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.

142 of 776 comments (clear)

  1. A LOT more new stuff... by daveschroeder · · Score: 5, Informative

    In addition to the iPod Photo, which comes in 40GB and new 60GB flavors for $499 and $599 respectively, there's also:

    - iPod U2 Special Edition ($349)

    - The Complete U2, a digital box set of every song ever recorded by U2, plus some crazy and rare recordings, available in November for $149 via the iTunes Music Store, with a $50 certificate towards it with the iPod U2 Edition

    - iTunes 4.7

    - QuickTime 6.5.2

    - iPod Updater 3.0.4 (2004-10-20)

    - iPod-focused Apple Store: iPod Store

    - EU iTunes Music Store added to 9 more European nations, with over 700,000 songs

    - iTunes Music Store is coming to Canada in November

    - Press releases

    Other cool things: in addition to its dock, the iPod Photo can also even output video via its own headphone jack with a special 1/8" AV cable, and the 220x176 65536-color screen also displays album art while playing, as well as color games, etc! (Don't have much/any album art? Get it!)

    While Steve Jobs talked at length during the presentation about why Apple isn't doing video on a portable device itself for reasons of battery life, device/screen size, weight, etc, now that this device has video output capabilities, I think it's a clear sign of the direction; that is, future devices - or future firmware - being able to output video content to an external monitor/projector. Imagine this: your iPod dock, already at your entertainment center. The iTunes Movie Store (or, your own iMovie content). H.264/MPEG AVC (Microsoft WMV9/VC-1 has hit some snags in its bid for standardization). Download a movie, sync to your iPod. Drop the iPod in its video dock at your TV (or ANY device that has video inputs). Done. And a LOT cleaner and easier than having a whole separate computer that needs to be maintained as a part of your entertainment center. Add 802.11g with things like AirPort Express to the mix, and who knows what might come...

    1. Re:A LOT more new stuff... by natron+2.0 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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...

    2. Re:A LOT more new stuff... by SilentChris · · Score: 5, Informative

      To be honest, I'm extremely disppointed in the iPod Photo offering. Before I get marked down as a troll, I have many legitimate reasons:

      I own an Archos gMini400. It plays DivX/XviD videos (full movies -- got Lord of the Rings and about a dozen MST3K episodes on this thing right now), views photos on screen and on TV (just like iPod Photo), plays music with album art (just like iPod Photo) and has 10 hours claimed battery life playing music, 5 hours video (although I've had it run closer to 7 hours). I also got mine for $340 by using CNet's pricewatcher feature.

      Aside from the bigger hard drive, there's absolutely nothing to sway me to the iPod Photo from my gMini. The price is right, the interface is good (not as great as iPod's but few are) but an interface isn't worth $140 to me. The Archos works on both Mac and PC flawlessly, and even has a built-in CF slot (something photo sites have already frowned the iPod upon).

      Unfortunately, I thought Apple's first color would have a lot more revolutionary features. Instead, they're playing catchup to other companies, with an expensive and not-so-worthy introduction into colored screens (I mean come on... they don't even win on battery life anymore). I'm personally very glad I jumped Apple's iPod ship a few months ago.

    3. Re:A LOT more new stuff... by Syriloth · · Score: 5, Interesting

      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.

    4. Re:A LOT more new stuff... by numark · · Score: 3, Informative

      It looks like the only new firmware in this latest updater is the iPod Photo 1.0 firmware. Nothing else has changed from what I can tell, so there's really no need to download it if you don't want to.

      --
      Want Slashdot headlines on your site? Try SlashHead
    5. Re:A LOT more new stuff... by Dark+Paladin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The second reason why Mr. Jobs isn't offering "video on the iPod" is for legal liability.

      Yes, the Archos lets you watch xvid/divx movies on it, but I'm willing to bet they don't include a DVD ripper. So this is a niche product where they assume the buyers know how to get xvid movies (or rip them themselves instead of sucking them via P2P).

      So if Mr. Jobs were to offer an iPod with video capability, he'd have to have the infrastructure in place to support it. iTunes offered out of the box MP3/AIFF ripping for the iPod.

      Odds are, once he can convince the MPAA the way he convinced the RIAA that having digital movies available for download is not the equivalent to the "Boston Strangler", then we'll see an iPod Video as well as an iPod Photo. (Though, I am rather curious to see how an iPod video would handle battery life - a moot point at this stage.)

    6. Re:A LOT more new stuff... by phobos13013 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      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
    7. Re:A LOT more new stuff... by Frank+of+Earth · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The reason why people buy iPods is because iPods are the newest "trend" in mp3 players. Nobody is going to be impressed by your klunky looking Archos but if you whip out an iPod, you know people would be staring.

      Of course there are better products out there.. but it's the one that is marketed the best which wins.

    8. Re:A LOT more new stuff... by ostiguy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Am I the only one who wants to be able to plug a camera directly into a mp3 player and transfer photos without needed a 3rd party (belkin) widget?

      I don't really see the appeal of the ipod photo otherwise - I think my blackberry pager/phone has higher resolution

      ostiguy

    9. Re:A LOT more new stuff... by SilentChris · · Score: 4, Funny

      If you're using a piece of electronics for "sex appeal" you have something seriously wrong with you. With your logic, carrying around one of these curvaceous things around should get you laid instantly.

    10. Re:A LOT more new stuff... by Moofie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I bought my iPod because it works better, not because somebody thinks it's cool.

      Style and good design are not the same thing. Style changes every week. Good design is timeless.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    11. Re:A LOT more new stuff... by Frank+of+Earth · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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

    12. Re:A LOT more new stuff... by Dominic_Mazzoni · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The gMini400 is very cool, no question. To be fair, though, the list price of the gMini400 is $399, only $100 less than the iPod (yes, you can find iPods for less than list price, too), and the iPod actually has longer battery life (15 hours compared to 10), besides having twice the disk space. The gMini400 may be right for you, but the iPod is hardly a bad deal.

    13. Re:A LOT more new stuff... by prell · · Score: 3, Funny

      How do you ruin a black iPod?

      Answer: Make it look like a cat walking away.

    14. Re:A LOT more new stuff... by Kenshin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My problem with alot of these alternative devices is their use of buttons to access your music library.

      It's simply way too slow and clunky of a method for scrolling through long lists. That's why a wheel or something of the sort is absolutely necessary.

      --

      Does it make you happy you're so strange?

    15. Re:A LOT more new stuff... by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Uh, color LCD the major power drain? Compared to the HD? If you play video, the HD is constantly spinning. If you play music (or are viewing photos) the HD fills the buffer then spins down. Rinse and repeat.

      Also judging by the tech specs (and perhaps deductive reasoning) the HD is spinning down less for slideshows (buffer is filled faster by photos and music). Battery life for slideshows is 5 continuous hours. Battery life for music playback is 15 hours.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    16. Re:A LOT more new stuff... by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's also unclear to me if you can view photos that you've loaded via the Belkin adapter or if you have to wait until you're home at your computer and transfer from the iPod to iPhoto (or iTunes?) and then back to the iPod.

      A complaint I heard when the Belkin adapter first came out was that it was unacceptably slow. If this has changed, then I think it would be better than directly plugging in the camera, but whatever. What would work for me might not work for you.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    17. Re:A LOT more new stuff... by badasscat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

      I think the point is that fashion accessory or not, they're already passe in a lot of areas.

      I live in NYC too and I agree with the OP; iPods are a dime a dozen around here. You end up looking more like a conformist walking around with one than anything else.

      Which doesn't say anything about the quality of the device. It just says that this argument that people buy them to be "cool" doesn't really wash anymore, at least not in areas of the country where "cool" seems to even mean anything. (I'd imagine iPods are as ubiquitous in pretty much every large, cosmopolitan city these days.)

      It's the same phenomenon as the cel phone. For the first few years they were expensive and exotic; if you had one, you showed it off. But at first, it was mainly a product for the elite. Eventually the prices came down to where at least the upper middle class could finally afford them, and Motorola's Startac both gave the cool kids a phone they could show off while simultaneously making cel phones a commodity. Nowadays, are you at all impressed whenever anybody whips out their shiny new clamshell phone? I'm not, and I doubt most people are - if anything you're probably annoyed at being bothered by the ringer or by the yapping going on next to you.

      Apple's doing the same thing with the iPod. We've progressed past the point where iPods are considered "cool"; we're now to the point where they're almost boring, and are well on our way to the point where just seeing that white earbud cord looks pretentious and stupid.

      I don't know if the whole mp3 player thing will play out exactly the way the cel phone thing did, but it's a pretty common pattern in technology - a product is invented, one company comes in and popularizes it with the kids, inadvertantly commoditizes it at the same time, and eventually loses market share as the whole category becomes passe and competitors take advantage.

      This is obviously what Sony's counting on, and honestly, now that Sony's supporting mp3 natively (or said they're going to, at least), I'd probably rather have one of their somewhat more anonymous-looking Network Walkmans than an iPod. I don't think this stranglehold Apple has on the market is going to continue forever; somebody's just got to design a better product first. I don't think the iPod "brand" is as strong as Apple thinks it is, especially now that it's no longer as hip as it once was - their success right now is based on the fact that they've still got the product with the best combination of size, shape, and ease of use (though others may excel in one particular area, such as battery life, Apple's at least "pretty good" in all of them).

      This U2 iPod's going to be a big dud. Pre-load it with all of their music for $350, then you've got something. But $50 off a $150 purchase, and it's $50 more expensive? Am I understanding that right? So in the end, you're basically just paying for a 20GB iPod, and the "box set" is another $100. How is this a good deal?

      Photo iPod, also a dud. If you want to transport your photos around, you can do it just on your regular iPod (for like half the price). Who really wants to pay extra so they can look at photos on that tiny little screen? I may as well just carry my digital camera around and leave them all on that.

      The regular iPods will continue being the bread and butter for the iPod line.

    18. Re:A LOT more new stuff... by osmac · · Score: 3, Informative

      Are your LOTR and MST3K DivXs/XviDs legally acquired, DRMed copies of these fine copyrighted works of art? No?

      I never expected Apple to offer a device that would be designed to play mostly illegal content. Remember that, simply stated, ripping DVDs, theater screens and Screeners is illegal, as opposed to ripping non-copyprotected CDs or digitizing old vinyl. Or downloading photos from a digicam.
      I might as well underestimate the home movie market in the US, but that would still be a niche. And the iPod is about mass entertainment media. As Jobs implied, there exists not enough legal video content to justify mobile video playback capabilities.

    19. Re:A LOT more new stuff... by wirelessbuzzers · · Score: 5, Funny

      I live in NYC too and I agree with the OP; iPods are a dime a dozen around here.

      Wow. I've got to get into New York. I can't find an iPod for under $100 anywhere around here...

      --
      I hereby place the above post in the public domain.
    20. Re:A LOT more new stuff... by SilentChris · · Score: 2, Insightful

      DivX, legally acquired, non-DRMd. I own the DVDs. I put the DVDs in my computer, rip them and encode them in DivX. They never leave my computer/gMini, and they certainly don't go on P2P networks. I believe that's perfectly in line with my fair use rights.

    21. Re:A LOT more new stuff... by porcupine8 · · Score: 4, Interesting
      It just says that this argument that people buy them to be "cool" doesn't really wash anymore,

      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.
    22. Re:A LOT more new stuff... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I tried using an Archos for a few months, because I thought it'd be cool to be able to play movies.

      First I discover that they don't include any kind of ripping or encoding software. This is a huge oversight. This is supposedly a big feature and yet they don't even give you the tools to use it?!?

      On top of this, they claim to support MPEG-4, but somehow this support fails to include standard MP4 files like those I can output with QuickTime (or better yet, XVID/OpenShiiva, as I later discovered). What they mean is that they support MPEG-4 content in AVI files, which is absolutely useless to me. Maybe if they'd includes some encoding software...

      So, eventually I found out what I'd need to encode DVDs, and it turns out to be an incredibly slow, complicated, and ultimately painful process. There's got to be a market for a single app that does all of this. I couldn't for the life of me understand why it doesn't seem to exist.

      Then, as I relayed this story to a friend, he pointed out that it would be much easier to just download movies from P2P networks. I tried this, but only found two movies that I owned. I could have gotten plenty of movies that I didn't own, but that would be a) piracy, and b) ignoring the reason I bought the thing in the first place, which was to play the movies I already owned!

      So, in the end, I sold it on eBay, and to this day have not seen a product that actually fulfills the promise of letting me take my movies with me. Maybe if I had more 'mainstream' tastes and was into piracy I'd be useful to me...

    23. Re:A LOT more new stuff... by darc · · Score: 2, Funny

      Assault Rifle: $4500
      Spotting a passenger with an iPod, 45 seconds.
      Getting a subway full of ipods until your investment is indeed a dime a dozen: Priceless.

      --
      Tired of legitimate data sources? Try UNCYCLOPEDIA
    24. Re:A LOT more new stuff... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Exactly. My criteria for choosing a portable music player were:
      1. Size
      2. 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:
      • Smaller size. The iPod mini seems to be a nice form factor, and I would be very tempted by a 20GB version (although I'll probably have to wait a little while for hard disk technology to catch up before I can get one of these).
      • Access to the UI code. The iPod has a significantly nicer UI than any other player I've seen, but it's not perfect. I've filed a few UI bug reports with Apple about it, but they have not fixed them. I would be very interested in a player that allowed me to implement these fixes myself
      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  2. More info by gtpilot · · Score: 4, Informative

    A little more info:
    Advertised 15 hour battery life
    65k-color screen
    220 x 176 pixel resolution
    Same click wheel as previous generation
    Not mentioned (at least in my first pass) is that, the dock will connect to tvs and display a slideshow.
    Includes AV Cable (supposedly 3-plug RCA) The new ipods are slightly thicker. Each of the new ones is .75 in compared to .57 and .69 in for the 20GB and 40GB previous model. The weight about the same however, 6.4 ounces compared to 5.6 and 6.2.

    Does anyone else think that this a bit overkill. 60Gb is a LOT when you are just talking about music and pictures. It would be one thing if this generation included video playback, but ... it doesnt. Not to mention $600 (and $500 for that matter) is really reaching, considering we are just talking about music and pictures

    In other apple news Apple Launches 9 Euro iTunes Music Stores

    1. Re:More info by fracai · · Score: 5, Interesting

      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
    2. Re:More info by Lev13than · · Score: 5, Funny

      Advertised 15 hour battery life
      65k-color screen
      220 x 176 pixel resolution
      Same click wheel as previous generation


      Still only a single click wheel? What a joke - they'll never be able to compete with Windows until they add a second one.

      --
      When you have nothing left to burn you must set yourself on fire
    3. Re:More info by Maskirovka · · Score: 5, Informative
      Does anyone else think that this a bit overkill. 60Gb is a LOT when you are just talking about music and pictures.

      I could fill this up on a backpacking expedition or vacation.

      290pics/gig *60 gigs = 17400 jpg
      or 53pics/gig * 60 = 3180 raw photos from my d70.
      That's not including the 5 gigs of music I might bring along too. Compare the cost of this (and an ipod CF reader) with other portable photo hardrive options and it should look very attractive.

    4. Re:More info by commodoresloat · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Advertised 15 hour battery life

      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.

    5. Re:More info by cbelt3 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Will you also have to store receipts from the CD that you bought and ripped into your iPod ? Remember, Ballmer sez that iPod users are all thieves... Or I think it will be a good place to store those Ballmer inspired monkeyboy vid clips. This one is the best of the bunch: bPod

    6. Re:More info by Kethinov · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Does anyone else think that this a bit overkill. 60Gb is a LOT when you are just talking about music and pictures.
      No way. I've been holding off on buying an ipod for two reasons. 1 price and 2. insufficient storage. When I buy an iPod, I want it to be able to hold my ENTIRE music collection (40gb+) and have room to spare for expansion of my collection, installing osx on the ipod, or general purpose storage.

      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!
    7. Re:More info by numark · · Score: 2, Informative

      The batteries notice has been around for quite a while now. I think it's just a disclaimer to shield them from anyone coming back and saying that Apple never told them that a rechargeable battery can only be charged a finite number of times. No rechargeable battery will last forever, and if you charge your iPod every night, those charge cycles add up a lot quicker than your standard NiMH batteries that you only charge every few weeks.

      --
      Want Slashdot headlines on your site? Try SlashHead
    8. Re:More info by kzinti · · Score: 4, Informative

      I could fill this up on a backpacking expedition or vacation.

      Sounds like you're talking about storing photos as you take them, but the original poster was talking about photos stored for playback.

      At 290 pics per GB, your photos weigh about 3 MB each. That's big - either you store them at high resolution, uncompressed, or both. For archiving, that makes sense, but you don't need that kind of quality for playing on a tiny color LCD or even on a television. You can shrink the photos down to NTSC 740x480 (slightly higher for PAL), and compress as JPEG at -q 75. On a TV or the iPod's 16-bit color, they'll look just as good. With those parameters, you can get thousands of photos per GB, not just a few hundred.

    9. Re:More info by superdan2k · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Not to mention $600 (and $500 for that matter) is really reaching, considering we are just talking about music and pictures"

      Based on that statement, I'd guess that you probably don't own an iPod. I bought one two years ago -- a 20-gigabyte 2nd-generation model -- and it's as much a part of my life as my wallet and keyring. It's that simple. This thing has done for music what TiVo has done for TV. If I can carry my entire porn^H^H^hoto library with me, along with my entire music collection, that's worth investing a bit more than I spent two years ago.

      Quite frankly, I think 60GB is about perfect, given that my music collection is about 40GB in size.

      --
      blog |
    10. Re:More info by ericdano · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If only my music collection would fit on a 30gig iPod. Or even a 60gig one :-(

      --
      It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
      I moderate therefore I rule!
      --
  3. You read it here first! by grub · · Score: 5, Funny


    An iPod with picture capabilties: I dub thee The iPorn

    --
    Trolling is a art,
    1. Re:You read it here first! by savagedome · · Score: 2, Funny

      iAgree

    2. Re:You read it here first! by rattler14 · · Score: 3, Funny

      An iPod with picture capabilties: I dub thee The iPor

      -Particularly amusing when you consider that you can easily control an ipod with one hand.

      --
      my last sig was too controversial... now, a new and improved useless sig!
  4. Too expensive/not useful by lothar97 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I imagine this is just a little trick to get new people to buy an iPod. Who's going to spend $500-600 to store photos? I don't see current iPod users "upgrading," and I imagine there are some iPod hacks out there to store photos now (albeit without a color screen)

    You can get cheaper products for $50 which will allow you to do more creative slideshows, effects, etc.

    I think Apple missed the boat here. The killer function they should add to the iPod is a camera- which goes along nicely with the photo storage features. Nothing flashy or expensive, but for another $50 they could add a lens that's better than the cell phone cams.

    --

    1. Re:Too expensive/not useful by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 2, Insightful

      well, if it allows me to hook my camera up to it on teh go and download the pictures, it is very useful.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    2. Re:Too expensive/not useful by squiggleslash · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Actually, it does make sense. I'm seeing a lot of people with camera phones who use them, for the most part, to show pictures they've collected to other people. The major limitation of them is that they can only store pictures they took with the phone. I have a friend who is in absolute love with her two nieces and any opportunity she has she'll use to show pictures, but for now it's been email (awkward to make sure it's with you when you want it) or camera phone (only shows pictures taken and not yet deleted) bound.

      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.
    3. Re:Too expensive/not useful by daveschroeder · · Score: 2, Informative

      And funnily enough it does.

    4. Re:Too expensive/not useful by Slack3r78 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The first thing that popped into my head seeing this is whether or not it supports PictBridge. If so, they may be able to push it to professional photographers who are having to lug around a notebook as things stand right now. As much photostorage as a notebook but fits in your pocket while still providing a way to check what you've got stored? I could see how that would be appealing to someone with a DSLR camera.

    5. Re:Too expensive/not useful by gorbachev · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That SanDisk player is priced that way because it's a SanDisk's attempt of creating a loss leader to pump up sales of their other products.

      It's a poor example, although probably the best priced, of iPod Photo's competition, which, I believe, is way ahead of iPod Photo.

      There are several personal media players with video playing capabilities out there with much, much better features (audio, pictures, video) and compatible pricing (if not at $50 a pop).

      The iPod Photo will still, of course, sell well, because certain people will buy anything Apple produces no matter what it is. I think iPod Photo is way overpriced for its features, though the size of the hard drive might make it usable as a portable hard drive with a mp3/aac player.

      The only truly interesting feature, from a technical point of view, is the ability to display the pictures in a TV set directly from the device. I'm not so sure it's very useful in the long term without video capabilities, but still.

      --
      In Soviet Russia, I ruled you
    6. Re:Too expensive/not useful by jdreed1024 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I think Apple missed the boat here. The killer function they should add to the iPod is a camera- which goes along nicely with the photo storage features. Nothing flashy or expensive, but for another $50 they could add a lens that's better than the cell phone cams

      I don't think that would have worked. There's no market for a low-quality digital camera add-on, I think. You can get a "real" no-frills digital camera (ie: the equivalent of a 35mm point-n-shoot) for just about $100 at BestBuy, and probably for a lot cheaper with rebate. Or you can sometimes get one for free with a new computer or printer. That pretty much covers the price range of the cell phone cams.

      The iPod appeals to people who already have a lot of gadgets. It's like a Sharper Image/Brookstone version of the walkman (yes, oversimplification, I know). That audience probably either has a real digital camera or a cell phone camera, and addding $50 for a decent camera lens on the iPod isn't going to help.

      What I think they're doing here is offering a neat little feature that will be a plus when comparing models. It also plays up the "more than just a music player" aspect of the iPod (I've been using mine to backup my HD for a while now, but the average person probably doesn't).

      If they're clever, they had a little chat with Belkin when coming up with the idea for this, since the photo feature evokes thoughts of the CameraLink. Currently, all it does is provide a USB port to hook up a camera and function as a mass storage device. Assuming Apple and Belkin were smart, the new version of the CameraLink will copy the images to the iPod along with the relevant metadata to have them displayed by the Photo feature. Now *that* would be pretty darn cool. Except that my digital camera speaks serial, not USB :-(

      --
      There is no sig, there is only Zuul.
    7. Re:Too expensive/not useful by chia_monkey · · Score: 4, Informative

      Out of curiousity, what was your take when the iPod Mini came out? I'll admit, I thought it was overpriced. What's the big deal? It's a bit tinier, has colors, and basically cost the same amount as the regular iPod. Yet millions of trendy people bought the iPod Mini anyway. The iPodPhoto will be the same way. It has the "iPod" name and everyone trendy and geeky will want one. Another coup for the team in Cupertino.

      I also applaud the crew in the integration of photos and music in iTunes also. Apple is continuing to make the Mac look like the computer for the people.

      --

      "He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts...for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang
    8. Re:Too expensive/not useful by mazola_jr · · Score: 2, Interesting
      iPods aren't very useful for people who don't have a lot of music and I imagine the iPod Photo won't be all that useful to someone without many photos.

      As someone who has 15000 photos sitting on my Powerbook, I think this would be a great way to make more use of my collection.

      The key benefit isn't that it simply stores the photos, or hooks up to a TV. The benefit is that it can store *massive* amounts of photos, organizes them in a way that you can find them when you need 'em, makes it highly portable, and gives you an easy way to output to a large display without having to burn a disc.

      Apple's not trying to get everyone to upgrade, the plain ol' 20 and 40 GB models are still available. Rather, they're bringing the benefits of the iPod to those who love photography.

    9. Re:Too expensive/not useful by dborod · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'd like to point out that when the iPod mini was released it was totally panned on slashdot as too expensive for not enough storage, and besides, who wouldn't spend the extra $100 to get the 15GB model?

      It should be noted that Apple literally sold hundreds of thousands of them despite the slashdot crowd proving that they wouldn't sell.

    10. Re:Too expensive/not useful by squiggleslash · · Score: 2, Insightful
      (1) is subjective. Many people have no great desire to carry around a large number of gadgets. You don't find the feature useful, don't buy it then, don't assume others will.

      (2) Put up or shut up. If you actually believe the majority of digital cameras have large, decent, screens, then by all means show this. It shouldn't be hard.

      (3) Again, put up or shut up. I can't fit my Kodak in my pocket, not comfortably anyway. Neither can my girlfriend. I think I know only one person in the entire office with a small, reasonably functional, digital camera. I've walked past the rows of cameras at various electronic stores and online and, by and large, the small, comfortably pocketable, cameras are in the minority - and most of them have small screens. Take a look at the search results from Amazon I just linked to and count the number you'd comfortably carry around with you everywhere compared to those you wouldn't.

      (4) I stand corrected. I don't think it changes my point much, 20G carries a lot of photos, 1G doesn't.

      Oh, and ad-hominems aren't really a way to get your point across. You might have scored more than one out of four if you were less interested in insulting iPod owners (or "ipod fans") and more interested in publishing facts and figures.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  5. Photos, eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Now I just need my iPod to allow me to make phone calls and I'm all set.

  6. You mean... by Chris+Pimlott · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Photo *display* capabilities. When I think of photo capabilities, I think of something take can _take_ photos.

    1. Re:You mean... by switcha · · Score: 5, Insightful
      When I think of photo capabilities, I think of something take can _take_ photos.

      Yes, because what the world is waiting for is a device that can store tens of thousands of shitty photos. Leave the image capture to the proper equipment. The portability is what's cool for sharing the pics, not taking them.

      --
      You know what? ... A little club soda *did* get that out!
  7. Whewt, yet another! by KingPunk · · Score: 2

    joy, every 6months, a new ipod is released.
    how entertaining is this?
    i atleast hope it can show album art, while you're jamming to your favorite death-metal songs!

    1. Re:Whewt, yet another! by syd2000 · · Score: 2, Informative

      It can display album art, according to http://www.apple.com/ipodphoto/ "...And did we mention that iTunes 4.7 also autosyncs Album Art? It's true. The Album Art downloaded when you purchase music from the iTunes Music Store is transferred to iPod Photo along with the music. So while iPod Photo plays your tunes, you can enjoy the Album Art -- in color, of course -- on the Now Playing screen."

  8. iTunes improvements too! by fracai · · Score: 5, Informative

    included with the announcement is news that 9 additional countries (Austria, Belgium, Finland, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, and Spain) in Europe now have access to the iTunes Music Store and that the much awaited Canadian store will be available in November.

    --
    -- i am jack's amusing sig file
    1. Re:iTunes improvements too! by selderrr · · Score: 2, Informative

      Testing from Belgium, I can confirm it works now, but the music catalogue is vastly inferior to the US version : Gene Ammons for instance has ONE CD on the belgian iTMS, while the US version has some 15 CD's or so...


      Very frustrating. I hope they sync the catalogues fast...

  9. I like the Album Art option by Hawthorne01 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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."
  10. pshaw by anthonyclark · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So it can store photos. I can do that right now on my 20G ipod.

    And it can display photos on a TV, cool.

    But it can't transfer photos directly from a digital camera? You need to buy an expensive yet crappy belkin adapter for that? No thank you.

    It would've been cooler had it been able to display keynote presentations to VGA...

    I say it's another cube for apple.

    --
    ----- Documentation is worth it just to be able to answer all your mail with 'RTFM' - Alan Cox.
  11. New Audio-Related Features? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    .

    Photos and contacts and solitaire sounds like fun stuff, but what about any new audio related features--you know, since it's an audio portable and all.

    Something tells me they managed to overlook Gapless Playback and OGG/FLAC support again.

  12. Santa? Are you listening? by YetAnotherName · · Score: 3, Funny

    If so, please visit http://store.apple.com/ ... please?

  13. I've always found... by soulctcher · · Score: 4, Insightful

    that photo capability as a secondary feature is just about worthless. Pretty soon, I'll have a phone that surfs the web, plays games, takes photos, cooks dinner, plays mp3s, wavs, oggs, avis, mpegs, and can predict the weather. None of which I'll be using since my ipod will do that anyways.

    1. Re:I've always found... by Matt+Perry · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Pretty soon, I'll have a phone that surfs the web, plays games, takes photos, cooks dinner, plays mp3s, wavs, oggs, avis, mpegs, and can predict the weather.
      Yet it'll be barely adequate for making phone calls. At least that's what I'm finding as I show around for a new mobile phone.
      --
      Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
  14. Missing Feature by rgmoore · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sadly, Apple has made a mistake by failing to include a card reader. The iPod Photo is stuck in the paradigm of digital music, in which your computer is the center and the iPod is just a way of making the music more portable. For photos, though, I think of my camera as being the central point, not my computer. Being able to download directly from my camera's memory cards to the iPod would massively increase the number of pictures I could take without needing to go back to my desktop or haul around a laptop. Without that, this is just a minor improvement, but with the ability to download straight from memory cards it would be a major step forward.

    --

    There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

    1. Re:Missing Feature by netik · · Score: 2, Informative

      But apple included software in the existing Ipods to read smart media cards and copy data from cameras.

      Belkin makes this card reader:

      http://macuser.pcpro.co.uk/macuser/reviews/49990 /b elkin-media-reader-for-ipod.html .. so I don't see what all the fuss is about!

    2. Re:Missing Feature by Miphnik · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Which format card reader would you put in? Compact flash? MMC/SD/Mini SD/TransFlash (last two with adapters)? Memory stick? xD? All of these are in common use in digital cameras (or camera phones, in the case of TransFlash), leaving Apple with three choices:

      Put readers for all of them in, and grow the iPod photo even further (already noted that it's thicker than the 4G iPod)

      Build multiple versions of the iPod photo, each with a different card reader to minimize size impact, but complicating manufacture, inventory, and marketing (40GB/SD, 60GB/xD, 40GB/Memory stick, etc.)

      Leave the card reader out to keep things simple (and less expensive to manufacture and support), and let third parties fill in the gap with an external device -- possibly like a revised version of the existing Belkin card reader
      I'm not surprised Apple chose #3. Now, why Apple didn't design the iPod photo to download photos directly from a digital camera via a USB 2.0 cable, that's another question entirely...

      --
      "My order takes pride in knowing all that can be known, and most of all the rest..." --Galen
  15. Overkill? by daveschroeder · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Does anyone else think that this a bit overkill. 60Gb is a LOT when you are just talking about music and pictures.

    Think movies.

    See the last paragraph here.

    1. Re:Overkill? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
      Think movies.

      I can't! I'm still thinking different!

  16. Happens again.. by marcosc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here we go again, people saying this iPod won't be a hit. They said the same thing on the original iPod and the iPod Mini. Those were both huge hits, and this one will be too.

    1. Re:Happens again.. by phillymjs · · Score: 2, Informative

      Apple is setting their sights too high (the original iPod was only bought by the most diehard Apple fans)

      Uh, no.

      First of all, the original iPod was only meant to work with Macs, so your attempt to denigrate it by saying that "only diehard Apple fans bought them" is completey asinine-- Mac users were 100% of the target market!

      Second, your assertion is also completely wrong. The original iPod was a huge hit, and plenty of Windows users were quickly clamoring for Apple to provide a Windows-compatible model. Some Windows users bought Mac-only iPods and went to work getting them to talk to their PCs. There were quite a few apps written to accomplish this, like EphPod and xPod (later renamed xPlay, IIRC).

      ~Philly

  17. so close by joelhouse · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They just added Album Art, but I want to see the entire Album insert, lyrics, artist facts and news. How hard would that be to add for songs purchased from Itunes. Think of the Value-add. It would be nice to have a FM transmitter was well.

  18. Photo quality by fembots · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I did RTA, even another click to Tech Specs, but where is the specs for the photo quality, ie megapixel? or are the photos as big as iPod's screen resolution of 220 x 176?

  19. To borrow a phrase from television by Delphix · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The iPod just jumped the shark. There's a point in the life of a product where you try to integrate too much functionality. The iPod does music, and it does it very well.

    Granted some people like these new integrated all in one cellphone, photoholder, music player, portable video players, but I'm going to have to go with "more is less" in this case.

    I think certain devices (like the GameBoy Advance and the iPod) do well because they do one thing and they do it well. As long as they don't cripple or obfuscate the basic functionality, the iPod will still do fine. But once a company loses sight of what the product was made for and start trying to make it a swiss army knife, things tend to go downhill (N-Gage?).

    I still like the iPod and I don't think it's going away. But I think Apple's starting to toe the line on the border swiss army knife land...

  20. Huh. by captnitro · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm on a few different sides of this. (It goes without saying, first, that it looks pretty cool.)

    The iPod has revolutionized music in the past few years because of its simplicity and style. It does one thing, it does it very well, and it looks damn good while doing it. The iPod Photo kind of blurs those lines. Obviously, the iPod could become the next-gen portable media center: music, video, a Belkin iTV something-or-other. This gives us a glimmer of where they plan to go with this. iCinema Movie Store?

    It might not, also, but I'm leaving it up to somebody else to consider thinking of ways the IP could change the way we even think about our personal photography and wallpapers and whatnot -- like the iPod changed the way many people listen to music (albums out, playlists & shuffle in). That is to say, it looks weird as a product now, but somebody's in a room somewhere thinking of ways to make this thing awesome -- maybe. And that's why I question its branding as a separate entity, because it can't just be an iPod with a color screen, no -- it's iPod Photo!

    I know that whereas I have a good number of digital pictures, a $500 device with a color screen can't be $499.75 better than a damn CD-R (e.g., most DVD players now will do the same TV sharing thing with a CD-R full of JPEGs). And I own an iPod already, so I can easily see the argument for convenience among others.

    I also want to know, where does this leave iPhoto? "Now, you too can organize your pictures.. in iTunes! But you don't. You just download them there. You organize your pictures in iPhoto but you download them with iTunes, but you can also do it in iTunes if you want. Got it?"

    Music, and the way that we deal with it, is such a rich site for interaction (music, audiobooks, speeches, recordings, class lectures, whatever) that it's hard to imagine where they could take photos. But then again, I mean, music, yanno, you listen to it. Photos, yanno, you look at them. So who knows.

    1. Re:Huh. by HedonismBot · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I also want to know, where does this leave iPhoto? "Now, you too can organize your pictures.. in iTunes! But you don't. You just download them there. You organize your pictures in iPhoto but you download them with iTunes, but you can also do it in iTunes if you want. Got it?"

      It's not as if they have a lot of choices. If they keep photo management for iPhoto, winPods will be useless and if they ported iPhoto they would have one less reason for you to buy an iMac; pretty much lose-lose. Educated guess? Half-assed try with iTunes, the real deal with iPhoto.
      --
      Sailors. Oh man!
  21. Screw photos by digital+bath · · Score: 2, Insightful

    With 40gb/60gb, you could store quite a few compressed dvds on there. I want an iMovie!

    --
    find / -name "*.sig" | xargs rm
  22. Presentations... by jdunlevy · · Score: 4, Interesting
    No need to take your laptop to do a presentation; just load those "slides" onto the iPod Photo.

    http://www.apple.com/ipodphoto/: "Use the included AV cable to connect iPod Photo to a projector or TV."

  23. Re:Here's why it will fail... by presearch · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

  24. You can get one... by daveschroeder · · Score: 4, Informative
  25. Re:Here's why it will fail... by CountBrass · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.
  26. Re:captabilities ... by Big+Mark · · Score: 3, Funny

    No, it meows when you turn it on then it scratches your face off if you handle it too roughly and manage to ding its hard disk.

    I think the "shit all over the carpet" feature is for the next generation.

  27. Re:Missed oppportunity by Dazza · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I want it built in to the product, not *another* piece of kit to carry round. If Nokia are going to build SD card reading into phone, surely having it build into a iPod type device isn't too much to ask ?

    --
    -- "I know that this is vitriol, no solution, spleen-venting, but I feel better having screamed, don't you ?"
  28. Re:And yet. by Freggy · · Score: 2

    Try the IAUDIO (http://www.iaudio.com). It has Ogg Vorbis and Ogg FLAC support, and a radio tuner.

  29. black earbuds by Giant+Killer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:black earbuds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      it helps to break them in a bit first.

      The need to "break in" headphones is nothing but a legend.

    2. Re:black earbuds by ericdano · · Score: 3, Informative

      No no no. You want to get either the Shure e3cs or the Shure e5cs. Both are great. I use the e3cs on my iPod. Can't afford the e5cs at the moment.

      --
      It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
      I moderate therefore I rule!
      --
    3. Re:black earbuds by Reverberant · · Score: 4, Informative
      The need to "break in" headphones is nothing but a legend.

      I tried to point this out once before, and got moderated down for my trouble.

      It's not like the headphones (or speakers) are manufactured and shipped without ever being tested! The drivers are often custom manufactured for speaker & headphone makers by OEMs in Asia (and some in the US). Before the OEM ships the drivers to the manufacturer, the units are tested to make sure the driver meets the custom specs! 99% of the time, this testing will be enough to provide adequate break-in.

      If you don't believe me, maybe this will convince you. You can find similar statements fron Ken Kantor and John Dunlavy if you look hard enough.

    4. Re:black earbuds by rworne · · Score: 2, Informative

      The e5cs headphones cost as much as a high-end iPod!

      Is it really necessary to use headphones such as these for an iPod? Shouldn't a $100 pair suffice for a consumer device using lossy codecs?

      --
      I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
    5. Re:black earbuds by ericdano · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If you encode files using Apple's Lossless format, then it might be worth it. I noticed a HUGE difference when I moved from the Apple earbuds to the Shure e3cs. I imagine the e5cs are even better. I tried a pair briefly, but....alas.....can't afford them :-(

      --
      It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
      I moderate therefore I rule!
      --
    6. Re:black earbuds by catch23 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No you don't want the Sure e5cs unless you like bass music a lot. They're overpriced and basically crap. Just take a look at the frequency response for the e5cs for yourself. The low frequency is way high and there's a lot missing for the high frequencies. I've tried them out and it's not that great... not much better than the iPod earbuds at least. The iPod earbuds aren't that bad (as far as frequency response is concerned), but if you want good isolation, you should get the Etymotic ER-4P headphones instead. I've got a pair of ER-4S and I can't see headphones getting much better than that.

    7. Re:black earbuds by erockett · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Maybe breaking in your headphones is, but when I got my iPod, it took my ears a while to get used to the earbuds, so I think that your ears have to reshape or lose some nerves or something before you get comfortable with the earbuds.

      As long as I'm posting, I think that this is a bad idea - the thing that appeals to me about the iPod is its very simplicity. There's none of this PDA-ness, the calendar is fairly crippled, and you just use it for *music* - not keeping track of your pictures and a million other things. iPods are a symbol of coolness, simple music, just being able to relax. When you add that other junk, it brings in the PDA factor - images of a busy, suited person dashing around trying to get to their next appointment.

    8. Re:black earbuds by catch23 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Honestly, if you're gonna spend $500 on a pair of earbuds, you might as well get some Ultimate Ears instead. They're the lowest end model of the ultimate ears, but from I hear, they knock the socks off the ER-4S buds. They're custom fit to your ear whereas the e5cs, is universally fit, and doesn't stay in the ear that well (I've tried).

    9. Re:black earbuds by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 4, Funny

      But you keep these earphone for a long time, as opposed to throwing them out when the battery wears down.

      KIDDING! I'm just kidding!

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  30. No thanks... by jemenake · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Maybe I'm a luddite, but I just don't care for photos on my iPod.

    Part of what makes my iPod so nice is that its interface is really simple. I think that this is due, in part, to the fact that it doesn't do a large variety of things. All it does is play music based on playlist, artist, or album.

    I've seen similar cluttering on my TiVo. It used to be just about 4 or 5 menu items on the main screen. Now, it's packed from the top of the screen to the bottom.

    My old Symbian phone did tons of stuff. Games, calendar, to-do list, camera, web browser... you could even make phone calls with it. :P Problem was, you had to navigate through 3 pages of icons just to get to the app you needed.

    I don't want my iPod to become like my cell phone.

  31. Same thing was said... by daveschroeder · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...about the original iPod, and iPod mini.

    And they're runaway successes, to put it mildly.

    On one hand, we had analysts and pundits of all types saying Apple will fail if it *didn't* include photo/video functionality in a handheld, and now we've got a luminary here predicting it will fail because it *did*.

    Well, I think I'll trust Apple's judgment on this one, considering it seems to know what it's doing, thank you.

  32. Good news for the base models? by Moses+Lawn · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This sounds like a really cool device, although I don't particularly want or need one (if I was rich, though, hell yeah). What I'm excited about is the idea that this means that the prices for regular iPods *should* come down a little. For $250, I could rationalize a 20G unit. Or will Apple be dropping all the old models?

    On a related note, I like the black model but I really wish it didn't come with all that U2 crap on it. Yes, they had several classic, groundbreaking albums, but they haven't been very relevant since what - the late 80s? How about the Little Feat model iPod, or the Stax/Volt collection model? I'd buy one of those.

    --

    What if life is just a side effect of some other process and God has no idea we exist?

  33. Re:Here's why it will fail... by Trurl's+Machine · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The iPod needs metadata. People will not suddenly start putting information along with their photos.

    Most digital cameras create basic metadata as the Exif tags embedded in standard JPEG files. They provide basic informations such as camera type, shutter, aperture and original photo creation date (not necessarily the same as when the actual file was created). It's enough for iPhoto to sort pictures "by (virtual) roll", probably iPod software will work in similar way. On the musical side, iPod allows you to edit some of the metadata iTunes store in your musical library (you can alter your rating of a given file and also you automatically alter "last listening date" and "play count" just by playing a song file). Probably new iPod will also allow you to rate your photos and maybe change some of their arrangements.

  34. 60 aint overkill by Randy+Rathbun · · Score: 4, Informative

    Especially when you are using the device as temporary storage for a photo shoot. My Canon 10D files are an average of 6MB. Give me a few hours at a weding or a sports event and I will be filling that drive up pretty fast.

    Last summer I shot over 3000 pictures in two days at a trap shooting competition - that's roughly 18 GB of photos. Everything fit in my camera bag and I got some great pics.

  35. Managed by... iTunes?! by keytoe · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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...

    1. Re:Managed by... iTunes?! by saddino · · Score: 4, Insightful

      iTunes instead of iPhoto

      There is no iPhoto for Windows, hence Apple had to embed photo management into iTunes to support the dual-platform iPod.

      If Apple is indeed developing iPhoto for Windows -- which would take some time -- then it wouldn't make sense for Apple to wait and push the delivery of the new iPod past this Christmas season (esp. if they could simply hack iTunes to handle basic photo management).

    2. Re:Managed by... iTunes?! by afish40 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      To me, their reliance on Adobe products for Windows sounds like they have no plans to expand iPhoto beyond the Mac.

      The same was assumed about iTunes, back when Windows iPods used Musicmatch Jukebox for music sync.

      --
      Thanks a million. Push Start to replay.
    3. Re:Managed by... iTunes?! by danigiri · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hear this? Its just one more proverbial turd hitting the fan in Redmond. One little annoying piece of software that is kinda like being used all the time, called iTunes, just got one more compelling reason to be used instead of Windows Media Whatever(TM). Bummer.

      On the other hand, even though iPod Photo is considered too limited by the slashdot crowd, we have been proven wrong before (I also disliked the iPod and now own one).

      AND... for each iPod Photo sold there is one less Windows Portable Media Brick sold. Hear that again? ^_^ It's not a proverbial turd this time, but the sound of the Halo Effect(TM).

  36. Overkill? I think not by n0mad6 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've owned a Canon Digital Rebel (EOS 300D) for a little over 3 months now and have acquired approximately 7GB of photos in that time (not counting RAW images). This is purely a hobby. I'm sure other amateur photographers will agree with me that 60GB isn't really overkill, even just for photos, let alone for both photos and music.

  37. Re:iTunes Music Store still has some problems... by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 4, Informative

    Yeah, that sucks.

    It IS possible to get your music off of an iPod, though, especially since you're using OS X.

    Plug it in, and don't let it sync with iTunes. Leave it plugged in, as it should be mounted as a drive.

    I'm not at home right now, so I can't tell you exactly what the mount point is, but it should be something like /mnt/NameOfYouriPod

    Just go browsing through the directories. Copy the music off into a music directory in your home dir, and you've got your music again, minus the metadata.

    Not to be preachy, but you should have made a backup of the files. Apple encourages this, and you can even find documentation (official documentation) on how to make iTunes burn discs with data on them so you can back up your files.

  38. Re:iTunes Music Store still has some problems... by yeremein · · Score: 2, Informative

    The solution is to make non-DRM-encrusted backup copies of your music. Here's a program that will do that:

    http://hymn-project.org/

    Get it now, before Apple shuts it down with the DMCA...

  39. Re:iTunes Music Store still has some problems... by nuxx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why didn't you do some research before reformatting your iBook? Why didn't you do some research on how to pull music from your iPod back into iTunes? This process is very well documented all over the place.

    It sounds to me like you are either trolling, or really didn't know what you were doing when you started this process.

    Remember, data, especially purchased data, is important. Always back it up.

  40. Re:iTunes Music Store still has some problems... by kalidasa · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you had authorized the laptop, you would have been able to play from the iPod, but only if you DIDN'T synch. There is a program called iPodRip that you can use to copy the songs from the iPod to your hard drive and then add them to iTunes (and again, if you authorize the laptop, you're all set). The no multiple downloads thing is a bad idea, I think, but the one-way synching was a requirement imposed by the major record labels.

  41. I know more than Steve Jobs! by dynayellow · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Looks like it's time for this link again.

    No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame. -You know who...

  42. Re:iTunes Music Store still has some problems... by bogie · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Welcome to the wonderful world of DRM. I don't mean to kick you in the nuts while your down but this just shows how dangerous it is when your not in control of things you buy. I HIGHLY suggest you use fairplay or the software from the hymn project (or whatever its called now) and convert your music to MP3 so you don't have to go through this crap in the future. If you ever move away from Apple you'll have to do this anyway so you might as well start now. Sorry your beig treated like a criminal and are not able to access your music the way you want to right now. Of course now expect 50 posts from Ipod fanboy's telling you its your own dam fault. Hopefully you'll be able to resolve this soon.

    --
    If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
  43. Cool, but needs a few things... by Chuqmystr · · Score: 2, Interesting
    That's very nice indeed. However, I'd like to see it have host USB abilities so that one can attach it directly to their digital camera. There seems to be a few different schemes out there for this, one I know of directly is my Olympus simply shows up as a flash drive. I think it would be a nice addition and there's still the Belkin media reader thingie, assuming that is still suported.

    Um, what's up with iPhoto integration? I see iTunes 4.7 does the transfer but I'd think that if it were on a Mac vs. PC that iPhoto with an autosync system like iTunes would be the way to go. Perhaps that's coming later.

    Finally, it comes with a dock. It can do slideshows. How about throwing in a wireless remote? Just a thought.

  44. Bart Simpson sez by commodoresloat · · Score: 3, Funny

    iCaramba!

  45. Photo Transfers Via iTunes by kkrista · · Score: 2, Insightful

    With all the rumors of a photo ipod that have been floating around for months, I was always curious how Apple would handle this for Windows users. It appeared that Apple had two choices:

    1. make iPhoto available on the Windows platform and thus dilute the iLife suite
    2. restrict the photo capabilities to the Mac platform only

    I think it's interesting, but clever, that Apple took the rather unorthodox approach of transfering photos via iTunes. It would seem a good compromise that doesn't leave either of their supported ipod platforms out in the cold. Sure, this crossover muddies the water in terms of each program's functionality; but it works as a simple way to offer the new hardware to a wider audience.

  46. 15 hour battery life by dowobeha · · Score: 2
    Before too many people start complaining and moaning that the new color screen does nothing but suck down battery life, take note:

    The new iPod has a longer battery life than the old one did.

    15 hrs is the new estimate for music use, and that's with the color screen. 5 hours if you do continuous slideshows.

    --
    I am concerned about any program, any piece of hardware, any treaty, any law that treats me as a consumer, not a citizen
  47. Bitch, bitch, bitch... by MattHaffner · · Score: 2, Funny

    Not to mention $600 (and $500 for that matter) is really reaching, considering we are just talking about music and pictures.

    Sheesh!

    We've been complaining about Apple not having a sub-grand machine, and now it's too much? Come on! It's got Firewire and USB 2.0, a generous 220x176 built-in display (with AV-out if a 2" screen is too small for you whiners), and comes with real games (my Ti PB can't touch this)! Plus, it's portable! Plug in a keyboard, mouse, and your 37" TV and you've got one mean machine.

    Now we just need that Doom 3 port and we're set. I don't think Brick will hold my attention all that long...

    Look, I'm whining again already. Sheesh...

  48. The photo bit doesn't really matter by AllenChristopher · · Score: 2, Interesting

    First, a nice colour screen. Second, they brought the battery life UP to 15 hours.

    It's already won. The displaying of photos is nice... I'll probably use it to carry my portfolio with me. "Oh, you're an artist? What kind of work do you do?"

    But I'd buy it as my replacement iPod anyway. The photo bit is clever marketing of something that's *free* for them with the new screen.

    There are video players, sure, that will do this, but like everything else about the iPod this is elegant.

  49. Missing the boat by commodoresloat · · Score: 3, Informative
    I would say it is SanDisk that misses the boat in the above link -- the device there is cool, but it doesn't offer the crucial element that the ipod offers -- storage space. The benefit of something like the ipod is being able to shoot gigs upon gigs of raw format photos, store them, and keep shooting. The screen is nice just to flip through them and see what you have, or show your friends, but any real viewing will take place on a monitor or TV set.

    The iPod does miss the boat too, however; at least at the moment it looks like you can only tranfer photos via iTunes (if you want to be able to view them on the screen), which means you need a computer to connect between your camera and the iPod (and also means that they will be stored in whatever format iTunes uses, not in raw format). There is already a tool out that lets you transfer photos to an iPod for storage, but again, you lose any iPod interface to looking at the photos.

    Honestly this would be a cool gimmick but I wouldn't see myself buying one. I could see buying a device that was made to store photos that had a bigger screen, smaller clickwheel (or put it on the back), and an easy way to get information from photo media (CF, stick, whatever) into the device in whatever format you want, as well as an easy way to plug the device into a TV to play back. The point would be to eliminate the computer as the intermediary, so you can just carry around your camera and this thing... no need to buy new media every time you fill up the stick, and no need to run home to your computer in the middle of a shoot.

  50. I refuse to support this... by hai.uchida · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... Until I find out if it will play my photos in Ogg Vorbis. Whatever that is.

    --
    my password is private, but unchanged.
  51. BlueTooth by rkrabath · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'll buy a new iPod when I can transfer music from someone else's iPod wirelessly, then listen to it via my bluetooth headset. hint, hint Apple...

    --
    Who do I have to blackmail to get some representation around here!?!?!?!?
  52. Very true: by itistoday · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Slashdotters are, as usual, not what this iPod's aimed at. Think more in terms of proud family members - mothers and aunts especially.

    How true, before all you cynics open your mouths remember when the iPod was first introduced; all the comments on /. were predicting doom and failure ("the prices! OH THE PRICES!!!"). I don't think I need to point out how things turned out...

    Now that Apple finally found a way to sink its teeth into the market, I think they're going to be careful about the moves they make this time, especially with competitors itching to steal the market.

  53. Prepare for iPorn!!! by ZipR · · Score: 2, Funny

    Perhaps Apple will be opening another store soon -- for adults only!

  54. Here's what i want... by NRP128 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I bit the bullet and purchased a 40GB 4G in July/August to upgrade/replace a 128MB RCA Lyra that started my addiction of having music with me at all times. In the 3 months of heavy use of my iPod, here's the list of what i would like to see:

    integrated SD-memory reading (my dig camera uses SD cards, they're smaller than CF, and while not as flexible as far as legacy use and capacity, almost every portable device i've looked into purchasing uses SD or xD memory over CF.

    REMOVEABLE BATTERY - for the love of christ would they get this one right. it would really ease my mind significantly if they'd make it interchangable at home, maybe on the fly, where i can keep a spare battery handy as i do for my cell phone and dig camera, (2 spares in teh case of the camera) and when one goes dead, i do a swap. the thought of having to send my 4G off in a year or two at the cost of an ADDITIONAL $100 because they found it more convienent to design an integrated battery on an otherwise superior product gives me shivers.

    iCal and Address Book for Windows, or at the very least an iTunes extention that lets you manage these two precious entities. Oh, and a smart playlist parameter for whether or not a song is checked!

    Adjustable click wheel sensitivity and a dedicated reset button. My wheel has the most annoying tendancy to NOT want to move ONE click. no matter how softly i caress it or how little i bump it i usually move 2 or 3. maybe it's because i have larger than normal fingers or something. idk. also, if the thing has the remote possibility of choking on a bad mp3 and crashing, i'd love to have a manual reset button that doesn't go through software. That process sounds like something M$ came up with. many times mine will crash and run itself dead because the reset method doesn't work. even docked.

    If they're going to integrate a color screen onto the ipod they shouldn't have went the LCD route, but used emerging tech like full color organic Electro-Luminescent displays (think Pioneer's high end car stereos) Sony just released a PDA in japan based on this screen design, which is far superior to LCD for the parameters of a portable device. It requires no battery-hungry and heat generating back light. It has better viewability (word?) in direct sunlight than LCDs. It may not have the color detail, but the resolutions are comparable. It would be suitable for a small display like the iPod Photo's. This would ahve allowed them to retain at least somehwat more of the battery life.

    Are you listening Mr Jobs? Some of these things are not that damned difficult to implement, and others would just take a bit of time and effort.

  55. Re:There was no need to back up my music... by clf8 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ok, so you did something that you didn't fully understand and wiped out your collection. When you set it to re-home, it looked at your library that contained absolutely nothing and put that on your iPod. It did exactly what you told it to. Maybe it should pop up a second dialog box that says it will wipe the current contents of the iPod, but you'll still have people doing what you did.

    Not sure what you mean by loading MP3s from your other computer. Those would then be in your new iTunes library and would have gotten copied to your iPod (replacing what was on there since it's got a new home). You wouldn't lose anything there.

    There is no limit on burning songs, there is a limit on burning playlists. Subtle difference, and entirely unimportant to this since you'll have to reconvert them to AAC to get them back. Next time, just drop the AAC files on a CD. As for downloads, I'm pretty sure the word of the day is costs. Sure, digital delivery is cheap, but it ain't free. If you're barely breaking even, as Apple claims, every penny counts.

  56. Re:Apple will shoot themselves in the foot by Warlock7 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This has always been the complaint about Apple and EVERY OTHER pc manufacturer out there. "Moore's Law isn't fair. Get over it, because it hasn't slowed them down yet.

    This model has been expected since March, when the news was spreading that Apple bought the 60 GB drives and didn't release a 60 GB iPod.

    Aside from that, the price point is higher and this wouldn't have entered into the spectrum for many.

  57. iPod Socks by djtripp · · Score: 4, Informative

    And the most bizarre introduction:
    iPod Socks
    Added with Mini Pocket Warmers you can go jogging in Faribanks, Alaska, with your iPod, and not fear frost-pod-bite. Probably not a real good idea

    --
    "This is you left and that's your left. This is your right and that's your right. You're gonna die!
  58. Re:The way data is handled. by good+soldier+svejk · · Score: 2, Informative

    You can probably recover all or most of your deleted iPod files with Norton UnErase.

    If you mount your iPod as a disk the files are visible from the command line. Just open Terminal.app and cd to /Volumes/$YOUR_IPOD"S_NAME/iPod_Control/Music. Inside will be a bunch of directories Named F*. They contain your audio files. I assume those are gone since you synced your iPod to an empty library. However, so long as you don't write anything else to your iPod in the meantime, Norton should have no trouble recovering them. Then you can just cd to where they are and cp them to someplace on your computer. Not sure what that will do to their DRM. But at least you then have both a record of your purchase and the actual files if you need to argue with Apple. Good luck.

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

    -James Baldwin
  59. USB download by green+pizza · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm not surprised Apple chose #3. Now, why Apple didn't design the iPod photo to download photos directly from a digital camera via a USB 2.0 cable, that's another question entirely...

    USB Host support is much more complex than just being a USB device. Plus they would have to deal with multiple protocols and even some device drivers. Just look at the size of the code that makes up libgphoto!

  60. New iPod = New Media Distribution and Podcasting by Ebisu_11 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Just had a thought that what the new iPods allow you to do is to deliver visual books/presentations for people on the go. I could imagine scanning or taking photos of pictures from a book or pictures that tell a story. You can then record an audio track that will either narate the pictures or tell the story using Garageband. Upload both the files to your ipod and you're ready to go. I imagine my 4 year old son would really like looking at pictures of his favorite book and having his father narate the story. Great for long car rides. Add RSS 2.0 enclosures and the whole Podcasting thing has a new meaning.

  61. Thank God Slashdot members don't run Apple by calstraycat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As an Apple shareholder and happy owner of some Apple products, all I can say is: Thank God Slashdot members don't run Apple.

    Every time Apple introduces a new product, there is an endless series of posts about why it sucks, why it won't sell, what features were left out, why the new features are worthless, why it's too expensive, lists of poorly selling products that are "superior" and have more features and on and on and on.

    Apple's revenues are up, their profits are up, they have a slew of successful products and they have a lot of happy customers.

    Give it a rest guys. Let the market decide if the latest offering sucks. Based on history, when Slashdotters say an Apple product won't sell, it ends up being a phenomenal success.

    1. Re:Thank God Slashdot members don't run Apple by DaveCBio · · Score: 2, Insightful

      True, but all that it will take to unseat Apple is for someone to make something more "hip and cool". Apple makes decent products, but they aren't the be and end all that Mac zealots say they are. Also, just like a lot of companies that succeed they refine other people's ideas. The MP3 player has been around for a long time, Apple just pacakaged it well and charged a premium then engaged in a clever marketing campaign.

  62. Re:iTunes Music Store still has some problems... by Raptor+CK · · Score: 2, Informative

    /Volume/[iPod Name]/iPod Control/

    That is all.

    --
    Raptor
    "Procrastination is great. It gives me a lot more time to do things that I'm never going to do."
  63. Missing ingredient - better media readers by SuperKendall · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think the new Photo iPod will do very well. But the missing key that would really make it take off is a set of much better media readers.

    Right now the Belkin device is really slow, and also requires seperate batteries. In addition you can't transfer too much to the iPod without it dying either.

    Apple has taken care of a few of those items with a larger battery. It could probably support a standalone unpowered reader, powered from the iPod itself.

    So now all they need is new readers that are unpowered and a bit faster than the current ones to really take off in the market. While it would have been nice to be able to transfer pictures directly from cameras, good media reading capabilities will do just about as well in the market at large.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  64. Re:Am I the only one? by ShallowThroat · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yeah, i'm aware, thanks tips.

    But doing that, carrying movies around on your ipod to plug into a tv and watch later, isn't very practical. Even if the iPod did support video, which it doesn't (and won't until Jobs gets the MPAA on their side, which will take a while, if at all), how likely is it that your are going to be carrying around the required cables, and have a tv handy when you are out and you see someone whom you want to show pictures. Not only that, but the ipod is an on the go device, nobody really wants to sit down and watch your stupid slideshow of pictures of your dog.

    Sorry, I just don't see it.

    --
    The "Insert Quote Here" line is almost as predictable as inserting an actual quote.
  65. Re:dumb by tf23 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What's the screen size of this new iPod versus photos that people carry in their wallets? Or in their purses?

    Yes, the iPod would be smaller. But it'd be more convenient, and easier to show *many* photos to someone.

    Personally, I like it. I think it's a good idea. Even with the color screen it's battery will last longer then my 3G.

    If only the price weren't so damned steep for the color 60GB.... :(

  66. Re:dumb by SilentEchoes · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The ability to keep 60GB of photos around with their music as well. While working in the field. They can store their work on the iPod, View it, Compare it. And avoid draining the already pathetic battery time in a digital camera.

    I am no photographer so I can't really give any good examples but a friend of mine is and he is extremely pleased with this release so I can only go on what I hear.

  67. Use iTunes to sync your photos? What the hell? by kiddailey · · Score: 2, Insightful


    I gotta admit, as a long-time Mac user, fan and shareholder, I'm a little disappointed.

    Let me get this straight. I use iTunes to sync my photos with my iPod and if I used iPhoto to organize my library, iTunes has to import them before I can sync?

    This makes absolutely NO sense, Steve! What are you thinking. iPhoto should be the software that I use to sync photos to my iPod, not iTunes. Sure, it's two different apps and iPhoto isn't available for Windows (yet), but whos to say that everyone is going to do both music and photos anyway?

    I'm almost worried this is a sign of the end of good, clean, simple design and good usability. Hopefully I'm wrong and once I try out the software it will make more sense.

  68. Re: Photo iPod a Dud by Thorkytel+Ant-Head · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I would have to disagree with your assessment of the iPod Photo. First of all, the regular iPod is only $100 cheaper than the iPod Photo, not "half the price." Secondly, you can look at photos on any television, not just on the iPod screen. Thirdly, if your digital camera holds 25,000 photos, I'm sure the memory card alone cost a lot more than $100. And I'm sure your digital camera doesn't automatically sync with your latest pictures, doesn't allow you to make custom albums, doesn't allow you to output slideshows with music, and so on. Say what you want about wanting to save money, but for people who want to carry lots of pictures around with them, paying $100 more is very, very reasonable. And that doesn't even count the full-color album artwork, a clearer screen, and the various other perks of a color iPod.

  69. Jack of all trades, master of none by rsborg · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Pretty soon, I'll have a phone that surfs the web, plays games, takes photos, cooks dinner, plays mp3s, wavs, oggs, avis, mpegs, and can predict the weather.

    Agreed. You'll have all of that and it'll suck at doing all of it. My family just bought a bunch of new cameraphones and I can attest that after a month, the camera is effectively worthless (not that the first month was any good anyway). My major beef is sync. My data/media devices need to sync in standard formats/connectors. The state of sync in phones today is absolute garbage. At least the iPod doesn't suck so badly on that.

    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
  70. Re: Simplicity by Basehart · · Score: 2, Informative

    Trust me, you need a pair of ER-4P Earphones by Etymotic Research. I've been using them since got my iPod and they beat anything else out there. Check out this review.

  71. Re:Photographers used to rip out Ipod hard drives by michaeldot · · Score: 2, Informative

    Untrue. They may have wanted to do it, but it turns out the IDE mode used for the iPod drive is not suitable for the CF mode used in digital cameras (or vice versa). These microdrives were probably manufacturered specifically for the iPod, unlike the microdrives used in less popular MP3 hard drive based players which were more generic.

    However, the Creative MuVo did have a suitable drive, and THAT is the one that photographers bought to cannibalize, as it was cheaper than buying a microdrive by itself, so you may be thinking of that one.

  72. Useful as a tour guide for an art gallery by michaeldot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Museums and galleries have already been using regular iPods as tour guides, example, so with a color screen to display the artwork at the same time, this seems a natural fit.

  73. breaking in headphones by tentimestwenty · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm not familiar with the iPod headphones but it is true that most all speakers and headphones sound different after 100 hours of hard use compared to when they're new. Like any mechanical part, especially one that has a flexible part, it tends to wear in to it's natural state. This is especially true of metal and composite designs. Usually the characteristics will change from "tinny" or "shrill" to "warm" and "smooth". There are certainly exceptions but after listening to over 25 speakers and quite a few headphones this has been my experience.

  74. iTMS tidbit by Mildew+Man · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Seems people here have missed out on the tidbit that Apple projects to sell over 17.7 million songs on the iTMS for October. That's up from 10.8 million songs in May. At this rate they will reach 20 million songs per month by December (or sooner). That's 240 million songs per year and growing. I don't have numbers for the rest on the online music industry (a little help here from anyone with the time to get current numbers) but it seems that they are increasing their lead. Can you say "juggernaut"?