Slashdot Mirror
New Apple iPod with Photo Capabilities
artlu was the first of many to submit: "I was just watching my Dow Jones streaming news wire, and I saw that Apple is releasing a new iPod that will have photo captabilities. The news stated that the new iPod will be able to hold 25,000 photos as well as your traditional iPod functionality." Apple's got a page up about the iPod Photo and of course a press release.
One of those little extra touches that always puts Apple products ahead of their competitors.
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
Overkill for some, not all. I'm using almost 30 GB right now and while I don't listen to all of that every week, it's incredibly nice having all my music in one place. If the 60 had been available when I bought my 40 GB just 3 months ago, I'd have bought it.
-- i am jack's amusing sig file
The only thing that bothers me about the U2 iPod is the fact that it is a sweet jet black color, but still uses the white ear buds...
[n8.r0n] http://petesweb.spymac.net/
I predict that people who buy iPods with this will use it - people will store their entire digital photo libraries on it and whip out the iPod to show friends and family photos they've taken.
While this functionality will not sell iPods alone, I think it has great potential to make an iPod that's a "I'd kind of like this" into a "I really want this". Slashdotters are, as usual, not what this iPod's aimed at. Think more in terms of proud family members - mothers and aunts especially.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
http://www.apple.com/ipodphoto/: "Use the included AV cable to connect iPod Photo to a projector or TV."
Every version of the iPod was predicted to "fail". From the original 5Mb to the mini.
And every prediction was incorrect, to say the least.
The iPod Photo will be wildly successful, and evolve to be the standard by which all others are judged.
You're an idiot.
Sure if you had to edit some XML file it would never happen but Apple doesn't make you do that. It stores meta-data without you even noticing: meta-information from cameras is transparently copied over and used, other meta-data is attached just by dragging a photo to a folder.
The same is true of album art, drag and drop and it's there.
Not everything (fails to) work like Windows: that's why those of us who value our time pay a little extra to buy a properly designed system rather than some cobbled together crap from Dell and Windows.
Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
That's only if you don't use the photo feature that you presumably paid an extra $100 to have. Battery life drops to 5 hours if you're watching slide shows while you listen to music. And they're warning customers now about the battery: "Rechargeable batteries have a limited number of charge cycles and may eventually need to be replaced. Battery life and the number of charge cycles vary by use and settings. See www.apple.com/batteries for more information."
Does anyone else think that this a bit overkill. 60Gb is a LOT when you are just talking about music and pictures.
So you're saying 40 gb ought to be enough for anybody? ;^) Seriously, I agree, this is overkill, but not for the same reason. I'm happy to see bigger drives on these things, but I don't really understand the need to make this into a photo device too. Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining, and I could see how it could be useful (esp. coupled with a tool to transfer digital photos from card media directly to the ipod without the computer, so you could keep re-using the card during a long photo shoot), but the screen size on an ipod is way too small to actually make it a useful photo viewer. Hell, the LCD on my digital camera (Sony T1) is bigger than the ipod screen. I'm not sure it's worth the loss in battery life -- I think I'd prefer a 60G ipod without a color screen for $100-200 less.
Then again, like I said, this could be really useful for photographers, especially given the ability to easily connect the ipod to a TV or monitor to show the photos. Again, crucial here would be the ability to easily talk directly to the ipod without having to go to your mac to transfer anything.
trust me, you don't want the apple earbuds anyways, whatever color they are.
sony makes some very nice earbuds that come in black. surprisingly good sound quality, and they don't hurt your ears one bit. i've had them on for hours at a time with no discomfort. sony has a lot of similar ones, but the mdr-ex71's are great.
it helps to break them in a bit first. crank up the audio from the ipod to full for 5 or 6 minutes, and you're all set.
Does it strike anybody else as odd that you manage your photos on this thing using iTunes instead of iPhoto where you are presumably managing your photos? I realize that iTunes already has all the iPod management code built in and that it would be awkward to have iPhoto and iTunes working to manage the iPod at the same time - but it still feels contrived.
Maybe we're supposed to just deal with it until Apple gets Tiger out the door and Sync services are built into the OS proper? It just doesn't feel very Mac-Like this way...
Culture is more than commerce
The white earbuds aren't all that great anyway. The only reason to keep 'em is so that you can show off to the world the fact that you have an iPod. The best low-profile headphones around (in terms of bang for the buck) are the Sony Fontopia MDX-EX71SL in-ears, in my opinion. If you can get used to wearing headphones that are essentially silicone earplugs (no problem for me, I worked landscaping last summer and wore them all the time) then you'll probably be really pleased by the amount of detail they can put out, and the fact that they have pretty good noise-isolation characteristics is a nice bonus since you can listen to music over the ambient noise without having to crank the volume up to distortion levels. And they're black. Just make sure to get the SL version, there's an LP that looks the same but is lower in quality. And I guess that there's a WX series now, that's just like the SLs except in white, for the iPod Elite. Hunt around and you can probably find them online for $35 or so.
I will consider getting the 60gb model, but I may just wait until 80gb models come out.
You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
Actually a better bet is the recently mentioned iRiver PMP-1X0 series which runs a linux kernel. They have a ton more options for video playback and look a little cooler than the GMini imo. Which bringing this back OT is the only thing the iPod has going for it anymore (style). And being the first out of the gate. But now, the iPod-killer label has drifted out of use slightly since it doesnt need to be killed. Its slowly becoming a competitor working hard to keep its market share. This because enthusiats dont really care about the iPod out there since there are SO many options out there now.
...and it should be known by now
No offense calling your baby klunky. My point is that the iPod is almost like a fashion accessory these days. Even my wife, who doesn't care 2 shits about technology, could spot an iPod 100m away.
Also, the article you mention is from someone that does NOT want to be recogonized by their iPod.. I would guess that's the minority.
Regarless, I would go with an Archos like device myself... of course, I'm too lazy to carry around a phone AND a mp3 player... That's why I'm waiting for the king-of-all-devices
Live web cams
True. But even if you take out the people who are buying them to be cool, what about the people who don't know jack about technology and aren't going to research the alternatives and just buy what they see people using? Those people are (and will continue) flocking to the iPod, and they probably make up a huge portion of the population.
A lot like Windows - people go to buy a computer, and they get one that looks like their neighbor's computer or the one they have at the office. They don't necessarily even consider taking the time to see if OS X would be better for them. They just go to Best Buy or wherever and buy A Computer.
It's just that Apple has positioned themselves on the right side of that this time.
I think cel phones are a bit different, b/c often what phone you get depends on what company you're getting your service from. If they hand you a free Nokia, you've got a Nokia. If they hand you a free Motorola, you've got a free Motorola. If they've got a discount on the latest Samsung, you buy that. Again, most people just go get a cel phone, and in this case they pay less attention to brand name (or getting one like their neighbor's) and take what's presented to them. Yes, there are people who research the best phone and look at all the options etc, but the majority of the general populus takes what the cellular company offers them.
I do agree with you about the U2 iPod. Ok, so a small throng of die-hard U2 fans will get them, along with a few people who want to look cool by having a (OMG!) BLACK iPod! But then, I get the feeling they're not designed to be on the market for very long, and will probably be the first in a series of such "special editions."
Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
- Size
- Integration with jukebox software
The iPod wins hands down on both fronts. A comparable iRiver player (for example) includes an FM tuner, from my perspective a completely useless feature, and is 20% larger. 20GB is probably enough for me for the next few years, so I'm not interested in replacing it with a larger device. I use it for one purpose - playing music (both while I'm mobile and through my HiFi when I'm at home). I don't use half of the `features' my current (3G) player has, so I'm not interested in replacing it with a device suffering from feature creep. Battery life is acceptable most of the time (the only time I've ever wished for more was while I was flying to Japan, and that's not something I do regularly). There are two things that would persuade me to replace it:I am TheRaven on Soylent News