. It could do it automatically just like it does with firewire.

Re:One can only hope that it features Bluetooth

[Oculus Habent]

Not a chance. Wireless technology would mean the death of battery life. Also, few people would be accepting of a separate technology to sync contancs and notes, especially at the cost of battery life. The addition is hardly needed, either. Most people don't sync from multiple computers so removing the "inconvenience" of having to place the iPod in the Dock - virtually no work - just isn't worth the additional price (or reduced profit) and confusion for the user.

Re:One can only hope that it features Bluetooth

[Jeff DeMaagd]

At first my reaction whas 'huh'? But bluetooth 2.0 might be nice, if there were good bluetooth headphones to go with it. I'd think it would work pretty well and not require hiding a wire or restrict movement.

Given that even these will have to be charged every other day, I'm not sure what synching is really necessary if it can be done over the charger dock.

Re:One can only hope that it features Bluetooth

[Halfbaked Plan]

so removing the "inconvenience" of having to place the iPod in the Dock

The 'inconvenience' isn't placing the 'iPod' in the 'Dock,' the inconvenience is the requirement that the 'Dock' exist at all. A wireless design would mean that the iPod could connect to any system which included the wireless hardware, which said system includes by default.

The 'inconvenience' is having to purchase, install, and maintain 'Docks' all over the place, at any location where one wants to 'sync' or connect the 'iPod' to the rest of the world.

Re:One can only hope that it features Bluetooth

[rov4416444]

"You" could "try" taking the "dock" with "you" if it's that "important".

Re:One can only hope that it features Bluetooth

[Oculus Habent]

Without the Dock (or cable) you couldn't charge the iPod. It's fairly easy to carry the cable around with you, making it easy to connect to most computers.

Yes, Macinotosh computers can come with Bluetooth and 802.11b/g. But Apple isn't just selling to Macintosh users anymore. While 802.11x is becoming more prevalent, Bluetooth isn't a common (read: offered) option on Dells or HPs.

A wireless interface would suck the batteries dry. How worthwile would it be to sync all your music - or even just contacts - and then not be able to use the iPod? Or, you can sync wirelessly and carry around the charger block & cord, which is larger than the sync cable.

I don't object to external wireless devices, made to mediate wireless for the iPod; that's a perfectly acceptable solution. It can even run off the iPod battery. I don't care. I won't be buying one.

Re:One can only hope that it features Bluetooth

[Anonymous Coward]

Not a chance. Wireless technology would mean the death of battery life. Also, few people would be accepting of a separate technology to sync contancs and notes, especially at the cost of battery life. The addition is hardly needed, either. Most people don't sync from multiple computers so removing the "inconvenience" of having to place the iPod in the Dock - virtually no work - just isn't worth the additional price (or reduced profit) and confusion for the user.

I disagree, I think wireless could be useful to some people. The battery life impact might not even be an issue if you sit in its charging cradle while you do the transfer. With a 12 hour battery life, if I knock 1 hour off while transfering a few dozen files, I'd probably consider that a good deal.

Possible advantages of a wireless protocol:

1) One less cable on the desk (always a big plus for me)
2) Ability to swap play lists with friends
3) Kiosks that sell music

The big disadvantage would be bandwidth. I don't remember what Bluetooth's bandwidth is, but I imagine that it's a *lot* lower then a Firewire/USB cable.

Getting rid of one more cable on the desktop is what would sell it for me.

Re:One can only hope that it features Bluetooth

[Sigh Phi]

Wireless technology would mean the death of battery life.

With 802.11g, my iPod becomes the remote control for my stereo, from any room in the house. You know they're working on it.

Re:One can only hope that it features Bluetooth

[Oculus Habent]

I doubt it. When you have your stereo set up you're likely to have a computer to control your stereo. The computer doesn't run on batteries (well, laptops can, but I think you understand my intent) and doesn't have fetch delays from spinning up the hard drive. Sure, it would be nifty if the iPod could run your stereo, but it already can with add-ons like the iTrip.

I think we're more likely to see a Bluetooth or 802.11g purpose-built remote (to control your Mac or PC) for that need. That, or there will be a third-party add-on for the iPod. I don't see this being integrated into the iPod.

OMGWTFBBQ!!!!1!!11!!!2!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Holy crap! This is so amazingly, awesomely, insanely great, I think I just shat myself! Time to clean my brown iPod till it's white again! Ho! Ho ho ho! Dear my oh me, it smells.

Repeat of the iMac leak?

[Anonymous Coward]

When the last big rev of the iMac got released (flat screen), Time mag. leaked all the details something like 12 hours before Steve officially intro'd it. Obviously, Jobs had a cow over it -- they stole his thunder!

I wonder if Newsweek just pulled the same stunt by mistake?

Man, I just would not want to be anywhere near Steve Jobs right now...

Re:Repeat of the iMac leak?

[quizteamer]

You might be right. There is nothing on the http://apple.com/ web site about the new iPod.

Re:Repeat of the iMac leak?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd never want to be anywhere near Steve Jobs.

Re:Repeat of the iMac leak?

[supmylO]

The band Radiohead used to 'leak' their music onto the internet before their CDs officially came out. This created hype for their CD and got people interested. It's pretty hard to know if it was Newsweek or Jobs behind the leak. Obviously he took a picture for a major magazine holding the thing, so he's not too worried about it. Just a thought.

Re:Repeat of the iMac leak?

[Anm]

My gut tells me this is Jobs's way of getting back at Time. Newsweek is their major competitor anyway. And I don't know of any talks he's giving anytime soon; both Apple world wide developer's con and Macworld Boston both just finished.

Anm

Re:Repeat of the iMac leak?

[AndroidCat]

A reality distortion field strength of 1.0 Jobs can be hazardous to your health. However, experts disagree on the long-term effects or danger from background micro- or pico-Jobs fields.

Re:Repeat of the iMac leak?

[riclewis]

If you check out Steve's blog (http://justonemorething.com/) he doesn't seem very upset about the "leak".

He even quips about the fact that the iPod announcement is being hosted on Microsoft's MSN...

Re:Repeat of the iMac leak?

[Lars T.]

I wonder how Steve manages to manage two companies, when his life is filled with his vendettas against anyone who ever pissed him off.

Re:Repeat of the iMac leak?

[Queer Boy]

I wonder how Steve manages to manage two companies, when his life is filled with his vendettas against anyone who ever pissed him off.

This is what is commonly referred to as POWER.

Looks the same to me.

[Anonymous Coward]

It looks the same to me.
Of course I dont own an ipod. The differences must be subtle. So, any ipod owner ..tell me what are the differences?

I checked on the apple website .. only difference seems to be the backlight?

Thanx

Re:Looks the same to me.

[2nd Post!]

50% increased battery life

removed 4 buttons

thinner

revised UI

Yes.

[Illissius]

They cost $300 in the US.

Re:Yes.

[Flyboy Connor]

Here in Europe the 15Gb iPod is about 450 euros, or more than $500. Remember that the salaries here are much lower than in the US, and the taxes much higher. So, to compare, I should ask you if you would think that $1000 for a 15Gb iPod is overpriced or not. I thought so.

Re:Yes.

[Illissius]

I agree entirely, I'm European myself. You wrote 100 euros in the your last post, is the thing.

Re:Yes.

[nordicfrost]

Here in Europe the 15Gb iPod is about 450 euros

Bullshit. It's around 350 See for example Apple Spain

As for salaries, maybe in Greece or Poland.

Re:Yes.

[ax_42]

How many Euros? Where in Yurup are you? The following (German) prices are from www.mac-kauf.de and all include shipping:

15Gb iPod is 329 EUR from amazon.de
20Gb iPod is 419 from amazon (417 from novodrom)
40GB iPod is 519 at amazon, can get it for 500 from other shops.
iPod mini is 249 EUR at amazon and a few other stores.

Yeah, Apple stuff is a bit more expensive here than in the USA (c'mon Steve, drop the prices on the iTMS -- 1,20USD per song is a bit rich), but nowhere near the 450 EUR for the 15Gb iPod you were quoting.

Re:Yes.

[IAmATuringMachine!]

No, the 15 Gb iPod is 349 euros which is 434.68 US. Which is less than half of your "$1000 for 1 15 Gb iPod" figure. In fact, that last sentence seemed pretty odd when your other assertion was "or more than $500." I'm confused... I still grant you, though, that the iPods are more expensive in Euros by about 45%, but I am pretty sure that Apple did not influence your country's tax laws.

Re:Yes.

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you misunderstood the parent's comment.

It meant that taking into account lower salaries and higher taxes the cost relative to a persons disposable income would be like an American pay $1000 for one. $1000 maybe a bit of a stretch but the point the parent poster was trying to make is a valid one, and one that affects us down here in NZ too.

Re:Yes.

[mattkime]

I'm a US resident but I sold macs for a bit in the UK.

Prices are the same if you don't include tax.

Apple can't reduce its prices by 20% to account for your 20% sales tax. (or whatever the rate may be)

Then again, currency fluctations may also account for some difference. But if you're outside of the US, that should be helping you.

Re:Yes.

[aristotle-dude]

Blame your socialist governments for charging 20-25% or more VAT.

Don't like it? Stop voting them into power.

Re:Yes.

[IAmATuringMachine!]

Point taken. How much are the lesser products like the Dell DJ? Does the same metaphor apply, or does Dell eat a little bit to make the product more appealing in your market?

It's clearly time to visit the US and smuggle some back.

Re:Yes.

[eboot]

I will it's just that you know, effective free health care and a really good public transport system for everybody kind of makes those governments attractive. If I get sick ANYWHERE in Europe they will cover me up to a ridiculous amount. I don't mind paying more for an ipod etc if it means that I get these things. I don't know how good the public health care is in the US but I heard it wasnt that great... Then again I live in the UK which manages to have high taxes and crap transport/health unlike the rest of Europe. Damn.

discovered?????

[Anonymous Coward]

this has been known for years in Japan.

New iPod supports Ogg Vorbis.... in Japan!

[gumpish]

Seriously though... Vorbis support on iPod?

Anyone? Anyone? Beuller?

Never going to buy one

[SpooForBrains]

As lovely as the iPod is, I don't ever see myself buying one.

Firstly, I'm not happy with something that doesn't give you a sensible method of putting tracks on it, cross platform.

Secondly, I want somthing that plays a format that other people don't control the rights to.

Thirdly, they're just too damn expensive.

So, I think I'll buy an iRiver instead.

Re:Never going to buy one

[Anonymous Coward]

And they look ghey!

Re:Never going to buy one

[catwh0re]

To address some points you've made:

The sensible (and arguably the best) method of putting tracks on it is iTunes, even when music match for the PC was responsible for this, it too did a fine job. iTunes is available for Windows & Mac, linux programmers have also created similar music syncing software.

To address your format concerns, the iPod plays AIFF, WAV, MP3, Audiobooks and AAC. The first three of those are DRM free. Additionally the rights management on AAC is hardly limiting, the rights are static and unable to be changed by a 3rd party over time.

The price argument is negotiable, with 3Million sales, it couldn't be too limiting a price.

Re:Never going to buy one

[RollingThunder]

The sensible (and arguably the best) method of putting tracks on it is iTunes

In this age of ubiquitous USB storage, I would disagree. The sensible, simplest method is "Copy, paste to Ipod". Have it automount just like USB storage.

Re:Never going to buy one

[Xenna]

I agree with your first two arguments.

I got myself an iRiver H140 this week.

It addresses your two arguments:

- Normal USB harddisk that has actual MP3 files on it so you can easily hack up your own tools under any OS. You can also copy the tracks off it.
- mp3, ogg, wma, asf support

My main gripe is that it's interface just isn't very good. I can't stand the idea of someone putting up a millions-of-dollars production line to create excellent hardware and then put ill thought out software on it.

If they'd hire me I'd make it two times better at the very least.

Biggest problem: The shuffle option always shuffles in the same way. What idiot thought of that gem?

IMHO 5000+ songs are just begging for a good shuffle!

That and their marketing which sucks compared to Apple. If they get their act together on that as well as on the software front they could really start competing.

And competition is good...

Re:Never going to buy one

[macmastery]

Firstly, I'm not happy with something that doesn't give you a sensible method of putting tracks on it, cross platform.
Well, you can put it on from iTunes on Windows. But not from Linux (AFAIK), if that's what you mean.

Secondly, I want somthing that plays a format that other people don't control the rights to.
Perhaps I'm missing something, but it sounds like you're referring to protected AAC. I can put regular AAC (MPEG-4 Audio) and MP3 on it, at least. Perhaps you're referring to FLAC or Ogg Vorbis or something. It's not like protected WMA is open or anything.

Thirdly, they're just too damn expensive.
Ummmm....I got nothin'. :-)

Re:Never going to buy one

[Anonymous Coward]

AAC is also DRM-free when you rip your own CDs (or convert from another file, etc). Only iTMS-files have DRM.

Re:Never going to buy one

[crawling_chaos]

Only if you enjoy editing your playlists with a text editor or anally arranging your directory structure prior to copying. Most people seem to prefer to organize their music in iTunes and have that carry over to the iPod. True, it's less 1337, but most people don't care about their Geek Purity Test score.

Re:Never going to buy one

[BasilBrush]

Yes, and I think Apple have lost sales to all the other unemployed, Linux using, Ogg Vorbis fans. That's 14 sales lost right there! ;-)

Re:Never going to buy one

[OneDeeTenTee]

Well, you can put it on from iTunes on Windows. But not from Linux (AFAIK), if that's what you mean.

I thought the iPod was usable as a standard mass
storage device?

Is that untrue?

And yes, I'm aware that songs purchased through Apple's music store do need to be transferred through iTunes, but you should be able to transfer unprotected MP3's by just copying them over.

Re:Never going to buy one

[BasilBrush]

Why do something manually when iTunes does it for you. Just pop the iPod in the dock and you get all the same music on your iPod that you have on your computer. It doesn't get any more sensible or simpler than that.

Copy and paste using a file broswer is what you do on the cleap and nasty MP3 players.

One of the TV programs about gadgets did a test of 4 MP3 players this week. They had a newly ripped album on a PC, and they timed how long it took to plug the player in, get the tracks onto the MP3 player, disconnect, and play track 11. iPod was 50 secs. The nearest competitor was 1:50, the longest was 2:35. QED.

Re:Never going to buy one

[Anonymous Coward]

I just bought an Archos AV140 40G, MP3 player/recorder, video capture, voice recorder, USB (2.0) storage device. It is bulkier than an IPOD, being build around a standard laptop drive. BUT: It cost a little under $300 US, and requires no special software to run under any OS that supports USB storage. It also has more features than an IPOD.

It is not perfect. A bigger screen would be nice, a scroll wheel would help looking through big directories (folders to Winheads), video capture only does 304x224 @30 f/s max. Of course for a few more $$ Archos has the ultimate cool gadet the AV480! See it at archos.com.

Re:Never going to buy one

[AmigaAvenger]

Biggest problem: The shuffle option always shuffles in the same way. What idiot thought of that gem?

I've noticed a trend in mp3 players regarding this. My pioneer premier 840mp in dash mp3 player will pick about 6 songs and WAY overplay those 6. (maybe 1/2 of the songs played come from that pool) the same songs are in the pool as long as you don't eject. eject and you get a new six. (I've have the same song 3 times in a row, many times already!)

hmm, actually it just sounds like a 'top 40' radio station play list... nevermind, probably done intentionally.

Re:Never going to buy one

[yevaud_us]

The IPod uses a special directory structure and naming convention that prohibits direct copying. You certainly can use the ipod as a portable hard drive, but don't expect the MP3 songs you copied to the root of the unit to show up in the list of songs available for playing. -Michael

Re:Never going to buy one

[KH]

If one is so inclined, (s)he can take the 1337 path as well.

Mount the iPod as a firewire drive and ls, cp, mv., using one's favorite shell. All the music files are in /Volumes/*******'s iPod/iPod_control/Music/

on a 3g 20GB iPod. I think it was arranged differently on a first gen. iPod.

Re:Never going to buy one

[catwh0re]

I disagree, to update an iPod, you plug it in, do nothing and unplug it.
No need to find a music file, drag and drop it into a folder on a mounted drive. With iTunes you can go from doing nothing and have it automatically update all your new songs, then to making automatic playlists which will search through your music to fit categories and update those, to finally totally custom playlists, which you can then additionally have shuffle.
After all those much simplier methods, dragging and dropping is ancient and clumbsy.

Re:Never going to buy one

[Anonymous Coward]

Slight correction... AAC does *not* require DRM. You can encode AAC files without DRM and play these files on the iPod or any other device that plays AAC. (With iTunes, such files are .m4a where a file with DRM is .m4p)

If you purchase music from iTMS it will be AAC with the DRM wrapper. In this case the DRM restrictions apply but, as you say, the iTMS DRM is very reasonable as to what you can do with the files you buy.

Re:Never going to buy one

[Anonymous Coward]

Whoa! Hold on. I'm unemployed.

I bought an iPod so I could hack it, as did those other 13 taht I'm working with.

So no lost sales.

Re:Never going to buy one

[Glonoinha]

Might be a software bug. Many (many) years ago I was a corporate coder working on, of all things, the drug testing 'randomizer' program that one of the other coder wanna'bes wrote. Wrote it up in Foxpro because that was the language he knew. Anyways, I noticed a particularly alarming long term trend that in a company of +/- 300 the guys that got picked most of the time were the same set of guys (about 100).

Checked the code and the guy that wrote it set his precision to two digits on his variables, meaning his random number generator only returned two significant digits. This is all well and good until you realize that the random number generator doesn't return a number between 1 and 300 (the number of employees) ... it returns a number between 0 and 1 which then gets multiplied by 300 (the number of employees). If the granularity of your random number is only .01, .02, .03, ... .99 then there are only 100 possible choices, so the other 200 employees never got picked (of course when a person left the company it shifted the stack by one, so the others did get tested but (well you can see where I'm going with that.)

Re:Never going to buy one

[Glonoinha]

And this is why I don't own one. A friend of mine has one and after I saw all the hoops we had to jump through to get music (mp3s) off the hard drive into the playlist I decided against getting one.

Re:Never going to buy one

[nuxx]

And with that you just explained why most people buy iPods. Not to flame you, but most people don't care about support for anything beyond MP3 and "whatever iTMS uses". Most people also don't care about how the files are stored on the disk. Just the fact that an iPod can be used as a FW/USB external disk is good enough, although most people probably don't care about this either.

So, yes, once again it comes down to the interface. You can easily use it with one hand while driving, walking, whatever, and it's just fairly intuitive.

Re:Never going to buy one

[xrissley]

loops and hoops? Are you joking?

Test one:
have a cd, have an iPod:

1) put cd in tray, close tray.
2) let iTunes find CDDB data, then click import, let import happen.
3) plug-in iPod.
( 3)a) let iTunes work its magic, no user assistance required ;-) )
4) uplug ipod.

Which one of these steps qualify as a hoop or a loop? Pray tell me.

Test two:
have mp3 in a folder on HD (or on a separate disk, if you friend just plugged in his USB disk-on-key to give you -illegally? ;-) - some mp3) and iPod

1) locate mp3 files
2) drag and drop these to iTunes window
(which lets iTunes add them to its reference library, and if you set preferences so, copy them to its library folder too: better actually, if they are on removable media)
3) plug in iPod
( 3)a) let iTunes work its magic )
4) un-plug iPod

Now, if you have an issue with that, I might have to lower my opinion on some of ./ readers.

Some comments before flame arises:

* If your ipod capacity is inferior to the volume of your music files, you will have to tweak iTunes magic, obviously.
i.e. :
1) either have it let you manually put music on said iPod, up to its capacity

=> annoying after a while... but no worse than managing files and mp3 player as a removable media (because you still have gained bonus as music is also available for iTunes to play and organise)

2) or: create manual playlists, and only these will be set to update on ipod.
- you then have to be sure you drag and drop the mp3 files to the playlist, not just iTunes library (step 2 is still one step, just asks you to be a bit more attentive)

=> slightly less annoying, but you have to remember to drag music to the playlist (and not to general library). Still, next time ipod is plugged in, magic works. Only downfall? don't overload the playlist and exceed iPod capacity. Or buy a bigger one

3) or: create SMART playlists (on top of your manual fixed ones):
for example, a playlist that tells iTunes that it will be made of the 100 latest new songs.

=> any new songs added to iTunes (step 2) will be copied to iPod (step 3a)

* if you don't like iTunes for your mp3 (matter of taste, I let you off on this one), you might not like iPod either; so end of story.

* Now for my personal opinion (above were just plain verifiable FACTS ) :
The combination of iTunes+iPod gives you a solution where YOU have
- ease of use (amazing music playing experience, brainless management of songs, easy and fast synch, etc)
-, control (smart playlists, various settings to be found in prefs, like "import in XXX format, at XXX rate", or "let me / let iTunes organise my music library folders" and more)
- elegance in the whole approach, and respect for the user (you easily learn to use it, and can do tons with it -burn audio / mp3 cds, organise party playlists, edit all MP3 tags of songs, one or many at once, add cover art, etc etc. AND it has been designed for intelligent people by intelligent people)

Where were the loops and hoops again?

Like any tool, it just requires to know its logic and how it works. But unlike most tools, this one is bloody simple.
I reckon that iTunes is one of the simplest and most useful out there, and is taking a huge place in my life, by being so unobstrusice and useful...

Re:Never going to buy one

[Tim Browse]

I disagree, to update an iPod, you plug it in, do nothing and unplug it.

Until you have more music than will fit onto your iPod (like I have), and you have to do it manually.

And that's when the frankly appalling sluggishness of the Windows version of iTunes comes to the fore. It is fricking painful to move songs to your iPod.

I really love it when I click on a listbox on my 800MHz Pentium III PC, and it takes >1 second to select an item. Only iTunes for Windows can do this.

Best Windows application ever written, my arse.

(And don't, whatever you do, try resizing the iTunes window when in the iTMS. It's like they dispensed with the PCI bus for video transfer, and used a postal one instead or something.)

I use Ephpod to update my iPod - I only use iTunes for ripping. Life's too short to use the iTunes UI, really.

Basically, take all those whines from Mac users about Microsoft Office 6 for Mac, and throw them right back at Apple for iTunes for Windows.

Re:Never going to buy one

[Anonymous Coward]

P3-800MHz, that's like complaining that your pocket calculator doesn't get enough FPS out of linux.

With Intel Chips at almost 3GHz more than your current offering, why not just upgrade? After all apple hardware is -oh- so expensive and you could still purchase something from them.

Re:Never going to buy one

[Tim Browse]

P3-800MHz, that's like complaining that your pocket calculator doesn't get enough FPS out of linux.

Yeah, funny how (apart from the latest insane games) everything else I want to run on this PC runs just fine. It runs XP, and isn't slow. I must have missed the meeting where profligacy with the user's computing resources was ok to the point of requiring them to buy a new PC just because the app has a small database and a big listbox in it.

Apple can't even code up a listbox that responds within a reasonable timescale to user events on a machine with a clock rate of 800,000,000 ticks per second, so I should spend £500 and upgrade?

Like I said, I use Ephpod instead. It's not dog slow like iTunes. It also requires zero pounds in hardware upgrades.

Assuming you're going to be running on a 2GHz+ machine just because your UI is so dog slow is bad engineering, plain and simple. No amount of waving new computer catalogues at me is going to change that fact.

It sticks out like a sore thumb because (battery longevity notwithstanding) the iPod is well engineered. Shipping nice hardware and backing it up with crappy software is the sort of thing Apple would sneer at PC companies for doing. Quite rightly, I would add - but the fact remains iTunes for Windows is in many ways poorly engineered.

After all apple hardware is -oh- so expensive and you could still purchase something from them.

So you're saying you know something about my bank account that I don't? How about I take that money you'd want me to spend on a new system and do something more useful with it? Like buy software, for instance. There is quite clearly no need for me to upgrade my PC at the moment - for my purposes it works just fine. When Half-Life 2 ships, then we'll talk.

Re:Never going to buy one

[Some Dumbass...]

So, yes, once again it comes down to the interface. You can easily use it with one hand while driving, walking, whatever, and it's just fairly intuitive.

I hate comments like this. While the iPod's interface may well be good, a statement like the above implies that every other mp3 player is worse without actually presenting any evidence. Meanwhile, I still have this sneaking suspicion that most people have used at most one mp3 player for any length of time (e.g. they bought an iPod and stuck with it), so they don't really know other players except via reviews and such. In other words, few people are qualified to make such claims, yet the do get made an awful lot.

The reason I bring this up is that I do own another mp3 player (the Dell DJ) and I think the same thing can be said for it. The software looks like a clone of what's on the iPod. As for the buttons and scroll wheel, I can easily use them with one hand. In fact, I can hit every button with my thumb if I hold it in my left hand. Furthermore, a scroll wheel has to be more intuitive than a circular touchpad. I've actually used scroll wheels before (on a scroll wheel mouse) but circular touchpads are a new thing. Not to mention that rolling a scroll wheel up moves you up a menu and down moves you down. Compared to clockwise and counterclockwise, that _must_ be more intuitive! Plus none of the buttons serve double-duty -- they all do exactly one thing. So how is this interface worse than the iPod exactly?

Of course, I've never used an iPod, so I don't know for sure that there isn't some magic there. :) Still, I just have the sneaking suspicion that some of these comments are just summaries of the reviews which are out there. Who knows how much time those reviewers spent with the device, or what other factors might come into play (e.g. a bias towards whatever player they got used to first, because they're more familiar with it).

Re:Never going to buy one

[Anonymous Coward]

But the thing is, people are different. Their taste varies and some are obsessive. I recall when iTunes for Windows was introed. WinGeeks complained that iTunes messed up their file naming scheme. Forget the fact that iTunes can be set not to do so or iTunes organizes them in directories logically: Artist, Album, Songs. They prefer their naming scheme. The argument is usually, they knew how to find those songs. The fact that iTunes uses metadata to facilitate search and ordering is completely lost. You can locate files from iTunes just by selecting the song you want and press Cmd-R, much quicker than locating Artist-Album-##-Title.mp3 from different folders. And yet, they obsessively wanted to organize the files themselves. Somehow, the thought that they didn't have to be in control makes them ga-ga.

Re:Never going to buy one

[rjung2k]

I hate comments like this. While the iPod's interface may well be good, a statement like the above implies that every other mp3 player is worse without actually presenting any evidence. ... Of course, I've never used an iPod

You want evidence, but can't get your mitts on an iPod to try out the interface?

At least you chose your handle wisely...

Leaked Article

[Anonymous Coward]

here.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5457434/site/newsweek/

disappointing....

Re:Leaked Article

[BasilBrush]

Leaked would imply that it wasn't intended to be published today, and came out through unnofficial channels. Neither is the case here.

Re:Leaked Article

[Patik]

What's disappointing? The depth of the article, or the changes made to the iPod?

Re:Leaked Article

[Doppler00]

and disturbing!

quote from article...
If your music collection has exceeded your iPod's storage space, or your listening binges exceed your current iPod's battery life--or if you want to hear Bill Clinton's abridged book in 4-1/2 hours rather than six--consider the Bump this time around.

Direct link to large cover picture at MSNBC

[bobdotorg]

Newsweek cover.

iPod therefore iAm

[alex_ware]

iAm therfore i need an iPod

Dang!

[Some guy named Chris]

The only problem with Apple is that I lust after them.

Now, my 40GB iPod is obsolete! I must have the yellow one.

Re:Dang!

[Cavio]

Yeah. Read it and weep.

Full article text

[peen]

It is obviously too much effort to for the submitter or the editors to link to the full article text so here it is:

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5457434/site/newsweek/

Why

[m1chael]

do Macpeople in general get so excited about new products Apple announces it will release on schedule or be delayed? Are they that unhappy with what they have now?

Yes you could take this as a troll (which now it won't be because I said the t-word). It is interesting is it not? Interesting...

Macteens (!) beat them to it

[rschroeder]

Actually, Looks like Macteens beat them.

Re:Macteens (!) beat them to it

[Sockpuppetofdoom]

I was the one who gave the cover to Macteens.. *Crappy claim to fame

Hold your horses...

[igrp]

Afterall, this is macrumors we're talking about here. It's an excellent site that I visit often myself. But they do have a tendency to be quite a bit off (read: wrong) sometimes.

I guess to a certain degree that does come with the territory (being a rumor site and all) but I remember reading the speculations, which then somehow became 'accepted facts' for literally weeks. And guess what, all the 'facts' with regard to storage size and MSRP were way off. Reading the comments section during and especially after Steve Job's keynote speech (when he reavelad the iPod) was a lot of fun.

Re:Hold your horses...

[FosterKanig]

I am so confused as to what you are talking about. Are you saying the story isn't true? Are you implying that someone hacked into Newsweek's site and posted 6 fake pages with pictures about the new iPod? Jackass.

Re:Hold your horses...

[Anonymous Coward]

If you read one of the other threads, the photos were actually found by someone checking msnbc urls until they came across the photos. There was a rumor that there would be a newsweek article, so some folks started scouring the site.

Re:Hold your horses...

[tbone1]

No kidding! It's not like we linked to the New York Times for political updates on presidential running-mates.

Re:Hold your horses...

[gamgee5273]

Post, not the Times! It was the New York Post that got the VP selection wrong.

Re:Hold your horses...

[prockcore]

It was the New York Post that got the VP selection wrong.

I hear last week they also declared that Dewey Wins!

Photoshop

[Anonymous Coward]

Is it just me, or does that iPod look photoshopped in? At first glance, there is something screwy with it. On closer inspection of the headphone cables, look at the one on the right just before it reaches the ear. A little chunk is taken out, probably from a bad masking job. The earpiece looks like its in at the wrong angle, and the wire is supposed to be shadowed. The thumb holding the iPod is also several pixels past the edge, meaning that either the thumb is cupping the iPod, the iPod is inside of the thumb, or that the iPod was put in.

Re:Photoshop

[BasilBrush]

Yes, it's just you.

Re:Photoshop

[3vi1]

It's just you. Thumbs are soft, they wrap around leading edges of things you're holding, if they are positioned on the edge. You're also assuming the cables are perfectly round, but these things get pinched and twisted all the time.

I think it's hilarious that you think they put the iPod in the picture, but didn't just add the whole hand. You think they just have some recent stock pics of Steve Jobs holding his hand like that?

Re:Photoshop

[Jesus_666]

Actually, Jobs sent them pictures of himself, his hand and the new iPod so that they could photoshop it together, thus creating a "controversy" around how they got hold of the iPod infos, thus creating a story on Slashdot, thus making lots of Geeks buy the new iPods. It's one big conspiracy.

Ha! Jobs, we're on to you!

Steve Jobs: And I would have gotten away with it if it wasn't for those meddling geeks and their penguin!

Re:Photoshop

[Tim Browse]

Hey, how did you know it is actually Steve Jobs' hand? Did you fingerprint it? It could be anybody's! :-)

Re:Photoshop

[3vi1]

That was my point. If it was Photoshop'ed, they would have just taken a picture of someone's hand holding an iPod-mini or similar looking object and changed the display.

The grandfather post insinuated that the entire unit was sitting abnormally in a separate hand image. He would have known there was nothing abnormal about the thumb overlap, had he just pressed his thumb lightly on the very edge of a table.

Or maybe Steve Jobs is paying me to diffuse the arguments of those who get too close to the truth, lest they discover we found a way to put the entire unit in the earbuds.

Doh!

Re:Photoshop

[shyfabian]

indeed it may very well have been. the depth of field does seem a bit wonky and the ipod itself should have some light gradation considering the light source on Mr. Jobs. If nothing else I'm fairly sure that the ipod screen has been enchanced using photoshop, as is the style of the time.

Re:Photoshop

[Buran]

It's very common for magazines and newspapers to edit images, especially those used for covers or front-page articles, although many papers will refuse to make substantial edits and keep the final image basically true to the original content.

So yes, the picture is probably edited to a point, but still doesn't greatly alter the original content or purpose of the image.

What an UGLY male model on the NewsWeek cover

[Anonymous Coward]

Egads! What an UGLY male model. My dog would look better, and I don't mean your girlfriend, eithert !!

;

Re:What an UGLY male model on the NewsWeek cover

[Anonymous Coward]

Sad thing is, I am losing my hair the exact same way as Jobs :-(

Re:What an UGLY male model on the NewsWeek cover

[Anonymous Coward]

My asshole has more hair !! Want some ??

;

Out of the ordinary

[Xemu]

Apple's marketing department is the best. Not many vendors can get their products announced to the target audience before they officially exist, but Apple keep making front page news on slashdot. Here most of the readership are in their teens and thus are a perfect match the products intended demographics. It's marked up as news and not as the ad it really is. This is a marketers wet dream.

Best of all, you don't even realize your strings are being pulled. You think you're outsmarting Apple and reading something they don't want you to read.

Re:Out of the ordinary

[Pope]

Apparently you haven't been reading Nvidia's, ATI's or Intel's press releases :)

Re:Out of the ordinary

[Midnight Thunder]

Apple's marketing department is the best. Not many vendors can get their products announced to the target audience before they officially exist, but Apple keep making front page news on slashdot.

I wonder how much it has to do with marketing in certain cases and instead with the shear enthusiasim of the the customers? For example are there AppleInsider.com or macrumors.com equivalents for other stuff such as Microsoft, Dell, HP, etc?

Few companies in the IT world provide a line of products where people are willing to cut off their arm to find out what's coming next. Its like people expect Christmas from Apple.

Re:Out of the ordinary

[Anonymous Coward]

Martina Nannyscum!

Re:Out of the ordinary

[Anonymous Coward]

...are there AppleInsider.com or macrumors.com equivalents for other stuff such as Microsoft, Dell, HP, etc?

Of course. You can find scoops on future Dell products here.

Re:Out of the ordinary

[OrthodonticJake]

Agreed; logically, the marketer's wet dream would be to have to advertise a product that does the job itself.

Re:Out of the ordinary

[Anonymous Coward]

For example are there AppleInsider.com or macrumors.com equivalents for other stuff such as Microsoft, Dell, HP, etc?

Yupe! They are called PC Magazine, CNET, IT Week. For the dumb fanboys, there is always idiotic ramblings on Paul Thurrott's Internet Nexus.

Re:Out of the ordinary

[Queer Boy]

Its like people expect Christmas from Apple.

As a Jew and an Apple connoisseur, I resent that. What we expect is One More Thing. ;-)

Eh...

[SilentChris]

I agree with Taco. I just bought my first iPod last week, and I don't really see anything amazing with this one. Battery life? I'm not having any problems with mine. Button design? I LIKE the button design on the current 15 GB iPod (makes pressing buttons through pants pockets easier). The only thing I could've used was an extra 5 GB of space, but I'm having trouble filling 15 GB with music as it is (I'm using the extra space to store DVDs).

I'm not really sure why NewsWeek (or Slashdot) feels that this story needed to be front page. Vindication of the success of the iPod? We already knew about that. Call me when they make a video one. :)

Re:Eh...

[Anonymous Coward]

Translation: "God damn it I should've waited a little while longer and gotten 5 more gigs, new firmware, and a better case design for the same price"

Re:Eh...

[BasilBrush]

Here's the selling point: The 20GB and 40GB are $100 cheaper that before.

But I suspect he's on the cover on Newsweek because of the success of the business model, and the great quarterly results the company turned it last week. Jobs and Apple's business model are the real story, not an evolutionary improvement to the design of the white iPod.

Re:Eh...

[SilentChris]

"Translation: "God damn it I should've waited a little while longer and gotten 5 more gigs, new firmware, and a better case design for the same price""

Not really. I could care less about the 5 GB, the case isn't better (in my opinion) and why should I care about the firmware?

Re:Eh...

[nzkbuk]

I installed a copy of OSX onto my iPod. I've had my powerbook fail to boot because it needed to fsck the fs.
So if that ever happens again I can just plug my iPod in to my powerbook and just boot from that like a rescue disk.

Re:Eh...

[Anonymous Coward]

you are sooo smart!

Talk about milking the cash cow

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple has made a great product and stuck to it. I really hope that mp3 players are not a fad, because Apple has centered too much of its resources to the Ipod.

Kinda ugly aint it?

[segfault_0]

My personal opinion, but i think its kind of ugly. But then again its really the technology (large disk capacity) that sells these things anyways, right? So when do they become affordable (about 50% of their current base price)?

Re:Kinda ugly aint it?

[rjstanford]

So when do they become affordable (about 50% of their current base price)?

When they stop selling so quickly that they run into supply shortages even at the current price? Obviously, many people feel that they are currently affordable.

To answer your question less tounge in cheek (although that's the real reason), it would take a significant price drop in HD prices to spur additional price cuts. $399 for the 40GB model really isn't bad when you stop and think about the materials cost.

Re:Kinda ugly aint it?

[whitegold]

Indeed. "Affordable" is an iffy term. It's entirely subjective. When is it affordable for YOU? Well, right about the time you decide you want one enough to stick your money on the counter.

And yeah, I don't really see the price of these things going down. Much like computers. We'll see the prices stay the same, but the features, performance (read: storage space) go up. A lot.

Re:Kinda ugly aint it?

[schuster]

I don't know about that one. Jobs himself has said that they'd love to make a $100 dollar iPod, they just don't know how to do it (I wish I had the URL). Maybe someday when they can actually keep up with demand :) they'll be able to do it.

Re:Kinda ugly aint it?

[segfault_0]

Well when you call something affordable in this sense your talking about it being affordable to the average person, not just me. 250$ for basically just a music player with high capacity. You can carry 3 or 4 albums or more on a 60$ player (i.e. Creative MuVo).

Does the average person need to carry 4 gigs of music around with them and if so is it worth 250$? Probably not even if it is cool.

Re:Kinda ugly aint it?

[Moofie]

When was the last time Apple catered to the "average person"? They cater to people who appreciate good design and utility. Those people are certainly not "average".

Re:Kinda ugly aint it?

[aristotle-dude]

Well, a lacie mobile FW harddrive from lacie is 179 USD http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10105

Now that is just a HD whereas the iPod is a smaller form factor HD and a music player.

If you consider all MFG cost, your suggestion would create a loss leader without a follow up product to make money on.

The iTMS is already the loss leader driving iPod sales. Based on their sales figures, they are doing fine with the current and future prices. They don't need "your" money because others are fine with their prices apparently.

Re:Kinda ugly aint it?

[phillymjs]

Does the average person need to carry 4 gigs of music around with them and if so is it worth 250$? Probably not even if it is cool.

Based on how many iPods Apple has sold and the fact that a weekly news magazine has done a cover story on how the iPod has become a pop-culture icon/phenomenon, I'd say yes, the average person does need to carry 4GB of music around, and will happily pay the $250 to do it. Especially if to do so is deemed cool.

~Philly

Re:Kinda ugly aint it?

[rjstanford]

Well when you call something affordable in this sense your talking about it being affordable to the average person, not just me. 250$ for basically just a music player with high capacity. You can carry 3 or 4 albums or more on a 60$ player (i.e. Creative MuVo).

Does the average person need to carry 4 gigs of music around with them and if so is it worth 250$? Probably not even if it is cool.

I hate to break it to you, but the average person doesn't need to carry any amount of music around with them. Many people choose to do so, but it is a luxury expense and is treated accordingly, subject to the whims and vagrancies of fashion rather than being a cold utility calculation. This is something that Apple has understood from day one, much to the delight of their investors.

Re:Kinda ugly aint it?

[segfault_0]

Certainly true, but i look at this most as a conditioned reaction rather than something people decided they need to do. Perhaps im old fashioned but i would call it a weakness if i was manipulated into buying a device that was overkill for my application for the purpose of being cool or because i lacked control in some other sense. But this has been fostered in our society for years now and congratulations to apple for reaping the rewards.

Happily pay 250$ for a music player..that might be an overstatement.

Holy shit

[Anonymous Coward]

We just /.'ed Newsweek! lmao!!!

Personally prefer CF based players

[Moderation abuser]

Sure, I can't get everything on to a single card... yet... but the cards are 4Gb+ these days and batteries last much longer than players with moving parts.

Re:Personally prefer CF based players

[Anonymous Coward]

The iPod is a CF based player. The microdrive inside is a CF type 2.

sooo your post has no point

Re:Personally prefer CF based players

[BasilBrush]

Erm... The 4GB "Compact Flash" drives that are available for a few hundred dollars have a mini HD in them, complete with moving parts, and that is in fact exactly what you will find in an iPod mini. To the extent that some people buy iPod minis to pull apart and use the CF card for photography.

True 4GB CF cards with actual flash mamory and no moving parts costs >$1000.

Re:Personally prefer CF based players

[whitegold]

No, the drive inside is a hard drive (with aforementioned moving parts). You're possibly thinking of the Microdrive Iomega sold (and I think were made by IBM) which, just like this, were a standard (though small) spinning platter, mounted and built in such a way as to connect to the CF format. Not the same thing.

Kind of like those horribly expensive Ram Drive things are just large sticks of ram bunged into a format that means they can be attached like a hard drive. That doesn't MAKE them a hard drive. It's the same thing. Well... the exact opposite technically.

*note: may be utterly wrong.

Re:Personally prefer CF based players

[Anonymous Coward]

Really? I'd say this a false assumption on your part, the majority of mp3 players suck batteries down like nobody's business. The electricity used to power the cpu access the CF card are pretty hefty compared to say a CD player. My minidisc player has plenty of moving parts, and lasts ~50hrs on a single AA battery. How long does your CF based player last?

Re:Personally prefer CF based players

[mrchaotica]

Do you happen to know where I might find one of those iPod Minis without the hard drive? I've been wanting a CF-based MP3 player for a while (I don't need that much space), and a Mini would be ideal if I could find one!

Re:Personally prefer CF based players

[BasilBrush]

You've misunderstood my post. *All* the iPod minis have a hard drive embedded in a CF card inside. There aren't any iPod minis that don't have a hard drive. HD inside a CF enclosure inside an iPod. Like Russian dolls. Do you see?

Re:Personally prefer CF based players

[mrchaotica]

I know exactly what you're talking about -- what I was saying was that I'd like the shell of an iPod that's had the CF-form-factor hard drive removed, so that I can put a normal CF card inside it instead. I'm talking about something similar to the situation with the Muvo2 (e.g. this), except I want an iPod Mini shell instead.

Re:Personally prefer CF based players

[aristotle-dude]

Umm.. yeah. There is no big movement for DIY consumer electronics because most "consumers" are not geeks. They want ready made devices that are ready to use out of the box.

I believe millions of people don't need what you are looking for. Just look at the sales figures.

Re:Personally prefer CF based players

[mrchaotica]

So what? I was talking about trying to find one on ebay or something, not complaining that Apple doesn't make it. Sure, it'd be nice if they did, but it doesn't matter that much.

Re:Personally prefer CF based players

[BasilBrush]

Oh right, I'm with you now. No I don't now where you'd get one. I would think most people that are buying them to get the HD CF card throw the ipod in the bin when they are done extracting the drive.

If yo can't find one on eBay, I'd try looking for digital photography web forums and ask there.

Re:Personally prefer CF based players

[Anonymous Coward]

True 4GB CF cards with actual flash mamory and no moving parts costs >$1000.

Sorry, I don't mean to pick on your typho, but the first thought that came to my mind was flash mammary, i.e. flashing a girl's tit. :) No wonder it's expensive.

Re:Personally prefer CF based players

[Anonymous Coward]

I wouldn't say that you would find one, as the iPod mini CF hard drive doesn't work in digital cameras - so people weren't extracting the card for such a purpose, like they did the Muvo. Mind you the Muvo CF card no longer works outside either.

Or...

[Kjella]

...use Privoxy with referrer-spoofing. Any link I click to www.domain.com/foo/bar.html, has a referrer of "www.domain.com", no matter where I came from. Works with every site I know of. I consider it the same way as pop-ups. It was a privilidge, you abused it, I revoked it. No referrers for anyone.

Kjella

Re:Or...

[Anonymous Coward]

Now webmasters just need to code shifty processes that check to see if you have actually been referred by a local page in order to stop you cunts from hotlinking their images.

Nice one. You could just link to their pages, you know.

Re:Or...

[Qeantk]

Ya, because hotlinking their images is your inalienable right and anybody that tries to prevent that, and save their unsubsidized bandwidth is a bastard. You're a real nice guy, all right.

Re:Or...

[Anonymous Coward]

If you don't want people seeing your stuff, why do you have it online? Take it down, no one will waste your bandwidth anymore.

Re:Or...

[DraKKon]

A-FREAKING-MEN to that... Privoxy rules..

What about accessories?

[Belgand]

I'm certainly curious about what this means to the market for iPod accessories. When the 3G came out third-party manufacturers immediately dropped support for 1G and 2G iPods in most cases. Apple as well decided to more or less drop support of the older models up to and including the lack of firmware updates to provide many of the same features as present in the new models (I am told that it would be possible to add such things as on the go playlists and such, but Apple merely chooses not to). As the owner of a 2G I was, of course, upset by the idea that my iPod no longer seemed to exist.

While this design seems to be much more in line with the non-3G what with the return to the wheel as opposed to the independent buttons I'm curious as to where the compatibility will lie. Will earlier models suddenly be supported once again (probably unlikely, the wheel looks to be sized differently and the cutouts for the various ports are different, it might work as a kludge at best)? Will 3G-style products suddenly drop out of sight just like what happened when the design was last changed significantly?

There are some valid questions here that I don't think Apple or many others are bothering to consider. Yes there are advantages to making improved designs, but Apple doesn't seem to be paying any attention to the benefits of a consistent design with only functional improvements.

Re:What about accessories?

[BasilBrush]

The change between 2G and 3G was the cradle connector rather than the conventional firewire port. That's what caused all those unfortunate effects you talk about (I've been hit too). I imagine they will stay with that cradle connector, so other people won't get hit the way we were.

Re:What about accessories?

[mystereys]

So you mean you're not going to go right out and buy the new model? The apple overlords are indeed disappointed with you...

The Newsweek article mentions this: whether current iPodders are going to stick with what they've got or sell it & buy the new one. Personally, I think the rate of buying the new one is directly correlated to the size of the iPodder's wallet.

The pace is innovation that Apple has is great. However, continual support is a bit lacking. This doesn't apply just to iPods. Right now, I'm typing on TiBook with OSX 10.2.8 running. Mac is gradually stopping support for Jaguar in the months since Panther has come out, and thus newer versions of some programs are only coming out for OS X10.3, like Safari. It's a trade-off. You get newer, better (well, at least in most cases) things faster, but support for the older stuff gets dropped quickly. The choice is to upgrade or be left behind.

Re:What about accessories?

[Belgand]

That was indeed part of the issue, but the newer cases (like the new iSkin case that I greatly desire where they finally added in a screen protector) still wouldn't work quite as well with the old 2G models due to the new button placement and the slight change in size.

I still see no reason why firmware couldn't be updated for all models.

Re:What about accessories?

[Belgand]

The problem is that Apple keeps coming out with a new model every year or so. I got my 2G the winter before the 3G came out so by that point it was barely six months old.

For a product this expensive it seems very unreasonable to assume that people are going to be upgrading that often. Car companies likewise have a very expensive product that upgrades on a yearly basis, but they don't introduce such radical changes each year that the owner is coerced into buying a new car every year.

As is often the case it's not the early adopters who get screwed, the know what to expect and often have the surplus cash to lose. The people who really get screwed are the middle adopters. People who buy into a product in the median time between when it becomes widespread, but not mainstream. Sort of like everyone who bought a DVD player around 2001-2002 when they were just cresting into ubiquity. It was at a point where you could still pay $200 for a good quality entry-level model that today (i.e. after the mainstream acceptance) would retail for $100 or less.

Re:What about accessories?

[Anonymous Coward]

The people who really get screwed are the middle adopters.

*sigh* PLEASE tell me how ANYONE who currently owns an OLDER iPOD was SCREWED in ANY WAY!!!!!!! How in hell does Apple releasing a better version SCREW current owners? You are so retarded it's hurting my head...

Re:What about accessories?

[Dominic_Mazzoni]

I'm certainly curious about what this means to the market for iPod accessories. When the 3G came out third-party manufacturers immediately dropped support for 1G and 2G iPods in most cases.

As long as this model uses the same Dock connector (no reason to believe it wouldn't) and isn't a dramatically different size (it appears to be just a few millimeters smaller), almost all accessories will still work. Plus, Apple has done a good job of giving some of the larger accessory manufacturers (like Belkin) early access to new models, so it's quite possible they're already selling accessories that are compatible with both old and new models.

Re:What about accessories?

[Moofie]

And the 3G iPod makes your 2G iPod inferior, how? It still solves the problem you bought it to solve.

This is the computer industry. Get used to seeing betterfastercheaper weeks after you make a purchase. As it was in the beginning, it now and ever shall be.

Re:What about accessories?

[rjung2k]

Car companies likewise have a very expensive product that upgrades on a yearly basis, but they don't introduce such radical changes each year that the owner is coerced into buying a new car every year.

I didn't know Steve Jobs sent goons to the homes of iPod owners to compel them to upgrade whenever a new revision came out.

Re:What about accessories?

[Belgand]

Not really. The buttons are no longer right under the screen so one of the most common and useful accessories, a case, will no longer be supported (or rather, supported as well as the buttons will be obscured).

My personal hope is that the 1G and 2G models will be able to use the new cases and such.

Re:What about accessories?

[Belgand]

Oh, it still works, yes, but it's irritating when a company makes a product that does solve a problem (i.e. the deal-breaker on the iSkin for me is the lack of screen protection, otherwise I think it's the best iPod case on the market. The screen protector, however, is only available in the version that supports the 3G iPod) but chooses to only support a marginally newer product. In many cases 1G and 2G accessories are no longer being made and Apple doesn't support them with firmware anymore. It's like Logan's Run or something and nobody acknowledges that a very slightly less new product even exists.

I don't bitch about the lack of a dock connector. Yeah, it would be nice, but there's no fixing that. I do dislike the lack of software updates and third-party support that is merely being denied because it isn't the newest version on the market.

Re:What about accessories?

[Belgand]

"Buy 'em out boys!"

I'm still recovering from the jumper cables they used to hook a car battery up to my nipples. Apple isn't all sunshine and unicorns.

No, they don't actually force you to upgrade at all, but unlike a car company where support is generally expected for the next decade or so (or perhaps, in computer terms, the next two or three years) they tend to support a product for about a year so far before it gets shoved into the basement with the Newton and other things they don't like to talk about. These days iPod means 3G to Apple, the older models might as well be bus mice.

Re:What about accessories?

[Moofie]

Took me exactly one google search to find this. Sure it's designed for the 3G ipod, but since the screen is the same size. Or go buy a Vaja case that's beautiful and sturdy.

Or do what I do and put some clear contact paper on your screen. (Mine is a PDA screen, but the same idea applies to iPods...)

Deathwish

[Quixote]

I know I'll be flamed to a crisp by the iPod-weilding overlords here, but am I the only one to ask: what's the big deal? So, iPod drops a couple of buttons and looks like a mini; so what? Dropping a couple of buttons and/or adding buttons is not a radical design change. Why's everyone in a frenzy over this little crumb from Apple?

Re:Deathwish

[bcs_metacon.ca]

Standard Apple fan behavior. We tend to go nuts over any minor change (and most changes to Apple products *are* very minor over the life of a particular model). And why not? Why mess with perfection? By definition, any change (minor or not), is an improvement on perfection... logically impossible, but always big news.

Re:Deathwish

[FosterKanig]

A lot of people will like the fact that it 100 dollars less. Some will like the 50% improvement in battery life. Others will dig the fact that you can have multiple on the go playlists. A couple will like the menu redesign. And a handful will like that you can speed up or slow down audio books, with no pitch distortion.

Re:Deathwish

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not 100 dollars less. They're dropping the 15 gig model, making the entry level cost still $300.

Re:Deathwish

[Matey-O]

Mostly because the iPod didn't have a whole lotta butotns in the FIRST place. How many devices do you have with buttons EVERYWHERE? (Digital Cameras come to mind...with cellphones a close second.)

The fact the ipod's hitting it's 4th (5th if you count the mini) generation without a major overhaul of the ui shows how well designed it was in the first place.

Re:Deathwish

[prof_peabody]

Digital cameras have buttons everywhere because you have so many parameters to control. Eg: Aperture Exposure Time Metering type autofocus type autofocus zone flash exposure setting photo viewing and navigation white balance etc etc etc So thanks for posting without thinking. Apples and oranges...

Re:Deathwish

[krray]

It's because you don't own one. Really.

My serial number on my original (and only :) 5G version has me as one of the first 100,000 purchasers. Within a week I simply told my brother he HAS to have one (he does now :).

I have specifically NOT purchased a newer version due to the button layout. Having the buttons on the outer edge of the scroll wheel (original version :) makes it very functional and intuitive to use without looking at it (while driving).

Now that the buttons are back where they belong I'm interested in buying a larger version...

Re:Deathwish

[gamgee5273]

I agreed with you, until I upgraded from my 10GB to my 40GB earlier this year (bought a house, got a nice tax refund, had more than 10GB of music... what can I say?). Anyhow, after driving from Detroit to Miami with the 10GB, i found it to be more than a little difficult to control (and, thus, handed the iPod over to my wife during the trip). Since then, I have found the upper row of buttons much easier to quickly control the iPod.

I'm not saying I dislike the new one, but I think I'll hold on to the old one for a while. :)

Re:Deathwish

[Twirlip of the Mists]

It's not $100 less. It's 33% larger.

I'm also told it's got twice the stain-busting power of the other leading brand, but I have yet to verify this myself.

Re:Deathwish

[Matey-O]

Golly, what was I _thinking_? My last film camera did all of this with, hmm, three buttons and three knobs. (shoot, DOF preview, timer, focus, zoom, f.stop.) On a digital unit, there's more stuff to control, but the controls can also do more than one thing.

Re:Deathwish

[prof_peabody]

As a long time photography enthusiast, having 3 buttons to control that many functions makes using the ccamera very frustrating. When I'm shooting a sailing race, I quickly need to adjust many of the cameras parameters (in less tan 2 seconds). Having 3 buttons may look cool, but is useless from a photography standpoint.

Sure, if you are a point and shoot user, than maybe you want to look at three buttons and say "duh, looky pretty".

Re:Deathwish

[Elwood P Dowd]

And it looks like it has a slightly nicer screen - the LCD looks almost flush with the front bezel.

Re:Deathwish

[Amorpheus_MMS]

A lot of people will like the fact that it 100 dollars less. Some will like the 50% improvement in battery life.

I think with that they'd eliminate the two prime reasons to decide against an iPod.

Re:Deathwish

[sethstorm]

repost due to apple fanbots
I know I'll be flamed to a crisp by the iPod-weilding overlords here, but am I the only one to ask: what's the big deal? So, iPod drops a couple of buttons and looks like a mini; so what? Dropping a couple of buttons and/or adding buttons is not a radical design change. Why's everyone in a frenzy over this little crumb from Apple?

Re:Deathwish

[Matey-O]

Yeah and you're probably one half of one percent of all photographers.

When I was shooting Auto Racing, I would typically prefocus, preset shutterspeed and f.stop. It was hard enough stopping the motion of the cars, I wouldn't be farting around with _everything_ at once.

Further, learning the ins and outs of a Nikon doesn't prepare you for a Canon or Minolta. How long does it take to muddle through learning an iPod?

Re:Deathwish

[Moofie]

As soon as there's a perfect product, Apple will stop improving it.

However, since there will never be a perfect product, I think their R&D wonks don't have to worry about trying to collect unemployment...

Re:Deathwish

[Moofie]

How long does it take to muddle through learning an iPod?

About four seconds. It's not rocket science.

Re:Deathwish

[Matey-O]

Precisely my point.

Lion battery life.

[Moderation abuser]

They don't like to be repeatedly fully discharged. Fully discharging them and recharging them is the quickest way to wear them out. To get the longest use out of them recharge after every use, discharged or not.

Re:Lion battery life.

[Dever]

aren't they normal lithium ion batteries? i would think they would do just fine being run down (not all the way of course, that is damaging) to about 12-15% and then being charged.

i would think all that intuitive circuitry in lion chipsets is designed to eliminate battery shenanigans.

Re:Lion battery life.

[Moderation abuser]

They are normal lithium ion batteries, but the further you run down a lithium ion battery before recharging the fewer recharge cycles you will get out of them. The circuitry protects against gross problems like too fast charging/discharging, it doesn't protect against normal usage patterns.

e.g.
http://www.batteryuniversity.com/parttwo-3 4.htm

It just means charge it up when you can rather than running it to empty before recharge.

Oh snap!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Burn!

Steve's glasses

[Astrorunner]

I know its off topic, but damn... Steve's got some sweet glasses. I wonder where a guy gets a pair like that. Those are. by far. the coolest glasses I've seen. /four-eyes since six years old

Re:Steve's glasses

[nicwolff]

Those are Kazuo Kawasaki frames - they are great, but mine cost about $600 with prescription lenses.

Re:Steve's glasses

[Anonymous Coward]

Where did you get yours?

Re:Steve's glasses

[gmhowell]

Yup, Steveo probably has some ultra expensive frames, but go to your local eyeglass shop with a picture of them, and they'll have certainly seen them. Even if they don't sell the name brand, there are plenty of knock offs available. I have a pair that I got last fall. Cost around $300, but I have those modern auto-darkening lenses, some extra anti-glare coating, and other stuff like that. Also, I've been in glasses since six, like you. Glasses are an every minute of every day thing for me. Since glasses should about two years or so, what's fifty cents per day? Nothing. Foregoing the special lens coatings and infusions, I think it would have been about $150 or so for a pair.

The greatest benefit of the frames is that they are incredibly light. No, they aren't going to stop a hammer blow like some glasses I've had before, but that's what safety goggles are for:)

Another poster mentioned how they might be fake. Maybe. But these are also very thin lenses, even with high strength prescriptions. Toss in the anti-glare, and there is little refraction. Throw in some good camera work, and you should have results like that magazine cover.

Finally, there is one problem: the legs are not super stiff, so it is hard to put them on while wearing a full face helmet on a motorcycle. The legs want to bend around instead of going straight into place. A little practice though, and I figured out the technique.

Re:Steve's glasses

[Eric_Cartman_South_P]

Those are. by far. the coolest glasses I've seen.

Before you get some cool glasses, how about getting some commas? Here's a bunch for you, for free. Cut and paste as needed.

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Re:Steve's glasses

[That's Unpossible!]

Before you get some cool glasses, how about getting some commas?

He can't see! He thought those periods were commas, you insensitive clod!

Re:Steve's glasses

[klang]

Though Steve's glases might be cool .. The "Air Titanium" has been my prefered frame for the last 15 years or so.

http://www.iris-spectacles.co.uk/index.cfm?do=fr am es&brandID=20

http://www.plainsoptical.com/poAirTitanium.htm

http://www.lindberg.com/ ...

Re:Steve's glasses

[Eric_Cartman_South_P]

hehehehehehehehahahahhehe lol thankx

Re:Steve's glasses

[Anonymous Coward]

Frames? What frames? They look like two circles of glass to me. What are you paying the $600 for? The 50 cents worth of metal on your nose?

Re:Steve's glasses

[Peter Cooper]

How do you clean them properly? I push the limits with my sturdily framed glasses, and while these rimless types look great, I can't help but think that cleaning them might prove to be an annoying delicate situation.

Re:Steve's glasses

[gmhowell]

Two methods.

First, hold one lens at the top and bottom. Rub. Repeat for other lens. The trick is to clean the lens you are holding. If you tried to clean the one you aren't holding, you'd crease the metal bridge (it bends pretty far, but it's not as good as some of those spring metal frames or whatever they are called that were my second choice this last go round.) If you squeeze too hard, the pads of your fingers will mark the lens, so don't do that. The mounts over the nose snap out, so you can easily clean out the gunk. Oh, I should also mention that my optometrist convinced me to spring for the anti-scratch coating (and the polarization coating really cut down on the glare) which has worked pretty darned well. By this time, I've usually got dozens of teeny tiny nicks in my lenses. None after ~nine months. Given that the particular coating came with a two year warranty against ANY damage, I guess they had to make good on it.

When stuff really gets into the corners (which happens rarely for me, and I sweat profusely) I take a large cup (about 32 oz.) and drop in two tablets of denture cleaner. It works pretty well getting into the nooks and crannies. Learned this by seeing how many people do the same thing with jewelry.

If you followed my last two notes, you might be wondering why the heck I spent so damned much on the glasses, and got so much stuff. Well, I was gonna do a cheapo Four Eyes type pair of glasses, and get laser corrective surgery later this year, but then my wife got information about a deaf blind tour group trip to Hawaii that sucked up most of that money:)

Re:Steve's glasses

[Peter Cooper]

Thanks for the tips. I use an old t-shirt as my glasses cleaner, so I have some way to evolve still.

About that corrective surgery.. I'm not sure I'd think about having it done at least for another five/ten years when the technology jumps a way. There are the (inevitable) stories of screw ups, pain, and you can't join the (British) Army if you've had it done.. so I imagine there are a number of potential problems. Besides, Hawaii is better :)

Re:Steve's glasses

[gmhowell]

Hawaii better for wife. I had to stay at home and put in extra hours to pay for her trip. Ain't love grand?

I'm actually too old to enlist in the US army now (31).

I regularly use a t-shirt (or whatever I'm wearing) to clean my lenses. For about a month, I even kept them in the case at night and used the special cleaning cloth and all that crap. But I gave up. Chuck 'em around, and they still keep going.

FLAC in the US?

[Brian Puccio]

Be nice if I didn't have to transcode, I'm lazy like that :)

A black faceplate

[MalikChen]

With all the new colors and styles that the iPod is coming out in, I think that the developers have missed one important design: a black (or dark) theme. Is it just me who thinks that a black iPod would just look sweet?

Re:A black faceplate

[Anonymous Coward]

I suppose it's just you ;P

Besides, I doubt Steve will ever go back to the black theme. Remember NeXT?

Also, Apple has been following the fashion trend... in Japan. The original iMac was translucent when everything was translucent in japan, which by the way was a retro fashion from the '70s.

Until Japanese schoolgirls start carrying black cellphones, you can pretty much forget about black theme coming from Apple.

Re:A black faceplate

[adzoox]

Go to colorwarepc.com and have them paint it for you.

OR

you could just get a mini - I would imagine the colors will be mixed up a little bit in it's next generation.

OR

You could get a black exoskin for it.

Re:A black faceplate

[Anonymous Coward]

"Is it just me who thinks that a black iPod would just look sweet?"

• Why's it gotta be all about color?

Re:A black faceplate

[attemptedgoalie]

Because colors have their "owners" right now.

Black: Dell
Silver: HP
White: Apple

Re:A black faceplate

[gunnmjk]

...I think that the developers have missed one important design: a black (or dark) theme. Is it just me who thinks that a black iPod would just look sweet?

Well, White has often been used to signify cleanliness, and purity (Hospitals, Weddings Gowns, etc.) Maybe the developers were thinking that the white is a great metaphor for the iPod. A PURE(ly great) music player.

A call for perspective

[Jack Auf]

In the scope of all things, is it of any real importance that Apple has yet again changed the buttons on the iPod? I own several Macs and an iPod 3G and I couldn't care less.

What does that say about our society when a fairly simple re-design of a product garners such attention? Is it really important? Does it make your life better somehow?

Just get over yourselves.

Re:A call for perspective

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, because we all know that more storage, longer battery life, new UI tweaks & features, and a new easier to use scroll wheel means nothing.

Re:A call for perspective

[ThatWeasel]

I'm a Mac Fan(atic) but a cover story about new buttons are a bit much especially when the other two headlines at the top of the cover are so much more important than some gadget. Iran and Iraq... but heck, that new iPod looks sexy.

Re:A call for perspective

[Seth Finklestein]

You should get your news from Michael Moore, not "News"week.

Re:A call for perspective

[gamgee5273]

It's a question of what the iPod has become in society. The story here, other than the fact that the 4G iPod is coming out, is about the fact that Jobs is on the cover of Newsweek. That's what is actually important - a major weekly considers a new iPod, and the product's impact on society, important enough to put it, and Jobs, on the cover.

Re:A call for perspective

[nysus]

It's called corporate control of the media. My bet is that Newsweek has some kind of relationship with some big music company that has a big stake in iTunes. Hence, you get your bullshit news story and us talking about it like fucking idiots so we can buy! buy! buy! and make lots of executives trick us into making them rich.

Re:A call for perspective

[Jack Auf]

Very, very well said. You cut to the heart of my argument better than I did.

Re:A call for perspective

[EchoMirage]

What does that say about our society when a fairly simple re-design of a product garners such attention? Is it really important? Does it make your life better somehow?

If you'd actually bothered to read the article, you'd have noted that the Newsweek article is about the popularity of all the iPods in society, not just this latest incarnation. Is that news? Well, yes; the iPod is a cultural phenomenon, and it furthermore is changing the way that an extremely influential medium (music) is affecting society. You might poo poo this with an egalitarian snobbery, but it's a worthwhile news trend that Newsweek is rightfully trying to get a pulse on.

As for what it says about our society, mmm...it says to me that our society is interested in commercial products, just like every other society in the world. Perhaps you didn't notice?

Re:A call for perspective

[rafimg]

Nice try, but had you looked at the article, you would have noticed the MSNBC logo. I'll give you three guesses as to what the "MS" stands for. Hardly a case of a corporation wanting iTunes to be successful. Not everything is a conspiracy.

Re:A call for perspective

[Anonymous Coward]

This is slashdot, what are you expecting?

Re:A call for perspective

[DJ Super Dulce]

In the scope of all things, is it of any real importance that Apple has yet again changed the buttons on the iPod? I own several Macs and an iPod 3G and I couldn't care less.

In the scope of all things, which you refer to, not much that we care about is of any real importance. With perspective like that, it's hard to get anything done. If you don't particularly care about things, you can just ignore them. If you don't care about college football, don't visit ESPN.com in the fall. And if you don't care that Apple has changed the position of the buttons on the iPod, there are plenty of articles on the front page.

On the other hand, if what you really care about is other people getting too excited about new-and-improved button placement on an MP3 player, then maybe a little perspective check is in order.

Re:A call for perspective

[Blondie-Wan]

The cover story isn't actually about the new iPod; it's about the iPod phenomenon in general, and it's merely timed to coincide with the release of the latest model. The actual story doesn't even talk about the specs or features of the new model; it only mentions in one place buried deep in the article that there even are new models coming out, and it spends less than a sentence on that. The rest of the article discusses how Apple came to dominate this market, how it came up with the iPod in the first place, how the iPod has transcended the boundaries of a mere consumer product to become a fashion statement, way of life, etc., and so on. This article could just as easily have been written if there weren't new models coming out at all; the only things different would be a couple photos and one sentence.

Re:A call for perspective

[gamgee5273]

You must have a very low view of yourself if a cover story for an iPod has that much control over you and the people around you.

It's a magazine that talks about more than just the new iPod. Try RTFA, getting a clue and then come back and talk with the big boys.

Re:A call for perspective

[gamgee5273]

BTW: Here is the article for you to read: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5457432/site/newsweek/

I keep hearing about this iPod thing...

[Queuetue]

This is basically a modernized walkman without removeable media, right? Why all the hoopla about them removing some buttons from it?

Re:I keep hearing about this iPod thing...

[2nd Post!]

The hoopla is from several things:
UI improvement
Interface improvement
50% more battery life
$100 less

And it isn't a 'modernized walkman', it's a miniaturized/portable 600 disc CD changer :)

Re:I keep hearing about this iPod thing...

[Paulrothrock]

Does a Walkman come with games? Can you sync your address book and calendar to it? Can you keep a bootable system on it in the event of a problem? Can you store and view text files on it? Can you upload digital pictures to it?

It's so much more than a walkman. It's my fourth lobe. (My third being my Powerbook.)

Hell here

[dreamer8815]

Were did all this snow come from?

Re:Hell here

[Anonymous Coward]

Hell here .... Where did all this snow come from?

• 1983 here ... We want our joke back.

iBeard

[jamesl]

Steve needs to get a new iBlade for his iRazor.

Re:iBeard

[gmhowell]

That's not a beard. The only beard in Steve's life is the woman he lives with.

Wow!

[Anonymous Coward]

What a great overpriced MP3 player!

iPod purchase = vote for DRM

[jet_silver]

I'm with sfb (whoever called the parent a troll is an ass). I have a 1G iPod because I liked the idea of the HDD-based player, but it's an idiotic DRM-crippled piece of work and every iPod purchase is a vote for DRM - and iTunes is needlessly complicated and stupid to boot. With iRiver, Cowon and X-Clef offering DRM-free hardware, I will probably only have to wait another six months for one of those manufacturers to get their act together and supply a box as easy to use as the iPod but without the DRM.

I don't even have anything in particular against Apple: I have a MDD G4 and an iBook 800 G3 that has had no problems at all. The iPod is, within its design details, a fine piece of work, but the DRM is annoying in the extreme.

Re:iPod purchase = vote for DRM

[guet]

If you were talking about the iTunes music store, you might have a point. As it is your post doesn't make any sense.

The iPod does NOT require DRM, I don't know where you got that idea. You can play your music in multiple formats, the most widely used being MP3. It also plays DRMed music from the music store, if you choose to use that.

If you want to get the music off it again, there are several apple scripts floating around to do it. The files are only hidden after all.

Fix old problems first!

[geeber]

Does anyone know if the problem that plauged the initial release of the Mini have been fixed - that is, the bad connector which led to noise after a few weeks of use. I tiny four gig player is just the right size for me, but I refuse to buy one until all the kinks have been worked out.

What about the battery life

[Anonymous Coward]

12 hour playtime (so it says above)! Thats a huge improvement in itself.

freeipod.com - legit or scam?

[mrpull]

Although it is for the older models, check out freeipods.com.
(I shamelessly put my referal code in there)...
I've seen threads mentioning it on other "deal" sites and figure it may be legit.

Mr.

Re:freeipod.com - legit or scam?

[wiredbuddy]

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8 &threadm=6019bc74.0406262005.21439b64%40posting.go ogle.com&rnum=2&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dfreeipods.com%2 6hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26selm%3D6019bc74.04 06262005.21439b64%2540posting.google.com%26rnum%3D 2

Re:freeipod.com - legit or scam?

[Anonymous Coward]

*cough* pyramid scheme *cough*

Re:freeipod.com - legit or scam?

[generic-man]

It's a pyramid scheme. They know that 99% of people will get a few friends to sign up, but not enough to earn an iPod. There are also lots of "mysterious reasons" why people get their order cancelled.

Engadget did a little investigative reporting about freeipod.com.

Re:freeipod.com - legit or scam?

[cposs]

From what I've seen, they're really tough on "referal fraud," that is, when you try to sign up under yourself to get your referals done quicker. Everyone on this board who's done it seems to have been caught, and even a few people who just had similar names as their referals (i.e. Sr/Jr).
Anyway, the best way to do this is sign up for ancestry.com or AOL, then cancel the service during the free trial. For ancestry.com, you have to call an 800#, and they may make you call twice if you aren't insistant, but it's not hard. It does seem like a pyramid scheme, though, so beware (even though it seems like the site has been up a couple of month).
Once you get your five referals to complete their offers, they check your info, which takes a week or so, then they let you order your ipod. You can either get a 15 gb, which ships in a week or so, or a mini, which takes an extra month. Be careful, though, because I have heard a personal report from someone claming that right after they signed up, someone used their credit card number to buy some expensive plane tickets, but I think the two are unrelated.
The link to the forum I posted above has a "conga line" going for people who to refer each other and try to organize the process a bit. I've been siting at two completed for about a week, though, so I'll be a link whore, too.

Re:freeipod.com - legit or scam?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yo, fuckhead, make a link next time.

It's not bloody difficult.

<a href="http://www.example.com/">blurb</a>

Then the URL won't get mangled by the SlashDot filters.

new iPod

[schuster]

don't get me wrong- I think the iPod is great. That having been said, this is just a minor revision to the existing product. Does that really warrent steve jobs being on the cover of newsweek?

Re:new iPod

[Sophrosyne]

It isnt just about a minor revision, it's a mix of things such as Apple's recent sale of 100,000,000 songs, the success of the ipod in general and the release of the new iPod...

Re:new iPod

[crawdad62]

I don't think the article has anything to do with the "new" iPod. I'm guessing it has more to do with Apple's dominance in portable music players.

It's the Apple faithful that's freaking about the iPod itself.

Re:new iPod

[crawdad62]

Mod me down for redundancy. I can't think and type at the same time. Or spell correctly for that matter.

Re:new iPod

[schuster]

okay, next question. what looks worse? steve jobs' pic on newsweek or the steve ballmer face-shot on news.com?

Re:new iPod

[Paulrothrock]

Ballmer is way worse. He's a fat, bald man with a goofy smile in a suit. Jobs' isn't a fat bastard, and he's got this great "I'm so cool" grin on his face.

And Jobs doesn't shriek like a howler monkey while sweating profusely.

Left Unsaid was:

[Anonymous Coward]

Does it still use the dock?

Does is still use the same remote connector?

Will there be a "line in" dock?

Is the screen size the same?

Will the 3g iPod be upgradeable to some of the new features?

If the powersavings is mostly done in software, will 3g iPods get more life with a firmware upgrade?

Re:Left Unsaid was:

[phillymjs]

Does it still use the dock?

Almost certainly - now that 3rd-party products (like the BMW connector and Dension ICELink) are using that dock connector, Apple will most likely stick with it for some time-- and I believe it was designed with that in mind.

Does is still use the same remote connector?

Dunno, but probably.

Will there be a "line in" dock?

Doubtful, since the article makes no mention of built-in recording features. You still need a third-party accessory to record, so it would be up to one of those devices to allow line-in.

Is the screen size the same?

The screen size looks the same. The article says the 4G is a bit thinner, but that's apparently it in terms of form factor changes.

Will the 3g iPod be upgradeable to some of the new features?

Wouldn't surprise me at all, it certainly looks feasible. We'll probably get an iPod Firmware Update out of it to add some new features-- I'd guess that the 3G will probably get firmware revision 2.5, and the 4G's firmware will be called 3.0.

If the powersavings is mostly done in software, will 3g iPods get more life with a firmware upgrade?

It's certainly possible, and as a 3G owner, I'd love to see improved battery life in my exisiting unit though I have only run out of juice once in the year that I've had mine.

~Philly

There are some details here.

[mjj12]

Macobserver has a <a href="http://www.macobserver.com/article/2004/07/<nobr>1<wbr></wbr></nobr> 8.1.shtml"> few technical specs</a> of the new model. Apple claim that batterly life is improved by 50%, but I will believe that when I see it. The 20Gb model has been moved to the $299 price point, and the 40Gb model has been moved to the $399 price point, with the 15Gb model being phased out. My guess is that we will see a 60Gb model at the $499 price point when Apple is able to source a good number of the 60Gb 1.8" drives from Toshiba, but that's just a guess in my part.

has anyone actually handled one of these?

[koan]

They feel cheap like they would break if you dropped it 2 feet, I think I'll wait for the Sony *walkman* version they tend to build better stuff than Apple.

Re:has anyone actually handled one of these?

[Chucker23N]

Have you actually *tried* dropping them? iBooks look like they would break if you dropped them one inch, but mine never fussed a single time when I dropped it from my desk (about 5 feet) or my bed (about 3 feet).

Re:has anyone actually handled one of these?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, I know, don't Feed the troll:

I had a great Sony Walkman in highschool.

Several in fact...

It was a marvel of minaturized tech: when not loaded with a cassette it slid shut to a size smaller than a cassette! It was tiny and light, sounded great.

It was also the most fragile piece of consumer tech I have ever owned.

Which is why I had more than one... as it was constantly being replaced under warrany... mostly for drops less than 2 feet.

And it cost a fair bit more than the second iPod i bought yesterday for my household. The first of which has taken a few spills and continues to function *JUST FINE* thank you.

I suppose if you're referring to the low end of the Sony Walkman line intended to compete with the knockoffs, then yes... all that bulk and plastic and their very disposeable nature would lead one to consider hurling them at the pavement to test durability.

Better... my ass.

Re:has anyone actually handled one of these?

[theblueprint]

I was a huge Sony fanboy since the cassette walkman, and I got one of the Mini Disc players, and while the hardware is really ergonomic/sturdy, the software they make you use to write to mini disc is so bad that I've abandoned it and any hope of using another Sony product that involves using any of their software or formats.

Re:has anyone actually handled one of these?

[koan]

The funny thing is "it's always a troll when it doesn't agree with your view" the truth is I really believe Apple products are crap because I have used them, but people like you just can't get past the "troll" thing.
Censorship is alive and well.

Re:has anyone actually handled one of these?

[koan]

Hmmm, write your own software? I am sure someone has felt the same way and written something since there appears to be something written for just about everything.

Re:has anyone actually handled one of these?

[theoneknuckles]

Five feet from your desk? Vertically? I'm 6' 4" tall and rest assured I've never stepped up to a desk that struck me in the shoulders or required a ladder to scale up to the 4' chair required to sit at such a desk.

For reference, standard tables are on average 30" high and chairs will meet your ass at about 18" to 22" depending on your hydraulic settings.

Re:has anyone actually handled one of these?

[koan]

One other thing I notice you use "Anonymous Coward" where I will use my name, that says a lot for your argument.

Re:has anyone actually handled one of these?

[Chucker23N]

See, that's what happens when you live in a country with metric units; you get American units all messed up. Never mind my post.

Re:has anyone actually handled one of these?

[Anonymous Coward]

> I think I'll wait for the Sony *walkman* version they tend to build better stuff

You must be one of the few people who still believes that Sony build quality products.
Their stuff used to be better than their direct competition but now it's just crap, (and overpriced for what it is).

Re:has anyone actually handled one of these?

[dfj225]

Thats good to know...I'm thinking about buying an iBook and would like to find out from someone other than Apple exactly how rugged they are. Also, how about putting the iBook in a bookbag with other books or something of that sort? One of my other big concerns would be hard drive life. I know that the hard drive is supposedly in a ruberized chamber, but do you ever carry yours around w/ the drive spinning? Also, when the computer is hibernating, does the drive stop spinning? thanks

Re:has anyone actually handled one of these?

[base3]

I never cease to be amazed at the self-righteousness of those hiding behind a /. pseudonym not linkable to a real-world identity when berating those who post AC. Please, keep on ranting.

Re:has anyone actually handled one of these?

[koan]

I guess you're a slow learner =)

Re:has anyone actually handled one of these?

[Chucker23N]

Got my iBook July 2002. It's a 12 inch 700 MHz Combo drive model (G3). The hard drive, a Toshiba MK2018GAS, died April this year. But it's not like I ever treated my laptop well - I wanted a machine I could use *anywhere* and that's exactly what I did. So yes, I *did* carry it around with the drive spinning. And I suppose that eventually caused the drive's quality to deteriorate (it first had lots of problems writing and reading data; then it would start getting so far that it couldn't find all of the kernel on the drive any more, and that's when I realized booting from an emergency Linux CD might be a good idea to do backups.)

Replaced it upon others' advice with a Hitachi HTS548060M9AT00 (i.e. a Travel Star with 60 GB). Note that you lose any kind of warranty by replacing a hard drive, and that it's everything but easy.

Also upped RAM, first to 384 Megs, then to 640 Megs. It makes a huge difference. You don't want to use OS X with anything less than 384 Megs, but it won't be a *joy* with anything less than 512 Megs. Everyone will tell you that.

The hardware itself is incredible. Durable, lightweight, and really powerful enough for everyday work (I'm a programming and networking guy), watching DVDs, burning, etc. Of course, it goes without saying that Mac OS X is one of the best modern operating systems out there. As long as you're willing to deal with *slightly* less hardware and software compatibility (and even that seems to keep getting better) than you'd have on x86 machines, you're good to go. As an example, I just bought a Canon PowerShot A80 yesterday (great product I might add). It said on the backside that it would come with Mac OS X drivers. But up to now, I never used those. I plugged the thing in via USB and instantly, through Apple's ImageCapture software, had access to 1) downloading pictures, 2) sharing camera access over the web - thusly also to Windows and Linux PCs (ImageCapture comes with a built-in web server), 3) taking photos from the Mac, either manually or even in periodic intervals (again, this feature can be accessed from other machines through the network) and simple operations like rotating the images. Note again that this worked without *any* configuration - neither on the camera nor on the iBook - and without any glitches. Now, if I wanted advanced functionality such as Canon's photo stitching tool, I would of course have to install that. But the point is, if someone were to bring his camera over and it supports standards like PTP, I'm ready to go to use it. (My experience with using the Canon on Windows XP has been *muchly* different.)

(I should maybe note that the iBook does not come with PCMCIA, decreasing upgradeability. You can, of course, get lots of FireWire devices for external hard drives or TV tuners and whatnot, but Gigabit Ethernet or FireWire 800 will never be options for you.)

If there's anything else you want to know, you may want to register at applenova.com; they have quite a few experienced people there (it's obviously a "fan" board though, but that doesn't mean the people aren't critical of Apple).

Hope that helps.

Re:has anyone actually handled one of these?

[base3]

Heh :).

Re:has anyone actually handled one of these?

[dennism]

I'll vouch for the durability of the iBooks as well -- at least, the older models.

I had one in my backpack along with a heavily padded Dell laptop when it slipped off my shoulder and rolled down a fairly steep hill. I was pretty worried about condition of both laptops, but when I pulled them both out, the iBook (without any padding) had hardly a scratch. The Dell, also didn't have a scratch, but the battery had popped out. The iBook instantly awoke from sleep, and was pretty much exactly the way I had left it.

Not too bad for a laptop with no padding to fair slightly better than the heavily padded laptop.

Re:has anyone actually handled one of these?

[xrissley]

Have had three different laptops (a powerbook from 2000, an ibook from 2001 and lately a Titanium) from Apple, and lots of friends have also some.
I used to travel a lot.
I have always put the laptops in normal bags (either small backpacks, together with books and else, or travel bags, wrapped in a towel or a pair of jeans). I have never ever used one of these laptop bags that screams "I hold a computer inside, steal me quick". My laptops have never suffered from this.
The powerbook has fallen from tables many many times (i am clumsy, and I move it around all the time, and sometimes i forgot it was plugged in for charge, and would trip over the plug). Its plastic got cracked from the worst fall, but no more than estethic damage.
The ibook is my girlfriend's, and it is the laptop we take away with us on holidays. So it ended up going with us in Bali, and we hiked with it in our day bags (because of not wanting to leave it at the hotel ;-) ). It never suffered from it, neither did we, it is unobstrusive and although not so light, its small form factor makes it discreet.
It has sustained a few falls, without any consequences.
It feels and is really rugged. Previous ibook had this clamshell form factor that felt really sturdy, and when Apple re-designed it, they actually had to uphold the previous one on the sturdiness side (aimed for students, so needs to be solid?) Well, they did. Although it is not roundly shaped and does not seem to close in the protective way the clamshell felt, it feels very rugged. And the screen is attached to the back with only one large and solid hinge, feels good and solid. And the case does not crack or bend when you hold it by the side, like a tray. I trust it to be really reliable.
Last to suffer is the titanium: i work for a company that provides us with laptops and my titanium is one. I take it to work and back home every day in a normal backpack, together with books for reading in the train and else. No protective casing or cushioning.
The other day, i was showing a colleague of mine something, and because I was out of airport (wifi) range, I needed to plug into network with a cable. I have forgotten so much about it (because I am wireless all the time and the battery is good enough for having it unplugged when i am not at my desk) that I never pay attention to cable. which is what happened when i stood up in a hurry to answer my phone at the other end of the open space. Guess what? I went away with the cable on my feet and the powerbook just flew across the room from the table to the floor.
Where it laid, waiting for me to pick it up. still running. side of the casing was cracked because it landed from a 5 feet long (and 2 feet down ) flight, on a corner, where the power cable goes in (so the casing is fragilised already, being holed for the plug).
Apart from that, HD check came out with perfect drive, and everything runs fine and dandy. It did not event turn off or else.
I am not saying other laptos would not survive this. I am saying Apple's laptops are solid.

Regarding your issue with HD. I never ever turn off my laptops, they always are on standby in my bags. I usually get about 15 days uptime, at which point something will require a restart -updating system software, or maybe some stupid modem driver that need a restart after updating- if i were not doing any update or else, i would have a much longer uptime since boot. My girlfriend's ibook has once been noted to be at 45 days uptime (I cheked out of curiosity, before rebooting it for an install!). But since she nevers reboot it, just leave it on standby on the coffee table in the living room (we call it "our coffee table iBook"), and opens it every now and then for email or internet or writing a paper or watching a movie, it could have been time where it had a much longer uptime, i just never checked!
(side note: mac OS X allows a laptop to be operational by the time you have fully raised the screen open. with wifi coming back as fast, you are typing the website address as soon as you let your hand of the screen lid! Linux apparently can do that on apple's hardware too)
So standby really is not an issue, more of a bonus!

Re:has anyone actually handled one of these?

[Chucker23N]

Whilst the iBook looks like its case is plastic-only, it's really plastic mixed with magnesium beneath, making it a lot stronger than it looks. My white-translucent plastic cover does have scratches which are visible under unusual lighting conditions. But the actual hardware doesn't seem to care.

Re:has anyone actually handled one of these?

[phillymjs]

My iBook goes with me everywhere in my backpack when I'm on the job, along with a toolkit and a large soft case full of software CDs. I got a Sleevecase from Waterfield Designs, and it provides pretty good protection. The only thing I'd do differently with my next laptop is place something (like a sheet of felt or something else soft and about the same thickness) between the two halves when it's closed-- the weight of the other items in my backpack presses them together, and the finish around the display bezel has worn off in some spots. It's purely cosmetic, but I'm anal-retentive when it comes to keeping my equipment looking as new as possible.

When you put the iBook to sleep, it does spin down the drive-- you wouldn't be able to tell that it was on at all, if not for the pulsing sleep light. Even though it does spin the drive down, though, the iBook wakes up very quickly-- by the time you've got the screen opened and tilted back to where you like it, the iBook is ready for you to resume typing/mousing/whatever.

~Philly

Re:has anyone actually handled one of these?

[Bri3D]

And it cost a fair bit more than the second iPod i bought yesterday for my household. The first of which has taken a few spills and continues to function *JUST FINE* thank you.

It has taken a few spills since YESTERDAY??? That would go a long way to explain why your walkmen broke after 2-foot drops. You just fail to mention that it was after the TENTH 2-foot drop. I must admit the Walkman was probably weaker than an iPod, but not _that_ much weaker.

Re:has anyone actually handled one of these?

[Anonymous Coward]

there is a pcmcia slot in the ibook its just not externally acessible

its under the keyboard :)

Re:has anyone actually handled one of these?

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone remember the Sony DISCMAN? It was a "portable" record player, looked like a tall narrow tombstone, and you slipped the record into it and turned a center knob to clamp the unit onto the record. It was fragile, but rocked. You could hang it on a wall, lay it flat, or stand it on legs that could swivel out. Funky.

You insensitive clods!

[Anonymous Coward]

Heh. Figures.

At least the one I bought yesterday was a great deal. I've had a 20Gig 3G pod since xmas, and the wife's been wanting one ever since she made the switch to iTunes on her two home Winboxes. So yesterday at Futureshop I saw a clearance on a demo openbox 15Gig iPod and had a look, it was covered in fingerprints and had a few small scratches, but it was $40 off list, so I had the guy show it to her. As they were going through the box, he noticed the headphones and the software were missing... so he slips the sleeve with the tag off that box straight onto a new one, and sells her a brand new one at the same price.

Cool.

And now you insensitive clods are making me feel bad for not waiting for the 4G model goddammit!

(Still a good deal, and she loves it)

Re:You insensitive clods!

[Anonymous Coward]

It was pretty common knowledge that iPods would be released any day now for about 4 weeks.

Battery issue?

[Millbuddah]

I've been thinking about picking an ipod up for a while now but have been kept from doing so by all the negative press about the dead battery issue and the high replacement costs. Has Apple done anything about that yet and how much is it to replace the battery nowadays?

Re:Battery issue?

[2nd Post!]

It costs $29-$49 to replace

More here and here.

Re:Steve's glasses, faked?

[PenguinOpus]

Looking closely at the picture and the size of the lenses, I'll bet that Steve has a fake pair of those just for photos. There appears to be little or no refraction at the edges and, even with 1.7 super high index of refraction material, you would see something.

sig,
(-6.5, -8.25)

this didn't scoop a keynote or press event

[johnpaul191]

the LCD iMac leak was the day before MacWorld and Steve was going to pull the "one more thing" line and show everyone with the radical new design.

there is no press conference or anything scheduled for this iPod. the Newsweek thing was THE official first notification. and i guess Apple will follow with emails and press releases. ThinkSecret.com was the first site to pick up on the new iPod with some solid information, and one thing they kept saying was that Apple would not be using a press event to show it off, just some unusual (for them) way to publically get the word out to the masses.

ALSO there are rumors from the same sources that a revision to the iPod mini is coming in August. i guess it is known the manufacturer of the mini's drive has made a 6 gig drive (or has one one the way very very soon now?).

Limp Bizkit?

[HarbV7.0]

Limp Bizkit? I see they haven't implemented the "taste" or "talent" features yet?

Re:Limp Bizkit?

[Anonymous Writer]

Isn't it "limpbizkit" and not "Limp Bizkit"?

SCAM!

[nordicfrost]

A simple, disgusting pyramid SCAM! And you know it so stop plugging it like you're innocent.

Bitch.

Re:dropped from the bed?

[cwest]

Unless like me you're married longer than 15 years and are middle aged, do you have nothing better to do in bed?

MOD PARENT UP +1 WHO DESERVES CREDIT

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm a macrumors regular, but macteens broke the story.

Sigh...

[xgamer04]

I guess I'll be the one to say it: does it support OGG Vorbis yet??

RTFA

[Anonymous Coward]

Jobs says in the article that they have increased the 4G's battery life by quite a bit with careful power conservation. It remains to be seen whether they accomplished that purely in software or not-- if so, 3G users will get the same benefit with just a firmware upgrade.

They're probably still using the same battery as before, and as the previous responder pointed out you can replace it yourself for pretty cheap when the time comes, assuming you're not a complete gimp.

Fuckers!

[zors]

And this has to happen just one month after i bought my brand new 40 gig. Steve Jobs, you fucker!

Re:dropped from the bed?

[Chucker23N]

Nah, surfing the web and talking to my girlfriend over instant messaging is more fun in bed.

Obligatory Ogg Plug

[GarfBond]

But does it play ogg vorbis? :)

Just to let everyone know, the Rio Karma's still alive and kickin', and so is the iRiver H series. Both play Ogg Vorbis files quite well (and as an owner of the former, I'm incredibly pleased with my purchase). IMHO, the Rio Karma's the closest so far towards a true ipod competitor (USB2/Ethernet, 20GB, easy menu system, easy syncing, MP3/OGG/WMA/FLAC), with the notable exception of USB2 not working on mac or linux yet (use the dock's ethernet connection to sync up).

As an aside, an engineer from Rio (name changed in the article) posted his unofficial postulations on why the iPod has yet to materialize with Ogg support to Gizmodo. Essentially, his answer is that the processor originally used in the iPods just aren't powerful enough for it. There's also a rebuttal from a xiph.org guy, so I suspect the answer lies somewhere in the middle. In any case, if the 4g ipods use the same processor as the mini (looking likely) then Ogg support just might be coming yet, though Apple still may not do it for the same political reasons as before (mp3 good enough, aac just the same or better, blah blah blah)

Re:Obligatory Ogg Plug

[Chucker23N]

"Essentially, his answer is that the processor originally used in the iPods just aren't powerful enough for it."

Which is quite correct. Ogg Vorbis's strengthes lie in unmatched quality and "freeness", but its clear weakness is the inefficiency of the encoding algorithms in terms of CPU requirements.

Also, I would never buy a new portable music player that doesn't support the latest MPEG audio standards, namely AAC, and the quality difference between Apple's AAC encoder and Xiph Ogg Vorbis is truly negligible.

Re:Obligatory Ogg Plug

[Meowing]

At the 28 April iTunes anniversary conference call, Arik Hesseldahl from Forbes asked Teh Steve about that.

Arik Hesseldahl: Had a small profit. OK. Any interest whatsoever, since in the open source OGG Vorbis format?

Steve Jobs: We're certainly not getting any requests from customers for it.

So, if support for that format is something that would make you buy and iPod, it might be a good idea to tell them!

Re:Obligatory Ogg Plug

[orcrist]

So, if support for that format is something that would make you buy and iPod, it might be a good idea to tell them!

I told them indirectly in a similar fashion as the parent poster: I bought an iRiver. I'm also confident that any new features iRiver can get to work with my hardware will become available to me via firmware update which they have demonstrated in the past. Apple doesn't seem to give the existing iPod owners this courtesy; or at least that's what I gather from the other posts here.

-chris

Re:Obligatory Ogg Plug

[Meowing]

I told them indirectly in a similar fashion as the parent poster: I bought an iRiver.

The Economist recently published sales figures for the various HD and flash players -- the number of sales lost to iRiver is at the statistical noise level.

Why this matters is interop. If most people can't make good use of your favorite format, you'll continue to see a limited amount of material available in that format. If you want to get the majority vendors' attention, flying under their radar doesn't accomplish much. That's why it's good to contact them.

Re:Obligatory Ogg Plug

[Anonymous Coward]

So much for the value of Slashdot postings.

Apple has twice updated the firmware for all (including 1G) iPods, first to add m4a/aac support, and again to add "Apple Lossless" support.

Re:Obligatory Ogg Plug

[orcrist]

If you want to get the majority vendors' attention...

You obviously misunderstood the point (and slight sarcasm of) of my post. I don't care about getting Apple's attention. I'm completely happy with my player. I do hope to spread the word to other potential buyers, simply so they can enjoy the benefits of a company which already is *paying* attention, though I realize my contribution is miniscule :-P

-chris

Re:Obligatory Ogg Plug

[Meowing]

Ah, okay. Well enjoy your Betamax then.

Re:Obligatory Ogg Plug

[orcrist]

LOL!

That's a really good reply :-) Still wrong though, since there is a major difference. With my Betamax (yeah I had one of those) I was dependant on movies coming out in that format so I could rent or buy them. With my iRiver I encode all my own songs, so even if the company dies I can still enjoy it until the player dies. And as long as the company is still there, I'm still getting firmware updates. Like I said above, iPod users don't have that level of support despite being part of the 'majority' group of consumers.

So in the worst case I have exactly the same option an iPod owner does for the future: buy a new player.

-chris

Here's the new features...

[Swedentom]

- Click wheel (like the iPod Mini)
- A millimeter thinner
- More efficient Menus
- Multiple on-the-go playlists
- Listen to audiobooks slower or 25 percent faster without affecting pitch
- Longer play - 12 hours of battery life due to more power conservation
- Lower price: 40GB - $399, 20GB $299 (no 15 gig model now)
- Still white

Re:Steve's glasses, faked?

[babbage]

That's why photographers use polarizing lens filters:

Polarizing filters can be used with color or black and white film to reduce reflections. This can be essential when photographing through glass or when trying to capture an image of something floating beneath the surface of a lake or pool.

A trained studio photographer can use tricks like polarized lenses & carefully placed lighting to make it seem as if glass is perfectly transparent & non-reflective.

Ah, the whine of the rationalizer

[5n3ak3rp1mp]

Wow, not only are you spouting falsities (nobody controls AAC, dude, and iTunes for Mac/Windows is a perfect way to manage the music on the thing), I really think you'd buy one if you could afford it, so you're just whining and rationalizing. Just continue to whine and don't ever get your hands on one, since you WILL want it.

You sound like the married guy with the hot flirty secretary who keeps telling himself 5 exaggerated things wrong about her every day in order to stay minimally tempted.

Re:Steve's glasses, faked?

[Tim Browse]

I'm no physicist (it took me two goes to even spell the word!) but there is a difference between what you're talking about (reflection) and what the parent was talking about (refraction), no?

I think he meant exactly that - it looks like it is simply transparent glass, with no magnification/lens effect - there's no distortion, so they are probably not lenses, i.e. probably fake glasses.

Then again, on my examination, there appears to be very noticeable refraction on Steve's right cheek, but I've no idea if that would occur without a lens. IANAP, as I mentioned. :-)

As for being a trained studio photographer, I think even they would have a hard time negating the effect of a lens in a scene by using filters.

What about new features?

[Zed2K]

How about an OLED Color screen? Slightly larger? How about being able to store album cover art or lyrics accessed when the song places and scrolled or displayed on the screen if the user wants?

Re:What about new features?

[Anonymous Coward]

You want scrolled lyrics? It's a portable music player, not a karaoke machine! It's meant to sit in your pocket or backpack, be controlled via the remote on the wire, and listened to. Why can some people simply not grok this?

And as for album art, I believe that is already embedded into the track metadata, so if you've got album art in your songs in iTunes it's already in the copies of those files on the iPod. Embedded album art appeared to me to increase the size of the song file by quite a bit, so I don't use it-- I would rather use that space to store more songs.

And a color screen would cut the battery life as well as increase the price-- there already enough people whining about the iPod's price and/or battery life, I don't want to have to hear more of them.

Not just Time... MacWorld, too

[Anonymous Coward]

Steve wasn't happy about Macworld moving to boston from NYC. Apple didn't show for it... and now, they'll see that if they'd done it in NYC like apple wanted, they'd have had yet another big announcement to energize the masses and increase admissions... and profit.

Re:Not just Time... MacWorld, too

[Anonymous Coward]

Steve wasn't happy about Macworld moving to boston from NYC

Well boo-fucking-hoo.

iNeed to know

[slumpy]

Is there any talk about improving the sound quality? I've read several things about ipods having lower sound quality (Not much though) in comparison to other portable players.

Re:iNeed to know

[Anonymous Coward]

And your source for this would be... what?

Yes. Compared to an multi-track reel-to-reel studio recorder with killer headphones and a portable power supply consisting of deep discharge marine batteries and an AC/DC converter, the iPod does have lower sound quality even with high bitrate tracks.

It's true. Or at least... I read that somewhere.

Re:iNeed to know

[Mistah Blue]

You might try better earbuds or headphones. I listen to my iPod (3G 40gig) through Etymotic ER-4S and a Total Airhead amp and have no complaints. It sounds awesome. I just picked up the iPod about a month ago, but from the descriptions it doesn't sound like the 4 generation iPod is going to be something I'm missing out on.

No offense, but why

[Smeagel]

is it Apple's fault that you have much higher taxes? I can understand that you'd want the exact same price as us (maybe what, 70 euro's cheaper?), but to have a cheaper ipod solely because you have higher taxes and lower income is impossible. Maybe in a 3rd world country where the economy isn't so globalized, but if your idea came about next thing you would know european countries would be by far outselling the US in iPod's -- and mysteriously there'd be thousands up on ebay that were sold in europe.... Hell many wouldn't even take that step, I have family in Europe, I'd have them go to a shop and by one for me and send it over.

Re:No offense, but why

[mabinogi]

No, it's not apple's fault, but it's something Apple have to deal with when trying to sell in that country...

Though I'm pretty sure they're worked out what people are willing spend in each of their markets, and have set the rate accordingly - taking care of course not to make the differences between regions too great which would cause imports to undermine their pricing...

crap

[ivano]

goto www.apple.be and the 15G is 349 euro (without th 21% begian sales tax it's 289 euro)

fyi 40G is 549 euro

Have no idea if you're a troll or not - maybe you come from a EU country with 50% tax or something but since belgian is pretty much a representative country in the EU I think my prices above are a bit more representative too and so the yanks can make a better comparison QED

ciao

yah sure if your rich

[SmallFurryCreature]

Name the price of those 4gb cards plus a player that can even handle them (many are restricted to 512mb expansion) add the two together and see how many iPod's you can buy for that that still has a couple of times the space.

Memorie devices do have longer battery lives as the moving HD sucks a lot of juice but for the fast majority of people that is not a problem. Use it a couple of hours a day, plug it into the recharger when home and you never run out. People have already been trained to empty their pockets and recharge with phones and pda's.

Although I got to admit that I am currently looking for a cheap memory device since my current Nomad Zen battery life of about 8 hours means it often cuts out during work. Not good if you work in a factory and you have to spend the last hour of the night shift without music to keep you going.

Still no gapless playback

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a 3G iPod, which puts a small gap in between each song to load up the song from the hard drive. When listening to live albums you hear the crowd screaming in between tracks followed by a small gap of silence. I'm disappointed that the new ones still haven't solved this problem by loading a buffer in between tracks.

I like the clickwheel though, definately easier to use than the tapping that you have to do on the 3Gs.

Re:Still no gapless playback

[aduzik]

I thought the idea behind the iPod was that it loaded about 30 minutes of music into a buffer -- a conveniently-sized 32 MB buffer -- so that it would only have to spin up the hard drive occasionally and thus conserve battery power. If that is, in fact, the case, then something else must account for the gap between songs -- something that could probably be corrected with a firmware upgrade. Perhaps it does not start decompressing the next track until the previous track has been completely played? In any case, gapless playback would be a nice feature in my book.

Old News

[Anonymous Coward]

Futureshop.ca has had pictures and info up for a week already.

Real News

[blackula]

I think the real news is that a copy of Newsweek is $3.95 nowadays. That's just absurd.

Also, please fix SKIPPING

[Ars-Fartsica]

Don't tell me the iPod doesn't skip. It does intra-track buggering but not inter-track buffering. On a good sprint I can reliably get the unit to skip between songs. Very annoying.

Freudian slip alert

[Ars-Fartsica]

Well, I always thought Apple was pretty gay.

Dump the old one

[Dr. Sigmund Freud]

I didn't care much for the 3rd gen design either.

Apple will likely ship off all remaining inventory of the (3rd gen) iPod to HP, were Carly should be able to sell 'em as the hPod - the model that came before the current iPod.

Number 1 on my feature wishlist...

[SenorCitizen]

...would be gapless MP3 playback, like on the Rio and coming up (or already there?) on the iRiver iHP series. It's just a pain in the butt listening to live or DJ mix CD's with the annoying pause between tracks.

I can't understand why this feature isn't already in iPods - it really should be on top of the developers' todo list. Maybe Apple is so convinced that "nobody listens to albums no more"?

This might get me to get one

[harlows_monkeys]

OK, this is interesting. My Archos 15 gig is almost perfect, but I need more space. I've thought about the 40 gig iPod, but the price is a bit too high. However, at $400, that changes things. Wait until there is a $30-$50 off sale at Amazon, and a $100 off promotion for signing up for a year of Audible.com (which I've been interested in trying), and that gets it down to $250-$280 (Amazon is one of the dealers at which you can use the Audible discount). I'd snap one up in an instant then.

That blog is satire

[Anonymous Coward]

You know that's not really Steve's blog, right? It's satire. Some other guy runs it.

/me laughs at conspiracy nuts

[Anonymous Coward]

My bet is that Newsweek has some kind of relationship with some big music company that has a big stake in iTunes.

More uninformed consipracy mumbo-jumbo from the Tinfoil Hat Brigade.

Fifteen seconds of Googling ("who owns Newsweek") shows that Newsweek is owned by The Washington Post Company. Visiting their web site shows that The Washington Post Company owns no stake in any record/music company. Additional Googling shows no evidence that any record/music company owns any stake in The Washington Post Company.

The main reason Newsweek got this scoop is because in 2002 Time Magazine got the last one, and made its story about the new flat-panel iMac publically available online before the machine was officially unveiled at MacWorld-- thus drawing the ire of Steve Jobs.

This time, the iPod article *is* the major part of the unveiling, though I'm sure Apple press releases and a new Apple.com front page will follow tomorrow or Tuesday.

Archos

[moltar77]

I can attest to what you said about the Archos player. I have the Archos Multimedia Jukebox (20GB) which does a fine job of playing mp3's, but it's just a little too big to carry around in your pocket and the battery life isn't that great. It's a nice little device in that it can do many things, the problem is it just doesn't do any of those things extremely well (I cannot speak for any newer models that have come out).

This is why I am buying an iPod. I want to listen to music and I want something that can last longer and will fit in my pocket better. It can't do nearly as much as the Archos player, but what it does do, it does much better.

Or....

[benna]

...your battery just isn't what it used to be. Batteries to start to have less life after a while.

Modded as interesting?

[Anonymous Coward]

That should be moderated as "insensitive" considering that bandwidth isn't free. Thank you for making us web developer's lives more difficult.

Re:Modded as interesting?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you don't wan't people wasting your precious bandwidth, why do you have a website?

Yuk - bad design.

[grahamtriggs]

OK, I'll admit I haven't tried the iPod mini yet, but I do have a recent iPod, and before that had one of the earlier 20gig models.

Yes, the newer iPods are curvier and sexier because of it, but the ergonomics of the touch buttons is TERRIBLE. The original iPod - with 'hard' buttons arranged around the wheel is a LOT more user-friendly... specifically, you actually get some tactile feedback as to whether you have pressed a button, or not...

With the touch controls, it is FAR too easy to either fail to press a button, press a button when you don't intend to, or even double-press accidentally.

Why can't we have an iPod with sexy curves and tactile buttons?

Re:Yuk - bad design.

[hondo77]

Yes, the newer iPods are curvier and sexier because of it, but the ergonomics of the touch buttons is TERRIBLE.

Writing as someone who uses his iPod in the dock 99% of the time, I like the 3g touch buttons much more than the 1g hard buttons. I don't have to put my hand behind the iPod to push a button and having the click sound on gives me all the feedback I need.

Why can't we have an iPod with sexy curves and tactile buttons?

I think you're confusing iPods with Jeri Ryan :-).

Re:Yuk - bad design.

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you're confusing iPods with Jeri Ryan.

Huh? He didn't say anything about taking it to a sex club.

Re:Yuk - bad design.

[Anonymous Coward]

The new design DOES take that into account. With the buttons situated beneath the touch wheel, you have to actually press the wheel to activate a button....tactile.

This is intuitive, since the wheel itself uses touch senseticity to work, and thus couldn't otherwise be distinguished from the buttons beneath.

Still no radio?!?

[Baki]

What a dissapointment. Why not add a radio, for the occasion that you want to hear some news.

Anyone knows a good MP3 player that has both a radio and audiobook tempo adjustment? I would buy an Iriver player, but they don't have tempo adjustment. It seems I'll have to wait another year for the ultimate player (as replacement for my old pjbox).

Re:Still no radio?!?

[Nexx]

There's no radio because Apple wants to sell the same box internationally.

Personally, I don't listen to radio, so it's not a big loss to me.

Re:Still no radio?!?

[orcrist]

I would buy an Iriver player, but they don't have tempo adjustment.

Maybe not yet, but iriver is probably still a good bet, since they have been very active with their firmware updates. They seem offer significant improvements with each update. Just take a look at the latest update. So who knows, maybe that's coming?

In any case I'm wildly happy with this player: tons of functionality over the ipod (radio, recording, built-in mike, standard usb-storage protocol so I don't need proprietary software to copy songs and it doubles as a general file transporter), and it already has 12+ hours playtime: here and now. I just flew over to Germany from California non-stop a few weeks ago and I couldn't help but gloat (quietly, of course) about a fellow passenger and his obvious disappointment as his shiny iPod gave out several hours before the end of the flight ;-)

-chris

Re:Still no radio?!?

[Anonymous Coward]

There's no radio because Apple wants to sell the same box internationally.

Yeah, 'cause everybody knows those third world slobs don't have radio.

Re:Still no radio?!?

[Anonymous Coward]

Imagine a world where not every country used the same frequencies for the radio, scary isn't it?

Re:Still no radio?!?

[pangel83]

The iRiver series (Hxxx) with similar functionality have radio (FM only though), and also an option to select your country of residence in order to adjust radio settings appropriatelly (Europe / Japan / USA)

Creepy Newsweek cover shot of Jobs

[Zhe Mappel]

Steve's customary self-satisfied guru act is one thing. We can handle that. But what's up with this new look--jaw set, brow knit, eyes flaring wildly, carefully untended stubble shadowing a creepy sidelong glance?

It looks like a public service announcement: "Kids, don't get into the car with a stranger who offers you an iPod."

i think thinksecret.com was first

[johnpaul191]

i think thinksecret.com actually was first to break it... a few other rumor sites have been crediting them as being the first with the story

Existence = upgrades?

[panicboy]

Apple as well decided to more or less drop support of the older models up to and including the lack of firmware updates to provide many of the same features as present in the new models (I am told that it would be possible to add such things as on the go playlists and such, but Apple merely chooses not to). As the owner of a 2G I was, of course, upset by the idea that my iPod no longer seemed to exist.

You've got a great product that does what you want it to, and you're feeling "screwed" because the newer models have better features? Kinda like someone who got a computer 3 years ago feels screwed 'cause today's computers are better?

Yeah, you're talking about firmware. So hpw many applications have you bought that came with ongoing, free software updates, despite the fact that I'm told such a thing is possible?

Re:Existence = upgrades?

[orcrist]

Yeah, you're talking about firmware. So hpw many applications have you bought that came with ongoing, free software updates, despite the fact that I'm told such a thing is possible?

Well, iRiver's been fantastic in that department. After seeing that owners of the legacy iHP-100 and some other models got ogg support *after* those models were no longer in the stores, it was clear they don't leave their existing customers in the lurch. That was just another reason for me to buy from them.

-chris

Offtopic?

[SpooForBrains]

So, parent complains that there were features of the iPod UI that he didn't know about, and apparently weren't obvious. So, if he had read the manual he would have known about those things. How is pointing that out off topic?

Reading the manual may not be the ubergeek thing to do, but isn't it a good idea to know all the things that the expensive toy you just bought can do?

Re:Steve's glasses, faked?

[mbourgon]

*ROFL* Yeah! They've been photoshopped. Look in the reflection... the photo was taken in Germany.
*ROFL*

They ARE tactile

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, the 4G's buttons ARE clicky - like a snapple cap.

I really wish...

[ekgringo]

...they change the headphone cable. I was under the impression that all the modern portable music players had seen the light and supplied headphones that plug in at a 90 degree angle to the device. My iPod remote is already shorting out due to it constantly hitting my, um, abdominal muscles. Well, it could also have something to do with me saving the iPod from impacting concrete by catching the cord...

I guess they should have put Spiderman on front

[Anonymous Coward]

This is the same mag that has done issues with "The Year of the Matrix" last year and a big Spiderman 2 thing on the front.

The cover is a tool for selling magazines. If it is also an earth-shattering topic that's barely more than concidence.

Better Battery Life for 3G iPods??

[gunnmjk]

From The Article: Longer play. Coast-to-coasters rejoice: the new iPods are rated for 12 hours of rockin' between charges--a 50 percent boost in battery life. This is accomplished, Apple says, not by a heavier battery but diligent conservation of power.

Better battery conservation? Can anybody tell me if this would be a hardware or software thing? I have a 3G iPod, and if they found a way to give it better battery conservation simply by updating the firmware, I'll be sure to rejoice!

The flaw of the 3G iPod

[zerocircle]

Writing as someone who uses his iPod in the dock 99% of the time, I like the 3g touch buttons much more than the 1g hard buttons. I don't have to put my hand behind the iPod to push a button and having the click sound on gives me all the feedback I need.

Writing as someone who uses his iPod in his car or his pocket 80% of the time (and on a desk the other 20%), I can't tell you how frustrated I am that the 3G design isn't conducive to eyes-free use. The touch buttons are great if the iPod is sitting in front of you and you can hand-eye your finger to the target, sure -- but if you can't reasonably divert your attention and stare at the thing long enough to find the right button and touch it with the correct pressure, it's a mess. If you can't look at it, you have to divert even more attention to feeling around on the 3G iPod, because if you lay your finger in the wrong spot, you're going to unintentionally hit a button. Tactile buttons are necessary when you can't focus on the gadget.

I got my iPod the same day a friend got her iPod mini (on mini launch day, in fact), and the moment I held the mini, I knew the click wheel was going to be on the next iPod revision. This is what the iPod should have been from the beginning.

Well...actually, the mini is the perfect size. Until higher-capacity storage shrinks that far, the 4G iPod is as perfect as it gets.

why i prefer my iriver h140 to any ipod

[pangel83]

I have used both of them in the past(ipod 2nd gen, and iriver H140), and this is a listing of my thoughts on both products. please note that my experience with the ipod was relatively short, i feel that i have a good knowledge of all the features of the device, but please dont flame me if i made a mistake, just corrent me

- Ipod had a battery life of around 8 hours, while with iriver h140 i have experienced average battery lifes of 16 hours

- ipod is smaller slightly smaller than iriver hseries

- iriver remote has lcd screen, and provides access to ALL features of the device and to all the menus. you can use everything without ever touching the main module

- iriver leather case sucks (why brown leather???) while ipods rocks

- iriver has fm radio receiver, ipod doesn't

- iriver has built in microphone (which is of very good quality for a built in microphone). also there you have the option to connect an external microhone

- iriver has built in both optical input and outputs (which work as analogue as well)

- iriver has WOW and SRS audio filters, i don't remember something like that existing on the ipod

- iriver DOES NOT ANY SOFTWARE AT ALL in order to connect to a pc, apart from a basic USB storage driver. i find the simplicity of just chucking the songs you want to the device unparraled compared to the burden of having to install an extra piece of proprietory software

- you have the option to install a media indexer on your pc (which is slightly buggy at the moment) which builds a database of all the songs you have in the device. after that you can broswe by genre / artist / album (normally you get a filemanager). the database however increases the boot time of the device to about 30 seconds

- it plays MP3, WMA, ASF, WAV and OGG while ipod has AAC, MP3, AIFF, WAV

- the 40gb iriver costs as much as the 20gb ipod

- i believe that the ipod is much more of a fashion item, than a device that will meet the requirements of the average geek :)

Re:why i prefer my iriver h140 to any ipod

[Anonymous Coward]

Interesting analysis - everything you say is true. I have a 20g ipod, my colleague across the desk last week bought a 40gb iRiver.

My comments:
- on paper, and technically, the iRiver beats the ipod. it has more features, and i must say the battery life is impressive.
- radio is quite nice, and extra features like recording would probably come in handy at some point.

HOWEVER:
- it's simply not an ipod. it's not "nice" to use, it looks very ugly, that brown case is hideous and it is quite bulky in reality.
- something simple like moving back to the list of songs on the album you've chosen took me a while to figure out (minutes rather than seconds).

Case in point is this: the first day he had the iRiver, i watched him with furrowed brow, manual in one hand, iRiver in the other, a thick cloud of concentration hard on his face as he tried to figure out how to use it.

It might be "better", but it just ain't as nice to use. Me - i'll spend the extra for less features and gimmicks. "More" isn't always more...

You won't find a mini with no hard drive...

[mbessey]

The CF form-factor hard drive in the iPod mini doesn't work in (most?) cameras. Something's different about the firmware on the drive, I guess.

More details here

-Mark

Yes, time for a little of the old ultraviolence

[_damnit_]

They see you walking about with your pretty little white clickety box maybe playing a little Ludwig van and they'll soon give you a nice beating. Better served to just have a little milk and keep the clicky box hidden at home.

[I don't know why I wrote this. It's late and the previous post reminded me of Kubrick.]

well, if president bush can manage it...

[Anonymous Coward]

why not steve? he's at least 80 points higher on any given IQ scale

This is NOT Steve Jobs blog

[Anonymous Coward]

Read the bottom of this web page. This is not Steve Jobs blog. This is a parody. Do you really think that Steve Jobs would host a blog on a hosting service outside of Apple or Pixar?

Obligatory FLAC Plug

[Bklyn]

I for one have requested FLAC support, and hopefully other lossless audio geeks have as well. That and gapless playback would make the iPod beyond perfect. Right now its just near-perfect.

You can put the WAV files packed up inside your FLAC files onto the iPod pretty easily (albeit slowly) with Anapod Explorer, but you'd be able to fit twice as many if the iPod supported them natively.

Pretty please?

Re:Obligatory FLAC Plug

[Meowing]

I for one have requested FLAC support, and hopefully other lossless audio geeks have as well.

This one I don't think is a very big deal, since iPods do have a lossless codec now. Yes, it means that existing FLAC files require conversion, but it's (obviously) a lossless conversion.

Re:Obligatory FLAC Plug

[Bklyn]

This one I don't think is a very big deal

To me it is. To switch from FLAC to Apple Lossless would be a major pain in the ass. I have a lot of these files; hundreds of gigabytes worth. I keep them in FLAC format because they are supported more or less natively by:

• WinAMP and Xmms (with plugins)
• Nero (with a plugin)
• My Squeezebox
• Tag&Rename and MediaTagger, the two best audio file taggers I've encountered (Windows)
• Formerly, my Rio Karma. But it was a POS and I sold it on ebay.

FLAC is audio format that best suits my usage patterns, which is why I'd like to be able to use it with my iPod. Which, of course, is the best portable audio player around.

Converting everything over to Apple Lossless would be a large time investment, not to mention the fact that there don't seem to be any standalone encoders for it (URL me if you've got one, I'm all ears). I have a number of scripts I use for converting other lossless audio files to FLAC and tagging FLAC files I download, so cross-platform, command line tools are my preference.

New Iraqi Strongman Steve Jobs

[lifespan]

As the page was downloading on my tired old 56k connection I saw the headline, "New Iraqi Strongman", then the scary looking face of a man that is clearly evil. What the hell is he doing with an iPod plugged into his torture-scream receptors?

Re:dropped from the bed?

[triso]

Nah, surfing the web and talking to my girlfriend over instant messaging is more fun in bed

Hmmmm. Is she surfing the web and chatting with you from her side of your bed?