iPod nano, iTunes 5, iTunes Phone

adpowers writes "Lots of updates today on the Apple front. First we have the iPod nano, which is an iPod photo-esque replacement for the iPod mini. It comes in 2 and 4 gig varieties and is half the thickness of the mini it replaces. A new iTunes is release as well, which looks similar to Mail.app. I'm not sure I like the cosmetic changes. It also touts an improved search bar, but I can't find an explanation of what that means. Finally, Apple, Motorola, and Cingular announced the ROKR E1, which has the iTunes on a cellular phone. (Theorized last week.) It syncs with iTunes just like an iPod." Coverage of the Apple news extravaganza available at The NYT, Forbes, Gizmodo, Mobiledia, and Macworld.

Comments

but does it run...

[fredrickleo]

...well it just might :)

Re:but does it run...

[hunterx11]

Sorry, nope.

It doesn't run x86 OS X.

Re:but does it run...

[g33kb0y]

I agree... no thanks.

I need ANOTHER flash memory format like I need another Pentium II in my closet? Compact... Secure Digital... Meory Stick... now TransFlash? Yikes

Re:but does it run...

[The_Honkey]

...yet.

On first look, quite nice

[aftk2]

Ah...now we know why Apple's been buying up flash memory in spades.

That iPod nano looks ridiculously slick. Heh, and although I imagine I'm going to have my geek card forcibly removed after saying this, my first thought upon seeing it was, "What happened to all the colors?" Granted, it's form over function, but judging by the amount of iPod minis that I've seen, people like the colors.

Well, fear not: iPod nano tubes: Colorful iPod nano Tubes fit like a glove and offer full Click Wheel control from the outside. (Actually, as someone whose iPod sports an impressive amount of scrapes, I think this is a good idea.)

That Apple, they think of everything. Now I'm going to go back to waiting for my Dalmation iPod nano tube.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Anonymous Coward]

nice ... I actually like the iTunes phone E1, if it is indeed based on the E398, it has great audio quality...

Re:On first look, quite nice

[garcia]

That Apple, they think of everything. Now I'm going to go back to waiting for my Dalmation iPod nano tube.

Except how to make their shit affordable. $199 for 4GB? Don't you find that a bit expensive especially when it's really meant to be an end-unit for their super successful iTMS (additional costs and perhaps even rising costs)?

Yes, it's sexy, small, and cute but 4GB doesn't do me all that much and I would constantly worry about losing it, damanging it, or out and out destroying it.

YMMV.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[generic-man]

Look at the original debate about the iPod: $350 for 5 GB. People snapped it up as fast as they could.

Apple makes a very handsome profit on iPods. You don't have to fill them with iTMS songs (MP3s work just as well) but the pairing of iPod with iTunes now accounts for over a billion dollars annually in sales for Apple.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[jellomizer]

That iPod nano looks ridiculously slick.

Apple marketing department wants you to say. "That iPod nano looks impossibly slick."

Re:On first look, quite nice

[garcia]

Apple makes a very handsome profit on iPods. You don't have to fill them with iTMS songs (MP3s work just as well) but the pairing of iPod with iTunes now accounts for over a billion dollars annually in sales for Apple.

Which is why they should be less money. Wake me up when they play video and have TV-out like the Archos.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[the_mighty_$]

Yep, this is great news. I'll admit that when this was first leaked on digg.com a few days ago, I had doubts. I wonder how that guy knew?

Re:On first look, quite nice

[bahwi]

Ah, the tubes are better than the color. My iPod mini is green with a plastic-whitish sleeve. Very protected(not a scratch, not very dirty either since I use my Apple Polish once a month at least), but now you can have the protection AND the colors. Awesome. =)

Grr, gotta save up the money now, and trim my portable playlist to 4gigs(barely at 4.2 though, and I can do without a few audiobooks)

Re:On first look, quite nice

[generic-man]

So allow me to summarize:

1. Profit!
2. ???
3. Sell iPods for less money

Apple could make a device with more features, like the Archos, but that would cost too much money for them. Why toy with a winning formula?

Re:On first look, quite nice

[kaos.geo]

4GB doesnt cut it for me, 6GB is just about right for my music collection. (plus some podcasts)
The colors.... well I Agree with the first poster, people LIKE the colors and most likely you will see an ipod nano with colors or mini nano or whatever they choose to call it. (and also 6gb or MORE) apple is just testing the waters with this one.
Tubes, socks and the like are (IMHO) uncomfortable and unnecesary unless you are a little anal (ok a LOT) because this is , in the end, a PORTABLE device. To be enjoyed!!! not to be kept in blankets.
Ok those were my 2 cents.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[ePhil_One]

iTunes now accounts for over a billion dollars annually in sales for Apple

Which is why they should be less money

Except Sales != Profits. Most iTMS money goes to others, like the record company. But at the end of the day, iTMS profits go to improving iTMS, not to giving away iPods like AOL CD's. The iPod is perfectly usable without iTMS (I only buy songs when Pepsi or 7-11 give me credits), so it would be really stupid of Apple to give them away. Besides, if Apple was viciously undercutting competitors like the Archos using iTMS profits, people would scream about "Monopoly power", etc.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[shotfeel]

You may have that backwords. Apple makes money on the iPods, not on the iTMS. The iTMS exhists for the sole purpose of selling iPods.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[henryhbk]

A public traded company, must (yes must) maximize the profit of its shareholders. Apple is not a non-profit designed to do "good", they are a commercial enterprise designed to make money.

I'm sure we would all want porsche to sell their cars for $50, and 60" plasma displays for $75, but those companies need to make money too. In a free market economy if a product is overpriced, then people won't buy it. Since it has a 70%+ market share, then I would guess they are doing the right thing...

Re:On first look, quite nice

[soft_guy]

It is the same price as the mini for the same amount of storage, except now its flash instead of a hard drive.

If you wanted the best price per unit of storage, you would buy the full sized iPod. The mini was always a bad deal when you factor in the amount of storage and compare it to the larger iPods.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[shotfeel]

They (at least the non mini/nano) iPods do have video out (currently allows viewing slide shows on TV). All they really need is the hard/software to decode the video, which is why I'm disappointed it wasn't announced.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[hayne]

$199 for 4GB? Don't you find that a bit expensive especially when it's really meant to be an end-unit for their super successful iTMS

1) I just looked on froogle for: flash memory 4GB
and didn't see anything offered less than $200 - and that's just one component of the iPod Nano.

2) Apple makes more money by selling the iPods than it does with the iTMS.

3) Most songs on people's iPods don't come from the iTMS - so why should Apple provide bargain-priced iPods when they won't necessarily make any profit from them?

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple could make a device with more features, like the Archos, but that would cost too much money for them. Why toy with a winning formula?

If nobody had ever toyed with a winning formula, we would still be using horses and sailing ships for all our transport needs.

It's called "progress".

And I can't help but note that all these new iPod variants could be described as "toying with a winning formula"...

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Anonymous Coward]

Form over function

Why do we always see that formulation, as if "form" and "function" are mutually exclusive.

You can have ridiculously bad form and ridiculously bad function. In fact, the two more often than not accompany each other.

You can also have insanely great form and insanely great function. That's a lot rarer, and a lot more difficult from an engineering standpoint. Apple achieves it more than anyone else, yet they get pilloried here on Slashdot for even trying. I get the distinct impression that pimply Slashdot pussies don't consider pursuing "form" to be manly. Other things that are not manly, according to ardent Slashdotters, are going outside and meeting girls.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, its NOT the same price for the same amount of storage. The iPod mini was $249 for 6GB. The nano is only 4GB for that price.

I personally liked the look of the iPod mini over the original iPod. The one piece extrusion design is really cool. And to be honest, I would rather they had anounced an 8GB mini. I could care less about the color screen.

The nano does looks good and is very small. (Which is another reason I went for the iPod mini.) I'm sure there will eventually be a larger capacity version of the nano. I WILL buy one when they get to 8GB (as in, more capacity than my current mini)

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple has devices that play music and show photos and that's good enough for their audience.

When Apple considers you ready to enjoy video on the go, you'll be able to purchase a video player.

Devices such as the Archos are not suitable. They are not Apple. They do not sync with iTunes, the one program you need. They do not fit the need.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[soft_guy]

Oh, you are right. My bad. I saw the pricing and the numbers and made an assumption.

$199 for 2GB sucks.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[neuroklinik]

The original iPod (5GB, first generation) was actually $499, not $350. I know, cuz I bought one at the new (at the time) Tyson's Corner Apple Store, a mere two days after the iPod was released.

At $499, they still got "snapped up".

Re:On first look, quite nice

[neuroklinik]

The iPod (and iPod U2) *do* have TV-out. Composite A/V out through the minijack.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[That's Unpossible!]

Which is why they should be less money.

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of why things cost what they do. Things aren't priced based on "fairness," they are priced naturally on market demand.

So far, the market thinks they are priced nicely.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Anonymous Coward]

I stand corrected. $499! I could buy an Archos PMP-500-DCQLX with XviD/ASF/MPEG/WMA/PFS+ for that much today!

Re:On first look, quite nice

[theoneknuckles]

It comes in solid BLACK as well. Just browse through the iPodNano GALLERY.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Anonymous Coward]

I've never understood why, but Apple does not want my money. It doesn't care about my opinions and it certainly doesn't want to cater to my needs.

What are these needs?

1) Affordable
2) Affordable
3) Affordable
4) Stylish

In that order. Apple doesn't want people that are cost-conscious. They want people that will suck off the Apple Experience for all its worth.

People that value their money more than others don't get to play in Apple's sandbox. We're not welcome because we don't (in the long run) make money for Apple. One-off buyers do very little to extend the Apple brand and are not loyal.

Apple wants people that will happily punk down 2K for a desktop with half the performance of a Dell priced $1K less. They want people that value style more than substance.

Yes, OS X is a tremendous OS. It's very powerful and brings a lot to the table when looking at a new computer. But that hardly justifies the price tag Apple puts on their hardware.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[DisownedSky]

My music collection is about 70GB, and I am happy with my 4 GB mini, which realistically holds about 800 tracks (the 1000 tracks applies only to radio-friendly songs, and mine are radio-hostile). Think Smart Playlists.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[finrock]

Actually, they were $399. At least, that is what my receipt says.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[jcr]

$199 for 4GB?

Sure, why not? If you don't want to pay that much, wait six months.

-jcr

Re:On first look, quite nice

[shmlco]

What does it mean to "maximize" profit of your shareholders?

• Would I "maximize" profits by providing good products at a fair price, enabling a steady and dependable stream of customers?
• Would I "maximize" profits by creating great products at a premium price, ensuring fanatical customer loyalty?
• Would I "maximize" profits by investing heavily in R&D so that future growth and revenue is possible?
• Would I "maximize" profits by investing in my employees, minimizing turnover and producing a highly productive, highly motivated, highly competitive workforce?

And as stated, a company, like, say, Ben & Jerry's can have other values, like having minimal impact and being environmentally friendly. Investors "know" they have those values and that money will go to support them. That's one of the reasons they made the investment.

In short, as the various approaches to "maximize" show, profit is not always the only, or even the highest, consideration.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Mr. Underbridge]

Don't you find that a bit expensive especially when it's really meant to be an end-unit for their super successful iTMS (additional costs and perhaps even rising costs)?

Believe that's backwards. iTMS is used to drive sales of iPod, their profit on iTMS is pretty slim.

Yes, it's sexy, small, and cute but 4GB doesn't do me all that much and I would constantly worry about losing it, damanging it, or out and out destroying it.

I mean if you want an enormous "portable" music player have at it. Get a good stereo, a car battery, and an AC/DC converter and you're ready to go. Generally, most people want portable players to be small, though.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[jaypaulw]

*I could care less about the color screen.*

how much less could you care about it?

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Anonymous Coward]

You must be a real hit at parties. Theoretically, of course.

Whiny bitch.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[billimad]

Jobs would have said "insanely slick" I think.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Anonymous Coward]

Speaking of being a hit at parties, it's a real shame you never get invited to any.

Of course, being 12 and being grounded by your parents must be a real pain for you. Not that your lack of intelligence would really bring anything to the table.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Anonymous Coward]

Many of the public want more features. Many of the public would use more features were they to be included. Thus, Apple is short-changing the public in that it is advertising its players as the best, and yet they are closer to last with respect to features (or an extreme and worrying lack thereof).

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Anonymous Coward]

All my friends say that watching videos on the go is a low priority. There's simply no product out there that can display all my videos on an adequate screen with a large enough hard drive. Furthermore, there are no legal channels through which to purchase video content which respects the author's rights.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Skyfire]

Of course, from a different point of view, staying alive is the highest consideration, and customer satisfaction is well down the list.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[jc42]

A public traded company, must (yes must) maximize the profit of its shareholders.

People keep saying, but I don't believe it's true, in the US or any other country.

Has any public company anywhere ever been sued for "not maximizing the profit of its shareholders"?

Now, I do know of cases where stockholder groups have sued a company's officers for taking actions that seriously damaged a company. But that wasn't the claim. The claim was that a public company "must maximize the profit of its shareholders". That's something very different from running the company into the ground. I'm looking for a case in which a company was successfully prosecuted for actions that didn't maximize stockholder profit.

If there were actually a case to be made here, I'd think that there would be plenty of opportunity. For example, last week both Wal-Mart and Anheuser-Busch sent truckloads of bottled/canned water and food to New Orleans, and handed the food and water out without charge. At least one cell-phone company sent trucks with phones, generators and APs to New Orleans to help with the communication problems. Such actions were very clearly was at the expense of the stockholders. While the DHS may have interfered with these trucks, I'll bet that neither company will be sued by stockholders. Similar cases abound. Every time there's some sort of local emergency, there are always a few companies that start sending aid, at the expense of their stockholders.

But I've never read of a lawsuit over this.

Anyone know of any cases that were settled against the company? Anyone know of any cases at all of such a suit even being filed?

I suspect that short of radical malfeasance, a public company can in fact do as it wishes with its money without fear of being dragged into court by the stockholders. But I'd be interested in reading of evidence to the contrary.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[kaos.geo]

I agree but personally I don't like creating playlists, kind of bores me. I just shuffle or "DJ" on the spot ;). But you are right nonetheless. I guess I will give playlists a try! :P p.s.:70GBs of music! Now I have Gigabyte envy! Damn!

Re:On first look, quite nice

[mkiwi]

Apple marketing department wants you to say. "That iPod nano looks impossibly slick."

I think Steve Jobs would have it be more like: "That iPod nano looks insanely slick!"

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Anonymous Coward]

well mr. wizard. when a company like Apple places an order for 60,000,000 2GB and 4GB flash memory chips from samsung, im fairly sure they pay less than retail. *rolleyes*

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Pope]

Hell, I have 160GB at the moment, and a 10GB iPod. Since I mostly listen to it at work, I only take music that I can work to, which certainly isn't all of my musical tastes. I just got used to making playlists way back when, so my habits scaled up nicely.

Oh, and none of that 160GB are my rips... ;)

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Anonymous Coward]

well, you wont get 4gb for $200, but if you are a company which buys thousands/millions youll get quite a nice price ;)

Re:On first look, quite nice

[focitrixilous P]

There are many ways to profit. You can undercut your competiton in quality and price and make it up in volume, (Wal*Mart, Dell) you can establish a brand name that makes your product more valuable (Ambercrombie, Microsoft) or you can try and establish a brand loyality (Apple, Ford & other car manufacturers). Each company has chosen it's path to "Maximum" profit. Would apple make more by selling these for cheap, but making them seem less desirable to the gadget hounds? Would Wal*Mart make more by not treating their workers like month old bagels, increasing customer service but also increasing costs? Enough rhetorical questions, just pointing out that there are many ways to profit (and more to lose money)

Re:On first look, quite nice

[danaris]

2000 called, they want their BS anti-Apple complaint back.

Dan Aris

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Angostura]

Why are you assuming the "must" is a legal must?

You ask Has any public company anywhere ever been sued for "not maximizing the profit of its shareholders"?

You should ask: "Has the management of any public company anywhere ever been removed for "not maximizing the profit of its shareholders"?

Frequently.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[ePhil_One]

Many of the public want more features. Many of the public would use more features were they to be included. Thus, Apple is short-changing the public in that it is advertising its players as the best, and yet they are closer to last with respect to features

No, you're just overlooking the latest iPod Mega. Its been around for years, not only plays DVD's, but burns them as well; sit your ass in a hotspot and you can download music and video right from the player!

I assume by many you mean more than three, but less than the 87% of people who chose the iPod despite the availability of other models.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[RoadDoggFL]

http://www.newegg.com/product/product.asp?item=N82 E16820183156 Anyway, I'd be really interested in this if Apple's sole intent was to acheive an absurdly long battery life. I'm sure they could do with with a black and white screen and no hard drive.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[eyeruh]

Actually, the answer is yes to both questions.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[RoadDoggFL]

Ok, bad link. Anyway, 4GB only yielded this:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82 E16820228036
But I still agree with the pricing, argument was never really the point of my post.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[bmeteor]

since my music collection is bigger than my ipod, smart playlists are really good. I've been an iPod user for a while now (2nd gen 10G) and I've just really started to use the smart playlists. I only upload now three smart playlists to my iPod: recent additions (8 gb), top 50 Most Played (250 mb), and top rated (500 mb). When I dock my iPod, I have another playlist called Played Today (i don't have an on-the-go function on my iPod) where I then rate the songs i listened to that day when I come home from work. Nonetheless, Smart Playlists rock.

Still, since my goal is "listen to songs you want to listen to," I'm looking at applescript to define some of the relationships between smart playlists to fit in my measly 10 gbs.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[fonetik]

How about "Fantastically non-frictional"

Re:On first look, quite nice

[aichpvee]

Apple achieves it more than anyone else

Proof please. Because I've used their stuff and I have to disagree.

Can we please bring this one-sided "debate" of apple being better than everyone in form and function to an end? You guys sound like cable news commentators talking about how great republicans are.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Anonymous Coward]

No. A (for profit) company must only try to make a profit (the taxman he say so. There is NO obligation to maximize it.

There are lots of example of companies not trying to maximize profits, even "ethical" investment funds.

A publically traded company:
- must try to make a profit
- hold an annual general meeting, and extra-oridinary general meeting if called for by shareholders

Now directors of those companies have some obligations; such as acting in the company's and shareholder's best interests. That's a whole different story.

An if at an AGM the shareholder pass a motion that all products must only be sold coloured lime green, then lime it green it is - profitable or not.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Anonymous Coward]

Whew! Wouldn't have guessed you were being sarcastic if you hadn't put that cute little "*rolleyes*" at the end.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[v1]

Remember, if you can sell 100 units at $50 each, or you can sell 95 units at $60 each, you make more money selling for a higher price. There's 5 less customers, possibly unhappy with you due to your high prices, but you will cry all the way to the bank. If you keep those 95 customers despite the bad PR from the other 5, you come out ahead. Whenever I hear people complain about a high price on an item, I can only think that person must be in the 5% that got edged out by the cost.

You could make lots of happy customers and sell 300 units at $35 each, but then you would make much less money in the end since you have such a small proffit even with the large unit count.

If you're a stockholder and the company your stock is in is making its pricing decisions to make people like YOU happy, you will see very little dividends if any, and would be a fool to buy more stock. You may even sell it. This is the stick that keeps companies from doing stupid things like that.

If they make good decisions that make more money, they pay more dividends, people buy more stock, and stock prices go up. This means the company can invest more, to sell more units, become more efficient, invest in R&D, and ultimately may make even more money, continuing the cycle. That's busiiness.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Anonymous Coward]

How is this modded +5 Insightful? Does everyone out there think there is only one possible way to achieve profits? Of course there are several ways, far more than the four listed. And guess what? For each and everyone of them a company will estimate sales now and in the future, and then come up with the net present value of current and future profits. This is basic finance 101 and any company not doing this will almost certainly have sub-par returns.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Anonymous Coward]

All companies, including publically traded companies, *must* carry out the will of their owners. If Apple shareholders demand, under the rules established at the company's inception (and subsequent modifications thereto) to give a free iPod to every Canadian citizen, Apple must do it. It has nothing to do with profits -- companies must carry out the will of the owners, which often is "maximize profits" but is not required to be. Get over yourself and your "evil corporations" complex.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Anonymous Coward]

How the hell is this comment insightful? People confuse a postive Apple comment and agreement with insight?

1) I just looked on froogle for: flash memory 4GB
Yeah, I'm sure Apple is using Froogle and consumer packaged memory for their player. Memory has historically been one of the products where the individual components (board and supporting chips) are cheaper then the finished consumer product. I remember quite a few people using our electronic lab back in the early 90's making making memory simms from pre made circuit cards and individual chips. Back then, 1MB cost about $40 at the store, about $15 to build it yourself.

2) Apple makes more money by selling the iPods than it does with the iTMS.
This is disputed all the time (including in the child posts to your comment) and people can show links to prove either way which one makes money and which one does not. Just for reference.. Wal-Mart, Rhapsody, Yahoo, Napster and others ONLY sell online music (and many even less then the $0.99 that iTMS does) and do not have hardware to fall back on to subsidize. How the hell is their business plan going to make money but yet Apple is not with iTMS at the same with higher prices? If iTMS is NOT making money, has anyone thought about what is going to happen when the iPod sales saturate or peak? What is the long term plan for iTMS? Maybe you do not agree but can you throw me some forecasts or plans on how this is going to be sustained? Is there a point where it is going to achieve self sustaining and will that include a price increase which will effectively screw over those locked into the iPod-iTms only option because there is no other choice at Apple's choice? I am not knocking the iPod or iTMS in any way. I just have a hard time believing that such a business model as people describe it can stay around long term. Either it will not stay around or people are stretching the facts or twisting the facts on what does and does not make money. What if Apple did not spend $50-100 Million promoting iTMS/iPod per year (some random number for arguement sake). Would they make money then? I honestly think iTMS/iPOD is much bigger then Apple and everyone thought it would be at this point. I honestly do not think Apple would have took such a risky business chance with the iTMS/iPod system had they thought they could not make money with it at much lower subscriber levels at this point in time. That is why I find it really hard to believe iTMS is "not making money" for Apple.

3) Most songs on people's iPods don't come from the iTMS - so why should Apple provide bargain-priced iPods when they won't necessarily make any profit from them?

No comment on that.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[simscitizen]

Do you read your links? That's a microdrive, not flash memory...

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Skippy_kangaroo]

My music collection is about 210GB - but I keep it on silvered plastic discs with lots of pretty printing on one side.

I've also got a low quality, highly compressed copy of it sitting on my hard-drive somewhere...

Re:On first look, quite nice

[jo42]

Oh great, more Apple StinkPods...

Re:On first look, quite nice

[humina]

I disagree. Apple makes money on the iTMS. I will now post the same amount of proof as you did to prove my point.... Ok done. Thus proving that apple makes money on the iTMS. Case closed on that one.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[graffix_jones]

In a purely economic sense (I'm an economist), you maximize your profits when your marginal cost equals your marginal revenue (i.e. you make as much selling the next unit of the good as it costs you to produce it) along your marginal demand curve.

Thus, you're foregoing profits if you sell less than that amount, because (for example) you could make $50.01 on a good that costs you $50 to produce. You also wouldn't produce past that point, because you'd be losing revenue (i.e. making $49.99 on something that costs $50 to produce).

I'm not sure if that was the definition of 'maximizing' profits that you were looking for, but that's how economists define profit maximization. ;)

Re:On first look, quite nice

[dimension6]

I'm willing to bet they introduce colored iPod nanos in time...it's typical marketing.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[earnest murderer]

Well Mr. Dumbass thank you for pointing out the obvious for us while missing the point of the post.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[ozmanjusri]

there are no legal channels through which to purchase video content which respects the author's rights.

Garbage. You can download thousands of free videos at http://www.archive.org/ alone.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Anonymous Coward]

For a $100 Shuffle, Apple gets $50 of profit.
For a $350 iPod, Apple scores $100 of profit.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[E8086]

"My music collection is about 70GB, and I am happy with my 4 GB mini"

Similar situation, more than 4gb of music. I think the money I saved by getting the 4gb mini is well worth the effort of having to swap the songs once a week or two. Since you have to connect it to your PC to charge you might as well spend a couple minutes to make playlists and/or organize by artist/alblum so you can easily rotate through your collection. It's at most 4gb which doesn't take that long to transfer at 480/400mbits with USB2/firewire for the apple folks, if you have a G5 with firewire2 you have no reason to complain. If you only have USB1, it's probably still less time than it takes to recharge the battery.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[jcr]

That was true for quite a while, but with half a billion songs sold, I don't believe it's the case anymore. Apple still makes more money on the iPods than the music store, but the music store passed the break-even point quite some time ago.

-jcr

Re:On first look, quite nice

[motulist]

More features does not automatically equal a better product, even if those features are ones that the user wants. If, I said if, adding more feature creates more complexity and a lesser user experience, than the product is now worse, even if it theoretically does more that a user might want. What many people fail to understand is that the thing that makes the iPod / iTunes solution the most attractive to most users is exactly BECAUSE it isn't overloaded with every bell and whistle but rather focuses on it's core objective. This allows the end user the greatest possible experience in the area that he was seeking the product for in the first place. If you sacrifice your primary objective, it doesn't matter how many secondary objectives you hit because the product has failed it's primary objective.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[earnest murderer]

How the hell is this comment insightful? People confuse a postive Apple comment and agreement with insight? (followed by stupidity

If a comment gets positively moderated (+5 no less) maybe you should read it again. Perhaps a perusal of the parent might be in order. Spend a few minutes thinking about why you might be mistaken.

For instance, when I read your post my first thought was "hey, maybe I missed something". Unfortunately upon even modest scrutiny your arguments are not only wrong, they are non sensical in the context of the discussion.

Since I'm feeling magnanimous toward your dumbass self, I'll spell it out.

1: The new iPod nano offers exceptional *VALUE* to the *CONSUMER* in comparison to currently available memory products.
The only 4 gig flash drive sold by Compusa is $431.99
By comparison, the 4 gig nano plays music, shows photos, and stores data. And it packs a 14 hour battery to boot. Cost, $250.
The best price for the nastiest piece of hardware from a mail order warehouse can barely compete on price and looses utterly on features.

This is disputed all the time...(more bullshit)

2: Steve Jobs himself has said on several occasions the iTMS is basically a front for selling iPods and there is little profit in the venture. Pay attention or use Google. Most importantly, know when you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

3: Math is easy. Too bad you didn't learn any. If you can read a press release, multiply, and divide, you can figure out that iTMS content is not what's filling up these devices.

In short you are an ignoramus with a big mouth.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[bahwi]

I've mostly got Audiobooks and a few podcasts, some music, but most of it I can do without. The iPod is for the car and the gym(vocals and classical, and high energy playlists, respectively). I see no need to carry it all with me, of course 6gigs is quite reasonable, and a full iPod would work for you. Some people have a few hundred gigs and want to be able to take it with them everywhere. That's just ridiculous(since you've got more than 24hrs of music, and probably won't be listening to it all that much). Besides, a little bit of pickyness and you're 100gigs easily hits 20gigs. =P

Of course, for some, size is everything.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[rmjohnso]

Actually, the answer is yes. While it is difficult to prove, the Board of Directors MUST (legally) act in a fiduciary manner. That mean, they have to do what is in the best interest of the shareholders. However, if the Board takes a business risk, and it fails, then that is ok.

As to the point above about "maximizing profits," the shareholders (owners) of the company must decide what is "profitable" for them. For example, if a company is mostly employee owned, the oweners/employees may decide to pay employees more rather than pay out more to shareholders.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[axjdo]

YES, it is the law that profit must be maximized, one time henry ford, decided to stop paying stock dividends and use the money to create a scholarship program. He was sued and the court ruled that maximum profit is the LAW, and non investors are nobodys, no matter what 'good' might be served.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[bar-agent]

Venture Brothers?

Re:On first look, quite nice

[earnest murderer]

I disagree. Apple makes money on the iTMS. I will now post the same amount of proof as you did to prove my point.... Ok done. Thus proving that apple makes money on the iTMS. Case closed on that one. Annoyed, I bothered to use Google for a whole 1.5 seconds and came up with this juicy bit...

From FastCompany

Meanwhile, the $15 million or so that iTunes has generated in revenue thus far is statistically meaningless even for Apple. Case closed, indeed.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[bar-agent]

As I understand it, the iPod hard drive really isn't well-suited to being run continuously, which is what would be needed for video.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[earnest murderer]

Another more current quote from this years 2nd quarter conference call at Apple's Site In short, it is revealed in the Q and A that iTMS profits are (drumroll please)... A little above break even.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[earnest murderer]

Just a bit more for the bystanders... From this years 2nd Qarter conference call... iTMS profits are... (Drumroll please)

A little above break even.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[The Infamous Grimace]

Do a Google. It's common knowledge that Apple uses the iTunes Music Store to sell iPods. Apple has confirmed this. If the iTMS is in the black, it's a recent occurrence.

(tig)

Re:On first look, quite nice

[shmlco]

True, but the OP said that companies "must" maximize profits, with the typical slashdot implication that evil corporations must "rape, pillage, and burn" anyone and everyone.

Your curve is correct, but only as far as it goes. I attempted in my response to show that there are many business models in which attempting to extract every penny you can squeeze out of a customer is actually counter-productive, and in fact many corporations "must" do no such thing.

It can be to your advantage to leave money on the table, and chalk it up to marketing and good will. The intention, of course, is to maintain a happy, loyal customer base who'll give you not just additional pennies on your current product, but many more dollars on future products.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Builder]

Have a read of The Corporation. It outlines two cases, one in the US (Ford) and one in the UK (can't remember) where the company was sued for not maximising shareholder revenue.

In the case of Ford, I believe Mr Ford wanted to reduce the price of the vehicles so that more people could buy them. His shareholders sued him and won because this would have reduced their revenue. The court found that it is the duty of a company to maximise shareholder earnings.

The case in the UK was very similar, and both of these are now quoted as precedent.

So to answer your question, yes, companies have been successfully sued for NOT maximising shareholder revenue.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Yaruar]

Although Ben and Jerrys threw out most of their hippy ethos when they sold out to one of the biggest chemical/pharmacutical companies in the world. Although even before that the chief exectives voted to throw out their rule of capped salaries so they could give themselves big fat payrises...

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Anonymous Coward]

So you have no incentive or care to expand on why iTMS is "breaking even" while others selling online music are making money? Any comments on the concept os sustaining a break even? No comments on reaching peak sales of iPods and how iTMS is going to keep going? Nice way to show your superior intelect but yet completely blow off the actual points I was trying to make and discuss. If you have no idea how they can sustain the system going long term, you can admit it. If you have no idea how they are NOT making money from iTMS you can admit that as well.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[IvanXQZ]

Man there's been a lot of misinformation about original iPod/mini/etc prices here. Here's the story. Yes I made this table. sizes given are depth of lowest-capacity model (single-platter drive) f: +3mm [0.12 in] (dual platter drive) (xx) previous model sold alongside revised models Full size iPod: 1g: 19.9 mm [0.78 in] (moving wheel) 1.1: 5 [$399, 23-Oct-01] 1.2: (5)/10 [$399/499, 21-Mar-02] 2g: 18.3 mm [0.72 in] (touch wheel+firewire port) 2.1: (5)/10/20f [$299/399/499, 17-Jul-02] 3g: 15.7 mm [0.62 in] (four buttons across) 3.1: 10/15/30f [$299/399/499, 28-Apr-03] 3.2: (10)/20/40f [$299/399/499, 8-Sep-03] 3.3: (15)/(20)/(40f) [$299/399/499, 6-Jan-04] 4g: 14.6 mm [0.57 in] (click wheel+monochrome) 4.1: 20/40f [$299/399, 19-Jul-04] Pg: 16.1 mm [0.63 in] (color, aka iPod photo) P.1: (20)/(40f)/40f/60f [$299/399/499/599, 26-Oct-04] P.2: (20)/30/(60f) [$299/349/449, 23-Feb-05] P.3: 20/(60f) [$299/$399, 28-Jun-05] U2 models (black shell, red click wheel, rear engravings) U.1: same as 4g20 [$349, 26-Oct-04] U.2: same as Pg20 [$329, 28-Jun-05] iPod mini: 1g: 13.8 mm [0.50 in] (five colors: silver, gold, blue, pink, green) 1.1: 4 [$249, 6-Jan-04] 2g: 13.8 mm [0.5 in] (four colors: silver, blue, pink, green; improved battery life) 2.1: 4/6 [$199/249, 23-Feb-05] iPod shuffle: 1g: 8.4 mm [0.33 in] 1.1: 0.5/1 [$99/$149, 11-Jan-05 1.2: (0.5)/(1) [$99/$129, 28-Jun-05] iPod nano: 1g: 6.90 mm [0.27 in] 1.1: 2/4 [$199/$249, 7-Sep-05]

Re:On first look, quite nice

[IvanXQZ]

Ok, I'm dumb, but here reposted so that it's actually readable:

sizes given are depth of lowest-capacity model (single-platter drive)
f: +3mm [0.12 in] (dual platter drive)
(xx) previous model sold alongside revised models

Full size iPod:
1g: 19.9 mm [0.78 in] (moving wheel)
1.1: 5 [$399, 23-Oct-01]
1.2: (5)/10 [$399/499, 21-Mar-02]

2g: 18.3 mm [0.72 in] (touch wheel+firewire port)
2.1: (5)/10/20f [$299/399/499, 17-Jul-02]

3g: 15.7 mm [0.62 in] (four buttons across)
3.1: 10/15/30f [$299/399/499, 28-Apr-03]
3.2: (10)/20/40f [$299/399/499, 8-Sep-03]
3.3: (15)/(20)/(40f) [$299/399/499, 6-Jan-04]

4g: 14.6 mm [0.57 in] (click wheel+monochrome)
4.1: 20/40f [$299/399, 19-Jul-04]

Pg: 16.1 mm [0.63 in] (color, aka iPod photo)
P.1: (20)/(40f)/40f/60f [$299/399/499/599, 26-Oct-04]
P.2: (20)/30/(60f) [$299/349/449, 23-Feb-05]
P.3: 20/(60f) [$299/$399, 28-Jun-05]

U2 models (black shell, red click wheel, rear engravings)
U.1: same as 4g20 [$349, 26-Oct-04]
U.2: same as Pg20 [$329, 28-Jun-05]

iPod mini:
1g: 13.8 mm [0.50 in] (five colors: silver, gold, blue, pink, green)
1.1: 4 [$249, 6-Jan-04]

2g: 13.8 mm [0.5 in] (four colors: silver, blue, pink, green; improved battery life)
2.1: 4/6 [$199/249, 23-Feb-05]

iPod shuffle:
1g: 8.4 mm [0.33 in]
1.1: 0.5/1 [$99/$149, 11-Jan-05
1.2: (0.5)/(1) [$99/$129, 28-Jun-05]

iPod nano:
1g: 6.90 mm [0.27 in]
1.1: 2/4 [$199/$249, 7-Sep-05]

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Anonymous Coward]

I mean good video content, like Family Guy episodes. I don't mean free crap.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Svencer]

IANAL, but most states now have statutes allowing corporate philanthropy.

For instance in Delaware, 8 Del. C. s.122(9) states that corporations may "make donations for the public welfare or for charitable, scientific or educational purposes, and in time of war or other national emergency in aid thereof." Most such statutes do not incorporate explicit limits, although they are often implied. Namely, donations should be reasonable, bear reasonable relation to corporation's interest, and should not be remote or fanciful. Although direct corporate benefit is not necessary, corporate interest has to be a motive.

As for cases, A.P. Smith Mfg. Co. v. Barlow, 98 A.2d 581 (N.J. 1953) is often cited in corporate law classes as an example where a corporation was sued by its shareholders for making a corporate donation (in this case to Princeton University). The Supreme Court of N.J. held this to be okay because "modern conditions" required that corporations discharge social as well as private duties, including contributing corporate funds "within reasonable limits" in support of academic institutions.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Lars T.]

Good point. So who are those "others selling online music are making money"?

Re:On first look, quite nice

[Anonymous Coward]

Mmmm, elasticity of demand....

Re:On first look, quite nice

[PriceIke]

Exactly why the hell is the flamebait? It's a damn appropriate criticism. Look, I think the device is sexy as hell too, but I have to be practical when I'm shelling out hundreds of dollars for something that I expect to be functional. Four GB for $249? My ego can't afford that and my self-esteem is not based on how many trendy (would "hip" be too gross a pun?) Apple gadgets I carry around. My 3G 40GB iPod still serves me just fine and I could only see replacing it with one of greater capacity, not less.

Is Apple gonna make money hand over fist at this price point? You bet your ass they will. That doesn't make the price point reasonable. The fact that people shelled out hundreds of dollars for the iPod mini is proof only of the power of the spending potential of teenage girls, not the cumulative wisdom of the marketplace.

Re:On first look, quite nice

[VolciMaster]

$199 for 4GB? Don't you find that a bit expensive

I don't find it expensive. If you buy a 1Gb SD card for your digital camera (as I did at Christmas last year), you'll spend ~$75 for the sd card, on top of the (for mine anyways) $200 for the camera. So, for $199 I can buy just a camera, or just 2.5Gb in SD cards.

I think the iPod nano is a good deal.

Flash or HDD based?

[alexre1]

Anyone know if the Ipod Nano is flash based? I can't find any mention of it on the Apple website (or maybe I'm just blind...) It'd be wicked if it was flash based, then I wouldn't feel nervous every time I went jogging =)

Re:Flash or HDD based?

[MasterOfUniverse]

Yes, its flash. Look here http://www.apple.com/ipodnano/specs.html at the bottom Technical Specifications: iPod nano.

Re:Flash or HDD based?

[Ingolfke]

Anyone know if the Ipod Nano is flash based?

Actually I think it may use 1/8 of an inch tape.

Re:Flash or HDD based?

[TrevX]

Its completely flash based. You can find the technical specs here.

Trev

Re:Flash or HDD based?

[Anonymous Coward]

Samsung NAND flash

iHuh?

[Doc Ruby]

"ROKR E1"? Why didn't they call it an iPhone, probably the best name among all of Apple's products? Maybe they let Motorola, which usually prefers unpronouncable alphanumeric soup, pick the name.

Re:iHuh?

[ceejayoz]

Considering Motorola makes and sells the phone, it's not surprising that Motorola gets to name it.

It's not particularly nice looking, either, so Apple probably wouldn't want their style of name on it regardless.

Re:iHuh?

[necro2607]

The model number is actualy E790, not E1 ... "ROKR" is the user-friendly marketing-devised name for it, of course.

Re:iHuh?

[Winterblink]

Say it like it's spelled. ROKR="rocker". What's so unpronouncable about that? It's part of Motorola's new naming scheme, to have only four letter hip-sounding names for their gear. And it's not hurting their bottom line, so yay for them.

Re:iHuh?

[athakur999]

I agree, it's a crap name. At least the "RAZR" can be pronounced as "razor" which is marginally cool sounding.

What's this gonna be, the "roker"? The mental image of a formerly grossly overweight television personality doesn't quite fit the image of a sleek new mobile phone.

Re:iHuh?

[That's Unpossible!]

The names RAZR and ROKR are most likely nods to the text-messaging practice of SHRTNING WRDS 2 TXT QUIKR.

Re:iHuh?

[pavon]

The design of the phone doesn't match any of Apples other products either. When I heard Motorolla was building it, I expected a white RAZR which would be more in keeping with the current iPods and the rest of the iSomething line of products.

This is just, well ... boring. The ROKR E1 design is definately not up to the "shit your pants" standard that Apple has worked hard to acheive.

Re:iHuh?

[bmeteor]

MOTO has a bit of a BRND IMGE now with TKNG five or six LTTR WRDS, removing a VOWL or two, capitalizing it and GTNG a PRDCT name. Obviously referring to the halo model, the RAZR.

Seriously though, I'd expect a ROKR E2 soon, in a RAZR design. That'd be sweet.

Re:iHuh?

[djdavetrouble]

I had the thought a few months ago when this was brewing that any phone / music player should have two batteries somehow. These people are going to be plugging in to street lights to get a charge, no doubt.

Re:iHuh?

[jimbolauski]

The best part will be when you have to pay for the ringtone of the itune you just bought. It's brilliant.

Re:iHuh?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe "Rocker"...

Ya think?

-jewdass

Re:iHuh?

[soft_guy]

I think they meant for you to think of Rocker instead of Al Roker.

But considering the phone only holds 100 songs, perhaps Al Roker is the more accurate image.

Re:iHuh?

[x136]

No, it's pronounced "Roker" as in "Al Roker." Rokerphone. Free weather updates on the hour, every hour. Oh, and something about music. WEATHER!

Re:iHuh?

[Scruffeh]

Blatently stolen from Primal Scream's XTRMNTR album. If only they'd patented taking letters out of words!

Re:iHuh?

[bobbagum]

Because it's crap? Apple wouldn't want to associate their "i" brand with this hack job of a phone, come on, it's just a E398 which has been out for ages with one extra buttons and iTunes loaded, I can do a better job at that duct taping the nano iPod to the back of the damn phone.

Re:iHuh?

[Anonymous Coward]

How about a "68040 FONE"

Re:iHuh?

[Anonymous Coward]

Living in a big city and going into a restaurant where everyone is on the phone I know this will suck if everyone is playing music off their cell phone at McDonalds.

Re:iHuh?

[karnal]

PRDCT

That's 5. You can't have five and work for the allmighty MOTO.

You're fired.

Re:iHuh?

[FRiC]

The ROKR phone is identical to the existing E398 and the "E398 Hijacked by MTV", with just a music button added. The E398's are already marketed as music phones and do have pretty good audio playback quality through either the onboard stereo speakers or the headphones.

The E398 also has a large hacking community and many hacked firmware available. I wouldn't be surprised if the ROKR firmware becomes available for the regular E398.

Re:iHuh?

[sammy baby]

I dobut that'll happen. I have a Motorola V550, and used bluetooth to transfer a small mp3 to the phone, just to see if I could set it as a ringtone. Worked with no problem. Now, whenever my wife calls me, I get the first few bars of "Fell in love with a girl," by the White Stripes.

Since the capability existed prior to the iTunes features, I doubt they'd strip it out, but hey, stranger things have been known to happen.

(I only went through this exercise because it pissed me off that wireless companies would charge two bucks for a cheesy polyphonic ringtone, but that I could get the actual song online at iTunes for US$.99.)

Re:iHuh?

[Anonymous Coward]

OU812?

ROKOUT!

Re:iHuh?

[fiddlesticks]

Maybe they wanted to launch it in countries which
a) have more take up of mobiles than the US

and

b) don't speak English, so don't need a snazzy Apple name to remind them it's a phone.

Re:iHuh?

[koehn]

No, it's pronounced "Roker" as in "Al Roker." Rokerphone. Free weather updates on the hour, every hour. Oh, and something about music. WEATHER!

And I suppose we can expect the phones we buy today to be half the thickness and half the weight in a few years?

Re:iHuh?

[zapp]

I gotta put my rant in on this one.

Using T9 predictive text, it is WAY easier to just use full normal spellings than to bother trying to come up with these deformed retardations of words.

Re:iHuh?

[eclectic4]

"This is just, well ... boring. The ROKR E1 design is definately not up to the "shit your pants" standard that Apple has worked hard to acheive."

This isn't an Apple product. Everyone must realize this. They didn't design it, build it, etc... nothing. It's just a Motorola phone that has iTunes functionality built in, which is very cool, but that's it.

I repeat, this is not an Apple product in any way, shape or form. Period.

Re:iHuh?

[bmeteor]

Um sir, its YURE FIRD.

I'll be cleaning my desk out now :-)

Re:iHuh?

[binarybum]

unpronouncable? wow, I really need to stop snooping in on these Mac posts.
    It's pronounced "Rocker" hate to go the extra step at the risk of sounding patronizing, but it's rocker, like a rock star - music, get it?

      sounds no less dorky than sticking "e" in front of everything, or now the ubiquitous "i"

    remember the IROC? An eighties hill-billy would have slapped you if you called it the I.R.O.C.

Re:iHuh?

[yogkarma]

More interesting is done by cingular and Motorola. They added extra hard drive in phone. It's like selling their product using one more unnecessary feature.

Why can't I create a list of music I want to listen on my laptop, load it to satellites radio website and let satellite broad cast all song one by one on my mobile phone? Satellite radio is there any way; you just make it more customizable to work with mobile phone.

I am more interested in mobile phone world. First they use java/brew application then PDA now iPod.

Well when we will use mobile phone as currency or small children location device or clear signal mobile phone or just simple working mobile phone with no cancer.

Re:iHuh?

[op12]

But considering the phone only holds 100 songs...

If by 100 you mean 1,000, then yes.

Re:iHuh?

[generic-man]

Obviously MOTO played a lot of NES RPGS where you had to name your CHRS with four letter NMES due to the JPNS DEVS underestimating the LNGT of most ERPN names.

Re:iHuh?

[DA-MAN]

GP: But considering the phone only holds 100 songs...

You: If by 100 you mean 1,000, then yes.

No, the GP was referring to the phone. That is a different beast than the iPod Nano, which you linked to.

http://www.apple.com/itunes/mobile/

From Site: Plus, ROKR E1 phones from Cingular come pre-upgraded to support up to 100 songs.

Re:iHuh?

[dcam]

Looking at the phone, I think iBrick might be a better name.

Re:iHuh?

[afidel]

You must be retarded, that's the nano, not the ROKR phone from Motorola which only has enough flash for ~100 songs (128kbit, ~4 minute songs).

Re:iHuh?

[Anonymous Coward]

An eighties hill-billy would have slapped you if you called it the I.R.O.C.

And a hillbilly from any decade will slap you for hyphenating "hillbilly"

All in good fun...

Re:iHuh?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, but if you go over 160 characters the message spills over and you have to pay more, so word-deformation is occasionally justified.

Re:iHuh?

[soft_guy]

Well, if you listen to songs that are only 24 seconds long, then maybe you can get 1,000 onto the Rokr phone.

(Or just buy a huge memory card - or a real iPod.)

Re:iHuh?

[patio11]

Don't you mean FRD? OWND, BTCH. (Curse you lameness filter!)

Re:iHuh?

[tf23]

See, Motorolla is learning from the Apple marketing department. It's called the upsell. Get everyone to buy the new phone as is, when you know they're really wanting a RAZR that'll do itunes.

That'll come out next year, and make everyone who bought this one want the new razr version.

Re:iHuh?

[Linknoid]

Hmm, so you're saying the requirement is that they have to fit inside a 32 bit register?

Re:iHuh?

[humina]

"The ROKR E1 design is definately[sic.] not up to the "shit your pants" standard that Apple has worked hard to acheive[sic.]."

Then you will be happy to hear that apple's next product announcement will be the iDiaper for grown men that shit their pants during product announcements. It will obviously come in apple's signature white. Unfortunately someone will shit themselves at this announcement, but apple figured that this can be the last time that it will be a problem.

Re:iHuh?

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree. They need to treat countries such as China more seriously. Uptake of phones and mp3 players is far higher than the US (judged from experience) and 'nobody' bothers with the stupid deals with the carriers.

If I were Motorola, I would have reased it in China several months ago, when images first started appearing on the 'net.

It's probably too late now (the market is a little swamped), and it kinda looks crap. The look is much more important in China, I think.

Re:iHuh?

[earnest murderer]

It's not particularly nice looking, either, so Apple probably wouldn't want their style of name on it regardless. Indeed, for the most part it looks as if Apple's contribution to the device was making iTunes recognise it.

Re:iHuh?

[ajwitte]

Yes, but 160 is a lot. This post has 160 characters and look at how long it is. The average text message would be shorter, even with all the words spelled out.

Re:iHuh?

[customiser]

It doesn't look like an Apple product. Especially compared to the "ridiculously slick" iPod nano, its design is pretty lame. Maybe that's not the way they though about it, but for me it makes sense: it doesn't look good enough to stand next to the iPods, Minis, PowerBooks.

Re:iHuh?

[aug24]

SRRY J.

Re:iHuh?

[Anonymous Coward]

You can bet Apple is not going to let Moto make everything untidy and messy by handing over the iPhone name. Seems like Apple doesnt want the ROKR to be a huge success - look how they are stealing Motos thunder by announcing the ipod nano on the same day, and Jobs even fumbled with the ROKR interface on stage. And the lame 100 song limit is Apples idea as well. For now apple just wants to get the carriers get used to iTMS on the network. The iphone is going to be a genuine Apple branded product.

No firewire, USB 2.0

[ce25254]

Nano spec says USB 2.0 only -- and no firewire -- this means I don't think I can plug it into my MDD PowerMac. :-(

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[justforaday]

Since it has a dock connector, I'm assuming that you just need to get a firewire/dock cable. They more or less ditched firewire as the stock connector when they switched to color screens on the regular lineup a few months ago.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[ashpool7]

Look at the requirements on the tech specs page. Under "connectivity" it does not mention firewire. However, under Power and Battery it says: "Charging via USB or FireWire to computer system or power adapter"

So, who knows.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[Anonymous Coward]

It says it can charge via Firewire but I'm not sure about file transfer.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[zfractal]

I think the MDD actually *does* have USB 2.0 (at least some models do), it's just that the OS X drivers don't support that specific USB chipset. I think someone had created some drivers that supposedly got them working a couple of years ago.

There's some information here about it.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[Anonymous Coward]

This is old news. Apple stopped shipping firewire cables with iPods and defaulted to just USB 2.0. The Nano uses the same dock connector as everyone else, so you can use your same old dock or firewire cable.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[ce25254]

Thanks for the info. Alas, my machine is FW400. Anyway I think I'll wait until I see what next year brings before I think about upgrading...

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[ashpool7]

Stopped shipping is much different than stopped supporting. And charging via firewire cable is much different than firewire connectivity.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[NanoGator]

"Nano spec says USB 2.0 only -- and no firewire -- this means I don't think I can plug it into my MDD PowerMac. :-("

Argh. And my desktop has firewire but no USB 2.0. I just love competing standards.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[Anonymous Coward]

To everyone in the thread going on about how they don't have USB2 so can't use the iPod nano - you have USB so you can use that. Data transfer will just take longer.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[Anonymous Coward]

If you click through accessories and the dock, it says Firewire and USB. I'm not sure if you can trust that, however, as the transcievers are probably in the Pod, not the dock.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[Name Anonymous]

Buy a PCI based USB 2.0 card. The Adaptec ones work nicely with the USB 2 drivers that are part of Mac OS Panther & Tiger.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[Mercano]

The dock cable is just that, a cable. Its basically one fancy plug with pins for Firewire, USB, power (seperate from the USB and FW supplies, for the wall adapter), line in, line out, and, belive it or not, serial. However, the controlers for these interfaces live on the iPod, so if it dosn't have a FW chip, the FW pins in the cable connect to nothing.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[Anonymous Coward]

don't be stupid. it's the same interface.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[Fahrvergnuugen]

It uses the same exact dock connector as the rest of the iPods so that it can maintain compatibility with the gazillion iPod accessories that already exist. Considering this, Firewire compatibility is a sure bet (you don't need the dock itself, just the iPod Firewire cable).

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[Anonymous Coward]

don't be stupid and assume something that isn't certain

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[nigel_q]

USB2 devices are backwards compatible with USB 1, it'll work. Though it might not charge the battery off the computer USB, which is why they make an external adapter.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[Anonymous Coward]

I just got one from a local reseller that put them on sale earlier this afternoon. Apple seemed to plan this pretty well as compared to other launches, where the new product wasn't available *anywhere* for weeks. Anyway, yes, it is indeed the exact same interface and the firewire cable from my clickwheel iPod works exactly as it should.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[squiggleslash]

In the unlikely circumstances that it's true (see other comments), at worst you'll be able to use the MDD's USB ports, only file transfers will be slow.

Now, that said, a USB2 PCI card costs around $30 - from an office supply store like Staples or Office Depot, bet you can get it for half that or better elsewhere. The cards are generic (there's essentially one way to implement USB2 over PCI, and yes, they're compatable with Macs) and OS X supports it, since later Jaguar versions. I know this - I have a Beige G3 with a generic Belkin USB2 card, and it works great.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[idsofmarch]

It uses the standard 'dock' connector that the iPod Mini and iPod use, thus it can be connected via either firewire or USB 2.0. You will, however, need to buy the firewire cable as an extra.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[javaxman]

USB2 PCI card costs around $30

That's nice... unless you're like me, and were suckered into buying one of those ( otherwise quite nice ) flat-panel G4 iMacs... at the time it was like "yea, it doesn't have USB2.0, just 1.1, but it has FireWire for my high-speed connectivity needs"...

Now, just try to find a cheap external firewire drive enclosure, and watch in dismay as even Apple's own consumer devices favor USB2.0 over FireWire... this is a sad day for Firewire, though I've seen the shift coming from Apple and can't say I blame them *too* much... except they really should have done a USB2.0 rev of that G4 flat-panel iMac, it was USB1.1 for way, way too long...

Let me ask, would *you* like to transfer 4GB of files over USB1.1 ?? I'm just glad I already got my wife her mini, hopefully it'll keep working until I'm able to afford an Intel-based PowerMac...

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[Anubis350]

I believe that since it uses a normal dock connector, if you buy a firewire cable it should work fine (just like new minis only come with usb cable, but firewire cable if you have it works fine...)

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[squiggleslash]

My response was specific to the MDD-owning GP. I wasn't trying to explain Apple's choices, and personally, I'm not happy with their moving away from Firewire at all.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[Anonymous Coward]

Above is inaccurate.
Data xfer is not supported over firewire - only USB.
You can charge (it will supply more power) over FireWire however - and USB 1.1 will work (slowly) but won't be supported, of course.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[Jozer99]

Charging by firewire and syncing by firewire are very different things. If it charges by firewire, they just have to use the two power pins from a firewire cable connected to the battery, to sync with firewire, you need a firewire interface on your flash controller and on the embedded processor that runs the nano. I guess that put them over their $200 budget. Funny how apple spends years and millions making firewire an everyday standard, then dumps it.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[mrgreen4242]

I wouldn't bet the farm on that. Consider this: If they based the nano on the Shuffle electronics, and not the mini electronics, which considering the size, battery life, and cost of the shuffle is highly possible (plus everyone raved about how great it sounds).

There is a good chance that the nano simply does not have a FW bridge or whatever you want to call the bits that make the iPod communicate over a FW port. It may have the USB2 only communications module of the shuffle.

In short, if FW is an absolutely needed function for you to get a new iPod, I would either get a 30gb standard model, or wait until the nano is in people hands who can try it out and let you know what works and what doesn't.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[Aram Fingal]

I agree, such a card is a great upgrade for an older G4 tower. Several of the users I support have G4 towers with the Sawtooth motherboard and I have upgraded them with various brands of USB 2.0 cards. These cards are as cheap or cheaper than a USB hub, they give you the faster speed and are much better at powering external devices. Many of the newest USB flash drives will give a low power warning if you plug them into the built-in USB of a Sawtooth.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[ezthrust]

I am sure you can, it will just be ridiculously slow.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[javaxman]

My response was specific to the MDD-owning GP. I wasn't trying to explain Apple's choices, and personally, I'm not happy with their moving away from Firewire at all.

Mmm... yea, sorry about that... didn't mean to take it out on you... didn't really think I was until I went back and read my rant just now... I'm just bummed as I'd like to get one of these but can't afford it, much less a new computer right now grrr... not upset with you there, thanks. Maybe I can get a nano and use it with the G3 I gave my mother-in-law... grr...

Or, looking at the specs, it seems like a nano might transfer ( slooooowwwly ) via USB 1.1, and charge ( only ) via Firewire, but ouch... maybe I'll just save up for a full-size iPod...

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[javaxman]

I believe that since it uses a normal dock connector, if you buy a firewire cable it should work fine (just like new minis only come with usb cable, but firewire cable if you have it works fine...)

I wish that were the case, but unless Apple's posted specs are wrong, that's not the case. Firewire is listed under "Power and Battery" at the bottom, as a method for charging, but under "Mac System Requirements" is

Macintosh computer with USB port (USB 2.0 recommended)

Mac OS X v10.3.4 or later

I actually hadn't noticed the little 10.3.4 gottcha there at the end, either...

It does seem to indicate that I could use USB1.1 to transfer ( unlike the shuffle ) ... though, yuck, I can see why that would be 'not recommended' for 4GB of data transfer !!!

So, I guess I could update to Tiger, and use USB1.1 to transfer data, and Firewire to charge... but I'm not going to. Flat-panel G4 iMac users are sorta out of luck with this one... unless they're willing to transfer 2-4 gigs at USB1.1 speeds, I guess.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[Anonymous Coward]

Above in inaccurate.
I'm sitting here doing it right now.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[IvanXQZ]

Noway MDD has USB 2.0 onboard, and noway OS X wouldn't support it if it did. (I just checked the specs from Apple; no G4 desktop includes USB 2.0). However, it's trivial to add an off-the-shelf cheap USB 2.0 card and it should Just Work with OS X.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[IvanXQZ]

We need to think more logically and carefully about what the tech specs are saying. Too much assuming here.

From the system requirements, you're assuming that FireWire can't be used. That's an inaccurate assumption. The system requirements don't tell you anything about FireWire one way or the other. They are telling you what kind of Mac you need, not what kind of interface you need. (This is like whatever version of OS X (Panther I think) specifies Macs with USB ports in its system requirements.) There are no Mac systems that have FireWire but NOT USB, though there are some that have USB and not FireWire (e.g. iMacs 400 Mhz, PowerBook G3 "Lombard"). So therefore USB is a minimum requirement; if you've got USB and 10.3.4, you can use a nano. Nothing is said about whether FireWire will work or not.

Others are assuming that because there's a dock connector, and because all other iPods which have dock connectors work with FireWire, therefore the nano will work with FireWire as well. That's also a false assumption. A reasonable conclusion is that it is *likely* that it will work, but that's not the same thing as saying that it *definitely* will work, which you can't say since the nano is a new device and Apple has not said that FireWire will work.

Finally, some are assuming that because the "Connectivity" section of the tech specs (which lists USB as the only interface) doesn't specifically mention FireWire as unsupported, therefore FireWire *might* work. That's also a false assumption. Right in the next column, FireWire is explicitly listed as a supported interface for full-size iPods in addition to USB. Therefore, its omission in the "nano" column means it is obviously unsupported. There's nothing ambiguous about it.

Therefore, the correct and only conclusion to draw from what Apple has said is that that the nano can't be used with FireWire. That doesn't mean it doesn't, of course, and one reader here already claims that he's tried it and that it DOES work.

But Apple says it doesn't, and if it does, it's clearly unsupported.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[javaxman]

Therefore, the correct and only conclusion to draw from what Apple has said is that that the nano can't be used with FireWire. That doesn't mean it doesn't, of course, and one reader here already claims that he's tried it and that it DOES work. But Apple says it doesn't, and if it does, it's clearly unsupported.

Well, it wouldn't be the first time Apple's made a technical error on one of it's web pages that was later revised. If someone out there claims that it does work, I guess there's hope, and I could always ( at some point in the future when these things are more readily available ) wander into an Apple store and get someone to demo for me how it works with Firewire... the web page doesn't give me much hope, though.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[Fahrvergnuugen]

Do you honestly think Apple would sell a device with a connector that plugs into their own proprietary firewire / dock cable and have it not work?

Yeah... didn't think so.

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0

[Confuzzled]

It will not sync over FireWire, but will charge.

itunes interface

[godawful]

yeah, i'm not too sure about this one either..

but more pressing, the itunes note is still green?!

we've had blue. and purple, and i forget what else.. i figured at least a white or a silver..

just ordered on in black

[OctoberSky]

No I am not a apple whore, I get the education discount (which they didn't ask for?). I was going to order a regular 20gig last week but knew something was coming out today so I looked, liked, liked price, and ordered.

Free engraving on back...

RIAA v OctberSky
Exhibit: A

Re:just ordered on in black

[Virak]

Give credit where credit is due.

Re:just ordered on in black

[NewNole2001]

Through the Florida State Apple Store website, there is a $20 discount for the Nano. $179 and $229.

Re:just ordered on in black

[sean23007]

I hope you spelled it right when you signed up for that engraving. Heh...

Re:just ordered on in black

[thePowerOfGrayskull]

No I am not a apple whore I'm an apple whore. Wait, I misspoke. I meant, "I like apple juice."

Re:just ordered on in black

[OctoberSky]

I was going to get a 20GB iPod Photo last week, but knowing there was an announcement today I waited. While I waited I posted on a forum I frequent "Engrave my iPod."
That was the winner after I put it to a vote. Sorry if someone feels slighted.

Other nominees were...
Mr. Speaker, we are for the big.
Dear RIAA, iPwned
This iPod holds 5,000 songs, 4,988 of them are stolen
Apple Sucks
Overpriced Dell DJ (my favorite, but not the winner)
I survived Katrina & all I looted was this stupid iPod

Obligatory Strongbad Plug

[Nuclear Elephant]

iPod nano, which is an iPod photo-esque replacement for the iPod mini

I can see strongbad promoting these now. "It's not just photo-esque. It's danger-esque."

Re:Obligatory Strongbad Plug

[WilliamSChips]

Dear Strong Bad,
How do you use the iPod nano with boxing gloves on?

mork and mindy ref?

[bad_outlook]

Will apple use the ubiquitous Mork from Mork and Mindy to halk the 'nano', as in 'nano, neano' as Mork would say. As for the r0k3r, why did they go with such a dumb name? iPhone was obvious, so why the confusing phrasing? Will APple become too big and be the 'next google' on /.? Stay tuned...

Re:mork and mindy ref?

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice try at a funny, but Mork pronounced it "nanoo, nanoo". It's also "hawk".

You of course are aware that "nano" is a prefix for very small powers, like nanometer. Presumably, later additions to the iPod line will be the iPod pico, the femto, the atto, the zepto, and, my favorite, the yocto (which may be an implant).

iPod nano

[game kid]

Thick as a pencil and much more fun.1

1 Do not nervously bite iPod nano.

Re:iPod nano

[Ubergrendle]

Its not even as good as the iPod Flea.

Re:iPod nano

[jatemack]

iNo

Re:iPod nano

[andreMA]

I was disappointed that they skipped over iPod Milli and iPod Micro. I can't see myself keeping a straight face talking about an iPod Atto or, worse, and iPod Femto.

Re:iPod nano

[Colol]

Thick as a pencil and much more fun.1

1 Do not nervously bite iPod nano.

I give that a week on the site before it mysteriously disappears as did the iPod shuffle's similarly humorous footnote:

About the size of a pack of gum(1)

(1) Do not eat iPod shuffle.

Re:iPod nano

[adpowers]

I was thinking about adding that to the story submission, in order to get first joke, but I was afraid they wouldn't post it if I did :).

Re:iPod nano

[Anonymous Coward]

That was hillarious.

Uhh, yeah

[killtherat]

Last week they promised a change as big as the original iPod announcement. But somehow I am very underwelmed.
I guess it's those unrealistic hopes for a video iPod

Re:Uhh, yeah

[Iriel]

It isn't much, but considering we've had Bill Gates promising mobile phone software to help kill the iPod, Steve Jobs must be happy as hell to find out that Apple just beat competitors to the first phone marketed for its audio abilities.

Re:Uhh, yeah

[Whisperingwolf]

No kidding, yawn come on Apple show us something exciting.

Re:Uhh, yeah

[kuulad]

It seems Sony Ericcson beat them both, since the W800 har been in the stores for a while already, at least in Europe, don't know about the US though.

Re:Uhh, yeah

[Overly Critical Guy]

Actually, Microsoft put out a pre-emptive press release trying desperately to remind everyone that they had WMA phones out on the market already. Except that nobody noticed or cared. :) My favorite part is where Microsoft accuses iTunes and related technologies as being "proprietary."

More here: http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/ 6802/

iTunes phone

[millahtime]

The iTunes phone comes wtih just enough storage for 100 songs.

Re:iTunes phone

[Anonymous Coward]

One color;
No click wheel;
No wireless...oh... never mind. Carry on.

Quicktime 7 for Win

[GreyedOut]

With iTunes 5 also comes Quicktime 7 for Windows.

Re:Quicktime 7 for Win

[Anonymous Coward]

And with iTunes 5 for the Mac comes a Windows-like reboot. Why?!?!?

Re:Quicktime 7 for Win

[Anonymous Coward]

Probably the driver for the 'iPod Phone'. On my pirated copy of OS X x86 it didn't install the driver (obviously) and it didn't require a reboot.

Re:Quicktime 7 for Win

[Adlopa]

How about iTunes without QT7..? Installing iTunes 5 installs QT7 whether you want it or not, wiping out a registered (Pro) version of QT6. Naughty Apple!

Re:Quicktime 7 for Win

[13bPower]

Is iTunes 5 installing on windows for anyone? I get a 'send error report' to microsoft thing.

Re:Quicktime 7 for Win

[Anonymous Coward]

How about iTunes without QT7..? Installing iTunes 5 installs QT7 whether you want it or not, wiping out a registered (Pro) version of QT6. Naughty Apple!

On MacOS X you can rename the registered QuickTime Player 6 application (and preferably move it somewhere else meanwhile), and install QT 7 (or even Tiger which comes with QT 7, for that matter). That way you are left with a non-registered non-Pro version of QT Player 7, and a registered Pro version of QuickTime Player 6.

Since the underlying framework is anyway QuickTime 7, you can use most (all?) of the new features in the old player, like exporting to H.264.

I'm not sure if this works on Windows, though...

Re:Quicktime 7 for Win

[NMerriam]

No it doesn't -- iTunes 5 installs without a reboot. Quicktime 7 does require a reboot, presumably since it is relatively low level in the OS.

Still disappointing that Apple hasn't reduced the number of reboots necessary for software updates. Every now and then some silly software update will require a reboot and I wonder what the hell is going on -- Pages needs me to reboot the whole system?

It's a shame about Cingular

[fredrickleo]

Just yesterday I was reading about how crap Cingular service is. You'd think they would have just released the phone and allowed the customer to choose a carrier.

Re:It's a shame about Cingular

[mbrod]

Hopefully other companies are not far behind. Cingular tried to rip me off more than any other company I have ever dealt with.

6 months of dealing with them and the Better Business Bureau, so much fun...

Re:It's a shame about Cingular

[falcon5768]

unfortunatly the reason cingular is the service is because the others (Verizon for example) have their own iTunes esk service waiting to come out.

Course this might all change if the younger set starts flocking to cingular in droves to get one.

Re:It's a shame about Cingular

[bleaknik]

I'm not going to start a flame here, but I would like to detail my experience with Cingular.

When I first signed up for Cellular service, I got Verizon, and again and again I was disappointed with poor service.

About three years ago, I switched to Cingular, and instantly I saw service in all of Verizon's Dead zones.

Now before anyone assumes I'm nestled in a Cingular service area... The Cingular coverage area maps show approximately the same coverage as Verizon's maps. Not only that, but I live in extremely rural Indiana, so I don't have the benefit of living near a populated region.

I've had several friends with similar experiences coming from Nextel, Centennial, Verizon, Spring, and AT&T (although now Cingular and AT&T have merged).

On a side note, I'd rather own an iPod Nano and a regular cell phone than an *shutters* iPhone.

Re:It's a shame about Cingular

[maxume]

Unfortunately, the U.S. cellular system is nothing like that. Cingular is currently supporting two netorks, sprint also, sprint and verizon are compatible but don't have roaming agreements, no one else is, etc, etc.

Re:It's a shame about Cingular

[mjpaci]

Verizon is evil. Good coverage, but evil nonetheless. I'm sure there are a number of /. articles about it, but they force companies like Motorola and Nokia to cripple features on their phones that could hamper Verizon's revenue streams. (bluetooth data xfer directly to you computer for your phone book, pics, and ringtones)

Re:It's a shame about Cingular

[falcon5768]

yeah and it hurt them. Bluetooth which was crippled is now opened up in new phones because they where threatened with a class action lawsuit to open it up.

The number one thing Verizon could do though is just to fire their CEO. Hes a major dinosaur in the industry and with him gone Verizon could start to make a comeback. Its saf cause I like Verizon a lot, but they are in trouble now that Cingular bought AT&T and their current CEO just doesnt see the threat his company is in.

iPod nano

[mfender9]

No video. Thicker than a human hair. Lame.

Odd...

[Anonymous Coward]

Headphone jack on the bottom? Odd.

Anyone else notice that all of the iTunes screenshots on Apple's site are now for the Windows, rather than the Mac version?

http://www.apple.com/itunes/

Re:Odd...

[ModernGeek]

I think it detects what your OS is, and then shows either the mac or windows version. I'm on my mac mini right now, and the screenshot is of the mac version.

Re:Odd...

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately that is the Mac version as well.

Apple wrote iTunes 4 as a Carbon app and did a braindead port to Windows using Quicktime, whose Windows API is what Carbon was originally based upon. The result was an application that really felt out of place.

iTunes 5 is completely rewritten as a Windows application, with Winelib used for the Mac version. The downside is that the Mac version has a few UI glitches too, such as menus on the tops of windows rather than at the top of the screen. Jobs was keen that Windows users get a familiar experience, and felt priority should be given to them as long as Windows is the system with the higher market share, which is remarkably pragmatic really.

Re:Odd...

[bullitB]

Anyone else notice that all of the iTunes screenshots on Apple's site are now for the Windows, rather than the Mac version?

It changes, depending on which browser you use. In Safari they show Mac screenshots. I'd bet in IE they show Windows screenshots.

Re:Odd...

[Nick of NSTime]

That is singlehandedly the most well-thought-out troll post ever. My hat is off to you, Mr. AC.

Re:Odd...

[rathehun]

Here we are:

<!--
var agt = navigator.userAgent.toLowerCase();
var submitcount=0;

is_win = ( (agt.indexOf("win")!=-1) || (agt.indexOf("16bit")!=-1) ||
(agt.indexOf("win95")!=-1) || (agt.indexOf("windows 95"!=-1) ) ||

(agt.indexOf("win16")!=-1) || (agt.indexOf("16bit")!=-1) ||
(agt.indexOf("windows 3.1")!=-1) || (agt.indexOf("windows 16-bit")!=-1) ||
(agt.indexOf("win 9x 4.90")!=-1) || (agt.indexOf("windows nt 5.")!=-1) ||
(agt.indexOf("win98")!=-1) || (agt.indexOf("windows 98")!=-1) ||
(agt.indexOf("winnt")!=-1) || (agt.indexOf("windows nt")!=-1)
);

is_ie = (agt.indexOf("msie") != -1);

is_mac = (agt.indexOf("mac") != -1);

is_ok = is_mac || (agt.indexOf("windows nt 5.") != -1);
//-->
</script>
<script src="http://wdirect.apple.com/main/js/browserdetec t.js" type="text/javascript" language="JavaScript"></script>
<script src="http://wdirect.apple.com/main/js/platformswap .js" type="text/javascript" language="JavaScript"></script>
<script src="http://images.apple.com/itunes/itunes.js" type="text/javascript" language="JavaScript"></script>

Theres plenty of browser sniffing going on there. I think this is all the code they use - however, I do CSS, not JS so I could be wrong or could have ommited part of the code.

R.

Re:Odd...

[Anonymous Coward]

You're shitting us, right? I find the idea of Apple using winelib pretty unlikely. Do you have any references to back this up?

Re:Odd...

[Anonymous Coward]

I just downloaded the Mac versions of iTunes and the GP is right. Check out the iTunes.app/Contents/Frameworks/winelib.bundle directory.

Having the menus on the top of the windows is hideous! I hope Apple limits this to iTunes, it'd suck if one of the few advantages of OS X over Windows was to disappear in the Intel transition.

My wallet is becoming as thin as the nano...

[Anonymous Coward]

...from all the iPods I keep buying.

New Search

[godawful]

The new search is kinda snazzy, type a few letters and you get a little bar that lets you narrow it down by all, music, audiobooks,pod casts, videos, booklets, etc etc, certainly helpful for those with large catalogs

Re:New Search

[AddressException]

The new search is kinda snazzy

Wow, you actually managed to download a copy of iTunes 5 before the servers melted down?

Re:New Search

[dnquark137]

The search bar is nice, but when, oh when will iTunes allow me to search library from within a playlist??? Here's how this could work: from a playlist, 1. Say, Ctrl+click into search box Do a search, screen would split into a search results pane on top, current playlist on the bottom. 2. Drag the song you want to where you want it in the playlist. I hate having to: 1. Click "Library" 2. Click the search box 3. Drag the song to the tiny playlist name entry in the left-hand pane. 4. Click on the playlist name 5. Drag the song to where I want it in the list. This is something everyone does quite often. Making such a common procedure take 5 steps as opposed to 2 makes no sense at all. Hello, Apple!

Re:New Search

[Jord]

1. Double click on the playlist you want to modify (opens a new window)
2. position the two windows so you can see both
3. Search in one window
4. Drag song from search window to playlist window

Things are not as difficult as you make them out to be.

Re:New Search

[br0ck]

If you can use Applescript you can script it. Scroll to "Search Command" on this page. If not, how about creating a new smart playlist where the first condition is Playlist Is 'the desired playlist' and second condition (to get a second condition click the + button on the far right) is Artist contains 'artist name'?

Re:New Search

[Anonymous Coward]

5. Close the playlist window

This only saves time if you are building a list from scratch. What if you jsut want to add one or two songs?.. Again, 5 steps when the process can easily be implemented in 2.

Re:New Search

[br0ck]

This only saves time if you are building a list from scratch. What if you jsut want to add one or two songs?.. Again, 5 steps when the process can easily be implemented in 2.

I installed the new iTunes and they've changed the behavior. If you have a playlist selected on the left the top right search box only searches that playlist. It now only searches the entire library when you have selected 'Library' on the left.

And Next Week...

[SpeedBump0619]

The IPod Flea

Photos and Video of ROKR Link Here

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.prnewswire.com/mnr/cingular/22694

More like a Shuffle

[That's Unpossible!]

This thing replaces the ipod mini, no doubt, but really it's more the size/weight of a shuffle... very sweet. It's THINNER than the shuffle fer chrissakes!

Size comparison:

Shuffle: 3.3 x 0.98 x 0.33
Nano: 3.5 x 1.6 x 0.27
iPod: 4.1 x 2.4 x 0.63

Weight comparison:

Shuffle: .78 ounce
Nano: 1.5 ounces
iPod: 5.9 ounces

Re:More like a Shuffle

[ozamosi]

Yeah, it's what I've always dreamed of: I can watch (according to Apple) 25 000 "semester photos" on a display as big as my thumb nail.

Jupp, that's great news! No problems to see what you're looking at. Not at all...

I think this product is almost as stupid as the iPod Shuffle (the "feature" that you cannot decide which song you want to play is more stupid) How about a hybrid? A player without photo showing abilities (that only costs extra, takes space, and considering the screen it is stupid), but with a display and an interface that lets you decide what to listen to.

Re:More like a Shuffle

[Anonymous Coward]

Um... the iPod nano does let you select music, in case you didn't know.

Re:More like a Shuffle

[That's Unpossible!]

Yeah, it's what I've always dreamed of: I can watch (according to Apple) 25 000 "semester photos" on a display as big as my thumb nail.

Jupp, that's great news! No problems to see what you're looking at. Not at all...

This device is not intended to offer all the features of the iPods with video out. They have photo support just because they can. People do like to use ipods to temporarily store pictures for whatever reason. I think the primary reason for the color screen on this is because it looks better than black and white. Plus showing the album art is helpful.

Re:More like a Shuffle

[nine-times]

The nano has similar dimensions to some of canon's smaller cameras (which are thicker, but close in HxW).

Not that I don't like the idea of an iPod this tiny, but am I the only one who thinks they could make it a little thicker and include a simple point & click camera? Even if it had no optical zoom and very little in the way of manual controls, if it was good quality, a decent flash, and 3 megapixels, I'd buy it.

Re:More like a Shuffle

[jcr]

am I the only one who thinks they could make it a little thicker and include a simple point & click camera?

They could, but why would they? It's an excellent music player, and there's nothing to gain from adding a mediocre camera.

-jcr

Re:More like a Shuffle

[stickyc]

Yes, but the added width is a big deal. It means you cant really share it in a pocket with your wallet or cellphone or jacket pocked with sunglasses case anymore unless you want them facing eachother. Something that'll kill the finish unless you add a sleeve which will make it as thick as the shuffle again.

Re:More like a Shuffle

[Anonymous Coward]

But in the end, what is so great about it? I had a chance to try this nifty gadget out, and in the end it's the kind of thing only the fanboys will rush out and buy. It's basically an ipod with a fraction of the disk space and the battery life of the shuffle. The screen really pounds on the battery life of that thing. In the end, if you already have an ipod, the Nano will more or less come off as a vanity toy. It offers nothing new in way of innovation or features.

Re:More like a Shuffle

[nine-times]

Well there was nothing to gain from putting in a color screen either. There's arguably nothing to gain by adding games, a calendar, or an address book. It's a music player, why do I need to see cover art displayed on the screen while it's in my pocket?

What there is to gain is convenience for the consumers and sales for Apple. You know, the same things that are gained by making an excellent music player in the first place?

Re:More like a Shuffle

[jcr]

What there is to gain is convenience for the consumers and sales for Apple.

Nope.

A big part of any product design at Apple is deciding what not to pile on. This is why Apple's consistently kicking the other MP3 player's asses: it's not about "feature packing", it's about the product doing what it should, and not doing what it shouldn't.

-jcr

Re:More like a Shuffle

[Anonymous Coward]

without photo showing abilities (that only costs extra, takes space, and considering the screen it is stupid), but with a display and an interface that lets you decide what to listen to.

For Apple, the color screen is an important feature they're promoting on the entire iPod line. They want all their current units to be color. The photo abilities are a side-effect of cost-cutting measures. I'm sure they use the same chipset as is used in the full-size iPods, as having a chipset dedicated to only the nano makes no sense. The extra develpopment costs would save them nothing over simply including the full-featured chip that they can then standardize across lines.

With this, they use flash memory that uses an ATA interface, and make minor software changes to utilize a smaller screen. Otherwise it's really just a variation on the full-size color iPods that are standard at the high end. The savings associated with reusing standard components are not insignificant.

Then, consider that this ability is a stepping stone to the rumored video-watching capabilities of future units...

Re:More like a Shuffle

[lucas teh geek]

yes, but everyone that wants (and most who dont) a stupid crappy camera already has one in their cell phone. it'd be redundant putting one in an ipod

Re:More like a Shuffle

[That's Unpossible!]

I had a chance to try this nifty gadget out, and in the end it's the kind of thing only the fanboys will rush out and buy. It's basically an ipod with a fraction of the disk space and the battery life of the shuffle.

This is why you sit around and post anonymously on slashdot, and Steve Jobs runs a company that produces the most popular digital music player in the world.

FYI, the iPod mini was the best selling of all iPods, so what he did was just replace it with something that is better in every regard.

Think it might sell even better than the mini? I'd say it's a safe bet...

It offers nothing new in way of innovation or features.

Uh huh... just the smallest form factor for a player with that amount of space and a color screen. Not to mention the killer interface.

You're entitled to your opinion, it just happens to be different than the market's.

Re:More like a Shuffle

[biglig2]

I suspect their gains from the color screen are related to manufacturing considerations. Everything has color screen these days, so I expect manufacturers prefer to make color.

Re:More like a Shuffle

[nine-times]

yes, but everyone that wants (and most who dont) a stupid crappy camera already has one in their cell phone. it'd be redundant putting one in an ipod

A lot of those people also have stupid crappy mp3 players in their cell phones too. Of course, I'm not advocating a "stupid crappy camera", but a high quality but simple point-and-shoot camera. How many of those cell-phone cameras give you something in the megapixel range? How many have 4 GB of storage? How many are designed to interface easily with iPhoto?

Cameras should be taken out of cell-phones. Given that cell-phone companies want a strangle-hold on everything, forcing it through their network so they can charge you for every little fee, I won't use my phone for anything but placing calls. However, the IPod, having photo-viewing and PIM capabilities as well as games, is already more of a multimedia device than a music-only device, and it should pursue that classification as is fitting. A simple camera would make sense.

We have to ban it!

[convex_mirror]

These Apple nanos are going to replicate out of control and turn us all into grey goo! Or kinda whitish goo, I guess.

Re:We have to ban it!

[zev1983]

If the white and black models replicate in equal numbers then it will indeed look grey from a distance. Though this is disregarding the silver back, and the lit screen...

Theorized?

[pipegeek]

(Theorized last week.)

It's been theorized? Awesome! I've been waiting for one of these that could play Ogg...

Re:Theorized?

[Bobzibub]

no ogg, no buy.
Looks nice though.
-b

Re:Theorized?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure they will miss your custom.

No ogg? Tough kaka.

Wireless. Smaller size than a Shuffle.

[Hawthorne01]

Lame. :-)

Given that cingular.com is getting crushed right now, I'd say that the iTunes Phone will be a hit. Personally, I was hoping for a higher-res camera, as I want a 4-1 gadget to take with me (Phone, PDA, iPod, camera). Looks like I'll have to wait longer.

Thank God

[Anonymous Coward]

I was glad Apple chose to give us the iPod nano. The prototype iPod Emacs and iPod vi just didn't look as slick.

Ut Oh!

[databyss]

First a hurricane, followed by massive flooding and destruction. Then a volcano busting through Oregon, now this?!?!?!

The dark lord satan shall soon walk the earth!

Commentary also available on the Apple Blog

[ickoonite]

Commentary on the new releases today can also be found over here on The Apple Blog.

iqu :)

Re:iDuh

[saddino]

Because it's not an Apple product.

It's a Motorola/Cingular product that has an exclusive license.

(and regardless, according to the USPTO, the IPHONE trademark is live for at least two registered companies—both marks involve phones, natch— so Apple's claim to such a mark is tenuous)

nano comes in black

[justforaday]

The nano comes in both white and black (see here and click the "black" link under the picture). Gotta say that it does look pretty nice.

Re:nano comes in black

[Anonymous Coward]

On the 'Tech Specs' page, click on iPod Nano, it'll lead you to buy iPod Mini. Whoah?

Does iTunes 5 fix volume adjustment?

[imputor]

Does iTunes 5 fix the issue where volume adjustment settings aren't transfered over to the iPod? A quiet song forces you to turn up the volume, and followed by a loud song, this can blow your eardrums! The only thing I truly HATE about my iTunes/iPod.

Re:Does iTunes 5 fix volume adjustment?

[ndrtkr]

Why not try MP3Gain ? It makes all your songs to a constant normalized volume level.

I tried it myself and at first, 89db sounded too low in my car (iTrip); then I tried 92 and then 95db. I'm now satisfied at 95db, considering the fact that most of my songs danced between 85db and 110db before normalization.

Re:Does iTunes 5 fix volume adjustment?

[Otto]

Volume adjustment already works in iTunes/iPod. Turn on Sound Check on both iTunes and the iPod. Wait for it to finish scanning your library (it'll say "Determining Song Volume"), then resync with the iPod.

Works great for me.

Re:Does iTunes 5 fix volume adjustment?

[Daniel_Staal]

I believe there was a firmware update that fixed that issue. The grandparent probably needs to update both iTunes and the firmware, just to be sure.

Re:Does iTunes 5 fix volume adjustment?

[TheNetAvenger]

Does iTunes 5 fix the issue where volume adjustment settings aren't transfered over to the iPod?

Apparently not, guess it is beyond Apple's technological abilities, or they haven't found someone to write the code for them to 'borrow'.

Sad that a 5yr old Media Player from Microsoft is capable of such a simple concept when transfering songs to a device (of a company of your choice), and will even volume level when ripping the music to a CD as well.

Yah Apple! Proof of another company that has a better marketing team than a development team. Catering once again to the sheep screaming - "I don't care if it works, it is cute, and the ads on TV are cool!"

Geesh....

Re:Does iTunes 5 fix volume adjustment?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sound Check.

You're an eediot. (/ren)

Headphone jack

[nicedream]

WHY is it on the bottom? Otherwise, this would be perfect!

Re:Headphone jack

[Anonymous Coward]

It's designed for runners, if you have the jack on the bottom, and you using an armband... lift your shoulder and you see the screen correctly. One gripe that other players didnt think of.

Re:Headphone jack

[Ionizer7]

It is designed to utilized the lanyard headphones. It hangs like a shuffle.

Re:Headphone jack

[Anonymous Coward]

because it was designed to hang upside down?

Re:Headphone jack

[Gogo Dodo]

With the nano being so thin, they probably couldn't stack the screen on top of the jack. So it was either move the jack to the bottom or move the screen down.

Ipod photo is already small enough

[Willy on Wheels]

I have a 60GB ipod photo, and the screen is very small, just enough to view small thumbnails of my photos, but this nano appears to be too small to actually view anything. Expect this to fail hard and hopefully apple will next time to bring out the ipod jumbo.

t3h r0k3r?

[game kid]

As for the r0k3r, why did they go with such a dumb name?

Oh, don't be so hard on it. Soon it'll tell its owners what's going on around the country and what's happening in your neck of the woods.

iPhone looks like ass

[ilmdba]

what did dell design it or something?

Re:iPhone looks like ass

[Anonymous Coward]

no, just Motorola.

Re:iPhone looks like ass

[solive1]

No... Motorola did. It's only iTunes enabled (hence the ROKR name).

Re:iPhone looks like ass

[Anonymous Coward]

Yah, like Anna Kournikova's ass. I want one.

To use a baseball analogy...

[winkydink]

I see this as much more of a single than a home run.

The phone. If I could run iTunes on my phone and download somge over-the-air directly to it, that would be a potential killer app.

iTunes version 5. I'm sure it has some nifty ne features, but it's just a new release of existing software.

iPod nano. It's cool. Cooler that what it replaces. They'll sell a bunch. It's not terribly innovative though.

Re:To use a baseball analogy...

[soft_guy]

The phone. If I could run iTunes on my phone and download somge over-the-air directly to it, that would be a potential killer app.

Perhaps if the phone could hold more than 100 measley songs, this would be a good idea. Unfortunately, you would run out of storage space real quick.

It's like they combined a lame phone and the iPod shuffle except with a screen.

I have to hand it to Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

I have to give those Apple engineers credit. Somehow they always seem to evoke the "I want one of those" response out of me....

too small

[joerdie]

This thing is too small. My samsung 1 gig is tiny, but nothing compaired to this. Have pant makers started making pockets smaller? Why would you need something this small. p.s. they still have not fixed the battery issues! i expected that "big announcement" from apple to be a removable lithium ion..... not happy.

Apple, Please improve your Beta system!

[frostilicus2]

I think that I have just discovered an "undocumented feature" in iTunes 5 :

when "show duplicate songs" is selected from the edit menu, non-duplicate songs are displayed if the track name and artist are identical in both tracks. Surely it would be a better idea to calculate an md5 checksum or perhaps use CDDB data in order to prevent this.
I would have thought that this issue should be obvious...

Re:Apple, Please improve your Beta system!

[generic-man]

That was in iTunes 4.8 as well. iTunes' duplicate detection is worthless for anyone who has at least one live album from an artist.

Re:Apple, Please improve your Beta system!

[bullitB]

That's missing the entire point of the duplicate songs detection. The problem is that a lot of people have multiple copies of the same song, often from different sources. Say I rip a CD, then buy a an album on the iTunes store which which contains the same song and artist, but is different otherwise (one of the albums was a compilation, for instance). The point of the feature is to detect this duplication so you don't get the same song twice from different sources when you're shuffling.

Re:Apple, Please improve your Beta system!

[lavezza]

Exactly. I have American Girl from Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers on 4 albums (original album, Greatest Hits, Anthology & Box set). I only want it once in my TP&HB playlist. Duplicate songs works just the way I want.

Re:Apple, Please improve your Beta system!

[bradbeattie]

Music Brainz might be a good way of doing this. By comparing features of the song, duplicates can be matched up. Song length, general volume/pitch patterns, etc.

Re:Apple, Please improve your Beta system!

[aafiske]

a) That's not new in 5.0

b) Your obvious solution does not work. Suppose I have two versions of the song, one from a greatest hits compliation, one from the original cd. They might be remastered, slightly shorter by the span of a second or two of silence, or longer. Or the cd version blends into the next song, while the greatest hits doesn't. So much for MD5. The point of duplicate songs is exactly this, not to check if you have identical files laying around. (Although it will find those too.)

Re:Apple, Please improve your Beta system!

[thadman08]

For live albums I find it much easier to add a '(live)' tag or something similar to the end of the song title. That keeps the duplicate song feature from matching and makes determining live songs a lot easier when browsing by song titles.

Re:Apple, Please improve your Beta system!

[nine-times]

It's not 'worthless'. Just don't go deleting everything iTunes lists as a "duplicate" without listening first.

First of all, if the live version isn't a duplicate, you can just ignore that it shows up in your listing of duplicate songs. The feature doesn't need to be 100% correct. It only needs to narrow down the field, so that if you have thousands of songs, you get a relatively small list of possible duplicates.

Second, I do sometimes consider the live version a "duplicate". If I have two versions of the same song from the same artist, I usually don't want both showing up in my playlists. I might keep both in my library, but I'll usually devise my playlists in such a way that I only get the version I want.

Re:Apple, Please improve your Beta system!

[Anonymous Coward]

"So much for MD5"
True, MD5 would fail, but using CDDB should work fine.

Apple & Motorola Press Releases

[necro2607]

Press releases here, for those interested in more detailed information..

Apple iPod nano
Apple iTunes phone
Motorola ROKR

Thank goodness!

[ChePibe]

My iPod Mini is just so large, bulky, and thick! It's about time Apple did something to make audio players small and portable!

Re:Thank goodness!

[TheRaven64]

Actually, it is quite a shame. I was looking to trade my 20GB iPod in for a 20GB iPod mini at some point in the next couple of years. With the rate at which 1" hard drives were improving it seemed possible that in a couple of revisions I could do so. I have no interest in upgrading to a newer white iPod, since they are all larger (thicker - yuck) than my 3G 'pod. Hopefully they will realise that 60GB is more than enough for 99% of the population[1] and start making them smaller again.

[1]Or bump up the RAM a lot so I can listen to apple lossless music without killing the battery life. Although even with lossless encoding my music collection could probably fit on a 40GB drive.

Re:Thank goodness!

[ChePibe]

"Or bump up the RAM a lot so I can listen to apple lossless music without killing the battery life."

I'm an iPod owner, and although I'm far from an expert on these things, I've always wondered why they don't bump the RAM on them all across the board? 32 megs (what I believe they all have, please feel free correct me if I'm wrong) seems to be far too little, and bumping it up to a reasonable amount - say, 128 megs - wouldn't cost too much, but it would greatly increase battery life when playing all kinds of music, not just lossless (assuming you stick with the same playlist, that is).

Again, if I'm wrong about the amount of RAM (which is very possible), please feel free to correct.

Re:Thank goodness!

[coolfrood]

Hopefully they will realise that 60GB is more than enough for 99% of the population[1] ...[1] Or bump up the RAM a lot so I can listen to apple lossless music without killing the battery life. Although even with lossless encoding my music collection could probably fit on a 40GB drive.

But.. but.. 640KB of RAM should be enough for everyone, right?!

Pico

[dhasenan]

Nah, it's not Mork and Mindy that they're remembering, but the commonly used, unsung GNU applications. Next we'll see the iPod lsof, I think, followed by the grep.

ROKR questions

[Johnny Mnemonic]

• Why can't you sync iTunes via BlueTooth, since the phone actually has BT? First the mini mouse, now this.
• Will this phone be a full iSync citizen, or at least as much as other Moto phones? via BT?
• Can you use this phone as a Cell modem? Via BT? And why is it not EDGE capable?
• Can you sync photos via iPhoto?
• Can you purchase ringtones via iTunes?

I wish this was more of an iPhone, with the above features, than just some phone with iTunes slapped on it. As it is, it looks pretty half-baked, and I'm sorry to see Apple endorse it. I think I'm holding out until v 2.0 at least.

Re:ROKR questions

[Cutriss]

I wouldn't blame Apple or Motorola. Motorola makes some excellent kit, but then companies like Cingular and Verizon make them strip it to little more than a credit card with an antenna.

The odds are very, very good that an enterprising hacker would be able to unlock full BT functionality on this phone.

Re:ROKR questions

[Anonymous Coward]

Given that the average song is several megabytes of data, syncing over Bluetooth would be impractical in the extreme.

Re:ROKR questions

[All Names Have Been]

Why can't you sync iTunes via BlueTooth, since the phone actually has BT? First the mini mouse, now this.

Spoken as someone who has never used Bluetooth. Why don't we just transfer it semaphores, it would be just as fast.

Re:ROKR questions

[soft_guy]

Not to mention the fact it only holds 100 songs.

This phone will appeal to a few people because there is so much pent up demand for such a product. However, it has totally missed the mark from what it could potentially be.

I'd love to see Apple really do a home run phone.

Just wait until WiMax becomes massively available. Then maybe Apple will make a kick ass WiMax VOIP phone.

Re:ROKR questions

[Moofie]

"Why can't you sync iTunes via BlueTooth"

Because it would take a month. BT is handy, but it's sure not fast.

Re:ROKR questions

[Wireless Joe]

I don't know if I'd lump Cingular in with Verizon in this case. Unlike Verizon, Cingular doesn't cripple Bluetooth, and (until the merger) did unlock phones after a contract was up. You still can have them unlock one if you get a nice enough phone rep.

I'm sure if they and Apple could work out a revenue sharing agreement, they would be glad to have the extra data revenue from a few million iTunes downloads added to thir ARPU.

Re:ROKR questions

[Have Blue]

Have you ever tried to copy 256MB over Bluetooth? It's just not worth it. I'm sure someone will do it to prove it can be done, but it's not ready to replace cables (or 802.11) for bulk data transfer.

Re:ROKR questions

[Strudelkugel]

I bought one of these a few months ago. I put a 512M MiniSD chip in it - instant MP3 player. Also serves as a temp drive when I need it. I guess branding is worth something, but not that much. The ultra-lame "feature" of the Sanyo phone is that it restricts the amount of storage available for ringers. I can fill the phone up with megs of MP3s, but ringers? Maybe 1M of space is available. Oh, and you can't load them directly from the PC. Ringers have to come over the Internet connection via relay.

Clearly some marketing PHB wants to make money selling me ringers (which will never happen, I make my own), and forcing me to add the Internet service. At least that has some utility. Don't expect much in terms of flexibility when it comes mobile phones.

Re:ROKR questions

[Anonymous Coward]

Library sync with bluetooth would be painful.

Re:ROKR questions

[itcomesinwaves]

So... you admit that it would be totally EXTREME!!

Re:ROKR questions

[DECS]

Have you ever synced anything using Bluetooth? I gave up syncing my Palm phone over BT because it was so slow. I can't imagine wanting to copy over ~4 MB music files using BT. Mouse yes, iPod no.

Re:ROKR questions

[Jozer99]

This seems like a major departure from apple's normal marketing since Jobs got back. Apple NEVER partners, Apple never offers a half baked product, ect... I wonder why they saw the need for a iTunes phone was so bad that they rushed this crappy thing to market, instead of waiting until the holiday season to release something quite thought out, especially if they made it. I'm sure carriers would jump at the chance to sell an apple phone, especially if it was expensive (== higher margins).

Re:ROKR questions

[dcam]

Motorola makes some excellent kit

I can't comment on the hardware side of things, but Motorolla's software is rubbish. Counter-intuitive, slow and annoying. I owned a T720, which I was very happy to drop for a Nokia 6230.

I thought it was just me, but my brother-in-law has the same experience with his new motorolla phone. Having spent the money to buy a top of the line Motorolla phone, he wants to dump it for something that has a usable interface.

Re:ROKR questions

[not-enough-info]

Why can't you sync iTunes via BlueTooth, since the phone actually has BT? First the mini mouse, now this.

As others have already said: too slow.

Will this phone be a full iSync citizen, or at least as much as other Moto phones? via BT?

Since when are other Moto phones full iSync citizens??

Can you use this phone as a Cell modem? Via BT? And why is it not EDGE capable?

Probably.

Can you sync photos via iPhoto?

No.

Can you purchase ringtones via iTunes?

No, but you can burn/re-encode ITMS purchased M4Ps to MP3 which should play fine as ringtones.

Re:ROKR questions

[clonmult]

I was under the impression that bluetooth could transfer data a lot faster (100k+ per sec), so okay its not totally suited to huge data transfers, but invariably on phones it is restricted to something stupid like 10k per sec.

Re:ROKR questions

[doodlelogic]

tee hee:

The O2 version in the UK:

Cheaper (free on a 12 month contract not $250 on a 24 month contract);

Support for syncing tunes with Bluetooth;

After 12 months, you can unlock it to any network.

Re:ROKR questions

[Anonymous Coward]

I hate to say it.. but get a decent mobile phone. Nokia and Sony Ericsson phones are usually not encombered by these sorts of difficulties. You will find some of the operator branded variants will have additional restrictions, but they can be worked around.

itunes 5

[jatemack]

is a 32mb file download. Good God, isn't that a lot bigger than past versions?

Re:itunes 5

[jaycontonio]

That's because it comes with Quicktime 7 final for Windows

Re:itunes 5

[PsychoSid]

It probably includes QT7 or something. I just downloaded in for OS X and it's only 14mb

On second look, quite nice

[Anonymous Coward]

Then how about considering not buying it ?
Ahh. you'll get one anyway.

ps. you just havn't thought of making enough freaking money. Lazy douch.

pps. You worry too much.

unanswered questions

[parawing742]

1. Will it play regular MP3s, etc like the other iPods or just iTunes music?
4. Is there USB2.0 support? 512MB at 1.1 speeds will take a long time to transfer.
2. How much for additional memory cards?
3. How much for the phone?

Re:unanswered questions

[Anonymous Coward]

There is alot more details here:
http://direct.motorola.com/hellomoto/ROKR/

1. MIDI, MP3, WAV, and AAC (but they must be trasfered through the iTunes software)
2. Only 1.1. Pity, because it will take over an hour to fill with music.
3. About $100 for 512MB
4. $249.99 with two year contract

Re:unanswered questions

[soft_guy]

1. Will it play regular MP3s, etc like the other iPods or just iTunes music? Yes

4. Is there USB2.0 support? 512MB at 1.1 speeds will take a long time to transfer. USB 1.1 only. Yes, this sucks.

2. How much for additional memory cards? Check Frys. It appears to take a standard card (Apple's website refers to buying a card for it to upgrade the storage), but I'm not sure which one.

3. How much for the phone? Cingular wants $249 and I assume that's with a 1 year service plan.

Re:unanswered questions

[Majestros]

2. How much for additional memory cards? Check Frys. It appears to take a standard card (Apple's website refers to buying a card for it to upgrade the storage), but I'm not sure which one.

If you follow links long enough it mentions that it uses mini-SD cards

Re:unanswered questions

[adpowers]

4. Is there USB2.0 support? 512MB at 1.1 speeds will take a long time to transfer. USB 1.1 only. Yes, this sucks.

It's not that bad. My original MP3 player synced to the computer with a big parallel port (the printer port thing). Now that sucked.

Questionable success

[bennini]

Im really wondering how successful this iPod/Phone mix is actually going to be. The main reason the iPod was so successful was because it was the best of its class. It aimed to do one thing..and it did it perfectly. This new phone/mp3 player combo does not excel in any category. Out of the box it only supports 100 songs. Even the 100 dollar iPod Shuffle supports more than that. People are going to decide between A) buying a cheap family phone that costs 1 with a new plan PLUS a standalone ipod that can hold hundreds if not thousands of songs and B) a new phone that costs $250 and play 100 songs + whatever $35 for an extra memory card to turn it into a decent mp3 player. Success in europe? don't even count on it...it doesnt even support 3G. Throw in the fact that its bulky and has a name that no one will ever be able to pronounce without possibly regurgitating their lunch...the "iPod Phone" (im sure thats what EVERYONE is going to be calling it) is probably not going to be as successful as hoped.

Disappointing phone

[AC-x]

Rather then a new take on the mobile phone Apple are simply peddling an average Motorola phone that just happens to be preloaded with an iTunes player. It doesn't even look any good (especially compared to the V3). They may as well have just made a java version of iTunes player.

On the other hand iPod nano looks pretty cool (good in black as well), be interesting to see inside one of them (hopefully pictures should appear any moment :), I'd guess it still uses CF media but that's practically the entire height of the unit.

Re:Disappointing phone

[rfinnvik]

Yup, I'm amazed Apple would choose to associate themselves with something so un-appleish as that thing. Poor design, poor specs...

I guess Apple might be a bit desperate to get into the whole phone/mediaplayer market, but they really need to produce something better than this...

Ship Jonathan Ives off to Motorola for a year, and maybe we'll get an innovative product :)

Re:Disappointing phone

[tktk]

Apple are simply peddling an average Motorola phone

Apple probably doesn't have the right engineers at the moment to make a working phone. They can probably do the UI design and form-factor but not the internals.

Currently, this gives Apple a way out in case the RoKR flops. If the ROKR dies, then it's because of Motorola's bad phone design. If it's popular, then it's because Apple's iTunes is included.

Always find a way to blame the other guy.

Re:Disappointing phone

[NutscrapeSucks]

I certainly don't think it's a matter of resources. It's the marketing problem -- cell phone manufacturers are basically bound to the service providers, and can't compete with their services (like with iTMS). This runs contrary to Apple's mode of operation, where they basically control their entire channel.

Re:Disappointing phone

[cakesy]

The ROKR is just a e398, with an extra button, and different software!

ROKR E1

[Sarcastic Assassin]

Is it just me, or does anyone else detest the styling of the ROKR E1? If Motorola can release something as slick as the Razr (even if they can't spell it right), you'd think they'd be able to at least make it look nicer than some crap phone from three or four years ago. I personally think the iTunes phone would be better as a clamshell design, or some other, more crazy design I have yet to imagine... However, the phone seems to be multifunctional, allowing you to store music and data, to the tune (pun intended) of 512MB of total storage (from what I can gather from the FAQ) Apple definitely deserves props for the iPod nano. Wow, that thing looks amazing... Also, props to Apple for delivering what looks like a great new iTunes release.

audio quality?

[TheGratefulNet]

I wonder how it will compare to the ipod shuffle.

I didn't believe it until I got one (as a gift) but the shuffle has the best audio quality I've heard short of an external DAC into an spdif stream. its noisy (biased transistors in output stage?) but it has actual bass and enough drive to power headphones without distorting.

if this nano has the same audio or better, it will blow the market away for those that CARE about sound as well as the features of the player.

Re:audio quality?

[sootman]

And I'm guessing it will continue to lose sales to those who CARE about gapless playback. Everyone, HELP!

(Note: I own an iPod anyway. I just stew silently about the lack of gapless playback. Eh, CD players have only had this feature for 20 years, maybe it's just that no one at Apple has heard of it yet.)

Re:audio quality?

[Anonymous Coward]

Nobody gives a shit about gapless playback. Except maybe DJs. And nobody gives a shit about DJs.

Re:audio quality?

[jone1941]

UGH, THANK YOU! This has been my pet peev with my ipod. I find it hard to believe that this would be that hard to implement in the current generation of ipods.

Re:audio quality?

[Gulthek]

If its that important, then merge the files. If it isn't that important, then it isn't that important.

If you want it done on arbitrary playlists on the fly, then you can hardly bring CD players into the debate.

BTW, I don't notice any gap. Is it a big deal?

Re:audio quality?

[kurosawdust]

if this nano has the same audio or better, it will blow the market away for those that CARE about sound as well as the features of the player.

Spoken like a true elitist douchebag.

Sorry if the rest of us aren't as incredibly refined as you are, but it may surprise you to know that most people who say "I love my iPod" aren't lying. And most people who listen to the iPod shuffle won't come away from the experience feeling enlightened and that all of their other audio devices are inadequate from now on. The iPod is not only quite sufficient, but more than enough for most of us. It's pretty ignorant to simply assume that the rest of the world is solely comprised of knuckle-dragging retards simply because they weren't born with your sophisticated taste.

Re:audio quality?

[Anonymous Coward]

Um, people who actually "CARE" about audio quality wouldn't even deal with MP3, AAC, etc. due to their lossy compression. On any given higher-quality sound system (not with Sony, Pioneer, Bose, Harmon-Kardon or anything else you can get at Best Buy, but with products from companies like NAD, B&W, PSB, etc.), you can *easily* tell which song is an original audio CD vs. which song is an MP3 file.

So comparing the quality of one MP3 player to another is like comparing the gas efficiency of a H2 vs. a Porche Carerra. I'm not saying that comparisons can't be made, but you probably can't argue that someone making this comparison really "CAREs" about gas efficiency.

And, of course, if you're *truly* a hard core audiophile, you wouldn't even bother with digital at all; CD, DAT or otherwise. You'd stick with the medium that yields the best and most accurate audio reproduction possible: vinyl records.

Re:audio quality?

[bigNuns]

yeah, its a big deal, and telling me i should merge all my mp3s together is hardly a decent solution... there are plenty of albums that were released with no gaps between the tracks, XTC Skylarking comes to mind... i don't always want to listen to the whole album, but when i do, i would like it to all flow together as it did when it was released... so, yes its a big deal, and not just to DJs... i have no intentions of having two copies of the digital files (1 merged, 1 not), instead i'll just stick to players that can do gapless playback...

Re:audio quality?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, you're worried about sound quality on the iPod Shuffle? If you're that worried about sound quality, you must be using an audio codec that supports lossless compression, otherwise why bother? The iPod Shuffle can only hold about 2 albums that are losslessly encoded. I'm suspicious here.

As an aside, I would think the noise would be BETTER with the iPod Shuffle because you only have flash memory, not a magnetic disk spinning at hundreds/thousands of RPM. Anyone do the calculation on how much of an electric/magnetic field each would generate? I thought the shuffle would be less...

And finally, lossy codecs generally boost the bass frequencies because it hides deficiencies at higher frequencies.

Re:audio quality?

[jabuzz]

Rubbish anyone using it to listen to an audiobook or other spoken word stuff wants gapless playback.

Re:audio quality?

[TJ_Phazerhacki]

I don't know about the audio quality, but for practicality, Iwill soon be buying one of these... to replace my recently deceased Shuffle.

I love the shuffle in all it's glory, but it is too damn small... The first one was replaced (under warrenty) due to a mishap in the washing machine. (noo good!) The second has died due to being left in a leaky car. Too bad a drop of H2O kills the shuffle permanently. They really should have made an ATTEMPT to seal it.

Although... It does give me an excuse to get the nano. All works out in the end.

Re:audio quality?

[Fear the Clam]

Modparentup,peopledon'tleavegapsbetweentheirwordsw henspeaking.

Re:audio quality?

[Gulthek]

In my opinion, albums like that weren't mean to be split into tracks. I'd just keep one album as album_merged for the purist in me, and one not for the practicalist.

Re:audio quality?

[Anonymous Coward]

Must... have... Nano...

Re:audio quality?

[Anonymous Coward]

You shouldnt have to make that choice. It IS possible to solve this problem (other MP3 players have) so the iPod should too.

Re:audio quality?

[Anonymous Coward]

I seem to remember that the main Stereophile reviewer gave a fairly positive review of the (3G?) iPod which included technical analysis on an Audio Precision. So the audio quality cant be that bad. (This is the same trade mag that reviews high end equipment from Krell, etc.)

I do find it interesting that some people claim the Shuffle has better sound quality. Anyone paying attention knows that the Shuffle uses a different chipset (SigmaTel) than the regular iPod (Portal Player / TI / Wolfsan) I also found the comment that there was a tiny bit of hiss present in the Shuffle interesting.

I tend to believe that a little bit of thermal noise actually does make music sound better. It tends to hide whatever might be missing in the recording (spacial cues or whatnot) and lets your brain fill in.

Re:audio quality?

[wahsapa]

the ipod nano supports Apple Lossless... which is why im getting one... when reports confirm its the same audio chip from the shuffle

Re:audio quality?

[TheGratefulNet]

Wow, you're worried about sound quality on the iPod Shuffle?

worried? what, me worry? ;)

no, I made a statement. a simple statement. I was surprised to find such great audio quality - I didn't EXPECT it (like you).

you must be using an audio codec that supports lossless compression, otherwise why bother

I have a binary license to the famous fraunhoffer mp3 encoder (a linux binary, actually). I love it. I paid dearly for it (real money). its still the best I've found. its incredibly incredibly slow, but when you take an mp3 from that and send it to an spdif playback system with good speakers, its amazing how good a job they did (back in 98, when it was written).

As an aside, I would think the noise would be BETTER with the iPod Shuffle because you only have flash memory,

media aint got nothing to do with it, son. I'm talking about the analog-out phase. who cares what its source is, its totally irrelevant to how well they did the DAC and analog follower.

Re:audio quality?

[TheGratefulNet]

yes, a CONSTANT amount of hiss. doesn't track volume control or file content - just constant hiss. but its easily masked by all but the quietest of passages. and the sound linearity and bass is just incredible. only my outboard DAC into a decent set of speakers (I have maggies at home) beats it. I'm serious - it blew my mind when I heard how good that shuffle sounds. I hate its clunky filesystem and antics, but its dac and analog-out is the bees knees.

Re:audio quality?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't care about audio quality. My MP3 -> AAC transcoding stories will bring you shivers.

Re:audio quality?

[radish]

If its that important, then merge the files. If it isn't that important, then it isn't that important.
Right. Which means I lose (a) the ability to select a specific track (b) the ability to know which track I'm listening to and (c) almost a TB of disk space. Just because Apple can't fix a simple problem.

It's important to me, so important that I won't buy a broken player which doesn't work properly. There are players out there that have solved this problem, it's not rocket science. That's why I buy them over Apple. The nano looks great, I'd buy one in an instant if they did gapless.

If you want it done on arbitrary playlists on the fly, then you can hardly bring CD players into the debate.
No, I don't want it on playlists. I don't use playlists. I want it for albums which have no gaps and which I want to listen to in the same way I can listen to the CD.

Re:audio quality?

[radish]

I didn't believe it until I got one (as a gift) but the shuffle has the best audio quality I've heard short of an external DAC into an spdif stream. its noisy (biased transistors in output stage?) but it has actual bass and enough drive to power headphones without distorting.
Interesting thread on DAP sound quality : here

Re:audio quality?

[That's Unpossible!]

What are you talking about? Audiobooks are probably the worst example for why we need gapless playback.

The reason we need gapless playback is so that musicals, operas, classical works, and live concerts play as intended. Audiobooks sound the same either way, unless you're listening to a strange audiobook.

Re:audio quality?

[famebait]

Wow, you're worried about sound quality on the iPod Shuffle? If you're that worried about sound quality, you must be using an audio codec that supports lossless compression, otherwise why bother?

Umm, because hardware with inadequate circuitry to drive your phones can degrade sound a lot more than the lossyness does? Especially if you use a high-quality encoding.

192 may not be perfect, but the difference from 128 is huge.

If you don't think hardware matters when playing lossy audio, why don't you just check the same file/phone combo on different players. I can promise you'll be surprised. And apple hjas tended to come out very well.

iTunes Linux Support

[bosewicht]

If Apple wants to be really shocking they should start supporting Linux. There is a growing market out there that they are just ignoring.

Re:iTunes Linux Support

[bedouin]

Right, a growing market of people who don't like paying for things.

Re:iTunes Linux Support

[WillAdams]

Interesting and scary.

If Apple were to do this, the best thing to do would be to re-write ITunes as a Cocoa app (a good thing) and resurrect ``Yellow Box'' for Windows (something which Apple shied away from) and up-date enough of GNUstep to make iTunes work there by just recompiling (something which Apple is probably worried about 'cause then people could run more software on Linux instead of Mac OS X)

William

Re:iTunes Linux Support

[787style]

Not only that, but have you tried to release a closed source app for all the linux distros lately? It's a nightmare.

Re:iTunes Linux Support

[interiot]

So Linux users, in general, want to pirate music rather than buy it? That's a pretty gross generalization. Especially since many of them have reasonably-paying software/IT jobs. And they're geeks, so they're used to plunking down cash for computer upgrades and broadband upgrades more quickly than others.

Re:iTunes Linux Support

[Jim Hall]

I would love to buy my music off the iTunes Music Store. As it is, iTunes is pretty much the only reason I have a Windows partition anymore. I bought CrossOver for Linux to run iTunes. I can run iTunes, but I can't seem to buy music off the store.

Hell, I'd pay Apple to have a version of iTunes for Linux. If they're concerned about distro compatibility, then release it as a Java application!

Note to Apple: please make it easier for me to give you my money.

Re:iTunes Linux Support

[bedouin]

And they're geeks, so they're used to plunking down cash for computer upgrades and broadband upgrades more quickly than others.

Exactly, things they have to pay for to obtain.

The Linux desktop market is maybe 1 or 2%. Factor in those who would much rather use a p2p app to obtain music and it splits even further. Next, factor in those who hate the idea of any DRM or corporate control of their software or media, and your 2% shrinks again. Then, don't forget all those who won't touch anything unless the source is available. Beginning to see why it's a bad idea?

The general geek attitude is, "If no one does it the way I like, I'll figure out a way to make it happen, within my limited means." There's absolutely nothing wrong with that, but there's a reason Midas and Monroe don't have to place ads during a gearhead program.

Re:iTunes Linux Support

[eMartin]

Forgive my ignorance, but couldn't they release a single-file static-linked binary, and have it install as easily as most Mac apps...

Drag it to where you keep your applications and double click it.

Re:iTunes Linux Support

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't Mac OS X basically Linux?

Re:iTunes Linux Support

[Anonymous Coward]

Forgive my ignorance, but couldn't they release a single-file static-linked binary, and have it install as easily as most Mac apps...

Anybody could do this, but there are some pretty good reasons that people don't. Not to mention that it doesn't answer the key question: Why *would* they bother?

Re:iTunes Linux Support

[Saven Marek]

> Isn't Mac OS X basically Linux?

It's based on linux but now it's so far removed from what you or I would call linux that its incompatible

Re:iTunes Linux Support

[dr.badass]

Hell, I'd pay Apple to have a version of iTunes for Linux. If they're concerned about distro compatibility, then release it as a Java application!

That might be a good option...if iTunes were coded in Java. No, wait, Java is never a good option.

Note to Apple: please make it easier for me to give you my money.

They already make it pretty easy to buy a Mac, which is what they want you to do anyway. They don't want your 99 cents a song. They want your hundreds for an iPod and thousands for a Mac.

Re:iTunes Linux Support

[dr.badass]

...up-date enough of GNUstep to make iTunes work there by just recompiling (something which Apple is probably worried about 'cause then people could run more software on Linux instead of Mac OS X)

1) Apple has no connection to GNUstep.
2) The number of people running GNUstep is miniscule.
3) Very little Mac OS X software could be "just recompiled" to run on Linux/GNUStep. Apple has nothing to fear.

Re:iTunes Linux Support

[Overly Critical Guy]

So far removed that the letters are all jumbled and say "BSD"!

Sigh...

Re:iTunes Linux Support

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it's not based on Linux. It's based on Mach with a BSD subsystem and NeXTStep's APIs.

Re:iTunes Linux Support

[nikkie]

I bought an ipod photo this week, and had it working that night with gtkpod in linux. Not a problem. Why would I want iTunes? I nearly went with a Creative for the ease of use in linux, bigger hard drive for cheaper, etc. But I couldn't resist the shiny. Oops.

Re:iTunes Linux Support

[Anonymous Coward]

yes but I think it's from a 2.2 kernel so not compatible with today.

Re:iTunes Linux Support

[Anonymous Coward]

Or maybe this international multi-billion dollar company that has publicly anounced its flagship product will switch technology, has heard other OS's and projects created for cross platform devlopment, and maybe they have their own projects that they intend to keep secret until they are ready to launch. Or maybe not.

Re:iTunes Linux Support

[tickell]

Mac OS 11.0: Emperor (Penguin) ;)

Re:iTunes Linux Support

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would anybody give up the freedom with Linux/BSD just to run a music player program. Are you on crack?

Re-releasing the same products...

[Anubis333]

Apple and Nintendo do this a lot. They release the same products over and over again, with identical functionalities, hoping that people will be vain or stylish enough to want something that looks sleeker. I mean look at Nintendo, they have released how many Gameboy Advance systems (3?) all with the same exact functionality. Apple has released how many iPods? A company that claims to innovate, while many, many competitors have been releasing music *and* video players for almost 4 years now *for cheaper than apple's music only players*..

It's the same with entertainment media formats. I like a movie, but to see it at home I need the DVD, to watch it on my PSP I need the UMD, etc..

Re:Re-releasing the same products...

[Anonymous Coward]

At least Apple and Nintendo's products use the same media through most of the iterations. The Apple products all work with the same datafiles (MP3 and AAC). Sure, the DS and the Micro won't play GB/GBC carts, but it'll play all the GBA carts in the world, so nobody's forcing a format change on you. Your old iPod/GBA works fine - no need to replace it.

Re:Re-releasing the same products...

[2nd Post!]

The fact that people continue buying these products over and over again seems to refute your argument.

If competitors are releasing music AND video players 'for cheaper', and not making money, maybe it means two things:

1) Bad product
2) No market

If the competitors make a bad product, then of course the only remainging good product (iPod) will win. Apple just has to wait, review the market, and keep designing until it has a good product, even if it's a couple years late. Would you rather have a bad product now, or a good one next year?

If there is no market, then what's the point?

Re:Re-releasing the same products...

[bedouin]

I mean look at Nintendo, they have released how many Gameboy Advance systems (3?) all with the same exact functionality.

They only released two that I know of, but I could just be out of the loop.

The GBA SP added functionality, like a built in rechargeable battery and backlit display, all at the same price as the previous model.

The iPod nano offers flash memory, increased battery life, a color display, ability to play photos, in a much smaller package. There's tons of added functionality.

while many, many competitors have been releasing music *and* video players for almost 4 years now *for cheaper than apple's music only players*..

I can release a cell phone the size of a VCR, have it play DVDs, DivXs, run various emulators, and do my taxes, that doesn't change the fact that it's poorly designed and not very attractive. Apple is about simplicity. If you want a swiss army knife MP3 player then there's manufactures catering to you, but you're a minority in that desire.

Re:Re-releasing the same products...

[rsborg]

Apple and Nintendo do this a lot. They release the same products over and over again, with identical functionalities, hoping that people will be vain or stylish enough to want something that looks sleeker.

Hoping??? The GBA and iPod are two *very* successful products... and they have to keep repackaging them because most consumers have ADHD (or seem like it). Simple economics, if they keep repackaging (as you say) the same shit, then why does that shit keep selling? I think the original models were hella innovative for both of these products, and that fact bears out when you good sales on "rehashed" versions.

In fact, almost all successful consumer-product companies do this (sony- walkman, microsoft- word, palm -pda, etc).

Re:Re-releasing the same products...

[StarManta.Mini]

They will be releasing a third, smaller model soon, the Game Boy Micro.

Frankly I think it looks pretty sweet for those of us who don't already have a GBASP or DS.

Re:Re-releasing the same products...

[Anonymous Coward]

The third.

Re:Re-releasing the same products...

[oberondarksoul]

They're soon to release the Game Boy micro, a considerably smaller GBA without the clamshell design of the SP, but with replaceable fascias. It'll sell for $99. (Ars Technica journal article here)

Re:Re-releasing the same products...

[tktk]

They release the same products over and over again, with identical functionalities

Yeah, I hate it when :

• GE comes out with another set washers & dryers
• Ford comes out with yet another truck
• Parker, Cross, and all the other pen makers who rely on the stick form-factor
• And don't get me started on the wheel...

Re:Re-releasing the same products...

[hackstraw]

They release the same products over and over again, with identical functionalities, hoping that people will be vain or stylish enough to want something that looks sleeker.

Pretty soon car manufacturers, clothing companies, and many other common consumer good companies will be doing the same thing.

Get used to it.

Re:Re-releasing the same products...

[saddino]

They release the same products over and over again, with identical functionalities, hoping that people will be vain or stylish enough to want something that looks sleeker.

Hoping? Judging from their 6 million units sold last quarter, hoping is the probably the last thing going on at Apple.

Apple is milking this market, and rightly so: iPods are clearly now "lifestyle" products, and as such, just like clothes and other fashion accessories, small improvements (even in form alone) can sustain their viability in the space.

If Apple were to "reinvent" the iPod every quarter, they'd confuse their product line and would be much more likely to be taken down by a competitor.

Hoping? Hardly. It sounds like Steve and the other marketing folks at Apple know exactly what they're doing.

Re:Re-releasing the same products...

[Anonymous Coward]

Grandparent is incorrect, if Gameboy Advance systems means a system able to play Gameboy Advance games. There are 4 GBA systems released, with one more on the way:

GBA
GBA SP
GB Player (attaches to Gamecube)
Nintendo DS
GBA Micro

Re:Re-releasing the same products...

[Psykechan]

GP could be referring to the Game Boy Micro which is a really small GBA. It also lacks the functionallity of playing the GB/GBC games like the DS.

Speaking of which, shouldn't the iPod Nano be called the iPod Micro? I mean they just skipped a SI measurement didn't they?

I'll just wait for the iPod Fempto.

Re:Re-releasing the same products...

[Jetekus]

They don't have identical functionalities in some cases and in any case they are not all identical. The GBA:SP had a backlight which was the biggest complaint about the original GBA (the screen was impossible to use in low light). The new GBA micro is doing what Apple are doing with their iPods. Slowly but surely pushing up the battery life and pushing down the size.

By your reasoning Apple should have just made the original iPod and left it. They'd already made an mp3 player, right? Why "release the same products over and over again"?

The iPod and Game Boy are two portable items with fierce competition. Shaving off a few more millimetres might not matter for a DVD player, but could be wonderful for something you'll be carrying in your pocket for hours.

Re:Re-releasing the same products...

[Winterblink]

It's actually a very asian way to update products. You start with generation 1 of a product, and with each successive generation you shrink, lighten, enhance, improve, and innovate, not necessarily in that order or all in a particular generation. In the end, you have a palm-sized video camera, or in Apple's case you have a ridiculously tiny iPod with great battery life, bright color screen, and 4 gigs of storage space.

The core functionality doesn't have to change -- video camera, music player, whatever. It's definitely not the "same product", especially when you compare a generation 1 iPod to a nano. In fact, do a product comparison yourself between the two and tell me these are the same two devices.

If anything, you serve to affirm the fact that Apple got the core functions (playing music) right from the very beginning, and in the end all it needed was to do the incremental improvements to utterly annihilate the competition.

Re:Re-releasing the same products...

[Overly Critical Guy]

Releasing these new revisions isn't about having people rebuy them all over again (though that's a very nice side effect as most people end up selling their old goodies on eBay and using the money to buy the new ones).

The point is to cover markets. You and I might not rush out and buy an iPod nano because we already have iPods (though that nano sure is tasty-looking), but now when someone is out looking for a new iPod, Apple will have iPods that cover all their needs--the small color version, the tiny keychain version without the screen, the big hefty version with big storage space, etc. It's to keep the product fresh and always changing so it doesn't stagnate, and to stay alluring in the face of competitors (though there really aren't any).

Re:Re-releasing the same products...

[Anm]

Speaking of which, shouldn't the iPod Nano be called the iPod Micro? I mean they just skipped a SI measurement didn't they?

Are you suggesting there is such thing as a mini-meter or a mini-gram?

Anm

Re:Re-releasing the same products...

[RoadDoggFL]

That is assuming that everybody makes sound, informed purchasing decisions. Lots of things sell on hype, though I agree with the quality of the product in this case. The scenario you portray isn't always how things turn out.

Re:Re-releasing the same products...

[opticbit]

I still want a re-release of the Newton.

Re:Re-releasing the same products...

[2nd Post!]

Well, the whole argument was about two companies and two products; the Nintendo Gameboy and the Apple iPod, so there's really no talking about other products and scenarios. I wasn't really trying to make a generic statement, because that's a lot harder to qualify/defend.

The iPod of 2001 was bought and sold on sound purchasing decisions. It's not easy to part with $399 for a DAP, but for whatever reason people did. Four years later you don't HAVE to make a sound informed decision because everyone has already done the hard work for you.

Re:Re-releasing the same products...

[10Ghz]

The iPod nano offers flash memory, increased battery life, a color display, ability to play photos, in a much smaller package. There's tons of added functionality.

AFAIK, the Nano has less battery life than the Mini did. Nano has 14 hours of playback-time, whereas the Mini it replaced had 18 hours.

Quicktime 7 for Windows (standalone installer)

[.Spyder78.]

Quicktime 7 without iTunes can be found here... http://www.apple.com/quicktime/download/standalone .html

Re:Quicktime 7 for Windows (standalone installer)

[NCTRNAL]

That is kinda messed up but expected to ensure survival. I just used WinRAR and opened ITUNESSETUP.exe, then extracted the setup for Quicktime. If anyone wants to know how to do a silent install for Quicktime, let me know.

I wonder if the ROKR can use the same cable..

[VitrosChemistryAnaly]

...as the iPod?

'Cause if it can then I can use my computer to charge my phone and my current iPod car charger to charge the phone

Then I wouldn't have to buy any accessories!

Re:I wonder if the ROKR can use the same cable..

[MarkoNo5]

Then I wouldn't have to buy any accessories!

I think you've answered your own question ;)

No more apples for me

[DrCode]

My experience with my daughter's Ipod Mini has not been overwhelmingly positive:

On Windows XP, syncing to it in ITunes (via USB) causes Windows to reboot about half the time.

On Linux, syncing more than a few songs at a time (in gtkpod) causes a bunch of hardware errors, resulting in the partition being set to read-only. (So I guess Linux is a little more robust in dealing with hardware problems.)

Re:No more apples for me

[rabbit994]

Why does WIndows reboot? Have you thought about checking the Event Viewer to see why?

Linux isn't supported so what do you expect?

Re:No more apples for me

[sk1tch]

Are you seriously blaming a Windows crashing problem on something besides Windows? Step back and think about that for a moment.

I got a freeipod.com ipod, noticed how it just worked when I wanted it to, no stupidity involved. This inspired me to get a PowerBook, and guess what? It works. All the time.

Apple makes awesome hardware. Microsoft makes bad OS's. I dunno about your gtkipod problem though. Good luck with it.

Re:No more apples for me

[Anonymous Coward]

I take it you don't believe in open source drivers. Some of us do and expect it to work, like it usualy do.

Re:No more apples for me

[Txiasaeia]

In May I bought an MSI RS480 motherboard and a Leadtek PX6600GT video card - computer wouldn't stop crashing for months. Turns out that the motherboard doesn't support nvidia video cards. Believe it or not, hardware incompatibility *is* a cause for instability in Windows [XP], even in this day and age.

Re:No more apples for me

[Overly Critical Guy]

Those kinds of incompatibilities are why Apple's control of hardware and software makes for such reliable computers.

Re:No more apples for me

[DrCode]

I guess it depends on who created the USB driver that iTunes uses to talk to the ipod. I was assuming that it was Apple, but maybe I'm wrong.
I'm no fan of MS, but I do know that a bad driver can crash an OS.

Re:No more apples for me

[Txiasaeia]

I've used a modern Mac too, and I've had more kernel panics on it (powerbook) than BSODs on an XP machine (home built PC, even with the aforementioned problems). But that wasn't my point - my point was in regards to the grandparent, in that BSODs with windows aren't necessarily the result of Windows itself.

Re:No more apples for me

[the_2nd_coming]

usb i a standard driver. so it is probably windows. it is obviously endemic ONLY to your set up since no one else has complained and the iPod has spread so fast.

Re:No more apples for me

[QuaZar666]

then you have some seriously wrong with your Mac. Run DFA and fsck on the thing first off. I have several macs here, and am around macs all day at work and usual culprits are login items, directory structure damage, some weird application that installed some weird sys pref item that installed itself, system level fonts, sometimes hardware but not as common as everything else.

Re:No more apples for me

[Overly Critical Guy]

My point was that it doesn't matter whether it was PC hardware or Windows. Mac reliability wins.

If you're having problems, something is definitely wrong. My iBook and Mac mini run continuously day and night with no hitches (even through an upgrade to Logic Express 7.1 running an M-Audio Firewire 410).

Re:No more apples for me

[themonkman]

If your having GTKpod problems, especially when it deals with the mounting of the iPods internal hard drive, you might want to visit a tutorial on my blog. I used to have very similar problems, and found a solution to them. http://www.superpatriot.net/blog/sky_monkey/?archi ve=465

Re:No more apples for me

[aichpvee]

If you're having problems, something is definitely wrong. My iBook and Mac mini run continuously day and night with no hitches

I hear that a lot from windows users, but I don't believe them either. Though congrats on getting a mac that doesn't crash (two no less!), I hope that continues to work out for you.

Re:No more apples for me

[Farmer Tim]

Have to concur with the parent - 4 eMacs, an iBook and an iMac all on OS X, and haven't seen a kernal panic since 10.3.0. The hard drive failed in one eMac and the iBook had the logic board fault, but no problems with the OS...

Re:No more apples for me

[Xugumad]

Only time I've seen a OS X kernel panic was due to faulty hardware (mainboard in one, memory in another). Probably worth seeing if you can try some different RAM, at least, see if that helps. Maybe someone else can suggest more useful diagnostics...

Re:No more apples for me

[mbbac]

"On Windows XP, syncing to it in ITunes (via USB) causes Windows to reboot about half the time."

And you're blaming the Ipod for this? Windows is the piece of junk that is rebooting when you plug a peripheral into it.

Are the smart playlists less dumb?

[Incadenza]

Currently downloading the new iTunes at 2KB/sec (this brings back memories of modem days) but I wonder: any improvement in the smart playlists?

I really would like to have functionality such as 'play songs that I added over a year ago, and songs that I added just last week, plus the latest Brainwashed podcast'. Currently the only way to do this is by nesting your smart playlists, for a smart playlist is either 'any of the criteria' or 'all of the criteria'. There is more to Boolean logic Steve!

Oh, and while were on it, album-aware smart playlists would be great too. Just because Apple sells separate tracks doesn't mean that I want half an album chopped off when I limit my playlist in time or space.

Re:Are the smart playlists less dumb?

[Washizu]

Right. Or have them play 5 star songs 70% of the time, 4 star songs 20% of the time, and 3 star songs 5% of the time.

The smart playlists are great, but they could use some improvement.

Re:Are the smart playlists less dumb?

[TheRaven64]

No, not really. It's a conscious (wrong) decision by Apple that people can't understand complex boolean expressions, so they require everything to be in either conjunctive or disjunctive normal form. Fortunately, those of us who were paying attention in logic lectures remember the DeMorgan Laws and so can use negation to translate our queries into CNF or DNF - apparently this is easier than expressing things in their natural way.

Re:Are the smart playlists less dumb?

[Thorkytel Ant-Head]

And 5% of the time...silence.

iTunes

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe I'm just an idiot and don't know how to do this (which is certainly possible), but I downloaded iTunes 5 and they still haven't fixed my biggest problem with it. I can't select a wide swath of songs with my mouse, to drop into a playlist and such. If I want to highlight a bunch of them I have to click on each individually. Is there a way to highlight them all in one shot (similar to selecting a bunch of files in Explorer)?

Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these!

[dpbsmith]

[ducking]

Re:Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these!

[jc42]

So how long before we can put linux on it?

What I'm waiting for, actually, is a PDA running linux that has cellphone (including IP), wi-fi and GPS capability in the hardware. And
maybe Bluetooth, so I only have to plug it in to charge its battery.

Yeah I know; such a dreamer. And the corporate world isn't about to provide something so utterly useful. How would they get me to buy N different devices then?

$250 for the phone?

[arhar]

.... and that's with a 2 year contract? Please. That's way too expensive. But... I would actually consider it if it wasn't Cingular, which is THE crappiest phone service company [in the NYC area].

Re:$250 for the phone?

[frzndrag]

Unfortunately that is the standard pricing for most new phones (RAZR was 299 with a 2yr, and a VZ V710 or E815 is 199 or more on release) in the US market if you want to be bleeding edge you must pay

Nice, but...

[mrped]

Why couldn't they put the hold button and headphones on the same side?

A temporary success-single vendor, no streaming

[bdolan]

With an exclusive deal, every other phone vendor other than Cingular MUST use a non-Itunes solution. To add music to a phone is trivial, the processing power to decompress music is low speed processing compared to radio and all you need is dual channel audio chip and more flash and your good to go.

Almost by definition, these player will be compatible with WMV (with many vendors of product) or Real formats in addition to MP3. A streaming download will be availabe from at least one music vendor (it will just be a bunch of songs stringed together that expires.) Also trivial and could be many "channel" ... Apple disses streaming or rent all you want models. You can have any of these three.

And, no reason why videos and cameras can't be supported ... they are already in almost every phone anyway.

They are going to be blown out of the market due to their very closed and limited purchased-only music and no video model.

too bad.

Conspiracy Theory

[mobilesteve]

If you look at what song is playing in iTunes, you'll see it is from the new Kanye West CD.

I wonder if Apple picked a song from that Artist based on the recent comments he made during the Hurrican Relief Fund?

Could just be that he has a new CD out, or the person making the page was listening to the CD at the time, but I love a good conspiracy theory

Re:Conspiracy Theory

[th3space]

Looking at the rest of the music on the page, it would appear that they just have bad taste in music...no worries of a conspiracy theory there.

Re:Conspiracy Theory

[saddino]

It's more likely that they simply chose the current best selling song on iTunes (the very Kanye West track pictured).

Re:Conspiracy Theory

[Overly Critical Guy]

Or maybe it's the fact that the song they're playing is from the #1 selling song in iTunes, according to the top list in the Music Store. It was #1 before his little rant.

Re:Conspiracy Theory

[mbbac]

Kanye West performed at the end of the announcement event yesterday. He thanked Steve for still allowing him to perform.

Bah

[The Bungi]

I'm waiting for the iPod Femto. I hear you'll be able to lodge it under a fingernail. They're just working out the headphone connector.

Re:Bah

[Punboy]

Eh, it plugs into your nervous system and transmits audio straight to your brain.

nano replaces mini ?

[slide-rule]

Looks like from the Apple site that the "mini" is no longer featured at all... guess "nano" is the new "mini", which makes me wonder about [lack of?] future accessories or software updates for the mini line. Anyone have specific info on this?

Re:nano replaces mini ?

[jcr]

The third-party accessories will be around for years. There are a lot of iPod minis out there. As for Apple's support, iTunes 5 works fine with my old 10 gig iPod.

-jcr

Interesting demographic?

[NatasRevol]

Appealing to the younger crowd with hardware and content.

http://www.apple.com/itunes/harrypotter/

Re:Interesting demographic?

[Buran]

It's not just kids that like that series. There's lots of adult fans (I'm one of them, and there's people twice my age -- I'm 30) with the money to buy that iPod.

I would consider it if it were a different color other than the same old boring white. Say, pick a house and have the iPod be the colors of that house. I'd go for a deep blue iPod with a silver (not grey) click wheel. Deep green/silver, maroon/golden yellow (with black markings), and black/yellow click-wheel ... why are we still stuck with nothing but white with grey or black with red?

Re:Interesting demographic?

[hackstraw]

why are we still stuck with nothing but white with grey or black with red?

A wise man once said "You can have the car in any color you like -- so long as its black".

Re:Interesting demographic?

[NatasRevol]

Well, if you're willing to shell out a little more money...

http://www.colorwarepc.com/

Re:Interesting demographic?

[Buran]

I know about ColorWare ... but it'd be nice to have Apple do it. Since they sell black/red iPods (which cost more, which is ridiculous -- is it really that much more expensive to use different colored plastic, and engrave them, when they're frequently offering free engraving!?) they can certainly branch out for other "special" versions.

ROKR is lame

[soft_guy]

Did anyone else notice how they danced around mentioning the number of songs the ROKR will hold. Well, buried on Apple's website is a FAQ about the ROKR. Apparently it comes with a memory card slot (not sure of type) which will be pre-loaded with 512K card from Cingular.

100 songs. That's it. Compare that to the nano which will hold 1,000 songs.

I have a 20 GB iPod, I would love to carry one device instead of two, but 100 songs is not going to cut it.

The nano looks like a nice replacement for the mini, though.

Re:ROKR is lame

[Punboy]

I do hope you mean 512MB, because 512K can barely fit 1/6 of a standard MP3...

Regular iPod gets a boost as well

[Anonymous Coward]

It looks like they bumped the 20 gig iPod to a http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/A ppleStore.woa/wo/StoreReentry.wo?family=iPod30 gig iPod at no additional cost in the middle of the page, unless it's a type-o.

Re:Regular iPod gets a boost as well

[Anonymous Coward]

That's the 4th gen b&w ipod.

GARGH!

[th3space]

Damnit...I just got my stupid Shuffle. Now they come out with this for not much more money? I feel inadequate all of a sudden. :(

Re:GARGH!

[geofferensis]

If it's any consolation, you can use the shuffle as a jump drive and MP3 player. The Nano needs a dock.

Not compatible with mt-daapd

[uthanda]

Not sure if this is true with other open-source DAAP sharing programs and servers, but at least with mt-daapd (not linking to avoid Slashdotting them, search Google for mt-daapd), iTunes 5.0 returns a "The shared music library 'name' is not compatible with this version of iTunes".

I assume there with be a workaround, but for the moment, don't upgrade if you rely on this functionality (like I do).

Re:Not compatible with mt-daapd

[uthanda]

Just by way of update, the current mt-daapd nightly does work with iTunes 5.0. Guess it's time to update my old reliable server.

Re:Not compatible with mt-daapd

[nick this]

workaround is there now. updated packages (including NSLU2 packages) are on nightlies.mt-daapd.org.

They will be up on sourceforge tomorrow, and updates will probably trickle into unslung by the end of the week.

-- Ron

Not included...

[MattHaffner]

iPod nano... ...iMagnifyingGlass not included.

Re:iDuh

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a Motorola/Cingular product that has an exclusive license.

Well, it's more like a Motorola product, licensed exclusively to Cingular in the US, Rumour has it that it will be released by O2 in the UK and by T-Mobile in Germany.

What, no comments on the ROKR?

[bubba451]

Well, I don't blame you. I was pretty disappointed with the announcements as they were coming until they got to the Nano, which might be the first iPod that is universally drooled-over.

How exactly can Motorola get up on stage -- at an Apple-hosted event -- and present something that looks as boring as the ROKR phone? Are they hoping that people will think this thing is cool by association? It's not like they're incapable of producing slick-looking phones...

iTunes direct download

[Anonymous Coward]

The download form is getting hammered... but you can download the iTunesSetup.exe directly here

tiny capacity on that phone

[Myopic]

did you notice that the apple site for the new phone didn't mention how many songs it can hold? did you notice how hard it was to find that number on the cingular site, too? i'll save you the trouble: it can hold a hundred songs.

a hundred.

i have a fricking ipod shuffle, and i can hold way more than that. how hard could it possibly be to put more flash memory in these things? if you can put four gigs of flash into an "impossibly small" ipod nano, you can certainly put the same amount in what looks like an oversized phone.

ah, i'm just complaining. what i wanted was an ipod that could make phone calls, not a phone that could play a tiny selection of songs. i was waiting for this announcement to re-up my cell phone sevice, but i sure won't be buying this phone.

Re:tiny capacity on that phone

[ksheff]

According to the article, you can put in more memory. But it will still limit you to 100 songs. very odd.

iTunes autoupdate fuggered

[atomicbirdsong]

hmmm...tried the "check for updates" in iTunes 4.9 and it kicked back that 4.9 is the current version. Did I miss something?

New look for iTunes

[ddefenba]

The new iTunes no longer has the brushed metal window. Is this the beginning of the end for brushed metal? I wouldn't be surprised to see all of Apple's apps move towards this new look by the time they release 10.5. My personal preference: good riddance brushed metal.

Re:New look for iTunes

[StarManta.Mini]

The beginning of the end was when Apple introduced the Unified look when Tiger debuted.

This is actually a slightly modified Unified - somewhere between that and Metal.

Re:New look for iTunes

[Overly Critical Guy]

I didn't mind it at all when it was just a few apps like iTunes that used it (it really does fit with iTunes to me). It just got way overused. I'm looking at my Dock, and every running app except Dreamweaver and iTerm are in brushed metal. If everything else dropped the brushed metal, I wouldn't mind seeing it return in updated form in a future version of iTunes. Just seems right for a music player.

The new iTunes look reminds me of OS X Tiger's new Mail visual revamp, which people are referring to as "Plastic."

Re:New look for iTunes

[mbbac]

"Is this the beginning of the end for brushed metal?"

I hope so. I could actually dig everything going to the new Itunes style or the new Mail style as long as they retain the cool toolbar style of normal Aqua applications.

Good riddance brushed metal!

windows see windows, macs see macs

[cyfer2000]

that's it.

The Nano and iPod usage patterns.

[kaleco]

The Nano will be mine. I know many people will disagree with this, but I've always found my iPod to be a little too heavy for trouser pockets, so if I'm going out with it I need a jacket or a bag. I like to travel light.

I'm certainly willing to sacrafice storage space, since I've noticed I mainly listen to a fairly narrow vein of my music collection at any one time. I've never really alternated from Metallica to Madonna in a single round-trip away from my computer.

I'm not sure about the phone, it seems a little removed from the Apple aesthetic. I kind of like it, but the Nano is the big news for me today.

Re:The Nano and iPod usage patterns.

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree.. I have a long torso so I cant put my 20gig 4th gen ipod in my pants pocket so I put it in my shirt pocket when I walk.. But its so heavy and it pulls my shirt down so my pocket is near my stomach

I want this ipod nano.. I wonder if they'll be doing a freeipodnanos.com site because that's how I got my ipod

But is it accessible?

[beetle496]

One long standing complaint is that iTunes has not been sufficiently compatible with the screen readers used by the blind. This, in turn, has meant that the various iPods -- even the shuttle with no screen -- are not accessible.

This release, despite the whole digit change, doesn't change this. This is all the more ironic since Tiger now ships with an integrated spoken user interface! Blind folks, as a generalization, are at least as passionate about music and technology as the rest of us. This is a real shame.

ROKR Availability in Canada through Rogers

[necro2607]

The ROKR will be available in Canada exclusively from Rogers Wireless, according to this Motorola Canada site. Too bad there isn't more detailed information though. Rogers Wireless' site has no information on the phone or its pending availability unfortunately.

Re:ROKR Availability in Canada through Rogers

[gstoddart]

The ROKR will be available in Canada exclusively from Rogers Wireless, according to this Motorola Canada site. Too bad there isn't more detailed information though. Rogers Wireless' site has no information on the phone or its pending availability unfortunately.

Well, I have a Motorola T 720 phone, and I'm a Roger's subscriber.

If this new phone is like other phones, you'll get a phone which has a custom Rogers OS on it, and some of the functionality which the manufacturers manual says is there will be disabled.

For instance, on my phone, they've disabled the ability to go directly to an URL -- you instead go through their servers with an extra request so they can charge you more. (A co-worker had to work that one out.)

You will end up with a phone with is 'mostly' the ROKR, but it will have a few differences in its functionality. Motorolla makes good phones, but the carriers limit them to their subscription models.

Cheers

Re:ROKR Availability in Canada through Rogers

[necro2607]

Yes, at the TechVibes Massive 2005 trade show at Science World in Vancouver I visited the Rogers Wireless booth and talked to a representative about some of the phones/devices they offer, and I noticed a lot of features that I knew existed in the devices were not enabled with Rogers...

A coworker where I work got a PDA cellphone which also has 802.11b wifi capability. It had to be purchased from a European retailer because the local carriers don't offer the 802.11b capability even though the device is 100% capable - the carriers just want to restrict users' options, it seems...

I see no practical reason for it at all... but whatever, I have yet to purchase any sort of cellular device and probably never will...

Re:ROKR Availability in Canada through Rogers

[gstoddart]

and I noticed a lot of features that I knew existed in the devices were not enabled with Rogers...

Yup. That's what we've concluded -- lots of stuff we expected to find on the phones were missing.

I see no practical reason for it at all... but whatever, I have yet to purchase any sort of cellular device and probably never will...

May you be so fortunate. Eventually they just become more convenient to have than not I guess. I carry a satchel, so it's not much more of a burden.

Sports? Features? Has?

[sanctimonius hypocrt]

It also touts an improved search bar, but I can't find an explanation of what that means.

Open a console and type

dict tout

Re:Sports? Features? Has?

[coolGuyZak]

I'm not so sure. I own a 20GB iPod, and I don't feel like I was dict tout of my money.

Re:Sports? Features? Has?

[mottie]

Open a console and type

dict tout

It doesn't work!

C:\Documents and Settings\mottie>dict tout

'dict' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
operable program or batch file.

Re:Sports? Features? Has?

[sanctimonius hypocrt]

Windows users have to do wi'tout.

Re:Sports? Features? Has?

[Anonymous Coward]

bash: dict: command not found

Re:Sports? Features? Has?

[krunk4ever]

i prefer the firefox keyword, so it's just:

CTRL+T (new tab) or CTRL+L (location bar)
dict tout
ENTER

and it brings me to:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=tout

Re:Sports? Features? Has?

[Anonymous Coward]

I use a mac, you insensitive clod. I ctrl+Click the word Tout and look it up in the Dictionary.

Anyway, I get this:

To attempt to persuade people of the merits of (someone or something).

Which seems to make sense, no?

Re:Sports? Features? Has?

[sanctimonius hypocrt]

That suggests some interesting possibilities. How about CTRL+T CTRL+L ls? Or CTRL+T CTRL+L vi?

Re:Sports? Features? Has?

[sanctimonius hypocrt]

I wish I had a Mac.

It does make sense if Apple is touting their improved search bar; But for touting to occur, some person has to be the tout.

Although now that I think of it, maybe the gizmo comes with an audio file that plays when you turn it on:

"Good afternoon, Sir! Do you not admire this splendid search bar? It can be yours for a small fee. May I arrange the purchase for you?"

Then it would be touting its search bar. If it played a fanfare as well, it could be touting its own horn.

Re:Sports? Features? Has?

[adpowers]

Yes, that is what I intended. I was writing that very quickly in the hopes of getting it accepted and because I was about to head out the door, so I didn't really proofread it.

"The website touts an improved..."

Also, why go to Terminal when I could just put my mouse over the word and press ctrl-cmd-D? Yay for Tiger!

Re:Sports? Features? Has?

[line.at.infinity]

This is shorter:

CTRL+L (location bar)
dict tout
CTRL+ENTER (new tab w/ keyword)

Haven't used Windows in a while so the ctrl-enter trick may have changed to something like alt-enter or shift-enter. Feel free to experiment.

Re:Sports? Features? Has?

[Anonymous Coward]

Tout \Tout\, n.
          One who secretly watches race horses which are in course of
          training, to get information about their capabilities, for
          use in betting. [Cant. Eng.]
          [1913 Webster]

Re:Sports? Features? Has?

[Anonymous Coward]

"The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48"
Tout Tout, n.
The anus. Obs. --Chaucer.
1913 Webster

Re:Sports? Features? Has?

[krunk4ever]

not sure if you missed the or of the 1st step in my original comment, but if you want a new tab, CTRL+T opens a new tab and puts your cursor onto the location bar already, so you only need to hit the ENTER and not CTRL+ENTER in the last step.

Not Impressed

[aluminumcube]

I am totally disappointed with the Moto phone.

- It is substantially ugly. The basic shape is OK, but then it has the vented sides and all sorts of useless depressions, lines and curves. I would have expected Apple to demand some quality ID out of Moto (and we know Moto can do it, the RAZR and upcoming SLVR are very hot).

- The dynamics of the phone market suck for releasing new technology. Phone handsets are way overpriced for the consumer and rely on those pesky contracts. Sure the ROKR looks OK now, but how is it going to look a year from now when better stuff is available and your locked into that contract? To me, this is a major problem with the cell phone market- there are numerous technology improvements going on IRT data rates, camera quality, wireless features, design, etc... but the carrier contract lockin puts a significant strain in consumer's ability to acquire such technology at a reasonable price.

- The capacity on the ROKR sucks. 100 songs? That's less then 512mb. If your going to lock people into an MP3 playing cellphone for 2 years, give them some real capacity and/or an SD expansion slot. Hell, the slot doesn't even need to be readily accessible, throw it behind the battery (because I don't know if iTunes can manage an iPod device with removable storage) so people can upgrade as they see fit.

- It looks huge. I don't get it how they can make a tiny cellphone (again, the RAZR and it's upcoming SLVR brother) and a tiny MP3 player (the Nano and the Shuffle), but when you throw these devices together, you end up with a product that is bigger the the stand alone components tapped together even though the most space hogging portions are combined (buttons, enclosure).

Apple gets how to design a product and Motorola, while they have had some success, really needs to let Apple take the lead on ID/Product design. Moto should focus on the wireless tech, dealing with the FCC and cell carriers and manufacturing.

Re:Not Impressed

[Majestros]

If you look deep in the specs, it uses a mini-SD card

Re:Not Impressed

[gopher_hunt]

Sounds like you can upgrade the memory:

FAQ How much flash storage will I need to store songs on my phone?
Most ROKR E1 phones will come bundled with 512 MB flash cards, which allows you to store up to 100 average-length songs. If your phone doesn't come with a 512 MB card, you will need 128MB of available flash storage space to store 25 average-length songs on your phone. To store 50 average-length songs on your phone, you will need 256MB of available flash storage.

Re:Not Impressed

[Jethro]

I have to agree - the phone is terribly unimpressive.

It does, however, use external flash, so it could potentially have, uh. I dunno, 2gb? Still not impressive.

The point to this phone isn't really that it plays MP3s. There's other phones that do that. This one syncs with iTunes (slowly over USB1.1, hello?). Frankly I'm more than capable of transferring files between devices myself - especially when there's only 512MB to fill.

So yeah, dissapointing, but hardly surprising. It /is/ a Motorola phone. I've had a few of those, and have a V600 now. They all suck majorly. The RAZR, while very very nice looking, apparently suffers form all the same problems the V600 does, not the LEAST of being that it's SLOWER THAN ALL HECK.

Re:Not Impressed

[dcam]

The capacity on the ROKR sucks. 100 songs? That's less then 512mb.

Exactly. I own a Nokia 6230. I can plug a 512 Mb card into my phone for $70 (AUS) and have a 512Mb MP3 player. What is more, my phone doesn't need to be a brick to do it.

Re:Not Impressed

[sco08y]

I wouldn't buy it.

A major, if not *the* major, reason to buy any product associated with Apple is the UI.

I've got a Moto V600. The "smart" buttons on it can change the vibrate/volume setting when you put the phone in your pocket. Why in God's name you would want to raise the volume on a flip phone when it's closed?!

Re:Not Impressed

[cakesy]

It is not huge, it is a re-branded e398, with an extra button. It does support memory cards (Transflash cards), that fit behind the battery, so you can change it if you want. I personally think it is smaller than the RAZR, but that is becase the RAZR is a big phone - even tho it is a skinny clam shell.

Re:Not Impressed

[Anonymous Coward]

Yah, but the 6230 is shite for syncing, and hangs intermittently after using it as a bluetooth modem. Nokia took a potentially great phone, and failed to support it with firmware updates. Shame on Nokia.

Re:Not Impressed

[dcam]

Well I've never has problems syncing (mind you I use some custom software to do it), and while I don't use it as a bluetooth modem, I have used it with a bluetooth hands free extensively without any trouble.

The one problem I have had is that it someones switches to using Line 2, seemingly at random. When it does it also adds the link to switch lines into the quick link list (left button).

Digital Photographers rejoice

[wabisabicanada]

I'm not sure of the speed of the flash memory in these things but how long before photographers start buying these things to strip the CF cards? As 4GB card will run you about $300-$400 while the Nano 4Gig is $249.

amazing price

[mcbevin]

This is the first Ipod where I've really been impressed by the price. 4 gigs of flash alone for $249 is amazingly cheap, and you get a slick player to boot. Of course, some slashdot members will undoubtedly miss the point and complain that the price-per-megabyte is much worse than the 20/40 gigabyte hdd-variants, but compared to other flash players its incredible.

Of course, Apples been buying the flash in bulk masses and thus getting good rates, but you have to give them credit for making a 4gb flash player in a market where 512mb-1gig were previously the tops. In a market with increasing competition Apple had to do something really special to stay on top, and it looks like they've just gone and done it.

New Nano

[jvagner]

...has a color screen, but if I'm reading the iPod spec page correctly, it doesn't support photo images. Argh!

Re:New Nano

[smcavoy]

http://www.apple.com/ipodnano/ states "Holds up to 25,000 photos"

Re:New Nano

[jvagner]

Nevermind. I'm an idiot. It does in fact support photos...

Re:New Nano

[Greedo]

I'm hoping it supports the iPod Camera Connector.

Re:New Nano

[robbieduncan]

I read that it doesn't :(

The Nano is not listed as supported on the store page for the camera connector.

DalmatiAn?

[acariquara]

That Apple, they think of everything. Now I'm going to go back to waiting for my Dalmation iPod nano tube.

It's called a Dogcow. Moof.

Re:DalmatiAn?

[shotfeel]

What, you missed the Dalmation and Flower Power iMacs?

$50 more, 2GB less

[blamanj]

OK, so the display is color. However, if I'm interested in a music player, want music. I see the nano as a step backwards because the 4GB mini was $199, so I either get half the storage for the same price, or I pay $50 more for that 4G.

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[Moofie]

Uh, so get a mini on ebay. What's the problem? Want to buy my girlfriend's? It's blue.

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[thatguywhoiam]

OK, so the display is color. However, if I'm interested in a music player, want music. I see the nano as a step backwards because the 4GB mini was $199, so I either get half the storage for the same price, or I pay $50 more for that 4G.

I agree with you, but we are possibly in the (or a) minority.

I said the same thing when the iPod mini came out: you could get another model of iPod at the time which was 10GB, and $50 more than the 4GB. I pointed this out to people. The response? Either 'but it comes in colours' or 'but its so small'. Lesson learned, people put a huge premium on the size/shape/appearance of the thing. The Shuffle underscores this.

Kinda too bad, I always liked the Mini body the best, with the metal... maybe it was deemed too heavy. So yes from a stats point of view it seems a bit daft but the market reaction sure seems to bear out Apple's thinking. I was also surprised that the battery life on the Nano is a touch less than a regular iPod... I guess a smaller battery overall.. but usually flash memory gives you a big power savings (eaten up in the Nano by that colour screen no doubt).

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[Anonymous Coward]

For a good price, yes.

Ebay and Prices are never close to Reality though.

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[PureCreditor]

> i see the nano as a step backwards because the 4GB mini was $199, so I either get half the storage for the same price

is someone forgetting the huge advantage of flash mp3 over hard drive?

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[dr.badass]

I see the nano as a step backwards because the 4GB mini was $199, so I either get half the storage for the same price, or I pay $50 more for that 4G.
 
...and for $50 more than that you can get 20GB instead of 4GB.

This is just how smart companies price products. It's like a big fat arrow pointing up the ladder. They don't really care if you think it's a good deal: they want you to spend as much as you can convince yourself to.

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[Anonymous Coward]

Big difference - Nano is flash memory. No moving parts. Better, but less capacity. All the good things about the shuffle, but more features.

I will buy one.

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[Kizeh]

I've been waiting to buy an MP3 player for quite a while now. The slick stick-format Sony player was going to be it, until I found out how badly the software sucked and how crippled it was. The Nano made me just stare in disbelief and I've got one on order. Why? Size and design. It's finally small enough to carry comfortably, has sufficient features (screen!), looks very nice (I also like the free engraving!) and to boot it should interface with my car stereo like other iPods do!
Yeah, it only has 2/4 gigs, compared to 20, but that tradeoff versus the size is a total no-brainer for me. Besides, 4 gigs of music should keep me going for a pretty darn long time. There are other brands out there that have players that are also small and have a screen, but none of them has the aesthetically pleasing design and tactile feel of the iPods.

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[iocat]

I agree. The Nano announcement, thoughtfully timed to be the day before my birthday, got me to get my girlfirend to get me one (say that five times fast). And I can get one that isn't white! I could give a shit about the capacity -- I only have 994 songs total in iTunes anyway -- but the size is what matters to me. I'm pretty sure I'll be able to fit it in my PSP case pretty easily.

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[Laxitive]

I'm one of those people. I knew very well what the costs were. I'm well aware of how much space 4GB is compared to 15 or 20GB.

Secondly, I am by no means an apple whore. The iPod mini is the only apple product I have ever bought in my entire life.

I don't give a shit, I like the mini better. It's smaller, it's cuter. I don't care if it was the same price as big ipod, I would have bought the mini. Hell, I'd probably have paid up to $50 more for the mini than for the larger ipod.

Aesthetics matter. The marginal value of an extra 10 gigs of space is not worth the marginal cost of the larger size and non-rounded edges for me (don't care about the colors really, I got a silver iPod mini).

Anyway. Now I'm wondering how much I can sell this thing for and use the cash to a nano with.

-Laxitive

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[thatguywhoiam]

Yeah, it only has 2/4 gigs, compared to 20, but that tradeoff versus the size is a total no-brainer for me. Besides, 4 gigs of music should keep me going for a pretty darn long time. There are other brands out there that have players that are also small and have a screen, but none of them has the aesthetically pleasing design and tactile feel of the iPods.

Sure, I get it. It was a no-brainer for my girlfriend also. But for me, personally, I still like the original idea of the iPod: all your music with you all the time. I have an old 10gig one (2nd gen still going strong! I got a miracle battery, I guess) and I just cannot see myself going down from 10 gigs, now that I've had it. That's the difference. I have about 20 gigs of music and I still hate having to pick and choose. I've become totally spoiled. So while I dig the small form factor, I (again personally) fall on the side of slightly bigger, way more storage. I don't consider my view to be 'correct', its just another view. I get the Smaller is Better thing. But I just have a lot of damn music I want with me.

Apple provides this, its just called a regular iPod, and that's the segment I fall into. They are smart to go with this stepped approach, roughly $50 between each model up the chain.

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[crankyspice]

Lesson learned, people put a huge premium on the size/shape/appearance of the thing. The Shuffle underscores this.

Or there may be very real, practical considerations that upset the 'bang for the buck' equation. For instance, when I bought an iPod, I wanted something I could wear exercising. The mini fit the bill, as the smallest and lightest then-available iPod. Sure, other iPods had a lot more capacity for not much more money, but they were also a lot bigger and heavier; the mini fit my intended use.

Of course, there was still room for improvement, and when the shuffle came out, I snapped one up. For a 1 hour workout, capacity isn't that big a deal; I Auto Fill it every morning and I'm good to go. The shuffle is also delightfully low maintenance, owing at least partially to the flash storage and the lack of a backlit (or any) screen; I can toss it in a corner and pick it up a week later and it still plays. My mini's battery needs to be recharged if it sits more than a day or two. So for a grab-it-and-go solution the shuffle wins hands-down; what it lacks in capacity and interface it more than gains in transparency (you forget you're wearing it, it's that light and small), lack of worry (at $79, if it gets destroyed it's not that big a deal), etc.

My mom and I both have shuffles and minis and they fit our comparable lifestyles. My brother, who doesn't exercise and wants only to be able to carry a little device for car listening, instead of the huge binders of CDs he used to truck around (especially now that he lives in the city and parks on the curb and had to carry all that weight/bulk in every night or risk losing a window -- though probably not the CD collection, unless the thieve(s) were into obscure, bad death rock and bootleg CD-Rs) has a single high-capacity iPod 4G and is exceedingly happy with it. For him, the capacity/cost ratio is the controlling factor.

Not for me. I'll be getting a nano immediately; I've been bicycle-commuting and wearing my mini on an armband; this will be a nice replacement for that, with all that I love about the shuffle and all I occasionally miss about the mini (the capacity; the shuffle's great at the gym, the mini's better trekking to/from work and on errands).

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[Moofie]

I like that idea, too. But, once your music collection exceeds the size of the largest available iPod, other criteria become important.

It's not hard to design smart playlists that keep all my favorites on an iPod, and then a good healthy leavening of stuff I haven't listened to in a while. I probably won't buy a 4gb nano, but as they increase in capacity and my 4g 40GB gets long in the tooth and short in the battery, it's going to be a mighty attractive option.

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[EggyToast]

I agree to a point. For instance, I've got a 40 gig. It's got 31 gigs of music on it. A lot of that I don't listen to, but sometimes I'm out and about and, dammit, there's that one song you just want to hear a little bit from, and it's nice to have it sitting there. So I have pretty much my entire music library on my iPod. That's why I own one.

That being said, though, I can totally see the point of someone who owns a full-capacity iPod picking up something super-small like the Shuffle or the Nano for the times where they just want a little music without the weight or size of a full iPod. I ride my bike to work pretty regularly now that the temps here have dropped, and if I want to listen to music I need to put my iPod in my bag and keep my bag on my back. Now, I take my bag to work anyway, as it usually contains a thermos and some pens and my lunch. But I could also strap a supersmall and light Nano to my arm, strap the thermos to the 'tray' on the back of the bike, and not worry about the bag -- and have immediate access to the iPod.

My "main" playlist that contains all songs I've rated between 4-5 stars is currently 3.6 gigs. It's the playlist I listen to the most, and the one that I tend to gravitate towards when I just want some music to listen to. As I'm sure you realize, that's right at the bigger Nano's specs. In other words, I could have my full iPod that I fall back on when I'm not sure, and a baby iPod that's for travel or commuting where I want to skip around a bit but want to stay within my favorite songs.

So I'm totally with you on the size thing, and I think I'll always have an iPod that can hold all of my songs. But having something that's really, really small for the times where I just want to take my "favorites" playlist around? That's mighty tempting.

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[PickyH3D]

The iPod nano solves two problems that the iPod and iPod Shuffle solve only one of each.

The iPod nano is very light (less than 1/10 lb ... 1.5 ounces = 3 / 32 lbs), which the Shuffle has, but the iPod nano also lets you see what you are selecting/doing and modify things on the fly, which the iPod solves.

I am not sure what the difference between the nano and the mini is, but I am guessing it must have been weight. My friend had an iPod Mini and his brother had an iPod, and I honestly could not feel a difference.

Basically, I resisted buying an iPod because I knew eventually I would break the little hard drive inside and I did not like the Shuffle because I could not see what I was playing (unlike my existing Shuffle size player). I only really use an MP3 player when I bike, run, or work out and I like to do them all often.

For those curious, I had this: Creative MuVo TX FM before I gave it to my brother in Iraq (USMC). It worked GREAT before then, but I never really wanted to buy another one (did not really impress me that much). It weighs about 0.4 ounces less than the iPod nano (1.13 oz versus 1.5 oz) and the maximum size is 1 GB ($150) versus the 4 GB ($250) on the iPod nano for $100 more. 2 GB iPod nano is $200. All in all, without ever having touched an iPod nano (but having touched plenty of iPod's/iPod Mini's) I would say the nano is a much better drive since it uses flash memory too. The MuVo also took AAA batteries and I remember going through 2 of them relatively quickly. I actually might have just talked myself into buying an iPod nano (the arm band is $29 though!).

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[Overly Critical Guy]

It really illustrates the value people place on things compared to the technical nerds here on Slashdot, who were all naysaying the iPod mini. To us, we see it as a spec list. "But for $50 more, you get this and this and this!" To everyone else, it's "Wow, it's so small and convenient and even comes in a color I like."

Kind of like automobiles.

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[Overly Critical Guy]

Well, how much you willing to sell it for? :)

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[WatertonMan]

My second gen is still going strong as well. After a lot of hard use. I *almost* want it to break down so I can grab a new one... (grin)

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[Laxitive]

Well, picked it up for $330 canadian or so. I'm thinking of perhaps $170 canadian as selling price. Not sure though. I have to investigate what the going rate is for a used iPod mini.

I also don't have the original headphones anymore (I think I used them too much when exercising, sweat got inside and broke them), and there are a few scratches on it.

Also, I have to see if I'll be able to cover the difference for the nano.

-Laxitive

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[thatguywhoiam]

So I'm totally with you on the size thing, and I think I'll always have an iPod that can hold all of my songs. But having something that's really, really small for the times where I just want to take my "favorites" playlist around? That's mighty tempting.

Absolutely. And everyone needs a USB thumb drive. (It is the new floppy.)

That's why I had no problem with the GF buying a Shuffle - I can steal it to go running, and keep my big fat iPod for myself.

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[thatguywhoiam]

My second gen is still going strong as well. After a lot of hard use. I *almost* want it to break down so I can grab a new one... (grin)

I know! Mine stubbornly refuses to break. These guys complaining about dud batteries, they don't know what a gift Apple has given them! If only I could justify an upgrade. Ok some of that last bit was sarcasm but you catch my meaning. The one I have has been yanked off the treadmill by my uncoordinated, flailing arms sooo many times. And I've never used a case. The thing is a brick.

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[eclectic4]

I could care less what it looks like, but with no HD to fail, a color screen, and literally be light enough to hang around me neck... I'll put down another $50.

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[eclectic4]

As seen here.

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[Overly Critical Guy]

Should try the Marketplace section at forums.macrumors.com, or ipodlounge.com. Of course, there's eBay as well, but that's a hassle. I got my used iPod photo from the ipodlounge board. Good luck!

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[motulist]

I totally agree! Why don't they just come out with a 300 cd changer attached to a battery so I can take my whole music collection with me! The answer: because a portable music player has 2 main features: music and size. Having your music be most easily carried with you is the entire point that makes these products different than something to play your music at home. It's not just about capacity, but also portability. 4 gig worth of full size ipod costs less than 4 gig worth of iPod mini which is worth less than 4 gig of the much thinner iPod nano. The smaller the package the more each gig costs. That's the way Apple and every other portable audio maker on the market sets their price. It's not rocket science.

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[el_womble]

"I still like the original idea of the iPod: all your music with you all the time". Here! here!

But now that digital music is mainstream is it still achievable? 60GB is about enough storage for 1000 albums. Thats not that much over a life time. Hell, I'm only 25 and I've got 400 (all bought and paid for, storing the jewel cases is a PITA, and I've thrown away a lot of the damaged ones) or so now. At some point in the future I may have to stand up and admit that having nearly a years worth or music, but only half a days worth of battery is a little bit of an imbalance - the cost of which is the size of the device. As small as it felt when I bought it, my 40GB 3G iPod is too big an bulky - especailly when compared to the nano.

As it is, the battery on my 3G is dying. I was just going to replace it, but to be honest, 4GB, and the ability to take slideshows to people houses (something I'm currently doing with my powerbook) is probably all I need. I've already found myself paring down the music on my iPod as, although the interface is great, having to scroll through music that I 'grew out of' 3 years ago is a PITA - I guess I'm probably not the "all your music with you all the time" kinda guy I thought I was.

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[Golias]

The Nano made me just stare in disbelief and I've got one on order. Why? Size and design. It's finally small enough to carry comfortably...

Woah woah woah!

Finally small enough to carry comfortably!?

Isn't pretty much every MP3 player on the market small enough to carry comfortably? My 20GB iPod is smaller than my wallet, and slips right into any jeans pocket. How feeble are you that such an item is a burden? Seriously.

Then again, this is Slashdot, where operating a mouse is considered a good workout. Never mind. I retract my question.

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[blamanj]

The smaller the package the more each gig costs. That's the way Apple and every other portable audio maker on the market sets their price.

Very true, and I have no problem with Apple making different products with different capacity/size/price trade-offs. The problem is, they cancelled the mini, and so I've lost my ability to make the choice that I find most appealing.

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[Ashen]

People bidding competitively for a product where the person who bids the highest gets the product isn't reality?

Fine, don't shop there. :P

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[motulist]

Well I can understand your point of view in that case, but it is something that happens in all products in all markets. If I want to buy a 2004 Ford pickup truck in 2005 because I like them better, Ford doesn't sell those models any more. My only choice is to buy it used. It's an unfortunate reality that as new models of any product come out the old models are discontinued. And if a company is making the right business decision then many more people will want to buy the new model than were looking to buy the old model, whether because some people just want the latest thing or because it's actually a better product. It just a fact of the market economy. And in the rare cases when a new product is not selling as well as the old one then occasionally the new 1 will be discontinued and the old model put back in production. But in the case of the Nano, I predict a whole lot of them flying off the shelf.

Re:$50 more, 2GB less

[PriceIke]

LOL .. wish I had mod points today. Ah well. I offer a hearty "NO SHIT!" in agreement, for whatever that's worth.

That Apple, they think of everything

[Anonymous Coward]

especially when it's something someone else already came up with. these "tubes" were the realm of third party manufacturers, which apple will now happily crush.

Waiting

[solomonrex]

Apple will probably just enter the cell phone market with an Iphone when the opportunity presents itself. I'm betting this is just a defensive move - since the relationship between Apple and Cingular/Motorola just can't be stable. Too many conflicting interests. So let Motorola handle this for now.

Apple needs to gain experience and market testing from this move, and then ditch their partners like M$ normally does. And I think if the Disney/ESPN phone service rollouts work well, Apple will have to consider an Ilife/ITunes leveraged phone service with their own hardware.

Re:Waiting

[Celsius 233]

Cingular/Motorola? Motorola makes phones for all networks.

Ability to search library from within a playlist??

[dnquark137]

When, oh when will iTunes allow me to search library from within a playlist??? Here's how this could work: from a playlist,
1. Say, Ctrl+click into search box
Do a search, screen would split into a search results pane on top, current playlist on the bottom.
2. Drag the song you want to where you want it in the playlist.

I hate having to:
1. Click "Library"
2. Click the search box
3. Drag the song to the tiny playlist name entry in the left-hand pane.
4. Click on the playlist name
5. Drag the song to where I want it in the list.

This is something everyone does quite often. Making such a common procedure take 5 steps as opposed to 2 makes no sense at all. Hello, Apple!

(And yes, I know you can open a playlist in a separate window, but it is klunky and only useful if you are building a list from scratch, not when you want to add a couple songs on the fly.)

Sync to Outlook

[Tsiangkun]

The new feature list says iTunes can now sync with outlook. I've been using iTunes for years now, and I just never had any desire to sync my jukebox with my email application.

Can someone explain what that feature is good for ?

Re:Sync to Outlook

[Anonymous Coward]

It's so that iTunes will then sync that calendar data to the iPod which can display a calendar and appointments. Before, you could only do this on a Mac (it would sync to iCal).

Re:Sync to Outlook

[rojo]

It very handy actually. I've been doing it for the past couple years. It gives me all my contacts, calendar appointments, todos, and notes in a small package. It allows you to forget the PDA and/or Laptop and save some money by having a "dumb" phone. It baically becomes a read-only PDA.

I'm going to have it with me all the time anyway, why wouldn't you want to do it. (ok security is one, but not for me)

BTW, I've been doing it with iPodsync which is more powerful and only around $12.

Imagine if you will

[CKnight]

My bluetooth enabled car not only linking to my phone to give me handsfree capabilities, but also streaming audio directly to the stereo system.

BMW has (at least) one model car that interfaces with your ipod, so the thought isn't that far fetched.

Re:Imagine if you will

[Tycho]

There is a specification for transfering stereo audio over Bluetooth. I have a Bluewave from Macally, which is a set of Bluetooth headphones with a Bluetooth transmitter for an iPod. With a headphone extension cable the transmitter could be used with anything with a headphone jack. There are several problems with the Bluewave. One is that both the transmitter and the headphones each uses two AAA batteries which isn't enough power, as the set only lasts about four hours, but that is not the fault of the Bluetooth spec. At any rate, the worst thing that happened to me was that the connection was lost and all I heard was loud static. Turning the headset and transmitter off and then back on fixed it though. On the other hand, the headset of the Bluewave has a 1/8" jack so it could be used wirelessly with a cassette adaptor in a car, but why?

It's about the flash, baby.

[gandell]

I agree in part, but the price hike is due to the flash memory vs. hdd.

I'd be willing to sacrifice a little more space to have it in flash memory.

Re:It's about the flash, baby.

[jcr]

I'd be willing to sacrifice a little more space to have it in flash memory.

Indeed. There's a lot to be said for eliminating moving parts wherever possible.

-jcr

Re:It's about the flash, baby.

[E8086]

"I'd be willing to sacrifice a little more space to have it in flash memory."

The mini is already flash, the first flash iPod, feel free to check.
It's still $50 more for 2GB less. The price increase is because it's thinner and has a color display and it's the new one. I think the mini is thin enough and 1.5" color LCDs are for camera preview screens, not looking at pictures. The battery is also less, 14 instead of 18hrs and takes 1.5hrs instead of 1hr for the 80% quick-charge. They probably picked the cheap&thinner option for the still non-easily removable battery.

Re:It's about the flash, baby.

[timster]

The iPod mini has never been flash, period, end of story, never will be. The iPod shuffle was the only flash iPod before the iPod nano.

People get confused about this because the microdrive in the mini speaks the CompactFlash protocol, but it is a spinning platter disk all the same.

Vorbis

[pete-classic]

I'm so ready to buy that iPod nano. The second it supports Vorbis.

Come on, guys. ALL my music is in Vorbis. Help me out here.

-Peter

Re:Vorbis

[tim_olsen]

encode in FLAC. then transcode to any lossy format you want on demand.

Re:Vorbis

[That's Unpossible!]

Come on, guys. ALL my music is in Vorbis. Help me out here.

No problem!

Re:Vorbis

[pete-classic]

I can convert lossy formats all day. That doesn't make it a good idea. (Or a good enough solution.)

As I said, I want to play Vorbis on the iPod.

-Peter

Re:Vorbis

[pete-classic]

I have all my stuff in FLAC too. The question is, am I going to convert it into AAC for the privilege of using Apple's hardware?

The answer is no.

I like Vorbis. I like that it is a free and open format. (I like FLAC for the same reason.) I like it because it is VBR-centric. I like it because it yields good quality on a per bit rate basis.

I don't particularly dislike AAC, but I'm not going to buy a device that doesn't support my chosen format.

Thanks for the advice, though :-)

-Peter

Re:Vorbis

[pete-classic]

How is this a troll? I really would buy one if it supported Vorbis.

-Peter

Re:Vorbis

[Anonymous Coward]

I want that tooooo

iPod Flea

[feelyoda]

wow, this is beyond parody http://gprime.net/video.php/ipodflea

Re:iPod Flea

[FooAtWFU]

Bah. Forget the iPod Flea, give me the iPodling any day of the week!

Phone storage capacity?

[xRelisH]

I wonder how much the storage capacity will be for the phone. Somewhere on the page it says "pre-upgraded to support up to 100 song", I'm not sure if I should interpret that as the song capacity.

Also, by looking at this phone, there doesn't seem to be a trackwheel or any sort of simple buttons to press.
I don't mean to sound like flamebait, but one of the major selling points for iPods was the look and the ease of use, it doesn't seem like this has either of those things.

Re:Phone storage capacity?

[omnifunctional]

Very valid concerns. I was looking forward to an iPod/Phone fusion to get a piece of equipment off my Geek Utility Belt. But storing only 100 songs and no word on the possible usefulness of the thing as a USB/Firewire Hard Drive means that this is not the super device we had all hoped for. It does however have a camera. The single most useless feature that one could put on a phone to attract masses of idiots to buy. So I am sure it will be a success in terms of sales. But in terms of design, it's a failure.

Re:Phone storage capacity?

[biglig2]

Storage is a Mini-SD card. The pre-upgraded thing is them covering their backs; whoever you buy it from will normally ship it with a 512Mb card in the box, but of course they could be cheap and put a lower size card in there.
How much can you upgrade it - I think there is a 1Gb miniSD available, not sure if I've seen a 2Gb yet. Anyone?

iPhone = iExpensive....

[Duncan3]

$250 for the phone.
$480 per YEAR for service (cheapest plan).
----------
Forget it.

I'll stick to iChat for anyone with enough money to buy a computer (everyone I would now), my 2.9c/minute calling card for people that don't, and keep on waiting for a cellphone plan that doesn't involve bending over.

RE: Duplicate song detection.

[soft_guy]

You make a very good point. I have lots of songs that would be "false duplicates" because they are alternative versions of the same song by the same artist (live album vs. studio recording, etc.)

Of course, calcing an MD5 would not find duplicates that are actually two differents rips of the same song, say at different rates or two downloads from eDonkey of the same song, etc. But it would find cases where the file got accidentally duplicated. Like if you have to move your music collection onto another disk or something.

mini, nano, nah...

[Blimundus]

I'll wait for the iPod pico!

Re:Will new Itunes allow for folder refresh

[imputor]

This bugs the hell out of me too. I end up just manually re-adding any folder I move new music into.

Why is this innovative?

[Anonymous Coward]

So they have a smaller ipod...like we didn't see that coming, I hope they can change the same thing a few more times (*ehem* Gameboy) . Oh and they changed the GUI on iTunes, HOW EXCITING!... and the ugly cell phone, I thought Sony had some of those.

Could it be true?

[Anonymous Coward]

With iTunes 5's only upgrades apparently being playlist folders, a new look, and better searching (which I do actually like), could this be called an improvement for once? Runs just as well on my machine as all the others. I'm happy with it. Hopefully we won't be disapointed with additional unwanted features hidden in the works.

Amazing

[Thomas DM]

The iPod nano looks pretty amazing. I was stunned when I saw the first picture of it. I hadn't expected such a thin player.

I think Apple has a new hit.

User Interface

[Anonymous Coward]

I like the look of the new iTunes interface, but it seems they went out of their way to make it less user-friendly. Now we've got a hairline to resize the "Sources" column (unless we use the little widget at the top) - why couldn't they keep a decent border there? The blue background makes it noticeably more difficult for me to read the text in the sources folder (though my eyesight isn't so great anymore...). I've heard some UI complaints directed towards Tiger's native apps - is this a disturbing new trend?

Re:Digital Photographers rejoice

[tomcio.s]

I'm not sure of the speed of the flash memory in these things but how long before photographers start buying these things to strip the CF cards?
One word - Never.

Why? Because any self respecting photographer will not murk around with hacks (remember, you still have to provide the interface - be it compact flash, etc. soldering required) when near 100% reliability is needed - i.e. in their work.

Most photographers I know, myself included, will spend extra cash on memory based on its perfomance and reliability. So destroying nanos is not going to be popular at all.

Just my 2 cents.

So many features...

[Red Samurai]

But not even FM radio? What's wrong with Apple? If it wasn't for the lack of this (IMO) essential feature, I'd have brought an iPod ages ago.

Re:So many features...

[Bassman59]

"But not even FM radio? What's wrong with Apple?"

Nothing's wrong with Apple. What with Clear Channel's takeover of most radio stations complete, and the non-CC stations using the same formats, there's no radio worth listening to in most cities.

At least I can get WFMU on the internet ...

You just need the right cable.

[kf6auf]

You just need to get the firewire cable and it will plug in fine since it has the same connector on the iPod nano as on any other non-shuffle iPod. It will cost like $10 at a store or a couple bucks on ebay.

It's a Motorola Phone, not an iPod.

[Zombie]

There seems to be lots of confusion about this. It's a Motorola phone. In fact, it's an exact copy of my E398, only with "sound" now as an extra hard button instead of a soft button.

Which means:

• Transflash card. It's really tiny, the size and thickness of my pinky nail
• Tri-band
• USB 2.0, and you get to choose between it exposing the flash card as a USB disk device, or a modem. Cable included
• Stereo speakers. It's really cool to hold it just about 20-30cm from your face and hear pretty good stereo sound
• Earphones
• Bluetooth, and yes, you can copy MP3's that way too
• Groovy multi-coloured lights on both sides of the phone
• Speakerphone
• Camera with a powerful led instead of a flash. Doubles as a flashlight

And the downsides

• Sluggish user interface
• Blurry 640x480 camera. Taking into account the previous point, when you press "capture," you get to wait 2 seconds for the snapshot to be taken
• Buggy. Crashes on you, especially when the battery is low
• Really bad mpeg-4 playback. The user interface stops responding when it's playing. Sound may crap out. It will only do a bitrate so low that the picture has severe compression artifacts
• Limited functionality in BlueTooth. The only decent BlueTooth phone I've ever seen is a SonyEricsson
• No voice recording (duh), but I'm under the impression that that's a hidden feature that you can enable with a hack

Of course, the specs of the ROKR may vary, and the MP3 navigation is beyond a doubt better than on the E398, but it won't be far off.

Re:It's a Motorola Phone, not an iPod.

[FreshFunk510]

I have a Motorola E398 and I have to say that I'm pretty disappointed in Apple.

Don't get me wrong. I like my phone. It's decent and gets the job done. It plays some mp3s, video and has a wee-little camera. Yippee.

But it's nothing like I expected from Apple. There's no way this is on par with the release of the iPod. The motorola interface is a bit sluggish, and the mp3 playing interface is even more so. Unless they're also putting huge flash memory in this (i haven't read the specs), the memory will be very disappointing to. And, on top of it all, it doesn't have hte lovely, clean interface that makes hte ipod so popular.

I'm hoping this is the first of many steps. Motorola needs to team up with teh design firm Apple uses to design their ipods to get a really slick look. And then they gota work on teh software AND the hardware and redo the whole damn interface so it's nice and slick like the ipod. Until then, I'd recommend holding out on ROKKR0RR.

Re:It's a Motorola Phone, not an iPod.

[sco08y]

USB 2.0 ... # Bluetooth, and yes, you can copy MP3's that way too

Odd, becuase according to the FAQ

Can I use Bluetooth or USB to transfer music to my phone?

To transfer music to your phone, you need to use iTunes 4.9 or later and the USB cable that came with your phone. The ROKR supports USB 1.1.

I was surprised to see that it only supported USB 1.1 because it's a pretty slow standard.

I would *not* want to transfer tunes via Bluetooth.

Re:It's a Motorola Phone, not an iPod.

[bar-agent]

Based on Apple's FAQ, this phone is just the first to support iTunes. They are leaving the door open for other manufacturers & phones.

Yeah, the ROKR should have been called the SUXR, but someone will make something better.

Re:It's a Motorola Phone, not an iPod.

[Demanufacture]

You also forgot to mention that the Motorola phones use a crappy proprietary OS which prevents you from using all of those great Symbian apps out there (Frozen Bubble, Oggplay, Doom, FExplorer). You mention that the user interface is sluggish, but I would go so far as to say that it's just plain awful. Think back to old-school GNOME where OK and Cancel are just randomly on the left or right. Nokia put lots of effort into GUI design and it shows.

Transflash is electrically identical to SD, just in a different form-factor.

To unlock voice recordings, use moto4lin to edit the appropriate "seem" (kind of like registry settings). See motomodders.net for more info. Hint: You have to switch to USB to Data/Fax mode for P2K stuff to work.

People have been making a lot of fuss about the "iPhone", but I think that a better option is a recent Symbian Nokia/Sony Ericsson + OggPlay.

Re: Duplicate song detection.

[rjstanford]

You make a very good point. I have lots of songs that would be "false duplicates" because they are alternative versions of the same song by the same artist (live album vs. studio recording, etc.)

Wouldn't it make sense to have already noted which version of the song each file was in, say, the track name? You know, "... (Live)" or "... (Acoustic)"? Otherwise, how do you select the one you want to hear? Sincerely curious...

DRM changes in 5.0?

[black hole sun]

Will this work with JHymn, which decrpyts the locked files and can translate them to mp3 (for those of us with mp3 players != iPod*)? Or have they chosen to make it harder for us to exercise our fair-use rights by breaking JHymn (like they did with 4.5, 4.7, etc.)?

Everyone seems to love Apple but no one talks about the dirty tricks they play on non-iPod users who still like iTunes (for example, in one release of iTunes, all files it found that were converted by JHymn were permanently locked!!)

Re:DRM changes in 5.0?

[joelsanda]

Everyone seems to love Apple but no one talks about the dirty tricks they play on non-iPod users who still like iTunes (for example, in one release of iTunes, all files it found that were converted by JHymn were permanently locked!!)

Out of curiousity: why would you iTunes, which was designed for use with an iPod, with an MP3 player not officially supported?

Isn't that like using Real Jukebox and complaining when it doesn't work with the iPod? I'd say you take your chances using any music/ jukebox software with an unsupported MP3 player.

Re:DRM changes in 5.0?

[bano]

Then they can't complain about DRM.
So they CHOOSE to buy drm'ed content then bitch that it is drm'ed.

This related to a post I made the other day.
When you are given a EULA, you have a choice, agree to it and it's terms, or use something else. That is why we have OSS slashdot!
Choose wisely...

Re:DRM changes in 5.0?

[Stargoose]

I just installed iTunes 5 and am still able to play songs that I unlocked with JHymn.

And, yes, they're songs I paid for (or, Pepsi paid for them, I suppose) and unlocked for legitimate reasons (primarily so I could listen to them at work on my Linux machine).

Rhythmbox working on it...

[VValdo]

From the Rhythmbox development list, they're working on:

• podcast support
  
• iTunes-compatible music sharing
  
• iTunes-compatible music browsing
  
• iPod support

In development, but coming soon...

W

Re:Rhythmbox working on it...

[ovideon]

We're already there, but without Rhythmbox's clunky interface. amaroK already supports podcasts and iPods, while SharpMusique supports iTMS.

Re:Rhythmbox working on it...

[plj]

Do you happen to know whether they have any plans for AirTunes support? That is my worst lock-in to OS X at the moment – I nowadays play my music almost exclusively over AirTunes at home. It would be really nice to have that functionality in Linux, too.

I know that Jon Johansen has reverse engineered the cryptography of AirTunes, and some preliminary Apple Lossless codec also exists for Linux (AirTunes stream is an encrypted Apple Lossless stream). So technically, it could be possible.

"Comes pre-upgraded....100 songs"

[panurge]

What makes it worse is that the guy who wrote that sentence probably earns five times as much as I do.

Pre-upgraded. Think about it. Double plus ungood. If you think too hard about it, your brain starts to leak out of your ears.

Re:"Comes pre-upgraded....100 songs"

[Eivind]

It's marketing-speak. It has only a superficial resemblence to english. Basically, someone knowing english will *think* they understand it, but they actually won't because a majority of the words have been changed to have a different meaning, or just as frequently, no meaning at all.

Free does not mean you'll be able to get it without giving the seller money.

Improved means "changed".

Trusted means: Includes technology to control you, because we sure as hell don't trust our customers.

Secure means: You'll only be able to do things we want you to do. You'll still get viruses though.

Sometimes marketing-speak instead resort to sentences with no actual content whatsoever, but that are designed to sound as if they're actually saying something:

Only select ingredients means yeah, we selected ingredients, i.e. we didn't put in every ingredient available in the world. (name a product that *isn't* produced from "select ingredients")

Tested by [insert-authority-here] sounds good, until you consider that they don't tell you the *result* of that test. Could be it's been tested and found horrible.

Verified by the Vitamine-institute in Switzerland problem is, no such institution exists, it's just a name we freely invented.

Now less sugar yes, less than earlier. Earlier our choclate-spread was 83% sugar, now it's only 81%. This will make a difference to someone, somewhere, we're sure.

iPhone - WAP / HTML / Javascript / ???

[Corrado]

Ok, does anyone have a clue as to whether this phone will use normal HTML or will it require brain-dead WAP formating? I have a old Danger Hiptop and I *LOVE* the fact that it has a normal HTML browser built-in. It doesn't have Javascript, but I can live with that most of the time.

I am amazed that at this day and age more phones don't use HTML browsers. They have nice large color screens and plenty of horsepower - what's the problem here!?!? Why can't they include a real browser?!?!

Future ipod requests

[darjen]

The ipod phone looks a little big. I just ditched a Treo 600 for a RAZR because it was too big. I would like to see an ipod phone the size of an ipod nano. Apple, please email me when you are done, nano@phone.com. Thanks.

may not be possible

[boomerny]

If memory serves, the iPod Mini's microdrive was not a complete unit from Hitachi, Apple purchased them without a controller chip(or something like that, I can't find the article right now). I wouldn't be surprised if the Samsung flash memory was somehow hard-linked to the Nano so it could not be pilfered.

Re:may not be possible

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah...as in chips soldered directly to the motherboard! but if someone wants to desolder a BGA, repair the ball grid, and solder it to their own home brew CF module by all means have at it!

Also...

[sootman]

Here's the latest iPod non-killer. (Story here.)

Re:Also...

[rdoger6424]

wait... They're making DRM an upside?

Re:Also...

[Thorkytel Ant-Head]

I really am amazed by the wizards at Alienware: How they packed so much ugliness into such a small device, I'll never know. Among the obvious UI deficiencies: Why take up a third of the text space on each line with "Title:" indicators? I think the listener will be able to figure that out on his own.

Re: Duplicate song detection.

[soft_guy]

I typically know which version it is by looking at what album it is on.

Plus, I mostly prefer to listen to complete albums - in the order the songs were on the record. I guess that comes from growing up listening to LPs.

It still bothers me that the "sides" of the records aren't really marked in iTunes.

Last announcement

[Anonymous Coward]

You forgot to mentions Jobs' final announcement, snuck in at the last minute, that Apple's next Powerbooks will be 6.8GHz 1TB RAM and 2TB HDD. They will be produced on Mars at a special facility owned by 4Frontiers, which abandoned it's previous faciltiy in Oregon due to a giant bulge growing underneath it. The new facility will be powered by special high density hydrogen pellets. Progress of the facility's construction can be seen via the SALT telescope. Jobs' announcement was broadcast live on NerdTV by a group of strangely creative children, and also recorded using Hitachi's new terabyte DVD recorder.

Film at 11.

Makes sense

[ShadowMarth]

Obviously phones were quickly going to replace iPods when they got enough memory, so Apple was smart to put their foot in the door.

Where's my Bluetooth iPod?

[Anonymous Coward]

The nano is all well and good, but why hasn't Apple yet rolled bluetooth audio functionality into the larger iPod (at least)? The arrival of third-party adapters and headsets (Logitech, HP, iCombi, etc) suggests that the demand certainly exists.

The best excuse I can think of is that they haven't yet designed a bluetooth headset that's as elegant as those little white earbuds. I hope it's just a matter of time though - if Apple can't design a good looking headset, who can?

jr

iTunes now supports VBR AAC too!

[Otto]

Along with everything else in QT 7, iTunes now allows you to encode AAC in VBR mode. FINALLY!

Re:iTunes now supports VBR AAC too!

[lpangelrob]

VBR? Variable bit rate? Very big rocks?

For the less informed, why is this a big deal, and when I download the new iTunes, should I enable it?

Re:iTunes now supports VBR AAC too!

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, Variable Bit Rate. This allows the encoder to take up as much bandwidth as it needs on complex sounds, and go back to the baseline bandwidth on simple passages. What you get is superior quality to all but the highest possible CBR (Constant Bit Rate) setting, with a much smaller filesize.

Re:iTunes now supports VBR AAC too!

[Otto]

VBR? Variable bit rate? Very big rocks?

No, you had it right the first time. :)

For the less informed, why is this a big deal, and when I download the new iTunes, should I enable it?

Variable Bit Rate allows the bitrate to flucuate as needed, so the less complex parts of the music use less bits, and the more complex parts use more bits. This lets the track get higher quality in the same space, or less space for the same quality (depending on your point of view).

Generally, you should always use VBR. Enabling it would be a good idea.

In this case, the iTunes VBR AAC doesn't appear to be particularly effective at reducing space considerations. No real tests on the quality improvement yet.

When will a new $299 model be available?

[Anonymous Coward]

Right now the 20 Gig version sells for this price. Does anybody know when a newer version may be introduced, with more capacity at same price or a price reduction for this one?

I'll stick with two devices, for now

[Wireless Joe]

2GB iPod Nano: $199
Motorola RAZR: $199
With this package, I get a cool phone, a cool mp3 player, good resolution on both screens, etc. for ~$400.

OR

Motorola ROCKR: $249
With this package, I get a Nokia-esque phone, low-res screen, 100 song limit, etc.

I'd rather get a cool case for my RAZR that has a little pocket that would let me slip the Nano into. Or maybe just hotglue them together. It't probably still be slimmer than the ROCKR.

Bluetooth Stereo In-Car

[Tintivilus]

It's only a matter of time until there are combination HFP/A2DP carkits. I'm not sure how it'd work with the headunit, though -- most heads today have a "mute" input that kills the audio so a carkit can run; I've never seen one with a "barge" input to force the headunit to the aux input for automatic selection. You *could* fake something out with an IR transmitter on most aftermarket heads, but that's getting into macro-remote craziness.

OT: Profit Maximization Requirement?

[rossifer]

A public traded company, must (yes must) maximize the profit of its shareholders.

False. Even without clarifying your statement to include "legal profit", other concerns can be placed above the interests of the shareholders as long as they are clearly communicated (usually in the bylaws of the corporate charter).

Just because most (almost all) companies choose to put profit above all other concerns doesn't mean that all companies do. Or should.

Regards,
Ross

ROKR vs. Treo

[guacamolefoo]

I felt a tinge of regret for a nano second after seeing the iPod phone release. What's the big deal? My Treo 650 plays video, it displays pictures, it plays mp3 files (I have a 512mb card stuffed into it and could get bigger ones pretty easily), it takes pictures (not great, just VGA, but nice for a phone), and it takes movies w/ sound, which have been a nice addition to my personal blog or my family (mostly pictures of the chilluns). Oh yeah, it also works as a PDA and a phone.

I don't see why the iPod phone is that big a deal. The Treos have been able to play mp3s for a while now. Too bad palm didn't name them r0x0rz or whatever. Apple is so about image.

Give me a Treo any day of the week.

Re:ROKR vs. Treo

[Anonymous Coward]

Agree. There are several other phones which have similar features except the iTunes compatibility. They are just trying to create fame by association. Anyway Cingular's greed and neutering of interesting features will probably kill the buzz soon enough.

Re:ROKR vs. Treo

[solive1]

Apple is so about image.

Even though Apple is about image, this particular case is about Motorola trying to associate itself with Apple via iTunes. The Motorola phone is not good looking at all, and the only advantage to it is that it is iTunes enabled. I, for one, won't be getting it anytime soon. Hopefully, the less discerning iPod/iTunes junkies will realize this as well (but don't bet on it).

Why photoshopped?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is it just me, or do the pics of the nano look photoshopped? Didn't they have a physical model for the photo shoot? Is this standard for Apples press releases?

Further from competing with the PC, and...

[HerculesMO]

Closer to becoming the 'iPod' company.

As a Mac lover, it upsets me :(

You're missing the point.

[ArbitraryConstant]

You're missing the point.

As much as we hate paying for things, there's not a whole lot we can do to avoid paying for hardware. Apple doesn't make that much money on music, but their margins on iPods are quite good. iTunes isn't so good that Linux users want it just for the sake of the software, we want official support for the hardware.

About time.

[bsdrawkcab]

Love the Nano, of course, but I won't be getting one. For me, there's one big change that matters:

I can finally group playlists (hierarchically, even)!

Strange...

[piecewise]

Introducing iTunes for your mobile phone. With iTunes on your Motorola ROKR E1, you can listen to music on your mobile phone, wherever, whenever you want. [apple.com]

Re:Strange...

[necro2607]

Yeah, it's just that... well.. http://www.google.ca/search?q=motorola+e790

In my Exp.

[DarthVain]

From someone that uses Linux and Lives in Canada, iTunes sucks. When They start being a more compatible, less intrusive (and sneaky), offer at least a compairable list of songs as the US, etc... I will then look into it agin.

I was appalled recently when I tried to go to the iTunes site and buy a freaking Gift Certificate for my Sister. Don't belive me? If you don't subscribe to iTunes, and live in Canada, just try going to their Canadian site and buying either a Gift Certificate or a Pre-Paid Card. You cannot. When Apple starts treating us (Canadians) with respect, or even legitimate customers, I will see what they have to offer.

It also boggled my mind when they try to blame poor online sales on piracy. Seeing as iTunes is the largest online provider it doesn't surprise me in the least. How about facing up to the fact that you provide crappy service, and that has more to do with online sales than piracy... ARGH it makes to mad! rant rant rant @^#%#^ BANG! (head expolding)

mapi32.dll 'ordinal not found' problems

[yivi]

For those unhappy souls as myself that were left unable to run iTunes after upgrading, and that are receiving a moronic 'cannot find ordinal 21 on mapi32.dll' or something like that, check this

Regards, I.-

iPod one step closer to it's ultimate dream....

[greythax]

...of looking exactly like a pocket protector :)

Seriously though, am I the only one that thinks the iPod series has all the style and charm of an old rotary phone?

Maybe I am just wierd.

*shhh, can you hear it? That is what little karma I have shriveling...*

Make your own ROKR

[jitterysquid]

Buy iPod nano.
Buy 5 cents of sticky velcro.
Attach to existing phone.

Pros:
Listening to tunes won't drain your phone battery.
Doesn't cost 250 USD (only 200).
Doesn't tie you to Cingular for 2 years.
About as thick as older phone models.
Holds 5 times the songs.
Can be undone at any time.

Cons:
Applying sticky substance to shiny new iPod.
Everyone will point and laugh.

Re:Make your own ROKR

[SeaFox]

Cons:
Applying sticky substance to shiny new iPod.
Everyone will point and laugh.

You forgot:

Phone will not automatically pause music when call comes in.

Not that the pros don't still far outweigh the cons.

artificial capping on rokr

[roror]

OK, you did not make the memory expandable, but, 512MB was generous. Why spoil it with artificial capping of songs to only 100?

Lame apple, lame. You are getting too greedy.

Wow, that ROKR looks like JNKR...

[otis wildflower]

.. Man, my P800 phone came with a stereo headset and mp3 capability like what, 3 years ago?

That phone looks like junk, and without AD2P it looks like redundant junk.

they'd call it....

[Anonymous Coward]

...SURROUND SOUND!!!

Thanks I'll be here all week.

MOD PARENT UP!

[srussia]

People sjould know this. iTunes 5 breaks mt-daapd (mine is running on a Linksys NSLU2). How do I revert to 4.9?

Re:MOD PARENT UP!

[uthanda]

If I had to guess on Windows (but I haven't tried it yet), you should be able to uninstall both Quicktime and iTunes and then reinstall iTunes 4.9.

For Mac, it might just be a matter of reinstalling 4.9. I've kept the last few installers for iTunes, just in case.

NanoPod: Imagine ...

[valmont]

a beowulf cluster of these !@

Flash

[nurb432]

Ok, it doesnt say its flash, but we can assume.

Does anyone know for sure?

This sucker is HUGE!

[changa_lion]

Just downloaded iTunes 5 for windows...

It is taking 36 Megs of ram just to run!

I havn't even tried loading music into it.

Windows users with HFS formatted iPods

[moosesocks]

iTunes 5 for Windws appears to break support for using mac(HFS+) formatted iPods through macDrive, and instead displays a dialogue asking if you'd like to reformat the iPod.

This is probably just an oversight on apple's part, as this functionality was never 'officially' supported, although it'd be nice if they got a patch out so I can sync my iPod both at home (Mac) and at work (PC)

Re:Windows users with HFS formatted iPods

[plj]

Why don't you just use FAT32 on both Win and OS X? AFAIK OS X works perfectly well with Windows-formatted iPods; all you lose is the fancy iPod-shaped drive icon on your OSX desktop. And then you wouldn't even need MacDrive, if that was the only reason you were using that.

Although I don't know if Apple broke that functionality with iTunes 5 too.

Re:Windows users with HFS formatted iPods

[moosesocks]

1) Lazy
2) The last time I tried this, whichever version of iTunes I was using at the time refused to mount the iPod, even though I could access its filesystem perfectly. Right now, I'm not exactly inclined to reformat the iPod just for the hell of it.

Re:???

[JonKatzIsAnIdiot]

I'm sorry, but was that a comment or a press release? It's a little hard to judge from here.

Not that I'd be one to accuse the indefectible Apple of astroturfing, no, nothing like that.

Re:Digital Photographers rejoice

[b0bby]

4GB flash cards are more like $200, 2GB $100; 4GB Microdrives can be had for $100 also. (US prices)

Re: Duplicate song detection.

[Nasarius]

Of course, calcing an MD5 would not find duplicates that are actually two differents rips of the same song,

That's why we have TRM fingerprints (ie, the technology that MusicBrainz uses) to identify the same song. However, you do get false collisions on a "remastered" album if you have the original too.

Dude...

[cnerd2025]

iPod nano: iPod mini meets Motorola Razr

nano battery?

[aarku]

So, 14 hours of music playback time... wonderful! Now how do I replace the battery when it gets old? I'm sick of this behavior from iPod products.

Re:nano battery?

[jaypaulw]

I don't think they thought the battery part through or made any internal

cost/benefit/product/marketing/witchcraft/budget/p enetration/field/feasability/user/political

  studies related to your point.

You ought to email apple and let them know this is an issue for you.

Re:nano battery?

[jaypaulw]

I think it's rechargeable though, so you've got that going for you.

question

[101percent]

does ipod nano work with firewire or is it usb only?

new iTunes look

[stew-a-cide]

How hard is it for Apple to give iTunes anti-aliased corners like every single other window in OSX? As if the old jaggies weren't bad enough, now they've just given up and squared them off! (not consistent with any other style in OSX, including the new plastic-look Mail.app). Even something as custom and cross-platform as RealPlayer manages it.

In general I understand Apple motivation for adding this new style - brushed metal is getting overplayed, and for good reason generally since it allows custom controls and layouts to be integrated in a nicer way than with aqua - but I think it's really badly done. The only nicely done plastic app I've seen so far is Camino (Mail.app and this new iTunes are travesties)...

Re:new iTunes look

[uiucmatse]

Yeah, the corners are very strange, as they're not rounded at all.

If you look closely, say, by turning on Zoom in the Universal Access System Preference, the corners don't appear to be curved. They're at a 45-degree angle.

They look like this:

Top of window
-----
          \ -corner
          |
          | --side of window
          |

Very strange. I've never seen a window like that on a Mac. And it's a very ugly corner; you can see the individual three pixels stair-stepping down.

Does anybody thinkg this looks a lot more like a Windows Vista window?

But thank god, it's not brushed metal anymore. I'll take just about anything instead of that crap.

Oh, and I need more character to balance out my pitiful ASCII art. Anyway, another site just pointed out it looks a lot like the old SoundJam application upon which iTunes is based. I don't think so for the window itself, but when you look at the display, wow, it does.

Re:new iTunes look

[Roguelazer]

That would require them to rewrite iTunes as a Cocoa app, no?

Re:new iTunes look

[stew-a-cide]

Quicktime is Cocoa if I'm not mistaken. So is the Finder itself. Both have all the nice Quartz effects. Cocoa apps have access to all the US niceties that Cocoa apps do if done right.

I think iTunes is so weird because they re-implimented the OSX look for the Windows version in custom (hacked-on) ways, and haven't bothered to make a unique, native front-end for OSX.

Re:new iTunes look

[stew-a-cide]

Carbon-to-Cocoa-to-Carbon as appropriate ;)

Always a deal-killer.

[Markus Registrada]

Each new iPod makes me feel like waiting for the next one. 4G of solid-state storage for $250 is pretty good, and it's nice to have a sharp color display this time, but on this one they took away the IEEE1394 and USB2 connectors. I can't find anything to suggest how big or heavy the "dock" is, or even what it uses for power. (The link on Apple's nano page points to the wrong dock, BTW; you have to use "search" to find the right one.)

I won't spend $250 just to move music; I want to put be able to put *anything* on it. If that means carrying the dock around, I want to know how big and heavy it is; but they keep that a secret. Furthermore, there's no technical reason this thing couldn't be an IEEE1394 host, and let me transfer files to another another one, or to some other IEEE1394 device.

And, of course, no Ogg (again!).

Each of these is a deal-breaker -- at least until Linux is ported...

Re:Always a deal-killer.

[Anonymous Coward]

If I understand you correctly, you seem to think that you need the dock in order to charge/transfer data on an iPod. The dock is totally optional (and not intended to be carried around, to be sure). It's just a nice thing on your desk to rest your iPod on when you aren't carrying it around. But you can hook the USB cable directly to the iPod itself. The dock doesn't even come with the iPod I bought a month ago.

Also, you can transfer any data to and from the iPod since the original, as far as I know.

No ogg though, but... come on, get real.

Re:Always a deal-killer.

[jcr]

And, of course, no Ogg (again!).

And of course, there's still no point to including Ogg Vorbis in the iPod. The number of additional sales that Apple would get from people who are emotionally committed to a particular file format isn't even a rounding error in a monthly sales report.

-jcr

Re:Always a deal-killer.

[Markus Registrada]

The dock is totally optional

That's not what it says. It says it only has a "dock connector", and the dock is included.

I'm guessing the iPod you bought last month isn't a nano.

And, if you can transfer files directly between iPods without booting Linux on one of 'em, you must be the only one. The capability wouldn't cost them anything to provide, so it's only stubbornness keeping the feature out.

Likewise, Ogg support doesn't cost anything to provide. That's what all my music is encoded in, at 240 kbps. I should re-encode it all just so I can listen to it on an iPod, and I have to do it only because they were too stubborn and arrogant to support Ogg?

I'll wait and see about a Linux port.

Re:Always a deal-killer.

[DiscoOnTheSide]

1) Dock Connector: That's what Apple calls it, it's really just power, data and audio connections put into one plug (the connector also has a line-out ability) It's a multifunction port and when Apple first put it in iPods, the only thing out there for it was the DOCK. So that's what they called it but now you can hook up the camera connector, FM transmitters, all sorts of stuff. If you've bothered to ever use an iPod you'd know the cable that comes with it has USB or Firewire on one end, and the dock connector on the other end for the iPod OR Dock (the Dock is pretty much just a nice passthru that stands the iPod up)

2) Go into iTunes, then iPod options. Click "Enable Drive Usage" wow... my iPod is now a drive under Windows AND Mac, and I've seen it done with Linux. Unless you're touching the files needed for the music player, the iPod is simply a USB hard drive. Shut up troll.

3) And why should they bend over backwards for your measly $300 for their iPod when you're too stubborn and arrogant to support a popular standard. I don't bitch at Sony about where my copy of Sin City on BetaMax is.

Wait and see all you want. You won't buy one. People just like to bitch about something they can't have or can't afford.

Re:Always a deal-killer.

[Markus Registrada]

This seems helpful, at first: "Dock Connector: ... If you've bothered to ever use an iPod you'd know the cable that comes with it has USB or Firewire on one end, and the dock connector on the other end..."

Let me see if I understand. Only people who already have an iPod should expect to understand the web page offering to sell them? If I already had one, why in the world would I want to buy another? (Not to transfer files between, evidently.)

"Shut up troll ... you're too stubborn and arrogant to support a popular standard ... I don't bitch at Sony ... People just like to bitch ... "

The reply started out so helpfully ... I guess it's not just Apple. I wonder which got it from whom. I always thought if you paid for something, you had a right to look into what you were getting. I thought it reasonable to check if useful features missing from previous models, and that wouldn't cost anything to add, might show up in a later model.

Maybe I'm just not worthy to host the sublimity that is iPod during its short visit to Earth. Or maybe I'll make a donation to BJ at http://ipodlinux.org/, wait a bit, and see what happens.

Re:Always a deal-killer.

[ElectroBot]

Get a pocketdock from http://www.sendstation.com/. They've got one that has USB 2.0 (Female connector type B) and Firewire 400 (Female connector). Then get retractable USB 2.0 and Firewire cables and you're set to plugin anywhere where there's a USB 1.1, 2.0 or Firewire connection. BTW Remember to reformat your iPod to FAT32 for Windows/Linux/etc. compatibility using the Windows XP iPod Firmware Updater.

Re:Always a deal-killer.

[radish]

And of course, there's still no point to including Ogg Vorbis in the iPod. The number of additional sales that Apple would get from people who are emotionally committed to a particular file format isn't even a rounding error in a monthly sales report.

Fine by me. There are lots of players out there who do see fit to cater to my needs.

Re:Always a deal-killer.

[Anonymous Coward]

so stfu and go buy their products

Re:Always a deal-killer.

[Zhe Mappel]

Wait and see all you want. You won't buy one. People just like to bitch about something they can't have or can't afford.
--
Viva La Revolucion! Buy a Mac!

The irony obviously eludes you, but sneering at someone's economic condition kind of kicks you out of the Revolutionaries' Club (while counterproductively lending Macs and Mac users a bad reputation of elitism, to boot). The phrase you want is something more like: "Viva La Oligarquía!"

Re:Always a deal-killer.

[Zathrus]

I always thought if you paid for something, you had a right to look into what you were getting

You do. You didn't.

I thought it reasonable to check if useful features missing from previous models, and that wouldn't cost anything to add, might show up in a later model.

You still haven't pointed out any. No iPod has ever had a USB connector. The first generation may have had a Firewire connector, but the 2nd-4th gens did not -- they all had the dock connector on the bottom. Up to 4G they shipped w/ a dock-firewire connector, starting with 4G they changed to a dock-usb connector. So you can use any iPod that has a dock connector (all but 1G iPods and iPod Shuffles) with USB or Firewire as long as you have the appropriate connector.

And you claim that you couldn't find the weight of the dock, but you didn't even bother searching. Google for "ipod dock weight" provides several links (hint -- it's right about 0.6 lbs).

Your whine about file transfer just shows that you didn't even bother doing the slightest bit of research on it. And you're surprised that you got flamed?

And no, there's no Ogg support. There probably will never be any. There's absolutely no incentive for Apple to bother with it.

Re:Always a deal-killer.

[Jussi K. Kojootti]

I originally chose my preferred file format based on quality and freeness and support. I'm still prepared to change to another format, based on those same properties. You may call that being emotionally committed to a file format if you want to -- it does sound a little degrading, so I'd prefer you didn't.

My choice means that the ipod product line hasn't got anything to offer me at the moment. That could mean I'm part of a minuscule market segment Apple is not interested in, but I'm not sure about it: There are companies producing ogg enabled devices, so there seems to be a market for them, right? Without knowing anything about ipod the platform and the difficulty of development on it, I can't really speculate on the costs of adding ogg support to ipod either... But maybe you have better information.

Re:Always a deal-killer.

[2nd Post!]

Man, people are giving you a hard time for being ignorant. If you go into any CompUSA or Apple Store you'll see what a dock is and how it works. If it isn't a 1394 host, it's because Apple didn't want to QA and support any issues when someone connects their camcorder to upload DV and find that the entire iPod is dead.

Re:Always a deal-killer.

[noewun]

The first generation may have had a Firewire connector, but the 2nd-4th gens did not. . .

For the record, the 2G iPods have a Firewire connector, cause I definitely didn't solder one onto my 2G 10 gig.

As an aside, I think Apple will add Ogg support when more than the nine people who bitch about its absence on Slashdot use it.

Re:Always a deal-killer.

[Anonymous Coward]

No iPod has ever had a USB connector.

Sorry for the nitpicking, but the iPod Shuffle actually ONLY has a USB connector. Of course, you meant "No iPod with a screen has ever had a USB connector".

Re:Always a deal-killer.

[AHumbleOpinion]

Fine by me. There are lots of players out there who do see fit to cater to my needs.

Actually they seem to be going out of business doing so.

"D&M Holdings will exit the mass-market portable digital audio player business, currently marketed under the Rio brand, by Sept. 30."
http://www.macsimumnews.com/index.php/archive/6963 /

Re:Always a deal-killer.

[Markus Registrada]

As far as I know, you still can't plug two stock iPods together and transfer files & tracks. Is there an aftermarket gadget to trick them? If it sells, that's proof (if it were needed) that it's useful.

It would cost Apple nothing at all to build it in, and it would add at least twice as much value as the gross sales of that gadget. It might be that providing Ogg support, besides, would add relatively little measurable market value to the product. However, it is certain that it would cost them nothing -- either in direct per-unit cost, or even in such intangibles as interface complexity.

How many people are working on alternative firmware, or downloading it? Thousands, certainly. Most of them wouldn't bother if the features they wanted were already there. For each person who downloads such an image, many more might, but for fear, or difficulty, or just not knowing it's there. For each one of them -- who bought despite missing one or more features -- how many didn't buy because of them? Certainly many more.

When a company prefers excuses for leaving out features over quietly adding them, that tells us a lot about the company's attitude toward potential customers. When its existing customers deride, in crudely insulting terms, anybody who asks about missing features or missing information, that tells us volumes more about them. Are they people I would want to seem to be associated with? It's nice enough hardware, but a distinctly toxic milieu.

It is a fact that there's no way to tell from the Apple web site what's up with the dock connector. It is a fact that there's no direct way to tell from their web site whether the dock is needed to connect, or even how heavy the dock is. (There's no reason to think that a Google search would tell anything about a completely new product; the nano dock isn't the same as the mini's.) The most direct interpretation of what little it does say is misleading. I suppose it could be true that new iPods are only meant for people who already bought the old one, or who are inclined to sit down, shut up, and take what they get and like it, but I didn't find either spelled out on the site.

It's nice hardware at a not unreasonable price, and we have proof that it can be programmed to do useful things. If I had no kids, I might put in the effort to help out, myself. As it is, I have to wait and see.

(My experience is that anything not distinctly fawning toward Apple gets moderated to oblivion. I wonder if we will be permitted to discuss this topic.)

Re:Always a deal-killer.

[Markus Registrada]

Does "emotional commitment" mean "reluctance to spend tens of hours re-encoding my music in a format for which I have no good encoder"? Does "emotional commitment" mean wanting to carry my music in a format that will always be decodeable, no matter what some company decides I should be able to do? Or both?

It would take one Apple engineer about the same time to add Ogg support (for everybody) as for me to re-encode my music in some proprietary, patent-encumbered, and probably inferior format.

Actually, the product would be substantially better if, instead of built-in flash memory, it just had a compactflash slot. Not this year, it seems. Still waiting for the sweet spot.

Sneak peak of suxxess0r!

[DysenteryInTheRanks]

I have a friend who works for a big marketing firm and got a sneak peak at the marketing materials for the successor to the iPod nano!!

They just keep making em SMALLER!

Take everything you love about iPod and shrink it. Now shrink it again. Now shrink it again. Now put it in your ass.

With 10GB (2,500 songs) and 20GB (5,000 songs) models starting at $187, the pencil-thin iPod Smuggle packs the entire iPod experience into, well, a place you really shouldn't put it. So small, it will take your music places federal authorities never dreamed of.

(iPod Smuggle may not be returned for cash or store credit.)

That Steve Jobs is really hungry for market share.

Can You Put People on Hold with Your Music?

[Anonymous Coward]

I just always wanted to do that.

60+ MB !!

[Anonymous Coward]

install size, (32mb download size) for a f**king media player ?
LOL as it goes in the trashbin

i thought VLC was bloated, seems Apple are really innovating in the bloat department

I hate that phone

[Anonymous Coward]

Just in from S. Ballmer's office: I hate that phone, fucking Steve Jobs is a fucking pussy. I'm going to fucking bury that guy, I have done it before, and I will do it again. I'm going to fucking kill Apple. (Throw chair across the room)

HAHAHAHAHA (Falls over)

[Xystance]

You know, that's always how I pronounced it, and I thought of Al Roker, but more than anything... I thought of Family Guy's Quahog television station's weather man... IT GONNA RAIN!

Re:HAHAHAHAHA (Falls over)

[corrosive_nf]

Tom: And also I came to check my email. I cant get it to work at home.
Weather Guy: DID YOU CHECK YOUR TCP/IP SETTINGS?
Tom: Yes, yes I did.
Weather: YOU WANT THIS PUPPY?
Tom: No. No I don't

Headphone jack on the bottom???

[Anonymous Coward]

Did anyone else notice the fundemental problem of having the headphone jack on the bottom of the player? Sure, it works fine for their lanyard headphones, but for pocket use, its a serious problem. That said, I think the black is awesome...I'm still using my second-gen 10GB...

That explains the Paris Keynote Cancellation

[Anonymous Coward]

Steve's draft script for the Paris Apple Expo Keynote:

Errm, Hi, well you probably read it all a couple of weeks back anyways...

Just one more thing! ... only kidding. Nothing to see here, move along now.

itunes 5 Windows setup != working!!!

[kinglink]

It doesn't work, it doesn't appear to actually install Quick time, and by that it doesn't allow Itunes 5 to work (it requires QT7, which only comes in that package.)

This is about the level of Microsoft's competence. Anyone have a work around to get QT7 so I can try out the new design?

Re:itunes 5 Windows setup != working!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Funny, between my home and office I installed it on three Macs and three Windows XP machines (two home-built and one Dell) with no problems whatsoever.

"It works sometimes, but not all the time." That, friends, is why people who think running Mac OS X on a generic x86 PC will be just as flawless an experience as running it on genuine Apple hardware are stupid. No two installations of Windows, even on completely identical Dell PCs that came off the assembly line one right behind the other, behave exactly the same forever-- so your chances of getting consistent, reliable operation from Windows when your computer is just one of the infinite combinations of mobos, video cards, sound cards, etc, are slim to none.

Once you stir a Microsoft product into the pot, expect the unexpected. No matter how good Apple's stuff is, it can't cancel out the inherent crappiness of Windows.

Re:itunes 5 Windows setup != working!!!

[kinglink]

Well then you know what? that's Apple's fault. They chose to use the Window Installer. Many companies build their own, use the old VB installer, or anything. Apple has a large Team, why don't they design their own installer.

There is other installers then windows installer. Most of them work decently. There's also better ways to do this. And writing your own installer isn't hard for a group like Apple.

The problem is actually QT 7, I installed the stand alone, and that's giving errors. here's the problem... why isn't the Itunes and QT installer together giving errors when QT 7 alone can tell the errors. That's a big mistake.

And why does ITunes 5 not link immediatly with Itunes 4 on a neighboring computer at work as well as removing his whole play list?

If apple wasn't to dominate markets, it's gotta play the field. It wants to win points, not just blame their failings on Microsoft, but succeed and prove them to build the Elite work. I admire Apple's work towards the highest quality stuff, but this just proves the reason they are great is because they don't allow anyone to get into their works to mess it up.

That's fine but let's be honest, Quality is all good, but variety is the spice of life. That's why I rather surf the internet on a computer, rather then a console.

looks like mail.app?

[wardk]

huh?

the screen shot that link followed is the same iTunes interface that's been in place since day one.

now in the shot, the "browser" frame is turned off. maybe that's what made this look so "mailish"?

what's next in this sequence...

[jmil]

what's next in this sequence: mini, nano, ...

I can't wait for iPod Pico and iPod Femto.

Marketing: "Infinitely Small"

Bill Gates was Right...

[Anonymous Coward]

portable audio is moving towards the phone.

Harry Potter

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple released a Harry Potter branded iPod as well.

This may not be worth mentioning, but hey, the U2 branded iPod was posted.

Obligatory

[dantheman82]

Still No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.

And, one other precious gem from the original...

Raise your hand if you have iTunes...

Raise your hand if you have a FireWire port ...

Raise your hand if you have both ...

Raise your hand if you have $400 to spend on a cute Apple device ...

There is Apple's market. Pretty slim, eh? I don't see many sales in the future of iPod.

~LoudMusic

Nano? Sorry, that name's already taken.

[Anonymous Coward]

What's next, the Ipod Vision?

Apple isn't content with just stealing Creative's UI, now they're directly ripping off the names of their players.

Absolutely deplorable. I guess if playing dirty is what it takes, they're gonna do it. What, is this retaliation for Creative's patent that was approved a few weeks ago?

Maybe the Ipod Nano will come with a virus on it.

Ok, have I exhausted the joke resevoir yet?

Re:Digital Photographers rejoice

[sean23007]

But a hack wouldn't be required if Apple and the camera companies collaborated on an iPod-Camera interface. What I mean is, you have your iPod in your pocket, and a cable between it and your digital camera. Every picture you take is saved to your iPod, and automatically downloaded to your computer when you plug it in.

Would that get you and other photographers into the iPod-drive-as-camera-storage thing?

Sony Style

[Anonymous Coward]

It's actually a very asian way to update products. You start with generation 1 of a product, and with each successive generation you shrink, lighten, enhance, improve, and innovate, not necessarily in that order or all in a particular generation.

This is Sony's design process:

1. Get something cool out the door. (ie. MiniDisc)
2. Approximate the look of the media (notice 2nd gen (portable) MD players had windows/embellishments that resembled the MD's window.)
3. Approximate the size of the media (ludicrously tiny MD players, and they record too.)

It all works with a bigger sunrise-sunset design metaphor, (but that deals with the product's look.) You can read more about it in Paul Kunkel's book Digital Dreams: The Work of the Sony Design Center. (Kunkel also wrote the excellent Appledesign: The Work of the Apple Industrial Design Group.)

Re:Sony Style

[Winterblink]

I've owned a few MD units, I have to say those are some of the slickest portable media devices I've owned. Only the iPod was able to make me break away from it, and then only grudgingly because I miss the ability to record from practically any audio source.

At one point I had the opportunity to disassemble one of them, the circuitry and mechanisms inside those things are, as you say, ludicrously tiny.

I'll definitely make a point to keep an eye out for those books. Sound like they might be an interesting read. :)

Total Anti-iClimax

[l0ungeb0y]

For months I've been eagerly anticipating the Apple iTunes phone. iFigured (like many I'm sure) Apple would have heavy design influence over the phones look and feel.

iThought wrong.
I see the iPhone on the Apple site and iFeel totally iUnderwhelmed.

Quite literally my first iThought was, "that's it?"

Just another phone from Motorola except that it happens to have a mini iTunes interface.

The Nano on the otherhand ... now that thing is seriously nice.
I already have a 60Gb iPod, but I think I might just get a Nano as well. I mean, it has the built in reality distortion field and everything!

Too bad Apple could be bothered with letting Motorola in on any of their Patented "Jobsian Mechanism for the Distortion of Reality" IP.

Cuz that phone is utterly pedestrian, way to go Motorola -- get handed a great opportunity to carve up some market niche and you go and deliver a phone that looks like the one 1999's been calling asking about.

But who knows, I might head on over to Cingular and check it out. Since I might be more impressed once it's actually in my grubby lil iHands.

In for a penny, in for a pound

[beetle496]

Apple is quite clever with their pricing. $100 to start, then every $50 after that doubles the storage (or even better). The last upgrade is $100, but then you go from 20GB to 60. At that point, another $100 would buy you a Mac Mini. Another $100 after that gets you a Mini with an iPod Shuffle, and you are back where you started!

what I want in my next cell phone..

[gonar]

I don't want to haul around a phone, MP3 player, camera, PDA, notebook etc.

what I want is one device, the size of my cell phone that combines all the
features of these devices.

what I want in this device:
size of my current cellphone (Audiovox cdm-9900)
cell phone features at least as good as current + mp3 ringtones
2MP 3x optical zoom camera w/ VGA/30fps movie mode
industry standard flash memory card/data in industry standard storage format
read and write files on flash card using standard tools in windows,
linux and macos
play MP3 and mpeg/mp4/divx (at VGA/30fps when driving remote display)
(limitation to proprietary formats unacceptable, but support for proprietary
formats in addition to standard formats desirable)
PDA capabilities equal to palm pilot/zaurus/WINCE (assume primary data
input by keyboard in desktop mode)
wireless keyboard/mouse/display/headphone/microphone/networ king support

minimum 48 hours standby battery life/4 hours active use time (remote
desktop/mobile mode)

USB master/slave capability using standard cables

I want to be able to access _all_ data on this device from a usb/wireless
connected system as if I were looking at a hard drive/network drive

beyond solitaire/free cell/tetris/minesweeper level gaming, I dont care
about gaming performance.

graphics performance equivalent to first gen radeon is sufficient.

I expect that there are 3 primary usage modes: mobile, remote and primary
desktop

mobile usage model:
        in this mode, this should operate like a cell phone, MP3 player or camera
like a full function single purpose device for each of these uses. As a PDA
it would primarily be used for data retrieval as opposed to input, for anything
beyond trivial data input (on the level of what you would input into a cell
phone) it is ok to assume a wireless or USB keyboard will be used (i.e.
handwriting recognition not required/useful) the form factor of the divice
should not be comprimized in the false belief that a big display is needed.
the display on my cdm-9900 is more than sufficient.

with a secondary battery pack and set of display glasses, it should be possible
to watch two complete feature length VGA/30fps movies in this mode (think
flying Boston to LA)

remote desktop usage model:
        in this mode, the user is primarily expecting functionality equivalent to
a high end PDA/ultra portable laptop. the keyboard would probably be a
wireless thumbboard or a rollup usb keyboard, the display would preferrably be
a wireless head mounted display (HUD-glasses). external networking
capabilities might be non-existant, or limited to analog cell phone bandwidth,
so internal processing capabilities must be able to fulfill the minimums for
this kind of use.

primary desktop usage model:
        I want to just carry the device in my pocket, when I get to work, drop it
on my desk, have it recognize my keyboard, display and mouse and start driving
them. I want to be able to do everything I do on my desktop computer in this
mode. I expect that this will require remote processing to provide the
CPU horsepower necessary, but the UI will be displayed and driven here
(X11 terminal style, but once I've done initial setup, I don't want to have to
think about it. this should work from the other side of the world).

        I expect it needs to be on the charger for best performance in this
mode

what's missing to accomplish this:

        the biggest piece of missing technology for this application is wireless
capable monitors and really useable display glasses. by useable, I mean glasses
that work like the glasses I wear today, but also can be used as a computer
display. other than the weight issue and some manufacturing issues, the tech
is here today with an LCD film overlay laminated onto the glasses lens or a
projector/refractor model.

Re:what I want in my next cell phone..

[Roguelazer]

What I want in my next cell phone:

A device that is a cell phone and only a cell phone. No mp3 player. No camera. No video playing. No web browsing. Other devices do those better- 'tis better to have many small, great devices than one large, batteryless, shitty one. SMS is okay, because that's a cell phone feature. If given the choice between a large, readable black and white screen (Visor Edge quality) and a tiny, ugly, battery-draining color screen, give me the color screen. Give me a long-lasting battery. Give me Bluetooth2 to connect it to other devices that do other things (like browse the web and take pictures, and use the phone as a modem). And make it look cool.

Thanks.

Re:what I want in my next cell phone..

[spin2cool]

I'd like all of that too. And a pony, while you're at it.

Re:what I want in my next cell phone..

[Roguelazer]

Give me the black and white screen, that is. Damned typos.

Re:what I want in my next cell phone..

[OctoberSky]

"What I want in my next cell phone"

Reception would be nice. But I guess listening to my mp3 collection while waiting for a signal is also pretty neat.

Re:what I want in my next cell phone..

[Kevin Stevens]

I agree with you on some levels, but I feel that current phones are really just stepping stones allowing development of the technology that will allow you to have a good all in one device. I think we are still 5-10 years off from this "good" device, but considering moore's law and the ever increasing densities of removable storage, and we will be there soon. The big laggards seem to be battery capacity and wireless speeds. And of course there will probably always be tradeoffs between phone size (small = optimal) and display size (large = optimal). I am pretty sure most consumers would trade off size for the ability to surf the web easily and cheaply, and also be able to play decent games.

Then again, why phone manufacturers don't have different lines of phones to cater to those who just want to make friggen calls on their phones and those who want the kitchen sink thrown in is a good question. I get the feeling that the phone companies want to throw all the goodies down our throat so that we get used to them and will eventually cough up money every time we want to use every little thing on our phone.

Re:what I want in my next cell phone..

[jumpingfred]

You do know that many such phones exist now. So you are sitting in good plane phone gravy goodness.

Re:what I want in my next cell phone..

[Shawn Parr]

Hm, while you complain about getting a phone like this, I actually went out and found one.

While in the minority, especially as far as advertising goes, these things still do exist.

I pay for things

[Anonymous Coward]

You should too.

there's no CF card in there.

[YesIAmAScript]

A CF card would only fit in there in one direction, and there would be no room for the mobo below or above it, the top case above it, and only barely for the metal back below it. And you'd have no room left for the battery.

It is only just over twice the size of a CF card.

Are you sure you have a real grasp of how small this thing is?

Yellow Box

[itomato]

What if iTunes 5 is on an encapsulated runtime?

I assumed all the other versions were kind of doing that.

Re:Yellow Box

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, an encapsulated Carbon runtime, like QuickTime. Some 3rd parties have used it to make experimental ports of Mac software to Windows.

(Py|Sharp)Musique

[Noksagt]

I would love to buy my music off the iTunes Music Store

DVD-John to the rescue.

UNIX for a good reason.

[itomato]

All it takes is an Apple Official lib_ipod_io.so

Closed, supported, portable. Wrap any ol' thing around it, just don't ask them to replace it when you 'cat /dev/nastybits' into the iPod control routine.

Weak.

[yardbird]

I'm holding out for the Femto.

iPod Femto: the first MP3 player to be injected directly into your bloodstream!

They didn't call it an iPhone...

[doodlelogic]

...because they want to use that name later, if they make their own, prettier one, or if Motorola leave them...

Re: Duplicate song detection.

[Thorkytel Ant-Head]

I wouldn't call that a false collision; if I have two versions of the same song, one remastered and one not, then I certainly do want them marked as duplicates, so I can take the earlier version off.

Mac Nano Next?

[Kelson]

First Apple released the iPod, then the iPod Mini. Now there's the iPod Nano.

And last year, Apple introduced the Mac Mini.

<joke>Does this mean we should expect the Mac Nano sometime next year?</joke>

Re:Mac Nano Next?

[Kjella]

Well, the Mac mini does have a mini-itx mobo, they could make a nano-itx one and the name would fit. But as long as people need to use CD/DVD slots, it doesn't get any smaller :) Except perhaps as a really thin G5-a-like.

Kjella

Re:Mac Nano Next?

[Distinguished Hero]

Only if you think a Mac Shuffle will be released before it.

Re:Mac Nano Next?

[Anonymous Coward]

No. Here's why.

Release Dates:
          -iPod:10/2001
            (2 yrs, 3 mos. to)
          -iPod Mini: 1/2004
            (1 yr. 9 mos. to)
          -iPod Nano: 9/2005

Applying ratios to the Mac timeline, we have:

Release Dates:
          -Mac:1/1984
            (21 yrs. 6 mos. to)
          -Mac Mini: 7/2005
and
            (roughly 16 yrs. 9 mos. to)
          -Mac Nano: c. 4/2022

So we're looking at a Mac Nano release in or around April 2022.

(Disclaimer: Not all timespans may be exactly accurate, but at least we have a good idea now.)

Re:Mac Nano Next?

[narcc]

Mac Nano? Yeah, I'd buy that... or the Newton Shuffle...

Parental controls removes podcasts from sources

[__aadkms7016]

iTunes 5 lets you remove Podcasts from the list of sources now, although you need to do so via the Parental Controls menu and not the General menu.

but ....

[daevux]

.... but does the phone support music on hold? :)

Install iTunes 5, repurchase Quicktime Pro?

[E5Qk6XRwBm]

I went to install iTunes 5, and it told me I would need to purchase a new key in order for Quicktime Pro to work. I don't like that! Isn't there a way around?
That's like buying a new dryer, and then having to buy a new washer just because your wet clothes aren't formatted properly. Or something.

Re:Install iTunes 5, repurchase Quicktime Pro?

[bano]

Same thing as owning QTP6 then upgrading to Tiger.
You are required to use the new version, and thus buy a new key. :(
I wish upgrades were free.

Re:Install iTunes 5, repurchase Quicktime Pro?

[Anonymous Coward]

QT7 and QT6 Pro can coexist, although the normal "upgrade" installation steps on QT6. Also, there are various free third-party applications that provide the "pro" features of Movie Player 7.

Re:???

[Moofie]

Right, because anybody who has a positive impression of this thing must be an Apple shill. No way they could actually think it's a neat piece of hardware, huh?

Finally! Disable podcasts...

[mcguirez]

A feature I've been looking for (no use for podcasts) - but earlier iTunes versions wouldn't allow you to hide the podcasts icon on the left. Thought it was funny because you can disable other entries you don't use.

Now you can go to "Parental Control" on preferences and disable it (as well as music store and shared music)

Search by genre?

[FresnonserF]

I'm frustrated that iTunes 5 does not allow you to search by genre in the new search bar. You have to use the cumbersome "browse" window instead.

iTunes 5: Ugly and Buggy

[John Nowak]

Ugly: http://johnnowak.com/temp/uglyitunes.png After first searching: http://johnnowak.com/temp/search1.png Now I click "All" and then reselect "Music": http://johnnowak.com/temp/search2.png Oh, a new search bar. Out of nowhere. That don't fit on my screen. Thanks. Apple: PLEASE GET IT TOGETHER.

My first 5 minutes with the new iTunes.

[Anonymous Coward]

My initial thoughts about iTunes 5 for Windows:

(1) Something in the installer crashed trying to install a Quicktime driver, but then the iTunes setup finished anyway.
* Quicktime is installing a driver?
* Would it have been difficult for them to QA the installer before releasing it?

(2) Fugly interface.
* The new square playback window + seek bar is the only part that improved.
* The borderless window is the equivalent of a fat girl trying to look skinny. No, iTunes - your user interface makes you look fat, not the Window border.
* Putting the menu up in the window title area - dear god. It looks terrible. Apple users bitch out Windows programmers when they don't follow their platform's usability guidelines. So I get to bitch Apple out for not following the Windows usability guidelines. Trying to emulate the OSX UI on your XP app? What the fuck is wrong with you?
* The new type-select-bar (below the seek bar area and above the three-pane browser index) is confusingly redundant as it seemingly duplicates the actions of the three-pane browser index. It's not intuitive and needs reworking.

(3) Forced music store.
* There's no longer an option to hide the music store icon in the "source" pane on the left (Yahoo Music Engine was equally invasive - in particular it's searches defaulted to the online store, not, you know, your own music collection.).
* I also wish I could completely hide the source pane, it's a waste of space. I only use iTunes to catalog and listen to my own music collection. This means I live in the browser pane. I don't use playlists, I don't use the music store.
* And the music store still has a shitty selection. Way to ignore the "long tail". I'm still having to find obscure albums and imported material on physical CD. They should be signing as many small independent labels as they are able.

(4) Still no gapless playback.
* Setting "Cross-fade playback", gap zero seconds still doesn't give gapless playback. Come on. Winamp has been able to do this for at least five years. Apple markets themslves as being "hip", and "with it". Unless you rip a mix CD, which is apparently a little bit too "edgy" and "extreme" for them as obviously no Apple employee has ever come across one (and it's not like the Apple Music Store would ever sell anything as interesting as a mix CD anyway). Which exposes them for the cardigan-wearing easy-listening middle-aged management that they obviously are.

In summary, I'm feeling like iTunes just jumped the shark. It's starting to forget that it can also function as a music player (something Yahoo Music Engine also had trouble with). I guess that's because both iTunes and YME are really supposed to be retail portals that can occasionally play music.

iPod nano, iTunes 5, iTunes Phone

[rcha101]

Personally I do not like the iPod nano. I have owned an Ipod mini 4gb since they were released and have been looking for a reason to upgrade. I am disappointed Apple have chosen to kill off the mini form factor. I would have liked to have seen them upgrade the mini to a larger hd (8gig), a colour screen and video output. I think the iPod phone is a good idea and I hope Nokia get in on this but I hope the headphones and cabling are decent. Last time i tried to use my phone as a music player I found the cord got tangled something crazy.

Shitty battery life

[wiredlogic]

Why can't Apple make a flash player with a decent battery life? 14 hours is pathetic considering that iRiver has tiny flash players that can get 40 hours of a single Alkaline AA for a couple years now. I assume that this is only with the backlight off most of the time too. The shuffle only gets a paltry 12 hours and doesn't even have to deal with a screen. I would expect much better considering they have the packaging advantage of integrated Li-ion. Where is Apple's engineering prowess?

Nano's headphone jack on bottom

[FresnonserF]

They don't advertise this on any of the pages, but if you look at the quicktime VR of the iPod Nano, you'll see that the headphone jack is on the bottom, next to the dock connector. This makes sense for the lanyard headphones (which hang the iPod upside-down) but under normal use I prefer the jack on top.

Does it download album art automatically?

[Anonymous Coward]

I just got my first iPod a couple of weeks ago and I like it for the most part. ITunes is good especially how editing song info changes the actually file, not just some internal database, and the error correction when ripping CDs is really good. But I don't uderstand why it doesn't download album art with the rest of the metadata. Windows Media Player has done this for years.

It would also be nice if it group by artist then album rather than just reordering a flat list. That way it could make better use of the compalations flag. Rather than a separate option under the 'Music' menu on my iPod I'd like to see compalations listed under 'Various Artists' in the Artists menu.

It doesn't seem complicated to fix really.

Re:Does it download album art automatically?

[mh101]

It would also be nice if it group by artist then album rather than just reordering a flat list.

Check out the Browse button at the top right of the window. That's what you're looking for.

DAMN IT

[lowmagnet]

Now I need to re-rip everything. :(

Re:DAMN IT

[Otto]

From what I've read over at Hydrogen Audio, it doesn't appear to be all that great anyway. More like ABR than VBR.

LIES!

[Jim_Callahan]

Clearly, this new machine is not 1/1000000000 the size, mass, length, width, or depth of an iPod. Damn you, Steve Jobs, you were all good until you decided to pervert a perfectly good system of nomenclature to no apparent purpose!

Re:LIES!

[vague disclaimer]

No, no, no.

The name comes comes from the original plan to have Robin Williams and Pam Dawber feature inthe adverts.

BS

[Eunuch]

There is no such thing as a mobo that won't take a particular brand of viddy card. Tried smacking a PCIe into an AGP slot eh?

Re:BS

[Txiasaeia]

Hilarious. Besides the fact that the box itself says "Designed for Radeon-Series Video Cards," no nVidia cards are on the compatibility report, whereas other MSI motherboards (the Neo4 Platinum, for instance), *do* support nVidia cards.

But hey, I only struggled with the motherboard for several months and talked to several MSI techs who all confirmed this; it's not like I have any actual idea what I'm talking about, hmm?

Re:BS

[troc]

On Slashdot, Uninformed Speculation wins every time :)

Troc.

Re:BS

[Anonymous Coward]

hmm, a slot is a slot.
Everything is made to specifications nowdays, that's how you can use different types of devices with the same connector.

probably not enough power to run the video card or noob syndrome

Nanosoft

[dangitman]

No, what's next is Apple re-brands their software division as Nanosoft.

Do they offer sreaming on demand music from itunes

[EggMan2000]

I'm still looking for iTunes to stream music. I can't tell if they do that yet. I use Music Match and pay my $10 per month and stream tunes all day.

Re:???

[aichpvee]

Exactly. GP should know by now that apple fanbois always use apple market speak when talking about apple hardware. I've talked to more than one person who said that the G5 was "the world's most powerful personal computer" (word for word from the ads) right around the time that the G5 came out.

iTunes 5 + QT 7 : avoid them

[clamx]

Just tested them (Windows version):

iTunes 5 rebuilds the music library, so you might be unable to revert to iTunes 4.9.

iTunes 5 has a new interface look, and it automatically use the language set up in the "Regional and Language Options" control panel, under the "Regional Options" tab. It seems clever, but it is not since this setting is used to define the default currency, time format, etc. NOT the default language of the GUI. This setting exists in Windows XP but does not appear on regular consumer versions (only on Corporate ones, when a Microsoft MUI extension is installed). Yes, it's stupid since other OS like MacOS X let you switch the language of the entire interface even on the cheapest Mac you can get, but it's the way Microsoft did it. The only right way to define the UI language is to do it on a per-app basis. Which means : Add a bloody "Language" options to the iTunes preferences instead of trying to play the smart guy. I have an English version of Windows and my Regional Options are set to French, but I'd like iTunes to be in ENGLISH like the rest of the UI.

iTunes 5 still not support OGG.

iTunes 5 is unable to read correctly some very old AIFF files I still have in my Library (by "old", I mean "from my Atari ST": 12,538Khz 8 bit mono). QuickTime 7 opens them perfectly and it worked with iTunes 4.9.

QuickTime 7 is a real pain in the ass. I mean it. First, if you registered QuickTime 6, you need to pay again to register QuickTime 7. The player has the exact same limitations than the previous versions: it's unable to open files which have Unicode filenames or filenames that are >31 characters. Yes, exactly like on MacOS 9! Furthermore, the very convenient menus to work with tracks (delete tracks, enable tracks, extract tracks etc) disappeared. Now you must open the Movie Properties dialog, go to the correct tab, enable or disable the track(s), go back to the movie window, work on the track(s), go back to the Movie Properties dialog, etc. I use QuickTime Pro mostly to correct the movies I do with my little camera without recompression (the sound is delayed by 1 sound frame), now with this version it's became a real torture. By the way, if you use any keyboard shortcut of the Pro version (for example Ctrl-F for Fullscreen) but have the basic player only, you get a message asking if you want to register. It seems very clever too, except that some movies I made use QuickTime scripts associated to some keyboard shortcuts... like Ctrl-F. Guess what's happening ?

I've always been a big supporter of QuickTime, hoping that QuickTime 7 would be the same leap for the Windows versions that it was for the OS X version of QuickTime 6... I guess I had too much expectations...

Re:iTunes 5 + QT 7 : avoid them

[DreadfulGrape]

For the past two days I've been struggling with iTunes 5 for Windows, specifically its inability to see my firewire-connected iPod, which does show up as a mounted drive in my Windows directory. Latest iPod Updater likewise doesn't see the iPod. Multiple reinstalls of both, following Apple's own directions, failed to work.

So now I'm using WinAmp's iPod plugin, which works great, actually much better and faster at accessing and managing the iPod than iTunes. I know Apple only begrudgingly supports the Windows platform, but shame on them for releasing this piece of crap.

Re:iTunes 5 + QT 7 : avoid them

[wrash]

Actually, it's worse than that. iTunes 5.0 for Windows appears to have been delivered with so many problems that there are a vast number of messages on the Apple support discussions from peoaple who cannot make the new iTunes for Windows work. For many, the problem appears after the install appears to have gone well. There seem to be several reasons for problems, including conflicts with Norton Internet Security, and conflicts with firewalls. But one of the strangest is that the new iTunes seems to require the presence of Microsoft's MAPI32.DLL in the /windows/system32 directory. If it's not there, you get an obscure error and iTunes won't run. It's not clear why iTunes needs the MAPI32 drivers. But if you don't have the one specific version that comes with Windows XP SP2, you're out of luck. That means that if you've changed the MAPI drivers because you have a different e-mail system (Eudora for example) then you can't use iTunes. Just to make sure that I report this completely, you can rename the old MAPI32 driver (Eudora renames it to MAPI32.000) and iTunes will work. But as soon as you run Eudora again, it reinstalls the non-Microsoft MAPI driver. This is apparently the case with other e-Mail systems that install their own MAPI32 drivers. There's no explanation from Apple as to why it needs this driver, or what it does with it. This is by no means the only issue with iTunes 5.0. There are other installation problems, including some in which iTunes 5.0 for Windows has crashed computers, randomly invoked the Blue Screen of Death, mangled the Microsoft Installer, and otherwise done nasty things. But the one thing that is so far uniform is that Apple has said nothing. Wayne Rash

why ipod nano?

[pintomp3]

didn't creative already make a zen nano? i guess they r daring creative to file the lame interface lawsuit.

Nano Nano!

[maclassicuser]

Will Apple get Robin Williams (The actor not the tech writer) to advertize the iPod Nano?

Re:???

[NutscrapeSucks]

I've talked to a couple who bragged about the "UNIX-based OS", when I'm damn sure they barely know what a 2 button mouse is, much less UNIX.

Headphone accessory

[jdbaluch]

Wow...check out the headphones on the nano accessory page. Necklace-turned-headphones! I've been seeing that design in Korea for the past year and a half now. Gotta admit though, Apple's overengineering is beautiful.

Where's my 6Gig option?

[Kris_J]

I have a "5Gig" (4.66Gig) Seagate USB2 hard drive that is almost too small for the program I want to keep on there (and will definately be too small in the near future). When I ran out of space I was intending to purchase a 6Gig Mini, but Apple seem to have dropped their "maximum small" option to 4Gig. Does anyone know of a nice, small and bus-powered 6-8Gig portable USB2 hard drive other than the old Mini?

Re:Where's my 6Gig option?

[E8086]

My interpretation is you're looking for a USB-powered external 2.5" hdd. I bought my drive and case($15) separately. Once you have the case you can get the hdd(s) with the specs of your choosing, not be limited to the few case&drive combos with inflated prices. That's guessing all you want is storage, no music playing. If you want music there's Creative's Zen Micro at 4,5,6GB
That option makes sense if you're working at a PC with USB ports and a headphone jack and only need to bring your collection with you and not listen to them during your commute.

Re:Where's my 6Gig option?

[anagama]

You could always just get a 6gb mini for $220 (scroll down). Or a 3d gen ipod 15gb for $190 -- that's what I did with the intention of puting linux on it (3d gen works, 4th isn't so hot right now), except it's such a great player, I ended up ripping every CD I own. It looks and behaves brand new BTW so either it is actually an unsold new device, or Apple's refurbishing is really good.

Re:Where's my 6Gig option?

[Kris_J]

Friends of mine have 2.5" and 3.5" USB hard drive enclosures and the USB-powered bit is always a bit hit and miss. I have the 5Gig Seagate Pocket drive and the only USB ports where it chokes are on the wrong side of a "self-powered" hub. I believe the Mini is similarly as reliable on the power side, since it takes so little power it can run the hard drive and charge the battery at the same time.

I'm willing to pay a premium for a small, reliably bus-powered USB2 hard drive. However, I need at least 5Gig and come xmas it's possible I'll be needing 8Gig.

Re:Where's my 6Gig option?

[E8086]

"I have the 5Gig Seagate Pocket drive" ok, one of those, they're nice and avg $140

3.5" drives use a lot of power, and should have their own power cord. 2.5" drives use less so they can be usb/bus-powered. The only time I've seen problems is when the PC/Mac they're connected to has an underpowered power supply, the generic or older Dells and similar or if too many unpowered usb devices are in use. I've had my generic 2.5" case with a 10GB IBM travelstar for over a year with no problems.
5gb and 8gb are on the small side for 2.5" drives and don't seem to exist in the form of pocket drives yet. Newegg has external drive cases for about $15 and the smallest 2.5" is 30gb for $61, you can probably find a 10 or 20GB elsewhere. It won't be as small as your 3" round pocket drive, 3x5x.5" the size of a .5" stack of index cards and still fits in a pocket while holding a few times as much as pocket drives and minis. The other option is a full sized ipod, $300 for the 20gb, or a used older smaller one if you can find it, and has a battery so a sudden loss of power shouldn't happen. The only other 5GB+ I know of are the high capacity CF cards, $665 for 8gb, also at Newegg.
I hope that was helpful.

OMG!

[kerbawya]

So Kanye West wrapped up the keynote eh? How uncomfortable must that have been. "BROKE BROKE! ...WE WANT PRENUP!" HAHA that was hilarious!

Obligatory...

[CrazyTalk]

No bluetooth. Less storage than a Nomad. Lame.

lossless?

[Anonymous Coward]

Does this Nano play Apple's Lossless format? The Shuffle doesn't... I know it won't hold much, but I'm sure atleast one concert would fit.

write speed?

[LazyBoy]

Doesn't flash write a lot slower than an HDD?

Re:write speed?

[klang]

does it matter, as long as it's faster than USB2.0 and FireWire400?

No Bluetooth

[Anonymous Coward]

As a few bloggers have noted you can't sync over bluetooth. So Apple might have missed one cool feature.

I have however thought for a long time that I would like to see a phone designed by Apple. So I'll give it a look as this is atleast influenced by Apple. I like the elegant interface of the iPod, I hate the interface of all cell phones I've had in the last 5 years.

make the new iTunes match the rest of OSX

[sagefire.org]

http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/19074/ The Iridium theme for MacOSX 10.4 can make all of those different kinds of windows (including the ones from the new iTunes) match each other. Wouldn't it be nice if Apple would provide us with a unified GUI! (BTW: This is a shameless plug. I wrote Iridium.)

Re:iPhone = iExpensive....

[corrosive_nf]

Keep waiting then, the only real plans that dont fuck you over are the prepaid phones and even then you get a little ass tickle when you exceed your minutes.

Glossy black is this year's white!

[Redundant offtopic t]

But seriously folks, where the U2 ipod looks strange (maybe it's that inflamed zit of a click wheel), the black nano looks great (at least in the pictures).

coked up version

[Anonymous Coward]

basically just a (dangerously) thinner, prettier version of the mini.... reminds me of several young teen stars.

TB iPod mini

[E8086]

It would be nice if that 2TB laptop from the earlier posting was true. That way we could have TB portable media players about the size of an iPod mini or nano, anything smaller is starting to get awkwardly small, devices get smaller, our hands don't. And they should have easily removable batteries and 6.1 channel output.
Itunes 5 is just another version, no big news there. I have no interest in the phone, $250 plus 2yr contract. 100 songs, probably has a 256mb miniSD or similar card. Corporate espionage anyone? It's ipod-like so it can probably be used as an external drive, might be another thing to add to the list of things you can't bring into the office, but it should be airplane safe.
My mini is only 6mo old, no need for anything else.

Whine some more.

[Inoshiro]

AAC is better than MP3, and supported. Best of all, iTunes will convert your stuff to 128kbit AAC on the fly (at least for the Shuffles it will) when doing a fill, meaning I can fit 2x the songs, and lose not much quality as compared to my 256kbit VBR MP3 standard.

I know you want Ogg support, but there are plenty of other players which support that. Apple is about image and functionality.

Bass Response?

[ben_rh]

I give the Nano double thumbs-up. Very slick design. And the fact that we're up into multiple gigabytes in a completely solid state device is pretty exciting. I have a 1GB Shuffle, which I'm really happy with, mainly because of its size and weight (or lack thereof), excellent audio quality and solid-state-ness. I'd probably consider getting a Nano if I had the money.

The thing I'm most interested to learn, though, is how its bass response compares to other models. As is detailed here, the Shuffle has a far superior amplifier (based on a push-pull design, I believe) and as a result performs way above the competition in the lower end of the spectrum. The old Mini, however, was the worst of the lot. It just couldn't flesh out those wide low-frequency waves.

So, which amp did the Nano get? The gutsy push-pull setup from the Shuffle, or the ... improvable amp from the Mini?

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0 (1.1 compatible)

[a1291762]

You know, unlike the morons that made FireWire 800, USB 2.0 is backwards compatible. I use an iPod Shuffle with my Sawtooth Mac just fine.

Actually, unless the nano has faster flash, the speeds of USB 2.0 are wasted. I reckon my shuffle does about 20MB/s, compared with 11MB/s for USB 1.1 and 480MB/s for USB 2.0.

iPod pico???

[Deitheres]

Just wait until they integrate a camera in to the iPod, and market it as an accessory for the discriminating high-tech peepers.

Introducing the iPod pico

It's an apology for the shuffle

[Trejkaz]

When Apple released the shuffle, practically everyone bitched that it had no screen. I accept their apology. :-)

This ...

[Bake]

here... is about as close as you'll get these days I'm afraid.

Of course, that would require you to switch to a GSM carrier ;-)

Re:This ...

[gonar]

unfortunately, they broke rule number one: dont compromise the phone form factor for a big PDA screen. holding this phone to the side of your head is like holding a brick to the side of your head.

and they are GSM, which sucks in the states. verizon is the only company with good signal if you are more than 2 miles from the interstate.

hell, I even get 5 bars at my father-in-law's house in the middle of bum-fsck nowhere north dakota.

Updating music library...

[e40]

WTF is this about? It took a long time.
(It happened when I started iTunes 5 for the first time.)

was at the release party tonight ...

[vacorama]

i went to go see this motorola/ipod phone at webster hall tonight in NY.. all in all, cool but very very sluggish.. all the demo booths had phones with roughly 5 or 6 albums on them, and just that alone drastically slowed down the display. plus they didn't have any instructions, or tell anyone that to get the phones to play music you had to disconnect them from their laptop stations, a very bad move. this place was full of music writers that couldn't get passed the "Do not Disconnect Screen" to make the thing do what it was actally supposed to do. But they did have free drinks, which put most people in a really good mood.. Also, a really cheasy speech by motorola's head of marketing. i'm sort of suprised Apple has gotten behind something so sluggish. in the time it takes to load up one song from the main screen, i can grab a real ipod from my other pocket and play whatever i want to hear. someday it might be a nice little gadget, but not now, not sure why either but definately not right now...

One disappointment with iTune 5.0...

[MtViewGuy]

...It still does not support paid-subscription Podcasting. :-(

There are a lot of people that want to be download radio talk shows produced by Clear Channel's Premiere Radio Networks using iTunes' Podcast support feature instead of the custom software provided by Premiere Radio Networks. I wouldn't be surprised that before the end of this year there will be an update to iTunes 5 that will support paid subscription Podcast downloads, which could open the door for a lot of radio shows to be downloaded via iTunes to your computer. After, if iTunes supports paid download of music, why not paid download of radio shows in Podcast format?

More on the way??

[apetime]

I noticed, after installing iTunes 5, that the name of the playlist for music purchased off of iTMS had changed (in the Japanese version of iTunes) from "Purchased Music" (kounyuu shita ongaku) to "Purchased Items/Things" (kounyuu shita mono).
(It's actually difficult for me to confirm, cos my playlist was named "Musique achetée" before the upgrade, left over from a flirtation with French, but I've checked to see that it said "ongaku" from other sources.)

Has this changed in the English version as well? Maybe music videos and other contents are on the way soon?

How about...

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't actually *have* an MP3 player. When I listen to music on the go, I use my Palm. You can scream "well buy an iPod" 'till you're blue in the face, but the fact is that there are a few things that my Palm can do that an iPod can't. And mobile music isn't important enough to me that I'd buy an iPod or carry around an extra gadget, but it is important to me that, if it's possible, I'd like to listen to iTMS songs on the go.

Besides which - "designed" to go with the iPod? Much as I like Apple, I think "crippled" or "artificially restricted" is a better word. As wonderful as it is how iPod and iTunes work together - it is just marketing, you know.

Ugh, back to scratches and fingerprints!

[sleepcountry]

And here I was, thinking that Apple was coming to its senses when the Mini came out with a nice sturdy scratch-resistant aluminum case.

Am I the only one who thinks it's absolutely ridiculous that ipods are so susceptible to scratches and blemishes? It amazes me how many people have to uglify their gorgeous ipods with rubber skins, just so that it doesn't look like a dog's breakfast!

That said, I opted to use a near-invisible Podshield on mine from Trendygeek. Still absurd that I have to even do that though.

Paving the way for video store...

[SuperKendall]

They already sell music videos, but the new search sure seems to be paving the way to a full-fledged video store. Why else would you really need to distinguish between audio and video search results unless they were expecting people to be seeing a lot of video in iTunes.

Come on Apple, let us buy TV shows!

Re:This Apple Ad Sponsored by Slashdot Zealots....

[Budenny]

Well, its labelled a troll, and it is phrased rather intemperately, but it has a lot of truth in it. Particularly the point about openness. It is very striking that in an open source environment a company can be idolised which has locking as an essential component of its marketing strategy. Whether it is locking the OS to its own hardware, or locking its music formats and download service to its players....

It is a real legitimate question to ask: why do people feel it is fine for Apple to do these things, and anathema for MS to do similar things? Why, for example, if MS were to start taking people to court for running Office under Wine, would there be a universal outcry, when if Apple starts taking people to court for buying and running X on Dells, an awful lot of people here would applaud?

Moderators are on crack

[beetle496]

How is a comment about Apples clever pricing for the Nano offtopic on a story that has Nano in the subject line? I should meta-moderate more, but I don't actually want mod points...

Re:Digital Photographers rejoice

[tomcio.s]

I already use 20gb 4g iPod as a portable drive. The interface is very clunky if you ask me. I have to have spare batteries for the connector and pray to for it to work.
In fact on my last trip, it just plain refused to work.

Disclaimer: never tried the iPodPhoto conection.

And the only way this would become a powerful offering was if there was either a cradle for the iPod to attach to the bottom of the camera (ala battery pack) or if it worked using wireless protocol. The first approach is not very feasible, as I already find my D70s + lens + speedlight to be rather heavy.

Someone please tell me...

[Anonymous Coward]

...that iTunes 5 supports burning CD-Text.

If it doesn't, there's no way in hell I'm upgrading. As it stands, I upgraded to 4.9.0.17 and ended up with a fucking useless Quicktime (the tray icon used to load itself until I removed it manually, and no preferences or settings would appear). I also found out by upgrading that the Podcast interface is complete shit.

Mac Shuffle

[miller701]

No, the Mac Shuffle was back in the late 80's on mac's with only one floppy drive (pre SE days)

Ask, and ye shall receive!!

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.progsoc.uts.edu.au/~whophd/itunes-phone .html

The shuffle really IS better than the (3g) iPod

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm no audiophile (far from it) and even *I* can *easily* hear the difference in audio quality from my 3rd gen iPod and my iPod shuffle.

Just listen to the same file on both players, you'll hear it for yourself.

P.S.: I don't know if the 4th gen iPod has the same audio quality as the 3rd gen or the same audio quality as the iPod shuffle. Test with a 3rd gen iPod.

Whoa, did that email to Steve Jobs really ...

[Anonymous Coward]

make him produce an iPod / iTunes hybrid?

iTunes 5 Trashes Library after Upgrade

[w0lver]

I'm on Tiger and upgraded from 4.9 to 5.0 and now iTunes hangs while trying to do something with my Store purchased music. I even tried readding all my music to the Library and it hangs on any iTunes purchased music. I'm sure it some type of DRM upgrade bug... And I'm not alone check out the Apple Discussions, http://discussions.info.apple.com/ for more stories like mine.

corporate profits, shareholders

[screwthemoderators]

The OP is right in that corporations are legally obligated to maximize profit for the shareholders. While your alternative visions of maximizing profit make a lot of sense for private companies, shareholders have to be convinced, or have enough faith in, the CEO/Board of Directors to pursue anything but the most obvious, straightforward strategies for making the most money. This is extremely difficult and few people can pull it off, which is why Mr Pepsi (you know who) was kicked out, and Mr Jobs is back in Apple. Basically, you have no more idea about what you're talking about than the slashdotters you criticize. Pot Kettle Black

Re:corporate profits, shareholders

[shmlco]

Bullshit. Corporations are "legally obligated" to do what their charters (and the SEC) say they're going to do.

And since you bring up Apple, let's do a little comparison, shall we? Post-bubble, Apple kept their interns and continued to pour dollars into R&D. HP, on the other hand, cut interns, research, and spending to keep their balance sheet looking good, maintained prices, and engaged in a pointless merger.

Now Apple has a major piece of a market with the pod and itunes, a cool OS, and cool software (iLife, Final Cut). HP is tanking and laying off jobs left and right.

Now Mr. Smart Guy, which company has "maximized" profit and shareholder values? Which obvious, straightforward strategy has prevailed?

Amazon spent all their venture money building out infrastructure and on customer aquisition, operating at a loss... and now has the results to show for it.

Toyota kept their reseach into hybrid technology going strong while carmakers in the US were closing plants. Who now has the most sought after car on the planet?

Yes, you have to have faith in your CEO, Chairman, and board, but there are in FACT many approaches one can take to profitability, and the one you choose can depend greatly on your style, market, product, culture, and values. And SMART companies try to keep their customers happy, and look further into the future than the next quarters balance sheet.

Re:corporate profits, shareholders

[Anonymous Coward]

I think Google is the ultimate example of this. Here we have a company that is actively investing in open source technology, spend little on traditional marketing strategies, put the ads they do use in purposefully unobtrusive ways and not only invests in R&D but actively encourages each of it's employees to take time away from there official work to do there own research. They are doing EVERYTHING that public companies are not suppose to be doing and yet they are both in the black and generating amazing returns. The lesson? The lack of imagination in modern approaches to business not due to necessity, but laziness. And in the end, innovation will always win out for innovation's sake. You can only halt progress for so long.

Re:corporate profits, shareholders

[screwthemoderators]

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id =10571 Dodge vs. Ford Motor Co. (ca.1919) Michigan Supreme Court ...pg 36-37 of the companion book. FU!

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0 (1.1 compatible)

[IvanXQZ]

You mean Mbps, or Mb/s. That is, bits per second, not bytes per second, which is what MB/s indicates. Also, "high-speed" USB 1.1 is 12 Mbps, not 11. for what it's worth.

But to the shuffle -- you're really only getting 20 Mbps (2.5 MB/s) for transfers? Or are you actually getting 20 MB/s (160 Mbps), which would be more what I'd expect?

Nonprofits

[screwthemoderators]

You should have noted that they "must," as in its United States Law must. I hate to disillusion people, but "non-profits" often rack up expenses specifically to eat revenue. The paychecks of the CEO and Board of Directors has to come from somewhere! Non-profits usually also have incentives to expand and diversify their companies. What you meant to say is "charitable organizations." Non-profits can be companies that just funnel revenue in different ways than for-profit companies, and get some tax-breaks for doing it.

...Here comes the "Free ipodnanos" crap

[happycat64]

Jeez, these people don't waste ANY time with the free ipod scam deals.

Look at this. I think Apple gave them a press kit or something before hand or something so they could get their site up at launch time.

EDIT: Oops! Did I put someone's referral code in there? ;-)

GMSV

[Anonymous Coward]

quoted at GMSV

wholesale prices

[hayne]

when a company like Apple places an order for 60,000,000 2GB and 4GB flash memory chips from samsung, im fairly sure they pay less than retail

Indeed.
And here's an analysis of the memory component costs of the iPod nano. The Semico guy's lowest estimate was $160 as a wholesale price for the the 4GB of flash memory.

Re:wholesale prices

[Lars T.]

So buy a 4 GB player the maker sells at a loss for $300, if that makes you feel less exploited.

Re:???

[Lars T.]

So what does a two button mouse have to do with UNIX?

Make your own iPhone /. style!

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey, you can get a Nokia 6230 with a stereo headphone for one Euro and a 2-year contract! Now replace the 32 MB MMC card with a bigger one (256 MB for another EUR 40 or so). Then:

1. Select the song(s) you want in iTunes.
   
2. Look up the actual MP3 files.
   
3. Put the files into a temporary folder (this step not mandatory).
   
4. Move the content of that folder to the phone's MMC Card via Bluetooth in one big chunk. Easy!
   
5. Leave your phone alone for a while, copying 265 MB via Bluetooth takes forever.
   

Yea, its slow, but compared to the Motorola WANKR...

• it's cheaper
  
• not quite as ugly
  
• memory card upgradeable
  
• doesn't crash or break every right and left like usual Moto junk
  

Shock news! Apple / Pixar to buy Cingular!

[astonishedelf]

I predict that at some stage Apple / Pixar will be obliged to buy Cingular or Verizon to guarantee control and distribution of a platform. Difficult but not impossible. That, together, with taking the design of the next generation iPhone inhouse (with possibly Motorola manufacturing). No one who follows Apple can believe that Jobs was in anyway happy with the ROKR. IT IS BUTT UGLY COMPARED TO THE USUAL APPLE PRODUCTS.

iPod nano

[Anonymous Coward]

I find that the new flash player whip the minis I always hated the look of those players They never fit into the Apple family They were simply cheap looking At least now that Samsung is on the Apple team nobody will even come out with a player to challenge this iPod nano

Re:No firewire, USB 2.0 (1.1 compatible)

[Anonymous Coward]

I just plugged in my new Ipod nano into my older powerbook (which of course does not have usb 2.0). My firewire cable plugs in fine, but a message on the ipod screen explicitly states that it does not support firewire. And what used to take a few seconds is now taking half an hour. I will likely take it back and spend the extra $50 on a 20gb ipod.

My Impressions

[Kichigai Mentat]

iTunes 5
I am not impressed by iTunes 5 at all. When I hear software going from version X.z to version Y, I expect some pretty big changes. This kind of step is similar to that we saw from iTunes 4.8 to iTunes 4.9: adding one big feature with a few other features thrown in the mix. The big feature here is ROKR and iPod nano support. I look at this like OS X 10.4 Tiger: Lots of little nicities, nothing you'll notice on top. Smart Shuffle looks useful, as will Playlist Folders. The reorganized Preferences Menu confused me for a bit, but I got used to it.

Now, what annoys me here is the fact that iTunes 5 is just now introducing features we should have seen long ago. Primarily AAC VBR, and officially endorced bookmarking. I've been converting my audiobooks to AAC and using a "Make Bookmarkable" script to hack in my bookmarking support for quite some time now. It's about time they introduced this feature, long overdue. So is their "Exclude from shuffle" option.

iPod nano
I am a current iPod Mini owner. Not a day goes by when I don't wish I had spent a little more an gotten the full-sized iPod. However, I've tried to make due. Since I upgraded my iBook's hard disk, my music collection expanded from the conservative 4 GB to a large (for my taste) 6.3 GB collection, which includes a large amount of old radio dramas which I have acquired in preparation for a road trip in which I anticipate much boredom.

One thing I never really liked about the Mini was the lack of all-around support. iPod Speaker/Docks were one in particular. Everything was built around the 3G or 4G iPods, and never seemed to say, flat out, "Yes, iPod Mini will work with this." Theoretically, the Dock connector should allow everything to work with it, but with the smaller form factor, will the Mini fit in there without putting all the stress on the connector?

Now, us Mini Owners are going to be up a creek with the nano. Since it's clear the nano is replacing the Mini, accessories for the Mini will start to disappear. Apple is notorious in my mind for not having a lot of legacy hardware support (Does the 1G or 2G iPod even have Podcast support?).

I also have another problem with the nano replacing the Mini. It's flashed based, so shouldn't it be an upgrade for the Shuffle? Apple starts with 5GB, goes to 10GB, then gives us 4GB, up to 6GB, now capping us at 4GB with a base model at 2GB (that's following minimum space, excluding Shuffle). If you're going to offer us less space, at least charge us less for it! Don't give us 6GB now, only to discontinue it in two weeks, and force us to go down to 4GB. Or Apple should at least upgrade the Mini line with 10GB and 15GB drives.

I'm not about to buy a nano. First, my music collection is too big (I hate having to pick-and-choose). Second, I like having some extra hard disk space handy (for storage, temp space, scratch disk for memory heavy applications, who knows). Third, it looks like it would be unweildy. I find it inconvinient to work the Click Wheel on my Mini because I have to bend my thumb in so far to make a full circle. I remember owning a 1G iPod for Windows. If I were to test those two, side by side, I would have chosen the 1G for comfort. Now, look at the size of the nano. Can you imagine an adult's hand trying to work that itty bitty Click Wheel?

But, yes, I know people will buy it anyway. I'm sure there's someone out there who imported one of those necklaces that can be folded into a pair of headphones from Japan, or are waiting for their iPod Femtos, so before you start flaming with all of the now redundant comments, just bear in mind that this is just my opinion.

Re:Do they offer sreaming on demand music from itu

[EggMan2000]

thanks the mod down! I really appreciate that, now no-one will be able to answer my question of:

Does iTunes offer streaming music, much like Raphosdy and MusicMatch, et al.??

Not to be overrated, lol

Ogg is garbage

[Randall311]

Someone had to say it. Anyway, where is the $$$ incentive in putting a free file format support into iPod? Apple wants to make money using their AAC, as they should. I'm afraid that ogg will never see iTunes or iPod compatibility, just like mp3 is disabled in Fedora Core, but for a much better reason. Money.

No, it's not.

[jcr]

Umm, in my experience Ogg is a fine technology. It just doesn't offer anything that Apple needs.

-jcr

saw that

[ashpool7]

http://playlistmag.com/reviews/2005/09/ipodnanoacc essories/index.php?lsrc=mwrss

:-) funny!

[Anonymous Coward]

n/t

same heuristics, different conclusion

[Anonymous Coward]

When I ripped my collection, I used the same heuristics as you to choose a format, but arrived at a very different conclusion. The rip format I chose was Apple Lossless.

Quality: excellent - as in lossless.

Freeness: free as in beer, because Apple Lossless is an open standard and unencumbered by patents.

Support: excellent using iTunes, which I chose because the Airport Express has optical output which delivers a digital signal directly to my amp. Bonus: iTunes automagically re-encodes to AAC for my daughter's iPod

Nokia 6230

[Anonymous Coward]

I just exchanged a 6230 for a ROKR, which I pick up tomorrow. I loved my old Nokia, like the candybar formfactor, but wanted seamless syncing with OS X. No such luck. Everything I read says Nokia dropped the ball on this one by not adoptiming the Bluetooth Sync Profile. Also, the 6230 locked up after using it as a Bluetooth modem. Seems that Nokia simply failed to update the firmware on that phone. Shame.

btw, my motivations for buying the ROKR are: seamless bluetooth syncing with OS X, small candybar formfactor, data support, bluetooth modem support, and Sailing Clicker support. The music is just a bonus, as are the add ons from Griffin etc. that are sure to follow.

http://www.thecorporation.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php

[bubbaD]

http://www.thecorporation.com/

Apple did a lot of laying off and shrinking of R&D before the recent change in fortunes. I don't know what you consider "post-bubble," because Apple had a lot of problems previous to the internet bubble, and as a hardware, not an internet company, mostly impervious to "The Bubble" You're also giving credit to whole corporations "HP is tanking and laying off..." where you should be looking at the CEOs at the time of these decisions. Its easy to look like a smartguy when you're being so stupid.

Selective remembering

[Anonymous Coward]

What happened to the Newton, the eMate, Clarisworks? What is the state of HP printers in the printing market? Your comparison is highly selective. In theory you should be correct, but what stategies has Microsoft pursued. What strategies does Walmart pursue. Besides Apple, what successful companies can you name that look far ahead and keep customers "happy?"

http://www.law.utoronto.ca/documents/lee/Responsib leshareholder_SJLBF.pdf